European Identity - Individual, Group and Society - HumanitarianNet

132 EUROPEAN IDENTITY. INDIVIDUAL, GROUP AND SOCIETYequals on a union between them that they design and carry out witheffort. From this perspective, one cannot say that nationalisms are onthe borderline of European construction; they are rather decisiveparticipants in it.However, we are speaking about nationalisms with certain traits.Firstly, they are liberal-democratic, as it was indicated beforehand,although with significant deficits regarding their openness towardsinternational solidarity and immigrants. In principle, this implies apositive guarantee vis-à-vis the goal that can be reached. Secondly,they are nationalisms that use their sovereignty in order to create ajoint sovereignty in which to delegate part of their power. This aspect ismore complicated. Its positive side is that —in view of efficiency— thenew sovereignty is being built by those who presently ultimately enjoysovereign status. Its ambiguous side is that the scope of this partialself-denial has never been specified. Is it all about firmly maintainingsovereignty whilst making power delegations that are never above it?Or is it about maintaining sovereignty as a last resort, without renouncingthe “right to exit” with regards to what was agreed on, yet building astrong plurinational federal State? Are we dreaming about reconstructingnational identity in such a way that an authentic national Europeanidentity emerges, transforming all present-day national identities intoregional ones? Or are we aiming at a more radical self-denial,searching for the construction of a post-national Europe in whichnations stop being references for political and territorial sovereigntyand become mere cultural communities of civil society?Both the present-day feelings of belonging of Europeans, muchmore linked to their Nation-State (or nation without State) than toEurope as a whole and the fact that we find it hard to relinquish thepower that we have —even in order to share it—, do not yet allow usto anticipate any progress towards the last two alternatives (Europeannations with regions and post-national Europe, unitarian or federal). Itseems as if only the first alternative (a politically weak Europe withstrong States) and the second one (a multinational federation) are atsteak. Later on I shall indicate which is, in my opinion, the mostconvincing option, combining the principle-related and prudent criteria.As it can be seen, there are at least some nationalisms which arenot on the borderline of European construction; instead, they arerather in charge of it, using the sovereignty that they exert in a newdirection: not as much to become independent and establish a State,but to unite and share sovereignty. However, when we speak about“borderline nationalisms”, as in the title suggested for this presentation,I imagine we are thinking about other nationalisms, especially about