The Rhetoric of Inaction: Failing to Fail Forward in the EU’s Rule of Law Crisis



In the EU, political crises often serve as catalysts for ‘failing forward’. Yet as a rule of law breakdown has swept some member states, EU institutions have repeatedly failed to act. We argue that this outcome is partly tied to how political elites strategically mobilize rhetoric to legitimate stasis. We rectify existing theories' bias for change drawing on Hirschman’s work to theorize ‘rhetorics of inaction’: coordinative discourse wielded by national and supranational actors to reconcile divergent preferences and justify stasis by appealing to the very policies and values under threat. We specify conditions under which they are most likely to pervade EU policymaking illustrating the theory’s explanatory purchase in the EU’s (non-)responses to constitutional breakdowns in Hungary and Poland. We demonstrate that populist affronts conceal far more sophisticated and effective argumentative strategies behind-the-scenes, concluding that rhetorical politics are central to understanding the EU’s failure to respond to crises.

Version notes

The new version (1/31/2021) significantly reorganizes the argument, making clear our expansions upon other existing bodies of literature. We also nearly double the primary sources referenced, and summarize the evidence presented the Transparency Appendix in a new Figure and Table.



Log in or register with APSA to comment
Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting and Discussion Policy [opens in a new tab] – please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .