We Need to Talk:
What or Who Blocks the EU to Communicate With the Public?
"Let our eyes not look away, but meet. Let us not look east and west for materials of conversation, but rest in presence and unity."
Ralph Waldo Emerson, The Later Lectures,
Volume 1, p.450
Introduction
Since its inception, the European Union has struggled to effectively communicate with the public, resulting in a number of embarrassing setbacks and delays in regards to meeting certain goals and convincing the European public at large to support the Union. These failures were rightly viewed with some alarm in Brussels, and the European Commission set about attempting to outline and implement an effective communication policy that would foster the development of a robust, transnational public sphere. This possibility has become less and less likely “with the rise of particular interests at the expense of concern for the general good, as well as the deterioration of rational public discourse about public affairs” (Calhoun, 2002, 393).
However, these problems have only been exacerbated and magnified by the recent financial turmoil threatening to disrupt or even sever the weak bonds holding the European Union together.
Only by examining the main challenges for those attempting to formulate the European Union's information and communication policy, the origin of these challenges and some possible solutions for overcoming them, one able to see any possible path for the establishment of a robust public sphere in which residents of Europe can productively discuss transnational public policy.
The Main Challenges:
Public Apathy or Official Ignorance?
The main challenges, which must be overpowered by European information and ...
... middle of paper ...
... EurActiv. Retrieved 23.09.2011
http://www.euractiv.com/priorities/eu-communication-policy/article-117502
Fossum, J., & Schlesinger, P. (2007). The European Union and the Public Sphere: A Communicative Space in the Making? New York: Routledge. PDF
Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (2010). The Making of a European Public Sphere: Media Discourse and Political Contention. New York: Cambridge University Press. EBook. Retrieved 25.09.2011
Steeg Van, M. (2002). Rethinking the Conditions for a Public Sphere in the European Union. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(4): 499– 519.
Trenz, H., & Eder, K. (2004). The Democratizing Dynamics of a European Public Sphere towards a Theory of Democratic Functionalism. European Journal of Social Theory, 7(1), 5-25. VUB Library
Before starting the story of the passage to the Union, Van Middelaar identifies three types of discourses and three types of spheres that illustrate the diversity in understanding the nature of the EU. He explains: intergovernmentalism (Offices and States discourses), supranationalism (Offices and Citizens discourses), and constitutionalism (States and Citizens discourses). By identifying and explaining these discourses, the author shows the limits of previous studies of the EU because “each of the three discourses encourages an illusion that can blind its supporters to the historicity of politics.” (p.10). He has distanced himself from this “illusion” and has used a unique approach that considers the effect of time, which is “the link between past, present, and future” (p.11). The author then identifies three different spheres to analyze the political nature of Europe. The first sphere is the outer sphere which represents the geographical limits of Europe and the sovereignty of each state in the Union. The second sphere is the inner sphere that has started with the treaty of Paris in 1951 that established the European Coal and Steel Community and that represents the institutional and co...
The European Union (EU), since the initial foundation in 1952 as the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and throughout periods of development, has been considered one of the most advanced forms of regional integration. It, based on numerous treaties and resolutions, has strived to promote values such as peace, cooperation or democracy, and in 2012 was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for having “contributed to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe” (Nobel Media AB, 2012). Despite its struggle for promoting democracy, the EU itself has long experienced scholarly criticisms that it suffers the democratic deficit, from which its democratic legitimacy is undermined by observable problems in political accountability and participation. As the importance of legitimacy in a democratically representative institution is hardly debatable, the criticism of whether and why the EU lacks democracy has been given a considerable gravity in academia.
Moull, David. (2004). Lessons the EU should learn from the formative years of the US: Challenges to EU authority in the areas of legitimacy and interpretive competence and the implications for the conceptualisation of the EU [Electronic version]. Jean Monnet Working Papers in Comparative and International Politics.
The progress represented by the EU is progress that deserves to be shared with the people of all European nations, yet on what scale? While today’s EU leaders are more than ready to invite fellow nations to join the EU, they fail to take proper account of the future, of how this could possibly cheapen the European identity and the work that was only spurred on by two destructive World Wars.
Western European people had endured a series of changes during the late medieval period. Changes can be categorized into two aspects: politically and socially. On politics, Popes were not as strong as they were due to conflicts between the state and the church. Socially, people began to live a religion- dominated life, and experienced active sexism towards women. These changes, either positive or negative, have become an undivided part of European History.
The European Union (EU) is fundamentally democratic and is evident through its institutions, however, the current democratic electoral structure is of great concern. The EU is a new type of political system, often referred to as a sui generis, implying its uniqueness as there exists and a non comparable political body. The EU can neither regarded as a ‘state’ nor as an ‘international institution’ as it combines supranational as well as intergovernmental characteristics (Hix, 1999, p7). In this regard it has developed its own understandings of what democracy is. It is evident that the development of and spread of democracy is a central concept and foundation to all politics within the EU, and remains focuses on makings its governing institutions “more transparent and democracy”. The recent Eurozone crisis, it’s associated anti-crisis measures and the recent enlargement of EU have however re-invigorated debate about the EUs democratic legitimacy. At the heart of the debate are discussions not about whether the EU is an all-encompassing democratic institution but rather what are ‘democratic deficits’ or the democratic shortcomings that exist within this powerful economic and political union. Underpinning these divisions as Schmitter argues, are different understandings of what democracy is in the modern context and more specifically in the unique context of the EU. This essay will argue that the EU presents a unique type of political system that is fundamentally democratic, however, there are democratic shortcomings within its procedural and institutional structure.
The European Union as an established governing body is an essential example of this concept which must be reviewed as the establi...
One of the original European institutions is the Commission. Though it was one of the originals, the institution has tremendously changed from what it used to be when the European integration first began. The Commission is a supranational body responsible for legislation proposals and policy implementation. It continues to work toward a more democratic European Union every day with the new legislations and laws that it passes. In this paper I will establish why I believe the EU Commission to be a supranational body, it’s relevance to the European Union and some of the strengths and weaknesses of the institution for the citizens of the European Union.
The European Union stands on the threshold of unparalleled change over the coming years. The next waves of enlargement will be unprecedented in nature and continental in scale. This process has gained so much political momentum that it is now irreversible.
Although the European Union consists of a large variety of institutions, the most important institution is the European Commission. Established in 1958 and based in Luxemburg and Brussels, this hybrid institution (executive and bureaucratic) “epitomizes supranationalism and lies at the center of the EU political system” (Dinan, 2010, p. 171). It has a substantial bulk of responsibilities and carries out these responsibilities with a vast number of constituents, acting as the executive for the EU. These responsibilities include anything from drafting and initiating policy to managing the financial framework of the EU, and can have a large impact on the other institutions of the EU. In order to “promote the general interests of the Union,” the Commission strives to unify the interests of the member states and is continually working for implementation and harmonization of EU law (Dinan, 2010, p. 191).
The Europeans Union (EU) has been as divisive as much as it has brought Europe together. Opinion polls within counties such as the UK have shown that the EU is unpopular (YouGov 2011). Yet, the EU has opened up territorial borders, and united Europe within one monetary bloc. Euroscepticism is a wide-ranging belief encompassing any criticism of the EU (McCormick 2011). It criticises both the structure and the policies of the EU. Solidarity is the concept that there is a cultural homogeneity within a certain group of people (Jary and Jary 2000). Solidarity is ‘situated … at the crossroads between ‘liberty’ and ‘equality’, between ‘self-interest’ and ‘altruism’.’ (Ferrera 2008) Solidarity is known to occur within a state, as citizens share a uniform socioeconomic and political system. International solidarity can take on two forms; transnational sovereignty, and member state sovereignty. Transnational sovereignty is the common sharing of an ideology within a population. Member state solidarity involves active participation and cooperation between nation-states. The level of cooperation is above that of participating within an intergovernmental organisation. This essay will outline solidarity within the EU. It will then analyse the impact of euroscepticism on solidarity. This will look at how euroscepticism has affected solidarity beyond nation-states. This essay will argue that solidarity is possible beyond the nation-state.
Lelieveldt, H. and Princen, S. 2011The politics of the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The public sphere can be characterized in basic form as an artificially constructed social space in which differing opinions, concerns and solutions can be expressed on a public level as a means of influencing political action. It is in a sense the social space where all citizens can engage in political participation and form public opinion, and has become an integral part of democratic theory. The public sphere is the central realm for societal communication that enables citizens to hold state powers accountable for their actions. While non-democratic societies may have spaces that are in a sense public as well as opportunities for the citizenry to express opinions and ideas to rest of the population, the concept of the public sphere has a distinct political aspect where democracy is necessitated for its existence. Put another way, a public sphere can only truly be a public sphere if it grants an opportunity to influence or even participate in the governance of its society.
Senior, Nello Susan. "Chapters:4,15." The European Union: Economics, Policies and History. London: McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.
Europe has a history of war and conflict that predates living memory and the idea of a united Europe is something that appears repeatedly in that history. Hitler, Napoleon, and the many Roman Emperors all sought a united Europe. Their quests although in many ways motivated by a horrifying desire for power sparked the minds of philosophers and other political thinkers to imagine Europe united in harmony and peace despite national differences. Today we have the European Union which is quite unique. After the horrors, bloodshed, and economic disaster of the twentieth century, in a desire for peace and harmony and economic and political prosperity twenty-seven states have limited their national sovereignty.2 With national interests and ambition still in mind these countries see the European Union and supranational governance and the benefits of peace and prosperity therein as something worthwhile. However, in the history of European integration there has been much conflict and Euroskepticism. Some see unity in diversity and diversity in unity as impossible, and the existence of differentiation in the EU as highly problematic. However, differentiation in the European Union’s integration process is not the hindrance it is often defined as, rather it creates further cooperation in Europe bringing the European Union closer to its objectives of peace, and economic and political growth, resulting in a more effective and efficient bureaucracy. Differentiation in the EU’s integration process has created more successful integration as it allows the nations who wish t...