![]() Social disorganization implies some breakdown in the social disorganization, which may be more or less according to the forces of social change operating at a particular time. ![]() Social disorganization may thus be more or less when the forces of social change create a threat to social stability and as a result of which there arise social problems. A change in the cultural context that destroys the functioning of coordination that constitutes the social order represents social disorganization. Social disorganization consists of the coordination of individual responses as a result of the operation of consensus and control. As a result, social disorder, misbehaviour, and pathologies emerge. Even so, there are times when people's minds have been programmed to violate or reject such established standards or conventions. All members of an organised community who obey the laws and standards are distinguished by sincerity, obedience, and loyalty. However, when it appears that society will be unable to sustain such laws and norms owing to a variety of causes, it produces a state of disorder and instability in the society, which has a negative influence on the social system's smooth operation. Finally, the chapter takes a forward-looking approach, examining the recent response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the possible ways forward.When all members of society adhere to the society's norms, mores, values, rules, and regulations, the society is called organised, ensuring the welfare and well-being of all members. The chapter then scrutinizes the main actions undertaken to try to halt this evolution and address the ensuing distortions, namely the failed attempts to 'repatriate' the Fiscal Compact and the European Stability Mechanism into the EU legal order and the subsequent decision to adopt an agreement amending the ESM Treaty. Drawing on such analysis, it critically examines the interrelations between disintegration and the protection of fundamental rights. The chapter begins by offering a brief overview of the disintegrative patterns that governed law in the context of the EMU after the financial and sovereign debt crisis started in 2008. This chapter looks at the process of disintegration of (and through) law from the EMU angle, focusing, in particular, on the interplay between the above-described evolution and the protection of fundamental social rights in the EU legal order. The second dimension has mainly to do with the effects that the choice to resort to instruments and procedures that depart from those provided for by the Treaties had on the very idea of integration and its legitimacy. The first dimension encompasses a wide set of cases whereby EU institutions and Member States relied on instruments having an uncertain legal nature or, at least, deprived of the procedural and substantive guarantees inherent in EU law to pursue policy objectives set by the Treaties. Overturning the classical paradigm encapsulated in the "Integration through Law" project, this evolution engenders a double process of disintegration of law and disintegration through law. This has especially occurred in high-salience and politically contested domains, such as the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and migration control, riding the wave of the multiple crises that hit the EU over the last decade or so. ![]() One of the defining features of the current the European integration process, and its constitutional architecture, is the progressive marginalization of EU law as an agent of integration.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |