That J D Vance Speech In Full

It's one for the history books!

As you likely well know by now, on Friday, Vice President JD Vance gave a speech to the Munich Security Conference that sent the European establishment into a collective meltdown.

Here in the UK, even supposedly right wing media has ruled the speech a dud. Vance was ‘lecturing’, he was ‘importing American politics’ (code word for discussing abortion), the speech was ‘misjudged’. The impression given was that Vance had used the podium as a pulpit from which to deliver a 15 minute sermon on the evils of abortion. Those things, of course, are simply not done in Europe, where we reserve the right to extinguish as many babies as we like, uncriticised.

The verdict could not have been further from the truth. Vance’s speech was, in fact, something far more akin to the sort of speech that Thatcher or Reagan may have given in calling for an end to the Soviet Republic. It had much more of a “tear down this wall!” flavour to it, than a ‘wailing and gnashing of teeth.’ Indeed, Vance himself invokes the spirit of the end of the Cold War, asking: what happened to the winners of that war, that they have now gone on to adopt the values of the losers? He closes with a quote from John Paul II, the Pope who also did so much to end Soviet terror: “Be Not Afraid.”

I suspect that in years to come, his speech will take its place in the history books alongside those of Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul II as one of the great speeches in defence of freedom and democracy against the forces of totalitarianism and collectivism. I present it here in full.

Transcript:

One of the things that I wanted to talk about today is, of course, our shared values.

You know, it's great to be back in Germany as, as you heard earlier, I was here last year as a United States Senator. I saw foreign minister, excuse me, foreign secretary David Lammy, and joke that both of us last year had different jobs than we have now. But now it's time, for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples, to use it wisely to improve their lives.

I want to say that, you know, I was fortunate in my time here to spend some time outside the walls of this conference over the last 24 hours, and I've been so impressed by the hospitality of the people, even, of course, as they're reeling from yesterday's horrendous attack. The first time I was ever in Munich was with my wife, actually, who's here with me today, on a personal trip. I've always loved the city of Munich, and I've always loved its people, and I just wanted to say that we're very moved. Our thoughts and prayers are with Munich and everybody affected by the evil inflicted on this beautiful Community. We're thinking about you, we're praying for you and we will certainly be rooting for you in the days and weeks to come.

[Applause]. I hope that's not the last bit of Applause that I get!

We gather at this conference, of course, to discuss security, and normally we mean threats to our external security. I see many great military leaders gathered here today. But while the Trump Administration is very concerned with European security, and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, and we also believe that it's important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense – the threat that I worry the most about vis a vis Europe is not Russia, it's not China, it's not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within: the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.

I was struck that a former European Commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don't go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany too. These cavalier statements are shocking to American ears.

For years, we've been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy. But when we see European courts canceling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we're holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say “ourselves” because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them.

Within living memory of many of you in this room, the Cold War positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. Consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that cancelled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not, and thank God they lost the Cold War.

They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty: the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build. As it turns out, you can't mandate Innovation or creativity, just as you can't force people what to think, what to feel or what to believe. and we believe those things are certainly connected. Unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it's sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the Cold War’s winners.

I look to Brussels, where EU commissars warned citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they've judged to be, quote, “hateful content”.

Or to this very country, where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of, quote, “combating misogyny on the internet: a day of action.”

I look to Sweden, where, two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Koran burnings that resulted in his friend's murder. As the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden's laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant – and I'm quoting – a free pass to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.

Perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britain in particular in the crosshairs.

A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Connor, a 51-year-old physiotherapist and an army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50m from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes. Not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied simply: it was on behalf of the unborn son he and his former girlfriend had aborted years before.

The officers were not moved. Adam was found guilty of breaking the government's new buffer zones law, which criminalises silent prayer and other actions that could influence a person's decision within 200m of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution.

Now, I wish I could say that this was a fluke, a one-off, crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person. But no. This last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called safe access zones, warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law! Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizen suspected guilty of thought crime.

In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat. In the interest of comedy, my friends, but also in the interest of truth, I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe, but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation. Misinformation like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaked from a laboratory in China. Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth.

So I come here today not just with an observation, but with an offer. Just as the Biden Administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump Administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that. In Washington there is a new sheriff in town and under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree.

Now we're at the point, of course, that the situation has gotten so bad that this December, Romania straight up cancelled the results of a presidential election based on the flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and enormous pressure from its continental neighbours. As I understand it, the argument was that Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections. But I'd ask my European friends to have some perspective. You can believe it's wrong for Russia to buy social media advertisements to influence your elections; we certainly do. You can condemn it on the world stage even. But if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn't very strong to begin with.

The good news is that I happen to think your democracies are substantially less brittle than many people apparently fear. I really do believe that allowing our citizens to speak their mind will make them stronger still. Which of course brings us back to Munich, where the organisers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing populist parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations. Now, again, we don't have to agree with everything or or anything that people say, but when people represent – when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them.

To many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet era words like ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’, who simply don't like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or, God forbid, vote a different way or, even worse, win an election.

Now, this is a security conference and I'm sure you all came here prepared to talk about how exactly you would tend to increase defense spending over the next few years, in line with some new target. And that's great because, as President Trump has made abundantly clear, he believes that our European friends must play a bigger role in the future of this continent.

We don't think – you hear this term burden sharing, but we think it's an important part of being in a shared alliance together that the Europeans step up while America focuses on areas of the world that are in great danger. But let me also ask you: how will you even begin to think through the kinds of budgeting questions, if we don't know what it is that we are defending in the first place?

I've heard a lot already in my conversations – and I've had many, many great conversations with many people gathered here in this room – I've heard a lot about what you need to defend yourselves from, and of course that's important. But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me, and certainly, I think, to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you're defending yourselves for? What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important? I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people.

Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now – the crisis I believe we all face together – is one of our own making. If you're running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump. You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years. Have we learned nothing [if not] that thin mandates produce unstable results?

There is so much of value that can be accomplished with the kind of democratic mandate that I think will come from being more responsive to the voices of your citizens. If you're going to enjoy competitive economies, if you're going to enjoy affordable energy and secure supply chains, then you need mandates to govern because you have to make difficult choices to enjoy all of these things, and of course we know that very well in America. You cannot win a democratic mandate by censoring your opponents or putting them in jail, whether that's the leader of the opposition, a humble Christian praying in her own home or a journalist trying to report the news.

Nor can you win one by disregarding your basic electorate on questions like: who gets to be a part of our shared society? And of all the pressing challenges that the nations represented here face, I believe there is nothing more urgent than mass migration.

Today, almost one in five people living in this country moved here from abroad. That is, of course, an all-time high. It's a similar number, by the way, in the United States, also an all-time high. The number of immigrants who entered the EU from non EU countries doubled between 2021 and 2022 alone, and of course it's gotten much higher since. And we know the situation, it didn't materialize in a vacuum. It's the result of a series of conscious decisions made by politicians all over the continent and others across the world over the span of a decade.

We saw the horrors wrought by these decisions yesterday in this very city. Of course, I can't bring it up again without thinking about the terrible victims who had a beautiful winter day in Munich ruined. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and will remain with them. But why did this happen in the first place? It's a terrible story, but it's one we've heard way too many times in Europe and unfortunately too many times in the United States as well. An asylum seeker, often a young man in his mid-20s already known to police, rams a car into a crowd and shatters a community.

How many times must we suffer these appalling setbacks before we change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction? No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants. You know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit. Agree or disagree, they voted for it. And more and more all over Europe, they're voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration.

Now I happen to agree with a lot of these concerns, but you don't have to agree with me. I just think that people care about their homes, they care about their dreams, they care about their safety and their capacity to provide for themselves and their children,

And they're smart. I think this is one of the most important things I've learned in my brief time in politics. Contrary to what you might hear a couple mountains over in Davos, the citizens of all of our nations don't generally think of themselves as educated animals or as interchangeable cogs of a global economy. And it's hardly surprising that they don't want to be shuffled about or relentlessly ignored by their leaders.

It is the business of democracy to adjudicate these big questions at the ballot box. I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns or, worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections or shutting people out of the political process, protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy.

And speaking up and expressing opinions isn't election interference, even when people express views outside your own country and even when those people are very influential. And trust me, I say this with all humor: if American democracy can survive 10 years of Greta Thunberg's scolding, you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.

But what German democracy – what no democracy, American, German or European – will survive is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There's no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don't.

Europeans, the people have a voice. European leaders have a choice. My strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future. You can embrace what your people tell you, even when it's surprising. Even when you don't agree! If you do so, you can face the future with certainty and with confidence, knowing that the nation stands behind each of you.

That, to me, is the great magic of democracy. It's not in these stone buildings or beautiful hotels, it's not even in the great institutions that we have built together as a shared society. To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice, and if we refuse to listen to that voice, even our most successful fights will secure very little.

As Pope John Paul II, in my view one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other, once said: do not be afraid. We shouldn't be afraid of our people, even when they express views that disagree with their leadership.

Thank you all. Good luck to all of you. God bless you.

---