‘Love Europe, Hate the EU’: A genealogical inquiry into populists’ spatio-cultural critique of the European Union and its consequences

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article analyses the genealogy of the expression ‘Love Europe, hate the EU’, which is taken as a spatio-cultural critique of the European Union that has important consequences for how European integration is contested. Closely associated with the Brexit movement, but also popular among other populist movements opposing the European Union, this catchphrase is analysed as the latest stage in the contestation over the political meaning of Europe. However, the article demonstrates that the desire to do away with a rules-based institutional order rests on a deliberately ahistorical reading of European inter-state relations following the rise of the sovereign state. What is overlooked is the way in which Europe was conceptualized by the end of the 18th century as a distinct political unit with its own peculiar dysfunctionality, namely, a naturally anti-hegemonic order that often resulted in violent conflict. The spatio-cultural critique of European Union institutionalization nonetheless expects that shared European interests and values can seamlessly recreate cooperation across sovereign states, an argument that culminated in the UK’s Brexit decision. Yet, as shown by the debate over the future of UK–European Union relations, this cultural and idealized understanding of Europe’s commonalities ignores the economic and political significance of borders and forgets the part played by the European Union in managing contested spaces. This emerging cleavage between institutional and cultural understandings of Europe suggests that European integration after Brexit needs to focus on demonstrating the value of institutionalized cooperation per se as much as on the cultural symbolism of supranationalism.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean Journal of International Relations
Early online date20 May 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 20 May 2019

Fingerprint

hate
love
EU
European integration
cultural relations
symbolism
genealogy
institutionalization
functionality
Values
economics

Bibliographical note

© Sage 2019. The final publication is available via Sage at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354066119850242

Keywords

  • Brexit
  • European Union
  • Euroscepticism
  • institutionalization
  • international order
  • sovereignty

Cite this

@article{d5afd915248e46e9a212772b6433056d,
title = "‘Love Europe, Hate the EU’: A genealogical inquiry into populists’ spatio-cultural critique of the European Union and its consequences",
abstract = "This article analyses the genealogy of the expression ‘Love Europe, hate the EU’, which is taken as a spatio-cultural critique of the European Union that has important consequences for how European integration is contested. Closely associated with the Brexit movement, but also popular among other populist movements opposing the European Union, this catchphrase is analysed as the latest stage in the contestation over the political meaning of Europe. However, the article demonstrates that the desire to do away with a rules-based institutional order rests on a deliberately ahistorical reading of European inter-state relations following the rise of the sovereign state. What is overlooked is the way in which Europe was conceptualized by the end of the 18th century as a distinct political unit with its own peculiar dysfunctionality, namely, a naturally anti-hegemonic order that often resulted in violent conflict. The spatio-cultural critique of European Union institutionalization nonetheless expects that shared European interests and values can seamlessly recreate cooperation across sovereign states, an argument that culminated in the UK’s Brexit decision. Yet, as shown by the debate over the future of UK–European Union relations, this cultural and idealized understanding of Europe’s commonalities ignores the economic and political significance of borders and forgets the part played by the European Union in managing contested spaces. This emerging cleavage between institutional and cultural understandings of Europe suggests that European integration after Brexit needs to focus on demonstrating the value of institutionalized cooperation per se as much as on the cultural symbolism of supranationalism.",
keywords = "Brexit, European Union, Euroscepticism, institutionalization, international order, sovereignty",
author = "Andrew Glencross",
note = "{\circledC} Sage 2019. The final publication is available via Sage at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354066119850242",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1177/1354066119850242",
language = "English",

}

‘Love Europe, Hate the EU’ : A genealogical inquiry into populists’ spatio-cultural critique of the European Union and its consequences. / Glencross, Andrew.

In: European Journal of International Relations, 20.05.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘Love Europe, Hate the EU’

T2 - A genealogical inquiry into populists’ spatio-cultural critique of the European Union and its consequences

AU - Glencross, Andrew

N1 - © Sage 2019. The final publication is available via Sage at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354066119850242

PY - 2019/5/20

Y1 - 2019/5/20

N2 - This article analyses the genealogy of the expression ‘Love Europe, hate the EU’, which is taken as a spatio-cultural critique of the European Union that has important consequences for how European integration is contested. Closely associated with the Brexit movement, but also popular among other populist movements opposing the European Union, this catchphrase is analysed as the latest stage in the contestation over the political meaning of Europe. However, the article demonstrates that the desire to do away with a rules-based institutional order rests on a deliberately ahistorical reading of European inter-state relations following the rise of the sovereign state. What is overlooked is the way in which Europe was conceptualized by the end of the 18th century as a distinct political unit with its own peculiar dysfunctionality, namely, a naturally anti-hegemonic order that often resulted in violent conflict. The spatio-cultural critique of European Union institutionalization nonetheless expects that shared European interests and values can seamlessly recreate cooperation across sovereign states, an argument that culminated in the UK’s Brexit decision. Yet, as shown by the debate over the future of UK–European Union relations, this cultural and idealized understanding of Europe’s commonalities ignores the economic and political significance of borders and forgets the part played by the European Union in managing contested spaces. This emerging cleavage between institutional and cultural understandings of Europe suggests that European integration after Brexit needs to focus on demonstrating the value of institutionalized cooperation per se as much as on the cultural symbolism of supranationalism.

AB - This article analyses the genealogy of the expression ‘Love Europe, hate the EU’, which is taken as a spatio-cultural critique of the European Union that has important consequences for how European integration is contested. Closely associated with the Brexit movement, but also popular among other populist movements opposing the European Union, this catchphrase is analysed as the latest stage in the contestation over the political meaning of Europe. However, the article demonstrates that the desire to do away with a rules-based institutional order rests on a deliberately ahistorical reading of European inter-state relations following the rise of the sovereign state. What is overlooked is the way in which Europe was conceptualized by the end of the 18th century as a distinct political unit with its own peculiar dysfunctionality, namely, a naturally anti-hegemonic order that often resulted in violent conflict. The spatio-cultural critique of European Union institutionalization nonetheless expects that shared European interests and values can seamlessly recreate cooperation across sovereign states, an argument that culminated in the UK’s Brexit decision. Yet, as shown by the debate over the future of UK–European Union relations, this cultural and idealized understanding of Europe’s commonalities ignores the economic and political significance of borders and forgets the part played by the European Union in managing contested spaces. This emerging cleavage between institutional and cultural understandings of Europe suggests that European integration after Brexit needs to focus on demonstrating the value of institutionalized cooperation per se as much as on the cultural symbolism of supranationalism.

KW - Brexit

KW - European Union

KW - Euroscepticism

KW - institutionalization

KW - international order

KW - sovereignty

UR - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1354066119850242

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067694862&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1354066119850242

DO - 10.1177/1354066119850242

M3 - Article

ER -