Why democratic legitimacy for EU regulations doesn't require a (non-existent) 'European people'

What is it about?

Many criticisms of principled democracy-deficits in the EU and similar supranational organizations in defense of the exclusive primacy of national sovereignty as the only forum of democratic legitimation rely on versions of the so-called 'no demos' argument. The idea is that supranational organizations, in forming binding regulatory agreements among nation-states, do not themselves form a state, and usually also cannot be understood to coordinate a 'nation' or other pre-political audience of legitimation, and therefore their regulations lack the legitimacy that (democratic) nation-states generate for their legislative and other regulations. This article analyzes three versions of this argument --one from the perspective of the legal system, one 'progressive' version from the perspective of defending national social and political achievements, and a generalized version-- and provides a refutation of each on the basis of foundations for democratic legitimacy that all of these arguments agree with or must accept.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

The article is important because it challenges (and refutes) one of the most widely shared, intuitively appealing foundations of purportedly democratic Euro-sceptical and more generally, multilateralism-sceptical positions. The model used in the article of a layered sovereignty is also relevant for investigations of the future of (democratic) sovereignty beyond the nation state.

Perspectives