| Review of: | Supranational Citizenship by L. Dobson |
|---|---|
| Reviewed By: | Murray Stewart Leith |
| Reviewed in: | Journal of Common Market Studies |
| Date accepted online: | 02/11/2007 |
| Published in print: | Volume 45, Issue 03, Pages 745-769 |
Book Reviews
Although part of the Europe in Change series, the author declaims this work as not being an 'EU-specific' text. Rather she posits that it is a theoretical consideration, written with the direct aim of being a 'normative theory of supranational citizenship' linked intrinsically to the justification of political authority. While it most certainly is, it is also nonetheless a work which clearly focuses on the EU as a case study for this enlarged idea of citizenship. This is a positive move because, as Dobson points out, such a concept can be (and indeed is) efficiently applied to the EU as it has developed as a social and political experiment over the past 50 years.
In terms of content the work marries two distinct theoretical areas; the first a focus on the works involved with the EU and citizenship, and the other a consideration of the works of the philosopher Alan Gewirth. Dobson provides a succinct introduction, consideration and development of Gewirth's works, employing them to build her argument and support her assertions. More than simply employing them as a lens to consider the EU, she adds to them, asserting that citizenship is 'a moral necessity' and thus a core addition to those employing Gewirth or similar approaches. The scholarship employs a clear and open normative approach to the core concept of citizenship, enlarging it beyond any national, or even international, borders. It dismisses the need for distinct organizational structures with which to associate the citizenship in question (hence the supra aspect of that citizenship) but nonetheless argues that the concept remains 'a project of political justification'. In this Dobson's consideration of the EU is quite strong, and she provides an insightful and arguable consideration of the development of citizenship as a necessity within the EU.
One aspect of the work that is quite contentious is where Dobson dismisses both the idea that citizenship and identity are the same, or that the latter is a constituent part of the former. Her dismissal of existing identities within the EU is not cavalier and she does recognize that her conception of citizenship is not currently widespread among the people of the EU. Yet her claim that supranational citizenship 'need not threaten and may nurture other identities' is stretching her normative credentials to the maximum in light of both the current and historical tendencies within Europe and the EU.
Notwithstanding this particular criticism, the work remains a solid addition to the literature, in both the EU field and political philosophy. Dobson makes her case in a well written and well argued manner, bringing her arguments together into a coherent and original work.