In the first two decades of
the twenty-first century, one trend in the American retail sector involved the
creation of a status that had not existed: customers as “members.” The jargon was
essentially marketing because managers in corporate headquarters realized that customers
would doubtlessly appreciate the more exclusive label of “member” because clubs
have members. Would the American political elite pick up on the trick and refer
to citizens as members of the U.S. even though such a label so applied would
not make sense? Meanwhile, to differentiate the E.U. from the U.S., Europe’s
political elite regularly referred to E.U. states as member-states even
though the same label could be applied to U.S. states. States of both unions
are represented at the federal level, and thus are indeed members, whereas to
be a customer is not to be a member of a store. When Canada’s prime minister,
Mark Carney, sought closer relations with the E.U. due to his trade-fight with the
U.S. in 2026, he discussed with European leaders the possibility of Canada
becoming an “associate member” of the E.U. even though no such status existed.
The implication is that E.U. states, unlike U.S. states, are not really states,
but rather are members. This implication exposes the underlying category mistake
that denies that states pertain to federal systems whereas countries are
members of international alliances and trade blocs.
The full essay is at "Canada as an Associate Member of the E.U."
