- Europe
- Inde
Less Brussels, More Freedom: A Case for a Decentralized Europe
Faced with Brussels’ bureaucratic stranglehold, Carlo Lottieri makes the case for a decentralized Europe rooted in subsidiarity, economic freedom, and competitive federalism inspired by the Swiss model.
One of the scourges of contemporary Europe is regulatory inflation. It is the consequence of the success of socialist culture and results in a gradual erosion of individual freedoms, stemming from the proliferation of norms and regulations. Instead of law as a set of a few fundamental principles based on respect for others and their basic freedoms, we now face a complex system of legislation born from the arbitrary decisions of members of the ruling class.
About two thousand years ago, in the context of Roman society, the refined culture of the jurists defined those golden formulas that succinctly express the very essence of law: “neminem laedere, honeste vivere, suum cuique tribuere” (“to harm no one, to live honorably, to give each their due”).
Nothing could be further from the ancient wisdom of the founders of our legal civilization than the voluminous codes that contain the rules we are expected to follow every day.
Paradoxically, the more rules there are, the less genuine law remains. This reflects a political culture that elevates the arbitrariness of regulation over the objectivity of law whether understood as natural law, inscribed in reality, or as historical law, the long-term outcome of countless interactions and thus of a tradition.
Homo Bureaucraticus: The New European Everyman
The convergence between the political centralization desired by the Eurocrats and the interventionist culture of contemporary elites (political, economic, and cultural) has created a new anthropological type: homo bureaucraticus. Originally confined to state administration, this bureaucratic identity is now indistinguishable from that of the average citizen.
In this regard, the case of French agriculture is particularly telling: once a domain of free enterprises, it is now increasingly dominated by regulatory and redistributive mechanisms. This is the result of the combined effect of EU directives and the way the French parliament has transposed them into national law. The outcome is that the Rural Code has grown from 755 pages in 1965 to over 3,000 pages today. Similar situations have occurred throughout Europe and across all sectors.
The problem is that this vast network of regulations ends up stifling any room for free enterprise and innovation.
Whereas half a century ago a young person interested in starting a business would first assess the specific market, his own skills, and the necessary resources, today the first questions for a prospective entrepreneur are whether such an activity is even allowed and under what conditions. In the mindset of today’s European, anything not explicitly permitted is assumed to be forbidden or, at best, ambiguously defined.
Taxation Feeds Bureaucracy
In Europe, many fail to understand that every regulation (clearly distinguished from genuine law) restricts exchanges and contracts, thereby preventing actions that both parties consider mutually beneficial. In addition, this vast and overly detailed web of rules blocks the path of those who – by definition – is trying to create something that did not exist before: the entrepreneur driven by innovation.
The reasons for this growing regulation are many, but one – undoubtedly – can be linked to the expansion of taxation. Many Western states have stolen the future and opportunities from new generations by borrowing without restraint. From the United States to Japan, from Greece to Italy, from France to Belgium, many countries have public debt levels well above 100 % of GDP.
As a result, many governments now find themselves having to account for every single euro in order to ensure that they can collect their “tribute” on every transaction or other activity. Rising debt leads to high taxation, which in turn requires – so as to avoid tax evasion – the construction of a vast tangle of rules to be followed.
One clear example of this is the laws regulating cash use, as well as the increasing obligations imposed on homeowners (especially in the relatively new short‑term rental market).
In this context, a large number of people who thought they could reinvent themselves as micro‑entrepreneurs – competing with hotels and other traditional operators – have had to abandon their plans, since the bureaucratic burden became too heavy.
Within this framework it is painfully obvious that public authorities have become the center of the scene, while citizens, families, businesses, associations, and other social forces have been marginalized.
Decentralisation and the Path to Autonomy
Escaping this trap requires, above all, a cultural revolution: it is essential to rekindle a culture of freedom and the dignity of those who intend to live honestly and to undertake ventures in service of others’ needs. It makes no sense that splitting a room in two, without even touching the load‑bearing walls, requires administrative authorization – or that converting a property classified as an office into a residence must go through a tortuous bureaucratic process and a hefty payment. Those who want to return to a simpler, more genuine world must speak up.
Moreover, it is vital to stop the creation of a “Super‑State” based in Brussels. Every form of centralized decision‑making favors socialist and illiberal logics, paving the way for an explosion of regulations. The 27 EU member states must resist the elites’ effort to eliminate all capacity for self‑government and all forms of distinct identity.
This is precisely why it is urgent to recover the lesson of competitive federalism:
- by allowing each political entity to govern itself, we foster healthy competition between different systems. Each population can adopt the solutions that suit it best, what makes sense in Sweden may not in Greece and, above all, each community is encouraged to choose the most effective models.
True competitive federalism should not be limited to the EU’s state‑level actors, but should also return maximum decision‑making freedom to local entities.
“Swissify Europe”: A Path to Local Freedom
A society like Switzerland derives its strength from being a country of under 10 million people, divided into 26 cantons and some 1,000 municipalities, each enjoying substantial fiscal and regulatory autonomy.
The idea to “swissify Europe” (“hélvetizer l’Europe”) was elaborated many decades ago by Denis de Rougemont, an original political theorist from Neuchâtel, who opposed to any centralized unification project and imagined a Europe of regions and autonomies.
To some extent, de Rougemont was naive, as he failed to see that the European project from the outset aimed to unify (not to emancipate communes and regions), but part of his message is still alive.
A Europe free from Brussels directives and endowed with broad local autonomy would produce effective tools to sanction those who multiply obligations and seek to standardize everything.
Greater freedom for people to move where they are treated better (and without having to travel hundreds of kilometers, change language and culture, etc.) would incentivize political classes to better serve society.
Hence, there is a great ideological battle to fight against the proliferation of the most abstruse rules (as seen in the body of eco‑regulations), but there are also concrete institutional options to adopt. A combination of the two could result in a better, less suffocating Europe.
