[PDF] - Fur i o Cer utti (Uni ver si ty of Fl or ence, Dept of PDF Document

SLIDE 1

Fur i

utti (Uni ver si ty

Fl

ence, Dept

Phi l

cer utti @ uni f i . i t) ON THE POLI TI CAL I DENTI TY OF THE EUROPEANS (Uni ver si dade do M i nho, Novem ber 1999) _______________________________________________________________ The debate on Eur

denti ty i s bi ased by a consi der abl e degr ee of conceptual conf usi

denti ty i n gener al and pol i ti cal i denti ty i n par ti cul ar . Yet I w i l l not begi n w i th def i ni ti

edef i ni ti

and w i l l r ather tr y to i ntr

w henever deal i ng w i th the Eur

questi

m akes i t necessar y. I am goi ng to r ai se f

m ai n questi

about Eur

i denti ty: 1. I s the pol i ti cal i denti ty

the Eur

necessar y? 2. I s the pol i ti cal i denti ty

the Eur

possi bl e? 3. Ar e the Eur

ng to have an i denti ty or sever al i denti ti es? Or : w hat i s the str uctur e

thei r i denti ty l i kel y to be? 4. W hat i s the nor m ati ve content

such an i denti ty, w hat i s the pr

ect contai ned i n i t? * * * 1. I s the pol i ti cal i denti ty

the Eur

necessar y? I denti ty i s an i ndi spensabl e el em ent of the Eur

ucti

y i f thi s i s to have pol i ti cal char acter ,

i n other w or ds, i f Eur

s to be a pol i ty (w hi ch i s not necessar i l y the sam e as to be a state). I am not ar gui ng that the EU has to becom e a f ul l pol i ti cal enti ty; and I am not goi ng to di scuss i n depth the questi

f i ts evol uti

r eady r eached the stage i n w hi ch the Uni

as a m atter

f act, r eveal s a pol i ti cal natur e. I am j ust hi ghl i ghti ng thi s essenti al , i f condi ti

, l i nk: i f the Eur

ti zens w i sh to have a pol i ti cal Uni

they cannot r each thi s goal w i thout devel

ng a pol i ti cal i denti ty. Ther e ar e str uctur al r easons f

thi s asser ti

pol i ti cal i denti ty i s a condi ti

l egi ti m acy,

SLIDE 2

w i thout l egi ti m acy ther e i s no l i f e f

pol i ti cal i nsti tuti

because they cannot r eckon

ti zens' al l egi ance and par ti ci pati

Pol i ti cal ar e those i nsti tuti

scuss choi ces and m ake deci si

ti m ate and encom passi ng i ssues such as peace and w ar , consti tuti

r ul es, di str i buti ve j usti ce. I n the f r am ew or k of Eur

ti l evel gover nance, the pol i ti cal deci si

m aki ng pow er i s no l

a m er e i nter gover nm ental i ssue that r el i es on the l egi ti m acy of nati

gover nm ents. I t i s i ncr easi ngl y l eavi ng the nati

capi tal s and m ovi ng to "Br ussel s", even i f l ength and am bi gui ty of the pr

have to be taken ser i

y ("Br ussel s" does not m ean excl usi vel y the Eur

Com m i ssi

Par l i am ent, but the r ecentl y r ei nf

ced w ei ght of the Counci l as w el l

Counci l i ndeed w hi ch i s not si m pl y a cl ear i ng r

sel f

nter ests, as i t acts under the com m on constr ai nt

r ei nf

ci ng the Eur

i nsti tuti

I n other w or ds: i f the EU becom es a m aj

deci si

m aker i n i ts ow n capaci ty, i t can cl ai m the ci ti zens' al l egi ance and exer t i ts author i ty onl y i f they f eel they have enough thi ngs i n com m on as to abi de by the r ul es set by com m on i nsti tuti

Al l egi ance and par ti ci pati

to them m eani ngf ul w i th r egar d to thei r com m on sym bol i c and nor m ati ve spher e. I n thi s sense they m ust f eel l i ke one si ngl e actor (or , phi l

cal l y,

ect). Other w i se ther e w oul d be l i ttl e sense (and no stabi l i ty of w i l l ) f

Por tuguese to pay taxes r ai sed by "Br ussel s",

f

Fr ench to endor se a r ul i ng of the Eur

t of Justi ce,

f

Bel gi ans, I tal i ans and al l the other s to r i sk thei r l i ves i n a peace- enf

ci ng

ati

der ed by M onsi eur Pesc. W hi l e I cannot unf

d the w hol e theor y of l egi ti m acy and show the l i nks betw een i denti ty and i ts other el em ents, I w ant to str ess that the i ssue I have so f ar deal t w i th i s pol i ti cal l egi ti m acy i n gener al , not dem ocr ati c def i ci t. I t i s a gr

em ent of pol i ti cal

der , w hi ch i s not at al l l i m i ted to dem ocr aci es. Fi nal l y, i t i s al m ost super f l uous to r em em ber that i denti ty i s not j ust a pr e- condi ti

pol i ti cal com m uni ti es to be per cei ved as l egi ti m ate, but a consequence of i nsti tuti

i sed com m unal l i f e as w el l . Onl y w hen the com m on val ues and i m ages have settl ed i n f

m al i nsti tuti

ted to i m pact on ever ybody' s l i f e, i n a w ay w hi ch i s ef f ecti ve and per cei vabl e to ever ybody, the consci ence of bei ng one gr

can f ul l y take shape and be r epr

s and gener ati

Not unl i ke the evol uti

nati

i denti ty, f

a new gr

denti ty to take r

n the ci ti zens' m i nd i t f i r st takes the deci si

a pol i ti cal and cul tur al él i te to establ i sh new supr anati

i nsti tuti

k. W e can per haps say that new i nsti tuti

e al w ays necessar i l y "pr em atur e" w i th r egar d to the ef f ecti ve stage of i denti ty- bui l di ng, For exam pl e, w e shoul d car ef ul l y w atch the i denti ty- bui l di ng ef f ects of the com m on cur r ency, w hi ch can be expected i n consi der ati

the sym bol i c i m pact

m oney

l i f e- w or l d.

SLIDE 3

2. I s the pol i ti cal i denti ty

the Eur

possi bl e? The ar gum ent that nati

i denti ty i s the ul ti m ate shape of pol i ti cal i denti ty because of i ts uni que r

n natur e and hi stor y has l

ntel l ectual cr edi bi l i ty at l atest si nce author s such as Ander son, Gel l ner , Hobsbaw m and even Sm i th have w or ked out the "i m agi ned" and "constr ucted" char acter

nati

an i l l um i nati

ch al r eady em er ged i n Er nest Renan' s sentence "l a nati

ebi sci te de tous l es j

s". The ver y cor e of any ar gum ent agai nst supr anati

i denti ty becom i ng possi bl e i s to be f

n the hi dden and uncr i ti cal assum pti

ves of i t exactl y i n the sam e ter m s as of nati

i denti ty. W hat m ust be str essed i s, f i r st of al l , that supr anati

i denti ty, i ncl udi ng the Eur

i s not goi ng to cancel and to bur y l

and nati

i denti ti es i n the sam e w ay as nati

i denti ty used to do, say, i n xi x. th centur y Eur

At thi s stage of

r easoni ng, i f w e w ant to f i nd out about the possi bi l i ty of an Eur

denti ty to exi st (about i ts Bedi ngungen der M oegl i chkei t, Kant w oul d say), w e see the necessi ty to r ef i ne our noti

i t, to desi gn i ts str uctur e - w hi ch w e ar e goi ng to do i n the next par agr aph. Ther e i s i ndeed a second w ay to r ai se the possi bi l i ty questi

thi s ti m e i n a m or e substanti ve ver si

Gr anted that a m eta- nati

i denti ty i s possi bl e i n Eur

w hat w i l l i ts r eal di m ensi

ng or vani shi ng of nati

i denti ty coul d end up i n som ethi ng w hi ch w oul d under m i ne the chance f

the Uni

s ci ti zens to devel

cor r espondi ng i denti ty. On the one hand, they coul d see the EU as a m er e f uncti

enti ty, good at r egul ati ng m ar kets, m oney and bor der s, but i ndi sti ngui shabl e f r

W est, pr i m ar i l y the US, as f ar as val ues, pr i nci pl es and desti ny ar e concer ned - w el l beyond the pol i ti cal and cul tur al l i nks now exi sti ng i n the Nor th- Atl anti c com m uni ty. On the other hand, they coul d r eact to the chal l enges and bur dens of gl

i sati

l i nes of w hat M i chael W al zer has cal l ed "new tr i bal i sm ", i . e. taki ng r ef uge i n a cl

def i ant pi ctur e of the l

ethni c com m uni ty - a sel f

ensi ve r eacti

ch i s one

the el em ents behi nd r egi

m ovem ents i n today' s Eur

g. Vl aam s Bl

Lega Nor d). These m ovem ents ar e som eti m es eur

asti c, but i n the sense that they pl ay the EU agai nst the nati

uni ty exi sti ng i n thei r countr i es and l

a ki nd of For tr ess Eur

bor n of r egi

sel f

nter ests and shi el di ng these agai nst gl

i sati

and i m m i gr ati

f r

the South. Theor eti cal i nvesti gati

el ease pr

es about the ki nd of i denti ty that m ay pr evai l . W e can onl y say that the outcom e i s not pr e- deter m i ned by "obj ecti ve" (cul tur al

econom i c) f actor s, but w i l l r ather depend upon the abi l i ty of

SLIDE 4

Eur

ti zens and statesm en to gover n the Uni

f

i dent actor i n the w or l dw i de com peti ti

ati

Tr i bal i sm i s m or e l i kel y to com e up w her e untam ed gl

i sati

l ack of vi si

gover nance pr evai l . Rel evant to thi s outcom e w i l l ther ef

e be not onl y the str uctur e, but al so the content

i denti ty. 3. Ar e the Eur

ng to have an i denti ty or sever al i denti ti es? Or w hat i s the str uctur e

thei r i denti ty l i kel y to be? The w or d i denti ty i s sti l l suspi ci

par ti cul ar l y to Foucaul ti an post- m ode r ni sts

to or thodox r eader s of Ador no' s Negati ve Di al ekti k Pr

di f f er ence, di ver si ty, m ul ti pl i ci ty, cannot concei ve of i denti ty other than i n ter m s of i m posed uni ty, com pul sor y hom ogenei ty and total i tar i an hi er ar chy. Thi s am ounts to sur r ender i ng an i ndi spensabl e and neutr al categor y to the tr adi ti

the uni

ée,

even Ei n Rei ch, ei n Vol k, ei n Fuehr er ,

si m i l ar ethnocentr i c types of "author i tar i an per sonal i ty" studi ed by Ador no et al i i . Ther e i s m or e di al ecti cs betw een i denti ty and di f f er ence than these pr

pr esum e. Di f f er ence i s di f f er ence onl y i n the r el ati

p of the di f f er ent i ndi vi dual s or gr

Thi s shoul d be taken i nto consi der ati

so by those w ho m ake use of the concept of i denti ty, but onl y as a m ul ti pl e, steadi l y r enegoti ated i denti ty, and f

get to say how the var i

denti ti es keep together , i . e. w her e thei r m om ent

uni ty and per m anence i s to be f

But l et us now f

the speci f i c f eatur es

pol i ti cal i denti ty, and Eur

i denti ty i n par ti cul ar . Because of the di ver si ty w hi ch i s Eur

s i ndestr ucti bl e r i chness, because of the gr adual , pi ecem eal m ethod of a pr

ch i s a pr

i ntegr ati

ather than uni f i cati

because of the si ze of the em er gi ng pol i ty, the i nsti tuti

str uctur e of the Uni

s l i kel y to be f ar f r

al i sed m odel

the m oder n state, even i n the f eder al ver si

And so w i l l the i denti ty of i ts ci ti zens l

i ke. Deci si

m aki ng w i l l r em ai n l

al l evel s (l

, r egi

, nati

, Eur

connected w i th each

by bar gai ni ng and com peti ti

ather than by a ver ti cal chai n of com m and. Once thi s str uctur e has becom e cl ear to m or e and m or e ci ti zens, coal i ti

i nter ests as w el l as ol d and new cul tur al af f i ni ti es w i l l l i nk ci ti zens and gr

th each other acr

nati

bor der s - to an extent, e. g. i n academ i c cooper ati

they al r eady do so. Loyal ti es and sel f

m ages ar e goi ng to assum e a m ul ti

ar str uctur e, the doubl e,

j

nt al l egi ance w hi ch i s w atched by Eur

w i l l pr

abl y extend i ts per centage (as of … , the Eur

i ne them sel ves as nati

and Eur

ti zens,

SLIDE 5

Eur

and nati

,

pur el y Eur

do not exceed… . . ) Thi s i s sti l l not enough to gi ve the Eur

i ti cal i denti ty. Thi s can succeed onl y w hen the peopl e see that the Uni

s abl e to m ake and enf

ce deci si

n a f ew essenti al f i el ds, i n w hi ch nati

states have l

thei r i ndependent pow er : how to ensur e peace, w her e and w hy to use m i l i tar y f

ce, how to ensur e an el em entar y degr ee of econom i c pr

i ty and soci al stabi l i ty and sol i dar i ty, a pecul i ar Eur

val ue. Legi ti m acy i s gr anted to i nsti tuti

ust because they em body our val ues, they m ust al so pr

r ef f ecti veness i n i m pl em enti ng those val ues (by the w ay, thi s i s w hy a pur el y nor m ati ve theor y of l egi ti m acy can har dl y be r egar ded as pol i ti cal theor y). A new supr anati

i denti ty can gather m om entum onl y i f the peopl e f eel that som e deci si

f ecti ng thei r l i ves ar e now m ade i n "Br ussel s", and that they ar e m ade by l eader s w ho r epr esent the ci ti zens i n a dem ocr ati c, accountabl e w ay. Nei ther f ur ther el abor ati

ty of desti ny" (Edgar M or i n), nor

ts Chr i sti an or Car

i ngi an her i tage, nor the best ever m odel s of Eur

tuti

not even a desi r abl e huge i ncr ease i n Er asm us exchanges or i ndustr i al j

nt ventur es w i l l have on the ci ti zens a com par abl e i denti ty- bui l di ng ef f ect. The r hetor i c of the hoped- f

Eur

ci vi l soci ety, w hi ch i s obvi

y a centr al f actor

i ntegr ati

ati c contr

, shoul d not conceal the f act that nothi ng l i ke pol i ti cal pr

e ef f ecti ve i n f

i ng pol i ti cal i denti ty. To be subj ect to the sam e r ul es, to be pr

s (as el ector s) and addr essees (as ci ti zens of a no- l

vol untar i sti c com m uni ty) of the sam e pol i ci es: thi s i s the ci r cum stance w hi ch w i l l m ake us (even the Br i ti sh?) f eel l i ke a "w e" (as f ar as i n pr esent- day dem ocr aci es, w i th al l thei r "unkept pr

ses", ci ti zens can sti l l f eel l i ke a sel f

ned "w e"

thi s cannot be di scussed her e). Other than soci al

cul tur al i denti ty, pol i ti cal i denti ty has and m ust have a center ed str uctur e, m ust be an i denti ty and cannot be a com pl ex

i denti ti es. I f w e act as a w hol e and m ake deci si

undam ental , even l ethal , i ssues, w e cannot do that w i thout thi nki ng that i t m akes sense to m ake those deci si

and f

the sam e r easons; r easons w hi ch i n a dem ocr acy ar e not "gi ven" or i m posed, but r ather def i ned i n publ i c di al

. Pol i ti cs i s al so bar gai ni ng, but i t i s not j ust bar gai ni ng; nor w oul d w e be abl e to shar e and to l egi ti m ate those deci si

f w e had to thi nk that they ar e the neutr al i sed outcom e of techni cal choi ce or str ategi c cal cul ati

er s of sel f

nter ests. Thi s gener al thesi s has thr ee cor

l ar i es i n Eur

a. I t i s i m por tant to keep pol i ti cal i denti ty, w hi ch i s j ust one of sever al types of i denti ty am ong w hi ch the i ndi vi dual s def i ne and r edef i ne thei r

sonal i denti ty, di sti nct f r

soci al and cul tur al i denti ty, w hi ch have a l ess and l ess center ed str uctur e and can thus

SLIDE 6

counter bal ance pol i ti cal i denti ty and nour i sh i ts pr

change\adaptati

I t i s l i kew i se i m por tant to under stand that i f w e f eel Eur

w i th r egar d to cer tai n gener al i ssues, w e can and actual l y do sti l l f eel l i ke I tal i ans and Si ci l i ans,

Ger m an and Bavar i ans, w hen i t com es to pol i ti cal i ssues w hi ch r em ai n i n the pow er r ange of nati

and r egi

gover nm ents. Thi s i s a w el l

act i n f eder al states, and ther e i s no good r eason w hy i t shoul d not be so i n the EU, w hi ch i n the f

eseeabl e f utur e w i l l not becom e the Uni ted States of EUROPE. W e can assum e subsi di ar i ty to be a key- w or d al so w i th r egar d to the r el ati

p betw een the l ayer s

pol i ti cal i denti ty . b. I w ant to str ess that the r easons I have so f ar pr esented f

an Eur

i ti cal i denti ty to be devel

ncl ude di vi si

r

ti

states or ci vi l i sati

The m om ent of sel f

denti f i cati

ng di f f er ent f r

s cannot be deni ed. But di vi si

separ ati

ar e not the basi s

w hi ch to def i ne and to bui l d up the new i denti ty. I n m etaphor i cal w or ds, pol i ti cal i denti ty i s not as such the r ai si ng of a boundar y w al l , al though thi s i s an i ndi spensabl e m om ent and al though ther e ar e actual l y i denti ti es (e. g. ethni c) w hi ch ar e centr ed on thi s w al l . I denti ty- bui l di ng i n the pol i ti cal gr

s f i r st of al l the w or k of l

ng at our sel ves i n the m i r r

and f i ndi ng enough com m on i deas and em oti

as to j usti f y com m unal l i f e i n the pol i s. c. The nar r

i ni ti

pol i ti cal i denti ty as som ethi ng di f f er ent f r

al and cul tur al i denti ty m akes the scepti ci sm about the "r

essness" of Eur

denti ty l ess cr edi bl e. Pol i ti cs i s no l

the par am ount hum an acti vi ty i t used to be i n r epubl i can or nati

i st par adi gm s, and i t does not pr etend to i m pose i ts m ar k on other spher es. Besi des, i t has becom e m or e "abstr act" i n at l east tw o senses. Fi r st, the gover nance of com pl exi ty (the m or e i n a pol i ty of 370 m i l l i

equi r es a hi gh degr ee of f l exi bi l i ty and adaptati

l

si m pl i f i ed pr i nci pl es that m ay be descr i bed and adver ti sed i n ter m s of substanti ve goal s. Secondl y, the pol i cy of soci al , r aci al , gender and so on f ai r ness, w hi ch i s the basi c pr i nci pl e i n advanced dem ocr aci es, l ets us f eel that w e agr ee

gener al and pr

al nor m s (the "r i ghts") r ather than substanti ve pol i ci es, w hi ch ar e to be deter m i ned case by case i n the ups and dow ns

pol i ti cal gam e. I t i s that essenti al , consti tuti

agr eem ent that i s at the cor e of

"post- conventi

" i denti ty. I t m ust al so be sai d that the abstr actness (absi t i ni ur i a ver bo, even i f I have dr

ks) of supr anati

and post- conventi

i denti ty does not r ul e

s - how coul d i t be, i f , as al l com m uni cati

pol i ti cal com m uni cati

ks w i th sym bol s? I t si m pl y r equi r es m or e abstr act, l ess tr adi ti

types of sym bol (i deas r ather than f l ags): the Eur

even Beethoven' s and Schi l l er ' s Hym ne an di e Fr eude, Eur

s not yet of f i ci al anthem , w i l l never r ai se the sam e w ave of em oti

i ke Tr i col

e and M ar sei l l ai se, and the sear ch f

Eur

s that m ay have the sam e char acter l i ke the nati

i s at the sam e ti m e m i sgui ded and patheti c.

SLIDE 7

M or e ser i

der ati

ves the ar gum ent that any supr anati

i ty m ust l ack the com m unal i ty of l anguage and habi ts that ar e com m on to nati

nsof ar no concr ete r

i n the com m uni cati ve exper i ence

ever yday l i f e. Thi s i s tr ue, al though i t m ust be r em em ber ed that a f ul l com m unal i ty i s not gi ven i n al l

the "hi stor i c" nati

"Abstr act" that i t be, Eur

denti ty w i l l have to com e to ter m s w i th thi s ci r cum stance, and the w ay has sti l l to be i nvented. I suggest that thi s pr

em over l aps w i th the pr

em

w hat publ i c spher e and publ i c

ni

m ay m ean i n the EU. But thi s i s a pr

em , not an unsur passabl e

e. 4. W hat i s the nor m ati ve content

the pol i ti cal Eur

i denti ty? The abstr actness of

pol i ti cal i denti ty m eans abstr act content, not l ack of any content. Now , hum an r i ghts (i ncl udi ng soci al r i ghts), i nstead of pow er pol i ti cs, and cooper ati

ntegr ati

i nstead of contendi ng sover ei gnti es, have been si nce 1945 the basi s on w hi ch the Eur

n r edi r ecti ng thei r hi stor y tow ar ds new com m on goal s of peace and pr

i ty. Thi s sti l l consti tutes the "pr

ect Eur

i t m ay have l

an spl endor

the or i gi ns, but the utopi a of the For ti es and Fi f ti es has now becom e ever y- day r eal i ty. I n so f ar , Eur

ty has al r eady r

n a hi stor y

f i ve decades. On the other hand Eur

s al so bound to becom e a r egi

Gr eat Pow er i n econom i c and (per haps) pol i ti cal ter m s. W e do not yet know w hat exactl y i ts pl ace w i l l be i n the m ul ti pol ar

der

r egi

Pow er s, but thi s pl ace i s now cer tai n. The EU w i l l be at the sam e ti m e a peacef ul and dem ocr ati c "beacon" w hi ch w i l l be cheer ed ar

m uch m or e than the US , and a pow er f ul com peti tor i n the pl anetar i an gl

i sati

gam e. How can the uni ver sal i sti c cl ai m s of the pr

ect be r econci l ed w i th the (necessar i l y) par ti cul ar i sti c f eatur es of a geopol i ti cal enti ty? Can they be r econci l ed? How w i l l w e f eel (w e, the ci ti zens

the top

the beacon) w henever a shi p w i th i l l egal i m m i gr ants w i l l be stopped bef

e the I tal i an or Spani sh shor es,

a deci si

the Com m i ssi

w i l l have negati ve ef f ects

the devel

ng countr i es' econom i es? Thi s i s not a contr adi cti

ved once f

al l . I t i s r ather a contr adi cti

w i th w hi ch w e ar e bound to l i ve, and have to l ear n to l i ve. The sel f

i ni ti

the

SLIDE 8

Eur

ace i n the f i el d def i ned by the tensi

es. The dem ocr ati c tr adi ti

n the US has al w ays had thi s pr

em , and w e shoul d tr y to com e to gr i ps w i th i t i n a l ess hypocr i ti cal w ay than

the

si de

the Atl anti c, but thi s shoul d not be i m possi bl e. For exam pl e, a w ay to r econci l e uni ver sal i sti c cl ai m s and par ti cul ar i sti c i nter ests i s to i m pr

i nter nati

cooper ati

and the i nsti tuti

i sati

i nter nati

r el ati

som ethi ng f r

ch the US i s hi nder ed by that pecul i ar pol i ti cal r eal i sm (the "nati

i nter est") that ends up i n i sol ati

sm and\or i m per i al postur es. Ther e i s no el em ent i n today' s pol i ti cal consci ence of the Eur

that m ay f

ce us to f

l

the sam e patter n. Gl

y These r ef l ecti

ar e based

the f

l

ng m eani ng

"pol i ti cal i denti ty": i t i s the set of val ues and pr i nci pl es (w hi ch m ay or m ay not i ncl ude com pr ehensi ve vi ew s

the w or l d\W el tbi l der , but i n any case i m pl i es a shar ed under standi ng of hi stor y, par ti cul ar l y of a hi stor y as contenti

thr

ch w e r ecogni se

sel ves as a "w e". I n other w or ds w e f i nd i n the shar i ng of these val ues, pr i nci pl es and i nter pr etati

f i ci ent r easons f

keepi ng together and desi gni ng together the f utur e l i f e of the pol i ty. (Recogni ti

kennung i s the key concept i n thi s def i ni ti

i t hi ghl i ghts the r ef l exi ve char acter

pol i ti cal i denti ty as a pr

to change and r edef i ni ti

Thi s i denti ty does not coi nci de w i th cul tur al i denti ty (cul tur al i st f al l acy), nor does i t si m pl y r esul t f r

n the past (hi stor i ci st f al l acy). Par ti cul ar l y i n the case of new dem ocr ati c pol i ti es, i t al w ays i m pl i es choosi ng el em ents f r

stor y and gi vi ng them a new or der and si gni f i cance (the nor m ati ve or "consti tuti

" m om ent, w hi ch i s essenti al i n the pr esent stage of the Eur

The sym bol i c char acter

any (i ncl udi ng pol i ti cal ) i denti ty does not i m pl y that i t m ust be based on a "f

m yth", al though som e i denti ti es ar e and even m or e used to be. [FI RST DRAFT, PLEASE DO NOT QUOTE; COM M ENTS ARE VERY W ELCOM E] 1. 1 W e have to m enti

s l i nk of pol i ti cal com m uni ty and l egi ti m acy r

n i denti ty i s si gni f i cant onl y i f w e do not shar e the system theor y of soci ety and i ts i dea that i n hi gh- r ati

i sed soci eti es pol i ti cal i nsti tuti

r