The
1960s European Golden Age
by Sharon Cornet
Ashford University
Twentieth Century Europe
HIS 306
Professor: Jennifer Bridges
October 26, 2009
The Golden Age of Europe in the 1960s was considered a time of growth. Many different areas were affected, such as the
youth culture and chemical drugs and protests, particularly the 1968 student strikes in
Paris, France. Womens rights were also
at the top of the list, as well as reform laws that were anti-homosexual. With all of these facial changes, there was an
underlying root to these inflorescence manifestations of the Golden Age. What stands out above most areas of change in
1960s Europe is the economic development of the states. It was the outward growth of the economy that
opened the way for certain areas to blossom beautifully, as well as to spread the weeds of
discontent in other areas.
It was, in fact, the issues surrounding economics, occupation, and high levels of unemployment despite the growth of the economy that spurred the student revolt of 1968 in France. Student populations had boomed in Germany, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom, since the government was investing in the youth culture (James, 2003, p. 310). Capitalistic growth, including political changes, public demonstrations, and movements against fascism, along with other acts of violence spread throughout Europe. In places such as Germany these protests grew to the point of terrorism (although in small numbers). Political upheavals did not really affect at least not in any governmental change most countries, except France, where de Gaulle wound up losing his position of power. The atmosphere at institutions of higher learning became more laid back, and less like the formalized than they were before (James, 2003).
Women also demanded their rights and feminism came to the forefront. Many called this movement the Women's Liberation. Feminism was all over the television, radio, and in books. One book written in 1969, called Sexual Politics, and written by Kate Millett, suggested, according to Harold James (2003), "that the sexual revolution would end patriarchy, and thus bring down conventional society" (p. 320). Yet that did not happen, even though much progress was made during the 1960s and beyond. Women found themselves working in areas that were originally and traditionally allocated for men. This is one area that is debatable as to whether the economy affected womens liberation by opening up this niche, or whether womens liberation and occupational roles affected the economy. Likely, it was both.
While early post-war efforts focused on the seriousness of economic recovery, the 1960s brought peoples minds from feeling fairly recovered, and spread out into other areas surrounding the arts, cultural and personal issues, and issues or morality. What is now referred to as the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual, Transgender) movement, but then focused solely on homosexuality, was brought to the public as a political issue, and new laws surrounding it were challenged in the courts. Homosexuality and other relationship status issues were suddenly thrust into the limelight. Many people living this alternative lifestyle desired no less than to be taken seriously, and adopted a stronger gay self-description, but the newly created reform laws were discriminating against this once-accepted and open European sub-culture (James, 2003). In this, and many other areas of European culture in that decade, people believed that they should be an intrinsic part of their personal and collective destinies.
Policies that promoted technological and economic areas became the backbone of the
cultural outgrowth of Europes ultimate fate. According
to information that came out of a meeting of the Centre for Economic Policy Research
(CEPR), Catch-up in the post-war
period was not automatic but depended on institutions and policies which provided strong
incentives to innovate, that is, they enhanced social capability (2009, ¶ 3). Furthermore, there were four key areas to growth
that the CEPR focused in on regarding the Golden Age in Europe:
First,
technology transfer was much more vigorous than before the war and was accompanied both by
an 'invasion' of American direct investment in manufacturing plants and a surge in
European R&D which promoted catch-up. Second, convergence of income levels within
Europe was particularly rapid following episodes of European integration such as the
formation of EFTA and the EC. Third, TFP growth in Europe was aided by the contraction of
the agricultural labour force. Lastly, both investment and innovation were promoted by
'the post-war settlement' which produced better wage bargaining and commitment
technologies to ensure 'good behaviour' by both sides of industry. Domestic and
international institutional reforms, and social contracts and rapid catch-up should both
be seen as mutually reinforcing.
Much of the European income per capita growth came out of innovation and
investment. However, according to Francisco
Alvarez-Cuadrado and Mihaela I Pintea (2008), it was, in particular, the structural change associated with large migrations from
agriculture to nonagricultural sectors, the Marshall Plan combined with the public
provision of infrastructure, the surge of intra-European trade, and the reconstruction
process which truly quantified the successes of the Golden Age. With an energy and international market
perspective, Gales, Kander, Malanima, and Rubio (2007) found that it was the
energy intensity of transport and industry, as well as the even greater growth
forces of the GDP (per capita) and population that caused the rapid increase in
productivity and efficiency (p. 230). According
to these same authors, the energy prices were very low, and USD per barrel of oil were
even below the prices of 1999, with their graphs displaying an especially fast growth in
income levels in the Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, and Spain during the decade of the
60s (p. 232).
Enrico Colombatto (2008), in the independent review of The European Economy since 1945: Coordinated Capitalism and Beyond, placed the trends of the 1960s within (2nd) the larger framework of a three-stage process:
Stage 1 consisted of Europes
utilization of human capital and the technological innovation of
US capitalism.
Stage 2 was when technological catch-up and
production capacity hit its ceiling, which opened
up doors for international trade.
Stage 3 has continued on into today where
entrepreneurial challenges continue and new sources
must be continually found to keep up living standards.
According to the above, it was ultimately the latter effect of international trade
that furthered growth, since production and technology had been integrated into most of
European society by the end of the 1960s. Indeed,
it had been noted by many Historians that Europes technology and production had
originally been a catching up to the innovations that came out of the United
States. Also, it is rather obvious that this
was just one aspect of the cultural sharing and diffusion that came out of the
international scene. In addition, the Cold
War was brewing, especially between the U.S. and Russia, fueling distrust between nations,
and pushing technological advances to extreme measures in the name of protection. Western Europe was caught in the middle.
Emanuel Copilas (2009) covered this aspect of Europes geostrategic position. Where the early years brought fear of military
involvement between Russia and the USA, the 1960s and later brought the realization
that these superpowers might make agreements in the area of economy and politics, that
could damage Europes position and stability. Europe
had found their economic power during the Cold War, but the USA, through NATO, had also
provided them with some security (Copilas, 2009). Copilas
also mentioned the tensions from within the European states:
In France, President
De Gaulle opposed two times, in 1961 and 1967, the United Kingdom's intention to enter the
European Community. He sustained his position claiming that UK could offset the delicate
political and economical balance that was beginning to emerge between France and Germany
and he was also susceptible to the close relationship between the UK and USA, presuming
that the last one would affect France's sovereignty and position in Europe. De Gaulle also
feared the German economic revival, trying political strategies to temper its
unforeseeable neighbor.
De Gaulle was ultimately put out of office due to the uprisings of the student
occupational revolt of 1968. It seemed that
the older generation, in their attempts to support the youth culture by financing and
promoting education through institutes of higher learning, somehow did not realize what
the economy had done in the younger generations minds and living standards, as well
as the morality of where their hearts laid. Where
the traditional methods had worked for older groups, the young people did not appreciate
these strict standards, for the international air of political power, and internal
economic sustenance, had them protesting in the streets of Paris for a different kind of
change. They wanted change to be the way
their freshly educated young culture envisioned it. Out
with the old, in with the new.
There were other areas than just occupation that were affected by this cultural
paradigm. Howard James (2003), in his chapter
on The Golden Age: The 1960s (p. 307), put it like this:
Generational conflict in a very acute form,
in which each side accused the other of not understanding the issues at stake, was played
out in almost every conceivable arena: cultural, artistic and musical life, the discussion
of sexuality, of moral behavior, of religion. What
separated the two sides of the barricades was a sharply different view of institutions:
for the old generation, institutions would generate reform; for the young generation,
institutions were the heart of the problem, and needed to be destroyed in order to make a
world that was more spontaneous and better.
Indeed, it was the school revolts of 1968 where some new leaders were discovered. According to James (2003) those in prominent
positions included lawyers who defended Baader-Meinhof, Horst Mahler, Otto Schily,
and Christian Strobele, all became prominent in German political life (p. 319). Mahler
began to see the anti-Americanism trend in the 1968 left, so became party to the opposite
extreme; Strobele stuck closely to the 1968 stance and was a leader for the Green party
for environmentalism; Schily was also with the Green party before transferring to the SPD
and eventually becoming an Interior Minister (p. 319).
Others in Britain, France, and elsewhere also went on to high political and
business positions throughout Europe.
Overall, Europe had its ups and downs in different areas of history, but the Golden
Age was still considered just that, and much of it dependent upon cultural and political
changes that were an outgrowth of economic expansion.
It was the outward growth of the economy that opened the way for certain areas to
blossom beautifully, as well as to spread the weeds of discontent in other areas. Diverse as it was, Europe in the 1960s, and
its international and internal/domestic economic dynamics, turned out to be a tremendous
boon for Europeans in the post-war era.
References
Centre for Economic Policy Research.
(2009, May). Economic Growth: The Golden Age.
Retrieved October 26, 2009, from http://www.cepr.org/pubs/bulletin/meets/4403.htm
Colombatto, Enrico. (2008). The European
Economy since 1945: Coordinated Capitalism and
Beyond. The Independent Review, 13(1), 141-144. Retrieved October 24, 2009, from
ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1502989421).
Copilas, . (2009). Within and After the Cold
War: Europes Struggling Role and Position Inside the Global Security Matrix. Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai. Studia Europaea, 54(1), 5-26. Retrieved October 24, 2009, from ProQuest Social
Science Journals. (Document ID: 1692833271).
Francisco Alvarez-Cuadrado, F., Pintea, M. I. (2008, February). A Quantitative Exploration of
the Golden Age of European Growth. Abstract retrieved October 26, 2009, from
http://www.fiu.edu/orgs/economics/wp2008/08-05.pdf
Gales,
Kander, Malanima, and Rubio (2007).
North versus South: Energy transition and energy intensity in Europe over 200 years. European Review of Economic History, 11(2), 219-253. Retrieved October 24, 2009, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1397083431).
James, Harold. (2003). Europe Reborn:
History, 1914-2000. Great Britain: Pearson Education
Limited