刃研社 中 / EN
← Back to Writing
Jun 28, 2026 Identity // The European Condition ● Critical — identity paradox detected

The Identity That Has No Sovereignty

Why the EU Pushed Political Correctness to the Extreme

The EU pushing political correctness to its extreme is not a cultural preference and not a moral choice. It is structurally inevitable. When you have no power, no treasury, no military, and no unified diplomacy, the only remaining material you can use to define 'who we are' is values.

阅读中文版 →

ConStruct Lab — Structural diagnosis. Not structural talk. Date: 2026-06-28 Framework: DNA Matrix v5.0 + ICC Formula v4.0 + CEF Model


Part I: The Precise Formulation

The European Union’s integrative configuration is not a policy choice, not a governance preference, and certainly not a cultural tradition. It is an identity proxy.

A normal sovereign state anchors its identity in multiple material dimensions: military victory, fiscal autonomy, monetary sovereignty, territorial control, cultural narrative, historical memory. These dimensions reinforce each other — if one weakens, the others can provide alternative legitimacy.

The EU’s defining peculiarity is this: it is constructing an identity while actively surrendering the material foundations of identity.

Material Dimension of IdentityEU’s StatusWhat This Means
Military sovereigntyDoes not exist — relies on NATO/USCannot define “who we are” through power
Fiscal sovereigntyIncomplete — euro has a central bank but no treasuryCannot define “who we are” through resource allocation
Territorial sovereigntyRetained by member statesCannot define “who we are” through territory
Diplomatic sovereigntyFragmentedCannot define “who we are” through external action

The core insight: The EU pushing political correctness to its extreme is not a cultural preference and not a moral choice. It is structurally inevitable. When you have no power, no treasury, no military, and no unified diplomacy, the only remaining material you can use to define “who we are” is values.


Part II: Why the EU Is Integrative — A Choice Forced by Constraint

The EU’s integrative model (consensus mechanism) was not actively chosen by Monnet and Schuman. It is the necessary outcome of having no enforcement capacity. When you have no army, no treasury, and no federal enforcement institutions, the only thing you can do is get everyone to agree. Because if they don’t agree, you can’t make them.

The integrative model is the compromise form of having no sovereignty.

The Historical Trajectory: Material Degeneration, Symbolic Escalation

PhasePeriodMaterial FoundationIdentity CarrierStatus
Economic integration1951–1992Coal/Steel → Common Market → Single MarketEconomic benefitMaterial foundation present
Monetary integration1992–2008Euro + ECBMonetary sovereigntyHalf a material foundation
Crisis exposure2008–2022Euro debt / Migration / Pandemic / War??Material foundation accelerating loss
Values integration2022–Environmentalism / Human rights / Diversity / GenderPolitical correctnessPure symbolic carrier

As the material foundation weakens at each step, the carrier of identity is forced to migrate toward the purely symbolic domain.

Why Specifically “Political Correctness”?

Because the EU is a supra-national construction — it must transcend national identities to exist. National pride would tear the EU apart. Religion creates division. Cultural tradition is too vague. The only symbolic material that can cross all national boundaries is values.

And values, when there is no material foundation, must be radicalized to be perceptible.


Part III: The Compensatory Radicalization Mechanism

The Core Formula

I = Σ(material dimension contributions) + Σ(symbolic dimension contributions)

For the EU:

I_EU = Military(0) + Fiscal(Low) + Territory(0) + Diplomacy(Low) + Monetary(Medium) + Symbolic(???)

To maintain I_EU ≈ I_US, the symbolic dimension must overcompensate:

Symbolic_EU >> Symbolic_US

The absence of material dimensions is compensated by the radicalization of the symbolic dimension.

What Compensatory Radicalization Looks Like

DomainHow Normal States Do ItThe EU’s Radicalized VersionCompensation Logic
EnvironmentalismOne policy tool among manyIdentity core — “We are the environmentally-conscious Europeans”Using environmentalism to substitute for military glory
Human rightsOne diplomatic tool among manyIdentity core — “Human rights are our raison d’être”Using human rights to substitute for territorial sovereignty
DiversityOne social policy among manyIdentity core — “Diversity is how we define ourselves”Using diversity to substitute for national identity

The key judgment: These values themselves are not wrong. The problem is when they are upgraded from “methods” (policy) to “identity” (existential definition).

Environmentalism is a method. In a 40°C heatwave, whether to adjust building codes and AC taxation — this is a methodological question.

But when “environmentalism” is upgraded to identity — adjusting taxation = betraying identity = betraying “who we are.”

And so 15,000 people died in Paris in August 2003, and the law did not allow them to install air conditioning.

The Self-Reinforcing Loop

Material foundation loss → Symbolic overcompensation → Symbols upgraded to identity →
Identity rigidification → Inability to adjust methods → Material foundation further weakened →
Need for stronger symbolic compensation → ...

The EU’s political correctness is not a position. It is an accelerator with no brake.


Part IV: Why Compensatory Radicalization Necessarily Produces Polarization

The EU’s F (institutional correction capacity) is abnormally low — the consensus mechanism means from identification to execution takes 4–11 years. And a heatwave kills people in 3 days.

α·C_Ω (compression speed) >> β·F (correction speed)

12 hours vs. 4 years = an asymmetric gap of orders of magnitude.

The EU has already crossed the phase transition critical point.


Part V: Identity Inflation and De-subjectification

Identity Inflation

The EU is experiencing identity inflation — when identity has no material anchor, continuously escalating the symbolic dimension leads to symbolic devaluation.

PeriodThe EU’s “Identity Currency”Material AnchorPurchasing Power
1990s”European peace”Post-WWII peace genuinely existedHigh
2000s”European economy”Euro + Single MarketMedium
2010s”European values”??Declining
2020s”Environmentalism/diversity/digital rights”??Rapidly devaluing

When the EU says “we represent European values,” an elderly French person gasping in a 40°C top-floor apartment can only think: “Can your values make me cool?”

De-subjectification

Identity construction without sovereignty is essentially de-subjectification — because the constructor has no material means to satisfy citizen needs, it can only sustain its own legitimacy by defining “what citizens should need.”

20% AC tax vs. 5% heating tax — this is not “environmental policy.” This is the legal declaration: “Cooling is not a need you should have.”


Part VI: The Identity Paradox

The EU archive records three core paradoxes: the expansion paradox, the autonomy paradox, the consensus paradox. This essay reveals a fourth — the most fundamental one:

The Identity Paradox: The EU needs identity to sustain the integrative configuration → but the EU has no material foundation to construct identity → can only use symbols to compensate → symbolic overcompensation leads to de-subjectification → de-subjectification leads to trust erosion → trust erosion leads to fragmentation → fragmentation is the EU’s ultimate fear → the EU needs stronger identity to prevent fragmentation → …

The EU is using the very mechanism intended to prevent fragmentation (symbolic overcompensation) to accelerate fragmentation.


Part VII: The Ultimate Judgment

The EU’s political correctness is not a problem of having too many values. It is a problem of having too little sovereignty.

A community with military sovereignty, fiscal sovereignty, and territorial sovereignty does not need to upgrade environmental regulations into an existential definition. It can pragmatically discuss “in a 40°C heatwave, should we adjust AC taxation” — because this question does not threaten its existential foundation.

But the EU does not have this sovereignty. So every policy question becomes an existential question. Every pragmatic adjustment becomes an identity crisis.

This is the structurally inevitable consequence of attempting to construct political identity without material foundations.

The EU is the first large-scale human experiment in “using values to substitute for sovereignty.” The results of this experiment are manifesting in 40°C top-floor apartments.


ConStruct Lab — Structural diagnosis. Not structural talk.

Core proposition: Identity construction without sovereignty necessarily leads to symbolic radicalization; symbolic radicalization necessarily leads to de-subjectification; de-subjectification necessarily leads to trust dissolution.

This is not a cultural judgment. This is a structural theorem.

← Back to Writing ← Home