europe after maastricht.odt

8/11/2019 Europe After Maastricht.odt

1/27

Europe After Maastricht - Do the New Clothes have an Emperor? *J.H.H.

Weiler **

Cop!ri"ht# Joseph H.H. Weiler$ %&&'.

(.

(t starte) with a an"# +he si"nin" of the +reat! on European ,nion at

Maastricht in eruar! %&&. (t en)e) in a whimper# (ts entr! into force in

Novemer %&&/ -- a low$ anti-climatic moment in the histor! of

contemporar! European inte"ration not its crownin" achievement. A woul)-

e triumph turne) sour.

+here is a )istinct moo) amon" Communit! Man)arins. 0recht1s wic2e) 3uip

ma! well )escrie the itter$ vin)ictive sentiment#

+he 4eople have )isappointe)# Maastricht$ 5ustl! haile) as a remar2ale

)iplomatic achievement$ was met in man! a European street with a

sentiment ran"in" from hostilit! to in)i6erence. 7ne cannot even )erive

comfort from those se"ments of pulic opinion which have rallie) ehin)

8Europe8 such as the a"ricultural lo! in (relan)$ the 4olitical Estalishment

in rance$ the 9erman 4artitocrac!. Narrow self-interest$ a formi)ale sta2e

in the status-3uo$ a "rowin" cleava"e with the constituents are the

respective hall-mar2s of this support. Ma!e +he 4eople shoul)$ in)ee)$ e

chan"e).

(t is not m! intention in this essa! to tr! an) e:plain$ with the tools of social

science$ 8what went wron" with Maastricht?8 M! intuitive impression is thatthe attitu)e to Maastricht is$ perhaps$ an in)ication of a )isillusionment

which e:ten)s far )eeper than an o5ection to the speci;c content of the

+reat! itself. +o e sure$ the never en)in" recession will have ha) its impact

too$ creatin" a "eneral climate of uncertaint! an) insecurit!. 0ut coul) it e

that 8Europe8 has a captivatin" pull onl! when the "oin" is "oo)$ a 9ol)en

Calf of plent! to e re5ecte) as matters economic turn sour? Dare one sa!

it? +he Europe of Maastricht su6ers from a crisis of i)eals. +he Memer


2/27

coul) elieve that lon" term self-interest coinci)e) with hi"her values. +he

reception ! the pulic of the Maastricht +reat! is the writin" on the wall --

Coul) it e that the 8Europe8 of Maastricht is an i)eal which has lost its

moili=in" force? A force which has lost its moili=in" i)eals?

We are force) thus to face s3uarel! the En)s of European (nte"ration$ oftenne"lecte) in what seems to e the more ur"ent )eate of Means -- the

instruments an) mechanisms$ political an) economic$ for achievin" the

speci;c o5ectives of the +reaties.

+his essa! is an attempt to re@intro)uce a )iscourse on i)eals into the

current )eate on European (nte"ration. +his attempt$ it is hope)$ will e of

some value re"ar)less of its utilit! or otherwise in e:plainin" the ehavior of

the various actors in the European polit!.

((

A )is3uisition focussin" e:plicitl! on i)eals is not an eas! tas2$ an) this for

two reasons.

irst$ much of the social science of European inte"ration has een

)ominate) ! the realist an) neo-realist schools of international relations.

Notions of i)eals$ ethics an) the li2e have a ver! limite) place in their

e:planator! an) normative apparatus of


3/27

the e:planation? ( thin2 not. ( thin2 the pa!-o6 coul) e hi"h an) that the

reason for the asence lies rather with the )isciplinar! 8mis;t8 of i)eals as

an o5ect for en3uir!.

What then woul) e the interest$ the intellectual 8pa! o6$8 in e:plorin" the

i)eals of European inte"ration an) the European Communit!?

( propose to answer this 3uestion after )escriin" ;rst one of the

Communit!1s foun)ational i)eals$ which$ in turn$ will serve as a means for a

"eneral phenomenolo"ical reBection an) as a tool to e:plain the utilit! of

e:plorin" the i)eals of European (nte"ration.

4eace$ in the imme)iate wa2e of Worl) War (($ was the most e:plicit an)

evocative of i)eal for which the woul)-e-polit! was to e an instrument.

Nowhere is this capture) etter than in the oft repeate) phraseolo"! of the


4/27

ima"er! an) values of Christian Gove$ of 9race -- not$ ( thin2$ a particularl!

astonishin" evocation "iven the personal ac2"roun)s of the oun)in"

athers -- A)enauer$ De 9aspari$


5/27

What rin"s the messa"e of peace in the formation of the Communit! into

the realm of i)eals$ what connects it to so )eep a fountain as Christian Gove$

is the historical conte:t of 5usti;e) hatre) an) fear. +he infamous 4eace (n

7ur +ime approach of the %&/s which saw the sacri;ce of C=echoslova2ia

was a counter i)eal# the i)!llic$ the comfortale$ without the altruistic. (n the

EC of the earl! 's an) somewhat e!on)$ their is a conte:t where peacehas oth the i)!llic an) the altruistic -- we have to overcome our feelin"s of

reven"e$ which were "iven full vent after the Worl) War ($ ut at the same

time the comfort of peace is ein" o6ere). (t was not then the fear of War

etween sa!$ rance an) 9erman!@ which ren)ere) peace an i)ealistic

)esi)eratum in %&'. (t was the ps!cholo"ical an) spiritual )eman) which it

ma)e which so ren)ere) it.

+he Firtuous#

+he i)!llic an) the )emonic elements have een e:plaine) in lin"uistic an)

ehavioristic terms# +he! correspon) to what we normall! mean when we

use the wor)$ or thin2 of$ i)eals the! impl! a certain un)erstan)in" of

human ps!che an) what appeals an) motivates us.

+he! are also value free an) a-historical. +he! )o not )i6erentiate etween

the 8i)eals8 of A)olph Hitler or Mother +heresa. 7ne can$ after all$ )esire evil

or mista2e it for virtue$ an) ma2e "reat sacri;ces to achieve it.

( woul) a)) therefore a thir) consi)eration# +he "roun)in" of i)eals in

ethics. ( can 5ustif! this consi)eration in two wa!s. irst$ as a reBection of

social realit!# When i)eals have een put forwar) as a social phenomenon$

as part of a pro"ramme of action$ the! have alwa!s een presente) as

ein" so "roun)e). 0ut$ ( woul) also a)) this consi)eration as an

unashame)l! normative la!er to i)eals )iscourse# a refusal on m! part to

)iscuss i)eals in purel! ehavioristic terms$ even if ( am min)ful of the

fashionailit! of moral relativism$ an) the manipulailit! of ethics. Even

peace can pose consi)erale ethical )ilemmas. ew of us$ after all$ are total

paci;sts.

( shall e:plain the fourth an) ;nal consi)eration later in this essa!.

(F

0efore we turn to e:amine the other i)eals of European (nte"ration in its

formative !ears ( shall reBect now more )elieratel! on the interest in

e:plorin" i)eals in "eneral an) European inte"ration i)eals in particular.

( see three )istinct interests#


6/27

A. A lar"e$ the lar"est$ part of EC stu)ies is instrumentalist# Actor-(nterest--

>esult$


7/27

Where one mi"ht have stron" )isa"reements is the importance that

European (nte"ration ()eals have ha) in societ!. ome.

+he Communit! shall have as its tas2 ... to promote throu"hout the

Communit! a harmonious )evelopment of economic activities$ a continuous

an) alance) e:pansion$ an increase in stailit!$ an accelerate) raisin" of

the stan)ar) of livin" ...

+he focus on prosperit! shoul) not come as a surprise. After all$ the

economic reconstruction of the )evastate) continent was intimatel!

connecte) with the notion of peace. Each was the means for the other.

(n)ee) in the ilical passa"e$ fre3uent in the oo2 of Ju)"es$ peace an)

prosperit! are lin2e)# the vine!ar) an) the ;" tree ein" a s!mol for oth.

+he i)!llic$ the )esire) state of a6airs is self-evi)ent. 0ut at ;rst lush it is

har) to capture the altruistic$ non-he)onistic )imension of the 3uest for

prosperit!. Are we not here in the presence of pure self-interest$ somethin"


8/27

to e almost ashame) of -- the ver! antithesis of altruism$ challen"e$

sacri;ce which are essential parts of i)ealistic narrative? Where is the

virtuous an) where is the challen"e to the )emonic which$ ( ar"ue)$ where

essential components of i)eals )iscourse?

+here was an i)ealistic )imension$ nuance) to e sure$ to the 3uest forprosperit! which me)iate) its utilitarian aspects. (ts virtue appears when set

a"ainst a ac2)rop of )estruction an) povert!. (n these con)itions

in)ivi)ual an) social@ prosperit! assume) an alto"ether )i6erent meanin"#

Di"nit! -- oth personal an) collective. (n an Enli"htenment oun) vision of

the in)ivi)ual$ povert! resonates with the emarrassment of )epen)ence on

others$ with the humiliation re) ! helplessness$ with the )e"ra)ation of

lac2 of autonom!. +here is$ thus$ nothin" shameful in aspirin" for prosperit!

when it comes to mean )i"nit!. +here$ then$ is its virtue.


9/27

historical map -- the re5ection of the European Defense Communit! an) the

European 4olitical Communit! in the 's an) the articulation of

supranationalism in$ especiall!$ the +reat! of >ome$ that the Communit!

vision prevaile) in the formative !ears of the EC. 0ut clearl!$ even more

than ever!thin" else in this essa!$ the construction of supranationalism an)

its virtues follows m! un)erstan)in" with no pretence to a commonl!1receive) 2nowle)"e1.

(n tr!in" to e:plain the wa!s in which the Communit! is$ or has ecome$

supra-national$ most )iscussion over the !ears has ten)e)$ interestin"l!$ to

focus on its relation to the 8state8 rather than the 8nation.8 +his conBation of

nationstate is not alwa!s helpful.


10/27

un)erstan) a certain asic appeal to our human species which is$ ar"ual!$

inherentl! social# the appeal that famil! an) trie have too. 4art of the

appeal is$ simpl!$ the provision of a framewor2 for social interaction. 0ut

surel! one has to "o e!on) that# after all$ much looser social constructs

than nationhoo)$ let alone trie an) famil!$ coul) provi)e that framewor2.

0elon"in" means$ of course$ more than that. (t means a place$ a socialhome.

+he elon"in" of nationhoo) is oth li2e an) unli2e the on)s of loo) in

famil! an) trie an) in oth this li2eness an) unli2eness we ma! ;n) a clue

to some of its un)erl!in" values.

(t is li2e the on)s of loo) in famil! an) trie in that those who are of the

nation have their place$ are accepte)$ elon"$ in)epen)entl! of their

achievements -- ! 5ust ein" -- an) herein lies the powerful appeal an)terrile )an"er@ of elon"in" of this t!pe -- it is a shiel) a"ainst e:istential

aloneness. (n$ for e:ample$ the tra)ition of the Jewish nation$ a tra)ition

worth! of some consi)eration "iven the continuit! of Jewish national survival

for over three millennia$ we ;n) a normative e:pression to this form of

elon"in"# 8Even thou"h he has sinne)$ he remains (srael8 +almu)


11/27

(t is here that one ma! turn from the nation to the mo)ern


12/27

+he ause ma! ta2e place in relation to the three principal oun)aries# +he

e:ternal oun)ar! of the


13/27

(t is eas! to see some of the faults of this vision# (t woul) e more than

ironic if a polit! set up as a means to counter the e:cesses of statism en)e)

up comin" roun) full circle an) transformin" itself into a super@ state. (t

woul) e e3uall! ironic if the ethos which re5ecte) the oun)ar! ause of

the nation-state$ "ave irth to a polit! with the same potential for ause.

+he prolem with this ,nit! vision is that its ver! reali=ation entails itsne"ation.

+he alternative vision$ the one that historicall! has prevaile)$ is the

supranational vision$ the communit! vision. At one level aspirations here are

oth mo)est compare) to the ,nion mo)el an) reactionar!#


14/27

+urnin" to the oun)ar! etween nation an) state supranationalism is

meant to prevent auses here too. +he supranational pro5ect reco"ni=es that

at an inter-"roup level nationalism is an e:pression of cultural political

an)or other@ speci;cit! un)erscorin" )i6erentiation$ the uni3ueness of a

"roup as positione) vis-a-vis other "roups$ callin" for respect an) 5ustif!in"

the maintenance of inter-"roup oun)aries.

At an intra-"roup level nationalism is an e:pression of cultural political

an)or other@ speci;cit! un)erscorin" commonalit!$ the 8share)ness8 of the

"roup vis-a-vis itself$ callin" for lo!alt! an) 5ustif!in" elimination of intra-

"roup oun)aries.

0ut$ cruciall!$ nationalit! is not the thin" itself -- it is its e:pression$ an

artifact. (t is a hi"hl! st!li=e) artefact$ with an entire apparatus of norms an)

haits aove all it is not a spontaneous e:pression of that which it si"ni;es

ut a co)e of what it is meant to "ive e:pression to$ fre3uentl! even

translate) into le"al constructs. Nationalit! is ine:trical! lin2e) to

citi=enship$ citi=enship not simpl! as the co)e for "roup i)entit!$ ut also as

a pac2a"e of le"al ri"hts an) )uties$ an) of social attitu)es.


15/27

Hermann Cohen$ the "reat neo-Kantian$ in his >eli"ion )er Fernunft aus )en

uellen )es Ju)entums$ tries to e:plain the meanin" of the Mosaic law which

call for non-oppression of the stran"er. (n his vision$ the alien is to e

protecte)$ not ecause he was a memer of one1s famil!$ clan reli"ious

communit! or people$ ut ecause he was a human ein". (n the alien$

therefore$ man )iscovere) the i)ea of humanit!.

We see throu"h this e:3uisite e:e"esis that in the curtailment of the

totalistic claim of the Nation


16/27

+he vision of European (nte"ration as e:plicate) aove$ ma! e:plain$ in part$

how it was that the Communit! onl! rarel! ecomes the focus of part!

politics in continental Europe. All parties can emrace it$ ecause$ if !ou

want$ the appeal$ or the lan)ness$ ta2e !our pic2@ of its i)ealistic

superstructure. +he Communit!$ li2e other political forces in 4ost War Europe

emrace oth lieralism an) social-)emocrac! so as to avoi) -- at the levelof rhetoric -- the actual choices which e:ist etween these pro"rammes.

Historicall!$ one cannot spea2 of mass moili=ation for Europe. 0ut as !ears

of Euroarometer surve!s show$ it was an acceptale i)ea alwa!s eas! to

support.

. At a secon) level we ma! turn to i)eals as a vehicle for constitution of the

self -- in)ivi)ual an) social. Consi)er ;rst the "eneration of the so calle)

oun)in" athers who saw their worl) fall apart in the horrors of Worl) War ((

-- a ne"ation of the ver! values of Christian love$ of soli)arit!$ of the

Enli"htenment pro5ect. European (nte"ration presents itself on m! anal!sisas ver! allurin"# (t is not onl! a new political an) economic architecture for

post War Europe which ra)icall! supplants the ol) Fersailles mo)el of 4ost

Worl) War (. (t is a vision which whilst ein" innovative an) ra)ical$ is also

)eepl! conservative$ since it re-aLrms their ol) Weltanschauun"$ in)ee)$ it

"ives a new lease of life to i)eals for which there are no availale meanin"

acceptale@ sustitutes at the time.

(t was a par-e:cellence wa! of aLrmin" one1s i)entit! on well 2nown terrain

an) avoi)in" the )eep )islocations which the rea2)own of civilit! in the

War ma! have create).

(t provi)e)$ for in)ivi)uals an) societies$ a comfortale wa! of )ealin" with

the recent past# +his 4ast nee) not call into 3uestion fun)amental values

an) i)eals# 7nl! the political structure an) technolo"! for their reali=ation.

Europe coul) re)e;ne@ itself as Christian$ sociall! responsile$ worth!

successor of the Enli"htenment.

(t is interestin" here to consi)er the perception an) self-perception of

ureaucracies. Alrea)! in the earl! 's the renewe) ran2furt


17/27


18/27

are the t!pe of i)eals which )epen) for their reali=ation on ein" share) !

a "roup of persons )e;nitionall! the! are e!on) the reach of a lone

in)ivi)ual. urther$ it is not onl! that the! cannot e achieve) ! an! one

in)ivi)ual$ that the! re3uire a communit! for their practice$ in fact the! are

constitutive of a Communit! -- the! create the Communit! on whose

e:istence the! )epen).

+hat this is so in relation to peace is self-evi)ent# (t ta2es$ as the sa!in"

"oes$ two to +an"o. (t is onl! sli"htl! less self-evi)ent in relation to the

supranationalism cluster. +he invitation to pierce the veil of nationalit! is at

one level to celerate the in)ivi)ual as an autonomous ein"$ a universe

unto himself or herself$ an en) not a mere instrumentalit!. 0ut it is also$ at

the same time$ with all the richness of para)o:$ evocative of the two-

si)e)ness of Enli"htenment Gieralism$ a cr! for communit! which

transcen)s the arti;cial arriers of nationalit! an) emphasi=es the

commonalit! of share) humanit!.

(t is least evi)ent in relation to Mar2et$ the Communit! vehicle for prosperit!.

+here is a powerful stran) in the political theor! of mar2ets which i)eali=es

them as a neutral arena in which ! "ivin" free)om to in)ivi)uals to pursue

vi"orousl! in)ivi)ual economic self-etterment a""re"ate prosperit! will e

enhance). +he caricature of this view is the 8invisile han)8 its mo)ern

hallmar2s are passivit! of "overnment$ unshac2lin" the in)ivi)ual frompervasive re"ulation an) vi"orous in)ivi)ual competition. Ar"ual!$ it was a

variant of this i)ea which informe) an) e:plaine) "overnment moili=ation

ehin) the


19/27

conceive) the


20/27

,nion so clearl! pose. (nstea)$ the wa! peace is presente) now is the

opposite# 4assive$ the status-3uo$ preservin" the e:istin" comforts$ loo2in"

after ourselves whilst watchin"$ lar"el! scare) an) )etache)$ the horrors so

close to our or)ers. How has Europe respon)e)$ not for the ;rst time$ to

the 8Ethnic cleansin"8 of a reli"ious minorit! so close to its historical centre?

With wor)s an) palliatives. An) the Maastricht provisions on a Common


21/27

an empowerment of the Memer


22/27

+he lan"ua"e of s!mols is 5ust that -- s!molic. An) thus not too much

shoul) e rea) into it. 0ut the notion that the prolem of Maastricht is in the

)raftin"$ in its proli: st!le$ in its incomprehensiilit! shoul) perhaps e

3uestione). Ma!e its messa"e is all too apparent. An)$ to the e:tent that

Maastricht is a reBection$ a mirror of its polit!$ the interestin" )atum is not

in the si=e of the opposition$ ut in the impressive support the +reat! hasevo2e). (n this respect Maastricht is simpl! a creature of its time.

+he personi;cation of this s!molism is to e foun) in the Commission no

lon"er occup!in" that hi"h moral "roun)$ more li2el! in search for a

plausile 5usti;cation for privile"e. (t is almost$ ut onl! almost$ as if the

tales have turne) in that meetin" etween the Communit! 7Lcial an) his

or her national counterpart. (t is no secret that there is a )eep crisis of

morale in the Commission emlematic of the fortunes of Europe. +o e sure$

the cool reception of Maastricht is part of the e:planation. 0ut the low

morale ma! have an a))itional e:planation in s!nch with the theme of thisessa!$ namel! the loss of the )eeper raison )1etre of the enterprise$ the

)isconcertin" reali=ation that Europe has ecome an en) in itself -- no

lon"er a means for hi"her human en)s. No measure of information$

e:planation or structural tin2erin" can reme)! this.

O((

Assumin" that there is some merit to m! anal!sis$ there coul) e a

ten)enc! to ta2e it as an in)ication of a lea2 future for Europe. +hat

ten)enc! shoul) e resiste). Europe ma! or ma! not have a lea2 future$

ut a causal ne:us to the theme of this essa! is tenuous. 4ra"matic an)utilitarian politics can e hi"hl! successful$ in oth moili=ation an) result.

4rovi)in" welfare an) securit! ma! e all we wish from pulic authorit! in

the post mo)ernist a"e. (n)ee)$ this is the place to mention the fourth an)

last element -- i)eals as i)olatr!. An unstate) premise of this narrative was

that i)eals "ive meanin"$ ennole e:istence$ re;ne materialism. 0ut$ as


23/27

a loss of its earlier spiritual values$ ut as an actual source of social

>essentiment.

Consi)er$ chillin"l!$ the turn to fascism in (tal!$ rance an) 9erman! at the

e"innin" of the centur!. (n a most profoun) comparative anal!sis of the

cultural-political roots of the phenomenon the common source is i)enti;e)

as a reaction to some of the manifestations of mo)ernism.

At a pra"matic level the principal manifestations of mo)ernism were the

increase) ureaucrati=ation of life$ pulic an) private the )epersonali=ation

of the mar2et throu"h$ e"$ mass consumerism$ ran) names@ an)

commo)ifaction of values the 8astractism8 of social life$ especiall! throu"h

competitive structures of moilit! rapi) urani=ation an) the centrali=ation

of power. At an epistemolo"ical level mo)ernism was premise) on$ an)

e:perience) in$ an attempt to "roup the worl) into intelli"ile conceptsma2in" up a totalit! which ha) to e un)erstoo) throu"h reason$ science --

astract an) universal cate"ories.

7n this rea)in"$ fascism was a response to$ an) an e:ploitation of$ the an"st

"enerate) ! these practical an) co"nitive challen"es.

Eeril!$ at the en) of the centur!$ European ,nion can e seen as replicatin"$

in realit! or in the su5ective perception of in)ivi)uals an) societies$ some of

these ver! same features# (t has come to s!moli=e$ un5ustl! perhaps$ the

epitome of ureaucrati=ation an)$ li2ewise$ the epitome of centrali=ation.

7ne of its most visile policies$ the Common A"riculture 4olic!$ has ha)

historicall! the purpose of 8rationali=in"8 farm hol)in"s which$ in e6ect$

meant urani=ation. +he sin"le mar2et$ with its emphasis on

competitiveness an) transnational movement of "oo)s can e perceive) as

a latter )a! thrust at increase) commo)i;cation of values consi)er how the

lo"ic of the Communit! forces a topic such as aortion to e treate) as a

8service8@ an) )epersonali=ation of$ this time$ the national mar2et. +he ver!

transnationalsim of the Communit!$ which earlier on was celerate) as a

reinvention of the Enli"htenment i)ealism is 5ust that# universal$ rational$

transcen)ent# wholl! mo)ernist.

+hat the ,nion has cease) to e a vehicle for its foun)ational i)eals an) has

thus ecome a contin"ent ein" an) e:perience remove) from a normative

framewor2 5ust "ives a fashionale 8post mo)ernist8 twist to mo)ernist

an:iet!.

( am not su""estin" that Europe is aout to see a return to fascism$ nor

most certainl! shoul) this anal!sis$ if it has an! merit$ "ive 5o! to ;n-)e-si4cle chauvinists$ whose wares to)a! are as o)ious as the! were at the


24/27

start of the centur!. 0ut ( am su""estin" that the crisis of en)s mi"ht e

worse than simpl! a rupture with the past. (t mi"ht e an unwelcome

connection to another worrisome past$ an)$ in this li"ht$ the possile turn

awa! from communit! to unit! in the Maastricht pro5ect is simpl! sa).

O(((

Even with this )an"er in min)$ there ma! e an unease at a conclusion

which left such star2 choices with which to thin2 of the future of Europe. +his

essa! nee) not have a polic! oriente) tilt at all. 0ut it is inevitale that it will

e rea) ! some for its polic! implications. or what it is worth$ ( woul) li2e

to o6er three alternative perspectives an) a ;nal conclusor! thou"ht as a

rief input into the polic! )eates shapin" the post-Maastricht era.

7ne approach$ which woul) insist on a )ichotom! etween technolo"! an)culture$ repositions$ in)ee) reconceptuali=es$ the Communit! not as a new

polit! for European citi=ens$ ut as a technolo"ical instrument$ an a"enc!$

for the resolution of post-in)ustrial prolems such as environmental

protection$ transnational tra)e$ transport an) the li2e which transcen)

national oun)aries. Accor)in" to this vision$ one shoul) not loo2 for

meanin" an) value at all in the Communit!$ ut re"ar) it as a )evice which

lierates people to )evelop a m!ria) of culture communities e:pressin"

values at the level of localities an) wor2place. A hu"e pa!o6$ accor)in" to

this vision$ is the un)erminin" of national oun)aries as the prime

)elimitation of political culture an) the nation state as the prime vehicle forpolitical an) social e:pression.

+here is much that is allurin" in this reconceptuali=ation. ( )o not propose to

e:plore it in )etail$ ut one shoul) note its wea2 points# +o re"ar) the

Communit! as a technolo"ical instrument is$ in the ;rst place$ to

un)erestimate the profoun) political choice an) cultural impact which the

sin"le mar2et coul) involve -- a politics of eLcienc!$ a culture of neutral an)

a-social mar2ets. Historicall! we 2now the Battenin" impact which mar2ets

can have on local cultural )iversit!. Conse3uentl!$ it un)erestimates the

critical value choices involve) in technocratic re"ulator! re"imes.

A secon) approach$ )eepl! historical$ woul) ;n) a new political messa"e for

the Communit! in its putative responsiilit! towar)s the East. We coul) ta2e

Western Europe %&'% an) impose it without chan"e to Eastern Europe %&&%.

Does Eastern Europe$ awa2ene) li2e sleepin" eaut! into the nationalist

ethos of pre-/& Europe$ not nee)$ aove all$ new structures for peace$

prosperit! an) a supranational ethos which woul) lunt the e:cesses of

nationalism run amo2? Coul) not this e the prime historical mission of the

Communit!?


25/27

A thir) an) ;nal approach woul) e one which woul) e:plore the

communitarian$ as oppose) to lieral$ stran) in the European Communit!

ethos. +his$ of course$ is not the place to e:poun) the communitarian$

repulican$ political theor! an) ethos$ which emphasi=es at all levels of

social or"ani=ation$ not onl! ri"hts an) lierties$ ut civic responsiilit! an)

soli)arit!. +his woul) not e an arti;cial "raft# (t is not )iLcult to ;n)communitarian stran)s in much of Communit! )iscourse. 7ne place to loo2

woul) e in the ver! turn to a European Citi=enship. (t coul)$ after all$ e re-

conceive) as a ol) challen"e to the ethno-national state$ as a

reconceptuali=ation of the ,nion as a polit! elon"in" to its citi=ens rather

than nationals an) from there to an e:ploration of civic virtues at the core of

Communit! i)eals. 0! espousin" this ethos as the "ui)in" principle for its

ever e:pan)in" socio-economic le"islative a"en)a$ the European

Communit! coul) ecome a vehicle for this t!pe of politics of meanin". 0ut$

even if communitarianism is there it is in stron" opposition to the )eepl!

roote) lieral ethic. (t is not )iLcult to ;n) -- ut woul) e hu"el! )iLcult toreali=e.

O(F

+he Communit! is not )oome) nor even fatall! woun)e). An) its ailit! to

reoun) from crisis is part of its histor!. Crisis$ after all$ has alwa!s een the

si"n of its vitalit!$ its relevance. Europe woul)$ however$ e serve) if current

)eate aout its future a))resse) not onl! means ut en)s too.

A Brief Bibliographical Pointer

On the historical origins of the Community:

A. econstruction of Western Europe %&'-'% ,niv. of

California 4ress$ 0er2ele!$ %&P@

J. Monnet$ J. Monnet Q >oert


26/27

ival Fiews of Mar2et ecent Essa!s

Fi2in"$ NI$ %&PS@

7n the cultural-political ac2"roun) to facism

E. Nolte$ +he +hree aces of acism Wie)enfel) an) Nicolson$ Gon)on$

%&S'@

7n New Conceptuali=ations of the European Communit!

J. 7strom Moller$ +echnolo"! an) Culture in a European Conte:t N!t Nor)is2

orla"$ Copenha"en$ %&&%@

.


27/27

** Manle! Hu)son 4rofessor of Gaw an) Jean Monnet Chair$ Harvar) Gaw

esearch Center$Co-

Director$ +he Aca)em! of European Gaw$ European ,niversit! (nstitute$

lorence$ (tal!

europe after maastricht.odt

Documents