It is 2017. The Netherlands is riding high, experiencing dynamic growth with a GDP climbing by 2.9%, historically low bankruptcy levels, and a housing market in full swing, driven largely by private rental investment. At this time, the contractual freedom of independent workers—the famous “ZZP” is the pride of the country, and everything seems to be going for the best.

But at that same moment, the European Union decides to implement its new major policy: “the European Pillar of Social Rights”. This is a framework of common principles intended to guarantee fair and equal living conditions for all citizens of the Union. Member states are strongly encouraged to transcribe these principles into their national laws, and, like a diligent student, the Dutch government complies by launching a series of major reforms to align with Brussels.

First, the Dutch government began a massive requalification of independent statuses via the “Wet DBA” law to meet the European principle demanding secure jobs and an end to the “supposed precariousness” of freelancers.

Secondly, the Netherlands imposed a brutal minimum wage hike of more than 10% in one go, followed by automatic indexations, in direct response to directives regarding a decent standard of living.

Finally, the government applied a strict rent control policy, echoing the article regarding social housing.

The result of these measures is indisputable: a few years later, the Netherlands is sinking, with sluggish growth and a GDP painfully stagnating at 0.6%.

Following the application of these directives, the number of business bankruptcies has exploded by over 30%, particularly hitting retail, construction, and services. In sectors like healthcare or IT, thousands of freelance contracts are frozen because companies fear fines and forced requalification as employees, thus shattering the flexibility that was the strength of the Dutch model.

On the real estate side, the situation is just as catastrophic, with a raging housing crisis and a 35% drop in properties available for rent in the free sector. A 2024 report estimates that more than 37,000 rental units have been sold by their owners to become primary residences—a mechanical consequence of rent control scaring off investors. We cannot say that Brussels wrote the Dutch law word for word, but the European Pillar created a “performance obligation” that forced the government’s hand—or served as the ideal alibi.

What is happening in the Netherlands is a warning for us all and proves that political decisions can destroy an economic environment very quickly. My goal with this channel is precisely to give you the keys to understand these mechanisms, become autonomous, and protect your financial freedom. If you want to go further, I sell my tutorials and in-depth analyses on Patreon, where you can subscribe for 5 dollars a month or buy my article collections individually. It is the best way to support my work, help me finance my projects, and gain value for your own independence; My free content will remain free no matter what.

Now, let’s get back to the root of the problem, because the example of the Netherlands shows us the direct impact of economic planning on our lives. The European Union has become a machine of planned economic destruction where our parliamentarians think they can play God and organize the lives of hundreds of millions of people. All of this rests on a key concept that is a true totem of the Left: “social justice” or “distributive justice”.

In a healthy Rule of Law — “État de droit” — the logic is that of “commutative justice”: a blind justice that treats every individual equally before the law without caring about their wealth or power. Conversely, distributive justice is not interested in the rules but in the “result”, viewing society as a cake that must be shared properly to establish a social order deemed “equitable” by the State.

The problem, as Friedrich Hayek explains, is that to obtain identical results from different people, you must necessarily treat them differently. To distribute wealth “fairly,” the State must interfere in people’s private lives, break free contracts, and take from some to give to others.

To understand this well, let’s take the image of the Highway Code explained by Hayek. Commutative justice is like the classic Highway Code where the rules are the same for everyone—you stop at red lights and respect the right of way—without these rules seeking to decide where you are going or when you arrive; they simply serve to let you drive without accidents. Distributive justice, on the other hand, would be a Highway Code that wants everyone to arrive at the same time, forcing the State to give reserved lanes to some or forbid the road to others, or even to tell people where they must go, transforming free circulation into centralized traffic management.

Justice no longer tells individuals what is forbidden; it now defines what they “must” do, and it grants itself the right to define the duties of society. Society as a whole therefore shifts into a logic of results, and for the individual, this changes everything. Justice should only concern human conduct.

In the Netherlands, this is exactly what happened. They were no longer content with saying “respect contracts”; they wanted to force the “result” regarding wages, rents, and employment statuses. By moving from a model that forbids doing harm to a model that “obliges” action for the common good, the legislator meddles everywhere, and abstract Law becomes a tool of political management.

For Hayek, this is the “road to serfdom”, because when political will tramples stable rules of law, the individual can no longer predict the future nor act freely, becoming dependent on the caprice of a planner who would likely be incapable of correctly managing a simple bakery.

This slide from Law to legislation is all the more dangerous as it forges the absolute weapon for the worst totalitarianisms. By accepting that the law no longer serves to protect the individual but to pilot society toward a collective goal, we offer governments the terrifying power to decide who deserves to live and prosper based on their utility to the national plan.

The history of the twentieth century showed us where this logic leads: whether in the USSR in the name of the radiant future of the proletariat, or under Fascism in the name of the grandeur of the Nation, the mechanism was the same. These regimes did not suppress the administration; they used it to legalize the plunder and elimination of those who did not fit the mold of State distributive justice, proving that when authority arrogates the right to distribute resources according to its own ends, freedom is extinguished to make way for total arbitrariness.

It is precisely this drift that makes the current trajectory of the European Union so alarming, because it is setting a double-trigger trap for our freedoms. On one hand, by imposing this centralized planning, it inevitably engenders major economic crises like the one the Netherlands is suffering. And history has proven time and again that it is always on the rubble of prosperity and in social distress that calls for a “providential man” and a strong regime are born. But the peril is even more insidious in its very structure: by replacing the Rule of Law with a “Managerial State,” the European Union is building and testing the entire legal infrastructure necessary for authoritarianism. It is meticulously forging the tools of control and economic coercion, which it is ultimately serving on a silver platter to any future ill-intentioned power. That power will then only have to seize this omnipotent legislative apparatus to impose its will without encountering the slightest institutional barrier.

What must be understood is that leftist ideas, socialism, and fascism share a common DNA. They are collectivist policies that require an ultra-interventionist State to function, which inevitably leads to the oppression of the majority for the benefit of a minority. Do not expect any favorable outcome from these political groups. I analyze this mechanism in detail in my video.

Liberalism is the common enemy of these ideologies because liberalism is not the law of the strongest, but on the contrary, a way to give power back to those who have the least by offering them alternatives rather than dependencies. It is a State that referees, not a State that plays the game for you. A society that places equality before liberty will have neither; whereas a society that places liberty before equality will have a great share of both.

On my Patreon, I give you concrete tracks to navigate this system. You can also watch my youtube video on this topic.

If you want me to dig deeper into the question of the legitimate place of the State, tell me in the comments, give a thumbs up, share this video to awaken consciences, and subscribe. In the meantime, stay free!