{"title":"德国作为一个教派间妥协的模型","authors":"P. Manow","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198842538.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 argues that the cooperation in the interwar period between, economically, unions and employers and, politically, between Social and Christian Democracy, estranged the liberal Protestant camp from its former pet project, social reform. An important consequence of this estrangement was the birth of ordoliberalism. Ordoliberalism, however, was much less influential in the postwar period than usually claimed. It legitimized a politics of non-intervention, which rather left a void for the corporate actors to fill, so it involuntarily furthered corporatism, not liberalism. Otherwise it provided the inability of the central state to actively manage the economy with a post hoc ideological justification. Thus, Germany’s postwar compromise was “bipolar,” combining corporatist cooperation between capital and labor, heavily reliant on the organizational and material resources of the welfare state, with a central government with limited capacity for macroeconomic steering and without the means of credibly issuing promises of full employment (as the main difference in comparison to the Scandinavian cases).","PeriodicalId":431914,"journal":{"name":"Social Protection, Capitalist Production","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modell Deutschland as an Interdenominational Compromise\",\"authors\":\"P. Manow\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198842538.003.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 3 argues that the cooperation in the interwar period between, economically, unions and employers and, politically, between Social and Christian Democracy, estranged the liberal Protestant camp from its former pet project, social reform. An important consequence of this estrangement was the birth of ordoliberalism. Ordoliberalism, however, was much less influential in the postwar period than usually claimed. It legitimized a politics of non-intervention, which rather left a void for the corporate actors to fill, so it involuntarily furthered corporatism, not liberalism. Otherwise it provided the inability of the central state to actively manage the economy with a post hoc ideological justification. Thus, Germany’s postwar compromise was “bipolar,” combining corporatist cooperation between capital and labor, heavily reliant on the organizational and material resources of the welfare state, with a central government with limited capacity for macroeconomic steering and without the means of credibly issuing promises of full employment (as the main difference in comparison to the Scandinavian cases).\",\"PeriodicalId\":431914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Protection, Capitalist Production\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Protection, Capitalist Production\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842538.003.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Protection, Capitalist Production","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842538.003.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modell Deutschland as an Interdenominational Compromise
Chapter 3 argues that the cooperation in the interwar period between, economically, unions and employers and, politically, between Social and Christian Democracy, estranged the liberal Protestant camp from its former pet project, social reform. An important consequence of this estrangement was the birth of ordoliberalism. Ordoliberalism, however, was much less influential in the postwar period than usually claimed. It legitimized a politics of non-intervention, which rather left a void for the corporate actors to fill, so it involuntarily furthered corporatism, not liberalism. Otherwise it provided the inability of the central state to actively manage the economy with a post hoc ideological justification. Thus, Germany’s postwar compromise was “bipolar,” combining corporatist cooperation between capital and labor, heavily reliant on the organizational and material resources of the welfare state, with a central government with limited capacity for macroeconomic steering and without the means of credibly issuing promises of full employment (as the main difference in comparison to the Scandinavian cases).