Its early roots reaching as far as 1954, the great Buropean Post War Conference (CSCB), which lasted three years from 1972 to 1975, had to overcome the vicissitudes of the Cold War and the setbacks of thediplomatie normalization between Bast and West afterwards, before taking its final shape. Hence the multiple changes of its characteristics and purposes over the years.Resulting from a global rapprochement between the Super Powers and a cautious modus vivendi between the German twin States in Burope (Ostpolitik), the CSCB, although an old Russian dream, was finally seen by the other parties as a calculated risk and possibly a beneficial one. In the end, Western scepticism and criticism of the Helsinki Final Act were less founded on the actual outcome then on traditional reluctance towards the Bast and more vocal because of a darkening international outlook: the deepening economie crisis, the political disarray in Southern Burope (Portugal, ltaly, Greece, Turkey) and a disheartened public opinion (Watergate, Vietnam, etc.).A more sober view might nevertheless appreciate not only the balance of modest mutual gains for all participants, but moreover the outline and hope for a «rebirth of Europe's historical identity» (PresidentFord) as well as the first diplomatic acceptance of the BBC-entity and last, but not least, the «inevitability of reason», as expressed in the policy of détente and the general «vested interest» in it.

The inability of reformist socialism to cape with the rise of fascism and the Great Depression led to a significant challenge by neo-socialists. In Belgium, this challenge was led by De Man and Spaak. In 1933, the POB accepted De Man's Plan as its program of action; in 1935 it entered into the Van Zeeland government. Although in many ways, theneos showed greater understanding of the nature of advanced capitalist society than the orthodox reformists, they displayed an alarming tendency to try to preempt fascism by emulating certain fascist positions.De Man and Spaak broke with socialist internationalism and collective security. De Man became convinced of the bankruptcy of democratic institutions and of the democratic states. This attitude ultimately led him from neutralism to collaboration, in the belief that fascism was indeed the wave of the future.

Corporatist opposition against the introduction of a system of proportional representation in Belgium can essentially be reduced to the opposition by Joris Helleputte. The main reason for this anti-proportionalism way that proportional representation would seriously endanger the growth of a catholic corporatist party ("standenpartij") and - in the long run - of a catholic corporatist state. In 1894 though, political corporatism isalready on its way back, and so is socio-economie corporatism from 1899 on. In the "Belgische Volksbond" a large majority has come to accept proportional representation. This is one of the main reasons which lead Joris Helleputte on the 21th of July 1895 to definitely resign as a president of this association. Hid 1894 Helleputte had already founded the antiproportionalist newspaper "L'Union" but this disappeared within that same year. Another newspaper venture of his, "Le XXm Siècle" (from the 5th of June 1895 on) wilt prove more successful, and wilt become an eminent propaganda-tool against proportional representation.On the 4th of July 1899 Helleputte - together with Woeste - presents a proposal in parliament to introduce the uninominal system.A judicious gerrymandering would then ensure a huge catholic majority.Helleputte took it for granted that within the catholic party each "stand" (estate) would get a fair share of the seats. But the Helleputte-Woeste proposal dit not receive sufficient support. And eventually proportional representation for the legislative elections was introduced by law on the 29th of December 1899.

The Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg remains largely unexplored as far as social science is concerned. An excellent study in electoral sociology by Jules Gérard-Libois gives interesting insights and points out rather convincingly that Luxembourg is endowed with a political system that has a marked degree of specificity, be it from the point of view of the electoral system, electoral habits or the social structure in general. It shows in particular that owing to the rather peculiar electoral system (ordinal proportional representation system allowing panachage), a large party diversity and a dynamic regionalism is fostered.Consequently, the systematic study of small political entities such as Luxembourg enables a considerable and genuine refinement of political analysis.