Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

International

Europe Can’t Survive Without America

Published

19 minute read

  Sven R Larson

But it is not America’s job to save the old continent

The most beautiful place in the world is located smack dab in the heart of northern Europe. It is a small town called Östersund. It stretches along the eastern shore of Storsjön, the “Great Lake”.

Across the strait from Östersund is the island of Frösön. From the farmlands in its center, you can see 30 churches, dense forests, crop fields, and on the far side of the Great Lake a horizon filled with snow-clad mountains. There is a church there, on the Frösön, where the world’s happiest marriages begin: when the bride walks out from the church, she is so overwhelmed by the gorgeous view that she forever loses her ability to speak.

My Swedish hometown is not the only place where Europe brims with beauty. From endless oceanic views in Ireland’s Galway to the meandering riverside cityscape in Budapest; from the midnight sun in Nordkap to the seductive darkness of Palermo; cities that let you marinate in living history, like Munich, Stockholm, Vienna, Rome, and Edinburgh.

Europe has it all. And yet, that continent is slowly, sadly, but inevitably sinking. It is a terrible conclusion to reach, but I see no other path forward for them.

Thanks for reading Larson’s Political Economy!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

There are a multitude of reasons for this; the destruction of such a solid piece of civilization does not come easy. Which, in all honesty, is a tribute to the solidity of the Western project in itself: it takes decades of political and economic mismanagement to bring a continet of 500 million people from the top of world prosperity into the murky quagmire of industrial poverty.

However, that is precisely what the Europeans are now doing. Their decline only seems to be reinforced by every new measure to prevent it.

From an American viewpoint, the increasingly depressing state of Europe has not yet risen to the peak of the news cycle. Perhaps it never will, but the transformation of Europe from the world’s most advanced economy (alongside America) to an economy-class Latin America will have major economic, geo-strategic, and cultural consequences.

Before I dissect those consequences, let me point to the main character traits of Europe’s self-inflicted demise.

 

Lack of Leadership

If there is one thing Europe does not have, it is visionary political leadership. Not that our own crop of political heralds in Washington are much to brag about, but the new Trump administration actually does have an idea of how to make America better. By his fast-paced, confident leadership, Trump is now challenging the Democrats to step up to the plate; with a little bit of luck, we will go into the coming elections choosing between candidates running on different versions of “America’s best days are ahead of us”.

None of that exists in Europe. To the extent their leaders formulate ideas for the future, it is all about how government can spend more money, regulate more of the private sector, and dole out grants to NGOs to run the internet era of a billboard campaign themed around some empty political slogan. This is endemic in the EU, and it has tangible consequences: just last year the Europeans realized that America was running away with the path to artificial intelligence, while Europe has not yet even built its own Silicon Valley for old-school computer technology.

The realization among Europe’s political leadership that they are losing the AI race led the EU to issue a report suggesting more regulations on private-sector AI development and more government spending to investigate the potentials of the AI revolution.

Such is the European response to every issue, including the so-called green transition. When Americans elected a new president to end the mad dash into EV transporation—and instead let the free market be the arbiter on how we propel ourselves around town—the EU and national government leaders in Europe waged a virtual economic war on fossil fuels, without being even close to replacing it with “renewables”.

The German energy debacle went so far that major German manufacturers accelerated their foreign direct investments in other countries. This is one reason why there will be a lot more auto industry jobs here in America in the coming years. While European political leaders get fixated on some outlandish economic fantasy, America gets down to business, goes to work, and moves forward.

In addition to the fantasy that the green transition should be shoved down people’s throats by government, Europe’s political leaders have surpassed the Biden administration many times over when it comes to immigration—legal and illegal. Instead of asking pragmatic questions about the balance between a mostly uneducated labor supply and Europe’s perennially high unemployment rates, the elected officials and their unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, Paris, Berlin, and other EU capitals forge ahead like drunken cows. They have deliberately unhinged themselves from reality; it is only in a fantasy world free of opposing arguments that you can flood the streets of your cities with endless waves of immigrants, without causing major social, economic, and public safety problems.

 

A War on Democracy

Again, America is not immune to this kind of make-believe leadership, but unlike America, Europe has no voice of opposition. Where the Tea Party turned MAGA movement showed how true democracy works, forging a nationwide organic alliance of voters, Europe has invented institutions, conventions, policies, and a political culture of efficiently suppressing opposition.

There is no First Amendment in Europe, which politicians in both the EU and national governments have taken advantage of. In what can only be described as a war on the core of democracy, the European political elite is fighting an increasingly aggressive battle against dissenting voices. National governments are formed not to further the will of the people, but to quell the voice of dissent.

Coalitions of resentment against the people have appointed prime ministers in Sweden, Finland, Austria, France. A coalition of resentment is trying to form a functioning government in Germany. Where hatred of a common adversary is the only common denominator, there can be no room for visions. All political eyes remain in the rearview mirror, anxiously trying to keep the distance from the last election results.

People are blinded by a common hatred they cannot see the future.

From the viewpoint of policy, the only thing that these coalitions of resentment can produce is a regurgitation of the past. This explains why there is no debate in Europe over the “green transition” and why there is only token talk about immigration. Prevailing paradigms, which caused people to vote for alternative parties, reign unchallenged.

As do their consequences. In other words, the more Europe’s anti-democratic leaders double down on policies that thwart free speech, choke their economy, and fragment cohesive societies, the more they will distance themselves and their continent from the future.

 

A Stupid Economy

Europeans pay far more in taxes than we Americans do. Income taxes often start at 30-40 percent—for the lowest incomes—and there are value-added taxes, VATs, on everything they buy. Excise taxes, “green taxes”, fees and administrative charges run amok.

At the same time, they don’t get much more than we do. If anything, they get less of most of things. In health care (which I hope to have time to write more about in closer detail), Europe’s foremost contribution is the waiting list. You have the right to health care, but that does not mean you can get it.

The same is true for the countries in Europe that have elaborate systems of child care: you have the right to it, but that does in no way mean it can find a spot for your kid when the time comes.

Europeans brag about their paid-leave programs. It is true that, e.g., parents can take a lot of time off from work to be with their kids. They also have long vacations. However, since these benefits are mandated by law, they are in no way reflective of what businesses can afford in terms of an absent workforce. Yes, it is nice to be able to be at home with your baby for the first year or 18 months of its life, but during that time your employer needs to hire a replacement.

When I talk to Europeans about their paid-leave system, they often suggest that we Americans have no paid leave at all. I point out that just because government does not provide it, does not mean it does not exist. We prefer to let employers and employees handle the paid-leave issue as part of a workforce benefits package.

Fixated on letting government take care of as much as possible of their lives, Europeans have created a welfare state that demands taxes close to—and sometimes higher than—50 percent of GDP. This is well above the 40-percent line where GDP growth permanently slows down; once the tax burden crosses that mark and no one cares, the country inevitably sinks into economic stagnation.

There is no advancement in the standard of living. Private purchasing power is no longer adequate to keep businesses going. Capital formation stagnates and eventually moves abroad. The tax base is eroded; a consequence-impaired governing coalition of resentment responds with even higher taxes.

All in all, Europe has ended up in a vicious downward economic spiral. Her leaders are unable to understand the problem, let alone offer a solution. Among the many repercussions of this is the slow decline in standard of living that is already passed on from parents to their children: each new generation of Europeans will find life to be a little less prosperous than their parents did.

 

The Role of America

For all these reasons—lack of leadership, a dwindling democracy, and a stagnant economy—the European continent is unable to break out of its self-inflicted societal stranglehold. But what made it drift into this fog of endless political self-harm?

In one word: America provided the Europeans with a shield of security during the Cold War. Germans, Brits, French, Dutch, Spanyards, and others got so used to living under the protective shield of American military might that they believed they no longer had to think about existential issues. Instead, they could spend their time inventing new entitlements for their welfare states.

Again: make-believe politics. They never thought that their growing welfare states would sink their economies; in fact, economists never thought that this would happen either. I was the first one to point out this relationship, and I did it only a decade ago.

Likewise, Europe’s make-believe politicians thought that they could enjoy free-of-charge American military protection forever. The end of the Cold War did not exactly change their minds: suddenly, they thought they had somehow “won” that war, and that they as the victors could dictate the terms of their own existence—without having to work for it.

When America gradually began orienting itself away from Europe, there was at first massive denial across the old world. Due in no small part to foolish rhetoric from our neocons (both Presidents Bush, Vice President Cheney and his daughter Liz, John Podhoretz, Senator Graham of South Carolina, Irving and Bill Kristol…), the Europeans were led to believe that America would still provide that shield of safety no matter how many other parts of the world we were engaged in.

But not even neocons last forever. Reality began poking through the European bubble of political fantasies during Trump’s first term; after a “breather” during the Biden administration we are now back to the harsh reality where America is asking the Europeans to do what every other nation, or union of nations, is doing: grow up and take responsibility for their own sovereignty.

In other words, America can save Europe, but it is not America’s business to do so.

The rational reaction to this from the Europeans would have been to open a vigorous, public debate over what priorities their countries should make: the welfare state or national defense? But instead of doing just that, they have gone into an Alice in Wonderland-style mental lockdown where politicians in every cardinal direction dispense edicts about throwing Gargantuan amounts of money into military expansion projects that they have no funds for, and no industrial capacity to deliver.

At best, Europe will fragment into regional coalitions of countries, where some will make a future for themselves and others will continue to sink. The four Visegrad states, Poland, Hungary, Czechia and Slovakia, are relatively strong economically. So are the Baltic states.

The Nordic countries could form a strong regional economy, but with Sweden suffering from political deadlocks, high crime, a corrupt government, and a perennially stagnant economy, that outlook is no longer possible.

Germany is an enigmatic entity in this context. If they cannot change their own energy policy, they are going to de-industrialize at a rapid rate. That, in turn, will likely lead to growing political tensions; is therean independent, non-communist East Germany in the cards?

Southern Europe is ironically the most resilient part of that continent. Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal have survived centuries of prosperity, poverty, war, and peace. They will find a way to muddle through a glacial but politically and economically visible European implosion.

The comparison to Latin America is more accurate than it might seem. Before World War II, Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil were among the best, most thriving economies in the world. Then the welfare state happened…

Thanks for reading Larson’s Political Economy!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Larson’s Political Economy is free today.

But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Larson’s Political Economy that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription.

You won’t be charged unless they enable payments.

Pledge your support

Before Post

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

espionage

Ex-NYPD Cop Jailed in Beijing’s Transnational Repatriation Plot, Canada Remains Soft Target

Published on

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

A former NYPD sergeant was sentenced to 18 months in prison this week for his role in a shadowy Chinese government operation that sought to coerce a political exile in New Jersey to return to the mainland. The conviction of Michael McMahon marks the first successful prosecution of a current or former American law enforcement officer accused of profiting from Beijing’s covert repatriation campaign, known as Operation Fox Hunt—a global manhunt that has ensnared operatives from Vancouver and Toronto to Los Angeles.

McMahon, 57, was convicted alongside two Chinese-American co-conspirators, Zhu Yong and Congying Zheng, who were previously sentenced to 24 and 16 months in prison, respectively. The trio was found guilty of interstate stalking and acting as unregistered agents of the People’s Republic of China, after a federal jury heard how they aided Beijing’s secret police—using Chinese businessmen and hired thugs based in the Tri-State area and California—to track and psychologically terrorize their target: a former Wuhan official named Xu Jin.

While McMahon’s sentencing concludes one legal chapter, The Bureau’s investigation into court records and national security sources reveals a far broader and ongoing web of espionage, coercion, and transnational repression—directed by senior Chinese Communist Party officials and bolstered by diaspora operatives and criminal proxies across North America.

McMahon and his family have fiercely denied his culpability as a tool of China’s secret police, insisting he was an unwitting pawn in a clandestine war that U.S. authorities failed to warn domestic citizens—including former law enforcement officers—about.

In private messages to The Bureau, following months of in-depth reporting into sealed court documents, McMahon’s wife, Martha Byrne, emphasized their belief that he had done nothing wrong.

“My husband, Michael McMahon, committed no crime,” she wrote. “There’s plenty of media to expose this grave injustice on my family.” She added a stark warning directed at law enforcement and intelligence communities: “It’s extremely important you use your platform to warn private investigators and local law enforcement of these patterns. Our government did nothing to warn us, and they knew my husband was being used. They knew since as early as 2015/16 these Chinese actors were using PIs. They put our family in danger and in turn the security of the entire country.”

But the sentencing judge in Brooklyn emphasized McMahon’s witting participation—and the fact that he profited from the scheme.

The case centered on Xu Jin, a former municipal official from Wuhan who fled China with his wife in 2010, seeking refuge in the United States. By 2015, his face appeared on a China Daily “most wanted” list—alongside dozens of Canada-based targets—part of Beijing’s sweeping Fox Hunt campaign to repatriate ex-officials accused of corruption, dissidents, and political rivals of President Xi Jinping. While Chinese authorities accused Xu of accepting bribes, he maintained he was not a criminal but a political target caught in a purge masked as anti-graft enforcement.

By 2017, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security escalated its efforts, dispatching emissaries, threatening Xu’s relatives in China, and launching a North American rendition operation. That’s when Zhu Yong, a 66-year-old Chinese national living in New York, hired McMahon—then working as a private investigator—to locate Xu.

Tapping law enforcement databases and traditional surveillance tactics, McMahon began tracking Xu and his family. The key break came in April 2017, when Xu’s elderly father—who had recently suffered a brain hemorrhage—was flown to the U.S. by the PRC, accompanied by a government doctor. His role: deliver a threatening message in person to his son. If Xu refused to return to China, his family would suffer the consequences.

These same tactics have been deployed in Canada, according to a January 2022 “Special Report” by the Privy Council Office on Chinese Fox Hunt operations, obtained by The Bureau.

McMahon surveilled the father’s arrival at a New Jersey home, then followed him to Xu Jin’s residence. Within days, the Chinese team had the address they needed.

Soon after, Congying Zheng and another associate showed up at Xu’s front door. They pounded on it, peered through the windows, and left a note that read: “If you are willing to go back to the mainland and spend 10 years in prison, your wife and children will be all right. That’s the end of this matter!”

By that point, McMahon’s role had deepened. Text messages recovered by federal investigators confirmed that he understood the objective of the operation. In one exchange with another investigator he had contracted, McMahon acknowledged that the goal was to repatriate the target to China “so they could prosecute him.”

After providing the address of Xu Jin, McMahon told his surveillance partner that he was “waiting for a call” to determine next steps. The partner replied, “Yeah. From NJ State Police about an abduction,” to which McMahon responded: “Lol.”

He later suggested further intimidation tactics to a Chinese co-conspirator, advising: “Park outside his home and let him know we are there.” According to prosecutors, McMahon also conducted background research on the victim’s daughter, including details about her university residence and academic major.

In total, McMahon was paid over $19,000 for his role in the PRC-directed operation. To obscure the origin of the funds, he deposited the payments into his son’s bank account—an arrangement prosecutors noted he had never used with any other client.

Court filings in the case traced troubling connections northward—to Canada—where suspects linked to Fujian-based organized crime networks, long known to Canadian police and senior elected officials, have been under investigation since at least 2022. Yet despite mounting intelligence, no charges have been laid.

The same Interpol “red notice” that named Xu also listed Chinese nationals living in Canada. According to Canadian law enforcement sources who spoke to The Bureau, multiple individuals now targeted by Fox Hunt reside in Vancouver and Toronto—cities with large mainland Chinese communities and a documented history of interference concerns.

“In Canada, we just knock on doors and talk to people,” one RCMP officer told The Bureau. “In the U.S., they go in and make arrests.” The officer pointed to a critical gap in Canadian law: the absence of a foreign agent registry—one of the FBI’s key legal tools in dismantling Fox Hunt cells on U.S. soil.

Beyond McMahon and Zhu Yong, the FBI investigation revealed a sprawling web of operatives functioning as “cutouts”—deniable intermediaries who provide a buffer between Chinese intelligence and the dirty work of coercion.

Even as the New Jersey operation began to falter—after Xu’s ailing father reportedly resisted efforts to pressure his son and Chinese operatives grew wary of U.S. law enforcement closing in—officials in Beijing leveraged McMahon’s surveillance to identify a new target: Xu’s daughter, a university student in Northern California. A second Fox Hunt pressure campaign was soon launched.

In California, the Ministry of Public Security dispatched Rong Jing—a PRC national and permanent U.S. resident—who had operated with apparent impunity across the U.S. as a bounty hunter for Beijing’s global rendition program.

This time, Rong sought to hire a new American private investigator.

On May 22, 2017, Rong met with the PI at a restaurant in Los Angeles. He didn’t know the man was an undercover FBI informant—and agreed to let their four-hour conversation be recorded.

When Rong proposed video surveillance on Xu’s daughter, the informant began to ask probing questions. Rong opened up—not only about the mission, but about the entire Fox Hunt apparatus behind it.

Asked how payment would be arranged, Rong said it would depend on what the PRC decided to do once the daughter was located. “Say, if the next step somebody asks me to catch [Xu’s] daughter,” he speculated. “When we get there, they wouldn’t feel comfortable to arrest her… So we need to be there on their behalf.”

According to Rong, successful Fox Hunt collaborators could submit for reward money—paid out inside China and split with U.S.-based operatives. The funds, he said, were controlled by Party officials, with the Communist Party overseeing all payments.

Rong contrasted his own freelance status with another class of agents—PRC “lobbyists” sent abroad as salaried civil servants. These operatives, he said, traveled under false names and work visas, sometimes posing as academics or trade representatives. Their job was to persuade overseas Chinese to return “voluntarily.”

“These lobbyists explain the advantages of returning to the PRC,” Rong said, euphemistically.

And then he pointed north.

Rong told the informant he had personally met one such PRC lobbyist in Canada. Though he did not name the individual, he described the tactic: use false identities, operate under official cover, and insulate the PRC government from any legal risk.

As the conversation turned back to Xu’s daughter, the informant asked the most pressing question: would she be safe?

“If there was an accident,” Rong replied, “in truth, you could claim that you were just investigating her.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Bureau, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

Continue Reading

Business

DOGE Is Ending The ‘Eternal Life’ Of Government

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Bossie

In his 1964 “A Time For Choosing” speech, Ronald Reagan famously said, “a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” And for more than 60 years, President Reagan’s words have proven to be true. However, with the historic re-election of President Donald Trump and the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the leadership of Elon Musk, the Gipper’s contention is finally being challenged – and not a moment too soon.

The Trump Administration inherited a horribly bloated federal government in dire need of common sense streamlining from top to bottom. For decades, the executive branch has expanded at an incomprehensible rate and along with it, so has waste, fraud, and abuse. Presidents on both sides of the aisle have made promises to tighten the government’s belt, shrink the bureaucracy, and return power to the people where it belongs. Those efforts for the most part – however well-intentioned – never got off the ground. The reality is that when politicians have been forced to choose between a legislative priority and cutting government spending, cuts are always the first casualty. But currently, with our $36 trillion national debt spiraling out of control, reining in the size and scope of government is no longer a choice, but a necessity.

President Trump is the perfect leader for these trying times. He’s battletested and fears nothing – and no challenge is too large. Whether it’s securing the border, growing the economy, forging peace in Ukraine and the Middle East, or negotiating fair trade deals, this president is on a mission to save America. And if any chief executive is going to have success at deconstructing the administrative state, it’s Trump the steel-spined change agent. The shadowy deep state doesn’t scare him, the biased liberal media can’t intimidate him, and this time there are no phony partisan investigations aiming to sidetrack him. Trump made a promise to bring fiscal responsibility back to governing, and along with Musk and DOGE, they’re finally conducting the “audit with teeth” that the American people have been waiting for, and their hard work is turning out to be infectious.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

With each passing day, a different member of the cabinet is announcing a new cut, discovering a duplicative program, or updating an antiquated system to steer us away from the fiscal cliff that’s rapidly approaching. When the president also happens to be a highly successful businessman, making the business operate more smoothly and for less money is the name of the game. Trump has brought this mindset to the White House and according to recent polling 77 percent favor a full review of government spending.

President Trump is going back to the basics that have become taboo in Washington, like asking fundamental questions about whether an agency has been successful in its mission or if a program is still necessary. In the case of the Education Department, Trump sees an emergency and is not willing to kick the can down the road any longer. The president believes that education excellence for our children is essential so America can compete for generations to come. Drastic reform is long overdue and that means moving education decisions back to state and local officials – and parents. That’s why President Trump is taking the steps to confront the failed status quo and close the underperforming department so we can turnaround lackluster public schools and low-test scores.

Similarly, with the decision to end USAID and slash foreign aid, Trump and DOGE are simply putting America first. America is handing out billions upon billions in taxpayer dollars around the globe on programs that should be spent on fixing our own domestic problems. The plan to decentralize and modernize the Agriculture Department is another great example of thinking outside the box. The American people understand the rationale that downtown Washington, D.C. is the last place decisions about farming should be made. Relocating the department to various hubs around the heartland is common sense.

Additionally, the announcement that the Department of Health and Human Services will cut 20,000 full-time employees is part of President Trump’s vision to “right-size the federal government and unleash the private sector again” in the words of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. And word that the Trump Administration is planning to work with Congress to finally defund National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service is welcome news to millions of Americans who believe sending taxpayer funds to biased news outlets is wrong.

DOGE is also doing courageous work at the Social Security Administration (SSA). The amazing efforts to identify individuals who are either deceased, in the country illegally, or otherwise ineligible will help stave off the program’s insolvency, which experts predict is only ten years away.  When a DOGE official disclosed that 40 percent of the calls made to SSA are from would-be fraudsters trying to exploit the system, it’s become all too obvious that new safeguards must be adopted.

When it comes to the question of how much money DOGE will ultimately end up saving taxpayers, in the context of our $36 trillion debt crisis, the more the better. However, the overall change in mindset – forcing government to operate efficiently and responsibly like businesses and families – and passing that mindset onto future administrations is perhaps the most critical shift that can be made. In fact, in an ideal scenario, every state, county, and city would have its very own DOGE operation. We must get serious about cutting government waste now or we’ll go bankrupt. That’s just the reality of the situation and President Trump knows it.

David Bossie is the president of Citizens United and served as a senior adviser to the Trump-Pence 2020 campaign. In 2016, Bossie served as deputy campaign manager for Donald J. Trump for President and deputy executive director for the Trump-Pence Transition Team.

Continue Reading

Trending

X