European institutions?

ABSTRACT

The aim of this article is to sketch a phenomenological theory of political institutions and to apply it to some objections and questions raised by Pierre Manent about the project of the European Union and more specifically the question of “European Construction”, i.e. what is the aim of the European Project. Such a theory of political institutions is nested within a broader phenomenological account of institutions, dimensions of which I have tried to elaborate elsewhere. As a working conceptual delineation, we can describe institutions as (relatively) stable meaning structures. As such, the definition encompasses phenomena like the European Commission, Belgium, marriage, the Dollar, the Labour Party, but also political subjects themselves. In order to develop said theory of institutions, I will draw primarily upon resources in the work of Maurice Merleau-Ponty and John Searle.

Notes

1 Meacham, ‘The ‘Noble’ and the ‘Hypocritical’ Memory’; ‘The Institutional Life’; ‘What Goes Without Saying: Husserl's Concept of Style’.

2 See www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/science-nature/understanding-orca-culture-12494696/ [last accessed April 4, 2016].

3 This is the translation of the German word Stiftung that I will use. The term has also been translated into English as instauration, establishment and foundation. The former is used in some English translations of Husserl’s work (Ideas II). All three, along with the term institution itself, have been used in both the French by Merleau-Ponty and Derrida (as translations of Stiftung), and in English translations of Merleau-Ponty’s and Derrida’s French.

4 I have argued elsewhere that institution is the key concept in Merleau-Ponty’s post Phenomenology of Perception attempts to develop a phenomenological ontology. See Meacham, ‘The ‘Noble’ and the ‘Hypocritical’ Memory’; ‘The Institutional Life’.

5 In his obituary for Merleau-Ponty, Sartre wrote that Merleau-Ponty had taught him history. See Sheridan, ‘On Ontology and Politics’.

6 Claude Lefort does something similar with his concept of “regime”, which he describes as the “principles that generate society, or more the form of society”. See Lefort, Democracy and Political Theory, 217.

7 Merleau-Ponty, Themes From the Lectures, 40–1.

8 Merleau-Ponty, Institution and Passivity, 13.

9 Thank you to an anonymous reviewer for demanding this clarification.

10 Searle, ‘What is an Institution?’, 8.

11 Merleau-Ponty, Institution and Passivity, 13.

12 Weber, From Max Weber, 233.

13 Patočka, ‘Edmund Husserl’s Philosophy of the Crisis of the Sciences’, 235–6.

14 Searle, ‘Social Ontology and Political Power’, 93.

15 Ibid., 101.

16 Ibid., 93–4.

17 Ibid.

18 A more sustained engagement with Searle’s social ontology in relation to the phenomenology of institutions, beyond the very coarse lines that I have drawn here, is certainly warranted. My aim here is limited to drawing some broad distinctions and points of conflict.

19 Manent, ‘Democracy without Nations’, 93.

20 This is probably a more contentious point now than in the late 1990s or early 2000s, but nonetheless I think it remains a valid proposition as the current perceived weakness of the EU has not seen a correlated re-strengthening of European nation-states, in the relevant sense.

21 Manent, Modern Liberty and its Discontents, 107; cited in Janssens, ‘Habeas Corpus?’, 185.

22 Manent, ‘Democracy without Nations’, 99.

23 Ibid., 101.

24 Ibid., 102.

25 Manent, A World Beyond Politics?, 60.

26 Janssen, ‘Habeas Corpus?’

27 Ibid., 185.

28 Manent, ‘Democracy without Nations’, 97.

29 Ibid., 98.

30 Ibid.

31 Janssens, ‘Habeas Corpus?’, 174.

32 Manent, A World Beyond Politics?, 62.

33 Manent, ‘Democracy without Nations’, 96.

34 This is in fact the crux of Habermas’ defence of the EU in the The Post-National Constellation: the institution of the nation state has become impotent in the face of other global institutions, namely those controlling market forces, so a larger, more powerful political institution is necessary to ensure rights and well-being of citizens. See, Habermas, The Post-national Constellation.

35 Manent, World Beyond Politics, 63.

36 Janssens, ‘Habeaus Corpus’, 177. I am to some extent superimposing my language of institutions onto Janssens's critique of Manent.