History of European Identity. Lecture I: A European Political Identity?

1. History of European Identity. Lecture I: A European Political Identity? Johan Wänström johan.wanstrom@liu.se

2. Why the EU?Historicalperspective • 1950 – a continentdestroyed by nationalism and wars • Germany got topay a highprice for WW1 • Fostered revengeratherthanreconciliation • Focus on barriersratherthan integration • Resulted in an evenlarger disaster: WW2 • UK and especiallythe US wantedto go a different pathafter WW2 • Francelearned the lesson the hard way • Economically strong and integratedstateshadmoretolosethangain from starting a war • Countriesthatareeconomicallydependent on eachotherresults in economicgrowth • Trade fosterscultural integration and understanding

3. A growingcommunityPeace and prosperity all over Europe?1950-1979

4. A growingcommunityPeace and prosperity all over Europe?1980-1999

5. A growingcommunityPeace and prosperity all over Europe?2000-2014

6. Futureenlargement?

7. EU: a ”liberal” project? • Conservatives • The nation-state • Acollectiveideabased on traditions (religious/popular) • Socialists • The welfarestate • Acollectiveprojectbased on politicalideology as well as social engineering (popular) • Financed by hightaxes • Major reasontowhy Sweden stayedoutsidefor a long time • Liberals • Focus on the individualratherthan on the collective • No borders, no restrains (cosmopolitan) • Impossiblewithout a common social model???

8. Integralism as a responseto a liberal and cosmopolitan EU • “Integralism, or Integral nationalism, is an ideology according to which a nation is an organic unity. Integralism defends social differentiation and hierarchy with co-operation between social classes, transcending conflict between social and economic groups. … • Integralism claims that the best political institutions for given nations will differ depending on the history, culture and climate of the nation's habitat. Often associated with blood and soilconservatism, it posits the nation or the state or the nation state as an end and a moral good, rather than a means.[1] • The term integralism was coined by the French journalist Charles Maurras, whose conception of nationalism was illiberal and anti-internationalist, elevating the interest of the state above that of the individual and above humanity in general.[1] “ (Wikipedia)

9. Whatareidentities? • Shared representations of a collectiveself as reflected in: • Public debate • Political symbols • Collectivememories • Elitecompetition for power • Collecivebeleifsabout the definition of the group and itsmembership, whichareshared by mostgroupsmembers(intersubjective)

10. Why do weneed a common identity? • Ouridentitysayssomethingaboutwhatweareconsideringto be right and wrong • Immanuel Kant: Categoricalimperative • "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.“ • Hard to get people to obey rules/laws that they don´t agree upon • Hard to get people to pay taxes for something that they don’t agree upon

11. The need for a common identity ”politicalcommunities – communitiesthatclaim the legitimateuseof force over theirmembers – requriesome form ofallegiance and loyalty, which has a somewhatexclusivenatureboth in itsclaims: [-] over solidaritywithourfellowcitizens, and in [-] itsdemands for defendingourowncommunityagainst external threats”

12. Why is European identity important? • A viable and legitimate European polity requires some degree of identification in order to be sustainable! • Example: Parental leave • Attempts to create basic European standards failed • Different ideas of who we are and therefore what is right or wrong • Hard to agree even within Sweden • 15 months – governmentpays 80 percentofincome • Eachparentcanonlyuse 13 months – 2 monthshaveto be used by the otherparent • Shouldthere be 7,5 months for eachparent (forcingparentsto split) • Identitybased on traditions? • Identitybased on reason?

13. A brief history of the concept of identity • What was it like to be, say, a peasant somewhere in Europe 500 years ago? Where did your identity come from? • Your identity was ascribed to you by the surrounding society.

14. A brief history of the concept of identity • Identity politics is a modern phenomenon. Identity as we understand it did not exist in medieval Europe. • This changed with modernization (between the 16th and 18th centuries). • A distinction between ‘the social self’ and ‘the authentic self’.

15. A brief history of the concept of identity • Twoexamples: • Jean-Jacques Rousseau (mid-1700s): The authentic self is not the social self created by the passage of historical time. • The Reformation and Martin Luther (1517-1648): To be a Christian believer is not to accept the rituals of the Catholic Church, but about “what I believe on the inside - not whether I follow the rituals dictated by my society. God looks inside my soul at whether or not I have faith”.

16. A brief history of the concept of identity • The political aspect of modern identity: The importance of recognition. • Friedrich Hegel (early 1800s): History itself is driven by the struggle for recognition - by the desire of human beings to have their fundamental dignity recognized by other human beings. • This makes the struggle for identity into an inherently a political act!

17. A brief history of the concept of identity • This political struggle for recognition can be found in modern nationalism – the most dominant political struggle in Europe over the last few hundred years. • The “European project” was created in order to come to terms with the destructive impact of nationalism. • Europe could not survive after two World Wars unless “Europeans moved into a post-national identity”. (Habermas)

18. Jürgen Habermas • How do wedeterminewhat is right or wrong (or ouridentity)? • In an objectiveway • Nature • Religion • Impossible? • In a subjectiveway • No common determination – onlyindividual • In an intersubjectiveway • Rationalcommunication/discussionsamongpeople, free from traditions and individual status • Yetimportanttryingto understand eachother • Sharedmeaning - changes (slowly?) over time • It is possibletoidentify common solutions to all problems ifweonlycommunicatewellenough • Identity is somethingweconstruct in a rationalwaytogetherwithothers

19. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • Once again: A viable and legitimate European polity requires some degree of identification in order to be sustainable! • What we get then, is the problem of constructing a common European political identity! • Normative theories try to deal with this problem – how should a European political identity be constructed?

20. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • Two distinct aspects of political identity: • Identification • Whoweare? • Allegiance • Solidaritytowhom?

21. Two ways of understanding the relationship between European and national identities: Nation-like, or essentialistic, conceptions • Zero-sum game between identities: the priorities of people’s political identities must change. • Makes no distinction between identification and allegiance Post-nationalist, or constructivistic, conceptions • Positive sum: ’Nested’ or ’cross-cutting’ identities possible. • Distinguishes between identification and allegiance (but sometimes acknowledges the psychological connections between them)

22. Example: USA • Are all amercians dixies? • No: somepeople in the South considerthemselves dixies • Are all americansyeankees? • No: some (all?) people in the Northeastconsiderthemselves yankees • Double identities? • All dixies areamericans • All yankees areamericans • Dixie and yankee: primarilyculturalidentities? • American: primarilypoliticalidentities??? • Patriot: beingloyaltoamericanideas/values – the constitution?

23. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • One influential example of a post-nationalist conception: • Jürgen Habermas’ ’Constitutional Patriotism’ • An attachment to the European polity based on its ”civic”, or cosmopolitan, values, rather than on ”thick” cultural attachments. • Open to inclusion of ”the other”. • Combines both universalism (cosmopolitan values) and particularism (attachment to Europe).

24. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • Habermasargues that the creation of such a common identity is both necessary and possible. • It is necessary because Europe has moved beyond the point where functional conceptions of European citizenship are plausible. • Functional conceptions (based on efficiency, the common market, and bureaucratic administration) ignore the importance of emotional attachments for loyalty towards the community and the political system.

25. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • Functionalism is exhausted because of the new challenges for Europe: • Governing the enlargement. • Political consequences of increasing economic unification: redistributive justice. Redistribution in times of economic crises. (Greece???) • The need for a common foreign and security policy (the new geopolitical situation after 9/11). • These challenges call for a new understanding of European identity which embodies loyalty towards the European political community.

26. A Europeanpoliticalidentity? • Is Constitutional Patriotism possible? • Habermas: • National political identity was also crafted as a “solidarity among strangers”. This can be done with Europe as well. • There has been a development in national identification, from an identification with a national community to an identification with a democratic community. • Europe has a common history, and common values, that we can build upon, e.g. secular politics, certain liberal values.

27. Castiglione • AConstitutional Patriotism is not enough • Habermas failstorecognize the importanceofpoliticalconflict • Identityalsoincludes an ideaof ”the otherside” – the exclusivesideofpolitics