February 15, 2025 - 10:00am
It’s easy to see why everyone in politics is talking about JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference yesterday. It was an astonishing speech, for several reasons, and one likely to be remembered as a watershed moment in post-World War II transatlantic relations.
In sharp contrast with the diplomatic platitudes often heard at these public events, the US Vice President launched a scathing and surprisingly blunt attack on Europe’s authoritarian and anti-democratic drift, accusing continental leaders of engaging in rampant censorship and even cancelling elections, as recently occurred in Romania. In his view, European governments do this in a desperate attempt to hold on to power and suppress the democratic backlash against their flawed policies — first and foremost mass immigration.
Vance directly called out the European Commission for threatening to shut down social media during civil unrest, and said he was shocked to hear a former European commissioner — he was referring to Thierry Breton — applaud Romania’s unprecedented decision to annul the elections following EU pressure over alleged Russian interference, and threaten to do the same in Germany should the AfD triumph.
In his sweeping attack, Vance didn’t exempt the UK either, harshly condemning the criminalisation of silent prayer as the sign of a broader tendency of European governments to encroach upon fundamental freedoms under the guise of social progressivism. He concluded by calling upon European leaders to “believe in democracy” — in other words, to step aside and allow a new generation of populists to take charge.
Vance’s comments have predictably sent shockwaves across Europe, sparking sharp criticism from mainstream leaders and pundits while earning enthusiastic praise from conservatives and populist sympathisers. Those of us who have long warned of Europe’s turn away from democracy will have felt a rush of schadenfreude at seeing these feckless leaders being scolded by their transatlantic master.
However, Vance’s remarks were also riddled with contradictions, not least because the United States has been an active participant — and often a guiding force — behind many of the very policies he condemned. While Vance’s attack on European authoritarianism is compelling, his omission of the US role in these developments is just as notable. The case of Romania illustrates this perfectly. As the entrepreneur and political commentator Arnaud Bertrand pointed out on X, it was the US State Department that first issued a statement expressing concern over Russian involvement, two days before the Romanian constitutional court annulled the election. American involvement also extends to the crucial role played by US-funded NGOs in orchestrating this unprecedented judicial intervention.
In short, the EU didn’t act independently: it followed the US’s lead. It’s therefore a bit rich for Vance to lecture the Europeans about democratic backsliding without acknowledging America’s instrumental role in setting the precedent. The same applies to censorship policies. Much of the EU’s approach to online censorship was developed in close coordination with American agencies and tech companies. The current Brussels content moderation framework is not a uniquely European creation — it was heavily influenced by American practices and pressures, particularly in the wake of US concerns over “disinformation”.
Indeed, as former US State Department official Mike Benz has highlighted, Nato — an organisation largely steered by Washington — has been instrumental in developing a the “anti-disinformation” framework that has significantly influenced global internet censorship policies. Vance completely ignores this reality as well, portraying Europe as the sole architect of policies that were, in fact, transatlantically coordinated — if not led by the US.
More broadly, it is important to recognise that the feebleness of today’s European leadership is not incidental. It is, in part, the result of decades of US efforts to keep Europe in a state of strategic vassalage and subordination. Washington has consistently cultivated European politicians willing to prioritise American interests over those of their own nations and citizens. This broader context is also completely absent from Vance’s speech.
On top of this, for all the talk of the US “disengagement” from Europe, the reality is that the Trump administration is continuing the longstanding tradition of US meddling in European politics — evident in its explicit backing of populist parties such as the AfD. Regardless of whether one supports this agenda or not, the fact remains that it represents yet another form of external influence.
Vance’s remarks may not necessarily signal a break in US-European relations, but rather the beginning of a new phase of American ideological dominance. Instead of fostering European autonomy, this shift would simply mark the transition from the liberal-progressive hegemonic phase to a post-liberal one, with the US still dictating the terms.
Thomas Fazi is an UnHerd columnist and translator. His latest book is The Covid Consensus, co-authored with Toby Green.
battleforeurope
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“ While Vance’s attack on European authoritarianism is compelling, his omission of the US role in these developments is just as notable.”
Did the author actually listen to the speech? Vance openly stated that the US was also a problem at this point.
True! Not a great article!
It’s a little unfair to blame the new US administration for the anti-democratic policies of their predecessors or, for that matter, to absolve European leaders pursuing anti-democratic policies on the grounds that they are ‘only following orders’.
I suspect a majority of Europeans and Brits outside the metropolitan elites will endorse Vance’s criticism.
The problem is there is not one US policy – different fiefdoms within the US government make their own policies, in an uncoordinated fashion and often contradictory.
It is obvious why our current crop of US NGO, think tank and foundation-incubated “leaders” feel existentially threatened – leeching off the US for jobs and assisted thinking is their life-blood. Mature leaders would sit back and bring out the popcorn, secure in the knowledge that this too shall pass.
I get the point about the new administration, but all the equality, trans, DEI, BLM, trans, mass migration and eco nonsense originated in the US and infiltrated Europe under the sponsorship of successive US administrations, and as vassal states we did not get much but to eat it up yum, yum.
One of my hopes following Brexit was that with the main gateway closed US poison might find it a bit more difficult to penetrate the rest of Europe
However, Mr Fazi is either blind to, or cognitively dissonant of, the fact the Europeans sniggered at Trump 45 and ignored his orders. The Progressive garbage spewed into Europe was carried out under Biden and Obama. And the lunatic Leftists there were delighted to welcome it.
So no, neither this Trump administration nor the previous one is to blame necessarily. So Fazi is the one contradicting, not Vance. Not very savvy reportage.
I agree entirely agree and their discomfort (that is the Europeans and the British political establishment) is a joy to behold.
If only DT would contact me I could help him plan some more humiliations. How about an investigation into the attempt by the British Labour Party to interfere with the US Presidential election for starters.
Nah. It came out of the WEF in Davis, and out from whatever rock Soros is hiding.
Indeed and the author seems to be unable to differentiate between “contradictions” and “hipocracy”. Just because some previous US governments may possibly have encouraged certain responses from European governments – does not in any way amount to the claimed “contradictions” in the speech. The authors opinion is either intentionally disingenuous or just poorly thought through.
I doubt that Europeans and Brits outside the metropolitan elites listened to JD Vance’s speech or would care about it if they did. He was too much in the abstract. Too little about doing things in the real world. Like ending the war in Ukraine, which is about the real enemy. JD Vance’s talk about “the enemy within” sounded like the silliest McCarthyism.
And I doubt that Europeans will want to follow American demands no matter what they are. I as an American, for example, don’t much care to be lectured by European leaders even when I agree with what they say. It’s not their place to tell me what to do.
I disagree. I think the speech was incredibly refreshing. In Britain, and Europe, we are, after all, living with the threats of the elimination of democracy from an increasing authoritarian state with no effective leaders to inspire an opposition to this. There have been tangible consequences for people as a result of ideology and the threat is from within.
So what’s the answer to the threat from within? Give speeches? Insult the audience you are speaking to? I didn’t hear anything constructive suggested by JD Vance in his speech. Just haranguing about a problem as though that will solve it.
That’s what lawyers do, like JD Vance is. Litigators get up and tear into the other side as though they are ignorant and evil and don’t have a single argument in their favor. They go to war, but everyone knows that wars don’t solve problems, they only make them worse.
Look at the war in Ukraine (which JD Vance should have been talking about). Has three years of horrific death and destruction there done anybody any good?
The war exists because a populations freedom of expression is denied.
Vance told the audience that their policies could be anti-democratic and detrimental to the citizens of the societies they govern, and he gave several uncomfortable examples of this. He admitted the same about his own country too. This is an audience full of people that have failed for a long time now to be concerned about the needs of their own populations. Quite frankly they need to be insulted. And we need to hear this.
i thought JD Vance’s ideas were fine but that he, figuratively speaking, misread the room and did more harm than good. In politics, timing and context are just as important as the message itself. Even if JD Vance’s ideas had merit, delivering them in a setting where the audience holds different views can indeed backfire.
For instance, Greta Thunberg has a strong and loyal following in Sweden, in Scandinavia, and perhaps to a lesser extent, in Europe, and the condescending and negative remark about her tends to be met with resistance.
It’s a tricky balance for any politician to find the right tone and message for their audience. When they give a speech, they want the audience to react in a certain way. They don’t want them to think, “that’s a brilliant speech”. They want them to go beyond thinking to act, to do things that matter in the real world.
What is going to be the reaction to JD Vance’s scolding and insults? what does he hope to accomplish? I hope he thought this through before he made his speech and that he made them with a purpose in mind. Because I just don’t see what that purpose could possibly be.
Anyone who is a loyal follower of Thunberg is a religious zealot without a clue. She’s proposing to impoverish the industrial world to avoid a 1.5 degree Celsius temperature increase. That’s insanity.
Man is a tropical creature. We can handle any temperature increase as long as we keep economic growth strong. The central UN forecast is that world p.c. GDP will grow by 275% in the next 75 years. If there was no warming, it would grow by 300%. It’s a totally manageable cost.
and very important, if not the most important, is that the audience of this speech was EU citizens, not EU elites, and its aim was to support people who feel intimidated and rejected, and to show them that the wind of change is coming – at least I hope so
I heard his speech and I live at the tip of Africa. X.
Are people there talking about the speech? Do you think it will affect your country’s policy?
I think Trump/Vance are already affecting S Africa’s politicians in a big way
Not so. In my village pub there was much support for Vance .
Interesting. I didn’t expect that.
But what are people saying they are going to do about it? Did JD Vance change anyone’s mind? Or did he just appeal to those who already thought like he does?
Actions speak a lot louder than words, and it’s more important to look at what people do than what they say. That’s why speeches mean little. I can’t think of a single speech that changed history unless it prompted people to take actions that actually did the changing.
Advertiser David Ogilvy (and classicist) captured this when he said,
Peggy Noonan did too. She was a speechwriter for the elder president George Bush, and now writes for the Wall Street Journal. She told a story about the designer Coco Chanel.
Too often speeches sound brilliant but result in nothing. British advertising executive Jon Steel tells this story:
JD Vance is a brilliant man and I like a lot (though far from all) of his ideas. But I don’t think he knows how to get things done in the real world, and that, more than the ability to give good speeches, is what we need. I think his speech did more harm than good.
The world economy, for better or worse, is largely powered by American middle class consumers and their cast iron stomach for tolerating debt. We’re therefore the world’s most important export market.
Why should we trade with people who think free speech, fair elections, and personal liberties are for ignoramuses?
Similarly, though our military has badly degraded over the last decade or two, we still have the world’s most fearsome military.
What is it our forces are defending? Sneering, psuedo-intellectual Eurocrats? Greta Thunberg? Charvet and Hermes-clad “civil servants?”
If Europe and the American left are so concerned about “democracy,” perhaps they should look up the term. Their definition of “democracy” sounds more like Sloan Ranger socialism.
As Vance said, “There is a new sheriff in town.”
Brilliant speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCOsgfINdKg
Make your own minds up.
I loved his comment about Greta!!
I loved his comment cutting Musk down to size – no more impactful than teenage greenie. A lot of truth in that!
What was his comment about Greta?
Never mind, I found it. “Trust me, I say this with all humor, if American democracy can survive 10 years of Greta Thunberg’s scolding, you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.”
A gratuitous insult like that is not going to play well in Sweden, or elsewhere in Scandinavia or broader Europe. It plays to JD Vance’s American audience, but that won’t help change Europe.
Vance is a political tabula rasa with no personal track record to defend. To date I have seen the incoming Administration seek to implement the mandate they were elected on including dismantling some of the institutions responsible for Fazi’s criticisms. It doesn’t pay to be naive – politics is a dirty and often self-seeking business – but Vance’s speech will resonate with many millions of Europeans. When out “leaders” stop the invasion, rape, and terror perhaps we will feel differently. In the immediate aftermath of the Munich attack, Vance simply looks like a man holding up a mirror. At this point I’m happy to believe it’s 2 way..
“not least because the United States has been an active participant”
Except he explicitly did refer to the past administration’s role in the current state of affairs, hence new sheriff in town..
As for the conclusion, yes, the USA is stronger than us, incomparably so.
Not their fault, ours.
The consequences are ours to pay for, not them. Why is that remotely shocking? The only thing we Europeans should have paid attention to back in 2015 when Trump put the topic on the table… No, we just laughed at him. Sniggered. Snarled. We knew better. Good grief the conceit!
The intelligentsia’s childish and naive perception of the world where you can expand eastwards without consequence despite Russia emphatically telling you there will be, where you can multiply energy costs tenfold whilst building more coal plants and actually increasing your carbon emissions, where you can accept racist immigrants filled with hate in their millions, where you can ignore vast sections of the voters because unlike the immigrants, you can call them racist, where you can, in short, behave as though all Europeans need to be protected from themselves.
In fact the intelligentsia has proclaimed itself superior. Just because. It is this lack of faith in humanity, this lack of hope, this adversity to risk, which is pushing us to the brink. And no, I am not American, but I totally fail to see why we would be worth defending.
Well that’s no surprise is it? Unherd didn’t like his speech either. Democracy? What’s that?
Vance also alluded to Tommy Robinson, ‘imprisoning journalists…’
‘Silenced ‘ has been watched 157 million times around the world.
No one has watched it at Unherd.
It’s no surprise this writer didn’t understand the reference.
Unherd is part of the problem. It actively undermines democracy. It is so compromised they wouldn’t even know they are doing it.
Is it really necessary to add this many comments? Maybe you can bring all your thoughts together in one?
It’s that one thought leads to another.
There’s an edit function.
I think it’s fine to add as many comments as one likes. Why not?
You can but it’s irritating for other users when the entire feed is taken up by one name and the technical functions mean there is no need to post 10 comments for 10 different thoughts.
It’s not that hard to scroll past a comment or ten when you see the name Richard Littlewood. I do it all the time.
Now for me Katharine Eyre’s name always gets a comment read. Or at least it has. But I don’t like to read churlish comments about other commenters’ commenting habits, boorish though they may be. Maybe next time I’ll scroll instead of read.
No one is picking up what Vance said. What are the values Europe is protecting from Russia and China? If Europe doesn’t care for or protect democracy then there is no difference between Europre and Russia and China.
There is nothing there for USA to defend.
There has been no diference in the democracy stake between Europe. US, Russia and China since UK, US, Europe handed over Palestine to the terror gangs of zionism without so much as a by your leave of the inhabitants of the country.
When a tough issue arises, the bigot always finds a way to support tge genocidal muderers and to blame the victims.
Exactly!
Contradictions? Perhaps the most undiplomatic–and factual–speech I have ever heard from someone in such a senior position.
I don’t have a problem with undiplomatic criticism, but the speech also contained outright falsehoods!It’s a shame that the US VP did not fact-check his speech when he was given it.
Please list these….
OK
Re Smith-Connor’s conviction. Smith-Connor was convicted of breaching a safe zone in October last year, after refusing repeated requests (made over a period 1hr and 40mins) to move away from outside an abortion clinic in Bournemouth in November 2022.
Scotland. Private prayer at home is not prohibited within safe access zones and no letter has ever suggested it was.
Romania. No ‘European court’ cancelled elections there – it was an internal matter.
Germany, he claimed police had carried out “raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of ‘combating misogyny’ on the internet”. In fact German police carried out raids last March on the homes of people suspected of posting misogynistic hate speech on the internet, including those advocating rape or sexual assault. Police raided homes and interrogated 45 suspects in 11 states. None of the suspects were detained.
That enough for you?
Why? Was he causing an obstruction? No, he was silently praying. Thought crime.
You don’t have to make a noise to be intimidating – all he had to do was move away to perform his silent ritual, as per the law, and he refused.
A subtle and disingenuous difference. If he handed out leaflets advertising a take-away restaurant would it be illegal? How would anyone know what was going on in his head? The police only knew he was praying because he was honest. Wow! That’s appalling!
Burst out laughing about the Scotland reference. Laughed off the rest as a result. Are you for real?
Certainly more real than Vance – what he said about Scotland was a lie, so I can’t see what your issue is.
For one thing, Thierry Breton didn’t applaud the cancelation of the Romanian election and threaten to do the same to Germany. He said that the EU agreed to open an investigation into TikTok (at the request of Romanian authorities) to see if it had violated the digital rights law prior to the Romanian election, and that it would do the same if German authorities suspected TikTok violated the law regarding its elections.
There is rampant misrepresentation on the Internet of Thierry Breton’s comment, but I never thought it would be blatantly misrepresented in JD Vance’s speech. Free speech does have its drawbacks. Half the things I see on Substack are false or misleading. Even here on UnHerd it’s hard to sift through the false to get to the true.
If UK throws Tommy Robinson in prison for accusing the media and politicians and judiciary of corruption what makes us any different to Russia and China?
Why bother to defend UK?
I have no answer.
Don’t ignore what Vance was saying.
TR was sent to prison firstly for criminal fraud, and then for criminal contempt of court. No wonder you don’t have an answer if you don’t know the facts!
Why the downvotes for stating facts?
Because they are not the facts Tony. You are regurgitating the State line promulgated by the State controlled progressive MSM. Wake up!
The facts are that he was jailed for fraud and then for criminal contempt of court – in what way is that wrong? Happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
One day Unherd will open up the discussion for why he is in prison. He defended a 15yr old English boy who was accused of racist bullying of a Syrian refugee. The libel case was a scandal. An indictment of British justice.
One day it will be infamous. Another shameful event in recent British history.
He almost ruined a trial by publicly repeating his lies. And previously he was jailed for fraud – was that a con?
It was very clearly a Deep State set up Tony. Why were the teachers bribed then forced to sign a NDA? Why was the school then shut down?
Refugees welcome lol … don’t go against the narrative Tony.
The progressive State, government, Muslim mayor, complicit MSM and far left extremist Org and part time MI5 helper, Hope not Hate all conspired to white wash this story.
TR exposed it and is now paying the price.
You may look down your nose at TR and yes, he’s a bit of a chancer but he’s also a brave, intelligent and tenacious man with his heart in the right place.
Islam is the greatest threat to Britain (and indeed the whole western world) we have ever faced. Look at the result of 6% being made up of them! Imagine 16%!
Wake up Tony!
Tommy Robinson (the Zionist whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) is a lying anti-Muslim thug who would be only too happy to see race war on British streets. Idiots like him should be exposed for what they are, and never allowed to tear the UK apartapart
PS they should also be treated like anyone else under the law, and given his full rights. But: He’s not in jail for saying things that the establishment don’t like. He broke the law and made repeated false allegations against someone. He has previously been in jail for fraud, public order offenses, and drug related issues.
Bit rich for Trump’s deputy to complain about people disputing the outcome of an election.
“Cancelling”
Not really as they cancelled it without any proof or material evidence. Still!
Hold on Om – the Unherd commentariat don’t want facts which get in the way of their prejudices!
Yes, the Islamic invaders brook no resistance.
The writer condemns Vance because of ‘contradictions’ in U.S. policy, but fails to mention that the policies were those of the previous administration, which Vance has every right to criticise, and which are currently being dismantled. The contradiction here is in the article, not the speech.
Unherd by ignoring the corruption in the UK is party to it. Just as Tommy Robinson claims in Silenced.
He posted that film on X knowing he would be sent to prison for 2 years.
Vance didn’t ignore the US’s own mistakes, he mentioned them at several points. Also, to go into too many avenues of shared culpability would have lessened the impact of his speech which was nothing less than historic and truly exhilarating as we watched feckless and arrogant European leaders squirming in their seats. What a joy to watch. The fact that only 2 people clapped when he called for the defence of freedom of speech speaks VOLUMES about current attitudes among European elites.
I don’t see the support of the AFD by MAGA as continued US meddling: it’s more like a return-to-sender tactic after German politicians and media openly supported Harris. This is the US saying quite clearly and fairly to Europeans: if you dish it out, you’ve got to take it too.
I just love Vance and I loved this speech.
It was a clear reaffirmation of the values of freedom and liberty that we’re fast losing sight of in Europe…while the Americans are fearlessly clawing them back. I know which side I’m on.
Do you think the speech accomplished anything? Do people react the way you want them to when you insult and rail against them? History says no. I agree with a lot of what JD Vance said, but think he would have been more effective if he had been less, a lot less, of a scold.
Believe me, the German establishment needed that scold and it needed it in a very public way because they do not seem able to self correct and the situation there is getting critical. The same applies to Musk’s comments on the UK grooming gangs. He didn’t seem that clued up on it, but drawing such massive global attention to what was and is a comprehensive state failure over decades made it impossible to sweep under the carpet which is where it would have stayed if the matter had remained domestic.
So you think Elon Musk’s muckraking will bring about change? I don’t. I don’t pay much attention to what the richest man in the world thinks I should think, and I don’t think most other people do either.
Same with JD Vance. So he scolds the German establishment and wins the adulation of the AfD, a controversial party because of its occasional open support of the National Socialists of the 1930s and 40s (commonly known by another name that rhymes with Fazi). He also gets the applause of Russia. Is that going to help or hurt democracy in Europe?
I think it hurts. Don’t be an attack dog like JD Vance if you want to bring about change. Be a big, rambunctious Saint Bernard like Donald Trump, who slobbers all over and is annoying but by throwing his weight around without seeming to gets things done.
Perhaps it would have been clearer had he said something like, “I wonder whether it might be possible that some aspects of free speech are undergoing challenges of a detrimental nature that might possibly even be interpreted as possible threats to open discourse when taken as a whole and observed in the context of a comparative analysis of the totality of speech when used in any form that openly states a harmless but debatable manner.”
You’re right, JD Vance gave a good speech, much better than a Kamala Harris speech would have been. My question is, did his speech accomplish anything more than hers would have? Or by being both brilliant but biased and barbed, did JD Vance’s speech accomplish less?
I don’t know! But at least it was clear and cogent. I would rather hear straight criticism than verbiage that hides a message.
Many of Trump administration Courtiers current utterances are deliberately more WWF than serious diplomacy. They play to the WWF crowd and the Show of course is fake. Just takes a while to work out that’s the Trump style and hence copied by his acolytes desperate for their bit of spotlight.
European politicians in real positions of responsibility will of course not unduly respond and certainly won’t point out the obvious irony – Trumpster and his crew tried to overturn the 2020 election despite losing popular vote by 7million.
It’ll be no bad thing if the effect is an increase in European defence spending – albeit the issue with defence spending is sometimes less the total than doing it effectively.
Nonetheless the WWF show can confuse and may encourage Autocrats. The Trump administration is going to get judged on competency in due course and the honeymoon period does not last for ever. Eventually folks get a bit bored by WWF.
They literally cancelled an election in Romania because the winner is opposed to building a NATO base that will be twice as large as the biggest one in Germany. Where is the rebuke from the EU?
No. The election was cancelled on account of massive and blatant ‘state actor’ interference… by Russia trying to keep some puppets in place.
See, for example, US State Dept statement Dec.’24: (which of course the Trump admin could delete at any monent): https://ro.usembassy.gov/statement-on-romanian-constitutional-courts-ruling-on-romanias-presidential-elections/#:~:text=We%20note%20the%20Romanian%20Constitutional,investigations%20into%20foreign%20malign%20influence.
All the evidence suggests that the Romanian election was annulled by Romanians due to internal political squabbling rather than EU pressure. Thierry Breton’s comment is being grossly misinterpreted on the internet to suggest otherwise. Sad to see JD Vance do the same thing in his speech.
You see JV, the comments from others on Rumania show it was a little more complicated. Yet you wanted to believe JD’s allegation. You won’t have read up on the detail. I doubt you are that interested in Rumanian politics. So why was that?
Ok so I ‘get’ we all tend to jump at stuff that confirms our preferences and bias. I have to stop myself sometimes too.
A very fair article. It is difficult to dispute.
As to “Washington has consistently cultivated European politicians willing to prioritise American interests over those of their own nations and citizens. This broader context is also completely absent from Vance’s speech.”
a certain BLair sprang to mind, the Iraq war and Extradition Act 2003. I understand that 2Teir also threw his lot in, admittedly with the previous administration, with the Chagos Islands and his support for the extraditions of Gary McKinnon
What a joy it was to watch our spineless and uninspiring leaders squirming as the child told them the emperor had no clothes on. They are yesterday’s men now. The attempted rebuttal by Pistorius was like the bleating of a dying sheep. Vance’s words will spread around Europe and find support as we look at alternatives to the leadership we’ve saddled ourselves with in upcoming elections. Thomas Fazi, you write great articles, but here I think you’ve got hold of the wrong end of the stick.
David Eades
Hear hear
Trump-Vance aren’t responsible for the last 40 years of neoliberal America.
He’s speaking in the understanding that he represents a change, and that the Europeans will have to adapt.
Partial disengagement from Nato and dismantling of USAid doesn’t seem like a continuation of American hegemony either. Seems like the opposite.
I feel duty bound to point out it is USAID and not USAid. Quite a distinctive difference….
So Mr Fazi blames this administration for the idiot progressive policies of the past administration that Europe happily followed. Unbelievably myopic.
Because let’s face it and have some honesty here. There is no real “Contradiction” from Vance. These European leftists followed their US orders only from US leftists and they have been delighted to do so. The orders from the U.S. under Biden and Obama were exactly what they wanted to hear. It wasn’t an order for them to enact progressive nonsense, it was a green light! In reality they sniggered and scoffed and largely ignored US orders from Trump 45, which they considered a mere hiccup in their march to authoritarianism.
How on earth Thomas Fazi can’t see this is beyond me. It’s this article that’s actually full of contradictions.
How on earth Thomas Fazi can’t see this is beyond me
Let me help you. Thomas is a socialist. Or f…ist, because these entities are synonyms of the same evil
Vance is part of a crowd which empowers and enables a gang of terrorists to destroy their victims in Palestine all the while feigning to be fighting a war on terror. I think a period of silence on his part on freedom of speech and democracy would be welcome.
What would be even more welcome would be silence on the part of the pro-Palestinian mob in support of Hamas, whose stated goal is to wipe Israel off the map and attacked innocent Israelis on October 7 2023, thus bringing down the fully justified retaliation of Israel in its determination to defend itself against Islamist-inspired murder, rape and filmed torture of young women – absolute cowards.
There you are. Stop attacking Israel and you (we) can all live in peace.
It’s simple. The USA is under new management.
Vance’s excellent speech has given tens of millions real hope. Let’s hope it is indeed the end of the liberal globalist order.
However, while yes, it was the US pushing much of the toxic Post Modernist poison or the Critical Justice Theories that so plague our continent it most certainly wasn’t this administration. New management can’t be responsible for old Neocon bankrupt ideology.
End all MENAP and Sub Saharan migration AND asylum now. Remigration must start soon.
Weak argument- it relies on blaming the Trumpets for the Biden administration policies.
If you want to actually attack them you could point out that they’ve got the blood of thousands of innocent Palestinian women, children, and men on their hands.
Or for encouraging the release of Palestinian soldiers so they can repeat the rapes and murders of innocent Israeli women and children all over again.
The derogatory naming of the majority of Americans hardly seems constructive. If one wishes to call out the blood on hands of thousands of Hazans, perhaps it should be on those actually responsible: Iranian mullahs and their paid puppets, Hamas.
I thought Vance recognised the faults of the US democracy, under Biden, of course, but they are only 1month into their administration and can rightly claim they have made progress on advancing free speech and democracy already.
Any true democrat in Europe will surely welcome this speech from Vance, no punches pulled, he told us as it is.
Mainland Europe is indeed in a dire position under the EU but elections due in France and Germany could bring huge change in Europe with Meloni already forging the way forward.
As for the UK we could be one of the very few socialist govts left in Europe by the end of the year, but it seems Starmer is going to find it difficult to deliver his socialist agenda, with Trump’s America and right of centre populists pulling strings in France and Germany.
The latest edition of the BBC cut-price chat show formerly known as Newsnight is worth watching. Simply because it is a contrived mirror image of Vance’s performance.
Like Vance, the two guests were also concerned about the internal threat in Europe but defined this as from the far-Right parties. The guests complained about US interference in European politics but only insofar as this encouraged the far-Right.
The viewer was never informed of the cancellation of democracy in Romania, nor of the activities of the State Department in it.
The two guests expressed no concern about all the other past American interference. A notable example being the activities of the American Committee on United Europe. The ACUE promoted the State Department’s obsession with a united Europe, channelling funds to individuals and organisations working for European integration, as well as financing anti-Communist parties. Though the major beneficiary was the European Movement.
In discussing support for British and other ‘boots on the ground’ in Ukraine, one of Newsnight’s guests, Lord Sumption, asserted that Gen Z would be like the generation who in 1936 declared that they would not fight for king and country but then did so in 1939.
But, my Lord, shouldn’t we make sure that Trident works properly before giving the Kremlin casus belli?
As for the faith in Gen Z, it’s sometimes sadly necessary to give someone everything they want and in double measure if they stubbornly refuse to listen to reason. Only then will they be satisfied, or learn wisdom and change their mind, or suffer self-immolation through their own desires. For them, there is no other way. And who could say the last outcome was unjust?
Thank you for providing the link to the speech. There were no contractions.
It’s a perfectly fair to ask the question of whether American “blood and treasure” should be used to prop up governments who are becoming increasingly undemocratic.
America has propped up many governments that are undemocratic, as long as they’re in America’s interests
True – but that wasn’t my point. Why should America prop up any country that doesn’t share its values ?
Warning # 1:
https://youtu.be/zloRqGYGaG8?si=yo8eYQPYI7SVT-aA
The author conveniently omits the fact that the US-influenced online censorship took place under the previous administration and was an important factor in Trump’s reelection. The US electorate returned Trump to the White House to break up the ideologically captured, progressive managerial state that influenced the EU to impose speech laws that US constitutional protections prevented them from imposing in the US. Why should Vance have acknowledged the US’s role in this when the only reason he was standing there addressing the Munich Security Conference in the first place was because he represents the American political repudiation of this madness and, simultaneously, the reaffirmation of the freedoms America has traditionally represented globally? He didn’t have to but yet he actually did acknowledge it. Did the author not watch the speech?
Instead of fostering European autonomy, this shift would simply mark the transition from the liberal-progressive hegemonic phase to a post-liberal one, with the US still dictating the terms
.
My God! Demand from Europe to spend more money on its own security is a “dictation of terms”…
Dear Fazi, you are either not familiar with elementary logic or you are sure that your readers are idiots.
I think the speech was a mistake. Vintage JD Vance, he insulted and railed against the other side to the applause of his own supporters back home. He didn’t convince the people he challenged, and so didn’t accomplish anything. That can be effective politics, but it doesn’t get things done.
JD Vance needs to start trying to get things done. He’s old enough now that he should have some accomplishments in his career other than just talking. He has his very successful book, but that didn’t get anything done. He was a venture capitalist, but a mediocre one and they aren’t known for getting things done either.
If JD Vance continues like this he’ll end up a Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. They rose high in political office, but they never in their long careers got anything of real worth done. All hat, no cattle.
If you want to get things done you can’t be at war all the time. You can’t be the lawyer, the litigator, focused solely on winning. You have to negotiate and conciliate and look for the win-win.
Donald Trump knows how to do that. JD Vance still needs to learn. I hope he does.
What on Earth are you talking about? You think he was there speaking as JD Vance? He was there as the representative of the new administration. He wasn’t trying to convince the EU; he was telling them that America isn’t going to play this game anymore with left-wing progressive authoritarianism in our allies. “There’s a new sheriff in town,” were his exact words.
You’re right that JD Vance said, “there’s a new sheriff in town”. But the new sheriff is the sheriff of the US, not the world, and JD Vance was speaking to world leaders. What’s that supposed to mean to them? Is he saying they have a new sheriff who’s going to police them? What right does the US have to do that?
And I spoke of JD Vance’s way of doing things because he needs to change if he wants to be effective. No matter what your message is, you shouldn’t give a speech like that. It’s arrogant and condescending. You’ll turn off most people and turn on the fanatics. You’ll never get things done.
I disagree. Vance was telling Europe that America’s back as the leader of the free world and they’d better fall in line. It wasn’t trying to convince them, there was a definite “or else” implied. I don’t know what you mean when you say, “what right does the US have to do that?”. The United States is the guarantor, both economically and militarily, of the Atlantic Alliance. The EU only exists because of the security umbrella the US has provided since WWII allowing Western European nations to spend nothing on their own defense. Things have changed, if you didn’t notice. The VP of the US isn’t going to come to Europe hat in hand meekly asking them to pull back on their authoritarian speech policing, anti-democratic cancellation of election results they don’t like, and disastrous migration policies. The VP of the US is going to stand up in front of the leaders of subordinate nations, tell them the way things are going to be from now on, and they’re going to listen if they want to continue reaping the benefits of alliance with the US.
I can’t tell if your argument is serious or sarcastic.
I think the question is, are you serious? Trump cut off all US foreign aid to South Africa on a dime when the ANC passed a law allowing them to just take farms from white Boer farmers. Trump isn’t afraid to punish nations suddenly and consequentially that don’t play along. EU leaders have no leverage and they know it, Trump knows it, and they know Trump knows it. That’s why he sent Vance to deliver that speech to them. They got the message.
The VP was pointing out that Europe is free to continue its path of increasing tyranny. Unjoined by the US.
VP Vance pointed out that the Emperor has no clothes. Fools they are, they take umbrage and flaunt the flaccid corpulence.
Just another pretentious BS shill post from Mr. Fazi. It is getting boring, actually.
There is no contradiction in Vance’s comments, only a stark contrast between Conservative democratic values presented by Vance and the woke authoritarian position of the Biden administration, namely that democracy was only ok if it elected radical liberals.
This article rather misses the central point. Vance’s point was that these so called democracies were increasingly denying freedom of speech and have imported millions of unwanted immigrants with no democratic mandate to do so -absolutely against the wishes of voters.
We could do with more honest plain speaking. Look at Europe. Look at the ceaseless immigration . Look at the attacks on citizens by Immigrants. Hands up if you voted for this .
Not a single EU politicians has ever spelt these truths out. It takes a true friend to tell you home truths.
Vance’s speech demonstrates and emphasizes the power shift between the US and the EU. The EU can whine, but the EU bigwigs are now clearly not bigwigs in US eyes, and Europe is not a player on the US radar. And if the EU attempts retaliation for Vance’s slights, the US still hasn’t played it’s tariff card. The bleatings sound like sheep that have lost the protection of their shepherd, and have little in the way of protecting themselves from the wolves to come.
Do you have hearing problems Mr. Fazi? he clearly stated the US had been a huge contributor to censorship! as he said, there is a new sheriff in town, the message was loud and clear. You obviously wanted to hear what you wanted to hear.
I’m disappointed on you son.
I mean honestly, did you even watch the speech? He SPECIFICALLY went out of his way to expressly acknowledge that America was at the forefront of the censorship industrial complex under the previous regime but promised that there was a new sheriff in town. This is really poor stuff from you.
Yes I’ve watched the whole speech and he does clearly acknowledge the US role.
Vance can’t be blamed for what happened before he became VP and he did say that there was a new sheriff in town. Without getting carried away I think we can take Vance at his word.
I agree, all the rhetoric boils down to “the game has changed, follow the new rules or else”. America signals its vassals the new course.
“Contradiction” is not an honest description of an announcement of a change of policy by the new administration.
Sorry, but you need to listen to the whole speech – Vance did acknowledge the US’s failings in these areas. He didn’t dwell on them, but he did mention them. This is partly why he said ‘there’s a new sheriff in town’ – i.e., America is under new management.
This is the bullet in the back of the head progressive liberalism needs.
We do need California to be dewormed though as much of the poison originates from there.
I don’t think Vance will make a lot of friends in Europe (Western Europe at least) by revealing his anti-abortion views.
Obama then Biden, inspired by Clinton and emulated by Cameron, spread DEI poison around the western democracies and thereby initiated a massive curtailment of free speech and civil liberties. Our present UK Prime Minister is a robotic enthusiast of the same damaging philosophy. I earnestly hope that Trump & Vance will not only destroy this contagion in the USA, but in the western democracies too and thereby return freedom and common sense to our existence.
Fazi got Vance’s speech wrong. The contradictions are in his article. And millions of Europeans will have been given hope at long last by his clarity and determination to confront all that has been so wrong in our liveds for far too long.
It’s like 10 years of reading polemical trolling on online journals/papers and internet platforms has somehow made acceptable a speech like this to a global political and media audience. A weird paradigm shift.
How bizarre to claim one is concerned about the frog March of to oblivion of civil liberties in Europe and then complain that about the messenger.
The following have all interacted: the neoliberal economic global model, producing gross inequalities; liberal democracy, producing governments with ever decreasing legitimacy; progressive social policies, devastating social cohesion; global security policies, maintaining Cold War era thinking while failing to deal with the real threats of terrorism.
The EU in particular has refused to recognise any of this, instead doubling down on much of it.
Vance has in one “ill-judged” speech yanked our failing so-called elite into reality. Any soft pedalling would have left them burbling and blundering on.
I doubt that Trump, especially with Musk as his stormtrooper, have the nous to really change things. Smashing failed policies and practices one by one with single point attacks is certainly long overdue, but what then? I do not believe they have any coherent vision.
Vance on the other hand clearly has intellectual heft, and a plausible vision of an alternative economic and social order; one that is not ideological but open to political debate in its implementation.
Let’s hope he gets the upperhand before chaos or AI overwhelm us.
.
Up until very recently US policy & NGO ocracy was essentially Neo-Marxist.
That is change society by changing the culture.
This is also in line with EU position.
Vance is simply sending a memo.
We’ve changed – so woe betide you if you don’t too.
And not before time.