Pribram’s 1918 essay argues that the war has not abolished capitalism but has destroyed the self-evidence of liberal economic policy. Economic policy has no autonomous end: it follows from the state’s answer to whether the individual is an end in himself or subordinate to a higher collective purpose. The work’s three movements—prewar liberalism, wartime compulsion, and postwar transition—trace the emergence of that new purpose.
Prewar policy appears as an unstable compromise. Liberalism secured freedom of contract, trade, enterprise, mobility, and property, and Pribram recognizes its immense productive achievement. Yet competition also brought capitalist domination, crises, urban atomization, and class conflict. In the Central Powers, foreign policy still obeyed the state’s power aims, while domestic economic policy largely left prices, wages, production, capital, and associations to private interest. Tariffs, social laws, middle-class protections, and tolerated cartels were interventions without a coherent principle.
War supplies that missing principle through scarcity. Initially, military demand confirms capitalism’s elasticity: industry adapts rapidly to state orders and high prices. But blockade, transport shortage, raw-material scarcity, and food crisis force the state from buying into directing—foreign-trade controls, requisitions, raw-material offices, maximum prices, rationing, compulsory delivery, production duties, plant closures, and labor obligation. The decisive conceptual shift is that market selection by purchasing power is displaced by administratively judged urgency.
Eine Skala der Dringlichkeit tritt an die Stelle der für den freien Verkehr maßgebenden Auslese nach der Stärke der Kaufkraft.
English translation: A scale of urgency takes the place of the selection according to the strength of purchasing power that is decisive for free commerce.
For Pribram this is not socialism, but public necessity inserted into a capitalist organism. Copper may not go to the highest bidder if the army needs it; bread may not be allocated by wealth when poor households face exclusion. Mere price ceilings fail because they ask capitalist actors to abandon capitalist motives; effective control requires command over stocks, distribution, and use. Wartime economy is therefore
Es ist, um es mit einem Worte zu sagen, die Politik des wirtschaftlich beengten Daseins
English translation: It is, to put it in a word, the policy of economically constricted existence.
Even so, property, money, profit, and entrepreneurship remain; free action is narrowed only by emergency.
all das ist nur insoweit suspendiert, als es die Not des Tages erfordert.
English translation: all of that is suspended only insofar as the exigency of the day requires.
The postwar argument is that peace cannot simply restore laissez-faire. The war has consumed stocks, worn out machinery and livestock, destroyed capital, killed labor power, and saddled the state with debts, pensions, invalid care, compensation, and reconstruction. Recovery requires “ängstliches Haushalten und Sparen”: rebuilding productive means, producing export surpluses, guarding the currency, and restricting luxury imports. A free market might economize, but it might also divert scarce goods toward speculators, rentiers, and luxury demand. Currency weakness, shipping scarcity, and fiscal pressure therefore point to continued import controls, raw-material allocation, monopolies or state participations, and supervision of syndicates.
Pribram’s deeper thesis is ideological. Nationalism, strengthened by war, is likely to replace liberal individualism as Central Europe’s organizing consciousness. It is not simply absolutism: the national subject still imagines itself as formed by the wills of its members. But once the nation appears as a collective personality, private economic freedom is justified only instrumentally.
Der Geist des Nationalbewusstseins fordert von neuem die Unterordnung des Wirtschaftslebens unter einen deutlich vorschwebenden, einheitlichen, höheren Zweck: den Machtzweck der Nation.
English translation: The spirit of national consciousness demands anew the subordination of economic life to a clearly envisaged, unified, higher purpose: the power-purpose of the nation.
Foreign economic policy thus becomes power policy: autarky, managed trade, and Mitteleuropa are political projects. Internally, cartels, unions, cooperatives, consumption associations, municipalities, and compulsory bodies become means for organizing a “Gesamtwillen” without replacing capitalism by bureaucracy. Economic policy becomes
in eine Frage der Ethik
English translation: into a question of ethics
Austria is the limiting case. A national economic policy presupposes a national state, but Austria is a Nationalitätenstaat whose peoples pursue divergent aims and will form nationally marked economic associations. Hence Pribram doubts that the Austrian state can sustain a unified program:
In diesen Verbänden, und nicht im Staate wird der Schwerpunkt der Wirtschaftspolitik liegen
English translation: In these associations, and not in the state, will lie the centre of gravity of economic policy.
The essay’s relevance lies in this precise threshold diagnosis: emergency regulation tends to persist, liberal market universality loses legitimacy, and capitalism survives as a state-guided, nationally disciplined, corporatively mediated order.
This work was divided into 7 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 7 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian