European Transnational Social Fields and Identifications
5. European bureaucratic social fields
The term ‘bureaucrat’ is commonly known; it can hold many connotations, but in general it is a neutral definition of someone who is working within an institu- tion of government. But, when attaching the prefix ‘euro-’, the word becomes misleading in a way. Since its emergence, the meaning of the term has varied sig- nificantly. It has been acknowledged that the meaning was once attached to civil servants of the EU, to political elites who work and act in Brussels as well as to a non-transparent system of power, which replaced democratic institutions; how- ever, in all contexts, the notion describes the distance between ordinary citizens and the European polity (e.g. Georgakakis and Rowell 2013, p. 3). Who, then, are the Eurocrats, and why is this question important for this study? There are many different approaches to tackle the issue that range from studies of elites, perspectives of international relations, and institutionalisation to the socialisa- tion of individuals into European administrative machinery (extensive review in Georgakakis and Rowell 2013, pp. 3–6). Recent, (and most inspiring) perspec- tives studied the European bureaucracy as a transnational example of the Euro- pean bureaucratic field as explored by Pierre Bourdieu (e.g. collection of studies edited by Georgakakis and Rowell 2013). The important contribution of these studies is their breaking with the unified picture of ‘Eurocrats’. It has been argued that building EU institutions as a social field allows to better define EU institu- tions, their internal dynamics and their relative location in the...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.