Owen Parker – författare

The invocation of ‘the market’ has been omnipresent in media discussions of ‘crisis Europe’. On the one hand, ‘the market’ is presented as that to which EU member states must collectively respond. It is the very purpose of a post-national government and that which dictates individual and collective identities. The expansion of market is that which guarantees and constitutes peace in Europe. On the other hand, ‘the market’ is that which government must seek to tame. It is the servant of government and ought not be permitted to undermine collective identities and solidarities associated with the juridical imaginary of social contract and sovereign nation-state. It is, from this perspective, the expansion of the social institutions of nation-state into the post-national arena that will constitute a lasting peace in Europe.

Cosmopolitan Government in Europe uses a Foucauldian lens to consider the ethics of the scholarly and institutional discourses associated with these apparently divergent market and legal cosmopolitan visions of Europe. It reflects on attempts to reconcile or move beyond these discourses, particularly through the invocation of more pluralist modes of governance, but claims that such moves have been largely unsuccessful in both practice and theory. It argues that the very ambiguity in the relationship between the ideal subjects that these market and legal visions promote – respectively, post-national ‘entrepreneur’ and ‘citizen’ – is that which permits a space for resistance and politics. Thus, the book argues for a pragmatic politics which is cognizant of the violent potential inherent in any cosmopolitan attempt to govern Europe, while recognising the contemporary dangers associated with the dominance of a market cosmopolitan Europe.

This work is an important and timely intervention in contemporary debates about democratic Europe and its shortcomings and will be of great interest to scholars of international political theory, European studies and international political economy.

The invocation of ‘the market’ has been omnipresent in media discussions of ‘crisis Europe’. On the one hand, ‘the market’ is presented as that to which EU member states must collectively respond. It is the very purpose of a post-national government and that which dictates individual and collective identities. The expansion of market is that which guarantees and constitutes peace in Europe. On the other hand, ‘the market’ is that which government must seek to tame. It is the servant of government and ought not be permitted to undermine collective identities and solidarities associated with the juridical imaginary of social contract and sovereign nation-state. It is, from this perspective, the expansion of the social institutions of nation-state into the post-national arena that will constitute a lasting peace in Europe.

Cosmopolitan Government in Europe uses a Foucauldian lens to consider the ethics of the scholarly and institutional discourses associated with these apparently divergent market and legal cosmopolitan visions of Europe. It reflects on attempts to reconcile or move beyond these discourses, particularly through the invocation of more pluralist modes of governance, but claims that such moves have been largely unsuccessful in both practice and theory. It argues that the very ambiguity in the relationship between the ideal subjects that these market and legal visions promote – respectively, post-national ‘entrepreneur’ and ‘citizen’ – is that which permits a space for resistance and politics. Thus, the book argues for a pragmatic politics which is cognizant of the violent potential inherent in any cosmopolitan attempt to govern Europe, while recognising the contemporary dangers associated with the dominance of a market cosmopolitan Europe.

This work is an important and timely intervention in contemporary debates about democratic Europe and its shortcomings and will be of great interest to scholars of international political theory, European studies and international political economy.

The European question has divided the Labour Party and the progressive left for over 50 years. The contemporary left-wing antithesis to the EU harks back to Bennite anti-marketeer narratives: a neoliberal EU undermines the potential for national progressive policies in relation to labour markets, state intervention and finance. However, many make the case that the EU’s four freedoms support a progressive politics: the single market project embeds social and workers’ rights, challenges member state support for large corporate interests and facilitates free movement for EU citizens.

There is, in short, a progressive dilemma for the British left in relation to the European issue, which the authors navigate through the analysis of four policy issues that arose during the Brexit debate and remain significant for British politics and for the left in particular: free trade and the single market, industrial policy and state aid, free movement of persons and finance. Crucially, they point to a route beyond this dilemma for both Europe and the British left.

The European question has divided the Labour Party and the progressive left for over 50 years. The contemporary left-wing antithesis to the EU harks back to Bennite anti-marketeer narratives: a neoliberal EU undermines the potential for national progressive policies in relation to labour markets, state intervention and finance. However, many make the case that the EU’s four freedoms support a progressive politics: the single market project embeds social and workers’ rights, challenges member state support for large corporate interests and facilitates free movement for EU citizens.

There is, in short, a progressive dilemma for the British left in relation to the European issue, which the authors navigate through the analysis of four policy issues that arose during the Brexit debate and remain significant for British politics and for the left in particular: free trade and the single market, industrial policy and state aid, free movement of persons and finance. Crucially, they point to a route beyond this dilemma for both Europe and the British left.

This book investigates the causes and consequences of crisis in four countries of the Eurozone periphery – Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland. The contributions to this volume are provided from country-specific experts, and are organised into two themed subsections: the first analyses the economic dynamics at play in relation to each state, whilst the second considers their respective political situations. The work debates what made these states particularly susceptible to crisis, the response to the crisis and its resultant effects, as well as the manifestation of resistance to austerity. In doing so, Parker and Tsarouhas consider the implications of continued fragilities in the Eurozone both for these countries and for European integration more generally.