There have always been different definitions of the character of the
European Union; it has been referred to as a “postmodern political form”, a
“sui generisstructure”, or as a “neo-medieval empire”. Whatever the
definition, supranationality is a necessary component of it.
Supranationality has long been exposed to different interpretations, and the
ongoing crisis is only increasing the heterogeneity in this regard. This
paper is considering the ideational domain and it is an attempt to present
conceptual differences regarding this subject by analyzing the relevant
ideas. Our starting point is the role that Max Weber added to the ideas as
such, which are the drivers of different interests. Without taking into
account the organizational forms of supranationalism (we did not discuss the
relationships between intergovermentalism and supranationalism), our aim
here was to shed light on the existing situation regarding supranationalism
by presenting a selection of confronted ideas. The paper consists of four
parts. In the first part, we are questioning the possibility to subordinate
supranationalism to depoliticized functionalism. The second part presents
the ordo-neoliberal frameworks of European supranationalism. In the third
part, we are investigating whether the notion of populism enables better
understanding of supranationalism. Finally, in the fourth part, we are
questioning the possibility of dichotomous interpretation of
supranationalism.
Regions Lobbying the European Union: Organizational Forms, policy portfolios and Venue Selection