Suchergebnisse

This chapter traces changes in EU-official discourse around EU legitimacy since the 1950s, relating them to the trajectory described by Pierre Rosanvallon in Democratic Legitimacy (2011a). Accordingly, the legitimacy of modern democracies broke down in the 1980s owing to a loss of faith in its two main foundations in elections and bureaucracy. This gave rise to the emergence of alternative modes of legitimation, classed under the ideal types of impartiality, reflexivity, and proximity. This chapter plays Rosanvallon's analysis, which draws on national experiences, against the EU context. It finds important differences, in particular regarding the balance between electoral and bureaucratic legitimacy in the earlier years of integration – as well as significant similarities and interaction, manifested in a striking resonance between particular strands in EU-official legitimation strategies and Rosanvallon's ideal types. The ways in which they played out in the case of the EU point to dangers inherent to them; of highlighting proximity over actual influence and control; making democratic forms so complex and 'reflexive' that they become unintelligible, and unaccountable; or replicating bureaucratic thinking that obscures choices and judgments behind claims to independence and impartiality. What is more, the discursive history of contests over EU legitimacy illustrates a predisposition of Rosanvallon's account of democratic legitimacy towards "unpolitical democracy", rooted in its attempt to contain the threat of populism. His goal is to politicise the indirect institutions of impartiality, reflexivity and proximity rather than democratic procedures such as voting and majority rule, with the effect that deliberation is used strategically as an alternative to electoral and partisan democracy.

Cet article développe une perspective historique de longue durée sur les références, changeantes et concurrentes, à l'opinion publique et à "ce que veut le peuple" dans les discours de légitimation de l'UE et des institutions communautaires, des années 1950 à nos jours. Il rend compte du passage d'une première séquence, où le consensus permissif de l'opinion publique à l'égard de l'intégration européenne est tenu pour acquis, tout en insistant de plus en plus sur la nécessité d'agir sur cette opinion publique et de la façonner, à une deuxième séquence, suite à un tournant important à partir du milieu des années 1970 et surtout des années 1980, durant laquelle toutes les revendications relatives à la légitimité communautaire se fondent sur les attentes des citoyens. Le chapitre suivant dans l'histoire des discours sur l'opinion publique a été marqué par une politisation et une polarisation croissante et incontestable de cette opinion publique. Cette tendance est apparue flagrante dans le contexte des diverses crises – constitutionnelle, de l'Euro, des réfugiés, et plus récemment du Brexit – qui traversent l'UE même si elle commençait à être visible dès le traité de Maastricht et le traité constitutionnel. Désormais, l'équilibre discursif penche irrévocablement en faveur des discours reconnaissant la nature profondément politique des enjeux de la politique de l'UE, plutôt que de ceux visant à les dépolitiser. Le défi consiste alors à développer des mécanismes permettant de canaliser et de concilier des préférences, des intérêts et des identités contradictoires, en reconnaissant ces différences, sans pour autant prétendre les harmoniser.

This paper addresses the relationship between political legitimacy arising from a link with the 'will of the people', and political legitimacy arising from beneficial consequences for them. Questioning the common assumption of an inherent trade-off between 'input' and 'output legitimacy', it suggests that the two necessarily go together, and that their relationship is continuously reconstructed through discursive contestation. These claims are first substantiated conceptually, in reference to the legitimacy literature in European Union (EU) Studies, which is situated in the broader fields of Political Theory and Comparative Politics. In a second step, the argument is developed on the grounds of empirical case material: an interpretive, non-quantitative reconstruction of the changing discourses on EU legitimacy by the European institutions from the 1950s to the early 2000s.

Les cinq dernières années ont bouleversé les fondements mêmes de l'Union européenne. Autrefois symboles d'une promesse de paix et de prospérité, l'Union européenne et l'euro plus particulièrement en sont venus à incarner une image parfois contraire, celle d'une menace pesant sur le bien-être économique et financier des citoyens européens et des États membres. Ce volume réunit des économistes, des historiens et des spécialistes de science politique afin d'enquêter sur l'origine exacte de ce phénomène, ses conséquences sur les manières de vivre l'Europe et l'euro et sur les possibles évolutions du projet européen. Il présente aussi une première analyse des nombreuses réformes institutionnelles et politiques prises au niveau européen depuis la crise des dettes publiques de 2010. [4e de couv.]

Intro -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Abbreviations -- List of Images -- Chapter 1 The Setting: The Greco-German Affair on the Euro Stage -- Abstract -- 1.1 The Foundation of European Demoicracy -- 1.2 The Greco-German Affair and the Battlefield of Stories -- 1.3 Mutual Recognition and Its Denial -- 1.4 Rebuilding Trust -- Chapter 2 The Players: Greeks vs Germans -- Abstract -- 2.1 Of Greek Squanderers and German Misers -- The Good Life -- Conflicted Cheapskates -- Inequalities and Suffering -- The Age of the Lobster Pasta -- Blame Games -- Greece, Relentless Mirror -- 2.2 Swindlers vs. Hearts of Steel: Moralities of Rule of Law, Public Spirit, and Solidarity -- Greek Diseases -- Only Greeks? -- A Liar Will not Be Believed -- The Two Greeces -- Playing by the Rules -- Solidarity -- 2.3 Greece Mirror of German Demons -- Bankruptcy Greeks -- Traumas Resonating -- 2.4 Your History, My History -- Heir of Antiquity vs Err of Antiquity, and the War of Clichés -- German Guilt, German Debt, German Responsibility -- Lost in Translation -- Mirror, Mirror on the Wall -- Greek Historical Memory Revised -- 2.5 Power and Resistance -- German Despots and Their Greek Collaborators -- The Power of the Weak -- The Reluctant Hegemon -- With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility -- Chapter 3 The Name of the Game: Shaping Europe Through Self and Other -- Abstract -- 3.1 A Union of Prosperity? -- From Promise to Threat -- Bottomless Pit -- United in Fear? -- Cui Bono? -- 3.2 Europe Re-Nationalised? -- Germanisation, or Nationalisation? -- Community of Fate and Responsibility -- Mortal Europe, More Europe, and a Different Europe -- European Domestic Politics -- 3.3 Embodiment of Progress, Competent Governance and Modernisation? -- Saviours Without a Plan -- Markets as the Lords of Politics -- Europe as Moderniser

As political polarisation undermines confidence in the shared values and established constitutional orders of many nations, it is imperative that we explore how parliaments are to stay relevant and accessible to the citizens whom they serve. The rise of modern democracies is thought to have found physical expression in the staged unity of the parliamentary seating plan. However, the built forms alone cannot give sufficient testimony to the exercise of power in political life.

Parliament Buildings brings together architecture, history, art history, history of political thought, sociology, behavioural psychology, anthropology and political science to raise a host of challenging questions. How do parliament buildings give physical form to norms and practices, to behaviours, rituals, identities and imaginaries? How are their spatial forms influenced by the political cultures they accommodate? What kinds of histories, politics and morphologies do the diverse European parliaments share, and how do their political trajectories intersect?

This volume offers an eclectic exploration of the complex nexus between architecture and politics in Europe. Including contributions from architects who have designed or remodelled four parliament buildings in Europe, it provides the first comparative, multi-disciplinary study of parliament buildings across Europe and across history.

Praise for Parliament Buildings

'In its totality, this is an invaluable book, both as a comprehensive review of the wider implications of architecture and building in culture and society, and as a specific resource in the understanding of one highly specialised, but profoundly significant building type.'
Dean Hawkes, Cardiff University and University of Cambridge

'Symbols of history and of hope, theatres of struggle, cradles of consensus: parliamentary buildings, as these diverse essays show, both reflect our democracies and can help them function better.'
David Anderson, House of Lords

'Parliament Buildings is a brilliant interdisciplinary exploration of a fascinating topic. Theoretically sophisticated, empirically rich and historically informed, it demonstrates the multiple ways in which politics and the built environment intersect, and sheds light on the symbolic and material practices central to contemporary representative politics.'
Duncan Bell, University of Cambridge