I know this is a bold thesis. It is meant to provoke thought and encourage debate. Here are some of the considerations that led me to it:
-
Europe depends on US military protection, and the US uses this “alliance” as leverage -> NATO gives Washington structural influence over European security choices.
-
US tech firms dominate Europe’s cloud and software stack, creating digital dependency. Also, European data often sits under infrastructure exposed to US legal and corporate power.
-
Russian energy dependence was a problem for Europe when the Ukraine war started. The US were quite eager when it came to “help” by replacing the Russian energy dependence with American energy dependence.
-
US sanctions policy often forces Europe to absorb costs for Washington’s geopolitical priorities.
-
American platforms shape European speech, commerce, administration, and most importantly: public debate.
-
“Strategic autonomy” exists as a slogan because dependency is already the default.
Nah that just the orange clown and some of his figurines around him.
But there are others too! Seriously dark and strong ones in the background.
Sure
Everyone knows that the real power is in the background
But the average 'Murican isn’t an edgy teen, they’re an idiot toddler finger-painting with their own shit
It’s going to get worse when the edgy-teen phase kicks in because the destruction won’t be wanton, it’ll be wilful
Nah, the orange clown was elected TWICE by the American people. It’s the whole of America as a nation. Sure there are few individuals who are not like the rest. But as a nation? America is and has been a petulant child for a while now.
So they have elected themselves a petulant toddler. So what.
So what???
If those people thought a petulant toddler was their best leader to lead, TWICE, just what does it make those people?
Do you think smart people would have elected him twice?
I don’t know. I’m not trying anymore to understand them.
The system made him the winner, but i believe he lost popular vote both times and also a huge portion of the nation didn’t vote at all. Sure that also says something about the people of the nation but i think it is fair to to distinguish between a ‘a regime and the people and companies that support that’ vs ‘a national entity including all it’s people and history’.