What is Left of the European Economic Constitution? A Melancholic Eulogy

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW European Law Review Pub Date : 2004-11-01 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.635402
C. Joerges
{"title":"What is Left of the European Economic Constitution? A Melancholic Eulogy","authors":"C. Joerges","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.635402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The essay starts from the assumption that the efforts to cure Europe’s democracy deficits will also have to address the social problematique of the Europeanization process. This is a challenge with new dimensions. Europe had started its integrationist path as a mere economic community. In its formative era, the constitutional perspectives of German Ordo-liberalism were attractive. In the ordo-liberal account, the European polity has a twofold structure: At supranational level, it is committed to economic rationality and a system of undistorted competition. Redistributive (social) policies could – and should – be left to the Member States. This edifice was refined in the 1970s and 80s. Monetary Union and the Stability Pact completed it. The German Constitutional Court’s Maastricht judgment endorsed its constitutional validity. However, the new dynamics and the strive for an ever closer Union in the Maastricht Treaty has led to a strengthening of European regulatory policies and a broadening of their scope, which were incompatible with the ordo-liberal legacy. The erosion of the economic constitution has not paved the way to a cure for Europe’s social deficit. Neither the Open Method of Co-ordination nor the commitment to a social market economy in the Constitutional Treaty nor the new social rights provide a conceptually sufficient and politically credible basis for this end.","PeriodicalId":45752,"journal":{"name":"European Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"461-489"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2004-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.635402","citationCount":"86","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.635402","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 86

Abstract

The essay starts from the assumption that the efforts to cure Europe’s democracy deficits will also have to address the social problematique of the Europeanization process. This is a challenge with new dimensions. Europe had started its integrationist path as a mere economic community. In its formative era, the constitutional perspectives of German Ordo-liberalism were attractive. In the ordo-liberal account, the European polity has a twofold structure: At supranational level, it is committed to economic rationality and a system of undistorted competition. Redistributive (social) policies could – and should – be left to the Member States. This edifice was refined in the 1970s and 80s. Monetary Union and the Stability Pact completed it. The German Constitutional Court’s Maastricht judgment endorsed its constitutional validity. However, the new dynamics and the strive for an ever closer Union in the Maastricht Treaty has led to a strengthening of European regulatory policies and a broadening of their scope, which were incompatible with the ordo-liberal legacy. The erosion of the economic constitution has not paved the way to a cure for Europe’s social deficit. Neither the Open Method of Co-ordination nor the commitment to a social market economy in the Constitutional Treaty nor the new social rights provide a conceptually sufficient and politically credible basis for this end.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲经济宪法的左翼是什么?忧郁的悼词
本文的出发点是这样一个假设:要想治愈欧洲的民主赤字,就必须解决欧洲化进程中的社会问题。这是一个新的挑战。欧洲作为一个纯粹的经济共同体开始了它的一体化之路。在其形成时期,德国奥多自由主义的宪政观点是有吸引力的。在秩序自由主义的解释中,欧洲政体具有双重结构:在超国家层面,它致力于经济理性和未扭曲的竞争体系。再分配(社会)政策可以而且应该由会员国来决定。这座大厦在20世纪70年代和80年代进行了翻新。货币联盟和稳定公约完成了这一切。德国宪法法院的马斯特里赫特判决认可了其宪法有效性。然而,《马斯特里赫特条约》中新的动态和为建立一个更加紧密的联盟所作的努力已导致欧洲管制政策的加强和范围的扩大,而这些政策与自由主义的遗产是不相容的。经济体制的侵蚀并没有为解决欧洲的社会赤字铺平道路。无论是公开的协调方式,还是《宪法条约》中对社会市场经济的承诺,还是新的社会权利,都没有为实现这一目标提供概念上充分、政治上可信的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Playing by its own rules? A quantitative empirical analysis of justificatory reasoning in the registered trade mark case law of the European Court of Justice - dataset Beyond Food Safety: EU Food Information Standards as a Facilitator of Political Consumerism and International Law Enforcement Mechanism When Does a Communication to the Public Under EU Copyright Law Need to Be to a ‘New Public’? Regulatory Autonomy after EU Membership - Alignment, Divergence and the Discipline of Law Regulatory Autonomy after EU Membership: Alignment, Divergence and the Discipline of Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1