Abstract

For the last few years, the European Union has been experiencing a deep and prolonged institutional crisis. This has manifested itself, for instance, in the sovereign debt and Euro crises, the tension between national and transnational sovereignty, and tensions about the rule of law. This manifold crisis has dwarfed the enormous successes of integration and convergence that have been achieved over the past six decades in Europe. Crucially, this crisis has blinded many observers from being able to see how and in what form European integration has managed in a successful way to connect the different parts of Europe with the whole over the last few decades. Our contribution is firstly aimed at showing how the European mechanism of integration of diversity in unity functions and why it has been so successful in many policy areas. We propose that, in order to get out of the present deadlock, the mechanism that has worked so well in some policy areas should be widened to all decision-making processes. Equally importantly, we argue that at its core the current crisis is a cognitive problem. We therefore argue that in order to recognize the institutional achievements as a positive common European experience, widening the general perception of "Unity in diversity" among Europeans, a new conceptual figure or interpretative scheme is needed for two reasons: first, in order to see how unity and diversity has already been dynamically harmonized in a directly recognizable way, and second, in order to provide a tool that creates further harmonization and enhances popular legitimacy for further European integration and convergence. In doing that, our proposal brings Nicholas of Cusa's (1401–1464) concept of spiritus conexionis into the fold. His concept, in our view, represents the dynamically integrative figure needed presently in Europe. As Cusanus lived in a historic period, in which the medieval interpretative schema to integrate diversity and unity was no longer tenable and the modern idea of nation state was not born yet, he conceived a new pattern of integration according to which any national identity – but even any culture or religion – in order to be aware of itself as a specific entity, has to be dynamically connected with a supranational identity that composes the different pieces in an harmonic whole; only in light of this identity that transcends individual identities, identity specificity for individual entities can be achieved