Transnationalization of public spheres may be an enabling condition for the politicization of the European amalgamation process. European integration or transnationization is approached with the assumption that politicization will have a mainly positive effect on the integration process. This is because cosmopolitan supporters have a more suitable platform to air their views and to rally other European citizens around this. Two arguments arise from this assumptions. The first is that politicization of the European integration process should be interpreted contextually within a more fundamental cosmopolitan nationalist cleavage. The second is the highly ambiguous process of the politicization of the European integration. The analysis is done based on two political research projects that were carried out in 2009 and 2013 respectively.
According to Grande and Kriesi (2015) data from the leading newspaper and tabloid were used to pinpoint each actors position on specific issues. The findings were as follows. Three types of globalization conflicts arise as a result of transformational cleavage because of denationalization. First, globalization fueled transnational economic competition, thus raising social and economic risks in advanced welfare states. Second, European integration and globalization caused an increase in cultural diversity, thus threatening identity within society through immigration. Third, the political alliance led to a transfer of legislative authority away from the national state to institutions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
These conflicts transformed the culture of political strife in Europe. A new cleavage with a demarcation-integration nature emerged. This redefined the real dimension to change the two-dimensional political space into one who considered culture as well. The transformed political conflict has made European integration an issue in campaign and mass politics. Its importance matches environmental issues, immigration and it is just slightly less salient than economic issues.
The next step was in analyzing public debate on European issues and identifying constellations. Grande and Kriesi (2015) point out that both radical left and radical right political parties strongly oppose European integration. Greens, Liberals and Social Democrats support integration. Some issues leading to this support choices included the EU institutions having their dictatorial powers, and institutional forces extended. The inclusion of new member states to enlarge the EU was the other main issue. Sub-issues include strengthening of the market correcting policies and enforcement of further market-making policies. The political parties support the issues in a skewed way. Those who support significant issues do not necessarily share the same position on sub-issues.
Cleavage groups were identified from political actors who hold positions and those who oppose different positions. They are not constituted from political coalitions or parties rather than from players who support positions based on particular interests and allegiances. The four ideal-typical alliances included interventionist-cosmopolitan, neoliberal-cosmopolitan, neoliberal-nationalist and interventionist-nationalist. The first group is affiliated to the left parties though they are divided on economic axes. The second draws members from the Liberal, Conservative, and Christian Democratic parties through their central conflict is on cultural issues. Some of the right-wing parties also share membership in the third cleavage group. The fourth combines members from all sides (Grande & Kriesi, 2015).
Finally, actor positions and actor constellations have realigned themselves to play different roles. Actors present include EU institutions and the International Monetary Fund. Foreign executives, national executives as well as external, national and EU parties also have positions that contribute to the European crisis. The actor constellations can be divided into supranational actors who are prominent in all countries as well as local or government actors. The issues they publicly discuss and contribute to include crisis management and structural reforms. They take different positions on issues such as economic and financial stability, national efforts, financial deepening and institutional deepening. Finally, it is established that the relationship of critical players to each other determines their actions. The results show that the Euro crisis is weakening organized civil society in donor countries. It is also alienating the stronger supporters of integration. This dissatisfaction may or may not strengthen the agenda of inclusion.
References
Grande, E., " Kriesi, H. (2015). The restructuring of political conflict in Europe and the politicization of European integration.
