journal of european integration history revue d'histoire de l ...

132
The social and economic decline of the sector in the twentieth century was prompting the
powerful agricultural interest groups to play this game. The slow reconstruction of the agricultural
production, coupled with romantic ideas attached to the sector and the way of life in
societies where industrial production was taking over, mobilised agricultural elites to try to
persuade governments that the sector’s position was less favourable than that of other sectors.
That was why the agricultural sector could retain the ‘special position’ that it had had
nationally in the era of European integration. However, what seems to be lacking in the analysis
of the period at this level is the breakdown of ‘agricultural interests’. This would allow
a distinction between what arguments were political arguments produced by agricultural
politicians in order to retain their dominant political positions, and what arguments were
grounded on ‘real’ economic and social problems the sector was facing. One example of this
is the fear of a turbulent world market from which European agriculture had to be protected
– promoted for instance by the French government during the Green Pool negotiations – and
also later, outside the realm of this book, in the EEC. In reality, however, it is doubtful that
all French farmers were harmed by fluctuating prices at the world markets as much as by the
fear of a return to the crisis situation of the early thirties, as well as bad planning of the production
and trade barriers by the government. Moreover, statistics of the period will show
that agricultural prices on the world market did not fluctuate all that much in that period, and
that the terms of trade of agricultural products on the world market actually increased in the
post-war period (FAO, 1956). Ludwig Erhard in Germany was one contemporary who did
not follow the line of argumentation pleaded in agricultural circles; that became clear when
he took up the battle against the Deutscher Bauernverband in 1963-64.
The argument of the harmful effects of the world market nonetheless turned out to be
very powerful politically by maintaining the ‘special position’ of agriculture during the
1950s and 1960s, but it was less grounded on realities than in a constructed political perception
of the situation. One study which dissects other aspects of the rhetorics of agricultural
interest groups is made by the Danish historian Anders Thornvig Sørensen, Et spørgsmål om
suverænitet? Danmark, landbruget og Europa, 1950-53 (Haderslev, 1998). For a more
extensive view of the positions and activities of agricultural interest groups in relation to the
initiatives made at European level, reference should be made to the work by the Swedish
historian Martin Peterson in his dissertation, International interest organizations and the
transmutation of postwar society (Göteborg, 1979); none of these works appear to have been
used.
In addition, the absence of the much-debated work by the American political scientist
Andrew Moravcsik, in particular his book ‘The Choice for Europe. Social Purposes & State
Power from Messina to Maastricht’ (Cornell, 1998) is puzzling, particularly because it
stresses the importance of competing interests at the domestic political scene. This criticism
apart, Thiemeyer presents a fascinating insight into the domestic controversies about agriculture
and European integration in the 1950s. At this level, the analysis explains why the
process moved, or did not move, more convincingly than at the superstructural level.
A book which presents a study of a central aspect of the European integration process,
based on extensive archival research in three important countries is, by definition, noteworthy
for the readers of this Journal. For some readers the density of the text as well as the fact
that it is written in German, could be an obstacle. Not reading it on those grounds would be
a shame, because it is an analysis presented with much skill and carefulness.
Ann-Christina LAURING KNUDSEN
External Lecturer
Center for European Cultural Studies, University of Aarhus