![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to demonstrate that in order to understand competition as a socially organizing phenomenon, we should not examine competition in isolation, but as constellations of heterogeneous logics. More precisely, the article is based on two main theoretical points: (1) Logics of competition are only realized as particular forms of social organization by virtue of interplaying with other kinds of logics, like legal logics. (2) Competition logics enjoy a peculiar status in-between constructedness and givenness; although competition depends on laws and mechanisms of socialization, we still experience competition as an expression of spontaneous human activities. On the basis of these perspectives, a study of fundamental rights of EU law, springing from the principle of ‘free movement of people’, is conducted. The first part of the empirical analysis seeks to detect the presence of a presumed logic of competition within EU law, whereas the second part focuses on particular legal logics. In this respect, the so-called ‘real link criterion’ (determining the access to transnational social rights for certain groups of unemployed people) is given special attention. What is particularly interesting about this criterion is that it introduces, into the core of competition as a socially organizing phenomenon, issues of equality, community, and belonging. In addition, it is argued, the ‘real link’ logic implies mystic and fatalistic elements. The last part of the paper reflects upon the implications of the interplay between the presumed logic of competition and the ‘real link’ logic.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Christiane Mossin is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen. Her research is interdisciplinary and brings together political philosophy, conceptual history and legal analysis. Empirically, she focuses on EU-law and on structural and ideological problems of the European democratic welfare states.
ORCID
Christiane Mossin.
Notes
1. In contrast, Werron defines competition as a particular ‘social form’ which can be clearly distinguished from other social forms (Werron Citation2015).
2. For Locke, competition forms part of a natural mode of social organization (Citation1980, chapter 2). In contrast, the ordo-liberalists emphasized that competition must be artificially created through policies directed towards market conditions (Eucken Citation2008). Today, the understanding of markets as institutionally created is becoming increasingly dominant (Hall and Soskice Citation2001; Pedersen Citation2011).
3. Foucault argues that the subject of rights and homo economicus are based on heterogeneous logics: ‘a dialectic of renunciation’ versus ‘a dialectic of spontaneous multiplication' (Foucault Citation2008, 292).
4. This latter point is passionately pursued by Adorno (Citation1991; Citation1994).
5. Art. 18, 45, 49, 28, 56, 63 TFEU.
6. Art. 20, 21, 45 TFEU and Directive 2004/38/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 April on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.
7. For a critical discussion of the potentials of the EU citizenship, see Swiatkowski (Citation2009).
8. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU lays down fundamental rights corresponding to human rights. However, they ‘shall be exercised under the conditions and within the limits defined by [the] Treaties’ (Art. 52(2), Charter of Fundamental Rights). So far, they function as interpretational aspects of EU law rather than as independent rights (Fierro Citation2003).
9. This identification of a particular temporal-normative structure of human law is inspired by Ricoeur's distinctions between different temporal structures, different relations between past, present, and future (Ricoeur Citation1984, Part I).
10. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze [2009] ECR I-04585 para 26.
11. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 28–9.
12. Case C-456/02 Trojani [2004] ECR I-07573 para 16.
13. Case C-456/02 Trojani, para 18.
14. Case C-456/02 Trojani, para 24.
15. Art. 57 TFEU.
16. Case C-318/05 Commission v Federal Republic of Germany [2007] ECR I-06957 para 70.
17. Case C-281/06 Jundt [2007] ECR I-12231 32, 33, 36–8; Case C-318/05 Commission v Federal Republic of Germany, para 67.
18. Case C-318/05 Commission v Federal Republic of Germany, para 68; Case C-281/06 Jundt, para 30.
19. The Jundt case (C-281/06) concerned a teaching activity carried out by a German citizen in a French University, on a secondary basis and in a quasi-honorary capacity.
20. Case C-516/09 Borger [2011] I-01493 para 26.
21. Art. 14(4)(b) and 24(2), Dir. 2004/38/EC.
22. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 30–2.
23. The judgment considers two different scenarios: first, can Mr Vatsouras and Mr Koupatantze be regarded as ‘workers’ within the meaning of the Treaty, and, secondly, in case they cannot, what kind of protection would they enjoy? We shall deal only with the second scenario.
24. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 36.
25. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 37.
26. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 38–9.
27. Joined Cases C-22/08 and C-23/08 Vatsouras and Koupatantze, para 45.
28. For instance Case C-258/04 Ioannidis [2005] I-08275 para 30–33 and Case C-138/02 Collins [2004] 02703 para 69–72.
29. Case C-258/04 Ioannidis, para 33.
30. As argued by O'Brien, describing the real link as ‘of airy, artificial substance’ and ‘consequence’ vis-à-vis Member State decisions (O'Brien Citation2008, 665).