Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
"Europeanisation" is a bit of a malaprop, I think:
Malformed and amorphous to cover "cohesion" anxieties, "subsidarity" questions, and extra-territorial tests of EU gov "globalizing" bureaucracy, supremacy or "mission creep". Continental Europe's boundaries --distinctive cultural and political territory-- are not well understood.

"The map is not the terrain."

What's wanted, I think, from discourse through evolution of the  member-states' is some acknowledgement of the status that "citizenship" conveys to their constituents. Citizenship is a gift from government, in the first instance, not birth, guarded by some as jealously as others revile it.

Citizenship is a contentious idea for this generation, so far and long distant from centuries of concrete imperialism as the are. Violent conquest is the sword, so to speak, that has divided people into citizens and, shall we say, "non-essential persons" since the era of Greco-Roman civilization first formed. What is gratuitously accepted by generations of victors --status and "privileges" called "rights" granted-- is regarded with envy by those necessarily bereft of the benefits enjoyed by the citizens who possess them.

Those are the people, ethnoi, who rush into the breech wherever and whenever it appears. After all, Europeans have been alienated and insulated from the craft of conquest by distance and government. But breeches are not accidental. "Those people" are seeking and will always seek "citizenship" and the appearance of safety, ironically, so long as Europe is at war with ROW.

by Cat on Wed Feb 20th, 2019 at 03:49:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series