The creation of the European Union economic and political bloc was an unprecedented and bold experiment in the late-20th century, that few thought would succeed. For nearly three decades, the EU continues to exist, but as outlined in the article by Kaiser (2017), there are two distinct perspectives on the history and future of the bloc.
One of the perspectives defined by the elites as part of the ‘New Narrative’ which views the EU as a highly integrated, culturally unified, and democratically bright future for the continent. Meanwhile, the other perspectives stem from the supposed public majority and citizens, demonstrating opposing viewpoints on countering integration, criticizing the economic union and policy approaches, and not viewing Europe as a beacon of problem-solving and democracy for the world (Kaiser, 2017). The founding of the EU was set for convenience (perhaps the best of goals achieved through a unified currency and banking system), mutual prosperity, and reduction of political tensions after centuries of animosity on the continent (Lee, 2013).
The EU was imagined as a socio-economic nearly utopian state, but the bloc is being overburdened by crises ranging from COVID to immigration to economics, most of which it seems to have ignored or put off (Copelovitch, 2020). A system that was supposed to raise faltering economies created millions in unemployment. National governments have little ability or control over their economic decisions, driven by the common Euro objectives and priorities of the rich powerful countries in the bloc such as Germany and France (Thornton, 2015). Politically and socially, the bloc is ever more divided, there are fewer signs of a healthy democracy, but as indicated by the citizens’ responses, a mixture of totalitarianism and plutocracy dominated by the cultural and business elite seeking to secure their interests (Kaiser, 2017).
By many expert accounts, the EU has been and continues to be a failure. While certainly, it has achieved some landmarks in its 60 years that were unexpected, perhaps it can be credited for certain with one thing, which is bringing peace and stability to the continent. However, in practicality, the key ideas of European integration, the ‘unity in diversity’, and cultural and value commonality are far from reality, as the bloc faces severe crises of identity today (Hall, 2016). Therefore, what is the purpose of the New Narrative and what does the clash of perspectives truly represent? In the broader context, the ‘new narrative’ for Europe seems nothing more than a political exercise and propaganda tool. As noted by Kaiser (2017), the objective was “to mobilize cultural elites” (p. 217). Even in such simple matters as drawing a vision, so to speak, there are numerous barriers and failures ranging from including the relevant history contributing to the creation of the bloc to bureaucracy and cultural clashes within the Commission.
The dissonance between the perspectives of cultural and political elites with those of citizens on the history, status quo, and role of the European Union is concerning. The reality is, that facing multiple crises, the EU often seems more divided than unified in its approach, and these differing perspectives are inherently dangerous to the very core of the existence of the bloc.
Reference List
Copelovitch, M. (2020) ‘None of the above’ is no longer an option for the Eurozone. Web.
Hall, P. A. (2016) The Euro crisis and the future of European integration. Web.
Kaiser, W. (2017) One narrative or several? Politics, cultural elites, and citizens in constructing a “New Narrative for Europe.” National Identities, 19(2), pp.215–230.
Lee, B. (2013) The European Union: a failed experiment. Web.
Thornton, B. (2015) The E.U. experiment has failed. Web.