12.07.2015 Views

European Identity - Individual, Group and Society - HumanitarianNet

European Identity - Individual, Group and Society - HumanitarianNet

European Identity - Individual, Group and Society - HumanitarianNet

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

DILEMMAS AND TASK IN THE FORMATION OF EDUCATION-BASED ... 167develop <strong>and</strong> put forward their own views <strong>and</strong> opinions, not simply tolearn what is in their teachers (or parents, or politician’s) mind, <strong>and</strong> toreproduce this. We are concerned with developing the sense thatopinions <strong>and</strong> viewpoints matter, that they are indeed vastly important.This means that we have to conduct the work of education ininstitutions that are themselves democratic, sensitive to viewpoints <strong>and</strong>opinions, respectful of the rights of their members. This implies, formany educational institutions, a reversal of current hierarchies of“knowledge” <strong>and</strong> power. I referred much earlier to the tensions <strong>and</strong>dichotomies in this area: here we see tensions between the roles ofteachers <strong>and</strong> learners, between knowledge <strong>and</strong> empowerment.Benedict Anderson (1991) argued that our national communities areimaginary. By this he meant the reality of a modern nation-state existedprimarily in the shared imagination of its members, that we constructourselves as good members of our national community through holdinga shared picture that represents a linked history, language, culture <strong>and</strong>identity. “Europe” is as much a mutual imaginary icon as are each ofour individual nations. Norman Davies’ history of Europe (1996)emphasises this: Europe in any objective description is no more that theextreme end of the great Eurasian l<strong>and</strong>mass. Hobsbawm points outthat much contemporary “history” is pure invented tradition: manufacturedby political-historians to «make the punters feel good» (2002,also Hobsbawm <strong>and</strong> Ranger, 1986). But what we mean when we usethe term Europe is some sense of collective bond, some shared culture,history, set of values. However, when it comes to definition, we can nomore define what is shared than we can delimit the geography. Europefor many years was used to mean what we now call Western Europe,with a fragile <strong>and</strong> indeterminate eastern boundary —this might be theVistula, or the Dneiper, or the Don, or the Volga, or the Urals. RobertStradling (2001) points to the divergence between those who defineEurope by its shared cultural heritage, <strong>and</strong> those who emphasise itsdiversity. The former stress Graeco-Roman philosophy <strong>and</strong> Judaeo-Christian ethics <strong>and</strong> beliefs, <strong>and</strong> focus on shared historical experiences(the Crusades, feudalism, the Enlightenment), while the later highlightthe variety of ethnic <strong>and</strong> linguistic groups, the shared loyalties, conflicts,nationalism <strong>and</strong> the political a <strong>and</strong> economic dynamics that arise fromfragmented, rather than centralised power. There are horizontal,transnational bonds that unite the continent run concurrent withvertical particularist nationalisms. Today, Europe is often used as asynonym for the <strong>European</strong> Community: one of us recently heard aLatvian complain that when arrived at immigration in Brussels or Parishe was often “And how long do you intend to stay in Europe?” To

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!