European lawmakers are questioning whether Amazon, Microsoft, and Google cloud services can be trusted with sensitive data. Countries are developing domestic semiconductor industries to reduce dependence on American chips. The E.U. is promoting homegrown alternatives like TomTom and Here for navigation.

Experts note that U.S. tech platforms "often fail to reflect the needs and realities of users in the global majority." That's a diplomatic way of saying American companies built for American users and assumed everyone else would adapt.

The real question is whether these alternatives can actually compete on merit, or if they'll just become expensive digital walls.

Here's the uncomfortable truth: most of these alternatives aren't better than their American counterparts. They're just not American. Proton Mail works well, but it's not technically superior to Gmail — it's just not operated by Google. Zoho is cheaper for emerging markets, but that's pricing strategy, not innovation.

And there's a deeper irony: many of these "independent" platforms still depend on Silicon Valley for funding. Venture capital remains concentrated in the U.S., which means even companies built to compete with American tech often answer to American investors.

But the shift is real. Once countries start building their own infrastructure, it's hard to reverse. The internet was supposed to be borderless. Instead, we're watching it fragment into regional spheres of influence, each with its own platforms, each with its own rules.

Silicon Valley spent two decades assuming it was building universal infrastructure. Turns out it was just building infrastructure for people who were okay with Silicon Valley having all the data.