When the nationalities of the multiethnic Austrian Empire began to demand national self-determination "on their own territory“, they
started the struggle for the national "Besitzstand“. The great nations like the Magyars, Czechs, Poles and Croats claimed for their historical "Staatsrecht“. The Austrian governments answered with the concept of national autonomy in national homogeneous districts on the basis of the existing historical "Kreise“. Palacky on the Krensierer Reichstag, Stadion in the Reichsverfassung of 1849, Ernest von Körber in the context of his deliberations to solve the "Bohemian question“ presented concepts for realization. When the
governments of Stürgkh, Clam Martinic and Seidler/Hussarek declarated the "Kreisordnung“ for Bohemia, there was no chance for acceptance, because the question of the settlement of a Czechoslovak State was decided., Článek zahrnuje poznámkový aparát pod čarou, and V křestním jméně pod názvem je chybně napsáno Helmt místo správného Helmut
In East-Central Europe, Marxist humanism embodied one of the most promising theoretical developments of the 1960s. While respecting the unquestionable value of this intellectual current, this article highlights the contradiction between the emancipatory proclamations of humanist intellectuals and their reluctance to recognize certain prevalent forms of oppression. After comparing the humanist approach toward gender-structured themes in the former Czechoslovakia with the contrasting techno-optimist approach, the latter group is shown to have been more sensitive toward women’s issues. Th e article concludes that there was an intrinsic problem in Marxist humanist theory that contributed to this historical shortcoming in its emancipatory eff orts.