Chapter 3 outlines our three conceptual innovations for the study of European integration and EU interventions in the socioeconomic field. First, we shift from the classical distinction of negative and positive integration to one that distinguishes horizontal and vertical integration modes. Second, we propose to go beyond the classical, state-centred (intergovernmental or federal) paradigms of EU law and political science, as we have found that the EU’s new economic governance (NEG) regime mimics the corporate governance regime that transnational corporations use to steer the activities of their subsidiaries and their workforce. Finally, we pursue an analytical approach that complements existing EU politicisation studies, which assess the salience of Eurosceptic views in media debates, opinion polls, elections, and referenda, as we must study EU politicisation also at the meso-level of interest politics. After all, the political cleavages that structure national politics have neither been created in individuals’ minds at the micro-level nor are they simply an outcome of systemic macro-level changes.

This chapter commences by looking at how the ideas of Europe and European Union have informed debates about the European Union. It then traces the history of the European Union since the Second World War. It considers how two ideas have been central to European integration. Intergovernmentalism emphasises the place of the national State within European integration, and sees it as the only arena serving as the locus for democracy. Supranationalism allows for political decision-makers that are not national ones, the overriding of the national veto and conceives democracy as something that can transcend the nation State. The chapter then looks at the current treaties which establish the European Union. The Treaty on European Union set outs its institutions, central values and foreign and defence policy. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union sets out its other policies. The chapter culminates by looking at the crises that have beset the Union in recent years: the sovereign debt crisis, Brexit, the crisis in liberal values, Covid-19 and, most recently, the crisis in Ukraine.

This chapter outlines the different analytical perspectives that can be used to study the EU. It first discusses three different integration theories (neo-functionalism, intergovernmentalism and postfunctionalism) and their spin-offs. These theories seek to explain why and how countries have decided to establish European cooperation and what role key actors (governments, interest groups, the public, politicians and civil servants) play in this. The chapter subsequently outlines theories of EU politics which seek to explain the actual functioning of the EU. In doing so it places a strong emphasis on the comparative politics approach, where the functioning of the EU is analysed by employing theories and concepts that are used in analysing domestic political systems. Additionally the chapter also discusses multi-level governance and federalism as two additional ways to understand EU politics. These theories provide complimentary insights in to the EU’s functioning. The choice to employ a certain theoretical perspective depends upon the types of questions asked and the actors that are of interest.

EU law has increasingly become entangled in difficult and sensitive political questions, which means that studying EU law without appreciating the political context within which it operates risks missing the point. The message of this book, then, is that in studying EU law, the law itself matters as much as context; and context also matters as much as law. This first chapter tackles a question that is at the core of this book: what is the EU for? We will look at four theories that have different answers to the question what the ‘point’ of the EU is: intergovernmentalism, neo-functionalism, supranationalism and post-functionalism. These four theories offer heuristic models to think about the nature of the EU and the choices that are implicit in EU law. As we will see, the tensions, problems and questions discussed in this chapter will resurface throughout the book.

This chapter tests the main empirical hypothesis introduced at the end of Chapter 7. If it is true that the most significant mode of persistence of the Christian Democratic ideology in the contemporary political landscape is not as a partisan phenomenon, but rather as a feature of established institutional frameworks and political cultures in regimes where it previously held a dominant political position, then many of its distinctive features should still be visible in these institutional frameworks and political cultures. To see whether this is indeed the case, I will focus on one such regime in particular: the EU.