In Without Remorse, T. Mills Kelly provides a window onto late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Bohemia, a time and place when dislocations associated with industrial expansion coincided with a more volatile, populist politics. The origins of these politics lie earlier in the nineteenth century with the success of the Czech national movement and the enactment of constitutional reforms. Beginning in 1860, career politicians constructed fairly stable political parties; but with the extension of the franchise, beginning in the 1890s, new parties arose, each attempting to orient its message to a wider cross section of the electorate. This popularization of politics involved not only sincere attempts to better the conditions of the urban and rural poor, but also opportunities for a more virulent, vicious politics of demagoguery and obstructionism. In the lands of Bohemia, no party made more successful use of such tactics than the Czech National Socialist Party. In this slender volume, Kelly familiarizes us with the message and tactics of the National Socialists, as well as a methodology for explaining their relative electoral success.

The success of the Czech National Socialists, Kelly informs us, lies in the unexpected coincidence of their strident, uncompromising rhetoric of nationalist and Socialist struggle—often extending into hate speech and street violence—coupled with a shrewd tactical flexibility. The National Socialists used harsh rhetoric and rowdy demonstrations to separate themselves from their rivals. In an opportune moment, however, they would quickly form an electoral alliance with one rival in order to take advantage of the perceived weakness of another. Once elected to office, they would just as readily cooperate as employ obstructionist tactics in the parliamentary assemblies or on the streets.

These alterations in tactics might have limited the appeal of the National Socialists, but they worked well enough in specific circumstances to ensure an increasing share of the Bohemian vote between 1897 and 1914. The National Socialists employed a rhetoric of fear, claiming that the nation and its working class were threatened by Habsburgs, Germans, Jews, clericals, industrialists, and traitorous Czechs. To explain why this message was effective in some districts but not others, Kelly employs what he calls an ecological inference methodology, a quantitative approach created by the political scientist Gary King. In this method, electoral results are correlated to local social indicators derived from census data. From this data, Kelly constructed a quality of life index based on three variables: infant mortality, saving deposits per capita, and the share of the labor force employed in agriculture. Through these measurements, he can claim whether a particular district was waxing or waning in relation to the districts around it, thereby providing a sense of how the population might perceive itself—and whether the fear-mongering of the National Socialists might have resonance. As Kelly clearly states, it is impossible to know how each individual voted; therefore, any conclusions must be understood in terms of generalities. The evidence, nonetheless, illustrates a strong correlation between symptoms of relative decline and voter preference for the Czech National Socialists.

During the last years of the Habsburg monarchy, the National Socialists employed an increasingly radical and irresponsible set of tactics, which provided them a bargaining chip vis-à-vis the other, more moderate parties, a mantle of resolution, a position from which they could oppose any action of the government should it prove unpopular, and martyrs should the police crack down on their illegal street demonstrations. In this way, the party succeeded in appealing to populations already feeling at risk, but, at the same time, probably limited its appeal only to such populations. As we have seen—and not only in Central Europe—a politics of obstructionism can be quite effective when evidence of decline is already present.

There is always more to be desired in a book. In this case, the author might have provided a broader description of National Socialist party-building activities, conducted an analysis of why some voters in these same districts preferred other political parties, and addressed the process by which contemporary political parties in general succeeded in increasingly penetrating all levels of society. As it stands, this book will be useful well beyond the confines of Czech history. As a result of its methodology and conclusions regarding radical nationalism, it is well suited as a supplementary text in any relevant upper division course in modern history and should provide inspiration for future researchers.