Return to Video

1/6.Chouard.Metz.oct2011-ENJEUX CONSTITUTION

  • 0:17 - 0:19
    We are pleased, here with ATTAC,
  • 0:19 - 0:21
    to welcome Etienne Chouard
  • 0:21 - 0:24
    for a conference with an utopian title:
  • 0:24 - 0:27
    European Union, if we had to do it again?
  • 0:27 - 0:29
    Etienne Chouard is a teacher
  • 0:29 - 0:31
    of Law and Economics in Marseille.
  • 0:31 - 0:33
    He is also an independent researcher,
  • 0:33 - 0:35
    and he feed his thoughts with debates
  • 0:35 - 0:38
    which took place in 2005
  • 0:38 - 0:41
    during the European Constitutional Treaty.
  • 0:41 - 0:46
    The possibility to say "no" to that treaty, to this constitution
  • 0:46 - 0:49
    made him study it thouroughly,
  • 0:49 - 0:53
    and then reveal all the wrongdoings of this constitution,
  • 0:53 - 0:55
    which, he says, was done
  • 0:55 - 0:57
    not for the people,
  • 0:57 - 0:59
    but for those who wrote it,
  • 0:59 - 1:01
    and who governs us.
  • 1:01 - 1:03
    Tonight, he will present
  • 1:03 - 1:05
    his vision of the European Union,
  • 1:05 - 1:07
    Of democracy and what it means.
  • 1:07 - 1:10
    We will also discuss
  • 1:10 - 1:13
    the theme of money creation
  • 1:13 - 1:16
    Question the need for a constitutional treaty.
  • 1:16 - 1:18
    And evoke
  • 1:18 - 1:21
    a new and original process:
  • 1:21 - 1:22
    that is selected by lot
  • 1:22 - 1:25
    in order to elect our representatives.
  • 1:25 - 1:27
    Before giving the mic to Etienne,
  • 1:27 - 1:30
    I want to thank the City Hall
  • 1:30 - 1:33
    for giving us this conference room.
  • 1:33 - 1:35
    And thanks to Etienne
  • 1:35 - 1:38
    who is not paid to be here.
  • 1:38 - 1:44
    This conference will last
  • 1:44 - 1:46
    until around 10 PM.
  • 1:46 - 1:48
    So, we will have a first part,
  • 1:48 - 1:49
    until 7.30PM,
  • 1:49 - 1:51
    To talk about different points.
  • 1:51 - 1:53
    Then we will make a short break.
  • 1:53 - 1:56
    It's possible to get food nearby.
  • 1:56 - 1:58
    And we'll come back
  • 1:58 - 2:01
    at 8 to continue the debate.
  • 2:01 - 2:05
    Now, Etienne will take the stage.
  • 2:05 - 2:08
    Can you hear me?
  • 2:08 - 2:12
    I should lean closer to this thing...
  • 2:12 - 2:15
    Can you hear me?
  • 2:15 - 2:19
    Good evening, everyone.
  • 2:22 - 2:27
    I have a strong idea to get us out of this mess.
  • 2:27 - 2:30
    I'm here to talk about it.
  • 2:30 - 2:33
    I woke up 6 years ago
  • 2:33 - 2:35
    during the debate for the
  • 2:35 - 2:37
    European anticonstitutional treaty
  • 2:37 - 2:39
    which was suggested in 2005.
  • 2:39 - 2:41
    I say anticonstituational
  • 2:41 - 2:43
    because it serves, once well studied,
  • 2:43 - 2:47
    it serves to destroy our national constitutions.
  • 2:47 - 2:49
    And, it works well.
  • 2:49 - 2:52
    It's a system that works.
  • 2:52 - 2:53
    And, since then,
  • 2:54 - 2:56
    since I woke up
  • 2:56 - 2:59
    I remained awake,
  • 2:59 - 3:02
    and I'm thinking about what might
  • 3:02 - 3:04
    protect human beings
  • 3:04 - 3:07
    against abuses of power.
  • 3:07 - 3:08
    So I read a lot.
  • 3:08 - 3:11
    The more I read, the more I want to read.
  • 3:11 - 3:13
    It's becoming a reading frenzy.
  • 3:13 - 3:15
    And at the same time, I am discovering.
  • 3:15 - 3:16
    something useful. I'm finding,
  • 3:16 - 3:17
    in the history of men,
  • 3:17 - 3:19
    in the history of human thinking,
  • 3:19 - 3:21
    I find that men
  • 3:21 - 3:24
    have had problems with powers for a long time.
  • 3:24 - 3:25
    I find that men
  • 3:25 - 3:27
    need (ruling) powers
  • 3:27 - 3:29
    when we live in a society.
  • 3:29 - 3:33
    We need to delegate some powers.
  • 3:33 - 3:37
    And the men to whom we give the power to,
  • 3:37 - 3:38
    have always been changing.
  • 3:38 - 3:41
    They transform in a bad way.
  • 3:41 - 3:43
    So I find by reading,
  • 3:43 - 3:45
    that since Aristotle and the Athenian era,
  • 3:45 - 3:47
    - I'll talk a lot about Athens tonight
  • 3:47 - 3:49
    especially in the second part -
  • 3:49 - 3:51
    I find that...
  • 3:51 - 3:55
    men have developed means
  • 3:55 - 3:58
    to protect themselves from power abuses.
  • 3:58 - 4:01
    Very clever means.
  • 4:01 - 4:04
    Often thwarted by those
  • 4:04 - 4:07
    I call "power thiefs".
  • 4:07 - 4:10
    But...
  • 4:10 - 4:12
    It's not set in stone.
  • 4:12 - 4:13
    Today,
  • 4:13 - 4:15
    we are governed by people
  • 4:15 - 4:17
    abusing of their (ruling) powers.
  • 4:17 - 4:18
    I think the current situation
  • 4:18 - 4:19
    really allows for....
  • 4:19 - 4:21
    It is a caricature today.
  • 4:21 - 4:22
    Those who don't see
  • 4:22 - 4:23
    that those in power abuse
  • 4:23 - 4:25
    are completely blind.
  • 4:25 - 4:28
    But I think everyone sees that.
  • 4:28 - 4:30
    Room question : Who are you talking about?
  • 4:30 - 4:32
    The people who are in power.
  • 4:32 - 4:34
    Members of the Parliament,
  • 4:34 - 4:37
    Ministers, they all make decisions.
  • 4:37 - 4:41
    Without any means for,
  • 4:41 - 4:47
    the people's discontent to materialize.
  • 4:47 - 4:51
    I think it's clear enough.
  • 4:54 - 4:59
    The main tool that humans created
  • 4:59 - 5:03
    that has been used since Athens,
  • 5:03 - 5:05
    is called the Constitution.
  • 5:05 - 5:08
    It's the rule of law.
  • 5:08 - 5:10
    The law allowed for
  • 5:10 - 5:12
    societies to be pacified.
  • 5:12 - 5:16
    Our representatives,
    to whom we give the right
  • 5:16 - 5:19
    to write the law,
  • 5:19 - 5:22
    to whom we give the power
    to write the law,
  • 5:22 - 5:24
    are, by definition,
    because they can write the rules,
  • 5:24 - 5:25
    they are dangerous.
  • 5:25 - 5:30
    And the constitution is used to...
  • 5:30 - 5:32
    to limit their power.
  • 5:32 - 5:34
    To weaken their power.
  • 5:34 - 5:38
    A constitution is used to protect
  • 5:38 - 5:41
    those who consent to obey the laws.
  • 5:42 - 5:45
    It is used to protect them
    from the abuses of those
  • 5:45 - 5:48
    who have the right
    to write the rules and the law.
  • 5:48 - 5:51
    And so, this is an important
    and clever text.
  • 5:51 - 5:54
    In fact, when we talk about
    the constitution,
  • 5:54 - 5:56
    we talk about the law of the law.
  • 5:56 - 5:58
    It is a law which is above
  • 5:58 - 6:00
    those who make the law.
  • 6:00 - 6:03
    It's a superior law.
  • 6:03 - 6:04
    It's more than a law.
  • 6:04 - 6:08
    It's more than politics,
    it's philosophical politics.
  • 6:08 - 6:11
    And it concerns us all directly.
    All of us.
  • 6:11 - 6:14
    It concerns us very directly.
  • 6:14 - 6:18
    We should learn what a constitution is,
  • 6:18 - 6:20
    from a very early age.
  • 6:20 - 6:22
    We should know our constitution
  • 6:22 - 6:24
    by heart.
  • 6:24 - 6:28
    And we should protect our constitution.
  • 6:29 - 6:31
    As if it were the best protection
  • 6:31 - 6:34
    against all sorts of dominations
  • 6:34 - 6:38
    which might attack us.
  • 6:40 - 6:42
    Oddly enough though,
  • 6:42 - 6:45
    people don't care about
    the constitution at all.
  • 6:45 - 6:46
    They ignore it.
  • 6:46 - 6:48
    They've heard the word,
  • 6:48 - 6:50
    but they don't know what it means,
  • 6:50 - 6:52
    what it's for,
  • 6:52 - 6:53
    how it works.
  • 6:53 - 6:55
    They don't know what's in it.
  • 6:55 - 6:57
    And I think that it is...
  • 6:58 - 6:59
    I'll get back to that,
  • 6:59 - 7:01
    but I think it's the cause of causes.
  • 7:01 - 7:03
    You'll see that I'm looking for,
  • 7:03 - 7:05
    in my various subjects,
  • 7:05 - 7:07
    which I think about
  • 7:07 - 7:10
    while I'm on this kind of quest,
  • 7:10 - 7:14
    the quest to resist against
    abuse of power.
  • 7:14 - 7:15
    The main method which ...
  • 7:15 - 7:18
    which I am following is...
  • 7:18 - 7:20
    I'm looking for the cause of causes,
  • 7:20 - 7:22
    as Herodotus suggested.
  • 7:22 - 7:24
    I'm looking for the cause of causes,
  • 7:24 - 7:26
    and it's true that it works well.
  • 7:26 - 7:29
    When you want to solve a problem,
  • 7:29 - 7:31
    try to find (a solution) through...
  • 7:31 - 7:34
    Everything is multifactorial.
  • 7:34 - 7:36
    Every phenomena has several causes, but,
  • 7:36 - 7:40
    if you manage to find
    the determining causes,
  • 7:40 - 7:42
    by this I mean the causes
  • 7:42 - 7:44
    that lead to other causes
  • 7:44 - 7:46
    The primordial causes,
  • 7:46 - 7:48
    and even better, if you find
  • 7:48 - 7:50
    one cause particularly important,
  • 7:50 - 7:55
    by thinking about this one cause,
  • 7:55 - 7:57
    you solve many problems at once.
  • 7:57 - 7:58
    It's more intelligent
  • 7:58 - 8:00
    than treating the consequences.
  • 8:00 - 8:01
    But from what I see,
  • 8:01 - 8:03
    the people who came
    before my wake up call,
  • 8:03 - 8:05
    while I was still a passive citizen,
  • 8:05 - 8:07
    all the old resistants,
  • 8:07 - 8:09
    those who spent
    most of their lives resisting
  • 8:09 - 8:11
    very often, they resisted
  • 8:11 - 8:13
    focusing on the consequences.
  • 8:13 - 8:14
    Some resists
  • 8:14 - 8:16
    against ecological disasters.
  • 8:16 - 8:20
    Others against
    the lack of democracy at work.
  • 8:20 - 8:24
    Others against the corruption
    of the government.
  • 8:24 - 8:28
    There are associations, movements...
  • 8:28 - 8:32
    Some are against nuclear plants,
    for example.
  • 8:32 - 8:34
    Etc...
  • 8:36 - 8:39
    And, I think,
  • 8:39 - 8:43
    - I'm like everyone else,
    I have my own pet subject -
  • 8:43 - 8:45
    but I think that,
  • 8:45 - 8:49
    all those social injustices,
  • 8:49 - 8:51
    have one common cause,
  • 8:51 - 8:53
    which is the abuse of power.
  • 8:53 - 8:55
    I mean the possibility
  • 8:55 - 8:58
    for those who have the power,
    to abuse of it.
  • 8:58 - 9:01
    It seems to me that
    this is the common cause
  • 9:01 - 9:04
    So, I try to understand.
  • 9:04 - 9:08
    What allows people who have power
  • 9:08 - 9:09
    to abuse in this fashion
  • 9:09 - 9:12
    wihtout us being able to react?
  • 9:12 - 9:16
    Today, the states create for the banks
  • 9:16 - 9:20
    hundreds, thousands of billions
  • 9:20 - 9:23
    so that banks can themselves
  • 9:23 - 9:27
    lend it to us with interests.
  • 9:27 - 9:32
    And instead of lending to small companies,
  • 9:34 - 9:38
    or to citizen in needs,
  • 9:38 - 9:41
    this money goes in the pockets
  • 9:41 - 9:42
    of people super rich
  • 9:42 - 9:45
    who already have too much money.
  • 9:45 - 9:47
    And we can't do a thing to resist!
  • 9:47 - 9:48
    What can we do to resist?
  • 9:48 - 9:49
    I am not exaggerating.
  • 9:49 - 9:51
    Concretely, what can we do to resist?
  • 9:51 - 9:54
    Someone in the room :
    'It's essential to sustain the banks...
  • 9:54 - 9:56
    so that they can allow for investments."
  • 9:56 - 9:58
    I do not agree.
  • 9:58 - 10:01
    In fact, when we will talk about money...
  • 10:04 - 10:08
    Your objections are absolutely
    precious to me.
  • 10:08 - 10:12
    I mean, I need objections
    to improve myself.
  • 10:12 - 10:15
    And objections, controversies
    I'm experiencing since six years
  • 10:15 - 10:17
    make me progress very fast.
  • 10:17 - 10:21
    So I will definitely not remove
    any of your objections
  • 10:21 - 10:23
    with the back of my hand
  • 10:23 - 10:25
    wihtout making the effort to prove
  • 10:25 - 10:28
    carefully and rationally
  • 10:28 - 10:32
    the points I defend in opposition to you.
  • 10:33 - 10:35
    When you say:
  • 10:35 - 10:40
    "We absolutely need to save the banks,
    to support the banks"
  • 10:40 - 10:44
    Yes, but not unrequited.
  • 10:44 - 10:46
    Yes, but not without obligations.
  • 10:46 - 10:48
    Yes because if we give up on the banks,
  • 10:48 - 10:50
    the system falls and us with it.
  • 10:50 - 10:51
    Yes so in fact,
  • 10:51 - 10:55
    as Frederic Lordon, a friend, says
  • 10:55 - 10:59
    in fact, we need to support the banks.
  • 10:59 - 11:01
    Support our financial system.
  • 11:01 - 11:03
    But nothing, nothing obliges us
  • 11:03 - 11:06
    or obliges those who govern us
  • 11:06 - 11:08
    to do it unrequitedly. Nothing at all.
  • 11:08 - 11:10
    These people are in fraudulent bankruptcy.
  • 11:10 - 11:13
    The banks today are
    in fraudulent bankruptcy.
  • 11:13 - 11:15
    Which means they should be in jail.
  • 11:15 - 11:17
    And instead we save them
    without any compensations?
  • 11:17 - 11:19
    I find it more than questionable.
  • 11:19 - 11:21
    But we will come back to it if you want
  • 11:21 - 11:23
    when it will be the time
    to talk about money.
  • 11:23 - 11:25
    Because I have many topics.
  • 11:25 - 11:27
    And I can talk about money now but
  • 11:27 - 11:30
    it seems to me
    that there is a logical order.
  • 11:30 - 11:32
    I think we can start by observing
  • 11:32 - 11:36
    the way European Union works
  • 11:36 - 11:38
    and its malfunctions
  • 11:38 - 11:40
    as it is the topic of the evening.
  • 11:40 - 11:42
    What do we do with this European Union?
  • 11:42 - 11:45
    If we had to do it again, would we?
  • 11:45 - 11:48
    And, as we will study the European Union,
  • 11:48 - 11:49
    we will talk about money.
  • 11:49 - 11:51
    We will deepen the topic of money.
  • 11:51 - 11:53
    And I will tell you about
  • 11:53 - 11:55
    the mecanisms of monetary creation.
  • 11:55 - 11:56
    The way today
  • 11:56 - 11:57
    we create money
  • 11:57 - 11:58
    is... crazy!
  • 11:58 - 12:00
    Really not reasonable.
  • 12:00 - 12:01
    And it's not the only way to do it.
  • 12:01 - 12:03
    There are alternatives.
  • 12:03 - 12:05
    We could create the money
    in a different way.
  • 12:05 - 12:07
    With risks that we need to understand
  • 12:07 - 12:09
    and which we will talk about.
  • 12:09 - 12:12
    But risks which should not lead us
  • 12:12 - 12:14
    to give up reclaiming
  • 12:14 - 12:16
    the process of monetary creation.
  • 12:16 - 12:18
    But I suggest that we will talk
    about it a little bit later.
  • 12:18 - 12:21
    To avoid talking about everything
    at the same time.
  • 12:21 - 12:23
    But, everytime, which would be good
  • 12:23 - 12:25
    is that I could tell you
  • 12:25 - 12:28
    where I am with my analysis.
    The work I am doing.
  • 12:28 - 12:29
    And then I stop.
  • 12:29 - 12:31
    Even if I haven't said everything.
  • 12:31 - 12:33
    Because if I say everything I have to say,
  • 12:33 - 12:36
    I could talk about it days on end
    without stopping
  • 12:36 - 12:38
    So, I won't to tell you everything.
  • 12:38 - 12:40
    That I stop and let you talk.
  • 12:41 - 12:43
    And a good part
  • 12:43 - 12:44
    of what I have to tell you,
  • 12:44 - 12:47
    I express it in reaction
    to your objections,
  • 12:47 - 12:49
    your fears, your suggestions.
  • 12:49 - 12:51
    And also because, for me, it is precious.
  • 12:51 - 12:53
    I come looking for this as well.
  • 12:53 - 12:54
    Which means you will
  • 12:54 - 12:56
    most certainly bring me
  • 12:56 - 12:57
    a lot of things
  • 12:57 - 12:59
    through new objections, a new idea.
  • 12:59 - 13:01
    Almost at every conference
  • 13:01 - 13:04
    I come out with a good,
    a really good idea.
  • 13:04 - 13:07
    Which will help me. Which I cultivate.
    Which I work on.
  • 13:07 - 13:09
    Someone in the room :
    "Dialogue is essential...."
  • 13:09 - 13:11
    Absolutely! Dialogue is
    absolutely essential.
  • 13:11 - 13:12
    There is a sentence
  • 13:12 - 13:14
    which I discovered last week
  • 13:14 - 13:16
    which says it differently.
  • 13:16 - 13:19
    Which says "I need my enemies".
  • 13:19 - 13:21
    It's really well said, I believe.
  • 13:21 - 13:24
    It's true that I need my opponents.
  • 13:24 - 13:26
    I need my opponents to move forward.
  • 13:26 - 13:28
    And I also need my friends.
  • 13:28 - 13:30
    Who disagree with me on certain topics.
  • 13:30 - 13:31
    And who contradict me on those.
  • 13:31 - 13:33
    I love controversy.
  • 13:33 - 13:36
    here, I think I never progress as much
  • 13:36 - 13:39
    as during a contradictory debate
  • 13:39 - 13:41
    where we do not agree.
  • 13:41 - 13:44
    And sometimes I realize that I was wrong.
  • 13:44 - 13:46
    That I had a wrong angle,
    and I correct it.
  • 13:46 - 13:47
    Sometimes I manage to show
  • 13:47 - 13:49
    that it's my opponent
    that had a wrong angle.
  • 13:49 - 13:51
    And here we discuss.
  • 13:51 - 13:53
    My goal is not be right.
  • 13:53 - 13:55
    I am looking for... the greater good.
  • 13:55 - 13:58
    And most of the resistants too.
  • 13:58 - 14:01
    We all have our method, our tools.
  • 14:01 - 14:04
    I think that people who are looking
    for social justice,
  • 14:04 - 14:07
    out of good faith, should be able
    to get along.
  • 14:07 - 14:08
    If they disagree on
  • 14:08 - 14:10
    the means to reach
  • 14:10 - 14:11
    social justice,
  • 14:11 - 14:13
    I think they should be capable
  • 14:13 - 14:15
    to discuss it respectfully.
  • 14:15 - 14:17
    By trying to take the best
  • 14:17 - 14:18
    of the other's thinking process.
  • 14:18 - 14:20
    We just need to give ourselves time.
  • 14:20 - 14:22
    And actually it is good
  • 14:22 - 14:23
    that we have time tonight.
  • 14:23 - 14:26
    Because these are real rich
    and dense topics.
  • 14:26 - 14:28
    On which we have much to say.
  • 14:28 - 14:30
    It's good to have time
  • 14:30 - 14:31
    to develop them
  • 14:33 - 14:36
    I handed out
  • 14:36 - 14:38
    a first double-sided document .
  • 14:38 - 14:40
    A simple sheet on which...
  • 14:40 - 14:42
    You will see I have brought
  • 14:42 - 14:43
    a lot of documents.
  • 14:43 - 14:46
    Because I am a teacher.
  • 14:46 - 14:48
    And so, I am used to...
  • 14:51 - 14:55
    Not saying everything.
  • 14:55 - 14:59
    And at the same time to see
    that people who listen to me
  • 14:59 - 15:01
    are not always so focused.
  • 15:01 - 15:04
    And I am the same, we are all like this.
  • 15:04 - 15:08
    And can miss an important moment
  • 15:08 - 15:11
    which we lack, later,
    from the whole reasoning.
  • 15:11 - 15:14
    The good way to overcome
    these difficulties
  • 15:14 - 15:16
    to communicate orally
  • 15:16 - 15:19
    is to have a written support,
    which sets [the topics] well.
  • 15:19 - 15:21
    [A document] prepared in advance
  • 15:21 - 15:23
    and on which we are sure
    we haven't forgotten anything.
  • 15:23 - 15:26
    I am not going to read this document
  • 15:26 - 15:28
    but I invite you to read it calmly
  • 15:28 - 15:30
    at your leisure, later.
  • 15:30 - 15:32
    They will surely be some things
  • 15:32 - 15:34
    which I would have forgotten
    to tell you tonight.
  • 15:34 - 15:36
    But it's not important.
  • 15:36 - 15:37
    You'll find it in the document.
  • 15:37 - 15:40
    And then, there are things I'll have said
  • 15:40 - 15:41
    that I won't have pronounced well
  • 15:41 - 15:43
    or on which I won't have insisted on enough
  • 15:43 - 15:45
    which you might not have understood...
  • 15:45 - 15:48
    And which you will understand
    maybe better by reading.
  • 15:48 - 15:50
    This first page
  • 15:51 - 15:52
    It is a sort of summary
  • 15:52 - 15:56
    of what leads me to think
    about this topic.
  • 15:56 - 15:58
    About the solution
  • 15:58 - 16:05
    the institutional solution
    that I plan or see
  • 16:10 - 16:14
    In this first page,
    there is this introduction
  • 16:14 - 16:15
    which I made earlier
  • 16:15 - 16:19
    and which explains men
    have always needed power.
  • 16:19 - 16:21
    Have always confronted power abuses.
  • 16:21 - 16:25
    Invented in order to resist
    the idea of constitution.
  • 16:25 - 16:27
    That a constitution is not used
    to organise powers,
  • 16:27 - 16:30
    it is used to weaken them.
  • 16:31 - 16:33
    It is used to weaken them.
  • 16:33 - 16:35
    And so, in a constitution,
  • 16:35 - 16:37
    if we seek to weaken the power,
  • 16:37 - 16:39
    if we don't seek to destroy it,
  • 16:39 - 16:41
    we need the power...
  • 16:41 - 16:42
    But we seek to weaken it
  • 16:42 - 16:44
    so that they don't abuse of it.
  • 16:44 - 16:46
    So that our servants don't become
    our masters.
  • 16:46 - 16:49
    So that we don't become
    the prey of tyrants.
  • 16:50 - 16:52
    And so that the constitution does its' job
  • 16:52 - 16:54
    of power weakening
  • 16:54 - 16:57
    while still having itself
    enough power to work,
  • 16:57 - 16:59
    there is a whole serie of measurements,
  • 16:59 - 17:03
    rules, articles in the constitutions,
  • 17:03 - 17:05
    of principles which we would like
    to see applied
  • 17:05 - 17:08
    which I have detailed at the back
    of this document.
  • 17:08 - 17:12
    At the back of this document,
    I have made a list.
  • 17:12 - 17:15
    We will not have the time
    to work on it this evening
  • 17:15 - 17:16
    Maybe later
  • 17:16 - 17:18
    we will work on two, three, four points.
  • 17:18 - 17:19
    Maybe points on which
  • 17:19 - 17:22
    you would like... maybe during the break,
  • 17:22 - 17:23
    you could have a look at it.
  • 17:23 - 17:25
    If there are points on
    which you would like to address,
  • 17:25 - 17:27
    we could deepen them.
  • 17:27 - 17:28
    "But why is he talking about this?"
  • 17:28 - 17:31
    or "Hey, he forgot to talk about that..."
  • 17:31 - 17:34
    All of this, in my thinking process,
    is not closed at all.
  • 17:34 - 17:37
    I am still thinking about it.
  • 17:37 - 17:40
    I find ideas every day.
  • 17:41 - 17:43
    I am totally open to criticism,
  • 17:43 - 17:46
    to evolution, to new ideas.
  • 17:47 - 17:49
    I am not at all
  • 17:49 - 17:53
    describing a turn-key solution,
  • 17:53 - 17:55
    a sort of new dogma or religion.
  • 17:55 - 17:56
    Not at all.
  • 17:57 - 17:59
    Simply, I beleive
  • 17:59 - 18:02
    that I'm educating myself to
  • 18:02 - 18:04
    "What is a constitution?"
  • 18:04 - 18:07
    How come we are not
    taking care of it?
  • 18:07 - 18:10
    Why is it that we have not seized it,
    everyone of us,
  • 18:10 - 18:13
    we who consent to obey to power,
  • 18:13 - 18:16
    why have we not seized this tool?
  • 18:16 - 18:18
    And what should we know in this tool
  • 18:18 - 18:19
    instead of neglecting it ?
  • 18:19 - 18:22
    And while I am making it mine,
  • 18:22 - 18:23
    as I am a teacher, I like to explain,
  • 18:23 - 18:25
    well, I make the most of it !
  • 18:25 - 18:26
    Moreover, I had the chance in 2005
  • 18:26 - 18:28
    to have this kind of unbelievable fame
  • 18:28 - 18:31
    which came from Internet
  • 18:31 - 18:32
    and of the game of the medias.
  • 18:32 - 18:34
    Well, I make the most of it.
  • 18:34 - 18:35
    It gives me the standing.
  • 18:35 - 18:36
    So I make the most of it.
  • 18:36 - 18:38
    I am discovering something.
  • 18:38 - 18:40
    It seems that I am finding an idea,
  • 18:40 - 18:43
    a series of ideas,
    which are at the same time original
  • 18:43 - 18:48
    and very old,
    because they date of 2500 years,
  • 18:48 - 18:50
    but completely buried,
    forgotten and brilliant.
  • 18:50 - 18:52
    Really, athenians had found
  • 18:52 - 18:53
    something marvellous
  • 18:53 - 18:55
    to protect themselves from power thieves.
  • 18:55 - 18:58
    I turning around this idea.
  • 19:04 - 19:06
    Testing it with fire.
  • 19:06 - 19:09
    To the fire of your critics
    and objections.
  • 19:09 - 19:10
    To check if it holds [true].
  • 19:10 - 19:12
    That it still makes sense.
  • 19:12 - 19:15
    It's not a dogma at all.
  • 19:15 - 19:16
    It's an idea which is...
  • 19:16 - 19:18
    Which is becoming stronger.
  • 19:18 - 19:26
    You will see that the idea
    of real democracy
  • 19:26 - 19:30
    possible and protected, by selection through lots.
  • 19:30 - 19:34
    You will see that it is seducing.
  • 19:34 - 19:36
    It is very promising.
  • 19:40 - 19:43
    Sortition, I saw it coming.
  • 19:43 - 19:44
    I will speak about it a little now,
  • 19:44 - 19:46
    and a lot more at the end of the evening,
  • 19:46 - 19:48
    when we will see democracy.
  • 19:48 - 19:49
    How it works.
  • 19:49 - 19:50
    How it worked in Athens.
  • 19:50 - 19:52
    And what should we reuse?
  • 19:52 - 19:53
    What can we reuse?
  • 19:53 - 19:55
    We will see this more in details.
  • 19:55 - 19:59
    But very quickly in fact, in 2005
  • 20:02 - 20:05
    while studying the European institutions,
  • 20:06 - 20:07
    I wondered
  • 20:07 - 20:09
    "But how could we write
  • 20:10 - 20:12
    such bad institutions,
  • 20:12 - 20:15
    so unprotective for citizens?"
  • 20:17 - 20:20
    Because, it will be
    the first part of the evening.
  • 20:20 - 20:22
    We will work or I suggest we work
  • 20:22 - 20:27
    on the main grievances that I find.
  • 20:27 - 20:31
    It is a first stone in the debate.
  • 20:31 - 20:34
    I don't mean to summarize it all.
  • 20:34 - 20:36
    But what I consider
    like the most important
  • 20:36 - 20:38
    to hold against the European institutions.
  • 20:38 - 20:40
    We'll see this in not too long.
  • 20:40 - 20:42
    But already, before looking at the detail,
  • 20:42 - 20:46
    if you have participated
    to the 2005 debate,
  • 20:46 - 20:48
    you will remember that there was
  • 20:48 - 20:50
    a lot to say about this constitution.
  • 20:50 - 20:52
    And as I was thinking,
  • 20:52 - 20:55
    I was wondering... still the same
  • 20:55 - 20:57
    I was looking for "the cause of causes".
  • 20:57 - 20:58
    But what led us to
  • 20:58 - 21:01
    texts so unprotective of men?
  • 21:01 - 21:04
    So pretentious?
  • 21:04 - 21:06
    Texts which pretend to protect us
  • 21:06 - 21:08
    pretend to establish...
  • 21:08 - 21:09
    what did they say?...
  • 21:09 - 21:11
    "The highest standards of democracy"
    they said.
  • 21:12 - 21:15
    And in the same time organised,
  • 21:15 - 21:17
    in the most minor detail,
  • 21:17 - 21:19
    the perfect politic powerlessness
  • 21:19 - 21:20
    of every citizen
  • 21:20 - 21:23
    who couldn't change a thing anymore.
  • 21:24 - 21:27
    I thought : "How did we come to this?"
  • 21:27 - 21:29
    In fact, by answering this question
  • 21:29 - 21:32
    I answered to all the questions of
    the same nature
  • 21:32 - 21:34
    which I could encounter
    at a national level as well.
  • 21:34 - 21:37
    Because what we encounter
    at the European level,
  • 21:37 - 21:39
    this political powerlessness
  • 21:39 - 21:40
    which is organised
    in the European institutions.
  • 21:40 - 21:42
    We already encounter it
    at a national level.
  • 21:42 - 21:44
    And we encounter it...
  • 21:44 - 21:47
    in almost every country of the world.
  • 21:48 - 21:50
    So, is it a fatality?
  • 21:50 - 21:53
    Or is there a common cause?
  • 21:54 - 21:57
    Which leads us to understand why
  • 21:57 - 21:58
    it always happen like this
  • 21:58 - 22:00
    and which would lead us to understand
  • 22:00 - 22:02
    what should we change for
  • 22:02 - 22:04
    it not to always happen like this.
  • 22:04 - 22:05
    And I think I found it.
  • 22:05 - 22:08
    The European institutions
    have been written
  • 22:08 - 22:10
    by ministers... and presidents.
  • 22:12 - 22:15
    And we see this everywhere
    in the European institutions
  • 22:15 - 22:18
    that it is ministers
    who wrote the institutions.
  • 22:18 - 22:20
    In the European institutions
  • 22:20 - 22:24
    legislative power is vested in
  • 22:24 - 22:27
    the ministers, mainly.
  • 22:28 - 22:31
    Our ministers at national level
  • 22:31 - 22:33
    who take off their minister costumes
  • 22:33 - 22:35
    when they leave France
  • 22:35 - 22:37
    to go to the European parliament
  • 22:37 - 22:39
    to go in the European institutions
  • 22:39 - 22:43
    And there they put
    on their parliamentary costumes
  • 22:43 - 22:45
    but they are ministers!
  • 22:45 - 22:48
    They put their parliamentary costumes
    to write laws.
  • 22:48 - 22:50
    The European laws.
  • 22:50 - 22:53
    Which are transposed in the French law,
    or in national law.
  • 22:53 - 22:55
    It is the same in all the countries.
  • 22:55 - 22:57
    Almost mechanically, automatically.
  • 22:57 - 23:00
    And then they go back in their countries,
  • 23:00 - 23:03
    and they put back
    their ministers costumes.
  • 23:04 - 23:08
    And we can see that they wrote the rules.
  • 23:08 - 23:12
    We will come back on the detail
  • 23:12 - 23:15
    of all the great risks
    in the European institutions.
  • 23:15 - 23:18
    But we can see
  • 23:18 - 23:20
    that it is European ministers
  • 23:20 - 23:22
    who wrote the European institutions.
  • 23:22 - 23:25
    In the same way
    that the French institutions,
  • 23:25 - 23:26
    the constitution of 1958, we can see
  • 23:26 - 23:29
    that it is De Gaulles [1st president of
    the 5th Republic] who wrote it.
  • 23:29 - 23:31
    I am told: "it's Debré."
  • 23:31 - 23:34
    Yes it is Debré, but Debré,
    he wrote it for De Gaulle.
  • 23:34 - 23:36
    Lawyers, the great lawyers,
  • 23:36 - 23:37
    the great teachers of public law
  • 23:37 - 23:40
    who wrote apparently the institutions
    of the fifth republic... [wrote it for De Gaule]
  • 23:40 - 23:42
    But we can see everywhere
  • 23:42 - 23:44
    that the institutions of the fifth
    are not made
  • 23:44 - 23:46
    like those of the fourth or of
    the third [republic].
  • 23:46 - 23:48
    They were made for the president
  • 23:48 - 23:51
    who built them for himself.
  • 23:51 - 23:56
    It's like this almost everywhere
    in the world.
  • 23:56 - 24:00
    And that's why in fact...
  • 24:01 - 24:03
    Men who hold power should not
  • 24:03 - 24:06
    write the rules that control power.
  • 24:06 - 24:08
    That's how I summarise it.
  • 24:08 - 24:09
    It is with these words
  • 24:09 - 24:11
    that I summarise the "heart of the heart"
  • 24:11 - 24:13
    The most important thing
    I have to tell you.
  • 24:13 - 24:16
    It seems to me that this is
    the cause of causes
  • 24:16 - 24:18
    of our political powerlessness.
  • 24:18 - 24:21
    It is that we have no constitution.
  • 24:21 - 24:23
    The declaration of human rights
  • 24:23 - 24:27
    which our revolutionary forefathers [wrote].
  • 24:28 - 24:30
    We need to read
    the constitutional debates.
  • 24:30 - 24:32
    The debates that had those people
  • 24:32 - 24:34
    in the moment where they freed themselves
  • 24:34 - 24:35
    from the former tyranny
  • 24:35 - 24:37
    and where they made a tool
  • 24:37 - 24:38
    to protect themselves against tyranny.
  • 24:38 - 24:41
    The thoughts, the discussions they had.
  • 24:41 - 24:43
    The thoughts they had
  • 24:43 - 24:45
    to protect durably
  • 24:45 - 24:46
    against power abuse.
  • 24:46 - 24:48
    That was the french revolution!
  • 24:49 - 24:52
    There are absolutely
    fascinating discussions.
  • 24:52 - 24:55
    And they knew very well
  • 24:55 - 24:56
    that we had to weaken power.
  • 24:56 - 24:58
    Montesquieu thought about it before
  • 24:58 - 25:02
    and revolutionnary knew
    of course Montesquieu, Rousseau...
  • 25:02 - 25:04
    They knew they had to divide powers
  • 25:04 - 25:07
    for the power not to abuse of power.
  • 25:07 - 25:08
    Montesquieu said : "We need
  • 25:08 - 25:10
    power to stop power."
  • 25:10 - 25:12
    Which means that we needed ...
  • 25:12 - 25:14
    and Montesquieu imagined
    only three powers.
  • 25:14 - 25:16
    He had seen:
  • 25:16 - 25:17
    - those who made the laws: the parliament
  • 25:17 - 25:19
    - those who execute the laws:
    the executives
  • 25:19 - 25:21
    - and those who settle conflicts
  • 25:21 - 25:24
    those who apply the rules: the judges.
  • 25:24 - 25:27
    And he said, we need
    that those who write the laws
  • 25:27 - 25:31
    the parliamentarians,
    do not put them in force.
  • 25:31 - 25:35
    That those who put laws in application,
    the executives
  • 25:35 - 25:37
    You shouldn't say government
    [in this case]
  • 25:37 - 25:39
    Because if you say government,
    you get scammed.
  • 25:39 - 25:41
    Otherwise it will do everything,
    it is going to write the laws.
  • 25:41 - 25:43
    If [the executives] are called government,
    then the government holds in itself,
  • 25:43 - 25:46
    the word holds in itself,
    the confusion of the powers.
  • 25:46 - 25:48
    We shouldn't call them government.
  • 25:48 - 25:50
    We shouldn't accept "one" government.
  • 25:50 - 25:52
    Call it the executive.
  • 25:53 - 25:56
    And you will see that the word leads you
  • 25:56 - 25:57
    to be more rigorous with
  • 25:57 - 25:59
    the essential principle of
    powers division.
  • 25:59 - 26:02
    An essential principle for us
    to protect us from power abuse.
  • 26:02 - 26:04
    So what Montesquieu said is that
  • 26:04 - 26:08
    the executive executes without having
    the right to writing [laws].
  • 26:08 - 26:09
    Without writing...
  • 26:10 - 26:13
    Because 1) if the one who writes the laws
  • 26:13 - 26:14
    cannot execute them,
  • 26:14 - 26:15
    2) if the one that executes the laws
  • 26:15 - 26:17
    cannot write them,
  • 26:17 - 26:19
    do you understand the idea?
  • 26:19 - 26:20
    It is a clever idea
  • 26:20 - 26:22
    to divide powers.
  • 26:23 - 26:24
    Very clever!
  • 26:24 - 26:27
    It allows, for a constitutional structure,
  • 26:27 - 26:31
    in the superior law structure,
  • 26:31 - 26:32
    of the right of law,
  • 26:32 - 26:34
    above those who will make the law,
  • 26:34 - 26:38
    it allows for our protection.
  • 26:38 - 26:42
    Because nobody has
    all the powers for himself.
  • 26:43 - 26:45
    And then Montesquieu continued
  • 26:45 - 26:49
    saying that judges must be independant
  • 26:49 - 26:51
    from the two other powers
  • 26:51 - 26:52
    to be able to apply the laws.
  • 26:52 - 26:55
    Therefore, for the law to be applied
  • 26:55 - 26:59
    It had to be that the one
    who writes the laws
  • 26:59 - 27:01
    agrees with the one who executes the laws
  • 27:01 - 27:05
    and agrees with the one who applies them: the judge.
  • 27:05 - 27:09
    We would be well sheltered
  • 27:09 - 27:11
    against power abuse if we do that.
  • 27:11 - 27:14
    What the revolutionnaries said
  • 27:14 - 27:16
    in the declaration of human rights
  • 27:16 - 27:22
    is that: "A nation
    which does not divide powers
  • 27:22 - 27:25
    doesn't have a constitution."
  • 27:25 - 27:27
    It is the article 16.
  • 27:27 - 27:31
    A nation which doesn't divide powers
  • 27:31 - 27:33
    does not have a constitution.
  • 27:33 - 27:35
    We cannot be clearer!
  • 27:35 - 27:38
    It means that if we pretend
    to having one, it's false.
  • 27:38 - 27:40
    And it's true... I believe it is true!
  • 27:40 - 27:42
    I will even say better for today.
  • 27:42 - 27:45
    In the twenty first century
    we can push a little further,
  • 27:45 - 27:47
    we can think further,
  • 27:47 - 27:52
    and say : "A constitution
    which does not protect us well
  • 27:52 - 27:56
    - either because of the undivided powers
  • 27:56 - 27:57
    or because of something else -
  • 27:57 - 28:00
    a constitution
    which does not protect us well
  • 28:00 - 28:02
    against power abuses
  • 28:02 - 28:03
    is not a constitution!
  • 28:03 - 28:06
    Because its job, its reason of existance
  • 28:06 - 28:10
    Because a constitution is used
    only for that!
  • 28:10 - 28:12
    To protect us all,
  • 28:12 - 28:14
    the rich, the poor, the young,
    the old, everyone
  • 28:14 - 28:16
    to protect us against power abuse.
  • 28:16 - 28:18
    As the definition itself
  • 28:18 - 28:20
    the essence of a constitution
  • 28:20 - 28:22
    is to protect us from power abuse.
  • 28:22 - 28:23
    If it doesn't do its job
  • 28:23 - 28:25
    it is not a constitution!
  • 28:25 - 28:29
    Or it's a bad constitution
  • 28:31 - 28:35
    From this point of view,
    the fifth [republic] is really bad.
  • 28:35 - 28:37
    It is a bad constitution
  • 28:37 - 28:39
    and the European constitution is bad too!
  • 28:39 - 28:41
    We can talk about it in details.
  • 28:41 - 28:43
    I am starting from the end
  • 28:43 - 28:44
    by telling you the conclusion.
  • 28:44 - 28:48
    It's not well but we can have a look...
  • 28:48 - 28:51
    Article by article, almost.
  • 28:52 - 28:55
    So it is in fact the meaning
    of the document
  • 28:55 - 28:58
    the back of the first document
    that I am talking about,
  • 28:58 - 29:01
    consists in saying :
    "let's see where we stand...
  • 29:01 - 29:03
    what do we expect from a constitution?"
  • 29:03 - 29:04
    By which mechanical ways,
  • 29:04 - 29:06
    which legal ways,
  • 29:06 - 29:08
    A constitution protects me?
  • 29:08 - 29:10
    "Protects me", I am not talking
    about me obviously
  • 29:10 - 29:12
    I talk in a general way, as "me citizen"
  • 29:12 - 29:15
    By which means a constitution protects me?
  • 29:15 - 29:19
    The parliament ... "Is above others"
  • 29:19 - 29:22
    "The voting system secures a majority"
  • 29:22 - 29:24
    "The voting system gives
    a place to the minority"
  • 29:24 - 29:26
    "Some seats are reserved...."
  • 29:26 - 29:29
    So you will see, in there, that
  • 29:29 - 29:30
    some things are a little unorthodox
  • 29:30 - 29:32
    because, when I say "Some seats
  • 29:32 - 29:34
    of every organs are reserved
  • 29:34 - 29:36
    to sorted citizens,"
  • 29:39 - 29:42
    Every single line could deserve
    to be studied.
  • 29:42 - 29:45
    If I start digging into this,
  • 29:45 - 29:47
    it is going to be too long and
    it mustn't be.
  • 29:47 - 29:49
    But what I wanted, I did a table there
  • 29:49 - 29:52
    with, to the right, some boxes to tick
  • 29:52 - 29:54
    and when I examinate
    my constitution : I tick
  • 29:54 - 29:56
    Do I have it? Or not?
  • 29:56 - 29:59
    And then I tick yes/no, yes/no, yes/no
  • 29:59 - 30:03
    And for the fifth, I have very few "yes"
  • 30:03 - 30:05
    very very few, there is almost only "no"
  • 30:05 - 30:07
    and for European institutions,
    I only have "no"
  • 30:07 - 30:09
    virtually only "no"....
  • 30:09 - 30:11
    There is no respect for blank vote...
  • 30:11 - 30:13
    There is no referendum of
    popular initiative
  • 30:13 - 30:15
    There is no power division
  • 30:15 - 30:17
    There is no... etc, etc...
  • 30:17 - 30:19
    Judges are not independant.
  • 30:19 - 30:21
    Every single one of these points...
  • 30:21 - 30:24
    If you want, when we talk about democracy
  • 30:24 - 30:26
    When we talk about democracy...
  • 30:26 - 30:28
    When we talk about constitution...
  • 30:29 - 30:31
    I do not just say words.
  • 30:31 - 30:32
    It's not enough to say:
  • 30:32 - 30:36
    " European institutions are
    the highest standard of democracy".
  • 30:36 - 30:38
    I go check inside
    the European institutions
  • 30:38 - 30:40
    to see tangibly
  • 30:40 - 30:41
    what is the apparatus
  • 30:41 - 30:44
    which allows to say "it is a democracy".
  • 30:44 - 30:48
    However, for me, democracy,
    I don't know for you...
  • 30:48 - 30:51
    It's a debate but for me
    it is "demos kratos."
  • 30:51 - 30:52
    The power of the people.
  • 30:52 - 30:54
    So, the people should have the power.
  • 30:54 - 30:56
    People should exercise the power.
  • 30:56 - 30:58
    Democracy : people exercise power.
  • 30:58 - 31:02
    And at least, there is none
  • 31:02 - 31:04
    on earth, there is none
  • 31:04 - 31:06
    very few, maybe... Switzerland
  • 31:06 - 31:09
    And still, not even, in Switzerland
    there are parlementaries
  • 31:09 - 31:11
    So there is no country
    in the world for now
  • 31:11 - 31:16
    where the people writes himself
    directly his laws.
  • 31:19 - 31:22
    In most of [political] regimes,
  • 31:23 - 31:24
    and we will see it later,
  • 31:24 - 31:26
    most regimes
  • 31:26 - 31:27
    are not democracies.
  • 31:27 - 31:29
    They are representative governments
  • 31:29 - 31:30
    And you will see, as we talk about it,
  • 31:30 - 31:32
    I will explain the history
  • 31:32 - 31:33
    and this is very important
  • 31:33 - 31:35
    to understand the regimes we have.
  • 31:35 - 31:36
    The story of our regimes.
  • 31:36 - 31:41
    What did the people who instituted
    our regimes want?
  • 31:41 - 31:43
    They didn't want to make a democracy,
    not at all.
  • 31:43 - 31:44
    They knew very well what was a democracy.
  • 31:44 - 31:46
    They didn't want it at all.
  • 31:46 - 31:47
    So it is normal that we are not
    in democracy.
  • 31:47 - 31:51
    It was not wished for at all
    from the beginning.
  • 31:51 - 31:56
    Sieyès, a great thinker of
    french revolution
  • 31:56 - 31:58
    wrote one day:
    " What is the third estate?"
  • 31:58 - 32:02
    One of the notables
    who followed all the french revolution
  • 32:02 - 32:05
    until Thermidor...
  • 32:06 - 32:10
    He was someone who didn't want....
    it is written black on white!
  • 32:10 - 32:11
    "There is no way that..."
  • 32:11 - 32:13
    In one of the documents
    that I'll hand out
  • 32:13 - 32:14
    there is the full quote
  • 32:14 - 32:17
    "There is no way that France
    shall become a democracy"
  • 32:17 - 32:19
    It is not going to be it,
    we are not making a democracy
  • 32:19 - 32:22
    People is not able
    to write himself the laws
  • 32:22 - 32:24
    People will designate his representatives
  • 32:24 - 32:28
    who will write the laws
    in its stead and that's all!
  • 32:29 - 32:31
    Well, this is not a democracy.
  • 32:31 - 32:33
    It is something else, it's an artistocracy
  • 32:33 - 32:35
    it's the government by the best.
  • 32:35 - 32:38
    If we manage to put
    the best of the best in power
  • 32:38 - 32:39
    it's an aristocracy.
  • 32:39 - 32:40
    But, if they are not the best of
    the best, it is going to be an oligarchy.
  • 32:40 - 32:42
    But in any way, it is not a democracy!
  • 32:42 - 32:45
    And this is really our topic of later on.
  • 32:45 - 32:46
    So I close this parenthesis
  • 32:46 - 32:54
    to stay in the scheme of the first part
    of european union
  • 32:57 - 33:01
    So, to finish this introduction
  • 33:01 - 33:05
    the reflexion on the european institutions
    in 2005
  • 33:05 - 33:07
    led me immediately
  • 33:07 - 33:08
    to [write] the first document.
  • 33:08 - 33:11
    The one that toured France and
    also a little around the world.
  • 33:11 - 33:14
    I wrote my conclusion:
  • 33:14 - 33:20
    "If such bad institutions have been written,
  • 33:20 - 33:23
    it is because those who wrote them
  • 33:23 - 33:25
    shouldn't have done so.
  • 33:25 - 33:27
    It should not have been them
    writing the constitutions.
  • 33:27 - 33:29
    It should not have been them
    writing the institutions.
  • 33:29 - 33:31
    They were judges and jury.
  • 33:31 - 33:33
    They were in a situation of conflict
    of interests.
  • 33:33 - 33:35
    They were writing the rules for themselves.
  • 33:35 - 33:39
    And there, I am on the "cause of causes".
  • 33:39 - 33:41
    I am on the first cause of causes.
  • 33:41 - 33:44
    If you let, if we let,
    the constitutions be written
  • 33:44 - 33:46
    by exactly those who should fear them;
  • 33:46 - 33:49
    If we let the constitution be written
  • 33:49 - 33:53
    by those who should fear constitution;
  • 33:54 - 33:57
    It is easy to understand
  • 33:57 - 34:01
    these people will not, write rules
    which will hinder them
  • 34:01 - 34:04
    burden them, keep them under control,
    threaten them
  • 34:04 - 34:05
    put them at risk
  • 34:05 - 34:07
    make them "accountable for"
  • 34:07 - 34:09
    make them responsible of their acts.
  • 34:09 - 34:11
    These people... But I am not angry at them
  • 34:11 - 34:13
    I don't say they are horrible people.
  • 34:13 - 34:16
    This is something important.
  • 34:16 - 34:22
    Under the law, a judge has to give justice.
  • 34:22 - 34:25
    But, when in a court case,
  • 34:25 - 34:27
    he is from the same family of the victim
  • 34:27 - 34:31
    or of the detained or the accused,
  • 34:31 - 34:34
    he is recused / disqualified.
  • 34:34 - 34:36
    And this isn't an issue.
  • 34:36 - 34:37
    That's how it is
  • 34:37 - 34:39
    in all the countries of
    the world obviously.
  • 34:39 - 34:41
    And everyone understands
  • 34:41 - 34:43
    that we are not saying
    this judge is dishonest.
  • 34:43 - 34:46
    Not at all!
    When we disqualify a judge
  • 34:46 - 34:48
    because he is from the same family
  • 34:48 - 34:50
    of the victim or the accused,
  • 34:50 - 34:52
    it is not because he is dishonest.
  • 34:52 - 34:56
    It is because, he cannot, in this very situation,
  • 34:56 - 34:57
    he cannot be honest.
  • 34:57 - 35:00
    But we don't say this guy there
    is dishonest, not at all!
  • 35:00 - 35:02
    In fact, the judge is disqualified
  • 35:02 - 35:04
    and he is not upset about it.
  • 35:04 - 35:05
    There is no issue.
  • 35:05 - 35:08
    He is in a situation of
    conflict of interests
  • 35:08 - 35:10
    so he cannot judge!
  • 35:11 - 35:16
    Well, parliamentaries, ministers, judges,
  • 35:16 - 35:18
    all the ones who have a power;
  • 35:18 - 35:21
    instituted,
    established in the institutions
  • 35:21 - 35:23
    and even those who haven't got it yet
  • 35:23 - 35:26
    this power, but want this power;
  • 35:26 - 35:28
    all those who are in political parties;
  • 35:28 - 35:30
    all those who are in political parties;
  • 35:30 - 35:33
    who are candidates to this power;
  • 35:33 - 35:34
    so they look ahead
  • 35:34 - 35:36
    they know they will, one day, be in power
  • 35:36 - 35:39
    Those people are in a situation...
  • 35:39 - 35:42
    I'm absolutly not saying that
    they are dishonest
  • 35:42 - 35:44
    please listen carefully so that
    there is no misunderstanding.
  • 35:44 - 35:46
    As it was for the judge,
  • 35:46 - 35:48
    I don't say these people are dishonest,
    not at all.
  • 35:48 - 35:49
    I say these people...
  • 35:49 - 35:52
    we need them, we need people
    who will exercise power
  • 35:52 - 35:54
    But they shouldn't write
    the constitution!
  • 35:54 - 35:58
    It is not to them to write the rule
    they should fear
  • 35:58 - 36:01
    and which will stop them
    from abusing of the power
  • 36:01 - 36:04
    and transform themselves
    from servants to masters
  • 36:04 - 36:06
    They cannot write the rule
  • 36:06 - 36:10
    which will stop them from becoming
    our absolute tyrannical masters.
  • 36:10 - 36:12
    It needs to be other people.
  • 36:12 - 36:15
    Others than people from parties
  • 36:15 - 36:17
    and who have the power
  • 36:17 - 36:18
    or who want it...
  • 36:18 - 36:21
    How will you do to designate them?
  • 36:24 - 36:25
    We will talk about it later.
  • 36:25 - 36:26
    But I can give you
  • 36:26 - 36:27
    a feeling of it
  • 36:27 - 36:29
    so that you have the idea in mind.
  • 36:29 - 36:32
    It is important that you see
    where I am going.
  • 36:32 - 36:33
    The golden thread.
  • 36:33 - 36:35
    My train of thoughts.
  • 36:35 - 36:38
    I try to find
    an honest constituant process
  • 36:38 - 36:40
    disinterested,
    without conflict of interests.
  • 36:40 - 36:43
    So for now, today
  • 36:43 - 36:46
    I am thinking about sorting
    the constituant assembly.
  • 36:46 - 36:47
    So maybe you'll find
  • 36:47 - 36:49
    a better idea, I'm all for it!
  • 36:49 - 36:52
    I am not looking into sortition,
    just because it is sortition.
  • 36:52 - 36:53
    I don't care
  • 36:53 - 36:54
    If I get a better idea, I'll take that one.
  • 36:54 - 36:59
    I am looking for [the good idea], and it seems
    to me that we should all be looking for it.
  • 36:59 - 37:00
    The problem is that
  • 37:00 - 37:01
    Noone cares for the moment.
  • 37:01 - 37:03
    That is the folly, the cause of causes
  • 37:03 - 37:05
    is our carelessness, our ignorance,
  • 37:05 - 37:08
    it's the fact that we don't care
    at all about constitution
  • 37:08 - 37:10
    and constituant process we care even less
  • 37:10 - 37:13
    In Tunis, in Tunisia today, they are voting
  • 37:13 - 37:16
    for a constituant assembly
  • 37:16 - 37:20
    Just to smile, I'll play the devils' advocate.
  • 37:20 - 37:22
    And if I'm wrong, I'll be the fool.
  • 37:23 - 37:24
    I can predicte that
  • 37:24 - 37:28
    the constituant
    which will be elected today
  • 37:29 - 37:32
    will not establish a democracy.
  • 37:32 - 37:34
    For the same reasons which forbid
  • 37:34 - 37:39
    real democracies to become reality.
  • 37:39 - 37:41
    Everywhere in the world,
  • 37:41 - 37:43
    if you let men in power write themselves
  • 37:43 - 37:45
    the rules of their own power:
  • 37:45 - 37:47
    they will not write
    the power to the people.
  • 37:47 - 37:50
    And I can't be upset at them.
  • 37:50 - 37:54
    It's normal... They won't commit hara-kiri
  • 37:54 - 37:56
    They wont... They look ahead
  • 37:56 - 37:58
    they have a vision of the greater good.
  • 37:58 - 38:00
    It's very well, they are very virtuous.
  • 38:00 - 38:04
    But when they are writing the rules:
  • 38:04 - 38:08
    "Should we tally and put into force
    blank votes?"
  • 38:08 - 38:10
    The possibility to kick us out
  • 38:10 - 38:12
    during an election,
    for the people to say "no".
  • 38:12 - 38:13
    I don't want As, Bs nor Cs
  • 38:13 - 38:14
    I want them all to go home.
  • 38:14 - 38:15
    "Should we respect the
    use of the blank vote?"
  • 38:15 - 38:17
    "Oh well... no it's not worth
    the trouble, the blank vote..."
  • 38:17 - 38:19
    will say parliamentaries.
  • 38:19 - 38:21
    They will say: "No, it's not worth it..."
  • 38:21 - 38:23
    No, the blank vote...
    the blank vote, no...
  • 38:23 - 38:26
    no there surely is something more important
    to do in the constitution
  • 38:26 - 38:28
    and they will focus on something else!
  • 38:28 - 38:29
    Who wrote the rule stating
  • 38:29 - 38:32
    a blank vote is equal to "not voted"?
  • 38:32 - 38:35
    It is not simple citizens
    who wrote that. It's impossible!
  • 38:35 - 38:37
    It is not simple citizens
    who said "Blank votes..."
  • 38:37 - 38:38
    Do you know what is the blank vote?
  • 38:38 - 38:40
    White vote is a vote of protest.
  • 38:40 - 38:42
    A vote which says :
    "Wait a minute, those there....
  • 38:42 - 38:43
    they are all villains!"
  • 38:43 - 38:44
    These are all people
    who are bad.
  • 38:44 - 38:47
    There are all people
    I have already seen lying to me.
  • 38:47 - 38:49
    people who already reneged
    on their promises.
  • 38:49 - 38:52
    Or people who, for this or this reason,
    no matter..
  • 38:52 - 38:53
    I want noone of them!
  • 38:53 - 38:54
    I want them all to go away.
  • 38:54 - 38:55
    I would like to put others instead.
  • 38:55 - 38:57
    That's the meaning of a blank vote.
  • 38:57 - 38:58
    The blank vote is a vote of protest.
  • 38:58 - 38:59
    Blank vote is an affirmative vote.
  • 38:59 - 39:01
    It is not a vote of carelessness.
  • 39:01 - 39:03
    Blank vote is not a mistake at all.
  • 39:03 - 39:06
    Blank vote is not an abstention.
  • 39:06 - 39:09
    Blank vote is a very engaged vote!
  • 39:09 - 39:13
    Which says "I am not happy at all
    with the candidates you are suggesting"
  • 39:13 - 39:15
    I want others!
  • 39:15 - 39:17
    Or if you ask me stupid questions
  • 39:17 - 39:19
    it's a vote which says
    " Please ask me other questions,
  • 39:19 - 39:21
    this one is stupid!"
  • 39:21 - 39:24
    A blank vote is truely very important,
  • 39:26 - 39:28
    Well, I won't open this parenthesis.
  • 39:28 - 39:30
    I was going to talk to you about ostracism
  • 39:30 - 39:31
    which was a way for athenians
  • 39:31 - 39:32
    to say "I don't want this one!"
  • 39:32 - 39:35
    A way of saying... It looks a little
    like the white vote
  • 39:35 - 39:37
    It was a way, an institution,
  • 39:37 - 39:39
    which allowed for people to say
  • 39:39 - 39:42
    not only what I want,
    but also what I don't want.
  • 39:42 - 39:44
    I will talk later maybe about it.
  • 39:44 - 39:45
    Anyway, what does,
  • 39:45 - 39:48
    what leads a constituant
  • 39:48 - 39:50
    someone who wrote a constitution
  • 39:50 - 39:52
    what leads him not to respect a blank vote
  • 39:52 - 39:55
    and mix it with null votes?
  • 39:56 - 40:00
    And this, this is just one of the 50 points
    which build a constitution.
  • 40:00 - 40:03
    The respect of the blank vote.
  • 40:04 - 40:09
    A parliamentary, a minister will mix
    a white vote with the nulls.
  • 40:09 - 40:12
    He will mix it with the "not voted".
  • 40:12 - 40:16
    He will do it because
    it is in his interest.
  • 40:16 - 40:18
    Because there is a personnal interest
  • 40:18 - 40:20
    to avoid people from
    being able to kick him out
  • 40:20 - 40:22
    when an election comes around.
  • 40:22 - 40:25
    So, there isn't...
    I am not even upset at him.
  • 40:25 - 40:30
    Understand me, he shouldn't be
    the one writing the constition.
Title:
1/6.Chouard.Metz.oct2011-ENJEUX CONSTITUTION
Description:

Pour approfondir tout ça, je vous propose d'aller faire un tour sur mon site : <br /><br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/ <br />http://www.le-message.org/ <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Documents_conferences/ <br /><br />Je vous recommande particulièrement cette sélection de documents, que je trouve particulièrement importants : <br /><br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/tirage_au_sort.php <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/documents.php <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/tous_les_resumes.php <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Journal.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Constitution_revelateur_du_cancer_de_la_democratie.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Reponse_Etienne_Chouard_a_Bastien_Francois.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/LettreAStephanePaoliEtBernardGuetta.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Bonne_Constitution_Guerison_Democratie.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/forum/index.php?2008/04/08/93-manifestations-obstinees <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Liens_en_totalite.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/monnaie.php <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/Tout_notre_debat_sur_la_monnaie_chez_Paul_Jorion.pdf <br />http://etienne.chouard.free.fr/Europe/En_Vrac.pdf
more » « less
Video Language:
English

English subtitles

Revisions

Our website uses cookies for analysis purposes.