Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Foundations of the Argument Read chapter Read first chapter

2018 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

8. The EU as a Communal Endeavour: Ideal and Reality

Authors : Ray Kinsella, Maurice Kinsella

Published in: Troikanomics

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In this chapter we explore the ethic of ‘community’ that is central to sustaining healthy transnational relationships within the EU. This invites an examination into the democratic ideals that underpin the EU—in particular, solidarity and sovereignty. The issue, in this context, is to ask why these are so central, and how they can be discharged in a manner that fosters the national autonomy of individual member states while simultaneously attending to the ongoing stability of the wider community. A key existential crisis that is assailing the EU at present is continued internal dissonance and the threat of further fragmentation. This will put at risk the extraordinary and providential achievements of Schuman, Monnet, Adenauer, and De Gasperi—and threaten a possible Balkanisation of the EU. A reluctance to challenge the prevailing Conventional Wisdom underpinning these developments will, inevitably, lead to continued fracturing. Our proposition is that rediscovering these foundational democratic ideals (with a particular emphasis on solidarity and subsidiarity) is indispensable to the resolution of the deeper existential crisis that the EU is undergoing.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Case Studies: Exploring the Lived Reality of Troikanomics
next chapter Troikanomics: Legacy and Lessons
Footnotes
1
The next Elections to the European Parliament will be held in late May 2019. Following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU, a vote by the European Parliament in February 2018 stipulated that the number of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) will be reduced from 751 to 705. These 705 members will represent around 500 million people from 28 Member States.
 
2
These efforts were acknowledged by The Nobel Committee in 2012 with the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize, noting that ‘[t]he union and its forerunners have for over six decades contributed to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe’. Alongside this, they were keen to note that ‘[t]he EU is currently undergoing grave economic difficulties and considerable social unrest’.
 
3
In 1956, following on from the Suez Canal Crisis and the corresponding end of Britain’s and France’s imperial influence in the region, the dominance of the United States over its Western allies had been left in little doubt. Consequently, German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer became emboldened to launch a European political initiative that could withstand other dominant global forces at the time. Here, he stated that while individual European countries would never be leading global powers in and of themselves, ‘there remains to them only one way of playing a decisive role in the world; that is to unite to make Europe. … Europe will be your revenge’. One year later, the Treaty of Rome launched the Common Market (The Economist 2006).
 
4
Here, Weiler (1999) provides a discussion on three foundational ideals that underpinned the process of integration: peace, shared prosperity, and supranationality.
 
5
The ECSC was formally established by the Treaty of Paris in 1951, and signed by Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. Its primary purpose was ensuring peace, which was achieved—amongst other ways—through the regulation of industrial production under a centralised authority. Based on the principles of ‘supranationalism’—wherein member nations agree to delegate power to an authority (see Kiljunen 2004)—it helped set in motion the ethic of transnational dialogue and decision-making that would culminate in the foundation of the European Union. The Treaty of Paris expired in 2002, and with it the ECSC.
 
6
The Treaty of Lisbon (13 December 2007) states in Article 2. 1 that ‘[t]he Union’s aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples’, this is followed by Article 2.3 stating that ‘[t]he Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress’.
 
7
Whose perspectives on these matters continued to be formalised in the years after the initial foundation of the ECSC.
 
8
See also Wachtel (2014).
 
9
The true extent of this extraordinary historical dichotomy, played out in a divided Europe, is reflected in the purported justification on the part of a centralised Soviet Power to invade Hungary in 1956 and then again Czechoslovakia in 1968 to enforce ‘fraternal solidarity’ (italics added) between a hegemonistic centralised authority of its vessel states.
 
10
In this context, Pope John Paul II (1995) has stated that ‘without an objective moral grounding not even democracy is capable of ensuring a stable peace, especially since peace which is not built upon the values of the dignity of every individual and of solidarity between all people frequently proves to be illusory’.
 
11
Weiler (1999) has also pointed out that the origins of European integration cannot be understood without an axiological dimension.
 
12
As de Areilza (2009) notes, this process necessitates ‘sacrifice and a transformation of the politics of previous decades’.
 
13
Here Christman (2014a, 2014b) draws a distinction between ‘respecting autonomy’ and ‘valuing autonomy’, both of which can be transposed to the context of the EU. Respect, grounded in the principle of shared dignity, provides limitations on how another is treated and, in this context, would seem to be aligned with the right to negative liberty—freedom from oppression. Valuing autonomy is centred on promotion—upholding a positive freedom to act.
 
14
This has, throughout history, been made an explicit responsibility imparted on the individual, for example, in the Epistle of Barnabas: ‘Do not live entirely isolated, having retreated into yourselves, as if you were already [fully] justified, but gather instead to seek together the common good’ (The Epistle of Barnabas 4,10).
 
15
For a further discussion on this point, see Innerarity (2014).
 
16
Here, Weiler (1991) differentiates between ‘unity’-based and ‘community’-based models of integration.
 
17
For further insights, see Mason (2000).
 
18
For further insights, see Raspotnik et al. (2012).
 
19
Cited in Pimor (2017).
 
20
The conceptual roots of the ‘solidarity’ are found in sociology, with significant foundational input from Emile Durkheim and Max Weber—who regarded it as being a fundamental principle of social integration.
 
21
The Holy See (1992) notes that ‘international solidarity is a requirement of the moral order; world peace depends in part upon this’.
 
22
Iglesias (2001) provides an insightful critique into the nature, and attendant dignity, of the human person. Here, she discusses three fundamental aspects of the human being: (1) the human being is bodily, organic, physical; (2) the human being is also an integrated-unity-of-life, a living being, a living whole, a one, an individual; and (3) the human being is a being with a temporal continuity, a being with a history, a being in time.
 
23
The Commission (1994) describes the ‘European Social Model’ in terms of values that include democracy, social protection, and solidarity.
 
24
See also EurWORK (2011). Articles 27 to 34 bear directly on employment and industrial relation. The four remaining articles in the Solidarity Chapter are Health care (Article 35), Access to services of general economic interest (Article 36), Environmental protection (Article 37), and Consumer protection (Article 38).
 
25
The authors discuss this point in Kinsella and Kinsella (2012). Here, newsreel footage comes to mind. It shows a middle-aged woman, in Middle America, in the immediate aftermath of having discovered that the pension on which she had relied had evaporated in the financial alchemy that defined the whole collapse. She turned to the camera and said, in a shocked voice: ‘But they lied to me, they lied to me?’ In this moment she was attempting to wrestle with the reality that perhaps the people whom she had placed her trust in did not have her own welfare at heart in their business undertakings. This visceral shock was of course replicated in a million different ways both across the United States and across the Eurozone.
 
26
This builds on a discussion by one of the authors in Kinsella (2018).
 
27
See Mulcahy and Massaro (2003).
 
28
Specifically, Article 3b (European Union 13 December 2007) outlines specific mandates, with particular reference to the principles of ‘conferral’, ‘subsidiarity’, and ‘proportionality’. Here, it notes that ‘[t]he limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality’. Specifically, it states that ‘[u]nder the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level’.
 
29
Under Article 5(3) (European Union 13 December 2007), three preconditions for intervention by the Union are laid out: non-exclusive competence; necessity; and added value.
 
30
See de Benoist (1999).
 
31
Here, in his discussion on democratic leadership, Gastille (1994) argues that at the heart of democracy should be an ethic of ‘deliberation’. The value of deliberation is that it enables both the challenges and opportunities that are encountered to be identified, explored, and resolved in a collaborative, congruent, and reflective manner. Leaders cannot, therefore, afford to be selfish with the power that they potentially wield, as doing so will cost dearly in terms of compromising members’ longer-term capacity for growth.
 
32
See Van Til (2008).
 
33
For further insights on this point, see Frigot and Bonadonna (2016).
 
Literature
Christman, J. (2014a). Coping or Oppression: Autonomy and Adaptation to Circumstance. In A. Veltman & M. Piper (Eds.), Autonomy, Oppression, and Gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Christman, J. (2014b). Relational Autonomy and the Social Dynamics of Paternalism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 17, 369–382.CrossRef
Commission of the European Communities. (1994). White Paper: European Social Policy – A Way Forward for the Union.
de Areilza, J. M. (2009). The History and Foundations of European Integration: A Contribution to the Debate on the Future of the Union. In C. Arvanitopoulos (Ed.), Reforming Europe: The Role of the Centre-Right (pp. 9–21). s.l.: Springer.CrossRef
de Benoist, A. (1999). What Is Sovereignty? Telos, 1999(116), 99–118.
European Union, C. o. t. R. o. t. G. o. t. M. S. (2007, December 13). Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community. Volume 2007/C 306/01.
Frigot, F., & Bonadonna, E. (2016). Europe and Sovereignty: Reality, Limits and Outlook. s.l.: Robert Schuman Foundation.
Galbraith, J. K. (1958). The Affluent Society. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Gastille, J. (1994). A Definition and Illustration of Democratic Leadership. Human Relations, 47(8), 953–975.CrossRef
Grabow, K. (Ed.). (2010). Christian Democracy: Principles and Policy Making. Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.
Iglesias, T. (2001). The Dignity of the Individual: Issues of Bioethics and Law. Dublin: Pleroma Press.
Innerarity, D. (2014). Does Europe Need a Demos to Be Truly Democratic? LSE ‘Europe in Question’ Discussion Paper Series, Volume 77.
Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. s.l.: s.n.
Kiljunen, K. (2004). The European Constitution in the Making. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Kinsella, M. (2018). Egalitarianism in Therapeutic Dialogue: A Catalyst for Client Autonomy. The Irish Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 18(1), 5–10.
Kinsella, R., & Kinsella, M. (2012, July). The Implosion of Solidarity: A Critique of the Euro Zone Crisis. Working Notes, (69), 22–28.
Mason, A. (2000). Community, Solidarity and Belonging: Levels of Community and Their Normative Significance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mulcahy, R. E., & Massaro, T. (2003). Subsidiarity. In The New Catholic Encyclopedia (p. 567). United States of America: Gale.
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. (2005). Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Pope Benedict XVI. (2009). Caritas in Veritate. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Pope John Paul II. (1991). Centesimus Annus. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Pope John Paul II. (1995). Evangelium Vitae. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Raspotnik, A., Jacob, M., & Ventura, L. (2012). The Issue of Solidarity in the European Union. s.l.: TEPSA.
Taylor, C. (1992). The Politics of Recognition. In A. Gutmann (Ed.), Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition (pp. 25–73). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
The European Parliament. (2012). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Communities, C(326), 391–407.
The Holy See. (1992). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd ed.). Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Van Til, K. A. (2008). Subsidiarity and Sphere-Sovereignty: A Match Made in…? Theological Studies, 69, 610–636.CrossRef
Wachtel, P. L. (2014). An Integrative Relational View. Psychotherapy, 49(4), 342–349.CrossRef
Weiler, J. (1991). The Transformation of Europe. The Yale Law Review, 100(8), 2403–2483.CrossRef
Weiler, J. (1999). The Constitution of Europe. “Do the New Clothes Have an Emperor?” And Other Essays on European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Metadata
Title
The EU as a Communal Endeavour: Ideal and Reality
Authors
Ray Kinsella
Maurice Kinsella
Copyright Year
2018
Book
Troikanomics

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97069-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-97070-7

Copyright Year: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97070-7_8