The Regulatory Web Is Driving Europe’s Economic Decline

As you, my esteemed readers, have undoubtedly noticed, the European Union’s position as one of the world’s leading economic regions has eroded over the past two decades. This is illustrated by the chart below, which shows the development of gross domestic product (GDP).

One clear reason for this unfavourable trend is the steadily growing — indeed, quite explosive — proliferation of well-intentioned but highly diverse regulatory requirements, namely EU directives. As a researcher, I have even experienced firsthand how they form a kind of regulatory web that effectively prevents publicly funded scientific knowledge from being translated into technological solutions for businesses and drivers of economic growth in the EU.

This has naturally contributed significantly to the EU falling behind both the United States and China in technological and economic development. This is clearly illustrated, for example, by patent application figures. While the Chinese have filed 1.4 million patent applications so far this year, the Americans 262,000, the Japanese 222,000 and even the South Koreans 186,000, the three major EU countries of Germany, France and Italy have filed just over 60,000 applications combined.

* * *

In this respect, it is encouraging that a number of northern member states are seeking to cut the funding allocated to the EU’s central administration, whose bureaucratic inertia spreads into virtually every corner of the Union. That is why I noted with satisfaction a brief news report stating that Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party) had announced that Finland could not accept Ireland’s proposal to reduce the EU budget by a mere €140 billion.

According to Orpo, “some savings have been identified, but far too few, and in some cases in the wrong areas.” By the latter, he was referring to budget cuts affecting defence, research and new technologies. In other words, the cuts are being directed at the very areas of expenditure that are most important for the EU’s future, rather than at socialist-style spending, such as cohesion funds intended to reduce disparities between different regions of the Union.

* * *

It remains to be seen, however, what the EU’s administrative machinery will ultimately decide. Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and Denmark share Finland’s position, but opposition is particularly strong in Southern and Eastern Europe, whose countries benefit from and advocate for cohesion funding — funding that, in many respects, resembles development aid.

Some kind of resolution may be reached at next week’s summit in Brussels. We should hardly expect miracles, however, since all political systems seem to have an unfortunate tendency to expand bureaucracy and endlessly quibble over details rather than trust in the creative power of the market’s invisible hand.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Carbon Sink Policy Lacks Cost-Effectiveness
Polish Politics: A Quiet Success Story
A New Beginning: Economic Independence in the Hands of Developing Nations

A Forecast of Population Replacement in Western Europe

As you know very well – my dear readers – immigration is rapidly changing Europe. In this connection, I came across the following image from Sweden on social media.

It shows, for the countries of Western Europe, the years in which the native population will – according to a mathematical model – become a minority in their own country. The image shows that Switzerland will be the first to reach this point. There, however, the change will not be as culturally significant as in many other European countries, because the majority of immigrants are educated Westerners.

The situation is different in Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Austria and the United Kingdom, which follow next, and where immigration is dominated by people from developing countries. This will mean profound changes in these societies.

* * *

According to the map, Finland would be the last corner of Western Europe where the native population becomes a minority. Thus, decision-makers here still have time to act even after the first European countries have gone through their own changes and their consequences are visible to everyone.

In this context, it is also worth noting that a major change in attitudes towards immigration is taking place in many European societies. As a result, political forces critical of immigration are rapidly gaining strength (example, another).

It may therefore well be that the demographic change in Western European societies will not take place according to the timetable shown on the map, but considerably more slowly. Nevertheless, sooner or later it will happen, due to immigrants of developing-country origin having a higher birth rate than the native European population.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Votes for Sale: Sweden’s Changing Political Culture
Hamtramck: A Test Case for Mass Immigration
From Burden to Benefit: Reforming Immigration in Finland

Palestine’s Statehood and International Law

Many European states have recognized or are in the process of recognizing the State of Palestine. Finland is not among these countries but is instead waiting to see how the situation develops, together with, among others, the USA, Italy, Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, Austria, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

This is reasonable in the sense that, from the perspective of international law, the existence of a state requires four basic elements – a permanent population, clearly defined borders, a functioning government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. Of these conditions, especially the second, third, and fourth are not met, so a rational person would sooner question the logic of the states that have recognized Palestine than that of the states that have chosen to wait.

Therefore, Palestine should be recognized as a state only when – or if – it one day fulfills all four conditions. In the meantime, every country – regardless of its stance on recognizing Palestine – can act in support of a just peace between Jews and Arabs living in the region.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
When Should the Independence of Palestine Be Recognized?
An Unexpected Endorsement of Professor’s Views
Abu Obaida’s Death Brings Palestine One Step Closer to Peace

Will Tomorrow’s Elections in Germany Be a Turning Point?

The transformation of Europe has become tangible, as various terrorist attacks in many countries follow one another. There's Sweden, Austria, Germany, and now France.

In the most recent case I mentioned, one person has died, and five police officers have been injured. The 37-year-old suspected attacker was on the watchlist of terrorism suspects, so France’s counterterrorism unit has stated that it will take responsibility for the investigation.

One can only hope that tomorrow’s elections in Germany will be a turning point—not just for Germany, but for all of Europe. If not, Europe faces a bleak future. A future so dark that I don’t even dare to imagine it.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?
Afghan's Rampage in Germany Signals the End of the Value-Liberal Era in the EU
The Swedish Immigration Catastrophe – A Cautionary Tale

Will European Culture Collapse Under the Weight of Islamic Immigration?

The wave of crime in Central Europe continues, as a 23-year-old Syrian terrorist fatally stabbed a 14-year-old boy and injured five others. The perpetrator's motive was Islamic hatred toward Europeans, as police discovered flags of the terrorist organization ISIS in his apartment.

It hasn’t been long since an Afghan terrorist drove into a crowd in Germany. Nor since Sweden experienced over 30 bombings in January. Or when Finland published statistics showing that Syrians commit sexual crimes up to 15 times more frequently than the country's native population.

The strange thing is why we Europeans tolerate such crimes against us without taking measures to prevent them. Of course, many are willing to act, but just as many seem content with the situation.

One way to analyze this is by comparing the support for immigration-critical parties to that of the Greens or far-left parties. In Finland, recent opinion polls indicate that the country’s only immigration-critical party, the Finns Party, has around 15% voter support, while the strongly pro-immigration Greens and Left Alliance have over 17%.

In Germany, which is heading into elections, the immigration-critical AfD and BSW together hold about 26% support, while the Greens and the extremely pro-immigration SPD are favored by as much as 30% of voters.

Austria held elections last year, where the immigration-critical FPÖ received nearly 29% support. However, other parties refuse to cooperate with it in government, meaning Austria will likely continue its previous policies—policies under which incidents like the stabbing mentioned at the beginning of this text occur.

The question remains: What will happen to European culture and its native population in the coming years and decades? Will a new form of European identity emerge, blending with Islamic traditions, or will the followers of Prophet Muhammad continue on the same path that has historically subordinated countless cultures—from Byzantine empire to Berber mountain tribes—under their system?

However, Europe differs in one crucial way from previous Islamic conquests. Every significant European country is far ahead of Islamic nations in terms of civilization, science, economy, and military strength. Yet at the same time, they are so mentally weak that they ultimately submit to those who are cheekier. Isn't this weird?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Statistics on Sexual Crimes Committed by Immigrants in Finland
Afghan's Rampage in Germany Signals the End of the Value-Liberal Era in the EU
The Swedish Immigration Catastrophe – A Cautionary Tale

Finland Shifts Stance on EU Joint Debt Amid Growing Defense and Ukraine Support Needs

As the United States grapples with the turbulence following the rise of a new administration, the European Union's role in supporting Ukraine is becoming increasingly significant. For this reason, the Finnish government is shifting its stance on EU joint debt, becoming more favorable toward it—provided it is used specifically for aiding Ukraine and strengthening collective defense.

As a sign of this shift, Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party) reiterated this position on Monday upon arriving at an informal EU defense meeting in Brussels. According to him, the guiding principle of joint debt should be that investments in defense must be based on necessity and threat assessments.

To clarify his stance, he stated that “those funds should be used where Europe is being defended. In that case, Finland must clearly be among the beneficiaries.”

Additionally, Finland, along with nearly all EU member states, proposed that the European Investment Bank (EIB) should increase its financing for the European defense industry. In practice, this would mean reassessing the EIB's so-called "excluded sectors" list to align with the EU's current political priorities. This adjustment would allow the EIB to finance traditional defense industries in the future.

One point of contention has also been where defense procurements should be made. As always, France—keen to favor its domestic industry—wants EU defense acquisitions funded by joint resources to be sourced from European markets.

However, Finland’s prime minister noted that Europe’s defense needs are so vast that there will be enough demand to support both France’s and Finland’s defense industries. Furthermore, he emphasized that it would neither be reasonable nor even possible for the EU to detach itself from the United States, given that American defense systems are highly advanced and will continue to be necessary.

It remains to be seen whether Orpo’s well-argued positions will gain traction within the Union. At present, Hungary and Austria oppose them, and many other countries—such as France—are waiting for more details before taking a final stance.

That said, Europe does not have the luxury of time. Decisions must be made immediately regarding Ukraine and, as soon as possible, to enhance the EU’s overall defense readiness. At the same time, efforts must be made to prevent the trade war threatened by Donald Trump from disrupting transatlantic economic and technological cooperation—or, more critically, NATO’s ability to operate effectively wherever necessary.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finland and the USA: Strong Allies with Shared Interests or a Trade Dispute?
Finnish Minister Riikka Purra: “Putin Is a War Criminal, an Aggressive Imperialist”
From Finland to Olaf Scholz: The Imperative of Supporting Ukraine's Independence instead of its Finlandization

A Major Victory for the Freedom Party in Austria's Regional Elections

The ultra-liberal immigration policies of Europe’s traditional parties are heading for a dead end. One sign of this is the local elections held in Styria, Austria, where the immigration-critical Freedom Party achieved as much as approximately 35% of the vote.

The Styrian conservatives received 26.8% of the vote, and the Social Democrats 21.1%. Thus, these parties have the possibility to form a majority coalition if they ally, for example, with the Greens or the Liberals.

In such a situation, smaller parties would have a disproportionate opportunity to influence policy. However, such a solution would not diminish the policies that 35% of voters opposed. Moreover, forming such an "unholy alliance" against the Freedom Party would intensify societal polarization.

A similar situation applies across Europe. In Finland, democracy has been taken seriously, meaning that the immigration-critical Finns Party has participated in responsible governance as part of a coalition led by the National Coalition Party. As a result, immigration policies have been rationalized in many ways and will continue to be so until the end of the government’s term.

However, it appears that in many European countries, normal democratic practices are being opposed by labeling parties with support from tens of percent of voters as unsuitable for cooperation. This, in turn, continues to polarize society, election after election. I wouldn’t call such an approach either reasonable or constructive.

Previous thoughts on the same topics:
The Fall of Germany’s Government Could Open the EU’s Path to a Better Future
Cancellation of Taylor Swift's Concert in Austria Was a Success for the Terrorists
French Election Results: A Deep Dive into Tactical Voting and Its Implications

Cancellation of Taylor Swift's Concert in Austria Was a Success for the Terrorists

Terrorists with links to the ISIS organization achieved success in Austria when three concerts by an American pop star Taylor Swift were canceled. This is, of course, unfortunate news for those who had purchased tickets and were looking forward to seeing a major star.

However, an even more distressing situation is the impact on a liberal, organized society, which has been brought to its knees in front of terrorists. This is because, even though the Austrian authorities have apprehended them — or at least three of them — the damage is already done by demonstrating that terrorist acts can influence Western countries. I am sure that this will inspire those individuals who, for one reason or another, are interested in or even excited by terrorism.

It must be said, however, that the descendants of the former Austro-Hungarian empire have themselves partly to blame, as Finnish media have reported that the "suspected perpetrators are 15, 17, and 19 years old, individuals already known to authorities." Yet they were still roaming free in the middle of Europe.

This raises several questions, to which we are unlikely to get answers. For example, why were these three known to the authorities not returned to where they came from? And more broadly, why is Western Europe and its culture slowly committing suicide by allowing an endless queue of Muslims seeking a higher standard of living and social security across its borders, even though they have shown countless times (example, another, and a third) that they pose a risk to organized society?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Sweden's Rapid Demographic Shift Causes Challenges
Two out of three Palestinians support October 7 attack
Prediction: Sharia law in force in the United Kingdom, Belgium, and France by the year 2044

Scientific community discriminates its youngsters

Recent research showed that scientific reports are more easily published if their authors are well known and respected scientists - e.g. Nobel laureates. The results reported by an Austrian group showed that only 23 percent of reviewer´s recommended rejection on manuscripts, when a prominent researcher was the only author shown, whereas 48 percent did so when authors were not known and 65 percent if the only author given was a little-known person. The evaluated manuscripts were the same for all three groups.

For me, as a well known and old scientist in my field, but also a supervisor of young talented students, the figures given above are just disgusting. That is because it shows the hurdles for success to be higher for young people. And even worse: the Austrian study seems to imply that old veterans might easily publish less important findings or even rubbish.

The scientific evaluation of manuscripts is basically simple. The peer reviewer of a scientific publication is another scientist in the same field, who is expected to check that the methodology is adequate to the problem and the evidence obtained is correctly interpreted. And that the findings add sufficiently to the scientific understanding of the topic addressed. 

The bias observed by Austrians obviously affect also funding organizations. If the applicant is well known and has a long record of scientific success, he probably gets funding much more likely to his applications than a young researcher with minor achievements. 

Therefore it was interesting to learn, that some funding organizations - such as the British Academy or the Swiss National Science Foundation - have taken advantage of a lottery in their funding decisions. That is, if several project proposals are very close to each others - but there is not enough money to fund all - a lottery will be used to select the ones getting funded.

That should be beneficial to the regeneration of scientific community, and provide young innovative researchers better chances to get funded. After saying that, even this kind of a lottery will not provide equal chances to youngsters, but at least it would reduce the gap to us - the veterans already going towards the sunset of our brilliance. 

All in all, I suggest that at least part of the European Union research funding would implement lottery in its research funding process. For example, in the Framework Programs for applied research - where application process often has two rounds of evaluation - the second round including only top applications rated by evaluators, could be replaced by a lottery. 

And nationally, I would be happy to see Academy of Finland funding to be partly replaced by a lottery. The principle could be simple: in the first step, all applications rated as "outstanding" by expert panels would be provided funding, and thereafter the lottery would be used - instead of the Research Councils - to pick up proposals to be funded from applications rated by the expert panels up to a level of "excellent". 

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Scientific misconduct on prevailing theories is too attractive 
Should forbidden questions be answered or not?
Facts, US Supreme Court and the case of Roe v. Wade