Etienne Chouard. — Part VII. (Lyon Conference) Mars 2012 - "Is Democracy a trap ? " Roots of our political impotency.

PART VII :
Writing of a Constitution: Venezuela case, alternative to random draw / common lot. — Citizen's Intiative Referendum, possibly mechanisms. — Basic income guarantee, Citizen's income, universel revenu, life income. — What are the weapons against oligarchy ? — The diplodocus and the virus. — Internet and the Exponential.

Bibliographie :
- Bernard Friot, L'enjeu du salaire. Éditions La Dispute (19 janvier 2012).
- Bernard Friot, L'enjeu des retraites. Éditions La Dispute (25 mars 2010).
- Duboin Jacques, La grande relève des hommes par la machine. Éditions Nouvelle (1932).
- Bernard Manin, Les principes du gouvernement représentatif. Flammarion (15 septembre 2008).

Etienne Chouard, independant researcher.
Conference in Lyon, on March 9th 2012. MJC St Just.
"Is Democracy a trap, an illusion ?"

Mounting & Framing : Matthieu Wadoux — [e-mail]
English translation : Dorian Faucon - [e-mail]

Maybe not to solve all our problems but to solve a large amount.

Can we agree on the idea that would give priority to...
- Changing the system!

- To impose, to put inside what we want: a Constitutional Assembly without politic professionals.

That is with people who don't want power.

We want that in this Assembly, you have people who renounce going into power in the futur,

and who aren't professionals. Or does something bother you with this idea?

- It goes already too far and Venezuela has prooved that even with professionals of politics,

you can still achieve something a lot better than what we have

today in France. Even if it isn't real democracy,

they still have, through professionals who wrote the Constitution, they still voted it in.

- By the people. The people wrote it.
- The people wrote it ?
- Yes, many citizens. All the villages were talking about it.

- Randomnly chosen?
- No, not randomnly chosen. That's why you can have an alternative to the random draw / common lot.

Someone, on my website, defends this with passion and says:

"With an assembly picked at random, you'll have a small amount of people who are going to write the Constitution instead of me.

And I," he says, "I want to write the Constitution."
I hear him loud and clear.

It's another way of writing a Constitution in a desinterested way, without politic professionals in the way:

to have a Constitutional Assembly in every town.

So here you have a controversy and it's interesting. I tell him: "But wait, you're going to have 360 000 Constitutions.

When you see the time you need to just read one Constitution,

to understand its' mechanisms, it's going to be complicated."

And he answers: "Yes, for sure you'll have to spend time."

But we aren't going to do it like that. We might have a central organ who will serve as musical conductor

and who will send to each town proposals, alternatives.

If we find, amongst the alternatives, something we like, we won't do it differently,

and it will bring points of vue closer together in a faster way than if we all had ideas all over the place.

And if a town or district has an original idea:

for example, a citizens' initiative referendum,

non initiated by 1% of the population but started if one person wants it.

No one would have thought about it. At that moment, all towns and districts would have decided that a citizens' initiative referendum

had to be started by 100 000 or 200 000 people. And there, one guy says, and he's alone, in a district :

"No, listen, we could have a citizens' initiative referendum with just one person starting it."

- Ah but you'll have too many referendums!
- No, no, no! Because that's not just that. One person can start it,

but then you have a referendum chamber, randomnly chosen, who'll listen to citizens. It's soul job is to listen.

So every citizen who has a good idea for a referendum, it's this chamber of randomnly chosen peoples' job to

listen, maybe for two hours,

or just to listen to him for 30 minutes.

After 30 minutes, if the chamber finds it interesting, it will say:

"You've got a further 30 minutes, carry on, because we've got questions to ask you."

And if it's still interesting, another hour and then yet another hour.

As long as the Assembly feels that it needs to listen to him. As long as it likes if the subject is interesting.

And for those interesting topics, the chamber will say: "Well, well, that is an interesting subject."

We vote amongst ourselves in the Chamber and we say: "Alright, we take it and put it

for the agenda of referendums."

And you see where I am getting at ? It's just a simple idea,

an idea that someone could have had,

and bring it up

and after that, the Central Constitutional Assembly

will bring it back down to the other towns and districts,

and see what they think about it.

That's possible and you don't even need the random draw for it.

That's kind of what happened in Venezuela.

Kind of because it didn't happen in such an organised fashion

and the people couldn't express as much. They could say what they wanted.

They made list of grievances and said what they wanted.

And it went on to the point that the Venezuelans know very well their Constitution.

They learn to read with it. It's the first text they learn how to read.

The Constitution.

They have it with them. It's a small text.

A small book that can be kept in your pocket.

I beleive it's a role model, in a certain way.

It's not a role model for everything, because for example to start a citizens' initiative referendum, you need to be many.

You need to be 20%. In my opinion, that's way too high.

- But that's normal. Or at least, I understand it.

- You can debate on it.

- In the same fashion, I think that the districts like Marinaleda, that you must know I imagine...

- Yes of course, Marinaleda, people should know.

- Districts like Marinaleda will surely not survive long in the middle of a system...

- Oh they've been at it for over 36 years now.

- I don't imagine that it will last long because it's real communism, well it's...

- But they want it. They do it because they want it.

- Yes, yes, of course.
- So that's a good thing!

- But Chávez arrived in power through elections.

- Yes, for one Chávez, how many hundred of Sarkozy do you have?

- Yes, yes, of course. To me, they are much more revolutionary. You can see that in France, we aren't near any kind of revolutionary ideals.

It's hard to beleive, at least, that true democracy will come from the streets.

I have a hard time beleiving today, with the system as it is, we'll change,

knowing that we don't do revolutions like we did 200 years ago.

The law inforcement, in front of us, isn't the same as it was 200 years ago.

And today, citizens with pikes and forks doesn't worry them much.

I have a hard time beleiving... but when I see Venezuela, it gives us hope.

Because I see that even through election, they managed to give birth to a Constitution

that protects them much more than what we have, today.

And I wanted to bring the debate towards a thought of a young girl who had to leave,

but who seem to converge on the concept of duality between civilians and citizens.

And you bring it up quite well when you talk about randomnly chosen assemblies in Mali,

where the questions on skill really fall apart automatically.

But that is because it is fed by public debate.

Do we agree ? Because you have the mass media. And this young girl said,

when she was thinking about minimum wage... And it's also a question I wanted to ask,

since you are a economy professor, but

it leaves a bit the context of democracy...

In short, she said that each citizen, because they are part of society,

- and that's how it touches minimum wage - takes part in the debates of society.

It's very binary to say that you have people who take care of politics and are interested and those who don't care and aren't interested.

You have people who are slightly interested, and them some more than others.

But in this public debate that is fed by independant medias, if we manage to retake control of our politics,

in this public debate, they are as important as people who really care about politics and will take part in Assemblies.

- Yes, absolutely!

And by the way, minmum wage, it's not at all disociated with the thoughts on democracy,

it's even very very Very important.

- I'm not saying this to turn the debate towards economy.

- No, but we can still say a word on it:

Concerning minmum wage, there are multiple versions with nuances that are interesting to know.

I invite you to work on topics of minimum wage, on Basic income guarantee, or citizen's income, or life long salary;

life long salary as Bernard Friot describes it.

By the way, his book, "The issues of salary" just came out.

He had wrote "The issues of pension" that was a wonderful book.

If you don't have time to read the book, listen to Friot's conferences,

on "The issues of pension".

It's actually exhilarating.

I know of no idea on the economical level - and on the topic of money, beleive me, I know quite a few

who pop your mind -

but more revolutionary as Friot's!

And his pension system works. It's not a utopia, it's something that already exists.

Pensions work already quite fine, and financy by distribution

could be applied to normal income. It could apply to investments.

It's fabulous! You need to know it.

And what he explains is typically the issues on salary.

I've just started reading it. I received it two days ago, but it's a really great book.

So he's for a lifelong salary, that you can differenciate from revenu,

because for him, the word "revenu" is negative.

If you can take a step back and look at those technical issues,

what is important is to take back control of money creation,

so that you can give to each citizen the possibility to live without working.

Without any condition, and for life. And it's not unrealistic. That's why Friot's work is so important.

It already exists!

Just have a look: it's pensions and civil officials.

You have it under your own eyes and civil officials work.

And still, if the civil worker does not work (NT: in France), he still gets payed. And still, he works.

There is something here!

Why does he work ?

Pensions, it's the same.

Retired people, do you know any? Ask them. They'll tell you they never worked so much in their lives.

- By distribution.
- With pension based on distribution.

- It's by distribution and by the pension money we put into it.

- Yes but that's not a problem. Even those who have pensions through invested capital, they work.

- You have people who talk about pensions by distribution.

- Yes, alright, but what I want to point out is: even though they don't have to work, those people work!

If you take out the job aspect, as Friot says, you stil carry on working.

Humans aren't lazy at all. You have some who are idle.

Ok, some are idle and lazy.

And Friot says: "I'd rather have him idle than let him be a financial engineer

or a atomic bomb manufacturer.

I'd rather see him idle!

Let him go play gold, I don't care, I don't need him to work!

We work already too much!"

It's exceptional. The work of Friot is outstanding.

I advise you to integrate his analysis.

We don't need to work that much!

We really don't need everyone to work.

I have forgotten to take "The Great Releif Team".

There is a book I scanned. I have scanned half of my books.

And I have scanned over a thousand books.

But there is one I scanned, "The Great Releif Team of Men by the Machine" by Jacques Duboin,

that explains in marvelous formulas - and this was between the two World Wars -

and he says: "It's incredible! Work is like a curse,

and when finally they are unemployed,

finally they come back from the front line, they are free,

we only have one thing in mind: push them back and send them back the the front line!"

They are free!

Unemployment is only a problem because it isn't generalised.

- A strong objection!
- A strong one!

- Imagine the people manage to take power again and we all know what will happen then more or less.

We'll abolish programmed obsolescence of everything we buy

and we have to throw away after a year. We all know this.

We'll abolish the odious debt we've built up the last 40 or 50 years.

And we'll face a frontal assault of "The Empire" at the same time.

At that moment, we'll see the Anglo-Saxons, and the Chinese who want to be part of the system,

fight strongly against us because we the people want to emancipate ourselves from the slavery of this matrix.

- But they are left at ease for the past 10 years in Venezuela

and remember they had a "Coup d'Etat" back in 2002

We all understand why they wanted to get Chávez out and put the bourgeoisie back in power.

I beleive that if they have been left alone for 10 years, it's because "The Empire" has other issues to deal with.

- Exactly!
- Once they'll have finished, they'll take care of Chávez

- I have an answer for that. And your objection is a formidable one.

The objection, if you heard it, is that once the people rebel

even a whole country, the former power will go to the oligarchies around that country.

The former people in power will just go to the next level of power.

That country will take the men in power around the rebel country and fight it

under the disguise of a war.

A war of such a technological level that it drives fear into your very bones.

The analysis I make of this objection

and it is a true objection

is that it puts the finger on the impossibility of the balance of power I was talking about earlier.

And I am conscious of this.

I see that the 1% have Everything and all around the world.

They have money, politicians, the industry, economy, the media, culture, the doxa...
- Education.

- the economists...

Just forget it! Just give up!

You don't stand a chance. In that balance of power, you have no chance at all.

I suggest a sickness.

I suggest that we get the monster sick.

Give him the flu !

Because you have a monster: an enormous diplodocus! He catches the flu : he's dead.

He needs to catch the sickness. He was enormous, invulnerable, but if you have found the sickness,

he will become weaker, without strength and he'll fall asleep.

You can give the sickness to olgarchy!

Olgiarchy has become all powerful, it has become triumphant,

it has become more than threatening. It's actually terrifying right now.

And it's a 200 year old thing. Before it wasn't so bad.

Before, it wasn't so awful.

Before 1789, before representative governance, before the election

which is like a booster for horror!

I sa: rather than the balance of power,

give the sickness to the oligarch monster.

and spot what boosts it, what makes it invulnerable.

It's the fact that we defend it like a holy cow, we, the victims,

the billions of victims, because they have twisted the words around.

They said: "This is democracy. That's universal suffrage

You're happy now ? You're a citizen." !

And all the words are upside down.

I am not a citizen, I am a voter!

I am not autonomous, I am heteronomous.

I live through the laws of my masters. I am not in democracy,

I am in an oligarchy.

They have twisted all the words upside down. And we defend it like a holy cow.

We say : "The one who doesn't defend universal suffrage is a fascist !"

And there, that's really natural selection. If we are too stupid, we'll just die

if we defend like a holy cow the central tool, the booster

of our worst enemies !

The factor that lets Goldman Sachs take control of Obama

and of the United States:

it's the universal suffrage! It the electoral campaign that cost Obama 750 million.

That's the last campaign. The next one will be a billion!

Who'll pay the billion ? Small support groups with a dollar each ? You know that's not true.

Don't beleive it, it's a lie!

It's Goldman Sachs that pays, Goldman Sachs and the industrials

that pay Obama.

Who controls ?

It's the universal suffrage.

You could beleive in it two hundred years ago, but now you have collected

200 years worth of data.

Do you see ? 200 years of not keeping promises !

How long are we going to carry on ? Let me resume to keep it simple:

200 years of random draw/common lot, the 1% never ruled.

200 years of random draw in Athens, the 1% never rule. The 99%, the poor, always rule.

Ok ?

200 years of representative governance, of false democracy, of false universal suffrage, of false citizens...

200 years: the rich, the 1% always rule. The poor, the 99%, never rule.

Never! And we're at a point that nuclear warfare is being prepared,

sensless wars, with millions of deaths. One Billion!

Enough now!

So just one conslusion: the random draw gives to the 99% the power, always!

Election gives the power to the 1%, always !

With one exception, now and then, just enough time to put him back in a cage with a good war.

How long will the 99% still defend the election?

That's my question. Because the solution isn't in others, here,

it's in US!

It's not the fault of those in power to abuse of it.

Power is like an object moved by a force stronger than itself.

This pen is going to fall because there is the gravitational force

and this until it finds a limit.

And at the limit, it stops !

Well with power, it's the same! A power will go until the end of it's power (Montesquieu)

It's no use in blaming Sarkozy. Sarkozy goes to the end of things and he'll just take everything from us.

Until we set a limit to it all!

And if you don't set any limits, we'll all end up in labor camps.

Like IG Farben, chemical cartel, that made the deported work in the Auschwitz camps.

At Auschwitz, the capitalists, those who were the captains of the industry,

the competent people, those who were apt and responsable. Nothing like us, the beggars.

The responsable people made the deported who arrived by trains work.

They weren't fed, they weren't paid.

It was perfect. An ideal for capitalism.

- You always mention the name of Sarkozy.

- But Sarkozy, it's because it is our president. No, but it's all the same. Sarkozy isn't worse than any other,

they are all the same.

I say "those in power"... Power goes until it finds a limit.

So what is very important is: who sets the limis ?

That should be us!

But when is the last time you set a limit to power ?

When was the last time you thought about the articles of the Constitution

that should be in our Constitution

so that we can have political power? And of those who aren't in it!?

The articles that aren't in the Constitution and who build, by their absence, our political impotency.

When is the last time we actually thought, then demanded, wanted, an article for the Constitution ?

Never ! No one cares !

I say, and this is "Chouardesc", and I would love it to not just be chouardesc,

I would like that this be "Citizenesc". I mean that we, the voters as small cocoon

we transform into butterflies and that this metamorphosis

help us become, help us want to become autonomous and that in the end, we set the limits to our parents (our representatives).

- Let me stop you one moment. The problem to get to that point, that the "viruses" spread,

it's to communicate, we agree on this.

These conferences are great, and from time to time, we communicate too, we communicate outside.

But on the other hand, we don't have access to media.

We won't debate on their independancy, but we all see that it is doubtful.

- With Internet, we don't need them.

- Yes, that's where I am getting at. But it won't last.

There is a law that is trying to get through in Europe called ACTA and it wants to fight couterfeit.

- They have given up. It's not looking good for them. The people went so much in the streets that they gave up.

- No, they gave up the examination to a counsel that would have given it's opinion about the wrong articles.

- We must stay vigilant.

- If the network isn't neutral territory, we're done for. What would happen, and let's stay in a hypothesis,

is that the citizen would no longer be responsable for his publications.

It would be the Internet Service Provider (ISP)! If the Provider is responsable for what is hosted...

- It's awful, yes.

- He won't take the risk.

- Internet will become a television and that's it.
- A television, a shopping mall.

- I read on Internet that a decret went through last week

that obliged ISPs to keep our personal data for at least a year.

- Yes, that's correct, and it's approximatively logical. However, they are not yet responsable for the published content.

- Yes, it's true. But now the government can come and controle.

- Yes, it will come.

Yes, and it's a high price for us and the neutrality of the network.
- Yes, that's ACTA

But Internet is the media that let us, and many of us think that way,

be here tonight. And that's not nothing!

- And I'd say: so what ?

- We need to go fast, faster than now!

- For me, it's a non-sens because we talk about Internet.

You just need to go and watch the most watched videos of YouTube.

They don't fly very high on the intellectual level.

So neutrality or not, how many voices will you have more than the thousands of Greeks that are in the streets now ?

You can't have a stronger sign of protest than that !
- But the Greeks, we don't hear them

- Alexandre says: on YouTube, you only find silly things. On YouTube, you find the funny and silly

videos and the useful and serious stuff, they are few and not much watched.

And at the same time, Alexandre, what gives us strength, is that

the exponential is maybe not a factor ten, but mabye just two. It doubles every time.

Bam! Each time we talk about it, it doubles. It doubles. It doubles!

You know, there is the image of the pond, the small lake.

And you have lily pads that double, double, double and double yet again.

They double every hour.

And you just need two more hours before it's full, because you're only at a fourth.

Three hours, you were juste at an eighth.

Four hours, and so on. When you are the very beggining, you say: we'll never get there.

But when you have an exponential...
- Right now, we're not in an exponential.

- That depends on us ! What is your name ?
- Pierre-Louis, thank you,

- Our videos have 80 000 and when we look at the videos 2 years ago, you also have 80 000 views.

It was already anti-system and widely seen. It's already a lot.
- And the Greece, I had many hopes but it didn't last long.

I mean, more media than what you have in Greece is difficult ! And they have our ideas,

all the ones in the streets, more or less, and it didn't bring anything!

- No, No. They didn't talk at all about the constitutional process, nor of randomnly drawing a constitutional assembly. Not at all!

They didn't take care of that superior law to which the army and the police obey.

- But that's the thing. It a small law they want to change and they can't.

- No but that's normal. They are fighting the consequences, and I am sorry.

- It should be easier to change it.

- No not at all ! Changing a consequence will change nothing at all !

- Yes, it won't change anything, but...
- No, Pierre-Louis, I must insist.

What I am suggesting, we can not say that it has already been tried and that it has worked.

It's not true. We have never found an idea that united people who are said right-wing,

left-wing people,

and people of the center-wing.

We have never found it for now.

We haven't managed to no split in two. And our opponents are very united !

They have group consciousness. You should listen to Soros.

Soros says: "Yes, but of course you have a war between social classes."

Wait that's not Soros.
- It's Warren.
- It is Warren Buffett.

Of course you have a social class struggle. There is even a war between social classes.

"And it is my class of rich, ultrarich, that leads it,

leads it and wins it !"

They are quite aware of this and they know fully well that there is a class consciousness.

But if you want, I know well that this might not work.

But I have nothing better to suggest.

- Everyone is waiting for something it seems.

So there, you have a consequence that is important and it actually happening right now.

We are reaching a peak of petrol production. And it is going to be a great shock to our society.

Our political leaders, our political system doesn't take it into account.

And it is an unacceptable consequence of our political system.

There is a very strong group that is building up and goes to speak at the parlement, who will even go in "Le Monde" (NT: newspaper)

with people to back it, movements, associations and so on.

There is a strong will behind them to show the absurdity of our political system

and who is missing completly the point.

That doesn't see the peak of the oil production,

when it has been announced for years !

- It's an awful ecological catastrophy. But it is a consequence.

- It is a consequence ! But on it, we are going to try and crystallize people.

They have engineers, people of power who are going to try and make some damage.

And if you follow it, you'll see that it will shake things up.

- I beleive that it's the practical part of this idea that is the difficult conception point.

- Can I ask something of you ?

There is something that is going to be critical in our thought process. And it is that when we leave

each other, you either do something or don't. If you just go back home

and say : "Yeah, that was interesting, original what that guy said. It was fun, good."

Then it's over. It is over and I think that we're not doing too good even right now.

But if you try, and I don't know if you'll be capable, but if you try to convince some people around you

by saying, just to see what it would do: "Is it that hard ?"

And you'll see at start you'll stumble. It will be difficult at start.

And in front of opposing arguments, you'll say: "I just can't do it."

But please insist. Me, at first, I didn't desintox myself right away.

The random draw/common lot, when I starting reading about it, I thought:

"But what a load of stupidity ?!"

But reading about it : "Ah look, it's not that stupid, not stupid at all."

And finally, after a while, you tame the idea. You desintox yourself step by step

concerning false democracy, false citizens, false universal suffrage.

And you say: "OK! That's what we need ! We need real democracy, real universal suffrage.

We should be autonomous citizens and gain our political power back

which would let us impose social justice."
- Yes, but how ? Just by viraly spreading the idea ?

- So the answer...Ah yes, I didn't answer to outside oligarchies aggressin the country.

The videos that I have made last year and this year are starting to be translated.

In German, in English, in Spanish. With English and Spanish, it will be a fabulous booster!

Because the idea is like a rhizome, under ground, we will pass the word to each other

by saying: "OK. What we need more, after what I have understood, is for the next Constitutional Assembly

not to be composed of professional politicians and I need to fight for this.

And I need to spread the word, and I do spread it." And we can't know how many we are

because we do it more discreetly than here. And we spread the word, we spread it more, but all around the world.

And one day, and I don't know when, I can't know when, but when is not the real matter here.

It's not because we don't know when that it will never happen.

And one day, it will be spring, and we'll grow.

And we'll start growing everywhere ! And at that moment, it won't be just one country

that will start to become powerful and autonomous, because it will start to write it's own Constitution

that will give it the rights to fight injustice.

It will be more than one country, and with multiple countries it should word. It has more chances of succeeding

than simply winning an election in one country.

- It needs to be that. If we want to protect ourselves from the globalist empire that is here,

we need it to be at least european, that we at least have our neighbours with us on this

But we still don't have the core of this thing

nad that is: "How do we go from viraly spreading the word to the practical,

once we will see a country starting to change it's Constitution?"

- I don't know how it will happen but let us think about it. We will maybe find

a starting switch, a sort of password, a code that would say:

"The moment is now, people, we must rise..."

I don't know.

It is important that it stays relatively invisible.

Because right now, they are writting down the name of the resistants.

And I am telling you this without paranoia. In all the wars of history,

it starts with raids against the resistants of that given moment

and they are all thrown in prison. The communists, the unions, the anarchists : in jail !

And you will have a social body where it's resistants have been ripped from it.

And that means that you'll need to find resistant ressources amongst those who hadn't resisted before.

And so, if we manage to spread the word, rather discreetly, we give us the strength to resist.

There will be seeds that will grow, or at least ready to grow

outside of these raids.

- Discreetly over Internet, it's...
- Discreetly over Internet, it's Game Over.

Yes, yes. This needs to be in our living rooms, between us.

It is necessary that Alexandre carries on, invites his guests back and still talks to them about this even if they don't want to.

- And can we not count on the debates inside of the system?

- Maybe. Yes, yes, of course, that would be great. If we manage to have elected representatives

or powerful people who have a conscience. It exists!

- What I meant is that you already have those. In our National Assembly, you have people...

- But of course.

- ... who think that. That is that all these people like you who do conferences and all, they debate, meet elected representatives.

And they start saying what you say.

- As in what I have been saying ?

- Yes, what you say.

There are representatives that say it as well. But simply, they can't openly say it or they will loose their job.

They are fired from the right-wing or the left-wing and their career is over. But you have people like that.

- Seriously ?
- Yes.
- It's growing. It's growing.

- It's growing ?

- So this isn't a question. Concerning the book of Bernard Manin "The principles of representative governance",

you can't find it anymore.
- Oh yes, it's not published anymore.

- Yes, that's true. There are some books we can't find.

I would like to thank you all for participating here. We are going to stop now. I think that Etienne Chouard will say a short conclusion because we can't carry on

- Me, I am a student: I have access to this book in a number of copies in two libraries.

If there are people who want to come, I can double-lend it.

- That's a good idea ! Use the libraries to photocopy the old editions.

- I have scaned it and digitalised it. So if you write to me, I can send it to you.

- Write it on the walls!
- What is your name ?
- Juliette

- Julliette suggeste to photocopy Bernard Manin and stick it on the walls, in the metro, in buses,

[...]

- It's too long!

- No, you have thick passages but that are formidable passages. A great book!

"Principles of representative governance". It's going to shake things.

It will transform you, change you. It's a guy who make an honest balance sheet between election and random draw/common lot.

But since we have never heard about random draw / common lot, it's a vibrant advocacy; a vibrant defense

Extraordinary. With a bibliography that will bring you to read Hansen, Finley,

great people who love athenian institutions.

It has be great tonight. It has been very tonic, really good.

- Etienne, a last question.

- If you want a short moment, you can meet up again on the other side. We have a little bit to eat and drink.

- Who would be interested in staying in touch, that we see each other, I don't know, once a month ?

- So we have taken down emails of many people because when you came, we wrote it down.

All those who willingly left their email, we have it. So we'll be able to reboot things again.

If there are people who want to come to the Youth and Cultur Center aagain, to meet ant talk

we can set up more debates like this one if you want.

- You can also carry on in the web forum as well.

Just write Chouard in Google : C-H-O-U-A-R-D. You'll find the web site and there is a link to the forum

to the wiki, to the blog.

Last morning, I had an idea. Today, before leaving and arriving here, I had already 400 comments.

400 comments! It's inhuman !

And interesting ! People who don't agree at all.

Some fear, others don't agree at all, and there is nothing better to get a feeling of what society is thinking.

Thank you a lot to all of you for having been here.

- Thank you to you !