Construction of European identity by the Pro-European Parties

Yıl 2022, , 73 - 87, 02.06.2022

Melek Aylin Özoflu

https://doi.org/10.33458/uidergisi.1124976

Cited By: 1

Öz

The political scene of the European Union (EU) presents a discursive field where identity construction becomes a vital tool for political parties to claim political credit and legitimize themselves. While pro-European parties utilize the narratives of an in-group of European identity, Eurosceptic parties problematize the gap between ‘us’ and ‘them’ by employing narratives of intergroup differentiation as an instrument to re/shape the political reality. The scholarly literature mostly focuses on Eurosceptic populist discourse and right-wing rhetoric relying on discursive socio-political exclusion to form in-group identification of national identities. By adopting a different stance, this article seeks to address the discursive strategies of the pro-European parties employed and mobilized during the 2019 European Parliament election campaigns through the discourse historical approach. It argues that it is of critical importance to reveal the pro-European discourse to reflect the pro-European stance over the debates on the existing identity cleavage within the turbulent European political scene.

Anahtar Kelimeler

2019 European Parliament elections, Discourse Historical Approach (DHA), European identity, European crises, identity construction

Destekleyen Kurum

The present publication is the outcome of the project „From Talent to Young Researcher project aimed at activities supporting the research career model in higher education”, identifier EFOP-3.6.3-VEKOP-16-2017-00007 co-supported by the European Union, Hungary and the European Social Fund

Avrupa Yanlısı Siyasi Partiler Tarafından Avrupa Kimliği İnşası

Öz

Avrupa Birliği (AB) siyasi sahnesi, kimlik inşasının siyasi partiler için siyasi bir meşrutiyet kazanma aracı haline geldiği söylemsel bir alan sunmaktadır. Avrupa yanlısı partiler, Avrupa kimliğinin grup içi anlatılarını kullanırken Avrupa şüpheci partiler, siyasi gerçekliği yeniden şekillendirmek için gruplar arası farklılaşma anlatılarını kullanarak “biz” ve “onlar” arasındaki grup ayrımını sorunsallaştırır. Literatür çoğunlukla, söylemsel sosyo-politik dışlama yoluyla grup içi ulus kimliği inşa eden Avrupa şüpheci popülist söylem ve sağcı retoriğe odaklanır. Bu makale, farklı bir duruş benimseyerek 2019 Avrupa Parlamentosu seçim kampanyaları süresince Avrupa yanlısı siyasi partilerin başvurduğu söylemsel stratejileri söylem-tarihsel yaklaşım yöntemiyle ele almayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalkantılı Avrupa siyaset sahnesindeki Avrupa yanlısı söylemi araştırmak bu partilerin grup içi kimlik bölünmesine ilişkin duruşunu ortaya koymakta kritik bir öneme sahiptir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

2019 Avrupa Parlamentosu seçimleri, Söylem-Tarihsel Yaklaşım, Avrupa kimliği, Avrupa krizleri, kimlik inşası

Kaynakça

• “A New Social Contract for Europe”, (2019), PES, https://www.pes.eu/export/sites/default/.galleries/Documentsgallery/PES-Manifesto-2019_EN.pdf_2063069299.pdf (Accessed 23 April 2021).
• Aydin-Düzgit, S. (2012). Constructions of European identity: Debates and discourses on Turkey and the EU. Turkey, Palgrave Macmillan.
• “Borrell: “I present this candidacy to build a socialist Europe: fair, open to the world, tolerant and cohesive”, 5 September 2019, PSOE, https://www.psoe.es/actualidad/noticias-actualidad/borrell-presento-esta-candidatura-paraconstruir-una-europa-socialista-justa-abierta-al-mundo-tolerante-y-cohesionada/ (Accessed 22 April 2020.)
• Börzel, Tanja A. and Thomas Risse (2018). “From the euro to the Schengen crises: European integration theories, politicization, and identity politics.” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 25, No 1, p.83-108.
• Bruter, Michael (2003). “Winning hearts and minds for Europe: The impact of news and symbols on civic and cultural European identity”, Comparative political studies, Vol.36, No 10, 2003, p.1148-1179.
• Castano, Emanuele (2004). “European identity: A social-psychological perspective”, Richard K Herrmann, Thomas RisseKappen and Brewer, Marilynn B (eds.), Transnational identities: Becoming European in the EU. Oxford, Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, p.40-58.
• Cinpoes, Radu (2008). “Thematic articles: National identity and European identity”, Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, Vol.2, No 1, p. 3-14.
• “Conclusion report of the High Level Working Group on the future of Europe”, (2018), PES, https://www.pes.eu/en/pesdocuments/index.html?topic=&type=&page=3, p.13, (Accessed 10 June 2020).
• Conclusion Report on the future of the Europe, (2018). PES, https://www.pes.eu/fr/policies/democracy-human-rights/ documents/, p.43 (Accessed 3 June 2020).
• Curtis, Amber K (2014). “Inclusive versus exclusive: A cross-national comparison of the effects of subnational, national, and supranational identity”, European Union Politics, Vol. 15, No 4, p. 521-546.
• Datondji, André Cocou and Franck Amousou (2019). “Discourse-Historical Approach to Critical Discourse Studies: Theoretical and Conceputal Analysis, Basic Characteristics and Analytical Tools”, Revue Internationale de Linguistique Appliquée, de Littérature et d’Education, Vol. 2, No 1, p. 70-80.
• Diez, Thomas (2005). “Constructing the Self and Changing Others: ReconsideringNormative Power Europe’”, Millennium, Vol.33, No 3, p.613-636.
• Faktenblatt Mehrwert Europa, (2019). CDU/CSU, https://www.cducsu.de/sites/default/files/2019-05/cducsu_faktenblatt_Europa_1.pdf (Accessed 22 April 2020)
• Galpin, Charlotte (2017). The Euro crisis and European identities: Political and media discourse in Germany, Ireland and Poland. Switzerland, Springer.
• “Guy Verhofstadt: Compromising on EU values would mean selling out on our integrity” (2018). Euronews, 29 Octobe, https:// www.euronews.com/2018/11/29/guy-verhofstadt-compromising-on-eu-values-would-mean-selling-out-on-ourintegrity-view (Accessed 1 June 2020).
• Habermas, Jürgen (2003). “Making sense of the EU: Toward a Cosmopolitan Europe”, Journal of democracy, Vol. 14, No 4, p. 86-100.
• Habermas, Jürgen (1996). “The European nation state. Its achievements and its limitations. On the past and future of sovereignty and citizenship”, Ratio juris, Vol.9, No 2, p. 125-137.
• Harvey, David (2005). The new imperialism. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Hobolt, Sara B. and Christopher Wratil (2015). “Public opinion and the crisis: the dynamics of support for the Euro”, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 22, No 2, p. 238-256.
• Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks (2009). “A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining”, British journal of political science, p.1-23.
• Jäger, Siegfried and Florentine Maier (2009). “Theoretical and methodological aspects of Foucauldian critical discourse analysis and dispositive analysis”, Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, (eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis, London, Sage Publications, p.34-61.
• Jean-Baptiste Moreau : « Sans l’Europe, il n’y aurait plus d’agriculture en France », (2019), En Marche, https://en-marche.fr/articles/ actualites/podcast-jean-baptiste-moreau (Accessed 21 April 2020)
• Krzyżanowski, Michał (2010). The discursive construction of European identities: A multi-level approach to discourse and identity in the transforming European Union. Frankfurt, Peter Lang.
• Manifesto 2019, Time to renew the promise of Europe, (2018), EGP, https://europeangreens.eu/manifesto/ (Accessed 7 June 2020). Manifesto 2019, Let’s open the next chapter for Europe together, (2018), EPP, https://www.epp.eu/papers/epp-manifesto// (Accessed 5 June 2020).
• Neumann, Iver B. (1979). “Self and other in international relations”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 2, No 2, 1996, p. 139-174.
• Ocak, Piril Akin and Cagri Erhan (2021). “A Litmus Test for the EU’s Longest Year: Solidarity Principle and Challenges by COVID-19 in 2020”, Uluslararasi Iliskiler, Advanced Online Publication, 28 May, pp. 1-23, DOI: 10.33458/ uidergisi.947511.
• Olausson, Ulrika (2010). “Towards a European identity? The news media and the case of climate change”, European Journal of Communication, Vol.25, No 2, p.138-152.
• “Overview of French Agricultural Diversity”, (22 September 2015) https://agriculture.gouv.fr/overview-french-agriculturaldiversity#:~:text=France%20has%20the%20biggest%20utilized,third%20in%20pig%20meat%20production, (Accessed 22 April 2021)
• “Policy Paper. A Europe that defends our values and interests in the World”, (2018), EPP, 7 November 2018, https://www. epp.eu/epp-news/press-releases/, p.1. (Accessed 1 June 2020).
• Priorities for 2019: What European Greens Fight For, (2019), EGP, https://europeangreens.eu/priorities-2019-whateuropean-greens-fight (Accessed 22 April 2021). Risse, Thomas (2014). “No demos? Identities and public spheres in the Euro crisis”, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 52, No 6, p. 1207-1215.
• Risse, Thomas (2009). “Social Constructivism and European integration”, Antje Wiener and Thomas Diez (eds.), European Integration Theory, Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 144-156.
• Tajfel, Henri (ed.) (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, Henri (1978). “Social categorization, social identity and social comparison”, Henri Tajfel (ed.), Differentiation between social group. London, Academic Press.
• Turner, John C. et al. (1979). “Social comparison and group interest in in-group favouritism”, European journal of social psychology, Vol. 9, No 2, 1979, p. 187-204.
• Turner, John C. (1982). “Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group”, Henri Tajfel (ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p.15-36.
• Verhaegen, Soetkin and Marc Hooghe (2015). “Does more knowledge about the European Union lead to a stronger European identity? A comparative analysis among adolescents in 21 European member states”, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 28, No 2, p.127-146.
• Waqas, Ejaz, (2017). “Analyzing Malaise and Mobilization: The Effects of Media on Political Support and European Identity in Old and New Member States”, Politics in Central Europe, Vol. 13, No 2-3, p. 33-51.
• Weldes, Jutta (ed.) (1999). Cultures of insecurity: states, communities, and the production of danger. Minnesota, University of Minnesota Press.
• Wodak, Ruth and Martin Reisigl (2009). The Semiotics of Racism. Approaches in Critical Discourse Analysis, Vienna, Passagen Verlag.
• Wodak, Ruth et al. (2009). The Discursive Construction of National Identity.Second Edition, Edinburg, Edinburg University.
• Wodak, Ruth (2013). “Politics as usual: investigating political discourse in action”, James Paul Gee and Michael Handford, (eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis, London, Routledge, p. 525-540.
• Wodak, Ruth (2015a). “The discourse-historical approach”, Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis, London, Sage Publications, p.63-94.
• Wodak, Ruth (2015b). “Critical Discourse Analysis, Discourse-Historical Approach”, Karen Tracy, (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, Oxford, Elsevier, p. 275-287.
• Wodak, Ruth (2018). “Discourse and European integration”, Free University Berlin- KFG Working Paper Series, no.86, https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/57625. (Accessed 29 April 2021).
• Zappettini, Franco (2019). European Identities in Discourse: A Transnational Citizens’ Perspective, London, Bloomsbury Publishing.