Unable to conceive of the digital world as a normal arena for political debate, European institutions treat it as a pathology that needs to be regulated. From the e-commerce directive to the Democracy Shield, regulation no longer organizes debate: it administers values, multiplies acronyms, and pre-frames what can still be discussed. This is a development with serious consequences for European democracies. There was a time – not so long ago, but already folkloric – when the European Union regulated the digital world as one regulates a market: with general rules, a certain technical modesty, and an almost naive respect for legal clarity and freedom, contractual or otherwise. In 2000, the e-commerce directive established a framework. A framework, not a moral code. Semantic shift Twenty-five years later, Europe is no longer content to simply regulate activities: it protects, corrects, balances, supervises—and prides itself on civilizing. The semantic shift is revealing. After the General Data Protection Regulation, the founding act of a protective and normative Europe, came the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act. Soon to come are the Digital Fairness Act, the Cyber Security Act, the European Democracy Shield, and the Digital Networks Act. DSA, DMA, DFA, CSA, EDS, DNA: at this stage, acronyms are no longer a tool for clarity, but a promise of a bright future in three letters. A regulation for every virtue The…
