- Europe
- Ecology
Freedom at Risk: How Brussels Hijacks Climate Policy
Under the pretext of a climate emergency, the European Union is enforcing a brutal, liberty-crushing, and deeply antisocial transition.
The ban on combustion engines, Low Emission Zones (LEZ), absurd energy standards, the environmental cost is first paid by the middle classes and peripheral territories. Across Europe, populations are suffering, but some governments, such as Italy or Hungary, are choosing to push back.
The ideal of ecological transition is driving our leaders into a frantic race toward “magical regulation”, with little regard for the economic, social, and even environmental consequences. Devised and implemented by disconnected technocratic elites, these measures are increasingly perceived by many as a direct attack on their freedoms and way of life. While ecological concerns are legitimate, there may be no issue today that is more poorly addressed. Three symbolic measures, the end of combustion engines, LEZs, and energy performance requirements, illustrate this dangerous trend.
The End of Combustion Engines: A European Industrial Sabotage
In February 2025, French MPs, notably those from Le Rassemblement National, refused to enshrine into national law the EU’s proposed 2035 ban on the sale of new combustion engine vehicles, a timeline that would have replaced France’s existing 2040 target.
Italy under Giorgia Meloni, along with Germany, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Portugal, also rejected this timeline imposed by Brussels.
Such a measure would be an economic disaster for European industry: manufacturers and suppliers, particularly in France and Germany, are at risk — with nearly a million jobs threatened. The policy would open the floodgates to Chinese carmakers, who are at least a decade ahead in electric vehicle technology. Delocalization, loss of competitiveness, inflation: a perfect storm.
Environmentally, the argument doesn’t hold up. Combustion engines can, in the medium term, achieve a carbon footprint comparable to electric vehicles, notably through synthetic fuels. Renault and others claim combustion engines could match electric cars in terms of emissions within 20 years thanks to R&D and clean fuels.
Moreover, mass battery production causes major ecological damage, outsourced to developing countries. Cobalt, lithium, and nickel mining — crucial to batteries — is among the most polluting industries on Earth. Battery recycling remains limited (only 46% collected), and electric vehicles are hard to repair or recycle. Their resale value is also problematic, as battery health cannot be accurately assessed.
Phasing out combustion engines also means condemning part of the population to limited mobility. Electric vehicles are ill-suited to rural areas due to range limitations, long distances, and insufficient charging infrastructure.
While France zealously applies Brussels’ harshest directives, other European countries are increasingly resisting eco-authoritarianism. Italy’s Giorgia Meloni has warned of “industrial desertification” and wants to “correct” the 2035 ban, calling it “absurd” and economically dangerous. Hungary denounces Brussels’ dogmatic approach and defends its energy autonomy. Even Germany, usually the model pupil, now promotes synthetic fuels: “We use CO₂ and hydrogen. These fuels are carbon neutral because the CO₂ is extracted from the air,” says Roland Dittmeyer, director of the Institute for Micro Process Engineering in Karlsruhe.
A divide is growing between one Europe that obeys and another that questions.
LEZ: Freedom of Movement Under Threat
Let’s stay with cars for a moment :
Low Emission Zones (LEZ), promoted by the EU, aim to ban older vehicles from major urban areas to meet European air quality standards. Their rollout was expected to accelerate in 2025.
But in France, a political shift has occurred. After being slowed down in May 2025 by an RN-UDR alliance in Parliament, the extension of LEZs was challenged again in June 2025, when the National Assembly voted in favor of abolishing them. This vote sends a strong signal, though it is not yet final: the bill must still pass through the Senate and may face legal challenges. This move reflects growing resistance to Brussels’ agenda, often accused of sacrificing individual freedoms in the name of coercive environmentalism.
But elsewhere, LEZs are spreading: 300 zones exist in Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, and the UK.
LEZs will continue to multiply, along with banned vehicles, turning “low emission zones” into “high exclusion zones.”
As a result, millions of Europeans will have to buy new vehicles to keep driving. The car — a symbol of freedom and autonomy for the middle and working classes — becomes a luxury. Public subsidies are inadequate. According to a French parliamentary report, “the average out-of-pocket cost for households and businesses receiving aid still exceeds €20,000, and can reach €40,500 for a new plug-in hybrid.” These costs are unaffordable for more and more Europeans, already burdened by inflation — not to mention skyrocketing electricity prices.
LEZs deepen the divide between green-converted cities and rural or peripheral areas. Pollster Jérôme Fourquet describes it as a split between “ecological oases” and “backyard France.” And beware of non-compliance: in France, fines range from €68 for private vehicles to €135 for trucks and buses. Elsewhere, they climb: €100 in Germany and Greece, €200 in Madrid, and over €350 in Brussels.
In reality, ecologists aim to force people to give up their individual freedom of movement, especially by car, in favor of collective transport or carpooling, if those even exist in their area. This top-down green collectivism betrays the core suspicion, or misunderstanding, of individual freedom within modern ecological ideology.
And in the rest of Europe? In Italy, despite Rome’s public hesitations, cities like Milan and Rome are enforcing LEZs. Budapest maintains a local zone. People endure, while local technocracies enforce Brussels’ plan. Another fracture between center and periphery, between imposed norms and denied freedoms.
Energy Ratings: A Social Time Bomb in Europe
In 2024, a new EU directive requires all new buildings to be zero-emission by 2030, and all existing buildings to be upgraded by 2050. In France, the main tool is the DPE (Energy Performance Diagnosis). But the system artificially penalizes electrically heated homes (multiplying energy use by 2.3), even though they emit less CO₂.
Since 2023, homes rated G can no longer be rented; F-rated homes follow in 2028, E-rated in 2034. This eliminates tens of thousands of rental units, worsens the housing crisis, and ruins small landlords who can’t afford costly renovations — triggering a housing disaster. Fraud is rampant, with shady deals between landlords, agents, and inspectors. “It’s become a nightmare, a scammer’s paradise,” says a former inspector.
Some countries are fighting back. Hungary refuses to mandate renovations without massive subsidies. Slovakia plans exemptions and a softer timeline. Italy has officially asked Brussels to relax its targets, citing the need to protect popular housing.
The Awakening of the Peoples Against the Green Utopia
One key figure: the EU accounts for less than 7% of global CO₂ emissions , France alone, just 1%. And yet, Europeans face massive restrictions.
But who wants their freedom of movement, housing, or consumption to be restricted? For green policies to gain acceptance, they must meet three criteria: they must not worsen social and economic inequality, they must have measurable impact, and they must be gradual rather than abrupt.
This dogmatic climate policy, designed in Brussels, places the burden on the most vulnerable while weakening our energy and industrial sovereignty.
But a European resistance is rising. Italy under Meloni, Hungary under Orbán, and others are rejecting this punitive and one-size-fits-all vision. They remind us that a true ecological transition must be realistic, fair, and respectful of individual liberties.
If the EU continues down this path of uniform and socially explosive measures, it risks a massive political backlash, from peoples who refuse to be the ones paying the price for green utopia.
