Young people and Europe, ” “Memory is not enough ” “

What did young European say about the two pictures of Ypres published in the press on the occasion of the recent meeting of EU leaders in the Flemish “martyr city?” In fact, one of the images depicts the beauty of the Lakehalle clothes market before the world conflicts, while the other picture portrays its ruins after the two world wars that devastated Europe for 30 years, starting in 1914. Those tragedies are miles apart from the lives of contemporary youths. And their memory, when it’s not enlightened by a reflection focused on the future, risks being dismissed as one of many pages of a history book yet to be studied that could be felt as a burden rather that as an encouragement to dare new paths of peace, justice and solidarity. If memory becomes sterile because of ideology, culture, egoism and indifference, it withdraws to leave space to the logic of conflict, which Ukraine and the Balkans are a painful reminder of. On the other hand, young people don’t need to listen to the same motivations and claims advocated sixty years ago reiterated over and over again. They need to understand, to be helped understand current events and the prospect of a European “common home” in the globalization era. They demand credible benchmarks in their quest for meaning, and resorting to memory – however indispensable – is not enough for the development of a new thought and a new project. The democratic deficit affecting the EU is of no help, but in order to prevent young people from being left alone with their complaints and protests, they should be told that the distance separating citizens and institutions can be bridged if young people reaffirm their presence and voice their claims, their needs and their innovative ideas within the political realm. Young people are well aware that the enemy number one is not Brussels but rather a widespread decrease in European self-conscience. They know the motivations of this identity crisis and they know that acting and thinking as Europeans could be rekindled through a set of core values shared at social level, against the backdrop of a moral and cultural convergence, thereby promoting commitments to build a de facto solidarity, the same solidarity which had prompted the Community’s first steps and that was expanded to embrace the rest of the world, Africa in particular. Erasmus, Socrates and other similar initiatives of the EU that add on to the Horizon 2020 program on scientific research and innovation, are to be viewed from this perspective. However, we should ask ourselves to what extent the experience of these young people has contributed to the growth of a European self-conscience. What has been the impact of personal experiences in European countries in the lives and the thoughts of families, associations, schools, and of society as a whole? Which occasions and which places have been offered to youths so that after their experience in European cities they could share the richness they received with their peers, including distracted adults? Why has the media portrayed the national meetings of Erasmus students as folkloristic events and not as occasions for sharing – and/or criticising – constructive ideas and proposals on Europe? The European Parliament elected in May will have to provide the answers to these questions, and this will be possible only through the recovery of an alliance between politics, culture and education. It is necessary to rebuild the bond linking various forms of competences and responsibilities. We owe it to the youths, in order to share with them the primary commitment to protect and promote the highest values of the human person and of the community as a whole. Teacher in humanity: in the globalization era this is the major, most urgent contribution that the world expects from Europe, a Europe in which cross-generational dialogue is marked by memory and projects, by roots and wings.