Why do some feel European and what it can tell us today

A good friend of mine told me many years ago that in any debate it is important to agree on our terms before starting the discussion. If you don't agree on the underlying assumptions and definitions then the most likely outcome of any debate is that you will simply talk across each other, going round and round in circles without getting down to the substance of the matter.

To a great extent, I have often felt that this is the problem with the debate on membership of the EU in the UK. We have not agreed on our terms.

So what is the question that lies at the heart of this discussion? It seems to me that the great tension in British society is between two views of Europe. One which sees a united Europe as a fundamentally good thing, improving the UK's prosperity, power and influence in the world. And another which sees it as a bad thing, diluting our influence and limiting this country. (There is a third view of a united Europe but without the UK, though this largely converges with the second in the context of this debate so is not worth treating separately here).

This would suggest that the most important question to resolve is why Europe should be united. However, I believe this still does not take us deep enough. The problem is that the answer to this question is still tied too closely to the initial tension. It would very quickly revert to the circular debates that I mentioned above because it does not really push us to think differently about this issue. In other words, 'why should Europe be united' is much too similar a question to 'why is the EU good'. It is a question that still leads us to think in terms of outcomes and the raw functionality of EU institutions and laws. It is also flawed because it sticks to an abstract conception of Europe. To progress on this debate, I believe that we need to move to a more personal and concrete level.

To this end, I believe the key question we need to consider is 'why do I (not) feel European?'



It is this sentiment, the belief that one is European, that you are in some intrinsic way linked to other Europeans, that drives people to protest, to campaign, to vote for a better Europe, a stronger Europe and a more united Europe. And vice-versa, an emphatic rejection of European identity is often presented as central to those on the other side, for whom a united Europe is an unnatural top-down creation.

To be clear, this is an idea of being European that is very different from the vague notions sometimes set out by those who have studied classics at Oxford and own a holiday home in Spain, a kind of remote historical idea of the whole country being part of Europe, with little connection to the individual. Rather, what we mean by 'European' here is an important part of individual identity, intimately linked to a political project of unity. It does not have to take the form of federalism, indeed the whole internal arrangement of Europe is still up for debate here, but it instinctively tacks towards a 'European unionism' and rejects separatism.

Therefore, what drives this difference between us and is it something we can debate and shift or is this to be a permanent and irreconcilable division?

The obvious answer to explaining the feeling of being European would be that I was born in Europe. Yet this is of course a circular answer. For that logic to work, I must already identify the place where I was born as being 'Europe'. And for those who do not feel European, this is not the case. Geographic reality aside, these people would reject the idea that they are born in 'Europe' precisely because they understand that this discussion relates to political and identity concepts, not simple geography.

Another possibility is through communication. Knowing and interacting with other Europeans seems to inevitably make it more likely that someone will feel European themselves. Though it is by no means guaranteed, the familiarity of being with other Europeans does help to highlight the similarities that you hold and to demonstrate how much we share in terms of values and culture. Meanwhile, going further afield outside of Europe can also demonstrate how different other cultures can be and minimise the differences that we see inside of Europe. That said, there is a variation of European sentiment between countries and within countries that simply cannot be explained by exposure to other Europeans alone.

There is also an argument to say that people feel European because they associate the EU with positive values and so wish to identify with those values. However, this does pose a chicken and egg problem. Do the positive associations with the EU come first or is the feeling of being European that leads people to prioritise the positive aspects of the EU?

We could construct a long list of possible reasons, mostly related to life experiences, history and culture but I think that one perspective stands out above the others: the relationship between Europe's national identities and European identity.

If you believe that a European identity is a replacement for a national identity then rejecting that European identity is a natural course for many people. The idea that the EU is set to erase national identities is one of the most common tropes used by its enemies. If people are convinced this is true or simply worry that there might be something to it, then it is very likely that they will decide they do not feel European. For most people it is the national identity which comes first and so in a binary choice between the two, it is the national identity which wins out. But of course it is not a binary. Most people who claim to feel European, myself included, also attest to holding a national identity. Indeed they may agree that the national identity comes first - it's simply that they do not see the European part as a threat to the national and so see no reason to reject the European.

The EU's motto is 'unity in diversity'. What must be understood is that this is not simply an empty slogan to give cover for secret desires to homogenise Europe and abolish its nations. For most supporters of the EU, this is a sincerely held belief. We enjoy the differences between Europe's nations, revel in them.

Economist writer, Duncan Robinson, recently wrote a piece on the prevalence of stereotypes in Brussels, the meeting place of all Europe's nations. While a good and fair piece, the conclusions felt overly negative to me. These stereotypes are not entirely hostile, especially when we think of them in terms of daily interactions and forming identities rather than when placed in the more brutal context of allocating budget spending. When my French and German friends jokingly argue over ownership of Alsace-Lorraine, this is not a rejection of the common European identity but an absolute affirmation of it, turning ancient conflict into modern friendship. The same could be said of stereotypes of the Brits as old-fashioned and eccentric, the Dutch as dry and direct, the Italians as loud and boisterous. Rather than being a sign of distance, we engage in these stereotypes as a never-ending game, poking fun at one another in the security that we still, at the end of the day, basically like each other. I've used the analogy before but it still seems most appropriate to me to think of Europe's nations as bickering siblings: clear, even fierce, disputes, but nonetheless, at the end of the day, one family.

This adulation of Europe's national diversity may seem like a strange aside but it is actually an essential point to underline. People who feel European are not going to go away in Britain. There will continue to be a great many of us. In the past, this large section of the population was relatively well accommodated. But with Brexit, there has been a general process of ostracisation, denial and condemnation. If Britain is to go back to being a country at peace with itself, then this European identity needs to once again be given a place in the public sphere, without threat or attack. The creation of strawman positions around pro-Europeans will need to be abandoned. It is not a case of not feeling British, it is not a case of not appreciating Europe's diverse nations, it is not adherence to a secretive plot to destroy those things that our opponents hold dear. We believe in being both European and British. We believe in a Europe united in its diversity.

Once this has happened, when it is established and commonly accepted that pro-Europeans are not against Britain or a threat to British identity, then we can move on to the next stage of discussing our common ground and to establish whether the majority would still be hostile to European identity (for reasons I have not appreciated) or whether this new understanding of what it means to 'feel European', once discussed away from the bluster of newspaper front pages and campaign slogans, does in fact form a national consensus. This will not only give us the basis to settle our place in Europe and how close we wish to be with our siblings in the other nations, but also return to us some measure of social peace.


Image via Flickr