These nationalist strategies, epitomized by Germany’s isolationist self-preoccupation, would ultimately set the stage for future international conflicts and a long-standing legacy of protectionist foreign policies that would come to characterize strategies in countries on both sides of the Atlantic.[11]During this time, a significant philosophical shift occurred, it seems, among most, if not all, countries that were impacted directly by the Great Depression, and that transition can be summarized as a paradigm shift from universal values and practices geared towards the stimulation and realization of mutual interests towards a new ideology, one of economic, political, social, and militaristic self-sufficiency.[12]The self-centered approach to economic, social, and political policies and practices was occasionally tempered by pacts and local agreements between two nations, such as that between Austria and Germany; however, more often than not, isolationism had serious negative consequences for all countries that placed strong emphasis on remaining solitary and self-sufficient. As Kofman argues, this attitude provided the ideological seeds that would spawn World War II, and which still mark foreign policy today, almost 80 years later.[13]While many countries emerged from the economic and social ravages of the Great Depression, those who did so the soonest and the best were “rewarded” with some degree of autonomy and a greater share of the power in Europe.

Not all nationalist ideologies resulted in negative outcomes, however. For example, Sweden was one country that successfully established a cohesive national identity as a result of policy changes stemming from a response to the Great Depression. Sweden achieved this renewed national identity through the implementation of a strategy known as?Folkhemmet, a term which means “the people’s home”.[14]The features of this nationalist strategy were simply an extension of an ideology that had been shared, but which had not been formalized, prior to the Great Depression. The core characteristics of the?Folkhemmetideology were a social structure based upon interclass respect and cooperation in the pursuit of shared interests and goals, and a belief that an alternate way of government and social organization was possible.[15]In fact, it may be argued that Sweden emerged from the Great Depression stronger, more resilient, and more cohesive than it had ever been.[16]Baer and Johnston contend that the seminal variables that determined the relative robustness of a nation’s recovery from the Great Depression included “differences in levels of class identification, group conflict consciousness and capacity to envisage alternative forms of the social organization of society.”[17]Sweden, in their estimation, possessed all of these characteristics and implemented them in their response to the Great Depression.

The Great Depression was a period of world-wide economic, social, and political upheaval that challenged governments to identify and implement strategies that would bring their countries back from the brink of fiscal ruin. Most countries were able to respond with effective strategies that did indeed result in the reconstruction of their financial institutions and the stabilization of their national economies. The consequences of the strategies to remedy the negative effects of the Great Depression, however, also had important social and political implications that remain relevant and influential today. Almost all of the countries focused on a two-pronged strategy to respond to the Great Depression: (1) the bolstering of the economy through restructured economies and (2) the encouragement of a cohesive and unassailable national identity. While the intentions of these strategies were positive, the results were mixed. Economic success is not always equivalent to social success. Although national identity is important and beneficial, it has also become a divisive factor in international relations. This paradigm shift can be traced back to the Great Depression, and its consequences are likely to continue being felt for years to come.

[1]Jeff Singleton,?The American Dole: Unemployment Relief and the Welfare State in the Great Depression(Westport, CT.: Greenwood Press, 2000), 175.

[2]Patricia Clavin, “The Great Depression in Europe, 1929-1939.”?History Review,(2000): 30.

[3]Clavin, “The Great Depression”, 30.

[4]Clavin, “The Great Depression”, 30.

[5]Clavin, “The Great Depression”, 30.

[6]Jakob B. Madsen, “Trade Barriers and the Collapse of World Trade During the Great Depression.”?Southern Economic Journal,?67, no. 4, (2001): 848.

[7]Clavin, “The Great Depression”, 30.

[8]Peter Pulzer, “Votes and Resources.”?German Politics and Society,?19, no. 1, (2001): 1.

[9]Clavin, “The Great Depression”, 30.

[10]Pulzer, “Votes”, 1.

[11]Jan Kofman,?Economic Nationalism and Development: Central and Eastern Europe Between the Two World Wars(Boulder, CO.: Westview Press, 1997), 31.

[12]Kofman,?Economic Nationalism,?31.

[13]Kofman,?Economic Nationalism,?31.

[14]Teresa Kulawik, “The Social Democratic Moment: Ideas and Politics in the Making of Interwar Europe.”?German Politics and Society,?19, no. 1, (2001): 119.

[15]Kulawik, “Social Democratic Movement”, 119.

[16]Douglas Baer & William A. Johnston, “Class Consciousness and National Contexts: Canada, Sweden, and the United States in Historical Perspective.”?Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology,?30, no. 2 (1993): 271-296.

[17]Baer & Johnston, “Class Consciousness,” 290.