For many observers, the United States has long stood as the nation of democracy, free speech, and free markets. This unique combination turned the country into a hyperpower — one of the richest nations in the world, with the most powerful military and the most dazzling soft power. No other country exerts such global influence in technology, diplomacy, and culture. Liberty, openness, scientific spirit, and a strong belief in the future have all driven America’s success.
By contrast, the European Union is often portrayed as a sluggish bureaucracy, plagued by mediocre economic performance — particularly since the Covid pandemic. Productivity remains low, and not a single major AI company has emerged from European soil. The reasons are well known: lack of venture capital, high taxation, and excessive regulation. The EU endured Brexit in 2020 and failed to defend Ukraine after the annexation of Crimea in 2014. In my view, the roots of this underperformance are clear: the EU became more concerned with redistribution than with growth, more focused on regulating than on innovating, more interested in comfort than in discovery and protection of liberty (including military protection when needed).
That being said, we should avoid caricature. Europe remains home to valuable innovation — in deep tech, robotics, cleantech — but it often lacks the scale and capital needed to compete globally. This is not a desert, but a fragmented and too small ecosystem. Europe has some remarkable AI startups, for instance. But they struggle to scale up — mainly because a true single market for digital services still doesn’t exist on the continent.
At first glance, this diagnosis may sound pessimistic. But it’s not — because something has been changing since the arrival of Trump in the Oval Office. It is no longer unthinkable that Europe may now be more classically liberal than the United States. Surprising? How can an overregulated, overtaxed continent claim to be the new home of liberalism? Let me explain.
I’m referring to classical liberalism, which rests on three foundational pillars: philosophical, legal, and economic. Philosophically, classical liberalism holds that human beings possess free will and rationality, and are responsible for their actions. What defines us as humans is our capacity for choice — grounded in reason.
Legally, it demands equality before the law. There can be no liberal society without the rule of law and an independent, impartial judiciary. Economically, it views liberty as the primary driver of prosperity and social harmony. Free trade is one of its core components — which is why liberals have always stood against protectionism and economic nationalism. So, when I speak of liberalism, I do not mean neoliberalism — often confused with deregulation at any cost — nor libertarianism, which rejects the state altogether. I speak of classical liberalism, anchored in reason, law, and freedom. A tradition that spans from Montesquieu to Berlin, and that deserves to be revived and defended.
With that in mind, it becomes clear that Donald Trump’s political agenda has nothing to do with liberalism. His brand of distorted capitalism has more in common with authoritarian populism than with any liberal tradition. He is a fervent nationalist and protectionist who fundamentally rejects free trade. He has openly challenged the independence of the judiciary, as seen in his attempts to override Supreme Court decisions. His disdain for science and his assault on research institutions reveal a rejection of rationality and innovation. To be fair, the American institutional system has shown great resilience in recent years. Courts, media, and civil society continue to uphold the Constitution. But the liberal spirit — the philosophical ethos — is clearly under pressure.
By contrast, Europe still upholds key liberal principles. Yes, economic freedom is hampered by excessive regulation and a burdensome tax system — especially in my country, France. And yes, some European governments (like Viktor Orbán’s in Hungary or Giorgia Meloni’s in Italy) embrace nationalist rhetoric. But most major EU governments — in France, Germany, Poland, and elsewhere — remain pro-science, pro–rule of law, and pro–free trade. Two telling examples: the European Union has stayed united in its opposition to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. The so-called “coalition of the willing,” led by Paris and London, try to compensate for the U.S.’s waning military support for Kyiv. Moreover, I hope — and believe — that the EU will remain united in order to avoid a protectionist escalation.
I have no doubt that, sooner or later, the United States will return to the founding principles of its Constitution — principles rooted in classical liberalism. But until then, Europe has a vital role to play: preserving the values of liberal democracy, keeping the flame alive until America once again finds its way back to its own legacy. Peace, scientific progress, and prosperity depend on it. It is therefore essential to multiply public stands in favor of liberal democracy, to oppose populist candidates in elections, and to defend our model against external attempts at destabilization — especially those coming from Russia.
— Nicolas Bouzou
I cannot help but completely disagree with every single point in your article, Monsieur Bouzou. What you describe sounds like a dream, not the reality of Europe in 2025.
## The Philosophical Pillar - Rationality and Free Will?
You claim classical liberalism's philosophical foundation rests on free will, rationality, and responsibility. Yet the reality across Europe tells a different story:
As N.S. Lyons documented years ago in "There Is No Liberal West" https://theupheaval.substack.com/p/there-is-no-liberal-west most European populations have abandoned support for the values of Locke, Bastiat, and Montesquieu. Far from respecting free will and rationality, European countries systematically undermine freedom of speech and thought:
- **Scotland's Hate Crime Act** criminalizes "aggravated prejudice" even in private homes with penalties up to seven years imprisonment
- **UK's "Non-Crime Hate Incident"** category allows police to "check people's thinking" without any crime being committed
- **France's "contempt of public officials"** law has been weaponized by Macron's government against thousands of Yellow Vest protesters, criminalizing criticism of the state rather than protecting rational discourse
- **Germany's NetzDG law** - so draconian it's been cited approvingly by China as a censorship model
- **Spain's infamous "Ley Mordaza"** (Gag Law) criminalizes photographing police, peaceful assembly outside government buildings, and "disrespect" toward authorities with deliberately vague language that can be stretched to fit almost any dissent
And this is without mentioning all the anti-semitism/hate speech laws that have been weaponized for political purposes in recent times.
These aren't fringe cases but mainstream policy across the continent most "liberal democracies". When "liberty of conscience" means citizens must fear expressing opinions in their own homes or in public, the philosophical foundation of liberalism lies in ruins.
## The Legal Pillar - Rule of Law?
Your claim that most major EU governments remain pro-rule of law rings hollow when examining their actions:
The European Commission itself has been pushing to criminalize "hate speech" and "misogyny" across member states. How is this equal protection when certain speech is criminalized based on subjective determinations of offense? How are citizens protected under these "liberal democracies" when they are incapable of addressing rising "insécurité" that many of us in France experience daily?
You've ignored the disturbing trend of EU political elites becoming increasingly illiberal while claiming to defend against "populism." How democratic is it to consider canceling elections when the "wrong" candidates might win, as happened in Romania and was suggested regarding AfD in Germany? Is it liberal to silence opposition because they have "wrong ideas"?
You have even used an Arab illiberal talking point, Russia is not destabilizing our democracies, we did it, the Russians are external actors merely exploit existing weaknesses, and seemingly now the US will too. Your claim that Russia is destabilizing our democracies mirrors the rhetoric of Arab leaders during the Arab Spring who pointed at shadowy "foreign agents" for their problems. Either they were wrong and fearful of their populations, or they were right and thus the "liberal Arab Spring" was just political destabilization of a whole region. We cannot have both.
## The Economic Pillar - Free Trade?
Your acknowledgment of European economic challenges is inadequate. The reality includes:
- Excessive regulation that hampers innovation (as you said)
- Redistribution taking priority over growth (as you admit), you either have economic freedom or equality
- Economic protectionism disguised as "standards" that conveniently benefit German and French industry while creating barriers for American or Chinese competitors (which you overlook)
The German automotive (and industrial) sector receives de facto protection through technical regulations, while the French agricultural sector benefits from subsidy regimes disguised as environmental measures. This isn't free trade - it's managed trade designed to favor European incumbents.
There is no creative destruction in Europe. The innovative Mittelstand you reference is also disappearing from Germany as prohibitive energy costs—driven by ideological (green parties of Europe) rather than market-based or scientific-based policies, create cascading economic effects. The EU's regulatory approach consistently favors established players over disruptive innovators. If the choice is innovation, and destroying the current class who is paying the lobby sums to the EU politicians, or developping a world-class economy by letting 21st century companies grow, the EU will always choose the first one.
## COVID Response, Brexit and Russia - The Ultimate Illiberal Test
Everything that happened in the last few years, revealed the true state of European liberalism:
- Dutch/French police opening fire on protesters
- Europe's mandatory vaccination policies
- UK increasingly draconian laws around freedom of thought and speech
- Increasing policing of certain opinion (regarding Israel or immigration for example) in the EU
- Blasphemy laws de facto or de jure in many countries (Denmark for example), where the police cannot ensure "freedom after speech" around Islam, see Salwam Momika.
John Locke may have insisted that "in the conservation of bodily health, every man may consider what suits his own convenience," but EU policies demonstrated the opposite philosophy.
Everything has intensified since Lyons' article was published. From German deportations of individuals for having the "wrong opinion" on the Hamas conflict to the recurring EU Chat Control act proposals, Europe fails across all three pillars of classical liberalism you identify.
The truth is that across Europe, Actually Existing Liberalism has become, as Lyons put it, "oligarch technocratic progressivism wearing liberal principles as a skin suit and flirting with authoritarianism."
While the US certainly faces its own challenges to liberal principles from Trumpism, claiming Europe as liberalism's last bastion requires overlooking the systematic erosion of free speech, equal protection, and economic liberty occurring across the continent. The sad reality is that the US has such an accumulated capital of liberalism they may not exhaust it even if Trump were to have 3 terms back-to-back.