to the European cultural cradle revolves .
As Remo Bodei writes : ‘ Memory can be compared to a steam train , which only moves forward if shovelfuls of coal are cast into its boiler . Similarly , memory works precisely because of commemoration [...]’ ‘[...] which means that if [ the collective memory ] is not continuously fed , [ it ] is bound to burn out ’ 4 .
This comparison lends itself in particular to the European Union , the precursor of which – the ECSC – introduced the pooling and free movement of coal and steel . Following the Second World War , European identity automatically became a political issue too .
Jean Monnet ’ s functionalist and so-called ‘ small steps ’ approach certainly contributed to a – primarily economic – form of integration . But in the 1950s , were the peoples of Europe ready to move from a modernist concept of national identity to the contemporary concept of a pluralistic identity ? To conceive of their own past and ( especially ) their own recent history as one side of the same coin ? And were European governments willing to dilute their power as part of a supranational system ?
According to Bodei , changes in individual and collective identity only happen following political trauma ( a revolution , war , the fall of apparently solid regimes or natural disasters 5 ). We can certainly view the Second World War as belonging to this category .
In the Ventotene Manifesto , the authors describe the crisis of modern civilisation , which reached its peak in the 20th century , as follows :
4 . Accademia dei Lincei press conference – Tra memoria e oblio . Una partita a scacchi ’ (‘ Between memory and oblivion . A game of chess ’) – 11.02.2016
5 . Ibid
138