Podcasts about Euroscepticism

With the full-scale invasion, relations with the EU have suddenly become very concrete for Ukrainian citizens. Many have been displaced, living in various EU countries under temporary protection status – some want to stay there. And while EU countries were seen as important in providing military aid, key member states such as Germany were heavily criticised for their perceived slow delivery. This episode is about Ukrainians - in Ukraine and abroad - their experiences of war and European integration, and what these might mean for the future of Ukrainian and European politics. Marina Rabinovych talks to Valeria Lazarenko, who has studied governance regimes for Ukrainian refugees in Germany, Sweden, Poland and the Czech Republic, and Kostiantyn Fedorenko, who has researched the risks of Euroscepticism in Ukraine - an issue of growing relevance as the war enters its fourth year and the stakes rise for potential negotiations and Europe's role in them. President Zelenskiy signed Ukraine's official application for EU membership on 28 February 2022, four days after Russia's full-scale invasion began. Although the application was approved and Ukraine gained EU candidate status with unprecedented speed, the road remains challenging and does not promise to get any easier as the war continues and around 20% of Ukraine's territory is occupied by Russia.

Speaker: Dr Bernadette Zelger, University of InnsbruckAbstract: The debate about the future of the European Union has long left academic circles, arrived in the midst of society and been awarded political attention. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of Euroscepticism accompanied by more nationalist political developments echoed in the swings to the right all across the EU. These developments may, arguably at least in parts, be explained by social resentments of the peoples of Europe. While acknowledging that law constructs and contributes to a social reality of its own it is thus, arguably also about the lack of a genuine socio-economic equilibrium within the law and political system of the EU. This imbalance is not only found within the EU legal constitutional framework, but also within the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, possible solutions to solve this socio-economic imbalance are limited: It is either (i) Treaty reform or, alternatively, (ii) a change in the approach of the Court in its jurisprudence. While these alternatives are both valid and, to some extent, mutually exclusive, they unveil and epitomise different visions as regards the future of the European Union. However, while acknowledging the differences in the approach, they are arguably different means to serve the very same end: Warrant the European Union's future success. For more information see:https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Speaker: Dr Bernadette Zelger, University of InnsbruckAbstract: The debate about the future of the European Union has long left academic circles, arrived in the midst of society and been awarded political attention. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of Euroscepticism accompanied by more nationalist political developments echoed in the swings to the right all across the EU. These developments may, arguably at least in parts, be explained by social resentments of the peoples of Europe. While acknowledging that law constructs and contributes to a social reality of its own it is thus, arguably also about the lack of a genuine socio-economic equilibrium within the law and political system of the EU. This imbalance is not only found within the EU legal constitutional framework, but also within the case-law of the European Court of Justice. However, possible solutions to solve this socio-economic imbalance are limited: It is either (i) Treaty reform or, alternatively, (ii) a change in the approach of the Court in its jurisprudence. While these alternatives are both valid and, to some extent, mutually exclusive, they unveil and epitomise different visions as regards the future of the European Union. However, while acknowledging the differences in the approach, they are arguably different means to serve the very same end: Warrant the European Union's future success. For more information see:https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

Ahead of the 27-member European Union elections earlier this month, experts had predicted a right-wing surge during the four-day exercise. And that is exactly what happened. While the election didn't produce a populist majority, the center lost more ground as compared to the last vote in 2019. French President Emmanuel Macron's party was handed a stunning defeat by the far-right, leading him to call for snap parliamentary elections at the end of the month. So how will the outcome of this election impact and continuing rise of Euroscepticism potentially impact the future of the bloc?   Ruben Durante, Professor, Department of Economics, NUS Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, shares his opinion on this episode of Morning Shot. Presented, Produced & Edited by: Emaad Akhtar  Photo credits: The Straits TimesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How student protests in support of Palestinians at Paris's political science institute are different from those in the US, a look at France's growing disaffection with Europe, and the long birth of the Channel Tunnel linking France to Britain – 30 years old this week.  Student protests against Israel's war in Gaza came to a head in the past week, when the president of the prestigious Sciences Po university called the police to forcibly clear out an occupation of the Paris campus' main building. Some have called the protests an imitation of what is happening in the United States, but the scale, scope and politics are a bit different. Students talk about why they have joined the protest movement, their shock over reactions by government and police, and compare today's mobilisation with student protests of the past. (Listen @0'00)On Europe Day, and with only a month to go before EU elections, surveys are showing France is an increasingly eurosceptic nation – only a quarter of the population place their trust in Europe and its institutions, and even fewer are optimistic about the EU's future. The disaffection with Europe comes as polls also show the far-right, populist National Rally is tipped to oustrip President Macron's ruling party in the elections. Laetitia Langlois from Angers University examines what's behind growing eurosceptism in France and what it means for President Emmanuel Macron. (Listen @16'30)The Channel Tunnel turns 30 years old this week. Officially opened on 6 May 1994, it was the culmination of two centuries of dreaming about a land link between France and the UK. (Listen @9'30)Episode mixed by Cecile Pompéani. Spotlight on France is a podcast from Radio France International. Find us on rfienglish.com, Apple podcasts (link here), Spotify (link here) or your favourite podcast app (pod.link/1573769878).

In the latest episode of our daily podcast Today in the EU, we take a look at the consequences of political polarisation in Poland. October 2023 marked the end of eight years of the nationalist government of the Law and Justice party in Poland, with the election of pro-EU veteran Donald Tusk. Brussels welcomed his rise to power and unfroze billions in funds to Poland. But change does not happen overnight. Tusk is now confronted with an electorate divided over how the government should address farmers' protests, the cost of living crisis, and hostile attitudes towards the European Union. Will he succeed in steering Poland away from Euroscepticism? 

Matt Goodwin is a professor of politics at The School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent in Kent, UK. His writing and research primarily focus on radical right-wing politics and Euroscepticism in the British context. Amongst others, his writing has appeared in publications such as The Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Guardian, and the Evening Standard. He also serves on the Social Mobility Commission via the British Department of Education. Peter and Matt build upon their previous interview and discuss illegal immigration and its effects on society and politics. Matt predicts that mass migration will cause a political rightward shift and a severe backlash from the political left. Matt and Peter then discuss the consequences, including an increase in polarization as a result of the political tumult 2024 is likely to bring.More from Matt: Matt's previous interview with PeterTwitter/X SubstackWatch this episode on YouTube.

In the scope of our coverage of the European elections, we will broadcast a series of programs in which we will be taking a closer look at a specific country or group of member states to determine what issues voters care about. We start with the Eurozone's largest economy: Germany. With its strong industry, a population of 84 million and 96 seats at the European Parliament, the country is the leading political and economic force in the EU. But it is also facing a crisis: Germany is in recession as its GDP dropped 0.3 percent in 2023. In turn, fear has kicked in, with many voters blaming the EU for its regulations and the Afd far right party floating the idea of a “Dexit” and rising in the polls. Can the German economy recover? What impact does its shrinking economy have on the rest of the Union? And how does this situation affect votes?

Alternative for Germany (German: Alternative für Deutschland, AfD; German pronunciation: [aːʔɛfˈdeː] ⓘ) is a right-wing populist political party in Germany.[3][4] AfD is known for its Euroscepticism,[5] as well as for opposing immigration to Germany.[6] As a right-wing party, AfD is commonly positioned on the radical right, a subset of the far-right, within the family of European political parties that does not oppose democracy.[7]

Matt Goodwin is a professor of politics at School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent in Kent, UK. His writing and research primarily focuses on radical right-wing politics and Euroscepticism in the British context. Amongst others, his writing has appeared in publications such as The Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Guardian, and the Evening Standard. He also serves on the Social Mobility Commission via the British Department of Education. In this conversation, Matt and I discussed the economic and political reality of immigration to the UK. Matt argues that, even though the UK is under a conservative government, the British population has been misled on the issue of immigration. We then discuss the future of Britain and the cultural effects of continued mass immigration.Connect with Matt: Matt on X/TwitterMatt's SubstackWatch this episode on YouTube.

In this episode, the Beyond the Byline podcast looks into the results of the Dutch elections, which saw the party of anti-Islam populist, Geert Wilders, lead the polls.The success of Wilders' Freedom Party (PVV) signalled a notable rightwards shift in a country that's seen over a decade of centrist governance.Geert Wilders is now positioned to lead talks for the next governing coalition, potentially becoming the first far-right prime minister of the Netherlands, with the PVV securing 37 seats in the 150-seat lower house of parliament — more than double his previous tally of 17 in the last election.This outcome is sending shockwaves through Europe, where far-right ideologies are gaining momentum.We asked Catherine Fieschi, a comparative political analyst with a focus on populism, authoritarianism and challenges to democracy and representation and a fellow at the Robert Schuman Centre, about the proliferation of far-right governments in the EU - and why Europeans are increasingly turning rightwards in the polls.

Belonging and becoming: strengthening the EU projectIn this episode Daniel Martínek engages in an exploration of European identity and the challenges it faces. Our guest, Niccolò Milanese, founding director of European Alternatives, sheds light on the need to strengthen the European Union in the thick of growing Euroscepticism. We touch upon the interplay of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law in shaping the European identity, while considering the diverse interpretations of Europeanness across the region. Join us as we navigate these fundamental questions surrounding what it means to be European in today's evolving landscape. Our click here to know more about host's piece of art recommendation.Host: Daniel MartínekProduction and Editing: Gloria Becerril Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With its foundations in the ashes of World War II, the European Union was initially formed to avoid further wars and remove trade barriers. It grew from a six-nation club as the ECC in 1957, to today's 27 members that covers much of the continent and has evolved to tackle contemporary issues such as mass migration, a global pandemic and the war in Ukraine. In recent years, it survived a wave of Euroscepticism that led to Britain leaving (Brexit), but other member states have looked to reform from within, preferring to stay part of the larger bloc during uncertain times. Katya Adler, the BBC's Europe Editor, shares insights into the EU from its foundation to its contemporary challenges.

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia.

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How do we explain the rise of populism, extremism, and conspiracy theory in the Americas and Europe? Why do members of a society come to feel this strong sense of discontent with their political system – so deep and broad that they believe the system to be irreparably broken? Scholars have explained these phenomena using two main models. The first focuses on economics and imagines the source of discontent is long-term economic change that creates winners and losers. An alternative model posits that cultural factors such as hostility to ethnic, racial, and gender minorities is more significant than economic attitudes. In The Age of Discontent, Drs. Rhodes-Purdy, Navarre, and Utych build on these models by combining the insights of political science with a tool from political psychology: affective intelligence theory. If emotions shape cognition and behavior, economic and cultural backlash might be better understood as sequential. The book argues that economic discontent is often the root cause but this begins a chain. Economic discontent leads to negative emotions that trigger cultural attitudes such as out-group hostility or in-group solidarity. The book presents a compelling theoretical framework the authors call “affective political economy.” Economic troubles can prime citizens to embrace culturally discontented narratives, leading to various forms of discontent based on local conditions. The Age of Discontent: Populism, Extremism, and Conspiracy Theories in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge UP, 2023) uses qualitative and quantitative methods to examine American sentiments of discontent expressed primarily during the Trump administration, Euroscepticism, and Brexit in the UK, and Spain to examine the interactions of economic and cultural issues across the globe. By examining case studies of democratic discontent in different regions and contrasting them with case studies in which discontent was avoided, the book demonstrates how economic crises trigger cultural responses, intensifying discontent with the political status quo. Two books mentioned during the podcast are David Goodhart, The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics (Oxford UP, 2017) and Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and why we Don't Talk about It)(Princeton UP, 2017) previously covered by the New Books Network. Dr. Matthew Rhodes-Purdy is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. He is the author of Regime Support Beyond the Balance Sheet (2017). Dr. Rachel Navarre is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bridgewater State University. She co-authored Immigration in the 21st Century: The Comparative Politics of Immigration Policy (2020) with Dr. Terri Givens and Pete Mohanty – and Lilly Goren interviewed them previously on New Books in Political Science. Dr. Stephen Utych is a market researcher with an area focus on political psychology, political behavior, and experimental methods. Dr. Uthych has published over thirty peer-reviewed articles.  Daniela Lavergne served as the editorial assistant for this podcast. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Încrederea românilor în Uniunea Europeană a scăzut dramatic, conform Eurobarometrului realizat de Parlamentul european. Doar 46% dintre români mai cred că apartenența noastră la UE e un lucru bun. În 2007, anul aderării noastre la blocul comunitar, 71% dintre români evaluau pozitiv apartenența la UE. Care sînt cauzele şi care sînt posibilele consecințe ale euroscepticismului? Am întrebat-o pe Oana-Valentina Suciu, sociolog, conferențiar la Facultatea de Științe Politice a Universității din București.   O emisiune de Adela Greceanu și Matei Martin  Un produs Radio România Cultural 

"From the 1940s until the late 1980s, the majority view within the Labour Party was against joining (and, then, in favour of leaving) the European Economic Communities", later known as the European Union. Yet by the 2016 Brexit referendum, among Labour members, supporters and most MPs, Euroscepticism had become a byword for imperial nostalgia and racism. We spoke to Richard Johnson, Senior Lecturer in the Politics and International Relations School at Queen Mary, University of London to find out how this change happened, the history of resistances to Europe on the left, and the consequences for Keir Starmer today. PLUS we hear the left-wing case for the UK monarchy! This episode was released early to our paid-subscribers. Help us develop The Popular Show and get extra shows at https://www.patreon.com/thepopularpod Full video version available at the Popularity Media YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH7yoUlK9WQ More ways to help us continue: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/thepopularshow https://www.buymeacoffee.com/thepopularshow https://cash.app/£ThePopularShow

Omar Sadr talks to Bengi Gumrukcu on democratic backsliding, populism, Islamism in Turkey. Bengi Gumrukcu is lecturer of political science at Rutgers University. She studies various aspects of social movements, political parties, far right, violence and Europeanization and Euroscepticism, mainly focusing on the case of Turkey. Suggested readings: Bengi Gumrukcu. "Populist discourse, (counter-) mobilizations and democratic backsliding in Turkey”, Turkish Studies, 2022 Bengi Gumrukcu. "Forming Pre-Electoral Coalitions in Competitive Authoritarian Contexts: The Case of the 2018 Parliamentary Elections in Turkey,” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern, 2022. Sebnem Gumuscu. Democracy or Authoritarianism Islamist Governments in Turkey, Egypt, and Tunisia. Cambridge University Press Hanspeter Kriesi. "Revisiting the Populist Challenge", Politologicky Casopis/ Czech Journal of Political Science. 2018. Connect with us! Google, Apple, Spotify, Anchor Twitter: @negotiateideas & @OmarSadr Email: negotiatingidea@gmail.com

On Sunday, September 25th, Italy held a snap election following the resignation of prime minister Mario Draghi and the dissolution of the Italian Parliament. The election resulted in a parliamentary majority a right-wing coalition led by Fratelli d'Italia (or Brothers of Italy), a far-right party with roots in postwar Italian neofascist movements. The party and its leader, new Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, espouse social conservatism, nationalism, populism, opposition to immigration, and Euroscepticism. Meloni's election holds significant policy implications not only for domestic Italian society, but also for Italy's relationship with the European Union and the wider world. Noelle Turtur, the Eugen and Jacqueline Weber Postdoctoral Scholar in European History at UCLA, joins Ben Zdencanovic on Then & Now to discuss the historical roots Italian fascism, the legacies of fascism in Italian politics, and what Meloni's election might mean for Italy and the international system. 

Europe's priorities have undergone a massive shift in response to Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Gideon talks to political scientist Ivan Krastev about how central Europe is gaining influence within the EU as a result of the Ukraine war.Clips: United Nations; France24More on this topic:EU to put price cap on Russian oil in new sanctions packageThe 90km journey that changed the course of the war in UkraineDenmark, Germany and Poland warn of ‘sabotage' after Nord Stream leaksEndless frictions with Brussels risk fuelling Euroscepticism in PolandThe EU should press Hungary hard on rule of lawSubscribe to The Rachman Review wherever you get your podcasts - please listen, rate and subscribe.Presented by Gideon Rachman. Produced by Fiona Symon. Sound design is by Breen Turner. Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What challenges and threats do European democracies face today? How actually democratic are they? What is an illiberal democracy? Will democracy in Europe resist the stress-test of the Covid-19 pandemic? Was “Brexit” a vaccine against Euroscepticism? To answer this questions, Pedro Pinto interviews Catherine de Vries in this episode of “It's Not That Simple” a podcast by the Francisco Manuel dos Santos Foundation. A political scientist and an expert on European politics, Catherine de Vries is a Dean of Diversity & Inclusion and Professor of Political Science at Bocconi University, and has published several books on the economic, political, and social reality of the European Union. A columnist of Het Financieele Dagblad (the “Dutch Financial Times”), de Vries is also a member of European Integration Committee of the Dutch Advisory Council on Foreign Affairs, and in 2013, she was selected a Young Global Leader in the World Economic Forum for her societal impact. In this episode, de Vries discusses the impasse the European Union has found itself in since the Treaty of Lisbon, the opportunities the current crisis might present to the EU, the impact national elections such as the April 2022 French elections might have on the EU's future, or the challenges of the energy transition, in a conversation worth listening to. More on this topic • Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration, Catherine de Vries, 2018 • On Euroscepticism and the future of European integration, Catherine de Vries, 2017 • Catherine de Vries and historian Timothy Garton Ash on the challenges faced by European leaders • On why it is so hard to reach a consensus within European institutions • Conference on “What Democracy?” of the Francisco Manuel dos Santos Foundation, 2016 • On the “illiberal democracies” of Hungary and Poland, by historian Anne Applebaum Other references in Portuguese • Essays of the Foundation: “A democracia na Europa”, by Catherine Moury; “Qualidade da democracia em Portugal” by Conceição Pequito Teixeira; “Instituições e qualidade da democracia: cultura política na Europa do Sul”, a study coordinated by Tiago Fernandes. • [IN] Pertinente podcast, “Estará a democracia ameaçada?”, with Raquel Vaz-Pinto and Pedro Vieira

On this edition of Parallax Views, Dulcie Everitt joins us to discuss her new book BrexLit: The Problem of Englishness in Pre- and Post-Brexit Referendum Literature (Zer0 Books; 2022). Dulcie's book delves into the idea of the sub-nationalist English identity (as opposed to British identity; English identity would be different from Welsh, Scottish, or Irish identity) in literature before and after the Brexit referendum that saw the UK leave the EU. It is important to note in this regard that England had a greater "Leave" vote than either "Scotland" or "Ireland", both of which voted "Remain", on the referendum. In this conversation we delve into the issue of what English identity is and how it is amorphous, slippery, or difficult to easily define. We delve into Englishness as an identity as it relates to both empire and post-Empire Britain. This, of course, brings us to the topic of Brexit, what it was, how it was spearheaded by figures like the Tory Party's Boris Johnson and UKIP's Nigel Farage, the formation of English nationalism as a retaliation to insurgent sub-nationalisms, the role of nostalgia in the Leave campaign and Boris Johnson's famous "Take Back Control!" line, the history of Euroscepticism on both the Right and the Left, why a second referendum is unfeasible now, xenophobia and racism in relation to Brexit, Ian McEwan's Kafka inspired take on Brexit in the form of the novel The Cockroach, as well as the more hope Autumn by Scottish author Ali Smith, Jonathan Coe's The Rotters' Club and its Brexit-influenced sequel Middle England, the dystopian Perfidious Albion by Sam Byers, the question of cosmopolitanism, and much, much more!

The UK has one of the highest death tolls from Coronavirus in the entire world, which has seen the British people live through some of the harshest and longest lockdowns over the past two years. Despite the many restrictions, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his colleagues have been outed for having allegedly dozens of illegal parties while members of the public, and even the Queen suffered and remained isolated as their family members died. The Quicky looks into just how many social gatherings happened at 10 Downing Street since 2020, and speaks to an expert in British politics to find out whether Mr Johnson will survive the findings of both an internal and police inquiry into the boozy events. CREDITS  Host: Claire Murphy With thanks to:  Dr Ben Wellings - Senior Lecturer in Politics & International Relations at Monash University, and an expert on Brexit and the politics of nationalism and Euroscepticism in contemporary Europe Producer: Claire Murphy Executive Producer: Siobhán Moran-McFarlane Audio Producer: Ian Camilleri Subscribe to The Quicky at... https://mamamia.com.au/the-quicky/ CONTACT US Got a topic you'd like us to cover? Send us an email at thequicky@mamamia.com.au GET IN TOUCH: Feedback? We're listening! Call the pod phone on 02 8999 9386 or email us at podcast@mamamia.com.au Mamamia acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the Land we have recorded this podcast on, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures. Just by reading or listening to our content, you're helping to fund girls in schools in some of the most disadvantaged countries in the world - through our partnership with Room to Read. We're currently funding 300 girls in school every day and our aim is to get to 1,000. Find out more about Mamamia at mamamia.com.au  Support the show: https://www.mamamia.com.au/mplus/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

BNR Europa, the weekly show on European Current Affairs of BNR Nieuwsradio in The Netherlands. Our Special Guest Adam Price, from Denmark, is the creator of the political hit series Borgen. But he is also a TV presenter, journalist, an amateur pianist and even a restaurateur. For three seasons, Europeans were glued to the television to follow the adventures of Birgitte Nyborg. Not only in Europe but in dozens of other countries all around the World. A worldwide success since Borgen even appealed to Americans. Listen to our conversation with Adam Price, about the European success of Borgen, why is he so fascinated by female leaders, his thoughts on a series about Euroscepticism. We also discuss his love of food, a passion he shares with this brother James with whom he owns six restaurants in Denmark. And of course, Adam Price reveals a little bit about the storyline of the fourth season of Borgen. Hosted by Stefan de Vries and Geert Jan Hahn.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Shona Murray, Europe Correspondent with EuroNews, joins us on this week's episode to examine the current state of Euroscepticism. Did Brexit give hope to people in other Member States who want their country to leave the EU, or did it make them try another tact? Plus, what are the varying shades of Euroscepticism? The Explainer is brought to you by The Journal. Providing open access to valuable journalism in Ireland has been the aim of The Journal for a decade. You can contribute to ensure we can keep questioning, investigating, debunking, explaining and informing at www.thejournal.ie/contribute/

Glossary for DiQ ep 7 series 3 – Jan Werner MüllerWho was Alexis de Tocqueville?(pg. 1 tocquevillian question of the transcript or 00:1:08)French sociologist and political theorist Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) traveled to the United States in 1831 to study its prisons and returned with a wealth of broader observations that he codified in “Democracy in America” (1835), one of the most influential books of the 19th century. With its trenchant observations on equality and individualism, Tocqueville's work remains a valuable explanation of America to Europeans and of Americans to themselves. What is nativism?(pg. 1 of the transcript or 00:4:42)Nativism represents the political idea that people who were born in a country are more important than immigrants. Source. Who is Marine Le Pen?(pg. 3 of the transcript or 00:10:03)Marine Le Pen, French politician who succeeded her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, as leader of the National Front (later National Rally) party in 2011. She was that party's candidate in the 2017 French presidential election. In 1998 she joined the administrative apparatus of the National Front, which had been founded by her father in 1972 and was the main right-wing opposition to France's mainstream conservative parties. She served as the director of the party's legal affairs until 2003, when she became the National Front's vice president. The following year she made a successful run for a seat in the European Parliament where she joined her father in that body's nonaligned bloc. As Le Pen emerged from her father's shadow to become a national figure in her own right, she distanced herself from some of his and the party's more extreme views. While she embraced the National Front's established anti-immigration stance, she rebranded the party's traditional Euroscepticism as French nationalism and she was a vocal critic of the anti- Semitism that has marginalized the party in the past.In June 2018 Le Pen announced that the National Front would change its name to Rassemblement National (National Rally), in an apparent effort to distance the party from its overtly neofascist and anti-Semitic past. The National Rally topped the field in EU parliamentary elections in 2019, and opinion polling indicated that they were likely to carry that momentum into French regional elections in 2021. The party performed far below expectations in the first round of balloting, however, in an election that was characterized by extremely low voter turnout. Source What was the Fairness Doctrine?(Page 6 of the transcript or 00:25:14)U.S. communications policy (1949–87) formulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Required licensed radio and television broadcasters to present fair and balanced coverage of controversial issues of interest to their communities, including by granting equal airtime to opposing candidates for public office. The fairness doctrine was never without its opponents, however, many of whom perceived the equal airtime requirement as an infringement of the right to freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution.In 1987 the FCC formally repealed the fairness doctrine but maintained both the editorial and personal-attack provisions, which remained in effect until 2000. In addition, until they were finally repealed by the commission in 2011, more than 80 media rules maintained language that implemented the doctrine. Source Who was John Dewey?(page 7 of the transcript or 00:28:02)John Dewey (1859–1952) was one of American pragmatism's early founders, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, and arguably the most prominent American intellectual for the first half of the twentieth century. Dewey's educational theories and experiments had a global reach, his psychological theories had a sizeable influence in that growing science, and his writings about democratic theory and practice deeply influenced debates in academic and practical quarters for decades. Dewey also developed extensive and often systematic views in ethics, epistemology, logic, metaphysics, aesthetics, and philosophy of religion. In addition to academic life, Dewey comfortably wore the mantle of public intellectual, infusing public issues with lessons found through philosophy. He spoke on topics of broad moral significance, such as human freedom, economic alienation, race relations, women's suffrage, war and peace, human freedom, and educational goals and methods. Typically, discoveries made via public inquiries were integrated back into his academic theories, and aided their revision. This practice-theory-practice rhythm powered every area of Dewey's intellectual enterprise, and perhaps explains why his philosophical theories are still discussed, criticized, adapted, and deployed in many academic and practical arenas.  Source Who is Elizabeth Anderson?(page 7 of the transcript or 00:30:40)American Philosopher specializing in moral, social and political philosophy, feminist theory, social epistemology, and the philosophy of economics and the social sciences. She is particularly interested in exploring the interactions of social science with moral and political theory, how we learn to improve our value judgments, the epistemic functions of emotions and democratic deliberation, and issues of race, gender, and equality. Source

How did TV shape Britain's relationship with the EU? And where do our preconceptions about European countries come from? Today on the show Beth is talking to historian David Lawton about German stereotypes, World War II references and British Nationalism in the eighties sitcom Auf Wiedersehen, Pet.  About David David is a PhD student at Queen Mary University working on Euroscepticism in Britain from 1970-2000. He has written on culture in the 1980s and has worked on the history of television in the 20th century. He is also a musician in the band Preen.  More on Auf Wiedersehen, Pet What Auf Wiedersehen, Pet teaches us about Britain and Europe by Tom Draper Credits Produced by: Beth Watson Edited by: Beth Watson Music by: Iora Find us on the interweb Beth Watson: @b.wott on Instagram & @bwatson19 on Twitter  The TV That Changed Me: @tvchangedme on Instagram & @tvchangedmepod on Twitter  

Jill Rutter speaks to Times Radio about the ongoing fishing rights dispute between the UK and France and the impact on domestic politics on both sides of the Channel.

Part Two of our Brexit mini-series focuses on the Brexit vote itself.In this episode, we'll look at why the UK held a referendum in the first place, how the campaign was fought, who voted for and against Brexit (and for what reasons), and why it was ultimately the vote to leave the European Union that proved successful. Recap of Britain's complicated relationship with Europe Why did the UK hold a referendum on EU membership in the first place? The rise of Euroscepticism & UKIP David Cameron & the Conservative Party Did people care about the EU before the Brexit vote? "Indescribably selfish recklessness" The Brexit campaign: Leave vs. Remain Reluctant Remainers Messaging of the Remain campaign ("An Unnecessary Risk") Messaging of the Leave campaign ("Take Back Control") Who voted to remain? Who voted to leave? “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts” Full transcript, subtitles and key vocabulary available on the website: https://www.leonardoenglish.com/podcasts/brexit-part-2

CEE returns to school with some of the slowest vaccine rollouts among EU countries. Elections In Poland are postponed this year due to a declared state of emergency, but the political scene remains far from stable. The Polish government is likely to use the crisis on the border with Belarus to improve chances of survival while President Andrzej Duda is expected to veto the LexTVN law to salvage relations with the US. Simultaneously, the Zapad 2021 exercises are spooking Poland, Lithuania and Latvia, but over-exaggerated narratives may play into the hands of Belarus and Russia. Meanwhile, divisive issue over Afghanistan reinvigorates political campaigns of populist parties like ANO in Czechia and SDS in Slovenia. The fate of PM Janez Janša's SDS party — currently leading in popularity polls — is undecided due to the alienation of the opposition and potential cracks in the ruling party ahead of parliamentary elections. Czech PM's Andrej Babiš's ANO party no longer trails behind the rival liberal Pirates party. Euroscepticism, hard-line immigration stance and allegiance to Hungary's PM Viktor Orbán has formed a grand narrative that attempts to define Central Europe in opposition to its western neighbours.

Alfonso is a passionate global macro investor offering a 10 000 foot view of the macro and market landscape. All opinions in this podcast and his substack are strictly his own and not financial advice.  Alfonso's newsletter -> themacrocompass.substack.comAlfonso's twitter account -> https://twitter.com/MacroAlfCentral Banks don't print money and you've been paying a tax on your savings for years already - negative real interest rates.All views expressed on this podcast are subject to change and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conexus Financial. This podcast is for educational purposes only and should not be relied upon as investment advice.

A política de imigração mal resolvida e uma crise econômica são ingredientes para o surgimento de um movimento xenófobo e nacionalista. O Dialéticas #51 trata de xenofobia e imigração com um artigo sobre a ascensão do UKIP, o partido radical nacionalista inglês. O debate seráa tese de Isabella Gonçalves e mediação de Giovanni Ramos a partir do artigo "Immigration, Euroscepticism, and the rise and fall of UKIP", de autoria de Geoffrey Evans e Jonathan Mellon. Veja mais em dialeticas.com/51migrar

In The Origins of Political Order (2011), Fukuyama described the problem of creating modern political institutions as one of “getting to Denmark”. The country, in his own words at the time, was “a mythical place known for its stable, democratic, peaceful, prosperous and inclusive institutions”. A few miles south of Denmark lie the Netherlands, a country that last week renewed Mark Rutte’s mandate to lead a coalition, from a somewhat reshuffled Parliament this time. Our two guests this week highlight a gradual shift in the core of Dutch politics towards a blend of fiscal hawkishness, moderate Euroscepticism and even a less liberal social policy than the Dutch norm. No other country, however, seems to have journeyed further into the proverbial Third Way and the technocratization of vast swathes of government policy. Simon Kuper (Financial Times) and Rem Korteweg (Clingendael Institute) walk us through the Fukuyamaesque clichés borne out in last week's race, whilst giving due warning that not everything is as may rosily seem in the Dutch Low Countries. Rate and review Uncommon Decency on Apple Podcasts, and send us your comments or questions at @UnDecencyPod or uncommondecencypod@gmail.com.

Welcome back to Generation Politics! Thanks again to everyone who voted in our poll and this time, we take on another of your most popular chosen topics: Intercultural exchange in Europe. We unpack this vast topic with three guests, but what lies really heart of this week's episode are the questions: "what does it mean to be European in 2021?" and "what opportunities are there for young Europeans today to discover each other's cultures?" We speak to Green MEP Niklass Nienass about the EU's work on culture, Constanze Itzel, Director of the Europe-wide museum House of European History around the tensions in creating a museum that tells a unified narrative of a diverse continent, and Uroš Milutinović, a 18-year old pro-EU Serb, who tells us how both Euroscepticism and Europhilia are gripping Serbia's young people today. Listen, subscribe, and above all we want to hear from you to decide topics for our future episodes - vote in our poll, and help us design our future episodes!

KBRA releases a new podcast episode led by Joan Feldbaum-Vidra, a Managing Director and Head of KBRA’s Sovereign Ratings Group. In this episode, a panel of KBRA analysts discuss how old themes are transitioning to new themes with regard to sovereign credit risk in Europe. Asia Drobnik, Senior Director in KBRA’s Financial Institutions and Sovereigns team, joins Associate Director Ken Egan, who is responsible for managing the majority of sovereign credit views in Europe, and Peyton Tich, an intern working on a wide variety of sovereign credit views across the globe, to provide their opinions on key recent themes including: Is fiscal space constrained?; Euroscepticism at bay or on the rise?; Will the UK ride out the layered shocks of Brexit and COVID-19?

KBRA releases a new podcast episode led by Joan Feldbaum-Vidra, a Managing Director and Head of KBRA's Sovereign Ratings Group. In this episode, a panel of KBRA analysts discuss how old themes are transitioning to new themes with regard to sovereign credit risk in Europe. Asia Drobnik, Senior Director in KBRA's Financial Institutions and Sovereigns team, joins Associate Director Ken Egan, who is responsible for managing the majority of sovereign credit views in Europe, and Peyton Tich, an intern working on a wide variety of sovereign credit views across the globe, to provide their opinions on key recent themes including: Is fiscal space constrained?; Euroscepticism at bay or on the rise?; Will the UK ride out the layered shocks of Brexit and COVID-19?

Science meets politics in this week's episode of Macro Matters. As the race continues to roll out a coronavirus vaccine, what should be a positive step towards normality has turned into a political debate over supply. Are we seeing the emergence of vaccine nationalism, and what does this mean for Covid diplomacy?This week on Macro Matters, our hosts Stephanie Kelly and Paul Diggle are joined once again by Robert Gilhooly, our in-house Senior Emerging Markets Research Economist. Together they discuss the political implications of the Covid vaccine rollout and what this means for foreign policy, UK-EU relations, and emerging markets.Part 1 focuses on vaccine nationalism covering Brexit, Euroscepticism and border controls.Part 2 ends with vaccine diplomacy and covers vaccine donations, emerging market vaccine supply and Covax.

Kathleen McNamara, Professor of Government and Foreign Service at Georgetown University and Co-Director, the Global Political Economy Project, joined us to explore how the cascading crises of the last decade have impacted the development of European identity, how it has fared over this period and what are its biggest challenges going forward. The Europe Desk is a podcast from the BMW Center for German and European Studies at Georgetown University in Washington, DC. It brings together leading experts working on the most pertinent issues facing Europe and transatlantic relations today. Music by Sam Kyzivat and Breakmaster Cylinder Production by Jonas Heering and Emily Traynor Mayrand Communications by Hannah Tyler, Iris Thatcher and Mitchell Fariss Design by Sarah Diebboll https://cges.georgetown.edu/podcast Twitter and Instagram: @theeuropedesk If you would like a transcript of this episode, more information about the Center's events, or have any feedback, please email: theeuropedesk@georgetown.edu.

Brexit means exit, but what exactly will we be leaving behind? Entry into the European Community in 1973 was a momentous event – one which had seismic effects on the politics and constitution of Britain. Brexit, while equally as momentous, has almost wholly been confined to discussions of economic consequence. But what will happen to the constitution?  Beyond Brexit: Towards a British Constitution (I. B. Tauris, 2019) looks for the first time at the impact of Brexit and the constitutional consequences of Britain's EU membership, raising the question of just how the United Kingdom is to be preserved. In this book, noted constitutional scholar, Professor Vernon Bogdanor explores the ever-changing relationship between Britain and the European Union from the original concept of European unity to 21st century Euroscepticism, the fundamental problems confronting Britain on its exit from the European Union, and argues that Brexit is the start of new beginnings – heralding a peaceful constitutional moment. In short, Professor Bogdanor has written a beautifully crafted text full of brilliant ideas concerning Britain relations: past, present and future with the European Union. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written for Chatham House’s International Affairs, the Institute of Historical Research's Reviews in History and the University of Rouen's online periodical Cercles. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We look at what the official confirmation of Joe Biden’s victory by the US electoral college means for Donald Trump’s campaign to overturn the result. Plus: we take a closer look at Oslo’s Euroscepticism and get the latest news from the art world.

In this episode, I talk to Simon Hix who is Harold Laski Professor of Political Science at the Department of Government at the London School of Economics and Political Science. We discuss his article “Brexit: Where is the EU–UK Relationship Heading?” which came out in 2018. In the article, Simon analyzes different scenarios for the medium-term relationship between the UK and the EU. The conversation focuses on what Brexit means for both sides economically and politically and how this affects their bargaining position. While freedom of movement is politically unacceptable for the current UK government, the EU is unlikely to accept breaking up the four freedoms of goods, service, capital and persons. A more basic Free Trade Agreement thus seems like the most likely outcome of the negotiations. We additionally discuss how the current crisis will potentially affect the future of the European Union. While moves toward stronger integration often happened during times of crises, such an outcome seems unlikely at the moment. If you want to know more about Simon and his research, you can follow him on Twitter under at simonjhix or visit his website http://personal.lse.ac.uk/hix/. I hope you enjoy the conversation Political science recommendation: Catherine de Vries, 2018, Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration, Oxford University Press. https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780198793380.001.0001/oso-9780198793380

In this episode, I talk to Sara Hobolt who is Sutherland Chair in European Institutions at the LSE. The conversation focuses on her 2016 article “The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent” (https://bit.ly/3dp8JG0) In this article, which was published in September 2016, so shortly after the UK decided to leave the European Union, Sara investigates the individual level determinants of the Brexit vote. Next to socio-demographic characteristics such as age and education, national identities and attitudes about immigration played a core role for the decision. We then also discuss Brexit in the broader context of referendums on European integration and people's attitudes toward the European Union more generally. Why do some people favor more integration than others? Can we imagine a similar development in other European countries? Sara and I discuss these and other questions in the next 45 minutes. If you want to know more about Sara and her research you can follow her on Twitter under “at” sarahobolt or visit her website www.hobolt.com. I hope you enjoy the conversation. Political science recommendations: https://www.cambridge.org/ch/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/political-economy/democratic-dilemma-can-citizens-learn-what-they-need-know?format=PB&isbn=9780521585934

In today’s episode, we investigate the complexities of Sino-Italian relations, which over the last few weeks—like a focusing lens—brought together many interesting topics: the outbreak of COVID-19, China’s disinformation campaigns, Euroscepticism, and wider discussions on EU solidarity. There’s really a lot to unpack here. Fortunately, we are joined by an expert in the field.Lucrezia Poggetti is an Analyst at the Berlin-based MERICS, a leading European think tank focused on China. She researches EU-China relations and China’s public diplomacy strategies in Europe, and also has experience working on China’s domestic policies at the EU Delegation to the PRC. Her works have been widely published by, among others: The Diplomat, China File, Project Syndicate, Il Sole 24 Ore, and the Berlin Policy Journal. Being Italian, she frequently comments on Sino-Italian relations and can help us shed light on the rapidly changing dynamics of Italian-Chinese interactions.More at: euchinahub.comPhoto credit: ©MERICS/Marco Urban

Giles talks to Professor of Political Economy Helen Thompson about not fitting in at Warwick University Labour Club, why Margaret Thatcher would have voted Leave and what to look out for in politics in 2020.

In our sixth episode, Catherine de Vries talks with Aidan Regan about different forms of Euroscepticism across the EU: their features, origins, and the way that radical and mainstream parties cope with or employ them.Catherine visited the UCD Jean Monnet Centre on the New Political Economy of Europe as part of our seminar series. You can check future events and speakers here:www.newpoliticaleconomyeurope.eu/events/s…arseriesYou can also find additional information on her work here:research.vu.nl/en/persons/catherine-de-vriesIf you want regular updates, make sure to follow us on Twitter! @UCD_DEI

Geoff Meade, former Europe editor of the Press Association, talks to Paul Adamson about his encounters with Boris Johnson then a young reporter in Brussels.

Geoff Meade, former Europe editor of the Press Association, talks to Paul Adamson about his encounters with Boris Johnson then a young reporter in Brussels.

Brexit - "British" and "exit" references the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. This term was first coined by Peter Wilding, the chairman of British Influence, in a 2012 blog post called "Stumbling Towards the Brexit." Brexit culminates after several decades of history. Originally, the European Communities, predecessor to the EU were created in in the 1950s. Great Britain attempted to join in 1963 and again in '67 but was vetoed by Charles De Gaulle, President of France - some of those not always warm and fuzzy Anglo-French relations. Finally, on the third attempt, the UK joined in 1973 under the Conservative government of Edward Heath. But not everyone was happy with the arrangement. There was a segment of the population known as Eurosceptics - another portmanteau. In the 1970s and 1980s these voices for withdrawal were mostly from the political left. Then in the 1990s the political right started showing opposition to further EU integration and this led to the creation of The United Kingdom Independence Party - UKIP which split off from the Conservative Party. This may also have been a factor in the UK never adopting the euro and staying with the pound sterling as their currency. Prime Minister Tony Blair declared that there were five economic tests that the euro must meet. It failed the five-tests and the pound has remained in the UK. Fast forward nearly 20 years and on June 23 2016, 51.9 percent voted to leave the EU. This vote resulted in Prime Minister David Cameron resigning after losing his campaign against Brexit. He was succeeded by Theresa May. The UK was scheduled to exit March 29th 2019 but that deadline was extended to October 31st. Also in March, Prime Minister Theresa May proposed "slow brexit" but ultimately under pressure she resigned effective June 7th of the year. July 24th 2019 Boris Johnson (BoJo - another portmanteau) was elected Prime Minister in his first statement to the House of Commons as prime minister, he affirmed his absolute commitment to leaving the EU October 31st, with or without any kind of deal. Brexit is a perfect example of the scope and power of one word.   Resources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroscepticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_European_Union–United_Kingdom_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100314/why-doesnt-england-use-euro.asp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoJo

Dr. Anamaria Dutceac Segesten, Assistant Professor of European Studies at Lund University, guests to discuss a live breakdown of the EU election results. We talk about the election results, the European Parliament's digital campaign, and what it all means for Europe. Here's the 2019 European Parliament's promo video: Choose your Future. And the 2014 video: Act. React. Impact.

Today Dr Ben Wellings, senior lecturer in International Relations at Monash University, Clayton, talked us through the rise of Euroscepticism, what the Anglosphere is and how the challenges of Brexit may stem from an identity crisis within the UK.

Today Dr Ben Wellings, senior lecturer in International Relations at Monash University, Clayton, talked us through the rise of Euroscepticism, what the Anglosphere is and how the challenges of Brexit may stem from an identity crisis within the UK.

Catherine de Vries discusses how to move the European project forward ahead of the EP elections. Catherine de Vries is Professor of Political Behaviour in Europe at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and a Hertie School Board member.

With Brexit literally hours away, we convene Leaver-turned-Article-50-Revoker ROLAND SMITH and law and policy expert DAVID ALLEN GREEN to stare into the abyss. How did we get here? What could happen next? Has May engineered a Hobson’s Choice between her Bad Deal and No Deal? And what happens if nothing happens? PLUS May blames Parliament for her own failings. Why John Bercow’s Eskine Mayhem isn’t a constitutional crisis at all. David discusses the Meaningful Vote in terms of Thanos’s Infinity Stones. The fooling of Arron Banks. Chained to a radiator with Seumas Milne. And whatever happened to old-fashioned, sane “euroscepticism”? This week’s episode was recorded before Donald Tusk’s bombshell intervention this afternoon.“Was our group naive? I have to say yes. Euroscepticism has been taken over.”This week’s REMAINIACS is presented by Ros Taylor with Ian Dunt. Produced by Andrew Harrison. Audio production is by Alex Rees. Remainiacs is a Podmasters production.Get every new episode of Remainiacs a whole day early when you back us on the Patreon crowdfunding platform. You’ll also get our monthly Ask Remainiacs special episode plus smart merchandise, an exclusive weekly column by our panel, and discounts on #RemainiacsLive tickets too. #OwnTheRemoanREMAINIACS.comGet your free download of our theme tune ‘Demon Is A Monster’ by Cornershop. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

My guest this week is Gisela Stuart. Gisela was elected as the Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston in the 1997 landside that brought New Labour to power. Her seat had returned a Conservative MP for the previous 99 years but she won as the Labour candidate in five successive elections before stepping down in 2017.Gisela became a household name late on in her political career, when, during the 2016 referendum, she chaired the Leave campaign, taking part in the televised Wembley debate watched by millions and touring the country with Boris Johnson and Michael Gove in the now infamous Vote Leave battle bus.As a German-born ally of Europhile Tony Blair, she was, on paper at least, an unlikely person to head up the campaign to take Britain out of the EU. But meeting Gisela, it soon becomes clear you are dealing with an original thinker reluctant to follow anyone’s lead on a question as important as Europe.I spoke to Gisela about the reason for Euroscepticism, the state of the Brexit debate, whether she supports the Prime Minister’s deal, the legacy of the referendum and the health of her party – including whether or not she would continue to take the Labour whip were she still an MP. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Journalist and author Ian Kearns warns of the dangers faced by a European Union on the brink of collapse – and issues a call to action to defend peace and progress in Europe. The momentous Brexit vote has thrown the future of the EU into doubt, and the rise of terrorism, the refugee crisis, growing Euroscepticism, and threats from both East and West have cast a shadow over Europe. Warnings over these issues have often been labelled as scaremongering; however, what if the real threat to Europe comes not from those warning of the danger that lies ahead, but from those who insist the danger has passed? This event was recorded live at The RSA on Thursday 20th September 2018. Discover more about this event here: https://www.thersa.org/events/2018/09/can-the-eu-survive-in-the-age-of-trump

From the corridors of Brussels to the streets of New Delhi, populist politics have swept through democracies around the globe. But despite all the headlines, is this wave of populism particularly new? And should we see it as a symptom of democracy in decay, or rather as a welcome sign that politics is returning to the people? On this week’s podcast, hosts Nicky Lovegrove and Sara Bice hear from Duncan McDonnell, Jill Sheppard and Paul Kenny about populism in Europe, Asia and Australia – with due mention to one particularly powerful populist leader sitting in the White House. Professor Duncan McDonnell is Professor of Politics in the School of Government and International Relations at Griffith University. His main research interests are political parties, populism and Euroscepticism. Dr Jill Sheppard is a political scientist at the School of Politics and International Relations at the Australian National University. Her research focuses on why people participate in politics, what opinions they hold and why, and how both are shaped by political institutions and systems. Dr Paul Kenny is a Fellow and Head of the Department of Political and Social Change at the Australian National University. His research covers several areas of comparative politics including the political economy of populism, corruption, and immigration. Show notes | The following were referred to in this episode: Populism and Patronage: Why Populists Win Elections in India, Asia, and Beyond by Paul Kenny Swedish model beckons for Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael: Duncan McDonnell opinion piece in the Irish Times Fanning the Flames of Hate: Social Media and Hate Crime: Karsten Müller and Carlo Schwarz. University of Warwick Working Paper series. For future’s sake…! by Ian Chubb Lies, damn lies, and the Global Financial Crisis by Quentin Grafton Cooler heads, calmer waters by Michele Miller The Executive Master of Public Policy offered by Crawford School and convened by Sara Bice. Policy Forum Pod is available on iTunes, Stitcher, and wherever you get your podcasts. We’d love to hear your feedback for this podcast series! Send in your questions, comments, or suggestions for future episodes to podcast@policyforum.net. You can also Tweet us @APPSPolicyForum or find us on Facebook. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Interview with Dr Simon Usherwood (University of Surrey, UACES Treasurer, Deputy Director of The UK in a Changing Europe) about European politics, researching euroscepticism and Brexit and top tips for postgraduate researchers. #UACES #ExpertonEurope Learn more about Simon Usherwood's work: http://www.simonusherwood.com/ Browse more UACES members and experts on Europe: www.uaces.org/expertoneurope/ Become a UACES member (student, group, early-career or individual): bit.ly/joinuaces Note: UACES does not take responsibility for opinions expressed in this recording. All opinions are those of the contributors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Music credit: David Szesztay 'Coffee Shop' (bit.ly/2Mkp0yh)

Margot Parker, deputy chairwoman of UKIP and MEP of East Midlands joins Dr Simon Usherwood, deputy director of The UK in a Changing Europe to discuss whether UKIP support is falling, it's Brexit policy, and the wave of Euroscepticism in the UK.

Hours before President Trump attends a NATO Summit in Brussels, we examine the role of the alliance and how it fits into Europe’s recent struggles. Brexit, terrorism, a new anti-establishment government in Italy, and rising nationalism fueled in part by a flood of immigrants from the Syrian war are testing the grand European experiment. How should the continent move forward? And how will the region handle Trump’s anti-European and anti-NATO rhetoric? The Aspen Institute’s Elliot Gerson leads a conversation with Kati Marton, journalist and human rights advocate; Douglas Lute, former US ambassador to NATO; and Mircea Dan Geoana, former president of the Romanian Senate and founder of Aspen Romania. Show Notes Follow us on Twitter and Facebook. Email your comments to aspenideastogo@gmail.com. The views and opinions of the speakers in the podcast do not necessarily reflect those of the Aspen Institute.

New political movements, Migration and Failing mainstream parties - all of this has come together over a long period of time and are now the foremost challenges in Europe. Euroscepticism is at an all time high and puts Europe at a crossroad. There is off course Brexit and what is to come. Actors on both sides are sitting on their hands. Waiting for the end result. Listen to Radio Utblick as we try to sum up what has been going on around Europe and also, what to expect this fall in the Swedish election. PARTICIPANTS: Jonathan Polk - Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science and the Centre for European Research at the University of Gothenburg Catherine De Vries  - Professor of Politics in the Department of Government at the University of Essex Adam Cwejman - Opinion maker at the daily newspaper Göteborgsposten in Gotenburg Laila Vianden -  Opinion maker at the daily newspaper ETC in Gotenburg   HOST: Gustav Nyqvist - Society of International Affairs, Gothenburg Sweden Spoken language: English 

Theresa May needs to be quit as Prime Minister to because the Brexit talks "resemble a Greek tragedy and it only ends when everyone is dead", a leading Tory party donor says today. Jeremy Hosking, a City financier who has donated £375,000 to the party since 2015, says the Government’s strategy to exit the European Union had to change. Mr Hosking is the first major donor to speak about against Mrs May and her Brexit talks. He tells today’s Chopper’s Brexit Podcast that it is time to take decisive action to ensure that Britain gets the best possible deal to leave the EU in March next year. He says: “We are three-nil down and it is half time. We are in the dressing room having half time oranges and the plan is to wait until we are six-nil down and hope for a miracle in injury time? It just resembles a Greek tragedy and it only ends when everyone is dead.” Mrs May had to be replaced “as soon as possible. There needs to be an audit on the strategy – the strategy is not working. “I feel like a bit like the story of the emperor’s new clothes – someone has got to say it – it ain’t working. Mr Hosking claims that the difficulties over the talks were part of a "deliberate" attempt to keep the UK in the EU, saying: "I personally have joined up my dots and concluded that it is deliberate... It doesn't really matter if it is deliberate or not if it is a failing strategy." Mr Hosking says other donors shared his concerns. "The collapse in morale in the last four weeks is absolutely staggering.  "We see absolutely no way out of the box on the current strategy, the same team is being sent out after half time with the same inability to play football, and they are scoring goals at will... Our troops are on the beach and they are surrounded." He adds: “There very definitely needs to be a change and a reset. You would need to have a new person to implement a strategy that is completely different to the old strategy. “A lot of the parliamentary Conservative party think everyone is going very well – and I am talking about some of the Brexiteers.  “It is a bit like the man who jumps out of the 50th Storey window – as they fly by the 20th Storey it is all going great but it is not going to have a happy ending.  “The way it is going at the moment we are going to wake up in February 2019 and realise it is not going very well and we have only got injury time to score five goals. He says that "somehow being a Brexiteer is politically incorrect. Those who oppose Brexit are playing on that like mad. There is a Pavlovian reflex from people to believe it, that we are xenophobes, racists and wife-beaters". Eurosceptics were considered to be “nutters and lunatics”, he complains. The party’s leadership felt that “the people who voted to leave didn’t really mean it and he idea of the Tories betraying Euroscepticism – and they are repeat offenders in this regard – that is still OK”. Separately, David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, says people in Scotland were getting bored of the SNP’s repeated calls to make Scotland independent. He tells the podcast: “The public’s appetite for discussing these issues is waning. People are fed up across the political spectrum of constantly hearing about independence and constitution.                 “Even people who voted yes in 2014 – a lot of those people don’t want another independence referendum because it was a very divisive event.   “And although we politicians went out afterwards and said ‘isn’t it great, 80 per cent of people voted, virtually everybody who was alive in Scotland voted in that referendum.   “And although we say it is great public engagement, most people hated it when you speak to them, they hated the fact that they fell out with friends and family, with people in pubs like the Red Lion.   “People were divided, at their work they were divided. It was very intense in the final weeks. In the street you could not go out and avoid it.   “People don’t want to return to that. They feel it was a once in a generation event. There was a divisive result in favour of staying in the United Kingdom and we should leave it be.”   Mr Mundell, the second longest serving Cabinet minister who voted to Remain in the EU at the 2016 referendum, says he would vote to remain again if there were a referendum today.   He says: “I voted Remain and I would probably still vote Remain but I accepted the result.”   Asked how he deals with abuse from nationalists on Twitter, he says: “I just don’t look at it. I know what I am taking on.   “I asked to do this – nobody is making me. It is a harsh political environment in Scotland, indeed across most of the UK, you just have to get on with it.”   Other guests are Ayesha Hazarika and Tom Hamilton, former aides to ex-Labour leader Ed Miliband, who have written “Punch & Judy”, an account of preparing for the weekly Prime Minister’s Questions in the House of Commons.   Chopper’s Brexit Podcast is available on the Telegraph’s website and iTunes from 6am on Friday May 25

Can money buy love for the #EU? Russell Foster (King's College London) argues that Euroscepticism can be countered by reforming the EU's symbols: specifically, currency iconography. This talk was originally given at a UACES Arena seminar in Brussels on 5th December 2016. Read a text version on the UACES blog: http://bit.ly/2Joflp5 #UACES #IdeasonEurope Russell Foster is Leverhulme Fellow at the Department of European and International Studies, King’s College London. Note: UACES cannot be held responsible for opinions expressed in this recording. All opinions are those of the contributors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Music credit: David Szesztay 'Coffee Shop' (bit.ly/2Mkp0yh)

A hung parliament in Italy and the prospect of a government led by one of two populist parties has caused a considerable amount of nervousness in Brussels. The maverick, eurosceptic Five Star Movement, which before the election rejected any prospect of a coalition government, has softened that stance since emerging the victor with 32 per cent of the vote. Government formation is likely to take several months and the anti-immigrant Lega party has also emerged as a major force, led by Matteo Salvini who has in the past spoken of selective ethnic cleansing in parts of Italy. On today's podcast, Europe Editor Patrick Smyth reports from Brussels on why the Italian election is bad news for Europe and will further strengthen Euroscepticism in the EU. Also, Eastern European correspondent Dan McLaughlin has the latest on the murders of journalist Jan Kuciak and his girlfriend Martina Kusnirova, which has sent Slovakia into a political crisis. With further anti-government protests are expect, populist prime minister Robert Fico and president Andrej Kiska are at loggerheads, amid calls for a snap election.

Anand Menon, Director at The UK in a Changing Europe, and Yascha Mounk, Executive Director at Renewing the Centre, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change discuss different strands of Euroscepticism, how to create an EU voice, and why they think Emmanuel Macron might not be it.

Catherine de Vries vertelt over haar boek "Euroscepticism and the Future of European Integration". We spreken over culturele en economische verklaringen voor houdingen over Europese integratie en over de vele verschillende vormen van euroscepsis. En natuurlijk over Brexit.

The French presidential elections have captured attention around the world as the populist firebrand Marine Le Pen faces off with political newcomer Emmanuel Macron. As the final round of voting approaches, Tom Carver is joined by Erik Brattberg, director of Carnegie's DC-based Europe Program, and Pierre Vimont, a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels to discuss the rising frustration with “politics as usual” in France that has led to such a riveting contest. In this episode, recorded shortly after France's first round of voting, Brattberg, Vimont, and Carver discuss the echoes of the 2016 U.S. election, the future of Euroscepticism, and analyze future of France under each prospective president.​ Erik Brattberg is director of the Europe Program and a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. He joined Carnegie from the McCain Institute for International Leadership at Arizona State University, where he was the director for special projects and a senior fellow. Brattberg was previously the 2014 Ron Asmus Policy Entrepreneur Fellow at the German Marshall Fund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, and visiting Fulbright fellow at Center for Transatlantic Relations at Johns Hopkins SAIS. (More on Brattberg - http://carnegieendowment.org/experts/1342) Pierre Vimont is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe. In June 2015, Vimont was appointed personal envoy of the president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, to lead preparations for the Valletta Conference between EU and African countries, to tackle the causes of illegal migration and combat human smuggling and trafficking. During his thirty-eight-year diplomatic career with the French foreign service, he served as ambassador to the United States from 2007 to 2010, ambassador to the European Union from 1999 to 2002, and chief of staff to three former French foreign ministers. He holds the title, Ambassador of France, a dignity bestowed for life to only a few French career diplomats.​ (More on Vimont - http://carnegieeurope.eu/experts/1041)

UKIP agriculture spokesperson Stuart Agnew discusses the relevance of UKIP in post Brexit agricultural policy in the UK and the increase in Euroscepticism in other EU member states.

UKIP agriculture spokesperson Stuart Agnew discusses the relevance of UKIP in post Brexit agricultural policy in the UK and the increase in Euroscepticism in other EU member states.

World Policy Institute — Much of the Western world is experiencing a right-wing resurgence, from Donald Trump's popularity in the U.S. to Brexit in the U.K. and angry Euroscepticism across the continent. On today's episode of World Policy On Air, Michael Genovese of Loyola Marymount University explores social divisions and the roots of these phenomena.

Could Europe's great postwar project fall apart? Peter Spiegel and Richard Milne say populist parties on the continent are watching as Euroscepticism becomes mainstream in British political dialogue. Contagion is seen as a risk if the country votes to leave the EU See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

After the Conservative Party’s victory in the general election, it now looks likely that David Cameron will follow through on his promise to hold an in/out referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union by the end of 2017. Although Cameron himself would prefer the UK to remain a member, there is now a serious possibility of ‘Brexit’, particularly given the rise of UKIP and a general disillusionment with the EU among many voters across the political spectrum. Euroscepticism has re-emerged on the left, too, with the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and Owen Jones calling for the UK to leave the EU. Business leaders have frequently warned of economic catastrophe if the UK leaves the EU. One much-quoted estimate is that between three and four million jobs depend on trade with the EU, though the claim that these jobs would all be in jeopardy if the UK left is controversial. The UK would likely continue to have free trade with the remaining members of the EU. But the economic issues run much wider than trade. Brexit could have significant implications for inward investment, the role of the City of London as a global financial centre, UK influence on the rules and regulations of a block that would remain a major trading partner, as well as agricultural support, free movement of workers, and so on. But perhaps it would be wrong to see the question of EU membership in narrowly economic terms. There is much concern that the EU now determines large areas of UK law, while lacking the accountability to voters that national parliaments have. The travails of the Eurozone have dampened enthusiasm in many quarters for the long-term project of ‘ever-closer union’. Some see the possibility of Brexit not as a rejection of Europe but as an opportunity to rethink our relationship with other EU member states. Is the EU reformable, or are its current ways of working too entrenched? Would an independent UK be able to survive and thrive outside the EU? Is Europe as we know it already doomed, or has it proven itself capable of weathering the crisis?Recorded at the Battle of Ideas 2015 Speakers Kishwer Falkner Baroness Falkner of Margravine; chair, House of Lords EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee; member, EU Select Committee Thomas Kielinger UK correspondent, Die Welt Matthew Kirk group external affairs director, Vodafone Philippe Legrain visiting senior fellow, LSE’s European Institute; author, Immigrants: your country needs them and European Spring: Why Our Economies and Politics are in a Mess – and How to Put Them Right Phil Mullan economist; director, Epping Consulting business advice; author, The Imaginary Time Bomb Chair Peter Lloyd consultant, financial markets research; campaigner, Manifesto Club; writer, Free Society

Podcasts from A Diet of Brussels, talking about the issues around the UK's forthcoming referendum on membership of the EU. Website: www.adietofbrussels.com

Oset Babur '15 pinpoints the influences of eurosceptic parties in the European Union, by focusing on the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and the Danish People’s Party (DPP). Euroscepticism will be broken down into ’hard’ and ’soft’ branches, based on the kinds of impacts suggested by each parties; a ’soft’ influence over the concern of state sovereignty might be a party’s decision to support discourse that is skeptical of a united Europe, while a ’hard’ influence may be proposing legislative motions to leave the EU on grounds of a lack of accountability between EU institutions and member governments. The talk will conclude by looking forward at the future of Eurosceptic parties, and hypothesizing about their continued impact on EU enlargement and integration, as well as the impacts they will have on their local political systems.

How those within the Brussels Beltway in the EU institutions must pine for the simple days of the past. Not only was the European project in itself far less contested, but the nature of the journalism surrounding the EU was also far more accommodating. One of the main lessons of John Lloyd and Cristina Marconi‘s fascinating book Reporting the EU: News, Media and the European Institutions (I. B. Tauris, 2014) is how much it has mirrored the evolution of the European project itself. In the first couple of decades the journalists were as likely to be true believers as the Eurocrats in the corridors of power, even if their reports tended to reflect the concerns and interests of the individual countries that they served. That started to change as the EU (under various names) grew and changed. In the 1980s the British press developed a real streak of Euroscepticism, and journalists in general began to ask more questions than the Eurocrats were used to. Big developments such as the Maastricht Treaty and the expansion into the poorer corners of the former Soviet Empire begged bigger questions. And then there was the euro crisis, and the current wave of popular Euroscepticism that has found a home in almost every corner of the continent. All the while Eurocrats and EU boosters charged that Euroscepticism was something contrived through the practicing of hostile journalism by spiteful editors in thrall to shadowy media tycoons. If only the people of Europe had a fair picture of what they did, they’d say: then they’d fall in behind the European project once again. At least the euro crisis has led to the EU finding its way to the front pages of newspapers, along with a widespread realisation that what goes on within that Brussels Beltway (and in places like Berlin) matters to all its citizens far more than they’d realised. The authors of the book hope that recognition will continue to give the EU, for all its complexity, a legitimate place in Europe’s popular media, worthy of this peculiar set of institutions that has grown to have such an impact in so many parts of daily life. I hope you enjoy the interview! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How those within the Brussels Beltway in the EU institutions must pine for the simple days of the past. Not only was the European project in itself far less contested, but the nature of the journalism surrounding the EU was also far more accommodating. One of the main lessons of John Lloyd and Cristina Marconi‘s fascinating book Reporting the EU: News, Media and the European Institutions (I. B. Tauris, 2014) is how much it has mirrored the evolution of the European project itself. In the first couple of decades the journalists were as likely to be true believers as the Eurocrats in the corridors of power, even if their reports tended to reflect the concerns and interests of the individual countries that they served. That started to change as the EU (under various names) grew and changed. In the 1980s the British press developed a real streak of Euroscepticism, and journalists in general began to ask more questions than the Eurocrats were used to. Big developments such as the Maastricht Treaty and the expansion into the poorer corners of the former Soviet Empire begged bigger questions. And then there was the euro crisis, and the current wave of popular Euroscepticism that has found a home in almost every corner of the continent. All the while Eurocrats and EU boosters charged that Euroscepticism was something contrived through the practicing of hostile journalism by spiteful editors in thrall to shadowy media tycoons. If only the people of Europe had a fair picture of what they did, they'd say: then they'd fall in behind the European project once again. At least the euro crisis has led to the EU finding its way to the front pages of newspapers, along with a widespread realisation that what goes on within that Brussels Beltway (and in places like Berlin) matters to all its citizens far more than they'd realised. The authors of the book hope that recognition will continue to give the EU, for all its complexity, a legitimate place in Europe's popular media, worthy of this peculiar set of institutions that has grown to have such an impact in so many parts of daily life. I hope you enjoy the interview! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How those within the Brussels Beltway in the EU institutions must pine for the simple days of the past. Not only was the European project in itself far less contested, but the nature of the journalism surrounding the EU was also far more accommodating. One of the main lessons of John Lloyd and Cristina Marconi‘s fascinating book Reporting the EU: News, Media and the European Institutions (I. B. Tauris, 2014) is how much it has mirrored the evolution of the European project itself. In the first couple of decades the journalists were as likely to be true believers as the Eurocrats in the corridors of power, even if their reports tended to reflect the concerns and interests of the individual countries that they served. That started to change as the EU (under various names) grew and changed. In the 1980s the British press developed a real streak of Euroscepticism, and journalists in general began to ask more questions than the Eurocrats were used to. Big developments such as the Maastricht Treaty and the expansion into the poorer corners of the former Soviet Empire begged bigger questions. And then there was the euro crisis, and the current wave of popular Euroscepticism that has found a home in almost every corner of the continent. All the while Eurocrats and EU boosters charged that Euroscepticism was something contrived through the practicing of hostile journalism by spiteful editors in thrall to shadowy media tycoons. If only the people of Europe had a fair picture of what they did, they’d say: then they’d fall in behind the European project once again. At least the euro crisis has led to the EU finding its way to the front pages of newspapers, along with a widespread realisation that what goes on within that Brussels Beltway (and in places like Berlin) matters to all its citizens far more than they’d realised. The authors of the book hope that recognition will continue to give the EU, for all its complexity, a legitimate place in Europe’s popular media, worthy of this peculiar set of institutions that has grown to have such an impact in so many parts of daily life. I hope you enjoy the interview! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How those within the Brussels Beltway in the EU institutions must pine for the simple days of the past. Not only was the European project in itself far less contested, but the nature of the journalism surrounding the EU was also far more accommodating. One of the main lessons of John Lloyd and Cristina Marconi‘s fascinating book Reporting the EU: News, Media and the European Institutions (I. B. Tauris, 2014) is how much it has mirrored the evolution of the European project itself. In the first couple of decades the journalists were as likely to be true believers as the Eurocrats in the corridors of power, even if their reports tended to reflect the concerns and interests of the individual countries that they served. That started to change as the EU (under various names) grew and changed. In the 1980s the British press developed a real streak of Euroscepticism, and journalists in general began to ask more questions than the Eurocrats were used to. Big developments such as the Maastricht Treaty and the expansion into the poorer corners of the former Soviet Empire begged bigger questions. And then there was the euro crisis, and the current wave of popular Euroscepticism that has found a home in almost every corner of the continent. All the while Eurocrats and EU boosters charged that Euroscepticism was something contrived through the practicing of hostile journalism by spiteful editors in thrall to shadowy media tycoons. If only the people of Europe had a fair picture of what they did, they’d say: then they’d fall in behind the European project once again. At least the euro crisis has led to the EU finding its way to the front pages of newspapers, along with a widespread realisation that what goes on within that Brussels Beltway (and in places like Berlin) matters to all its citizens far more than they’d realised. The authors of the book hope that recognition will continue to give the EU, for all its complexity, a legitimate place in Europe’s popular media, worthy of this peculiar set of institutions that has grown to have such an impact in so many parts of daily life. I hope you enjoy the interview! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This lecture analyses the growth of euroscepticism, first in the Labour Party after 1979, and then in the Conservative Party: http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/the-growth-of-euroscepticismThis lecture analyses the growth of euroscepticism, first in the Labour Party after 1979, and then in the Conservative Party culminating in Margaret Thatcher's Bruges speech (1988) and opposition to the Maastricht Treaty of 1992. The relationship remains controversial, leading to the pressures which have led to David Cameron's commitment to further renegotiation and referendum.The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College Website: http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/the-growth-of-euroscepticismGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 1,500 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.ukTwitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollegeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollege

Euroscepticism has a long tradition in Britain, particularly among conservatives. But the Fresh Start parliamentary group is bucking that trend. Fresh Start sees itself as a counterweight to the eurosceptic wing of the Tory party. The parliamentary group has about 100 members, among them Julian Smith from North Yorkshire. While Smith believes Europe needs reform, he staunchly defends Britain remaining in the EU. Smith has been facing criticism in his district, where the UK Independence Party has been gaining ground. But he enjoys support from industry and business.

Despatches: Syrians, exhausted by a seemingly unending conflict, face agonising decisions over their future, as Lyse Doucet has been finding out. Misha Glenny's in Rio as violent protests continue less than two months before the Brazilian city hosts the World Cup. The far-right Front Nationale could emerge from next month's European elections as the best-supported party in France -- Emma Jane Kirby encounters Euroscepticism, verging on Europhobia, in the south of the country. Matthew Teller's in Qatar: its economy's growing at nearly twenty per cent a year but its people are finding it hard to cope with a rapid pace of change. And Simon Worrall in the United States hears a love song as he witnesses the annual migration of Hispanic workers to Long Island.

Dr Ben Wellings (Convenor of European Studies at the ANU) talks to Dr Stefan Auer (European Studies, La Trobe University) on Britain and the EU; English nationalism and Euroscepticism; and the Cameron government's EU policies. Copyright 2012 Stefan Auer / La Trobe University, all rights reserved. Contact for permissions.

Few people are in a better position to assess different countries and cultures than those caught between them. So it is with Philip Oltermann: a German journalist who came to England while a teenager, and who has lived here and worked here ever since (even managing to marry an English girl). As you would expect from such a background, Philip’s Keeping Up With the Germans: A History of Anglo-German Encounters (Faber and Faber, 2012) is full of closely observed insights about the linkages (and differences) between these two great European rivals. He takes us through familiar territory and introduces us to new ways of seeing, for instance, the way the two square up on the football pitch (with an examination of two of the great players for each country, Bertie Vogts and Kevin Keegan). He brings fresh material to old subjects, such as the apparent gulf between the two when it comes to comedy (the Germans indeed do, he argues, have a sense of humour – but he glories in how the English build humour into so many aspects of their life). And he also brings us (or me at least) into fresh territory – for instance in their approaches to philosophy. There’s a lot to recommend this book, but, above all, it is also extremely timely. The Europe of today is crisis ridden and divided, and the global financial crisis has – through its exposition of the rickety structure upon which the euro is built – called into question the whole nature of European integration. Germany, for so long the willing, uncomplaining engine of integration, has been thrust into an unaccustomed leading role in Europe, while the crisis has also forced Britain into a position where its Euroscepticism may be forced to declare itself beyond sniping from the sidelines. These are interesting times in Europe. The balance of Anglo-German relations will be one of the main determinants of how the continent reinvents itself once the immediate crisis (eventually) begins to subide. This book is a useful, well written and insightful contribution to this relationship. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Few people are in a better position to assess different countries and cultures than those caught between them. So it is with Philip Oltermann: a German journalist who came to England while a teenager, and who has lived here and worked here ever since (even managing to marry an English girl). As you would expect from such a background, Philip’s Keeping Up With the Germans: A History of Anglo-German Encounters (Faber and Faber, 2012) is full of closely observed insights about the linkages (and differences) between these two great European rivals. He takes us through familiar territory and introduces us to new ways of seeing, for instance, the way the two square up on the football pitch (with an examination of two of the great players for each country, Bertie Vogts and Kevin Keegan). He brings fresh material to old subjects, such as the apparent gulf between the two when it comes to comedy (the Germans indeed do, he argues, have a sense of humour – but he glories in how the English build humour into so many aspects of their life). And he also brings us (or me at least) into fresh territory – for instance in their approaches to philosophy. There’s a lot to recommend this book, but, above all, it is also extremely timely. The Europe of today is crisis ridden and divided, and the global financial crisis has – through its exposition of the rickety structure upon which the euro is built – called into question the whole nature of European integration. Germany, for so long the willing, uncomplaining engine of integration, has been thrust into an unaccustomed leading role in Europe, while the crisis has also forced Britain into a position where its Euroscepticism may be forced to declare itself beyond sniping from the sidelines. These are interesting times in Europe. The balance of Anglo-German relations will be one of the main determinants of how the continent reinvents itself once the immediate crisis (eventually) begins to subide. This book is a useful, well written and insightful contribution to this relationship. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Few people are in a better position to assess different countries and cultures than those caught between them. So it is with Philip Oltermann: a German journalist who came to England while a teenager, and who has lived here and worked here ever since (even managing to marry an English girl). As you would expect from such a background, Philip's Keeping Up With the Germans: A History of Anglo-German Encounters (Faber and Faber, 2012) is full of closely observed insights about the linkages (and differences) between these two great European rivals. He takes us through familiar territory and introduces us to new ways of seeing, for instance, the way the two square up on the football pitch (with an examination of two of the great players for each country, Bertie Vogts and Kevin Keegan). He brings fresh material to old subjects, such as the apparent gulf between the two when it comes to comedy (the Germans indeed do, he argues, have a sense of humour – but he glories in how the English build humour into so many aspects of their life). And he also brings us (or me at least) into fresh territory – for instance in their approaches to philosophy. There's a lot to recommend this book, but, above all, it is also extremely timely. The Europe of today is crisis ridden and divided, and the global financial crisis has – through its exposition of the rickety structure upon which the euro is built – called into question the whole nature of European integration. Germany, for so long the willing, uncomplaining engine of integration, has been thrust into an unaccustomed leading role in Europe, while the crisis has also forced Britain into a position where its Euroscepticism may be forced to declare itself beyond sniping from the sidelines. These are interesting times in Europe. The balance of Anglo-German relations will be one of the main determinants of how the continent reinvents itself once the immediate crisis (eventually) begins to subide. This book is a useful, well written and insightful contribution to this relationship. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Few people are in a better position to assess different countries and cultures than those caught between them. So it is with Philip Oltermann: a German journalist who came to England while a teenager, and who has lived here and worked here ever since (even managing to marry an English girl). As you would expect from such a background, Philip’s Keeping Up With the Germans: A History of Anglo-German Encounters (Faber and Faber, 2012) is full of closely observed insights about the linkages (and differences) between these two great European rivals. He takes us through familiar territory and introduces us to new ways of seeing, for instance, the way the two square up on the football pitch (with an examination of two of the great players for each country, Bertie Vogts and Kevin Keegan). He brings fresh material to old subjects, such as the apparent gulf between the two when it comes to comedy (the Germans indeed do, he argues, have a sense of humour – but he glories in how the English build humour into so many aspects of their life). And he also brings us (or me at least) into fresh territory – for instance in their approaches to philosophy. There’s a lot to recommend this book, but, above all, it is also extremely timely. The Europe of today is crisis ridden and divided, and the global financial crisis has – through its exposition of the rickety structure upon which the euro is built – called into question the whole nature of European integration. Germany, for so long the willing, uncomplaining engine of integration, has been thrust into an unaccustomed leading role in Europe, while the crisis has also forced Britain into a position where its Euroscepticism may be forced to declare itself beyond sniping from the sidelines. These are interesting times in Europe. The balance of Anglo-German relations will be one of the main determinants of how the continent reinvents itself once the immediate crisis (eventually) begins to subide. This book is a useful, well written and insightful contribution to this relationship. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As opinion polls reveal that half the British population would vote in favour of withdrawal from the European Union, it seems the political class is catching up with public opinion when it comes to the EU. While perhaps just dozens of MPs are publicly calling for a referendum on the UK's EU membership, behind closed doors there are many more closet secessionists: at least 40 per cent of Conservative MPs according to one party insider. "In public I call for renegotiation of the Lisbon treaty. In private I argue for complete withdrawal from the European Union. And there are plenty of others like me," says one anonymous sceptic. Edward Stourton asks whether the crisis in the eurozone has emboldened more politicians to speak frankly on their attitudes towards EU membership and talks to supporters of withdrawal from both the left and right wings of British politics. Producer: Hannah Barnes.