Antonie Doležalová has written an imaginative and well-researched study examining the factors that influenced the state budgets of Czechoslovakia during the interwar years. In the process, she clarifies and demystifies aspects of Czechoslovak economic, political, and fiscal policy. Her central thesis is that the tax burden was high relative to benefits, especially given the inefficacy of state enterprises. Efforts to reduce state expenditures faltered for a complex set of reasons. The tax-paying public did not protest loudly enough because much of the cost and inefficiency were hidden. Members of parliament were persuaded to go along with the various ministers of finance because of their concern with the interests of their constituents. They were also swayed by arguments that certain governmental expenditures would enhance national welfare. The ministers themselves sought to contain deficits but did not try to reduce spending across the board. Efforts to control expenditures also foundered on special interests, including those of state employees. The lack of a true coalition government prevented long-term planning.

Rašín, Engliš a ti druzí is based on exhaustive research into archival records, published sources, and the details of state budgets. Doležalová brings information on the policymakers themselves to bear on her analysis of the political climate for budgeting, early twentieth-century theories of state finance, and the socioeconomic impact of state revenues and expenditures. In the process, she illuminates important and often overlooked or misunderstood aspects of Czechoslovak history.

The book makes several seminal contributions to the fields of Czechoslovak economic and political history. First, Dolezalova explains clearly the different theoretical understandings of public finance that influential economists and government officials espoused. This is particularly helpful because economists used the same terms differently. Their implicit understanding of the relationship between revenues and expenditures, and the ways they categorized each, affected how they approached budgeting. Previously, these fundamental differences among those theoretical perspectives had not been explained clearly.

Second, Doležalová discusses the personalities of the various ministers of finance. This is particularly helpful in assessing their contributions. The book provides significant insights into the contributions of Rašín, Engliš, and their colleagues. Alois Rašín's deft political ability enabled him to promote significantly expanded expenditures during the state-forming years of the early 1920s. He abhorred deficit spending, and his deep conviction that a strong currency above all would demonstrate the strength of the new Czechoslovak state led him to recommend new taxes to overcome the postwar deficit. Karel Engliš, by contrast, was a systematic thinker, well respected for his intellect, who sought to categorize public finance, as well as economic activity. He understood that preparing a budget was an exercise in prediction and as such was less “real” than the economic conditions that would ultimately determine whether the predicted revenues and expenditures were accurate. He was less successful than Rašín in building coalitions but was attuned to the political environment within which budgeting occurred; he pushed for developing budget proposals in the autumn, after the harvest and at a time when people were less skittish about their personal finances, and beginning the fiscal year on 1 January.

Doležalová shows how state budgets can hide information about their true priorities. The section on the sleights of hand and illusions of state budgeting is particularly interesting. Commentators often assume that numbers reveal the true picture; Doležalová demonstrates the many ways aspects of the budget can be hidden from public scrutiny or misrepresented. She deftly portrays the key points of each budget throughout the interwar era.

Doležalová clearly delineates the changing economic and political environment in which Czechoslovak fiscal policy was formulated during the interwar years. Although policymakers understood the importance of expanding social welfare as a way of ensuring stability in an industrial society, they were hamstrung by the Habsburg system they inherited, which included a large state sector. The decision to maintain Habsburg laws and structures became an impediment to change and modernization. Not only the policymakers, but also the budget itself straddled the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Finally, Doležalová sheds light on one of the quandaries of Czechoslovak history, namely, why industry and commerce had relatively little influence in a state that was well-industrialized and modern. The state sector (especially railroad and defense), social welfare, education, and agriculture received more attention in the budget than did manufacturing or trade. Despite public expressions of support for industry, the structure of the state budget undermined effective industrial policies. From the point of view of the budget, the state's relationship to the private sector was one of disinterest, rather than active promotion.

Rašín, Engliš a ti druzí is lucidly written. It contributes substantially to the body of scholarship that confronts long-accepted interpretations of the history of the First Czechoslovak Republic. Doležalová demonstrates the impact of tax policy and state expenditures on areas outside the fiscal sphere and explains why little fundamental change occurred during the twenty years under review. She brings the state budget to life, demonstrating that a balance sheet is more than numbers but, rather, that it reveals political alliances, the priorities of key actors, and social values. This is an important study of Czechoslovak budget policy that is also enjoyable and engaging.