corriere.it
EU's Flight: Bureaucracy and External Pressures Hamper Global Influence
The European Union faces internal bureaucratic challenges, exemplified by a 2025 regulation on egg coloring, and external pressures from the war in Ukraine and trade conflicts, hindering its global influence and necessitating economic policy reforms.
- What are the primary obstacles preventing the European Union from achieving its full potential on the global stage?
- The EU faces internal and external challenges hindering its progress. A July 2025 regulation exemplifies excessive bureaucracy, symbolized by 397 kilometers of regulations. Simultaneously, external pressures like the war in Ukraine and trade disputes impede the EU's ability to act decisively on the global stage.
- How do historical precedents, such as pre-revolutionary France, illustrate the detrimental effects of excessive regulation on economic and political progress?
- The EU's current situation mirrors historical periods where excessive regulation stifled economic growth. The article draws parallels to pre-revolutionary France, highlighting the need for regulatory simplification to promote freedom and competitiveness, much like the call for "one king, one law, one tax" in the "Cahiers de Doleances.
- What specific policy reforms are necessary to enable the EU to overcome current challenges and achieve sustainable growth, drawing parallels to historical periods of economic and political advancement?
- To overcome these challenges, the EU must fundamentally reform its economic policies, prioritizing deregulation and freedom over the pursuit of competitiveness. This requires a shift away from the Maastricht Treaty's emphasis on market regulation towards a system that fosters innovation and growth, inspired by Adenauer's vision of a less restrictive regulatory environment.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article uses the metaphor of Minerva's owl taking flight at sunset to frame the EU's current situation. This sets a pessimistic tone from the outset, emphasizing the challenges and obstacles faced by the EU rather than its achievements and opportunities. The selection of historical references (the French Revolution) further reinforces this narrative, implicitly suggesting a parallel between the EU's current state and a historical period of turmoil and transformation. The headline reinforces the negative connotation, making the challenges appear more significant than possible solutions.
Language Bias
The article employs strong, emotive language, such as "follemente appesantita" (foolishly burdened), "soffocante coltre normativa" (suffocating blanket of regulations), and "nuovo postmoderno Medioevo" (new postmodern Middle Ages). These choices create a negative and critical tone, shaping the reader's perception of the EU. More neutral language could include phrases like "heavily regulated," "extensive regulatory framework," and "period of significant regulatory growth.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the EU's regulatory burden and its perceived hindrance to economic progress, potentially omitting discussions of the EU's successes, positive impacts of regulations, or alternative perspectives on its economic model. The lack of counterarguments to the author's criticisms could lead to a biased understanding.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a stark dichotomy between the EU's potential for greatness and its current self-imposed stagnation. It simplifies the complex reality of the EU's economic and political landscape, neglecting the nuances and various factors influencing its trajectory. The framing of the EU as either soaring or sinking ignores the complexities of its evolution and the multitude of political and economic forces at play.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights how excessive regulation in the EU stifles economic growth and innovation, potentially exacerbating inequalities. The comparison to the pre-revolutionary French system, where excessive feudal restrictions hindered economic progress, underscores this point. The argument is that the current regulatory burden disproportionately impacts smaller businesses and individuals, widening the gap between the rich and poor.