Table of Contents

Introduction; 1. All paths to Rome? Transnational Catholicism in the nineteenth century; 2. Under siege: Catholic parties in interwar Europe; 3. After Versailles: left-Catholic cooperation; 4. In the shadow of dictatorship: contacts in exile; 5. Hegemony by default: Christian democracy in postwar Europe; 6. Creating core Europe: the rise of the party network; 7. Deepening integration: the supranational coalition embattled; 8. Informal politics: from Rome to Maastricht.

Promotional Information

This book considers the role of European Christian democratic parties in the making of the European Union.

About the Author

Wolfram Kaiser is Professor of European Studies at the University of Portsmouth, UK, and Visiting Professor at the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium. He has published numerous books, journal articles and book chapters, especially in the field of European Union history and politics, Christian democracy and the history of globalisation.

Reviews

Review of the hardback: 'Kaiser's survey impresses for its analytical incisiveness and chronological and geographic scope.' Central European History

Review of the hardback: 'Kaiser offers a detailed yet extremely clear institutional history that effectively highlights the personal contacts and relationships among integration's supporters.' Central European History

'… a landmark contribution to contemporary European history. [This book] should find a secure place on reading lists for advanced undergraduate and graduate courses on the history of Cold War Europe. Kaiser makes a valuable contribution to recent literature showing that European integration processes did not start in 1945 … Historians of the Cold War will read this book with great interest, for it presents an important and imaginatively construed way of transcending the differences between diplomatic and domestic social and political history. Kaiser's book powerfully demonstrates that the history of the Cold War, like that of European integration, is embedded in a much richer trajectory than historicist assumptions about historical epochs suggest.' Journal of Cold War Studies