On What Is Europe and Why Our Vote Matters

I was born in 1993 so, for me, the idea of a divided Europe is quite foreign. I was born in a world  with a unified Germany, a fallen Berlin wall, a divided Czechoslovakia, and with Jugoslavia and the whole Balkans on the edge of a terrible war of which I don't have any memory, even though it happened when I first started walking and talking. Despite this, in my memory Europe has always been a peaceful, borderless place - even though it not always was for everybody, of course. 

Yet, when we think of all these historical events listed above, they look as far in time as, say, the man landing on the moon, whereas the 9/11 terrorist attacks seem to be much closer in time despite only being three or four years apart from other historical events of this kind. Without getting into a much more complicated debate, which is the post-9/11 world and the effects it had on Europe too, my point is: the past twenty five years have defined an idea of Europe that has never been seen before, and, at least in this frame of time, the European soil has been far more safe and peaceful of other parts of the world mostly thanks to the agreements European countries had created and signed since the end of the Second World War. 

People of my generation hardly remember what life was like before the Schengen area or the Euro-zone. Despite travelling a lot by car with my parents in my early years, I don't remember ever getting my passport ready at a border or getting a foreign change for a trip within European borders. Only languages and, sometimes, landscapes told me that I was in a foreign country. 

The European Parliament Hall in Brussels. Picture from my visit last year.

If you think about it, this is extraordinary and hard to be found anywhere else in the world. This Winter I took a trip that led me through four countries, and I could do it without getting any visa, paying for any toll and, only because I visited two of the very few countries belonging to the EU that don't belong to the Euro-zone, I had to get only two different changes. Had I gone through other countries, I wouldn't even have had to do that. I could move from capital city to capital city, by bus, freely,  and getting checked only by the bus attendees, never by soldiers. This wouldn't have been possibile only twenty years ago, or it would have implied much more preparation than buying the bus ticket the day before.

I mentioned European borders before, and here comes the real focus of this post: what is Europe, really? 

The easy way out from this question might be: "It depends on whom you are asking it to". The answer is, in fact, heavily influenced by one's own experiences, ideas, values, education and so on. We would likely get a very different answer if we asked this to a Bulgarian farmer or to a Finnish real estate investor. Even within a single State the answer can be strikingly different: our own idea of Europe, and the feelings we have towards the institution that represents it (the EU), heavily depends on our own education, values, experiences, etc. 

Politically speaking, it seems easy to find a definition (and on the problematic issue of defining anything I will come back later)(moreover, forgive me: I will have to generalize on some points or I will write a book): Europe may be defined as a political union of 28 states, who agree on following legislative regulations emanated by a parliament, a council and many various agencies, committees and so on. This political union is nevertheless different from other realities like the European Commission. So this definition, too, is not so easy after all. The matter is even more complicated when we start thinking geographically or culturally. 

Outside of the European Parliament in Brussels. Picture from my visit last year.

From a geographic point of view, it is impossible to define the end of Europe. I mean, there's certainly some difference on a geological level that I am not aware of and that separates Europe from Asia and Africa, but I am not really informed about this so I will not dwell on this. What I mean is that, looking at a map, on the eastern side we don't have an ocean or a defined mountain chain that makes us say: "alright, here's where Europe ends". Of course, in history the eastern border has often been found in the Caucasus, even though it may be argued that countries in this region still share part of their heritage with Europe, as both Greeks and Romans came here and left their mark on this region. What about the region northerner than that though, what defines the line there, apart from political and institutional reasons? 

And here comes the real, complex issue: culture. Let's face it, defining an European identity - if we accept the idea that in this context identity and culture can overlap - is quite impossible. I believe we can say there are similarities, and a common heritage that we share and on which we founded our national traditions and cultures and, in the past century, the political institutions we are part of, but I am very careful in calling this an European "identity". Nevertheless, those who found themselves away from Europe, in contexts of extreme cultural shock like Asia or Africa, know that it is easier to feel some sort of deeper connection with other people coming from our continent, rather than with people belonging to the western world because of their anglo-saxon heritage. When I was in Australia, despite speaking a language that I already knew quite well and I could speak in any country in Europe, I felt, relating to some aspects, a much bigger cultural shock than I felt, for example, living in Portugal. 

The thing is, identity is not constant, it is something permeable, that changes through time, experiences, encounters with anything that comes from "outside". It is true for individuals, and it is true for cultures. What we call Europe today is undeniably different from what someone in the XVIIIth, XIXth or even XXth century would have defined as such. Today's idea of Europe as culturally based on Ancient Greece or the Roman Empire is still not universally shared, and it is challenged by those who think of the Germanic populations as the initiators of this cultural idea, instead. Some debate whether England or France had the most influence over the European cultural history, and the idea that Islam had a big role in shaping southern European countries' traditions, art and architecture and thus should be considered as part of the European identity, still raises some eyebrows. All of these ideas though changed through time, according to the historical period they were more or less successful, took a different shape or were abandoned. Same can be said for ideas of how European countries should come together, who should lead this union and so on. All this considered, there's actually no real reason why, in ten, twenty or thirty years, we won't be considering countries like Armenia or Georgia part of Europe. European identity has constantly changed through time, and it will again in the future. 

Since the XVIIIth century historians, philosophers, men of state and politicians had different ideas on Europe and some kind of European union, sometimes we came close to a creation of some sort - not only based on political or military agreements, I mean - but until the end of the Second world war very little was done. Even then, what came to life after the tragic events of the Second World conflict had different shades and took different directions than expected at first. Those men who first thought of a unified Europe were more focused on the idea of brotherhood and peace, than on the economic and political aspect that was later favoured; they understood that the only way to avoid something like that to ever happen again was creating a continental alliance based on a meeting of cultures and a shared economy. 

In my opinion, the European Union, which is the result of all these centuries of thought, reflections, tragic events and cultural meetings, is still far from perfect - which doesn't mean it is an useless institution, but that there's room for improvement. Especially in the past few years, it focused - or at least this is how the media and national politics narrated it - on economics, and only recently it started politically raising its voice on few matters like immigration policies and actions to prevent climate change. A lot still has to be done regarding raising people's consciousness about being Europeans, and it is not enough that regulations are proclaimed by the parliament or the council, if people do not understand the impact of these on their everyday life or on their government. Too many times in the past decade - at least in Southern Europe - the EU has been portrayed as unnecessarily overruling countries, dictating their economic decisions or immigration laws. Of course, complete balance by the media reporting these news is an impossible goal to achieve; but what people could do is start being more involved with the society they live in - on a local level first, and then on a continental level later - to understand what being part of the EU really means. There are so many opportunities given by the EU, as well as regulations that made our life more democratic and just, and yet people believe the only thing the EU does is taxing plastic bags at the grocery's stores. 

At least in Italy, affirming that one believes in the EU and feels European is becoming more and more uncommon. I myself am not an expert at all on how the European institutions work, but I strongly feel about Europe, and I consider being European a big part of my personal identity. 

In conclusion, feeling European - and thus Europe itself - may be a construct as, as I debated, there's no real, constant European identity, but the European Union is, for now, a reality that we built to keep peace and that we should not take for granted. All the rights we have as European citizens (for example, being able to ask for help at any European embassy out of Europe if our own is not present in that country), the shared level of democracy we have on the continent - even though some are trying to make it less democratic -, the low cost tickets to capital cities and so on, are all achievements we built step by step, and we can only imagine which other privileges we will have in twenty, fifty years from now if we give the EU a chance and help making it better and more effective, for us and for the rest of the world.  

Today is the last day we can vote to elect the new European parliament, and thus define the lead for the next five years. In troubled times like the one we are living in, contributing in forming the society we share is more important than ever. Climate change, migration, terrorism, are only few of the issues we need to take action on as a whole, since there's no more time to think as an isolated, unlinked-to-anything-else country. Whatever your idea of EU is, whatever you want from it, if you want to see it represented, you need to cast your vote. If you want to see a change...you need to take action. Your vote matters, too.