
How Vienna produced ideas that shaped the West - mastazi
http://www.economist.com/news/christmas-specials/21712044-city-century-how-vienna-produced-ideas-shaped-west
======
endriju
"Vienna was the heart of an Austro-Hungarian empire of about 53m people that
stretched from Innsbruck in the west almost as far as the Black Sea in the
east. After 1867 the empire was divided into two: a Magyar-dominated Hungary,
ruled from Budapest, and a heterogeneous, multi-ethnic, multilingual other
half, ruled from Vienna."

In all fairness the Magyar-dominated Hungary could be attributed the same
attributes, it was multi-ethnic and multilingual, especially in the suburban
areas of the kingdom.

Ethnic map from 1910 [1] shows it pretty well (Croatia and Slavonia were left
out from the picture).

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Hungary#/media/File...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Hungary#/media/File:Ethnographic_map_of_hungary_1910_by_teleki_carte_rouge.jpg)

~~~
paganel
The major difference was that the Hungarians implemented a politics of
Magyarization which was one of the main reasons for what happened for them at
Trianon. From the wiki
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyarization#Magyarization_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyarization#Magyarization_in_the_Kingdom_of_Hungary)):

> The policies of Magyarization aimed to have a Hungarian language surname as
> a requirement for access to basic government services such as local
> administration, education, and justice. (...) Between 1850 and 1910 the
> ethnic Hungarian population increased by 106.7%, while the increase of other
> ethnic groups was far slower: Serbians and Croatians 38.2%, Romanians 31.4%
> and Slovaks 10.7%.[38]

~~~
aries1980
This is an oversimplification. Trianon set the borders with neither the
interest on ethnicity, nor the wishes of their inhabitants. Cities were cut in
half (e.g Komarom and Komarno), families became separated, there are people
who had 5 different citizenship without leaving their villages. After the WW1,
there were only two census (Balassagyarmat and Sopron, both had to fight for
this right, with weapons), both voted to stay in Hungary.

For the diversity of the key positions, you can check the list of barons and
counts:

[https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyar_b%C3%A1r%C3%B3i_csal%C3...](https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyar_b%C3%A1r%C3%B3i_csal%C3%A1dok_list%C3%A1ja)
[https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyar_gr%C3%B3fi_csal%C3%A1do...](https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyar_gr%C3%B3fi_csal%C3%A1dok_list%C3%A1ja)
List of Jewish nobles:
[http://mek.oszk.hu/04000/04093/html/szocikk/13568.htm](http://mek.oszk.hu/04000/04093/html/szocikk/13568.htm)

One of the most powerful family was the (possibily Croatian) Grassalkovich
which once had the duke title as well.

I don't deny there was an ethnic tension which hadn't been resolved. But this
was a 100 years after the Ottomans were defeated after 300 years of permanent
war that drastically changed the ethnic demographic. Check the Balkans and see
how big the issue was.

~~~
oblio
There was also an underlying religious divide that was barely solved in the
last decades before their downfall: Orthodox, especially Romanians, were
almost completely excluded from political life. You list actually serves as a
counter argument to your own point from this regard since I could barely find
any Romanian names on that list (no "escu" as in Popescu or Ionescu for
example).

And that was for 3 million out of 20 million in the Kingdom of Hungary.

Trianon was a simple solution to a complex issue but the fact that the borders
have been kept despite more wars kind of points to the fact that they were a
decent compromise (and also kind of emphasizes the amplitude of the harm done
by the previous "historical" borders).

~~~
aries1980
True, there was not much Wallachian (Romanian, that time) names, but
Wallachian was one of the many ethnicities. The old word oláh (“vlach”) was
used not just for Wallachians, but Cumans as well. In the wikimedia list you
might find “Radó” (Radu in Romanian), which was one of the oldest noble family
in the Hungarian Transylvania.

You are right, the religion, common values and culture mattered more than
ethnicity. This is quite a standard among the nations, Wallachia and Moldavia
was no exception. There were not much tatar, cuman, bolgar or pecheneg among
the boiars.

~~~
oblio
You're moving the goal posts.

There were 3 million Wallachians in Hungary (15-20% of the total population)
at the time and barely a handful of Wallachian nobles in Hungary. Meanwhile in
Wallachia and Moldova Tatars, Bulgarians were just a handful, most likely less
than 1%. Cumans and Pechenegs were long assimilated in 1800-1900.

My point is that the previous poster was right: magyarization was the downfall
of the multiethnic Hungarian state. Hungarian nationalism couldn't accept that
>50% of the population in the Kingdom of Hungary wasn't actually Hungarian,
they tried to forcefully assimilate groups which had no problems with
Hungarian rule as long as they were left alone. The assimilation attempt
backfired.

Trianon was a political action with a solid social backing.

~~~
aries1980
The Hungarian nationalism did accept the multi-ethnic Hungary. You possibly
know in the 1848 uprising against the Habsburgs was led by 13 generals
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_13_Martyrs_of_Arad](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_13_Martyrs_of_Arad))
you can barely see Hungarian names. The poet's, who wrote and read the
proclamation and started the uprising had the family name Petrovich (Petőfi in
Hungarian). One of the general was called Josef Bem, Polish. The finance
minister was Ferenc Duschek (sounds a Czech to me) and justice minister Sava
Vuković (sounds Serbian) in the new government. Yes, there was no Romanian,
but neither Cumans, Jassic, Rusins, Saxon, Schwab or Armenian either. In the
uprising, prime minister Lajos Batthyány was initiated a negotiation about
reforms with Brătianu
([https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VtKypkRfLtUC&pg=PA102&lp...](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VtKypkRfLtUC&pg=PA102&lpg=PA102&dq=batthi%C3%A1ny+romania+negotiations&source=bl&ots=lUkgDjG7j0&sig=Gfoh0GRcM9Rqr0uN0VK6_qzbic8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwit7uv5mJ3RAhUKfxoKHaQ1BWgQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=batthi%C3%A1ny%20romania%20negotiations&f=false)).
In fact, Hungarians in the state capital (Budapest) was in minority that time.

I do understand your emotions and as I stated, the matter of ethnic discontent
was not handled properly. But try to put this into the context with the rest
of the world politics. In such context, the 19th century Hungary seems pretty
open-minded to me. Just read the text of the proclamation:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_points_of_the_Hungarian_Rev...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_points_of_the_Hungarian_Revolutionaries_of_1848)
. It claims equal rights regardless the religion, end of serfdom and general
taxation. Too bad the revolution has fallen.

------
holri
The article mentions “Red Vienna” in only one sentence. But the last 80 years
of progressive politics in Vienna was a huge success. Social housing, public
transport, social welfare, security, education etc. and therefore the quality
of live are exceptional in that city because of progressive politics.
[https://www.wien.info/en/lifestyle-scene/most-livable-
city](https://www.wien.info/en/lifestyle-scene/most-livable-city)

~~~
hueving
Successful at making them irrelevant in a global economy perhaps. What major
innovations and technology are coming out of Vienna now? The best case seems
to be that tourism stays busy enough to keep the taxes flowing in to sustain
the entitlement programs.

~~~
riffraff
is there any other country with less than 10M people and no natural resources
which is more relevant than Austria in the global economy?

Possibly Switzerland, but not by much.

~~~
maverick_iceman
There are so many obvious counterexamples to your claim as others have pointed
out. Mongolia was and is a tiny nation but had one of the largest empires the
world has ever seen.

------
swampthinker
For those of you that enjoy pre-1800 European History, I highly suggest
picking up a copy of Europa Universalis 4 on Steam. Wonderful strategy game
that ends up teaching you an awful lot about history from 1444-1821

~~~
Meegul
This may reveal my age/lack thereof, but Europa Universalis 3 is what
originally sparked my interest in history and also programming. It's a game
that allows you to explore 'what if' scenarios in a fairly historically
accurate context. It's by no means a simulator, but it does a great job of
making the era _feel_ right.

It got me into coding due to my curiosity with exactly those 'what if's. The
vast majority of the game data is easily editable, and the dev console is
great. Some of my first coding projects were just mods for EU3, which revealed
to me that there's really nothing _special_ that goes into making software if
13-year old me could do it.

Highly recommended.

------
empath75
Related:
[http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21859771](http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21859771)

1913: When Hitler, Trotsky, Tito, Freud and Stalin all lived in the same place

------
rumcajz
Not mentioned, bust also:

\- Ludwig Boltzmann, the father of statistical mechanics.

\- Richard Reti, the author of hypermodern "Reti Opening" in chess.

~~~
davidwihl
Nor Kurt Gödel

~~~
mherrmann
This. Most other figures from the article will be remembered in history books.
But Gödel's results will be remembered and learned for as long as people do
mathematics.

------
open-source-ux
The BBC recently broadcast a three-part series on Vienna for those interested.
Unfortunately, it's only available to watch for those in the UK:

 _Vienna: Empire, Dynasty and Dream_

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p046dkrd](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p046dkrd)

------
leoc
Obligatory Karl Kraus describing Vienna as an "experimental station for world
destruction".

------
UhUhUhUh
Let humanity fester and "sperm is in the air" (Zweig). I'd move to the next
one in a heart-beat.

------
redsummer
Where is the modern Vienna?

~~~
franze
Online Start-Up wise quite good. There is VC money, grants, tech talent,
meetups and the will to try new things.

But los of overall creativity still stifled by bureaucracy, mediocracy and
latent rassism.

Also we have something called SVA and "Sozialpartnerschaft" which hurts a lot.
The one takes most of young founders money, the other makes sure the curtent
old-white-male elite stays in place.

~~~
badlogic
I'm on of those "young founders" here and have zero issues with the SVA. They
take at most 20k/y from you for health care and pension, and I'm fine with
that. And just because you don't want to pay your potential employees a living
wage (which are low in the IT collective bargaining contracts) doesn't mean
the Sozialpartnerschaft is bad. On the contrary, it keeps those stary eyed
"young founders" from fucking over the people that help build their potential
future fortune.

~~~
maverick_iceman
This sort of sentiment explains why socialist Europe will never be able to
build successful companies like Google/FB.

~~~
JBlue42
Or maybe they're building smaller, useful, and profitable companies and don't
need to be the next Google or Facebook?

------
walterstucco
Vienna ideas didn't shape anything in particular. They were just standing on
the shoulders of the giants. The west was shaped by the thousands years of
European's history and wars.

~~~
Cyph0n
And not only Christian Europe, but also the centuries of work by Muslim
scholars all over the Middle East and Asia.

~~~
ahoka
I don't think that statement is true.

~~~
Cyph0n
Muslim scientists contributed to many fields, including philosophy[1],
astronomy[2], medicine[3], mathematics[4], and chemistry[5]. It was very
common for scholars to make contributions in multiple fields, so you'll see a
lot of repetition.

One of the key contributions that in my opinion influenced the Renaissance
greatly was the work by numerous Muslim translators on the translation of
Greek works to Arabic. In the process, many of the works of the great Greek
thinkers and philosophers were preserved for future scholars. Also, Muslim
scholars were responsible for bringing works from the East (China, India,
etc.) back to Baghdad, making them more accessible to the West.

Arabic was so widely used that it was the lingua franca for most of science
for a period of time (~12th century). European scholars who wanted to learn
more about the latest discoveries and inventions had to learn Arabic at one of
the large learning centers (Baghdad, Damascus, Granada, among others).
Sicily[6] was another place where East and West combined for the sake of
learning.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_philosophers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_philosophers)

[2]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_astronomers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_astronomers)

[3]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_doctors?wprov=s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_doctors?wprov=sfla1)

[4]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_in_medieval_Islam?...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_in_medieval_Islam?wprov=sfla1)

[5]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy_and_chemistry_in_medie...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy_and_chemistry_in_medieval_Islam?wprov=sfla1)

[6]:
[http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/197806/muslim.sicily.ht...](http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/197806/muslim.sicily.htm)

~~~
ahoka
I don't mean to lessen the output of muslim scholars, but if their
contribution was so significant, then why did the renaissance blossom in
Florence, instead of a ME center, e.g. Baghdad? I don't think that preserving
existing knowledge is a huge contribution, given there would be no need of
preserving without the muslim conquest. And what happened to muslim science
since their golden age?

~~~
Cyph0n
Please see my other comment in this thread. And who said that Muslims
scientists only preserved knowledge? I just listed a number of fields that
Muslims significantly contributed by the way.

The Islamic world peaked in the 15th century, then began to slowly decline.
The current lack of output from Muslim scientists is in my opinion primarily
due to petty internal religious conflict, poor unity due to conflicting
interests, the colonisation of most of the larger Muslim countries which led
to them skipping the more critical periods of scientific development and
education, the lack of interest in innovation, and the lack of freedom to
innovate because of perceived religious contradictions.

