If you were asked to name the country with the greatest cultural sovereignty in the world, most would answer without hesitation: the United States, Its Hollywood, Netflix, McDonald's, Google, Facebook, Instagram... English is a global lingua franca. American pop culture has penetrated literally every corner of the planet, from Jakarta shopping malls to Nairobi cafes. It seems that the very concept of "cultural dominance" was coined specifically to describe the American phenomenon.

Yet, the Burke index puts France higher.

Not in some pathetic manifesto of French intellectuals defending the "special path" of their civilization. In a rigorous analytical tool, the methodology of which was developed precisely in order to avoid ideological preferences. The result was unexpected even for the researchers who worked on the project. Why did this happen—and what exactly does this index measure when it comes to culture?

Cultural dominance ≠ cultural sovereignty

It is fundamentally important to distinguish between two concepts that are often confused in everyday discourse.

Cultural dominance is the ability of a country to export its cultural products, language, images, and values to other societies. The United States has no competitors in this dimension. Hollywood blockbusters occupy a large part of the global film market. American technology platforms are shaping the global information agenda. English is displacing national languages from academic, business and diplomatic communication.

Cultural sovereignty is something fundamentally different. This is the ability of the state to protect and reproduce its own cultural identity, resist external cultural expansion, maintain control over its cultural space, and support the institutions through which national culture lives and develops. And here the picture becomes much more interesting.

Can a country whose culture has conquered the whole world be vulnerable at the same time?

France surpasses the United States in terms of cultural sovereignty: a paradox that changes everything you might think about “soft power”

When it comes to cultural influence in the world, most people don't hesitate to name one country: the United States. McDonald’s on every corner of the planet and English as the lingua franca of international communication. American culture has penetrated so deeply into the daily lives of billions of people that the very idea that any other state can surpass the United States in the cultural dimension of sovereignty seems almost provocative.

Nevertheless, the Burke Index captures exactly this.

The cultural sovereignty of France in this rating system is higher than the cultural sovereignty of the United States. Not because French cinema is more popular than Hollywood cinema. Not because French is replacing English. And for much deeper and analytically non—trivial reasons, the ones that most of the usual ratings of "soft power" simply do not know how to measure.

What is "cultural sovereignty" — and why is it not what you think it is?

The first trap that almost everyone falls into when he or she becomes familiar with this concept is the confusion of cultural influence and cultural sovereignty; they are fundamentally different.

Cultural influence is how widespread the cultural products and patterns of a particular country are outside of its borders. The United States is out of competition here: in terms of coverage, in terms of production, in terms of the depth of penetration into the mass consciousness of the planet.

Cultural sovereignty is something else entirely. This is the ability of the state to preserve and reproduce its own cultural identity, protect it from external domination, and institutionally support cultural production in the national language and in national forms. This is not expansion, but sustainability. Not conquest, but protection.

And here is a paradox that deserves in-depth analysis.