In an earlier post on language I alluded to the idea of a European “demos”, that elusive common sense of European identity and political community which would seem to be the key to any chance of “ever closer union”. The disconnect between European citizens and their governing institutions is certainly stark. Have you talked to anyone lately who’s getting excited about the upcoming elections to the European Parliament? Can anyone doubt that the election of the American president was a much more exciting prospect for an overwhelming majority of Europeans than the selection of a new president of the EU Commission? And what of the question of identity? A resident of Manchester would probably describe him or herself as British, English, Northern and Mancunian before considering, if at all, that he or she might be European.
Some argue that it’s impossible to achieve a common political identity across 27 member states, pointing to different political traditions, language barriers and the enduring pride of the nation-state. The possibility of “demos” and the very logic of supra-national representation was, for example, attacked by Czech President Vaclav Klaus in the European Parliament last month. The attitude of Klaus, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council (bring on Sweden), is indicative of a habit of unproductive naysaying. It slams the European project without offering solutions and delights only those with preconceived Eurosceptic attitudes.
Without indulging in the media-fostered image of phantom overlords plotting away in Eurospeak in their Brussels hideaways, then, I fully admit the need for a greater sense of relevance for the EU and the importance of attempts to foster “Europeanness”. Indeed, in response to Klaus’s challenge, the task of pro-Europeans is to identify measures that could be taken to improve the extent to which Europeans identify with their policy makers and planners. Below the fold, I discuss some of these ideas.
