This blog is hosted on Ideas on EuropeIdeas on Europe Avatar

Latest

European Studies Needs More Class Analysis

Inspired by the growing debate on critical approaches to European Studies, Vladimir Bortun adds his own perspective. He argues for class analysis which not only asks how to fix the EU’s specific problems but which takes a more holistic approach. Is the EU in its current form even worth fixing or do we need to think about a different kind of transnational cooperation?

Image: Men in suits stand on a pile of gold coins looking down on disadvantaged citizens

© frittipix / Adobe Stock

I was pleasantly surprised to read the two recent articles on Crossroads Europe by Rachael Dickson Hillyard and Vanessa Bilancetti, both making the case for a more critical approach to the EU within the field of European Studies.

I must admit that, throughout my PhD, I have been struck by the virtually unconditional support for the EU that seems to prevail in the academic community, probably best highlighted by the debate and developments around Brexit.

The limited critical analysis that does exist is mostly local and targets one aspect or another of the EU. Some focus on the shortcomings of the Eurozone or others on the famous ‘democratic deficit’. However, hardly anybody in the field – with some notable exceptions such as Carchedi or McGiffen – challenges the EU as a whole. Nearly all debates are about “what’s wrong with the EU and how to fix it”, thus reflecting an underlying, undisputed consensus over the intrinsic value of the EU and the need to preserve it; maybe improve it or fundamentally reform it, but nevertheless preserve it.

In a context of multiple crises faced and at least partly caused by the EU, we need to bring to the fore the more fundamental debate on whether the EU is indeed worthy of such unconditional endorsement. This debate should be at the core of our field rather than confined to the rather obscure subfield of Critical European Studies. Its present marginality is not healthy for European Studies as a whole, which currently falls short, I believe, of the main duty of social researchers and intellectuals in general – to critically analyse the dominant structures, practices and discourses that shape the world we live in.

For too long, scholars of the EU have assumed that their object of study is intrinsically defensible or, at the very least, a neutral phenomenon that needs to be treated accordingly. Class analyses from Marxist or neo-Marxist perspectives have been largely dismissed as ‘ideological’, although the fundamental endorsement of this European integration is by no means any less ideological.

It would be impossible to fully develop here such a class analysis, but it entails going beyond the mere acknowledgement of the neoliberal character of the EU’s policies over the last few decades. It asks us to look at the more structural class character of the EU as a whole.

Such an analysis understands European integration not as the noble project for peace and prosperity in Europe but rather as a realignment of capitalist classes in Western Europe following the Second World War. These classes had come to realise – to the backdrop of developments such as the rise of the welfare state and the process of de-colonisation – that their interests could be best served through the establishment of a common market.

The subsequent, neoliberal, developments of that project only consolidated and furthered those class interests. Thus, from the design of the Single Market and of the Monetary Union to the management of the (still) ongoing Eurozone crisis, the EU’s neoliberalism is not some qualitative departure from its initial mission, but a rather logical continuation of that.

At the same time, as Vanessa correctly pointed out in her piece, the limits of European integration are set by the inherent limits of the cooperation among the various capitalist classes in Europe. In other words, European integration only goes as far as their common interests go, which means that when a capitalist crisis develops and the competition between (and within) national capitalisms enhances (as reflected by the current revival of protectionism), then European integration also enters a crisis.

This is reflected not merely by the growth of popular Euro-hostility but also by the increasing divisions among member states. What all this suggests is crucial: that genuine European unity is not possible on a capitalist basis.

In conclusion, a class analysis of the EU doesn’t merely ask “how to fix it” but whether it can be fixed and, indeed, whether it is worth fixing in the first place. These are crucial questions that our field, I believe, needs to address more explicitly.

Indeed, our field – which is called European rather than EU Studies for a reason – should try and escape the tacit TINA-like attitude currently prevailing; it should start envisaging alternatives ideas of transnational cooperation and internationalism that might be able to premise the kind of genuine European unity that many of us are committed to.

Please note that this article represents the views of the author(s) and not those of the UACES Graduate Forum, JCER or UACES.

Comments and Site Policy

Shortlink for this article: http://bit.ly/2I0nfpn


Vladimir Bortun

Vladimir Bortun 
University of Portsmouth

Vladimir Bortun is a doctoral candidate at the University of Portsmouth. His research focuses on transnational cooperation of new left parties in Southern Europe since 2009.


 

COMMENT

Recent Articles

‘Brexit’ and Anti-Discrimination Law in Northern Ireland

Published on by | Comments Off on ‘Brexit’ and Anti-Discrimination Law in Northern Ireland
Stormont buildings

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference The UK’s withdrawal from the European Union is bound to pose unique challenges for Northern Ireland, writes Clare Rice. Drawing on her research on anti-discrimination law in the region, she outlines the potential impact on the legal framework for equality and cross-community relations. The potential impact […]

Critical European Studies Need More Than Foucault

Published on by | Comments Off on Critical European Studies Need More Than Foucault

How can we create spaces for critical discussion about the European Union? Vanessa Bilancetti writes in response to Rachael Dickson Hillyard’s article on alternative approaches to EU Studies. Through her own research on institutional responses to the economic crisis, Vanessa Bilancetti identifies dissenting voices that can enrich an ongoing debate. I have read with interest […]

Measuring the Impact of EU Accession on Potential Candidate Country Parliaments

Published on by | 1 Comment

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference The impact of an EU membership perspective on the national parliament of potential candidate countries is an important yet underexplored subject, writes Blerim Vela. Outlining some of the elements of his research, he suggests that the executive-legislature relationship and strength of the media and civil society […]

Why the EU Needs ‘De-crisising’

Published on by | Comments Off on Why the EU Needs ‘De-crisising’

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference The usage of the term ‘crisis’ when discussing the EU’s current challenges has become widespread in media reporting, writes Max Steuer. Drawing from his analysis of quality newspapers in several Visegrad countries, where calls for the EU to address problems have often been accompanied by opposition […]

Taking an Alternative Approach to Doing EU Studies: Using Foucault’s Thinking to Better Understand the EU and Migration

Published on by | 1 Comment

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference The journey of connecting your research interests and questions as a PhD student with an effective means of exploring them can sometimes be challenging, writes Rachael Dickson Hillyard. Reflecting on her research critically analysing EU narratives on good governance and rights-based policies, she argues that it […]

The Spectre of the ‘Welfare Tourist’ within the Judgements of the CJEU

Published on by | Comments Off on The Spectre of the ‘Welfare Tourist’ within the Judgements of the CJEU

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference Although little evidence supports the existence of welfare tourism, the EU’s Court of Justice has increasingly adopted this economic rationale in its rulings, writes Charles O’Sullivan. He argues that the court, having departed from its original legal test for social assistance claims in several decisions, is […]

Harmful Cyber Operations in the EU: Implementing the NIS Directive into the UK Legal System

Published on by | Comments Off on Harmful Cyber Operations in the EU: Implementing the NIS Directive into the UK Legal System

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference The prevalence of cybersecurity threats against state infrastructure demonstrates the need for an effective European and national response, writes Eva Saeva. Focusing on the UK, she argues that, while legal measures are important, the fast-changing nature of the situation means that other avenues, such as public-private cooperation, […]

Why Brexit’s Impact on EU Foreign Policy Might Remain Limited

Published on by | Comments Off on Why Brexit’s Impact on EU Foreign Policy Might Remain Limited

Publication resulting from the UACES 2017 PhD and ECR Conference While last year’s Brexit vote marked a watershed moment for the European Union, its impact on EU foreign policy might remain limited, writes Ragnar Weilandt. He argues that the UK’s dual role as a provider of capabilities and occasional driver of policy on the one hand, and […]

How to Write for an Academic Blog

Published on by | 1 Comment

Blogs are increasingly relevant to researchers and, for those starting out in contributing to them, it can be useful to reflect on the differences with other outputs, writes Anthony Salamone. He sets out some suggestions on how to approach writing for an academic blog, including how to gain the most from the experience. As academia […]

Cyprus Peace Talks at a Stalemate: What Hope for Reconciliation?

Published on by | Comments Off on Cyprus Peace Talks at a Stalemate: What Hope for Reconciliation?

The substantial progress made in the Cyprus peace negotiations over the past 20 months risks falling short of success, as politics and grievances resurface, writes Fadıl Ersözer. He argues that true political leadership is required from both sides to achieve a lasting solution, and that the European Union as a framework can still be an […]

UACES and Ideas on Europe do not take responsibility for opinions expressed in articles on blogs hosted on Ideas on Europe. All opinions are those of the contributing authors.