Let’s start with the facts:
- Europe ages faster than any other developed region, especially in the South. The average age is above 44 years old and steadily increasing.
- The big technology companies that define our era are predominantly American or Chinese, with South Korean or Taiwanese companies as rare exceptions.
- Once-glorious European industrial giants like Nokia, Siemens, and Ericsson have transformed into B2B suppliers or corporate entities virtually invisible to consumers.
- While we host two of the most significant technology events in the world, MWC and IFA, we primarily serve as spectators in a game dominated by others.
- In the meantime, we focus on regulating: GDPR, AI Act, DMA, DSA. We legislate about innovations we did not invent and impose rules on games we do not play.
There is an uncomfortable but striking parallel to post-bubble Japan .
In the 1980s, Japan appeared poised to dominate the 21st century. Companies like Sony , Panasonic , Toshiba , and Nintendo defined key technologies that dominated the world at the close of the 20th century:
- The Game Boy and the desktop Nintendo
- The Walkman and the Discman
- The Trinitron TVs
- The VHS format that ultimately triumphed
- The iconic Canon and Nikon cameras that captured our memories
- The famous Casio watches
- The reliable Toyotas and Hondas that set new standards for quality
Moreover, the term kaizen (continuous improvement) became a guiding principle for companies globally. Japan, in addition to manufacturing outstanding products, exported methodologies, work philosophies, and visions for the future of technology.
<img alt="Japan has found the three most serious problems with the massive arrival of tourists. And none of it has to do with tourists." width="375" height="142" src="https://i.blogs.es/5c5525/pexels-photo-10698285/375_142.jpeg"/>However, this era ended, leading to stagnation, deflation, and a troubling sense of institutional nostalgia . Japan did not collapse but rather ceased to innovate, becoming a repository for how things once were relevant in technology.
Europe is following a similar trajectory, but at an alarming pace.
The pressing concern lies not in the absence of large European tech firms—save for a few notable exceptions—but rather in our reaction to this absence. Instead of fostering environments where new players can emerge, we focus on aggressively regulating existing ones. We behave as if true power resides in controlling others’ platforms rather than building our own technologies. It resembles the mindset of someone who no longer plays competitively: if I can’t win, at least I’ll dictate the rules. Yet establishing rules without the ability to enforce them renders us irrelevant.
Japan sought comfort in its culture and refined artistry, while in Europe, we take solace in our values : data protection, sustainability, and digital rights. While these concepts are noble, they are ultimately insufficient. The technological architecture that defines what is feasible in the 21st century is being constructed in California and Shenzhen . We are busy setting boundaries for systems and architectures invented by others.
The deeper problem is that Europe has internalized a narrative of managed decline . Instead of aspiring to lead, we aim to “preserve our model.” This translates to managing decline with dignity. Japan took decades to accept its newly redefined role on the global stage; Europe appears to be doing so in rapid succession.
As Europe grapples with these issues, it remains crucial to question the leadership structures and innovation pathways being established today. Are we content with merely playing by the rules set by others? Or will we strive to reclaim our rightful place in the realm of technological progression?