Governance or the crisis of governmentality? applying critical state theory at the European level

This article argues that accounts of EU-level decision-making drawing upon national-level comparisons have predominantly derived their analyses from liberal democratic and social democratic accounts of the nation state. This has had a detrimental effect on the development of a more critical account of EU decision-making. Following insights made by critical state theorists at the national level, we can view developments in EU-level politics as the result of the problematic nature of representative-democratic institutions within market economies. From this perspective the rise of European governance is viewed as a(n) (inadequate) response to the ongoing crisis of governmentality afflicting the European polity. Keywords: Critical theorydemocracyEUnew governance‘soft’co-ordinationstate theory Acknowledgements The author acknowledges the comments and recommendations of Simon Hix, Eiko Thielemann, Sara Motta, Abby Innes, and the two anonymous referees. He also acknowledges ESRC award R42200034145. Notes 1. On the notion of resistance employed here, see Jones Citation(2005), for whom twentieth-century theory and praxis have ‘left an implicit image (at least among many Western academics) of “resistance” as taking place on the streets or at the workplace (factory)’ (p. 55). In contrast, resistance is viewed as the concrete-particular expression of disaffection and disapproval towards the existing political and socio-economic constellation. 2. Despite the absence of critical state-theoretic approaches to EU-level decision-making, there have been a few attempts to explain European integration in general from a critical (almost exclusively Marxist) perspective. See, for instance, Bonefeld Citation2001; Carchedi Citation2001; Cafruny and Ryner Citation2003. 3. See, for instance, the lasting influence of the Miliband–Poulantzas debate (Aronowitz and Bratsis Citation2002), and the hugely influential ideas of discourse and governmentality (Hindess Citation1996). 4. I am grateful to one of the anonymous referees for highlighting the importance of this distinction between ‘old’ and ‘new’ governance. 5. From 1995 to 1999, the average annual growth in GDP was 2.46 per cent, a continuation of the long slump that has affected the European economy since the mid-1970s, prior to which the average annual percentage growth had been 4.7 per cent (source: Eurostat; Dunford Citation2000: 153). The annual rate of unemployment remained above 8.5 per cent throughout this 1995–99 period (source: Eurostat). The turnout of registered voters in member state elections fell from a yearly average of 75.6 per cent in 1991–95 to 73.7 per cent in 1996–2000, part of a steady and ongoing decline from 86 per cent in 1966–70 (source: own calculations, using data from the International IDEA Voter Turnout Website: http://www.idea.int/vt/index.cfm). During the years 1995–2000, centre-right governments were voted out of office, and replaced with centre-left parties/coalitions, in ten out of the fifteen member states: the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Greece and Austria. 6. The resignation of the European Commission can itself be seen as part of a wider crisis of legitimacy affecting the supranational level (Topan Citation2002: 2). 7. The turnout in the sixth European parliamentary elections of 2004 fell for the sixth consecutive time, from 49.8 per cent to 45.7 per cent.