Search

The author comments on the migrant crisis facing Europe and the return of the politics of fear. Particular focus is given to Europe's struggle with its national identity. Topics discussed include the Dublin III agreement, emergence of radicalization and terrorism, ideology of fear, and the growing number of nationalist, anti-liberal and anti-European parties in European Union member states.

The article examines the influences that European intellectual constructions exerted on the formulation of socio-political projects in Brazil in the nineteenth century. The analysis centers on Romanticism-based literary publications of mid-century, paying additional attention to the propositions advanced by the Positivism of the last quarter of the century. Even though nineteenth-century Brazil intellectuals saw Europe as the main source of influence for their own cultural projects, in Brazil the intellectual field was much less developed and members of local elites believed the future of their country depended on their direct involvement in leading the construction of an autonomous national identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study on whether there are any changes that occur in the national and European identities of citizens before and after the 2004 and 2007 enlargements of the European Union (EU) Member States. It used individual level data from the 2002-2009 Candidate Countries and Standard Eurobarometers to analyze 27 EU Member States. It said that there were no relevant changes that occurred in both levels after showing that attitudinal determinants remained stable after the enlargement.

Another challenge for contemporary historians consists of widening the German perspective to the European context without becoming an apologist for the EU. This essay departs from the assertion that at present the Europeans possess only a rudimentary consciousness of a common past. Most contemporary historians still seem to do their research within a national framework, although many of their questions actually transcend it. This historical amnesia of the European dimension has is largely a result of the lack of a shared understanding of the twentieth century within which research results could be placed. As an alternative to an acclamatory history of integration, culminating in the Brussels institution, a critical perspective is necessary which takes seriously the immense suffering of wars, revolutions, and racial murder. The European memory deficit will only be overcome by the pluralization of narratives that makes space for different memories and acknowledges the mutually inflicted pain as a basis for a dedication to a better future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In several respects, the EU represents both a novel system of quasi-supranational governance and a novel form of political community or polity. But it is also a fragile construction for it remains a community still in the making with an ambiguous sense of identity and within which powerful forces are at work. This paper has three main aims: first, to stress the shifting nature of Europe's geographical frontiers and assess whether cultural frontiers have remained more stable throughout time. In particular, it examines the main criteria, which have traditionally been employed when having to decide who should be included and excluded from Europe. A different question concerns the requirements for EU membership and the monopoly of the adjective 'European' by the EU, which somehow has become to be identified with Europe. Second, to explore the prospects for the emergence of a European identity. Here, I argue that European identity stands as a 'non-emotional identity' in sharp contrast with traditional forms of national identity associated with intense nationalist feelings. Third, through the analysis of the most recent Eurobarometer (annual survey of EU's public opinion) to examine the views of Europeans regarding the EU at a time of a major global economic crisis. To conclude, the paper explores the main challenges to be faced by a still incipient European identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments are presented in response to the article "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," by Liesbet Hooghe and Gary Marks. The author reviews the process proposed by Hooghe and Marks to demonstrate the need for Europeanization as a public process rather than an elitist one. Hooghe and Marks' proposal to use theories of strategic competition among political parties to identify potential points of exploitation is discussed. The author also comments on the tension between the increasing scope of European integration and national identities.

Conflicts between European Union (EU) members about enlargement result from its redistributive effects. EU members are more likely to suffer from enlargement if they profit from EU transfers and if they are relatively close to applicant countries in which unemployment is significantly higher than in member countries. Phasing in membership rights serves to compensate the relative losers of enlargement to accomplish EU widening. Using data from all previous enlargement rounds until 2004, we demonstrate that EU members are more likely to demand a discrimination of new members if distributional conflicts arise. The existence of these distributional conflicts in turn increases the odds of EU members and the accession candidates actually agreeing on a phase-in period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]