Le conseguenze politiche e culturali di una questione giuridica: la natura dell’UE

Abstract

The author demonstrates that the EU does not have, even in the slightest, elements of statehood (territory, people and sovereignty) and is simply an international organisation, with specific characteristics that do not negate its nature. The EU is,
therefore, an object (or instrument) of States, not a subject. This has multiple consequences in public discourse, which often, quite senselessly i) considers the EU a subject, both vis-à-vis third States and the participating States; ii) discusses the interest of the Union; iii) goes so far as to place trust or hope, when not veneration, in the EU, manifesting a form of modern fetishism (because it venerates or places trust or hope in an object); iv) avoids assessing whether the thirty-year instrument that States gave themselves in Maastricht was useful or harmful.
Furthermore, the author argues that in the de-globalisation phase, which could last decades, the States of the Union, being holders of innumerable negative subjective legal situations and de facto constraints, will be logically and certainly at a disadvantage compared to the other states, which do not have those constraints. Indeed, The Union essentially resolves itself into constraints for the States, which are the only political subjects; and the constraints prevent the participating States from exercising the powers necessary to navigate in the stormy sea of interventionist capitalism, imposed by de-globalisation.