Euroscepticism

The term EU - skepticism or criticism of the EU referred to a skeptical or critical, often an opposing, negating or aversive attitude towards the process of European integration, with respect to the objectives of the European Union or against its political system and its supranational institutions. The term itself is controversial, as many perceive it as negative judgmental. EU skeptics therefore often use other names, such as Europe realism. In scientific discourse EU - skeptical attitudes are used to designate the terms age - Europeanism and Euro skepticism used in the case of even greater fundamental opposition and anti - Europeanism and Euro phobia.

The exact meaning of the concept of EU - skepticism or criticism of the EU without further explanation very general and out of focus, because it can refer both to a general rejection of European integration as such as well as a critique of specific aspects of this process, such as only the criticism or rejection of the existing EU institutions and the use of more subsidiarity or intergovernmentalism. Often the desire is associated with Euroscepticism, to maintain or restore national sovereignty. Another concept as a result of EU - skeptical discourses is the European federalism, which also criticized the existing EU system, but this will be replaced by a full European federal state.

EU - skepticism is sometimes misleadingly used synonymously with Euroscepticism, although there is certainly a difference between skepticism about the actual design of the EU, and deeper fundamental skepticism about the European unification process.

Eurosceptic parties in the European Parliament

EU - skeptical positions are represented by some European parties that form their own group in the European Parliament since 1994. Since 2009, this is called Europe of Freedom and Democracy ( EFD), with 34 members, it is the smallest group in the EP. Your most important member parties are the British UKIP with 10 deputies and the Italian Lega Nord with 9 MPs. The attitude of the EFD Group in European integration is not unique; However, most of its members reject the membership of their respective nation-states in the European Union, or request their conversion into a purely intergovernmental confederation.

In addition to the EFD Group in the European Parliament, there is also the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR, 56 deputies). It was founded on 22 June 2009 after the European elections in 2009. The gathered into their parties could be described as a national conservative. Your greatest founding parties, the British Conservative Party (25 MPs), the Polish PiS (15 deputies) and the Czech ODS ( 9 MPs). The ECR parties are EU - skeptical, however, reject not necessarily membership in the European Union from, but only one contact for preservation or strengthening of national sovereignty. German -speaking parties are currently represented in any of the EU -skeptic groups. But ( non-attached ) Austrian FPÖ in 2009 expressed an interest in membership of the EFD Group. They did not join.

Also in the Group of the European United Left / Nordic Green Left (GUE / NGL, 34 MPs) are common EU - skeptical positions. Its members have but against the institutions of the EU is no common position. While the national member parties of the European Left from the southern and northern countries are traditionally EU - skeptic, the Central European parties represented far more pro-EU positions.

In addition, many of the 35 non-attached Members represented in the European Parliament more or less clearly Eurosceptic positions. This is among other things, that are among some right-wing populist and extreme right-wing parties, which does not meet the criteria for starting your own group. The right group Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty, which existed in 2007, disbanded after internal disputes.

History and lines of argument

Criticism of the supranational institutions was early a part of the history of the European integration process. So afraid about the German SPD in the fifties, the European integration could be an obstacle to the German reunification be; later she ran a integration-friendly EU policy. Charles de Gaulle, President of France from 1958 to 1969, took in the 1960s, a strictly intergouvernementalistische EU policy aimed at weakening the supranational Commission and a transformation of the European Communities in a confederation. Most clearly was the rejection of supranational integration in Britain, which feared that in this way his - to lose political great power - real or perceived. That is why the United Kingdom decide concluded with the European Communities and founded instead the purely intergovernmental EFTA. Only after the failure of Britain sought to membership of the EC, which took place on 1 January 1973. Even after that it took at further integration steps usually restrained positions. However, the fundamental need for European integration in all Western European countries was provided only by a very small, usually very quite conservative -oriented minority in question. On the part of the political left, the integration was rejected by the Soviet Union based on the parties, but advocates of the larger Euro -Communist parties essentially. Only since the end of the Cold War also won in the post-communist parties Eurosceptic views on weight.

In public, played Euroscepticism during the initial phase of European integration only a minor role. The unification process was not followed up by the media mostly benevolent with too much attention. One therefore speaks of a permissive consensus, with which the population hinnahm pursued by their governments integration. Only since the 1980s, the public debate about the EU, which also Eurosceptic positions were listened to more intensified. In particular, this was reflected in the referenda, which in several Member States, various EU treaty reforms were rejected, namely 1992, the Maastricht Treaty in Denmark, 2000, the Treaty of Nice in Ireland, in 2005 the EU Constitutional Treaty in France and the Netherlands and 2008 the Treaty of Lisbon in Ireland again.

Except in the UK Eurosceptic positions are common today in Scandinavia and Central and Eastern European countries rather that joined after the end of the Cold War, the European Union ( EU enlargement in 2004 ). The reasons for the rejection of a supranational integration are manifold. An often repre-sented argument is the concern for national independence: So the destruction of the British way of life is often in the UK feared; particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, national sovereignty and dignity is emphasized by the collapse of the Soviet Union. Conversely, fear EU skeptics in Western Europe by the rapid EU enlargement to a large heterogeneity in the EU's system of values ​​and thus justify their rejection of a more intensive integration.

In addition, some economic arguments are put forward. For example, it is claimed that the European Union bureaucracy brake the economic dynamics and is therefore better to replace it by a mere free trade zone. Especially in Eastern Europe was also feared a sellout national wealth goods to the economically stronger West European companies in the wake of economic integration. In Western European countries is the fear of the loss of jobs and in the Scandinavian welfare states against the fear of loss of social standards.

Moreover, it is often argued to the democratic deficit of the European Union. This EU - skeptics often argue that the EU principle of subsidiarity ( ' decisions should always be made ​​by the smallest possible community ') violated, as many political decisions could be made more useful at the national level.

Also a waste of funds under management and distributed subsidies is criticized, as well as corruption and nepotism.