A two‐tier conception of European Union peoplehood: A realist study of European citizens’ bonds of collectivity

• Date: 01 November 2017
• Published date: 01 November 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12270

ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT

A two‐tier conception of European Union

peoplehood: A realist study of European citizens’

bonds of collectivity

Jan Pieter Beetz*

Abstract

The European Union (EU) struggles to legitimate its rule. This realist study develops a conception of peoplehood in

the EU polity, because, in contemporary Europe, ‘the people’remains the sole source of political legitimacy. From

a realist perspective, a conception of peoplehood should yield a coherent story why EU citizens should accept, or

at least acquiesce, to EU rule. This study explores the possibility of a pluralistic conception being either multi‐lay-

ered, multi‐faceted or both. Taking a practice‐dependent approach, I first analyse the institutional systems that

structure relationships between EU citizens. I secondly propose conceptions of EU citizens’bonds of collectivity.

Thirdly, I develop a novel two‐tier conception of EU peoplehood in which individuals remain bound together as

national peoples, while these peoples are in turn united by commercial and liberal bonds. I submit that this con-

ception can lay the foundation for a convincing story to legitimate EU rule.

1|INTRODUCTION

In February2015, GermanChancellor Merkeland French presidentHollande arrangeda compromisewith Ukrainianpres-

identPoroshenkoand his RussiancounterpartPutin to contributetowardsending thewar betweenthose countries.

1

Exter-

nal conflicts, such as theabove, are not solvedby patiently findingPareto‐optimal outcomes. They requiretaking political

decisions that will entail compromising on both interestsand values. Moreover, external forces, such as speculators on

financialmarkets,have forcedthe EuropeanUnion (EU)to take decisiveand swift action.EU politicshas thus extendedfrom

the domainof regulation intothe world of realpolitik.

2

This typeof politics entailsdecision‐makingon often salient issues.

------------------------------------------------------- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- --

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, dis-

tribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

© 2018 The Authors. European Law Journal Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

*

Jan Pieter Beetz recently started as a Lecturer in Politics at the Radboud University Nijmegen and in Philosophy at Leiden University.

He wrote this article during his ACCESS EUROPE Postdoctoral Research Fellowship at the Department of Political Science and Public

Administration, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. For feedback on earlier iterations, I thank participants and audiences at the ACCESS

EUROPE Early Career Workshop, Amsterdam 2015; the panel on the ‘EU's normative identity’at ECPR SGEU, Trento 2016; the

ELJ author's workshop, Amsterdam 2017; and the Images of Sovereignty Conference, Leuven 2017. For their extensive comments,

I am grateful to Ben Crum, Luigi Corrias, Markus Patberg, and Tom Theuns.

1

L. Van Middelaar, De Nieuwe Politiek Van Europa (Historische Uitgeverij, 2017), 15–16.

2

Ibid.

DOI: 10.1111/eulj.12270

Eur Law J. 2017;23:467–481. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/eulj 467