Maastricht Treaty

The Maastricht Treaty was ratified by 12 democratic countries part of the European Union in 1992.  The document clearly states from the start that this treaty is a cooperation between each country on the principles of economics and foreign policy.  This treaty did not try to change the internal politics of each nation, but rather respected the national identities of its member states.  The timing of the ratification of the document is interesting in that it is shortly after the fall of communism in Eastern Europe.  Perhaps this document was an incentive for many former satellite states(including east Germany) to become democracies, as they could make a case to join the EU.  I find the word choice in this document to be surprising, especially in Article A, as it refers to the benefits for the ‘citizen’ of each country.  It gives the feeling that they are trying to build a community in an effort to bring prosperity, rather than another NATO which brings military implications.  Article F even states that the Union will respect human rights, adding to this idea of benefiting the people.

One of the most important themes is the economic implications put in place by this document.  In an attempt to create economic cohesion, the introduction of a single currency is put in place.  A single currency helps stimulate trade activities as well as the free movement of goods.  On the subject of foreign policy, Article B states the need for a common defense policy for each country to follow.  This policy is understandable as if a number of nations are under attack or in war, it would disrupt the overall economy of the union.  Lastly there is an emphasis on consistency throughout each member state as a whole.  Internal justice and home affairs will not vary dramatically, but as mentioned before there is a respect for each national identity.

Why do you think this treaty calls for consistency on justice and home affairs?  Why would countries want to join the European Union?

 

 

 

Eugenics and Citizenship

In Leora Auslander’s ‘National Taste’? she explains how the German and French populations addressed questions about the conceptions of citizenship by examining the tastes and preferences of various citizens within specific regions and also the nation-state as a whole. Although each country had its own unique concept of citizenship; the French interpreted citizenship using a just soli policy (citizenship determined by region of birth), whereas in Germany citizenship was determined by ancestral lineage and blood lines, both cultures developed their own “language of goods.” This “language of goods” enabled citizens to look beyond the mere race or appearance of a person and instead focus on their material possessions to gain a cohesiveness between distinct social groups and form a national identity. The Jewish populations were oftentimes ostracized and blamed for many of the misfortunes that proceeded WWI without just cause. In reality they were not culturally different from the non-jewish citizens, they were incorporated into either German or French societies, forming a part of the nation-state and adopting the accepted customs.  

In chapter four of Dan Stone’s Breeding Superman he examines the relationship between race and social class that existed in British eugenic theory throughout the interwar period. The racial component of eugenics has always existed, however Britain has been traditionally viewed as a government that focused primarily on the social components of eugenics while disregarding that of race. Stone explains how this is a misconception because the reality is that the racial and social components are inseparable. Many British officials believed in a racial hierarchy that saw white Europeans at the top and black Africans at the bottom. While policy makers sought to boost their respective populations, they wished to do so in a manner that limited the reproduction of the unproductive and parasitic social classes, and the ‘inferior races’ as well. The Nazi government of the Third Reich is singled out for their racist policies, and although they implemented these policies to an extreme degree, they were by no means the only country to do so. It was a common practice throughout most of Europe.

 

 

Leora Auslander wrote, in “National Taste? Citizenship Law, State Form, and Everyday Aesthetics in Modern France and Germany, 1920 – 1940,” how the concept of European national citizenship developed in the years between the world wars. She theorizes that the concept of citizenship is inextricably linked to the cultural understanding an individual’s everyday life, and that this link is traceable through the evidence of not political but anthropologic sources. Specifically she examines how the French and German citizens developed from regional to national citizens focusing on cultural norms and uniformity. She further divides the research into two group, the Jews and Gentiles, who lived on either side of the Rhine River.

She finds that citizenship is a concept already well developed by the twentieth century. Looking back to the French Revolution and German Unification, the idea of the larger national identity is a growing force of the centralized state. Her conclusion, drawn on detailed evidence and sound logic, discovers that the cultural similarities between the French population’s Jewish are strikingly consistent. That, juxtaposed to the German population of a similarly diverse Jewish and non Jewish body, are comparably also unified, but distinctly separate from that of the French nation.

Overall, the article seeks out a meaningful comparison through abstract means of developing an individual citizen. It deeply resonates with “The Lost Children” accounts of nationalism. The product of the French national education discussed in Zahar’s work is culminated in the uniformity of French society viewed in Auslander’s article. Therefore, in a sense singing “La Marseillaise” as a child in the French educational system had an affect proven by the homogeny of the French interwar population in comparison to the Germans or other states.