"Freedom rarely disappears overnight. It is lost in small steps — through well-intentioned laws, new exceptions and ever more control."
I am a citizen of the world. I travel extensively, I build companies in multiple countries, I compare systems first-hand. I could live and work almost anywhere — and that is precisely why I write this not as someone who must, but as someone who wants to: Europe is worth defending.
I believe in democracy, in the rule of law, in science and progress. Above all, however, I believe in free people — not administered ones.
Europe was built on freedom, human dignity, property rights, freedom of expression, privacy and personal responsibility. None of this is self-evident, and none of it sustains itself. This manifesto is not directed against Europe. It is directed against the gradual erosion of precisely those freedoms that made Europe strong.
Freedom dies quietly
History shows: freedom almost never disappears through a single sweeping blow. It changes slowly — with every new register, every additional documentation requirement, every database, every small restriction that sounds reasonable in isolation. That is precisely why citizens must remain vigilant. Not out of fear, but out of responsibility.
Of course the state has duties: combating crime, protecting children, preventing terrorism, detecting money laundering. I explicitly support these goals. But in a free constitutional state, a good goal alone is not enough. Every interference with fundamental rights must always be measured against the same questions:
Is it necessary? Is it proportionate? Is there a less intrusive means? And who controls the controllers?
What is changing right now
In recent years the EU has passed or set in motion a whole series of laws that reach deep into digital and economic life: the anti-money laundering package with stricter identity and documentation requirements, the European Digital Identity Wallet, the Digital Services Act, the AI Act, new cybersecurity rules, biometric border systems such as EES and ETIAS. Each of these regulations pursues legitimate objectives. But in aggregate they are shifting the relationship between citizen and state — and that is precisely what needs to be openly debated. Not because freedom is already lost, but because it is only preserved when its boundaries are defended again and again.
I am an entrepreneur. I know what these regulatory frameworks mean in practice — not as a buzzword, but as lost time, lost ideas and founders who never even try. And I know something else: capital, talent and ideas are mobile.
Those who restrict freedom lose first the ones who can leave. A continent that merely administers its best minds instead of winning them over will not become safer — only poorer.
Cash is printed freedom
Cash is more than paper. It enables economic self-determination, protects privacy and creates independence from technical systems, accounts and corporations. I watch with concern as its use is gradually restricted and made more difficult.
A modern society may promote digital means of payment — but it must never effectively displace cash. Freedom means freedom of choice.
Confidential communication is not a crime
A free society needs confidential communication. It used to be the letter; today it is the encrypted message. For years Europe has been debating whether to open private communication more widely to law enforcement — up to and including proposals to scan messages on citizens' own devices. I say clearly: the fight against child abuse and organised crime is right and important. But it does not justify placing private communication under general suspicion.
Strong end-to-end encryption does not protect perpetrators — it protects journalists, lawyers, doctors, businesses, whistleblowers and every individual citizen. Weakening secure encryption weakens the security of everyone.
No mandatory backdoors, no indiscriminate mass surveillance. Surveillance only on the basis of specific suspicion, grounded in law and subject to independent judicial oversight.
Digital control needs limits
The internet was once the freest space that ever existed. Today, under regulatory pressure, platforms prefer to remove too much rather than too little — this is called overblocking, and in the end it also affects lawful content. Added to this are debates about mandatory age and identity verification for digital services and ever-larger biometric systems at borders.
Border security is a legitimate task. But the larger these systems grow, the more important become transparency, independent oversight, clear deletion deadlines and effective legal protection. And the right to express oneself anonymously online must remain where there are no overriding rule-of-law reasons against it.
Innovation needs room to breathe
I am not opposed to technology — on the contrary, I build with AI and new technologies myself. The AI Act sets standards worldwide, and rules against misuse are correct. But Europe must not forget, for all its regulation, where prosperity comes from: from bold researchers, developers and entrepreneurs.
Those who treat every new technology primarily as a risk will end up watching it being built elsewhere.
By which we can be measured
- 1 Secure cash permanently — guaranteed by law, usable without restriction.
- 2 Privacy by Default — data minimisation as the baseline setting, not an option.
- 3 Protect strong encryption — no backdoors, ever.
- 4 No indiscriminate mass surveillance — surveillance only on the basis of specific suspicion and judicial oversight.
- 5 Sunset clauses for surveillance laws — every piece of intrusive legislation expires automatically if it does not prove its worth.
- 6 Independent oversight of state data collection — those who collect data are themselves subject to oversight.
- 7 Regulation with an expiry date and evaluation — every rule must regularly prove that it is necessary, suitable and proportionate.
- 8 Comprehensible laws — a law that no ordinary person can understand any longer is not a good law.
- 9 Freedom for those who build things — less bureaucracy for founders, innovators and entrepreneurs.
- 10 Technology serves people — not people the system.
My Call to Action
No government is infallible. No authority, no party, no institution. Democracy thrives on power being limited, laws being open to scrutiny and citizens being able to disagree. It is not blind trust that protects freedom — the control of state power protects freedom.
I call on politicians, entrepreneurs, scientists and citizens: do not reflexively reject every new regulation. But do not reflexively accept every one either. Ask the same questions of every law: Is it necessary? Is it proportionate? Does it protect our freedom just as consistently as it is meant to protect our security?
Europe's greatest strength was never its authorities, not its bureaucracy, not its regulations. Its greatest strength has always been free people — people who think, take responsibility and are allowed to disagree.
I have the choice of where I live and where I build. I want a Europe that people choose — not one they escape from. Freedom is not a privilege. It is the prerequisite for democracy. And it is worth defending anew by every generation.
For freedom. For self-determination. For a strong, democratic and free Europe.