88 / 169
THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
88
Democracy, supranationality and
sovereignty
Rodrik’s trilemma, a well-known theory articu-
lated by Harvard economics professor Dani
Rodrik in his book
The Globalization Paradox
,
addresses the quandary of societies attempting
to simultaneously pursue economic globalisa-
tion, democratic politics and national sovereign-
ty to their full extent in the age of globalisation,
which is that the achievement of any two of
these goals inevitably weakens their possibility
of accomplishing the third. Applied in a com-
pletely theoretical context to the EU, we find
ourselves forced to choose one of the three fol-
lowing paths: constructing a political, fully dem-
ocratic Union and sacrificing some degree of
national sovereignty; developing a framework
of deep integration that allows for national sov-
ereignty but implies sacrificing a certain degree
of democracy in favour of intergovernmental
institutions; or conserving full national sover-
eignty and democracy at a domestic level and
settling for a low level of integration. We may
assume that the first would be the preferred
choice of Europhiles, the second more or less a
reflection of where we stand now and the third
the vision of the Union that has traditionally
been defended by the UK and that certain
Eastern European countries such as the V4 con-
tinue to support.
These are three politically valid options that
can and should be debated and will receive
greater or lesser support according to their rela-
tive capacity to resolve citizens’ problems. If the
EU had responded adequately to the crisis
brought on by the great recession, we would
not now be seeing the growing Euroscepticism
and nationalism in various Member States that
is enfeebling the project of the European con-
struction.
What is clearly unacceptable is the use of
demagoguery, fake news and the shameless
manipulation of fundamental human emotions
– including fear – to trigger xenophobia and
outright racism and inciting hostility towards
others by portraying them as the enemy or the
source of all ills in order to achieve political ob-
jectives. This is happening now in Europe just
like it did in the 1930s. It is a beast, which if al-
lowed to grow, could become dangerous and
get out of control.
All of us, as Europeans, must resist this neo-
fascism contrary to the values on which the EU
was founded that unchecked could suppose a
lethal threat to European construction and even
democracy. Community institutions, the
Parliament, the Council and the Commission all
have a special responsibility to tackle anti-dem-
ocratic practices in the political as well as the
economic sphere. They must also commit them-
selves fully, with all of the means at their dis-
posal – which are bountiful – to the battle for
the narrative, because the political future of
Europe will greatly depend on the shape the
European narrative takes. The decentralisation
of information via social networks makes it
much easier to spread falsehoods and manipu-
late public opinion, especially if the lies being
circulated are not contested with the same en-
ergy and determination with which they were
disseminated. The objective truth matters little
or nothing in the digital world: the party that
weaves the most persuasive narrative is the par-
ty people support, and support for a strong,
united, democratic, fair and free Europe that
believes in solidarity is well worth fighting for.