Below is my column in The Hill on the defeat of Viktor Orban. There was good-faith criticism of Orban as autocratic. However, the irony is that Hungary may have now cleared the way for the final stage of the European Union in overruling individual nations and their citizens on core policies.
Here is the column:
The defeat of Viktor Orban in Hungary last weekend was celebrated by many who saw the former president as establishing single-party rule in his central European nation. The irony is that this claimed victory for democracy may fuel the establishment of a global governance system that is neither democratic nor accountable to citizens.
The European Union was criticized by many for taking sides in the Hungarian election and for undermining Orban, who asserted national priorities in disputes with the EU. No sooner had Orban conceded defeat than a jubilant European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called for the final coup de grace for national identity and sovereignty: the elimination of the ability of nations to stand against EU policies.
Orban was controversial for his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his lack of support for Ukraine. He was also accused of authoritarianism and corruption. I shared in some of those criticisms. However, the unintended consequence of this election could be the removal of a single autocrat in favor of a global bureaucracy.
Van der Leyen helped elect the pro-EU Peter Magyar in order to remove a barrier to the EU’s ultimate exercise of power. The EU had been squeezing Hungary over its defiance by holding back billions in funds. Despite his tough talk on negotiations with the EU, Magyar is expected by EU bureaucrats to be a suppliant, willing to fall into line with the EU agenda.
The EU Chief has reportedly already given Magyar a list of 27 demands he must meet before she will turn the spigot back on. She did not try to hide the agenda, announcing that the EU needed to “use the momentum now” to consolidate its power.
Under the plan, member states would lose control of their policy and could be forced to adhere to the priorities and values of the EU majority.
The EU Chief celebrated the new day of global governance in the making: “Moving to qualified majority voting in foreign policy is an important way to avoid systemic blockages, as we have seen in the past.”
In “Rage and the Republic,” I discuss the dangers posed to the American republic this century by the rise of global governance systems like the EU. The book explores how globalists planned to gradually get nations to yield their authority to the EU — destroying national identity and sovereignty in favor of an EU bureaucracy in Brussels.
As the EU moves to kill off national sovereignty, EU commissioners are calling for a single European military command, completing a longstanding globalist goal.
The 250th anniversary of our republic is occurring as we face an unprecedented EU threat. Our revolution was fought against a foreign empire. It now faces an even greater threat from a global government asserting the right to compel American companies to censor Americans and comply with environmental, social and governance or ESG policies.
At the same time, American figures such as Hillary Clinton are encouraging the EU to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights using the infamous Digital Services Act to restore speech controls to social media. Other Americans have testified before the EU, calling on it to fight the U.S. Banners are now flying in Europe declaring, “We are the Free World Now,” as the globalists attempt to supplant freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
If the American Republic is to survive another 250 years, it must preserve key rights that the EU has been systematically destroying in Europe — freedom of speech, division of powers and political accountability of decision-makers.
That is why, I believe, the EU is inherently unstable and likely to ultimately collapse.
The EU has worked very hard to dismantle national sovereignty and identity in its member states. Historically, such collapses have been followed by different forms of tyranny.
Whatever comes next — and I could be wrong in my pessimism about the EU — the U.S. must take seriously the threat that this global governance system poses to our own values and sovereignty.
Von der Leyen is right that there is “momentum now” for the globalists, but the momentum of history still rests with the U.S. and its unique experiment in self-governance.
We saw this threat before, and we defeated a world empire. If we are to survive and thrive in this century, we will need to return to our own creation as a republic — to dig deep down and remember who we are as citizens.
Ours was the first Enlightenment revolution that embraced natural rights originating not from government but from God. We remain a unique people, joined by an article of faith found in our own Declaration of Independence. If this republic is to survive, it will be up to each of us, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, to “keep it.”
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Below there was reference to Germany and Russian. After WWII the Soviet’s controlled East Germany under the Potsdam Agreement of 1945 and continued into late 1949 becoming the German Democratic Republic, remaining under Soviet influence until the 1990 reunification of Germany. In fact, the Soviet Union walled in (blockade) Berlin in 1948.
Citizenship is the base cohesive glue to society. When asked by a foreigner where you are from, do you say Nebraska or the United States, or upon meeting a foreigner do you expect one to say Timbuktu or Mali? Anyway, most individuals wouldn’t know where Timbuktu is, or for that matter Mali.
America should strive to adhere to the principles of the Mayflower Compact. I take a conservative approach.
Success for the EU may depend on leveraging particular national strengths and avoiding known national weaknesses. That is they should strive for: Italian cooking, German mechanics, Danish policeman, French romances, and if possible contract out to the Swiss to organize it all.
On the other hand they should avoid: promulgating English food, using French mechanics, making Germans the police, using Swiss for romance, and having it all organized by the Italians.
Just thinking about it, it would be fascinating watching the German army marching down Les Champs-Élysées or the Polish army marching down Unter den Linden.
No one’s more autocratic and despotic than the leftists.
@em
Not in 2026, no. It’s madness. Independent, Republican, Libertarian – we need to reject the modern left wholesale in this country. Europe will be left to it’s fate.
The younger generation should watch comedian George Carlin’s “7 Dirty Words you can’t say on television” video (full version). Or a Don Rickles comedy skit or comedian Lenny Bruce skit.
It’s hard to believe now, but decades ago in places like liberal NYC, in private member-only comedy clubs (not open to the general public). NYC police officers would break down doors and arrest comedians in the most liberal city in America.
Today in 2026, if Cardin or Rickles or Bruce were performing in some modern European countries they could receive prison sentences for making offensive jokes. In NYC Lenny Bruce may have spent a weekend in jail, but in some foreign first-world the written laws could get you a prison sentence.
The USA should never give up it’d freedoms to a foreign regime!
Ot
The catholic church is getting(past tense and currently) public money to run 36 preschools? Make that????? They are excluding gender identity and it’s going to SCOTUS? Bizarre
No schools should get money from the public.
All schools should be free to choose what they wish to teach, and parents free to decide what schools they wish to go to.
But the left can not get its way with respect to the values it indoctinates students. by funding the schools that teach as it wishes and denying funding to those who do not.
ALL schools should exclude this “gender identity”garbage. Not just catholic schools.
What business does government have teaching anything about gender identity ?
It is specifically this type of nonsense that is Why Government MUST be limited and stay in its lane.
ATS – you are free to teach your children whatever you wish.
You are Not free to dictate what must be taught to other kids.
If there is the least controversey – PUBLIC schools can NOT teach something at all.
BTW the lefts attack on Catholic Preschools is absolutely going to Fail in this case.
These preschools are NOT indoctrinating children. They are NOT teaching religion.
They are just refusing to shill for the left.
The CORRECT SCOTUS decision is that NO schools receiving public money can indoctrinate children in gender identity garbage.
But that is not the case before them.
Those it is likely we have something to that effect moving towards SCOTUS as Trump defunds educational programs that violate Title IX or that discriminate or that require advancing ideology that Congress did not authorize.
ATS? Work on your civility, JS.
Public money should not be used to fund any religious organization disguised as anything unless it’s revealed as a totalitarian political system involving this life and the next.
Congress could designate all lgbt as a handicap and all schools would accommodate or mitigate the handicap at public expense.
I’d think we would’ve learned the reason for 1A by now. It’s to avoid totalitarian political systems and monarchies encroachments, infringements, JS. What fine examples we have today in Iran and Saudi Arabia.
I enjoy your viewpoints. They often have views others don’t readily understand.
^^^ add in authoritarian and autocratic as we see today… flip it upside down and it becomes autocratic or authoritarian policy of a minority or lgbt. Small groups or any minority rule for any reason.
Blacks have declared mathematics racist. It does require logic. Logic is racist I’m guessing.
I’m not apologizing for any despotic minority, pope, ayotalloh, religion, lgbt etc. Peratos principle
Yeah I’m going to need SALLY to elaborate on what she meant when she wrote “And yes, they do have different limits on free speech than in the US, and that is good. They have seen first hand what unrestricted free speech leads to.” What have they seen firsthand that unrestricted free speech has led to? Because I’ve kept up with the goings on over there and all I’ve seen is what REstricted speech has led to. So please edumacate me. And additionally, what do you think about unrestricted free speech over HERE? Good or bad? Please own your comments!
Sally may in fact be Margaret Brennan, one of the most ignorant people in the Lamestream Media.
It would be extremely dangerous for the United States – with the most successful model of government – to defer American rights to foreign governments. America has always been great.
Despite our problems, the USA has the greatest freedom of religion in the world and the greatest free speech rights in the world.
We have the greatest freedom to worship (or not worship) because the First Amendments outlaws government from imposing a particular religious interpretation onto its citizens.
Nations like Iran impose a particular religious interpretation onto its citizens, resulting in no religious freedom at all. In the 1700’s American colonists broke away from King George III of England for behaving like Iran. Baptists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Catholics and any other faith were severely punished if they didn’t join the Anglican Church (Church of England).
We have a “constitutional democratic republic” – voters self-govern by electing our representatives in Congress and state legislatures. American voters can demand anything at all, as long as those actions don’t violate the U.S. Constitution.
Even in modern first-world nations around the world, a citizen can be punished or imprisoned for offending someone. This is very subjective as to what is “offensive or obscene” – so these types of thought-police laws are routinely abused by government officials. George Orwell wrote several books about it, basically saying don’t become like communist regimes. This creates a chilling effect on free speech.
In the USA, the end goal never justifies unconstitutional means. No other nation operates this way. In the USA if the government violates your constitutional rights, you can file a constitutional lawsuit against the government. If the government official is operating outside his or her constitutional authority, sometimes you can even go after the “personal” assets of the official if they blatantly violate their Oath of Office – since they never had that authority in the first place under their Oath of Office.
America also has a unique supreme loyalty oath (Oath of Office) than any other nation. American officials from the local sheriff to the FBI to the military to the CIA swear supreme loyalty (in their job authority) to follow the U.S. Constitution. Maybe the official opposes gun rights or LGBT marriage rights. They can still go to church on their private time, but in their job authority they have absolutely no authority to violate anyone’s constitutional rights. Americans would lose these freedoms deferring to an international government.
The U.S. Constitution is a wartime governing charter with wartime emergency clauses already built into the system. Our U.S. Constitution was created during wartime and designed to be followed during wartime. If our U.S. Constitution is fundamentally flawed we have a constitutional-amendment process to correct it (controlled primary by voters, not presidents).
America should never surrender our guaranteed constitutional rights to a foreign nation.
Well said. Our Founders knew exactly what they were doing. They had lived under state churches and speech control, then wrote a Constitution that treats rights as coming before government and binds officials by oath to protect those rights, even in war. That oath is the operating system. When we let “international norms” and foreign speech rules seep in through trade deals, platforms, or treaties, we are quietly swapping out that operating system without asking the people.
And you are right, we should never surrender our constitutional rights to any foreign regime. But we also have to stop importing their mindset. If our own kids grow up more shaped by EU‑style speech codes and corporate “safety” rules than by the First Amendment culture, those rights will survive on paper while dying in practice. The real fight is not just keeping the text of the Constitution. It is keeping a people formed to live it.
Well said
You have no understanding of religious freedom in Iran.
The Iranian constitution recognizes Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism as protected religious minorities. There are 3 seats in their parliament that are reserved for Christians. Jews and Zoroastrians get one reserved seat each in the parliament.
Iran has the highest population of Jews in the Middle East outside of Israel. There are several dozen synagogues in Tehran. The government pays for Jewish schools and a Jewish hospital in Tehran. The government officially recognizes Saturday as the sabbath for Jews.
Jews are not persecuted in Iran. Judaism is a protected religion. The government distinguishes between Judaism as a religion, and Zionism as a political ideology that is regarded as a perversion of Judaism rather than a true religion, hence their opposition to Israel.
They may recognize, but do the protect.
______________________
Iranian authorities are frequently accused of violating human rights, suppressing freedoms, and discriminating against women and minorities. Reports highlight widespread suppression of expression, arbitrary detentions, unfair trials, and systemic persecution of religious groups like Baha’is. Compulsory veiling laws and gender discrimination are also central issues (Amnesty International)
Hence our recognition of Iran as a totalitarian political system and a false , cover religion wanting power. It’s an outrageous want of power at any cost creating slaves in this life and the same in the next.
People understand it quite well.
The EU is a federal system, but its structure lacks the cohesiveness and checks and balances of the US Constitution. It is an incoherent, slap-dash, federal system. It is very likely to more fully unify under the pressure of a crisis, and end up as a tyranny, much like the old Roman Empire.
The EU & NATO are country clubs. Lets see what happens when the EU runs out of jet fuel.
Upon reading this, I immediately thought of Greenland.
Bear with me for a minute–this is not as OT as it first appears.
Maygar’s Hungary is a member of both the EU and the Schengen Area. ( the Schengen Agreement unites a total of 29 European countries communally–to share open borders that do not require passports amongst them, for purposes of social integration and economic benefit). (…I do not pretend to be smart-I had to look up the Schengen status of Hungary, Denmark, and Greenland.) We mostly talk about China wanting to control Taiwan or Hong Kong, or Russia incorporating Ukraine, but we forget about the EU’s competitive efforts to unite Europe as One economic, political Global Power (comparable to China’s “One Road?”) ,–bringing about full-circle Turley’s reference to
“Ursula von der Leyen call[s] for the final coup de grace for national identity and sovereignty: the elimination of the ability of nations to stand against EU policies.”
The providence of Schengen’s objectives is having trouble in today’s world. The EU implemented the “Schengen Borders Code (SBC)” (last amended in 2024) which addresses border management for the Schengen Area. “Since the ‘refugee crisis’ of September 2015, countries have reintroduced border checks at the EU’s internal borders more than 400 times. These checks have been justified on the grounds of the increased movement of refugees and migrants into Europe, counter terrorism…”
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/09/border-controls-europe-undermine-schengen-area-and-eu-itself
Now to Greenland. Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark. Denmark is a committed member of both EU and Schengen. Greenland is NOT a member of either the EU or Schengen. (The only other big hold-out is UK under Brexit-also not a Schengen member).
Think of Trump’s interest in Greenland….good or bad?
apologies for the length of my post.
(I should have noted that my comment was intended to address what Professor Turley said: “That is why, I believe, the EU is inherently unstable and likely to ultimately collapse. The EU has worked very hard to dismantle national sovereignty and identity in its member states. Historically, such collapses have been followed by different forms of tyranny.”)
The ‘border’ checks within the Schengen area during the refugee crises ARE part of that agreement. It means countries can still exercise their sovereignty. They are not required to wait for Brussels to issue an “order”.
While Greenland is technically not part of the Schengen Area or the EU, no document checks are performed for travel between Greenland and the Schengen Area. Greenland remains part of the Nordic Passport Union, meaning citizens of Nordic countries can travel and reside there freely. Being in the Schengen economic zone does not mean people are not required to carry passports or some sort of EU ID. They still need to Identify where they are from.
EU member states retain significant sovereignty, including the power to reintroduce temporary border checks (done over 400 times since 2015) as a measure of last resort for national security. Member states also hold veto power in many key policy areas, such as foreign policy and taxation.
X – the defeat of Orban is small potatoes – Yes the EU is trying to capitalize on it.
But that is because they are fighting a LOSING battle against the European right.
The EU as an economic union makes SOME sense – as a political union it has always been a disaster.
I do not know specifically about Hungary and Orabn – but the EU has been meddling in other national elections of member countries and has been caught committing egregious frauds and trying to manipulate those elections – not without some success.
This is stupid and dangerous – as the US revolution should make clear – deprive prople of control of their own government and the result will ultimately be VIOLENCE.
And that Violence will be justified.
I Know you are paying zero attention to the revalations that keep coming regarding manipulations of the 2020 US election.
But as more and more comes out it is clear just how corrupt the handling of the election and the post election inquiries was.
Just as with Europe – this is VERY DANGEROUS.
Election fraud by political parties is bad enough.
When the Government at various levels becomes complicit – THAT is what leads to violence.
I have argued here repeatedly that J6 was justified – but that the limited violence by J6ers was not.
That it was a protest that turned into a small riot as a result of mishandling by both sides – though MOSTLY by Pelosi and the Capital police.
The violence did not state until the CP fired tear gas into the crowd that was at the time legally protesting.
As the Crowd tried to get away from the tear gas one edge of the outward ripple ran into the baricades at the west tunnel entrace and the CP respondd with ILLEGAL use of Force.
They used “non-lethal” in ways that are illegal and potentially lethal – hitting people like rose Boylan repeatedly in the head with a billy club.
Aiming projectiles at protestors heads instead of bouncling them off the ground.
Or Ofc. Bird murdering Alishi Babbit – though that was later.
Regardless, it all refected an attitude that protestors lives did not matter.
But the truly important issue is what the left fixates on – was this an insurrection ? Was the use of violence justified.
While the answer to both is NO! the more involved in illegal election conduct the GOVERNMNET is the weaker the prohibition against violence becomes.
The Declaration of indepence makes clear that when govenrment is DESTRUCTIVE of the ends of Individual liberty – that the Government MUST go.
Anmd that includes by “insurection” violence.
J6 was NOT an inssurrection – and if it had been it would not have been justified.
But the efforts of those on the left in government in the US have brought us far to close to where insurrection would be justified.
And Europe has been making the same mistakes on a larger scale.
The so called European right is distinct from the American right. There are SOME values that are shared between them – but the European right does NOT for the most part have the libertarian character that the US right does – it also is not nearly as conservative. The European right is NOT mostly driven by individual liberty and limited govenrment.
But it is Growing and the european left is engaged in last ditch, and dangerous measures to hold power.
Unlike Turley and Unlike you my concern regarding the EU is that they are failing and desparate to hold power and making stupid mistakes to do so,
and as a result they will make the European Right shift that is inevitable more powerful and more totalitarian.
I have seen good signs in Sweden and Denmark where “democratic socialists” have grasped that they would lose power over specific issues like Immigration and they responded by changing their positions.
In other luny left areas -= it is the EU that went gender identity Nuts BEFORE the US, and it is the EU that came back from that nonsense first.
The studies showing that Left Wing not “gender afirming care at BEST accomplishs NOTHING, and at worst does a great deal of Harm come from teh EU – often Sweden and Denmark.
The UK government has goen from capitalizing on a split right to seize power disproportionate to their support to now being possibly the least popular UK govenrment in history.
Labor has gone Fast from leading Reform and Tories in 3 way races sufficient to give it a massive unearned supermajority, to Losing to Both Reform and Torriess.
And if anything Starmer and labor gets LESS popular by the day.
Regardless, Accross the world – the Days of the Davos Crowd are numbered. And the Election in Hungary does not change that.
Woke socialism is dying everywhere
Even just ordinary marxist socialism is dying.
I have no idea what will happen in Cuba – but there is little doubt that Castro style Socialism has failed.
I have no idea what will happen in Venezeualla – but it Will Not be more of Chavez Madoru socialism.
Argentia has freed itself from the Grip of modern Socialists.
The same fight is occurring all over South America – and the socialists are on the back foot.
The only Question in China is When do things come completely apart. China is in bad shape and unstable.
Putins Russias days are numbered to.
I would be shocked if the US pulled completely out of Iran right now – if the regime lasted until our election.
The people are assassinating the IRGC and regime factions are jockying for power and killing each other.
Europe has been teetering in and out of recession for most of the 21st century.
More and more people are noting that the american poor live better than the European middle class.
Beyond that – I am not interested in debating specific European policies with you.
Who cares what the specific polices are of failing regimes.
Meaningless, incoherent gibberish from someone who is clearly mentally impaired.
X- I’m pretty sure you never even heard of “Schengen Agreement” before Lin brought it up. You sound like you are trying to educate others, when in fact all you did was copy-catted WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID, about the “400 times.” AND what was already said about EU implementing the ““Schengen Borders Code (SBC).”
Stay off the AI and Wiki, X.
I love headlines…
“Far-right influencer Nick Fuentes is making a staggering fortune preaching hate”
If you love headlines, you will love this one, FBI director says arrests are coming related to 2016 Russia probe: ‘Never going to let this go’
https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/fbi-director-says-arrests-are-coming-related-2016-russia-probe-never-going
I do NOT “love” headlines – because they are always deceptive.
Not a big Fuentes Fan – but EVERYTIME I hear the left or the MSM talke abotu someone Spewing Hate – I presume that means they are saying something that the left does not like.
Such as that Boys can not be magically transformed into girls.
Just to be clear – if you feel like you were born in the wrong body – that is your business. If you wish to dress up like a women – I do not care.
But your FEELINGS do not change the FACT that you are not a women. You have no place in WOmens sports, Womens locker rooms,. and schools children should be taught FACTS – not FEELINGS.
Regardless the left has so overplayed their hand – that if Fuentes is an Actual Nazi looking to exterminate people he does not like – most people will not know.
Why ? Becaus the left labels everyone who disagreess with them on anything a hater.
You can not tell from left wing nut rhetoric the difference between real threats and those who CORRECTLY disagree with the left.
Yes, the poor little children actually believe them. Tragic
Just like O-dumbers preacher..
Sometimes complicated international affairs don’t fit on a bumper sticker. Isn’t it way more complicated than this?
Couldn’t you design an arrangement similar to federal vs. states like we do in the USA? Where an individual state can provide stronger protections for rights than the federal government?
For example: some states like Montana actually protect the privacy rights and 4th Amendment rights of their citizens more than the federal government or the U.S. Supreme Court does. Montana outlaws government officials from buying private third party data to skirt 4th Amendment law. Not even the U.S. Supreme Court or Congress protects us as well as Montana.
Most Americans with a brain know it violates the letter & spirit of 4th Amendment to simply purchase information to bypass judges, but the federal government has yet to protect us. Some individual state governments protect us more than the federal government.
Apply that example to the EU. So if an individual nation joined the European Union, couldn’t the strongest laws supersede weaker EU laws? A nation has a right to defend itself militarily, so those laws would supersede the EU laws. The international body couldn’t over rule those rights and sovereignty of nations.
One great benefit to the EU model is on commerce and tourism. Once inside the EU no need for passports to travel amongst EU nations. The United States used to have fewer restrictions traveling to Canada, making trade easier benefiting both nations.
Yes, The notion of 50 States of Laboratories (like Montana-Lab) making their functional ‘discoveries’ available to Washington D.C. would be a good method of progressive evolution. Unfortunately, nothing gets ratified in D.C. without centuries of debate, so adaptation is a slow-to-no-go prospect. The spirit and motivation is in the right place. The EU-States pushing De-Carb is a similar parallel, however one can already see some defection to the idea and unwillingness to participate over economic interest (National GDP)..
The last thing I recall that actually made a paradigm shift with a State enforcing its verbose regulations was the Air Quality controls for Auto Manufactures mandated in California in the late 1960s. .
Re:
Air quality controls for auto manufacturers in the 1970s were driven by the Clean Air Act of 1970, which mandated a 90% reduction in emissions by 1975. This forced automakers to shift away from high-emission engines and adopt new technologies, most notably the catalytic converter, which became standard on 1975 models. This period also marked the forced phase-out of leaded gasoline to protect these new emission systems.
Remember this goof-up…
____________________
California officially banned the gasoline additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) in 2002 (effective fully by 2003-2004) due to widespread groundwater contamination from leaking underground tanks. The ban was driven by California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations requiring Phase 3 Reformulated Gasoline.
They pushed this until it back-fired.
Do EU members have to pay dues?
Apart from the traditional own resources of the EU (such as Customs duties), EU member states pay 2 types of contributions, one based on VAT revenue and the other based on GNI (which brings in 61.5% of budget). The EU Commission has published a proposal last year to extend t since, inter alia, through lump sum contributions from companies resident in the EU for tax purposes with annual revenue exceeding Euro 100MM. That would essentially be a direct corporation tax levied by the EU in addition to the corporate income tax of the individual member states.
The Europe is becoming more like the US, which they see as good. Free trade, free movement, common defense benefit all. Each country is still a sovereign country, they just realized that working together makes everyone better off. North America would be much weaker if each state/province was an independent county with their own import laws, boarders, military, and incompatible laws.
And yes, they do have different limits on free speech than in the US, and that is good. They have seen first hand what unrestricted free speech leads to.
Sally, what jumps out to me is how different the basic material is in Europe. In the US, for most of our history, you had a common language, a growing but still shared culture, and one written Constitution that everyone had to learn to live under. We pulled people in from everywhere, but they were expected to assimilate into that framework, not the other way around.
The EU is trying something very different. You’ve got dozens of nations, many languages, very deep and different histories, and the plan is to drop one legal and regulatory structure over all of it. No common language, no single civic culture in any deep sense, and now they’re talking about taking away the national veto. That means the EU rulebook can override what those separate peoples think they’ve learned about their own rights and sovereignty, and they don’t even have a hard “no” left.
So when people say “they’re just becoming like the US,” I don’t buy it. We built one country out of many states under one Constitution that the people themselves ratified. They are trying to build one authority out of many countries by slowly pulling power up to Brussels and, if they kill the veto, doing it without real consent from the people below. Different history, different culture, different idea of rights, and a very different trajectory.
OLLY,
Great comment and analysis.
Olly, in addition, the EU suffers from what is called a democratic deficit. The executive branch (the EU Commission) is not directly elected but the members are appointed through backroom horse trading deals between the governments of the member states. Nobody had ever heard of Ursula von der Leijen before she was pushed into the chair role. There is a EU parliament that is directly elected but it has limited power. Most importantly, it has no right of initiative. In the EU, legislation comes from the executive branch through Regulations and Directives. The independence of the member states is under continued fire as the power of governance has shifted to Brussels. Academic research has shown that national parliaments spend about 70% of their time on implementing EU Directives. Over time, the EU resembles more and more a federal state, but at the detriment of national independence. Creating a European military is a decades old wish which was never really pursued due to the existence of NATO. But with schism between the US and the European countries over balanced contributions (Trump is correct that the Europeans deliberately and exploitatively rely on the US for its defense), the call for a European defense organization (separate from the US) is emerging again. That would make sense and I don’t think that we should keep on financing the defense of prosperous Europe, but it woud also mean further loss of sovereignty of the member states.
Good comment, Oliver, linguistics. 🤔 interesting pull
Olly, every power the EU has was granted via treaties (like the Treaty of Lisbon) that were voluntarily signed and ratified by the national parliaments (or via public referendums) of every single member state. Unlike the US Constitution, which was ratified once, the EU’s “rulebook” only changes when all 27 sovereign nations agree to change it. So your idea that they are centralizing power is incorrect.
Also, even if “Qualified Majority Voting” (QMV) is expanded to more areas, the EU is not a prison. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (as seen with Brexit) provides a clear, unilateral path for any nation to leave the Union if they believe their sovereignty is being compromised. A US state, by contrast, cannot legally secede.
Your claim that our nation shared a common language and culture from the start is wrong.
At the time of the US founding, the colonies were deeply divided by religion, economics (slavery vs. non-slavery), and language (large German-speaking populations, for example). The US “framework” was not a natural evolution of a unified people; it was a hard-fought political compromise between 13 very different, often suspicious, entities—much like the EU today.
And lastly, the EU’s primary mandate is the Single Market. Its regulations largely focus on trade standards, environmental protections, and labor rights to ensure fair competition. It does not dictate national languages, religious practices, or cultural traditions. In fact, the EU motto is “United in Diversity,” and it spends billions protecting regional languages and cultures.
All this means they are really good at creating consensus among diverse groups with different interests. Something even our own Congress is incapable of within 50 states all speaking one language. They’ve masters the art of understanding and recognizing various cultural, and regional differences and forming rules and standards that can accommodate everyone’s concerns. We don’t seem to have that capability and we claim we have the greatest form of government in the world?
Quite Right Olly.
Professor Turley writes: “If the American Republic is to survive another 250 years, it must preserve key rights that the EU has been systematically destroying in Europe — freedom of speech, division of powers and political accountability of decision-makers.” The EU sounds pretty “Autocratic” to me.
And they have the gall to criticize Victor Orban as Autocratic.
Allow me to simplify: Germany controls Europe through Brussels. The French pretend to have an equal say with Germany, but the economic balance of power is in Berlin. When Angela Merkel opened Europe to Syrian immigration in 2015, she was asserting Germany’s hegemony over the continent. All the other E. U. nations are second and third stringers.
Germany continues to be managed along the lines established by Bismarck: state control in all areas, managed by technocrats or experts. Individuals have freedom in small things and are allowed to vote, but in large matters, such as freedom of speech, they must toe the line. Even their votes can be nullified if they go the wrong way.
Europe continues to be governed by an aristocracy of talent and money, replacing (in part) the old aristocracy of birth. Confident as they are of their superior wisdom and training, they manipulate both the media and the voters as needed. The media are mostly compliant because they aspire to belong to the same aristocracy. All have a sense of superiority to Americans and complicated system of government and commerce, not to mention our backwardness in religion and culture. Some Americans reciprocate by seeking to emulate Europe’s new aristocracy.
American won the last two wars that the Europeans started. We have kept American troops in Europe for the past eight decades to keep them from going after each other again. Let’s not forget who they are, and who we are.
The problem is that these countries have never viewed themselves as merely part of a unified Europe. There is no historical tradition for that at all. In fact, quite the opposite. And the “common defense” you’re referring to, is non-existent. Without the resources and promises from the US toward NATO, none of these countries has anything even close to a capable military. Once these countries gave up control over their monetary policies, it was only a matter of time before everything else went too.
Along these same lines there was a podcast from JNS studios in Jerusalem with Fiamma Nirenstein and Gol Kalev that I found informative. Gol Kalev is a Jerusalem Post journalist and author. Fiamma has a bit of trouble expressing herself in English (she’s native to Florence) but despite this the point the two were making is that because Europe is so upside down in its thinking (and not just its current thinking but historically so) that it is now creating a global security problem. It appears blythely unaware that it is doing so. https://youtu.be/5VViUwQ-jps
If the EU is “inherently unstable” and “likely to ultimately collapse” (as he predicts), it cannot simultaneously be a potent, existential threat to the United States’ own 250-year-old constitutional system.
While the EU has stricter regulations on hate speech and digital misinformation (such as the Digital Services Act) compared to the U.S. First Amendment, Turley frames this as “systematic destruction. He likes to frame all things EU through our constitutional views which is wrong. They view free speech differently and that’s their right. It does not mean it is wrong or worse than what we have.
He ignores that EU member states are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights, which explicitly protects free expression. By contrasting the EU directly with the American Republic’s survival, he suggests that any regulation of the digital commons is a precursor to “tyranny,” ignoring the fact that European citizens regularly use their speech to vote out the very “decision-makers” he claims are unaccountable. Hungary’s ouster of Orban is a pretty good example and that is despite Orban’s throttling of freedom of speech in Hungary to maintain power. Something Turley “forgot” to mention.
Truley is getting more and more unhinged and separated from reality every year
@Sally
Oh, but you, of the nanny generation or the great white savior generation do indeed believe you are very ironically inherently superior because of your generational materialism and levels of personal comfort, and even at times due to your genealogy (for the slow, which you appear to be: race. ‘My family blahbedy blahbedy blah. Who cares? We are all free in this country, not just you). It is a bad joke, and as the actually mature and wise, we will keep our own counsel, thanks.
You come here basically to spank your monkey for money; wouldn’t OnlyFans pay more?
The EU “cannot *simultaneously* be a potent . . ” (emphasis added)
Nice job, deceptive one.
You injected a contradiction into JT’s argument, where none exists.
His argument is very clear. (Did you not follow it or did you intentionally mangle it?)
JT’s actual argument: *Right now*, the EU is a threat to American values. If the EU continues *in the future* with its collectivist policies, it is “likely to ultimately collapse.” (JT)
Per your usual intellectual dishonesty, you altered JT’s now vs. the future to read: “simultaneously.”
“While the EU has stricter regulations on hate speech and digital misinformation (such as the Digital Services Act)”
The EU’s use of both is despotic.
Why? You barely understand what you read. If they have stricter rules or laws that’s their right. We aren’t any better under Trump. He’s been calling for shutting down broadcast networks because he doesn’t like what they say about him. He’s threatened to sic the FCC on late night talk shows because they make fun of him. He has tried to deport foreign students because they wrote something critical of Israel. We are making the EU look like they are a better place to be.
@X
You are hilarious, George. Tell that to the people in Europe serving time for posting the ‘wrong’ thing on Facebook.
James,
Or, people praying too close to a . . . something.
Two weeks ago, some UK flunky bureaucrat was complaining Britions on X were expressing their thoughts and opinions on things like immigrant crimes.
Oh. The horror. /sacr
“If the EU is “inherently unstable” and “likely to ultimately collapse” (as he predicts), it cannot simultaneously be a potent, existential threat to the United States’ own 250-year-old constitutional system.”
Of Course it can – China is even more unstable and likely to collapse and that impending collapse could throw us all into WWIII
Unstable nations are very very dangerous.
Even Weak unstable nations are dangerous – the Wiemar Republic brought us the Nazi’s.
While I do NOT think the EU is an existential threat to the US – not in the way that instability in China is a threat to the US and the world.
That does not mean that because Europe is MOSTLY impotent – they can be ignored.
“While the EU has stricter regulations on hate speech and digital misinformation (such as the Digital Services Act) compared to the U.S. First Amendment,”
No the EU engages in IMMORALLY restricting speech that it does not like.
This is not some morally neutral differences in views.
Actually READ John Stuart Mill – the supression fo Speech is DANGEROUS.
It is actually silencing those that disagree with you that leads to violence.
” Turley frames this as “systematic destruction. ”
Because it is – The Declaration of independence is not just a justification for Political separation from England.
It is an expression of the relationship of people to govenrment.
The nonsense in Europe and particularly the UK are troubling because the Success of the US is built on the first principles to evolved first in Europe.
The concepts of individual liberty that are int he Magna Carte. as an example.
The European supression of speech that it does not like it only different with respect to moral scale from Hitler exterminating people he did not like.
“He likes to frame all things EU through our constitutional views which is wrong.”
Only marginally.
Our view is imperfect.
The Europeans are worse.
Our Constitution is not some biblical text passed by God to Moses on the mountains.
But it is the Best that humans have does so far at self governing – particularly at self governing a diverse population.
European regulation of Speech is morally WRONG. The fact that it also offends the US constitution is just evidence of the superiority of our form of self government.
“They view free speech differently and that’s their right.”
False and false.
First Rights are ALWAYS what the minority has that protects them from the majority.
Free speech is a RIGHT – even outside of the US. It may be an egregiously violated right – but it is still a right.
Even in the UE we have seen at various times those on the left and those on the right seeking to limit the free speech of those they do not like.
That is NOT a right. It is MORAL ERROR. It is MORAL error whether in the EU or the US.
I would note that Whitney Vs. California – the famous decision in which Brandeis lays out so strongly the principles of free speech.
Was a UNanimous decision to uphold a CA law limiting speech.
The US has never fully lived up to the promise of the first amendment .
The left rants about the past mistakes of the US – and though constantly getting the facts wrong – they are correct that the US has not lived up to its promise.
Where most of us differ is grasping that the past failures of our country to NOT change the overwhelming successess brought about by imperfectly following the principles of liberty.
The EU is constantly making mistakes that innocent people will pay for.
In England myriads of people have rioted – because the UK has filled the jails with people who say things that those in power consider mean, while releasing violent criminals who have gone on to committ murders and rape.
Are you actually going to defend that kind of nonsense ?
You CONSTANTLY forget that Government is FORCE – all law is ultimately imposed by FORCE on those who will not voluntarily obey.
I have told you over and over – that the use of FORCE is inefficient and expensive.
This is one of many reasons government MUST be limited.
The more laws you have the more law enforcement you must have – otherwise you make the law into a joke.
The more enforcement you have the more you decrease standard of living. Forst you must have more police to enforce the law, and more criminal justice system and more prisons and prison guards. But then you also take people from surviving on their own – possibly enven thriving to sucking resources from the rest of us.
Past a small core – further law reduces standard of living – and massive amounts of economic data have confirmed that over centuries.
So which do you want – Laws barring murder and rape or laws barring means speech ?
If you pick both – you must pay for both reducing everyone’s standard of living.
You not only punish the offenders – you punish everyone.
“It does not mean it is wrong or worse than what we have.”
Of course it does.
I have made numerous arguments – proving that many different ways to you.
My arguments are not really mine – they are just my paraphrasing of the arguments of the most brilliant men ever to live.
You lost the fight over the morality of limiting speech almost two centuries ago.
“He ignores that EU member states are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights, which explicitly protects free expression.”
Turley is not ignoring that – the EU is ignoring that – you despite mentioning it are ignoring that.
The EU convention on human rights is not worth the paper it is printed on – the US constitution is something that we atleadt try to live up to.
“By contrasting the EU directly with the American Republic’s survival, he suggests that any regulation of the digital commons is a precursor to “tyranny,” ignoring the fact that European citizens regularly use their speech to vote out the very “decision-makers” he claims are unaccountable.”
God forbid you should ever not hide your arguments in fallacious generalities.
Restring speech IS Tryany. It is what Tyrants have done through out history – even a few american tyrants.
Please read the declaration of independence – the word VOTE does not occur in it anywhere.
People in the past have voted for freedom. They have voted for Tryanny – Hilter received over 80% of the vote in the 1938 plebecite.
Voting does not preclude Tryanny.
As to the EU – yes the absolute mess of their political structure does mean that EU leaders are unaccountable.
The EU leaders imposing these tyranical restrictions are NOT voted on by the people – the elected members of the EU govenrment are fundimentally and by design impotent.
The EU is not a democracy or a republic – while it has pseudo democratic and republican elements, and a very very vaguelly republican structure, it is depierately constructed to deny the people a meaningful voice in government
The Davos and WEF crowds are terrified of “the people”
“Hungary’s ouster of Orban is a pretty good example and that is despite Orban’s throttling of freedom of speech in Hungary to maintain power.”
Orban is a bit of a tyrant – though relatively tepid compared to those in the EU.
At the same time he has been a very successful leader in Hungary.
As to Orban trying to game the election – probably – as did the EU – they have a long history of really egregious misbehavior in nations sovereign elections.
Regardless, trying to draw large significance out of Orban’s defeat goes counter to trends in Europe.
In general the “right wing” in Europe gains more and more power with each election EXCEPT in nations like Sweden and Denmark where the center left parties reverse themselves on the major issues of the political right – such as immigration and woke nonsense.
This is all concerning but not surprising. All of the masks came fully off during COVID.
Given that so many of our most ignorant voters are of a certain vintage: in science fiction parlance, the modern left think they are the Rebellion, or The Independents, or The Federation, when in fact they are the Empire, The Alliance, The Borg. They think they are punk rock when really they are the homogenized crap it was a response to.
For older folks: JFK and his party are dead. hippies turned out to be the biggest conformists of all. You are voting for Mao, Mussolini, Stalin, or Hitler. Nothing seems to be able to penetrate the wall of your TDS and conditioned thinking.
We can’t go down this road.
Says the guy who voted for someone who posted a photo of himself as Jesus Christ AND claims that the only power he answers to is his own moral authority. Yeah, sure man – the Democrats are definitely the problem here….
Did you forget when the MSN put a Halo on Obama.
Yeah, a harsh meme really changes things. That must have been some powerful ju ju for your atheist Leftists. Suddenly you now care what Christians think?
Destroying national identity and sovereignty *inevitably* leads to tyranny. Different nations have different customs, moral values, and material interests. Forcing them all to obey a single agenda and cultural template is tyrannical no matter who dictates it.
As I argued in my book *Why Sane People Believe Crazy Things*:
“In case of disagreement, do human groups have a right to force their moral views on the other groups? If we answer yes, then the inevitable result is either perpetual war (if no group can dominate the others) or tyranny (if one group can win). History suggests that no group can permanently dominate the others, so we end up with perpetual war. At least in theory, nobody wants that. In practice, we’d like to avoid it.”
https://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Crazy-Things-Second/dp/1736477544/
Forcing? EU member states reach consensus on rules and laws. Nobody is forcing them to accept these laws.
Genocide, palmer?
I generally agree with Turley on this one. An international governing body would likely destroy America’s guaranteed Bill of Rights that hopefully can be restored post-Trump (post-dictator).
It would have been beneficial for the United States to have joined the International Criminal Court. If we were bound by the ICC, it would have created a strong deterrent effect against George W. Bush’s war crimes and human rights abuses.
During the Bush years – like today – Congress refused to provide constitutional checks & balances on a president that was highly disloyal to his Oath of Office, disloyal to the constitutional rule of law, ignored federal criminal laws, ignored legally binding treaties, violated the Geneva Conventions (which protects American troops in future conflicts) and ignored the Nuremberg Defense precedent used to prosecute Nazis after World War Two. The USA under Bush was for the first time condemned by Amnesty International and the International Red Cross (a Christian founded organization).
Bush officials even violated Republican icon Ronald Reagan’s torture treaty – legally binding under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and codified into federal criminal law. Bush betrayed Reagan!
Maybe the worst thing was Bush created a “Unitary Executive Theory” (voters elect a dictator every 4 years) that Trump abused even more. Trump’s abuses of power were made possible by Bush’s lawlessness and disloyalty to his Oath of Office.
On torture, blacklisting-torture and cruel treatment belonging to the International Criminal Court could have provided a strong check & balance in a highly disloyal president – since that Congress was derelict in its duty.
@Report
Wow, that is some first class, gaslit, trolling. Today’s piece has struck a nerve, to be sure. Sure, ‘Report’, up is down, eh?
Is there any remaining doubt remaining the modern left is part of an unelected globalist regime?
Just one ‘remaining’, typo. Maybe the extra emphasis is necessary.
“The Report” movie happened during the Obama Administration – the movie was pro-American constitutional rule of law.
It was not anti-Republican. In fact on torture, it would be great to restore the Party of Abraham Lincoln – to make Lincoln’s Party great again;)
Both parties covered up torture, blacklisting-torture and destroying our rule of law system. Maybe watch the movie based on true events? It’s also about looking the other way on war crimes, by both parties.
So now we know we tortured mostly the wrong people, why hasn’t Congress apologized to their torture victims in more than 25 years for this gargantuan blunder?
@Report
Yes. Due to the fact that we are not five years old, nor were we educated in a modern university, we know. As millennials felt the need to broadcast to the world the first time they discovered their belly buttons, a great many others under the age of 45 feel the need to arrogantly overshare their first political awakenings. Such is the era we live in, and so were they raised. Wisdom and insight are not numbers post-dating a birth certificate; you could be 100 and still be utterly worthless in those terms of experience, wisdom, and insight. the nanny generation will likely never get there when at 40 they still crow like helpless children.
Do you have anything to share that does not involve the names ‘Trump’, or ‘Obama’, or something else the analog algorithm (also known as other people’s beliefs and opinions) didn’t insert into your brain, to spare you the hard work of thinking for yourself? If so, we’d love to hear. I suspect you do not. This is where the expression, ‘mushroom headed’ comes from. Comments precisely like your initial one. The mushroom headed are not smart enough to realize they are mushroom headed and rely largely on regurgitation because they have never actually done or experienced anything for themselves. these days, you can even get paid for it well enough to consider it ‘your job’.
james your comments rank, at best, as juvenile. “As for remaining doubt” … Are you a policy advisor for Trump or just a kool-aid drinking cultist.
@Anonymous
I think you are self-explanatory, and everyone sees it. If you aren’t paid to do this everyday, then I cannot fathom the emptiness of such an existence. I pity you, either way.
“the modern left is part of an unelected globalist regime?”
James, worse than that they are despotic and will use any means to achieve power.
@S. Meyer
Yes. According to the dictates of the group of which they are a part. Some of us still seem to think we are dealing with a homegrown American party on the left. We are not.
James, I think I am older than you, so you can blame my generation. I witnessed this before: bombings and killings from the far left that chose “peace” during the Vietnam War. There is nothing wrong with peace, but that was a mask for they were violent radicals desiring a total demolition of the existing order. Things have not changed. They may even have gotten worse.
Would there be any Democrats who committed “war crimes” or this this just a Republican thing?
I love headlines…
“WATCH: Outrage after Israeli soldier desecrates statue of Jesus Christ in Lebanon”
Hey, don’t be so hasty.
Maybe they are preparing to replace the statue of Jesus with a statue of trump.
Destroying idols is a biblical commandment.
If you love headlines, you will love this one, Five stories Democrats told during Trump’s 2019 Ukraine impeachment have fallen apart
“Years of belated bombshells have eroded most of the narrative Democrats sold to America, from the credibility of the initial whistleblower to Joe Biden’s claims.”
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/democrats-ukraine-narrative-has-gone-reverse-gop-seeks-expunge