Anu Bradford - Digital empires: The global battle to regulate technology

Summary

Anu Bradford discusses the concept of 'digital empires' in global tech regulation, highlighting three models: the American market-driven, Chinese state-driven, and European rights-driven approaches. She predicts the decline of the US model due to a shift towards privacy and competition regulations, while the EU model gains traction. However, concerns about European innovation, enforcement, and the appeal of the Chinese model in authoritarian states pose challenges. The future of liberal democracy in the digital age is at stake, with the need for effective governance by democratic entities, not just tech companies or authoritarian regimes.

Takeaways

• 📚 Anu Bradford's work revolves around the concept of 'digital empires', focusing on the regulatory models of the US, China, and the EU in the digital realm.
• 🌎 The US model is market-driven, prioritizing free speech and innovation with minimal government intervention, often leaving tech governance to private companies.
• 🏗 China's approach is state-driven, aiming to become a technological superpower while using technology for surveillance and censorship to maintain political stability.
• 🌍 The EU model is rights-driven, emphasizing the protection of individual rights, democratic structures, and a fair distribution of digital transformation benefits.
• 🔄 Each 'empire' is exporting its model differently: the US exports the power of its tech companies, China exports infrastructure, and the EU exports regulatory superpower.
• 🛑 The 'Brussels effect' is noted, where the EU's regulations influence global tech companies, leading them to adopt these standards worldwide.
• 💡 Bradford argues that the EU is not just reacting to US and China but is a significant player in shaping global digital governance with its distinct approach.
• 🔄 The script discusses 'horizontal battles' between these empires and 'vertical battles' within each empire against tech companies over regulation.
• 📉 There's a predicted decline in the American digital empire's influence as the world moves away from the market-driven model towards more regulated environments.
• 🏆 The EU's regulatory model is gaining traction globally, especially in democratic countries, but faces challenges in authoritarian regions and within its own enforcement capabilities.
• ⚖️ The final battle is for the soul of liberal democracy, where the effectiveness of democratic governance of technology is critical to prevent authoritarian or corporate control of the digital economy.

Q & A

What is the main theme of Anu Bradford's book 'The Brussels Effect'?

The main theme of Anu Bradford's book 'The Brussels Effect' is how the European Union's regulations are influencing the global digital economy and the world, highlighting the EU's role as a regulatory superpower.

What are the three primary models of digital regulation according to Anu Bradford?

The three primary models of digital regulation according to Anu Bradford are the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven model.

How does the American market-driven model approach digital regulation?

The American market-driven model prioritizes free speech, free internet, and incentives to innovate, with the government playing a minimal role and tech companies largely self-regulating.

What is the focus of the Chinese state-driven model in terms of technology?

The Chinese state-driven model focuses on making China a technological superpower, leveraging state resources for this goal, and using technology as a tool for surveillance, propaganda, and censorship to maintain political power and social stability.

What does the European rights-driven model emphasize in digital regulation?

The European rights-driven model emphasizes human-centric digital transformation, maximizing individual fundamental rights, preserving democratic structures, and ensuring a fair distribution of gains from digital transformation.

Why are the three leading technology regulatory powers referred to as 'digital empires' in Anu Bradford's discourse?

Anu Bradford refers to the three leading technology regulatory powers as 'digital empires' to metaphorically illustrate their global influence and proactive exportation of their regulatory models beyond their jurisdictions.

How does the concept of the 'Brussels Effect' relate to digital regulation?

The 'Brussels Effect' in digital regulation refers to the tendency of European regulations to shape global standards and practices, as tech companies often adopt these regulations globally to streamline their operations.

What are the horizontal and vertical battles mentioned in the script?

Horizontal battles are conflicts between the empires themselves, such as the US-China Tech War, while vertical battles are the efforts by governments to regulate tech companies within their own markets.

What does Anu Bradford predict about the future of the American digital empire?

Anu Bradford predicts a decline in the American digital empire's influence due to a global shift away from the market-driven model towards more rights-driven regulations.

What are the concerns Anu Bradford raises about the European regulatory model's global adoption?

Anu Bradford raises concerns about the European regulatory model's compatibility with innovation, effective enforcement of regulations, and its appeal in authoritarian or authoritarian-leaning countries.

Why is the battle over the future of liberal democracy considered the most important by Anu Bradford?

The battle over the future of liberal democracy is considered the most important because it determines whether digital economies are governed by democratic principles or by authoritarian regimes or tech companies, both of which could undermine liberal democracy.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to the Speaker and the Topic

The speaker, Anu Bradford, is introduced as an influential authority on the concept of the 'Brussels Effect,' which she first explored in her book published in 2020. Her new book, which is the focus of the discussion, has been recognized by the Financial Times as a best book. The moderator expresses excitement, particularly due to their own work on 'Governing Digital China,' and invites the audience to engage with Anu's work. Anu begins by addressing the global consensus on the need for technology regulation, despite the lack of agreement on its form. She outlines three primary models of digital regulation: the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven model. Each model is characterized by different approaches to balancing innovation, state control, and individual rights.

05:01

🌐 The Concept of Digital Empires

Anu Bradford discusses the term 'digital empires,' which she uses metaphorically to describe the global influence of the United States, China, and the European Union in technology regulation. Each empire is characterized by its unique approach to exporting its regulatory model. The US is noted for its tech companies' global reach, China for its infrastructure projects, and the EU for its regulatory superpower status. The speaker argues that these empires are not just coexisting but also competing in the global digital governance landscape, leading to both horizontal and vertical regulatory battles. Horizontal battles involve conflicts between the empires themselves, such as the US-China Tech War, while vertical battles are internal struggles within each empire's tech industry.

10:02

🛡️ The Decline of the American Digital Empire

The speaker predicts the decline of the American digital empire due to a loss of trust in the market-driven model of technology governance. She notes a global shift towards privacy regulations and competition laws, moving away from the US model. The European rights-driven model is gaining traction, especially in democratic countries. However, there are concerns about the European model's compatibility with innovation, given Europe's lack of leading tech companies. The speaker suggests that factors other than digital regulation, such as market integration, capital markets, risk-taking culture, and global talent attraction, better explain Europe's position in the tech industry.

15:03

🌟 Innovation and the European Regulatory Model

Anu Bradford addresses the myth that European digital regulation hinders innovation, arguing that other factors like market fragmentation, capital market structure, cultural attitudes towards risk, and the attraction of global talent are more significant. She emphasizes that the US's success in tech innovation is partly due to its ability to attract immigrant founders and foster a culture that embraces failure as a stepping stone to success. The speaker also raises concerns about the European model's enforcement, suggesting that without effective implementation, the regulatory victories could be hollow, and the American model might still prevail.

20:03

🌍 The Battle for Liberal Democracy in the Digital Age

The speaker concludes with a discussion on the battle for the future of liberal democracy in the digital age. She expresses concern that liberal democracy could deteriorate if the US and EU lose the horizontal battle to China or the vertical battle to tech companies. She calls for liberal democracies to demonstrate an effective way to govern technology that aligns with democratic values. The speaker also highlights the challenge posed by China's tech industry, which has thrived without political freedom, and the potential for generative AI to become a battleground where the correlation between freedom and innovation could be tested.

Keywords

💡Brussels Effect

The 'Brussels Effect' refers to the phenomenon where the European Union's regulations and standards become globally influential, often adopted by companies worldwide even outside of the EU's jurisdiction. In the video, Anu Bradford discusses her book 'The Brussels Effect' and how the EU's regulatory approach to technology is shaping global practices, illustrating the EU's significant role as a regulatory superpower in the digital age.

💡Digital Regulation

Digital regulation pertains to the governance and oversight of technology and digital platforms. The video emphasizes the need for global consensus on how to regulate technology, with Bradford outlining three distinct models: the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven model.

💡Market-driven Model

The market-driven model is characterized by minimal government intervention, prioritizing free speech, free internet, and innovation. Companies like tech giants have significant autonomy in this model. The video discusses how this approach is being questioned globally, with a shift towards more regulation as seen in the EU's approach.

💡State-driven Model

The state-driven model is exemplified by China, where the government plays a central role in leveraging technology for economic growth, social stability, and political control. The video highlights China's use of technology for surveillance and censorship, contrasting it with the more liberal approaches of the US and EU.

💡Rights-driven Model

The rights-driven model, as described in the video, is the European approach to digital regulation that emphasizes protecting individual rights, democratic structures, and ensuring a fair distribution of digital transformation benefits. This model is gaining traction as an alternative to the American and Chinese models, especially in democratic countries.

💡Horizontal Battles

Horizontal battles refer to the regulatory conflicts between the digital empires (US, China, EU). The video discusses how these empires are not only shaping their own digital landscapes but also exporting their models, leading to tensions and regulatory battles, such as the ongoing US-China tech war.

💡Vertical Battles

Vertical battles are the internal struggles within each empire between governments and tech companies over regulation. The video notes how governments, including the US, are increasingly regulating their domestic tech sectors, reflecting a global trend towards more assertive governance in the digital space.

💡Techno Libertarian

Techno libertarianism is an ideology that advocates for minimal government intervention in technology and digital markets. The video critiques this approach, suggesting it has led to overreach by tech companies and is being replaced by more regulatory models like the EU's rights-driven model.

💡Splinternet

The term 'splinternet' refers to a fragmented internet, where different regions or countries have distinct regulatory environments and technological landscapes. The video argues against this notion, suggesting that while there are distinct models, there is also significant overlap and interaction between them.

💡GDPR

GDPR stands for the General Data Protection Regulation, a comprehensive data protection law in the EU. It is mentioned in the video as an example of the EU's regulatory power and its influence on global data privacy standards, highlighting the EU's role in shaping digital rights.

💡Digital Empires

Digital empires, as used in the video, metaphorically describes the US, China, and EU as major powers with distinct models of digital governance that are exported globally. The term underscores the extent to which these regions' policies and regulations impact the global digital landscape.

Highlights

Introduction of Anu Bradford, the author who coined the term 'Brussels Effect' and her influential books.

The concept of 'Brussels Effect' and its significance in global governance.

Three primary models of digital regulation: American market-driven, Chinese state-driven, and European rights-driven.

The American model's emphasis on free speech, free internet, and minimal government intervention.

China's focus on becoming a technological superpower and using technology for surveillance and social control.

Europe's unique approach to digital regulation, prioritizing human rights and democratic values.

The 'digital Empires' concept, explaining the global influence of the US, China, and EU in technology regulation.

How each 'Empire' exports different aspects of their regulatory models: private power, infrastructure, and regulation.

The coexistence and collision of digital Empires in the global marketplace.

Horizontal battles: conflicts between the US, China, and EU over technology regulation.

Vertical battles: governments' efforts to regulate tech companies within their own markets.

Prediction of the decline of the American digital Empire due to a loss of trust in tech company governance.

The growing appeal of the European rights-driven model outside the EU, especially in democratic countries.

Concerns about the European model's compatibility with innovation and the lack of leading European tech companies.

The challenge for the US and EU to persuade countries not to emulate the Chinese model, given China's tech success without political freedom.

The high stakes in the battle for the future of liberal democracy in the digital age.

The need for liberal democracies to demonstrate effective governance of technology to maintain their values.

Transcripts

let me introduce to to you our speaker

of course many of you joined because you

know Anu Bradford about the term that

she coined the Brussels effect um and

her first uh book which was called the

Brussels effect how the European Union

rules the world published in 2020 which

was named one of the best books um of

2020 by Foreign Affairs her new book

that she will speak about today has also

already been been named a best book by

the financial times we're very much

looking forward um to to learning more

about it uh of course I'm particularly

excited because I'm currently also

writing a book finishing up a book

project and who knows a little bit about

called governing digital China so um so

I see my role later on to sort of use my

China and also Europe head to POS some

questions but um as I said before please

um please use this opportunity really to

um to pose any questions you may have

about anus work so um alna without

further Ado the floor is all

yours wonderful thank you so much

Daniela and uh and thank you all for

joining this is truly um an exciting uh

audience for me to engage with there's

incredible work that is being done uh at

hery so I am very eager to hear your

questions and comments and and then

after the initial remarks move to that

conversation so let me maybe start with

the uh some um General premises for the

book why I wrote it and what the

starting point is so I start from this

assumption that I'm observing that there

is increasingly now globally a consensus

that technology needs to be regulated

but there is no consensus on what that

regulation would look like so in the

digital Empires I argue that there are

three primary ways to think about

digital regulation there is the American

Market driven model there is the Chinese

State driven model and and then there's

a European what I call a rights driven

model so the American uh Market driven

model really prioritizes free speech

free internet and incentives to innovate

so the government is reserved only a

minimal role and the governance of

technology is basically handed over

largely to the tech companies so it is a

technol Libertarian techno Optimist VI

of the world the Chinese on the other

hand they are very focused on making

China a technological superpower and

under the state driven model they are

prepared to leverage State resources to

meet the goal but China is also

leveraging technology as a tool for

surveillance and propaganda and

censorship in an effort to preserve the

political power of the Communist party

and then to ensure social stability in

the nation so in this debate the

Europeans are often portrayed as being

forced to to choose between the US and

China because the Europeans lack a

thriving technology industry on its own

that would be comparable to the two uh

superpowers in the domain of Technology

but in the book I argue that the

Europeans are not prepared to nor are

they forced to to choose between the

Chinese and the American model the

Chinese model for the Europeans is

simply too oppressive but at the same

time the American model is viewed as to

permissive so the Europeans have carved

out their own third path forward and

this is premised on a human Centric

digital transformation a regulatory

model on under which the Europeans are

maximizing the fundamental rights of

individuals the preservation of

democratic structures of the society and

they also incorporate a notion of a more

fair distribution of the gains from

digital transformation so the idea is

that we are redistributing power away

from large platforms to smaller

companies to digital citizens and to the

public and Society at large so these are

the primary regulatory models that I'm

using as an analytical framework but you

may wonder why I call these three

leading technology and Regulatory Powers

digital Empires so Empires is a big term

it is a provocative term but and I use

it more metaphorically but at the same

time I think it is conceptually helpful

for us for the following reason is that

none of the three regulatory models are

confined to the jurisdictions themselves

instead each Empire is proactively

exporting its own regulatory model aboad

but what is interesting is that each of

the regulatory powers are exporting

something different the Americans are

primarily exporting the private power of

US tech companies which basically were

set free to take over the world which

they have uh uh effectively done so

companies like meta's Facebook has three

billion users in 160 countries and

through this Global Presence by offering

the services and products to the users

around the world they are also exporting

this American Market driven model that

all of us are now accustomed to the

Chinese are exporting something

different they are primarily exporting

infrastructure power so Chinese tech

companies are building 5G networks

undersea cables um data centers smart

Cities Safe cities along this digital

Silk Road that reaches across Asia many

parts of Africa Latin America and even

Europe so if the American s export the

private power of the tech companies

Chinese are building the infrastructures

what is the export of the Europeans

Europeans are exporting the superpower

they have which is regulation so this is

now tying to my earlier work on the

Brussels effect and I argue it is also

taking place in the domain of digital

economy so Europe often takes the lead

in drafting regulations for the

technology companies and then through

the globalization of practices of tech

companies they business decision to

often adopt those those standards across

their Global conduct or Global

Production these companies are then

exporting the European digital

regulations across the global

Marketplace so if the first argument of

the book was that this is not just a us

China game the EU is also an Empire the

EU is a player we should focus on three

players the second argument is that this

is not just a digital world that we

would think think about in terms of a

splinternet where we would have these

separate spheres of influence that do

not overlap because each Empire is

contributing a different layer to the

global digital governance you have many

nonaligned markets or unaligned powers

where you see Chinese infrastructure

American tech companies and European

regulations present at the same time

which means that these digital Empires

are coexisting and at times colliding in

the global Marketplace and this really

leads to the kind of battles that the

book then talks about and I distinguish

between two levels of regulatory battles

I talk about horizontal battles and

vertical battles and these two intersect

so horizontal battles are really the

battles between the empires themselves

the most notorious battle being the

ongoing and constantly escalating us

China Tech War it is a war for

technological Supremacy a battle for

economic geopolitical military and

ideological strength in the domain of

Technology but we also can witness a

regulatory battles another horizontal

battle mainly taking place between the

United States and Europe where the US

companies have come to the European

marketplace where Europeans feel that

they are

overextending they they their power they

are EX exercising the kind of economic

power political power cultural power

informational power that is too much for

the Europeans which is why the Europeans

have asserted themselves and then

extended their regulations to to reach

those American tech companies which has

then occasionally led to criticism in

the US saying it's not that our

companies are overreaching it's your

Regulators that are overreaching and

seeking to govern our companies as well

so in addition to those those horizontal

battles between the empires each Empire

is battling vertically the tech

companies in their own Marketplace so we

see constant efforts by the governments

to regulate their tech companies in

their own markets even the United States

government is now rethinking its techn

libertarian convictions and is looking

to start regulating the US tech

companies many of you may have looked at

the may have seen the executive order by

president Biden in the domain of

artificial intelligence that's pretty

far removed from a pure Market driven

model that has a very much the same tone

as the European rights driven model but

at the same time the the Americans are

considering digital regulation in the

shadow of that horizontal battle they

are worried that if they are too

vigorous in restraining the tech

companies in the domestic Market they

are eroding the very asset they need to

Prevail in the horizontal battle they

need these tech companies to be

successful they need them to innovate

they need them to lead in AI so that

they win the horizontal battle which

means we will see more restraint in

those vertical battles it's only so far

the Americans are willing to go but the

same way we see restrain in the

horizontal battle the Americans are not

going all the way restricting the flow

of American Technology to the Chinese

market because the American companies

need access to that Chinese market so we

see more restraint alongside rivalry in

these various

battles so let me now move to the

question that may interest many of you

which is who wins these battles who

prevails what happens in the horizontal

battle and what happens in the vertical

battle and here I'm prepared to make a

couple of predictions uh in the in the

book and one of them is that I predict

the decline line of the American digital

Empire the US is losing the ideological

battle there are very few individuals or

governments around the world that

anymore trust the governance of

technology to the tech companies

themselves instead there is now move

away from the the techn libertarian

worldview whereby governments around the

world are adopting privacy regulations

asserting they antitrust their

competition regul ulations rethinking

the disinformation looking for ways to

regulate content and now there's a

global conversation on the need to

regulate artificial intelligence so this

all is a move away clearly from the

American Market driven model that is

widely seen as un inept uh inep today to

govern the challenges of today's digital

economy so if the American Market driven

model is no longer having the same kind

of global appeal that is good news for

the European rights driven model which

is gaining more attaction also outside

of the EU especially in the Democratic

World in countries like Canada Australia

or South Korea or Japan or New Zealand

the governments are looking to the ways

that Europe is governing the digital

economy however there are potentially

three concerns that I want to share with

you that are are giving government some

PS as as to whether the European

regulatory model is the right one the

first concern is this idea that can the

European rights driven reg regulatory

model actually be compatible with

Innovation will it mean that if we move

towards the European model we will see

less successful tech companies emerge

and this is driven really by this uh uh

visible OBS this observation that that

Europeans are very good good at at

writing regulations we all know about

the gdpr but it takes us a longer time

to name a European tech company Europe

does not produce leading tech companies

which many attribute to excessive

digital

regulation I don't think digital

regulation is the problem even though I

do worry about European competitiveness

and I think there are other reasons that

explain why the Europeans haven't

managed to compete with for instance

Americans that have very little to do

with the European commitment to protect

the fundamental rights or otherwise

regulate the digital economy so let me

just mention four that I think are much

more important so one is that compared

to the United States there is no

integrated digital single Market in the

EU it is very hard for tech companies to

grow in the EU they cannot scale if they

face barriers that that follow the

national boundaries in the EU second

there is no deep IND created robust

Capital markets in the EU Capital

markets are also balkanized which makes

it much harder to fund your Innovations

in the EU third issue risk-taking is

actively discouraged under European

cultural Outlook but also under European

legislative Frameworks I blame

bankruptcy laws which are punitive in

most European countries it is often

fatal to f in the EU you cannot take

risks because if you fail you cannot

raise money again and you are not given

a second chance whereas failure is built

into the Silicon Valley and American

whole Tech ecosystem and that regulatory

model we want the entrepreneurs to try

big things to kind of head head towards

the cliff and some fall off the cliff

but but that's just part of the system

it's a right of passage you fail then

you raise money again and maybe the next

time you very very successful so

Americans are much more comfortable with

failure which also means they are much

more comfortable for pursuing disruptive

risky Innovations which is absolutely

critical for Tech economy and let me

name a fourth issue that I think really

explains why the Europeans are not

succeeding at the level of Americans

which is Americans are much better inh

harnessing the Global Talent to benefit

American innovation base so over 50% of

over $1 billion startups in the US have

an immigrant founder and if we for a

moment just look at the household names

the leading platform companies and they

Founders Steve Jobs of Apple is a son of

a Syrian immigrant Jeff basos of Amazon

is the second generation Cuban immigrant

um Elon Musk of Tesla is South African

Serge Brin the co-founder of uh of

Google is a Russian and Edward sain a

co-founder of Facebook is Brazilian

these are just examples of how America

has been so successful on being a magnet

for Global Talent the Europeans are not

succeeding at the same rate so I spent

some extra time laying this out because

I want to debunk this myth that somehow

Europeans are behind because they

committed to digital regulation I don't

think that if we now decided to scrap

the gdpr or decide never to go ahead

with the AI act that somehow a year from

now or five years from now there would

be massive Tech economy emanating from

Europe there are all these other

elements other pillars of the tech

ecosystem that the Europeans need to

work on which also means that if the

Americans that still remain somewhat

hesitant now where to move towards the

European rights Ren model it's not that

somehow we would not have uh uh

Innovation coming from the United States

the federal Privacy Law in the US would

not dismantle the US capital markets so

prevent the Global Talent from finding

their way to the United States so back

to my my question what are the potential

hesitations about the growing success of

of the EU regulatory model I don't think

overregulation is the problem I'm much

more worried about the Europeans

underdoing it by which I mean the

Europeans are very good at writing

regulations but they don't have the good

track record of en forcing uh the

regulations so we do not see as

successful implementation and as

effective enforcement of that ambitious

regulatory agenda which if the Europe

which means if the Europeans fail to

really translate these regulations into

effective Market outcomes they victory

in this horizontal battle is a hollow

one in practice the American Market

driven model prevails if these

regulations cannot be effectively

enforced

third concern that I have about the

European uh uh models Victory it's doing

well in the Democratic world but it

doesn't have many takers in the

authoritarian or authoritarian leaning

world and that part of the world is

constantly growing there are many

developing countries many countries that

are authoritarian that have no interest

in right driven model rights driven

model they are much more drawn to the

Chinese State driven model and I think

there are a couple of reasons why it is

very difficult for Europeans and for the

Americans if they try to work with the

Europeans and persuade the rest of the

world not to emulate the Chinese model

not to take the Chinese infrastructure

and rather align themselves with the the

global techn democracies one issue is

that I mentioned this Chinese

infrastructure power that infrastructure

is vital for many countries digital

development that is the path that they

cannot afford to to say no to especially

if there is no alternative Chinese

infrastructure is pretty good and it is

Affordable and often it is the only game

in town the Europeans have a couple of

alternatives to Huawei Nokia and Ericson

they don't come with the kind of

financial uh subsidies that allow the

countries to acquire them at a

reasonable rate that the Chinese

government is providing to support the

Chinese infrastructure Acquisitions

second issue and this is something that

I was very uncomfortable writing in the

book I I wrote this paragraph and I I

did not like it but it had to be there

because I think it happens to be

intellectually honest and true China has

shown to the world that political

freedom is not necessary for Innovation

they have managed to create a thriving

Tech economy without being free so it's

very hard for the US and the EU to go to

the rest of the world and tell them that

look you should not take the Chinese m

model because if you follow the Chinese

model the state driven one you will gain

control but you will not see economic

growth these countries look at China and

say look I think we can get both we can

have the political control and we can

have Innovation and economic growth here

my slide caveat is which I'm watching

very carefully right now is that in

generative AI the Chinese companies are

lagging behind the US counterpart and

one challenge for Chinese compan here is

that any generative AI model needs to be

consistent with the censorship regime

which limits the amount of data that you

can use and the ways that you can use

the data to train these models so there

may be a chance for the US and the EU to

say that we are Vindicated ultimately

Freedom does correlate with greater

Innovation but let me now uh move to the

to uh the the the most important Battle

of all the one that I think really has

the highest stake and that is the battle

over the future of liberal democracy and

this is the one the battle that leaves

me most concerned and I would want to

invite you to all to consider that this

battle can be lost in one of two ways

liberal democracy will deteriorate if

the US and the EU lose the horizontal

battle to China and I have given some

suggestions why it might be that that

that could be the case second we also

need to realize that liberal democracy

will also deteriorate if the US and the

EU lose their vertical battle to tech

companies a digital economy governed by

tech companies and not democratic

governments is also not consistent with

liberal democracy and here I am worried

because the United States even though

it's now rethinking its commitment to

markets and and is willing to regulate

it its Congress is not capable of

legislating China is capable of

legislating the Europeans are able to

legislate but they have a hard time

enforcing China doesn't have a hard time

enforcing if the Chinese Communist Party

decides it's time to crack down on big

Tech the Chinese Communist Party does

crack down on the big Tech so what

really needs to be done is for Liberal

democracies like the EU to show to the

world that there is a liberal Democratic

way to govern technology that will be

effective that will be shaping the

outcomes otherwise we are forced to

concede that Li that digital economy is

either governed by

authoritarians whereby democratic

governments are destined to fail in that

same Endeavor or in Liberal democracies

the digital economies governed by tech

companies and neither is a good outcome

for anybody who believes in Liberal

democracy as a foundation of Digital

Society and human engagement because

that would force us to conclude that the

true digital Empires are the

authoritarians and the tech companies