Search results

Eurostars and Eurocities: Free Movement and Mobility in an Integrating Europeexamines intra-European Union migration in the cities of Amsterdam, London and Brussels.Based on sixty in-depth interviews of free moving European citizens, and more than five years of ethnographic and documentary research, it uncovers the rarely studied human dimension of European integrationExamines the mobility, lifestyle and career opportunities created by the borderless society of the European Union, as well as the barriers that still persistAnalyses the new migration trends, challenges to the welfare state, and forms of urban cosmopolitanism linked to processes of European integration Adrian Favellis Associate Professor of Sociology at UCLA. He is the author of Philosophies of Integration: Immigration and the Idea of Citizenship in France and Britain, and (with Michael Peter Smith) The Human Face of Global Mobility: International Highly Skilled Migration in Europe, North America and the Asia Pacific.

The 'fourth freedom' of freedom of movement of persons – somewhat misleadingly labelled 'European citizenship' – lay at the normative heart of the European project. Although sceptics have often suggested it was part of the building of a European fortress, or even a last gasp of elite European colonial privilege, the essential point of EU freedom of movement was its revolutionary introduction of a regionally expansive non-discrimination by nationality, going well beyond established abstract notions of 'personhood' and human rights on which other global egalitarian movements depend. For sure, it had been battered by roll back in national courts, suspension of Schengen, and new external borderings, well before the Brexit vote. Yet the practice of the fourth freedom in terms of everyday transactions and interactions struck at the heart of the core of the modern Hobbesian nation state: its sovereignty to decide on the boundaries of its own, increasingly de-territorialised population, which was also its power to shore up the most potent source of global inequalities – the birthright lottery which protects the 'wealth of nations' and the privileges of democratic 'peoples' from the unbounded effects of de-territorialised mobilities. As we are also seeing – and hearing among many ostensibly progressive academic voices – the putatively egalitarian voice of people's democracy can be used to further bolster the shrinkage of moral community within the nation state. The essay takes upon itself to evaluate what is being lost normatively in terms of the return of the national – methodologically as much as politically – as the slow motion car crash of Brexit happens and after it takes place.

The article challenges the orthodoxy of current critical readings of the European crisis that discuss the failings of the EU in terms of the triumph of 'neo-liberalism'. Defending instead a liberal view on international migration, which stresses the potentially positive economic, political and cultural benefits of market-driven forces enabling movements across borders, it details the various ways in which European regional integration has enabled the withdrawal of state control and restriction on certain forms of external and internal migration. This implementation of liberal ideas on the freedom of movement of persons has largely been of benefit to migrants, and both receiving and sending societies alike. These ideas are now threatened by democratic retrenchment. It is Britain, often held up as a negative example of 'neo-liberalism', which has proven to be the member state that most fulfils the EU's core adherence to principles of mobile, open, non-discriminatory labour markets. On this question, and despite its current anti-immigration politics, it offers a positive example of how Europe as a whole could benefit from more not less liberalization.

Bien que les Européens semblent sédentaires en comparaison des habitants de l'Amérique du Nord, l'histoire européenne a connu d'incessants et d'importants mouvements de populations qui continuent aujourd'hui. Qu'en est-il du rôle de la mobilité spatiale dans toutes ses formes dans la construction européenne ? Cet article répond à cette question en analysant les trois types de migrants dans l'Europe contemporaine : les populations issues des vagues migratoires de l'après-guerre et les nouveaux migrants des pays tiers, les « libres circulants » ou « Eurostars » utilisant le droit à la libre circulation inscrit dans le Traité à la libre circulation, et enfin les ressortissants des pays de l'Europe centrale et orientale entrés dans l'Union européenne (UE) en 2004 et 2007 qui peuvent désormais vivre et travailler dans d'autres pays de l'UE. On peut dire qu'un nouveau système migratoire en Europe se met en place, qui repose sur un marché de travail secondaire exploitant les libres circulants de l'est, une ouverture à l'Est qui a permis une politique de plus en plus sécuritaire de fermeture au Sud avec une logique raciale claire.

Identité et citoyenneté européennes dans trois « Eurocités ». Une approche sociologique de l'Union Européenne. Ce texte complète le livre Eurostars and Eurocities dans lequel sont analysées les pratiques et les sentiments de ceux qu'on peut considérer comme l'archétype des nouveaux Européens, à savoir, les Européens mobiles partis s'installer dans un autre pays de l'UE. La recherche repose notamment sur soixante entretiens avec des résidents des trois points centraux de la mobilité européenne que sont les trois « Eurocités » : Amsterdam, Londres et Bruxelles. L'article analyse les opinions sur l'Europe de ceux qui sont partis, le plus souvent dans le désir d'échapper au cadre étroit de leur nation d'origine. Il montre la faible consistance des attitudes des Eurostars à l'égard de l'UE, qui contraste avec la réalité de l'usage intensif qui est le leur des possibilités nouvelles qu'elle offre à ses citoyens. Sauf pour ce qui touche aux droits politiques ouverts par le Traité de Maastricht : les Eurostars ne votent pas dans les villes où ils sont installés, et s'ils s'intéressent à la politique, c'est pour la majorité d'entre eux celle de leur pays d'origine. C'est dans leur vie quotidienne, en tant que consommateurs, voisins, usagers des services publics locaux et entrepreneurs culturels qu'ils exercent leur citoyenneté européenne. C'est ainsi qu'ils légitiment le projet européen, plutôt qu'en développant une soi-disant « identité européenne », mettant ainsi en question le fameux « déficit démocratique » de l'Union européenne.

This text is a complement to the book Eurostars and Eurocities in which the practices and sentiments of those who might be considered archtypal new Europeans are analysed - that is, the views of the ultra-mobile Europeans who have moved to live and work and work in another member state of the EU. The research is based on 60 interviews with residents of three of the major hubs of European mobilty : the "Eurocities" of Amsterdam, London and Brussels. Focusing on those who moved, most often because of a desire to get away from the restrictive circumstances they felt in their own home country, the article analyses the opinions of these individuals about Europe. It shows the low consistency of their attitudes towards the EU, which contrasts with their intense usage of the new possibilities that the EU offers its citizens. This however is not the case concerning the political rights guaranteed by the Maastrict Treaty. Eurostars rarely vote in the cities where they live, and if they are interesteed in politics, for the majority it is politics in their home country. It is in their daily life, as consumers, neighbours, public service users and cultural entrepreneurs that they exercise their European citizenship. This is also how they legitimate the European project, rather than in developing a so-called "European identity". The findings thus end by questioning arguments concerning the notorious "democratic deficit" of the EU.

This text is a complement to the book Eurostars and Eurocities in which the practices and sentiments of those who might be considered archtypal new Europeans are analysed - that is, the views of the ultra-mobile Europeans who have moved to live and work and work in another member state of the EU. The research is based on 60 interviews with residents of three of the major hubs of European mobilty : the "Eurocities" of Amsterdam, London and Brussels. Focusing on those who moved, most often because of a desire to get away from the restrictive circumstances they felt in their own home country, the article analyses the opinions of these individuals about Europe. It shows the low consistency of their attitudes towards the EU, which contrasts with their intense usage of the new possibilities that the EU offers its citizens. This however is not the case concerning the political rights guaranteed by the Maastrict Treaty. Eurostars rarely vote in the cities where they live, and if they are interesteed in politics, for the majority it is politics in their home country. It is in their daily life, as consumers, neighbours, public service users and cultural entrepreneurs that they exercise their European citizenship. This is also how they legitimate the European project, rather than in developing a so-called "European identity". The findings thus end by questioning arguments concerning the notorious "democratic deficit" of the EU.

Immigration, migration, free movement and the making of Europe Despite the image of European populations as sendentary in comparison to the highly mobile populations of North America, population movements have played a recurrent role in the history of Europe, up to and including the present day. How then does spatial mobility in all its forms fit into the European integration process ? This article answers this question by contrasting the three principle types of migrants in Europe today : the traditional, post war immigration of "ethnically" distinct populations from non-European sources, the "free movers" or "Eurostars" living and working as foreigners within Europe via the use of EU free movement rights, and the citizens from the new East and Central European member states who have gained access to the West European labour market as a result of the EU enlargements of 2004 and 2007. It argues that a new European migration system, dependent on the secondary labour market exploitation of new East-West movers, is in the making, an opening to the East that has enabled a stricter attempt to close doors to immigration from the South and elsewhere along clearly racialised lines. ; Bien que les Européens semblent sédentaires en comparaison des habitants de l'Amérique du Nord, l'histoire européenne a connu d'incessants et d'importants mouvements de populations qui continuent aujourd'hui. Qu'en est-il du rôle de la mobilité spatiale dans toutes ses formes dans la construction européenne ? Cet article répond à cette question en analysant les trois types de migrants dans l'Europe contemporaine : les populations issues des vagues migratoires de l'après-guerre et les nouveaux migrants des pays tiers, les " libres circulants " ou " Eurostars " utilisant le droit à la libre circulation inscrit dans le Traité à la libre circulation, et enfin les ressortissants des pays de l'Europe centrale et orientale entrés dans l'Union européenne (UE) en 2004 et 2007 qui peuvent désormais vivre et travailler dans d'autres pays de l'UE. On peut dire qu'un nouveau système migratoire en Europe se met en place, qui repose sur un marché de travail secondaire exploitant les libres circulants de l'est, une ouverture à l'Est qui a permis une politique de plus en plus sécuritaire de fermeture au Sud avec une logique raciale claire.