Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Résumé for English-speaking readers by niusheng11

VIEWS: 18 PAGES: 64

									                         Résumé for English-speaking readers
What is there to interest English-speaking readers in a Press Conference held by the 'President of the
United States of Europe' ?

The 'President of the United States of Europe' is a world citizen who claims to stand for 'universal
brotherhood'. The new money that he proposes - the ECU - places all the peoples of the world on
the same footing, with regard to 'added value'. He announces the creation of a world without
frontiers, in which all resources would be fairly shared. This marked the irreversible end of
'predatory capitalism', an inhuman economic doctrine based on the exploitation of man by man, and
of man by machine, to the detriment of ecological resources and to the survival of the human race.

Predatory capitalism can be seen as the apotheosis of two opposing yet complementary historic
movements - national capitalism (barbaric capitalism) and national socialism (barbaric socialism) -
these two inhuman, nationalistic visions of society which have made the world what it is today - a
battlefield between peoples and between generations, a world of violence in which injustice and
crime are law and impose their single, alienating attitude.

This book is an extract from a much longer novel ('Amanda, Secret Mission', which is available, in
French only, on the Web). It reflects the thoughts of a law-maker whose concern is, above all, to put
an end to the rule of crime, corruption and hypocrisy at the highest levels of the State. It is the
struggle of a man thirsting for true liberty, equality and brotherhood. This novel is addressed to all
those who are concerned with their future, with their people's future and with the future of
civilization. It is, above all, the sum of fundamental reflections which suggest concrete answers to
the anguish of thousands of millions of human beings whom the rich countries have excluded
because 'there are too many of them on this earth'. Beyond the economy, it is the notion of the 'rights
of man'; the rich countries and the spirit of their laws that are in the dock. The only right that
governs the world of barbarity is that of money and those who possess it. This is a right they intend
to keep by force of arms, thus by a form of violence that engenders another - that of international
terrorism and ethnic conflict.

The Bretton Woods Conference of July 1944 had already sought a solution to the imperative need to
replace gold by some other form of universal international money. The World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund, to which the Conference gave birth, did nothing to modify the old
rules of the economy. Lord Keynes regarded it as a 'law of nature' that one man's riches meant
another man's poverty. The attempt to create a new standard of parity between gold and the dollar
failed owing to the lack of discipline of the American financiers. Finally, the supremacy of the
dollar was recognized, a supremacy based on no consideration other than the arbitrary one of
serving its own interests. In so doing it made the U.S.A. the 'policeman' of the economic world - a
role with which the people of the planet had difficulty in coming to terms.

The theory of the ECU (Equivalent Currency Unit) is revolutionary and aims 'to take the world
capitalist bull by the horns'. The ECU has nothing in common with any form of traditional money.
Liberal economists have always maintained that the value of a currency is determined solely from
the free interplay of demand and supply. With the ECU, this value is determined solely by the
qualitative value of the products or services offered on the market. The ECU theory is both
scientific and liberal, because, for the first time, it is integrated into the metric system. The value
added is incorporated with the work invested and thus becomes quantifiable. This quantification of
the quantitative value takes nothing away from the interplay of supply and demand since those
products or services best adapted to demand will continue to impose themselves freely on the
market. However, the opportunities open to the various players on the economic scene become
equal. With consumption of energy becoming an integral part of the formation of prices, any
wastage of power will be considered to be a handicap in competitive terms. The ECU is, therefore,
an ecologically sound monetary standard which penalizes any form of waste of energy.

The 'Press Conference of the President of the United States of Europe' is a philosophical vision of
the economy which is addressed to all those who seek 'paradise on earth', and especially to the
young who ask if there is still a place in this world where life is worth living.




                                          Summary


       Preface                                                                Page 3

       Press Conference by the President of the United States of Europe Page 7

       The Journalists' Questions                                             Page 61

       What is "La plume verte" ?                                             Page 63
                                              Preface
The Euro is the cause of legitimate and deep disquiet. Anyone who has read Viviane Forrester's
'L'Horreur Economique' (Economic Horror), or François de Closets' 'Le compte à rebours'
(Countdown) , will either feel themselves caught up in the irresistible mechanism of a world system
which can only lead to Economic Horror, or to being ensnared in an unproductive State apparatus
which capitulates to shameless trade unions and, by its admitted laxity, can only lead to the coming
to power of the extreme right. Both writers confirm their readers in the conviction that the coming
to power of the National Front is the only possible way out, whatever happens, because the other
political parties will have shown themselves incapable of governing France. Such discouraging
pessimism only plays into the hands of those whom Viviane Forrester and François de Closets wish
to denounce.

These two authors, stricken with acute historical and geopolitical myopia, can only see the world
through golden, France-shaped, 'disaster-rose-tinted' spectacles. Both maintain that the solution to a
national tragedy, so unworthy of the French, depends finally on the French Government - 'the
French exception', that is to say attachment to the fundamental values of the Republic, being the
ultimate cause of all these woes - as though the crisis through which we are passing was somehow
linked with the original sin of being born French. This is bordering on the delirium of national
persecution.

Whoever is proud to be French, according to them, is not only retrograde, but also a potential
National Front voter eager to overthrow the Republic. The only solution - though they do not say
this openly - is the American way of life in the shadow of a providential mountain of gold. A
chimera! This is really handing the nation over on a platter to the National Front, and Mr. Le Pen
can only be heartened by all this. To denigrate the Governments of the Republic, continuously and
without distinction, without proposing anything else in their place, can only serve the enemies of
democratic republicanism. Incessant criticism of our politicians behind their backs gets us nowhere,
because the problem lies elsewhere.

Although both authors dwell at length on the symptoms of the present crisis, neither of them
addresses its deeper causes. Neither of them proposes a valid, credible way out of this crisis. This
booklet attempts to remedy this latter omission. My aim is to speak to specialists of the banking
world in terms accessible to ordinary people, since hundreds of millions of people in Europe and
throughout the world are concerned. The formula I have come up with here, I admit, demands an
intense effort of thought - one gets nothing for nothing. It also presupposes, I confess, a minimum of
good will and a wide basis of consensus. In the last resort, there is only the choice between fruitful
co-operation and sterile confrontation. However, apart from a handful of millionaires and a few
dinosaurs of the Stock Exchange, European and other, nobody should either suffer as a result of this
or lose the social advantages they have acquired or the values they hold dear.

I do not deny, enthusiast for Europe that I have always been, that I fear this areopagus of
technocrats in a Europe which the founders intended to be composed of peoples and citizens and
which is now far from being the case. Let us take a look at the recent past.
At a time when nobody was talking about unemployment, during the golden years, when everybody
was broadly-speaking satisfied and small businesses were doing well, the alchemists of Europe, in
Brussels, never tired of denouncing the 'lack of competitiveness' of European business. They spoke
boldly of means of remedying this lack - economies of scale, or the large-scale business. In other
words, the size of businesses should be increased and their manpower should be reduced in order to
increase profitability. Mergers were the order of the day, as was intensification of the rationalisation
of the means of production by automation and the famous computer-assisted production. We should
get rid of the proletariat, of a section of the population which had become superfluous, if not
undesirable.

Today we are harvesting the fruits of this policy. Cuts are being made right, left and centre, and
millions of people are being thrown out of work so as to keep salaries at their lowest. The orators of
the extreme right, who never read newspapers, denounce the 'real culprits' who are the cause of all
these problems - immigrants and other undesirables, in short, 'the rejects of society' who must be
eliminated in order to create employment. This brings to mind the final solution which sent Jews to
the gas chambers to make more lebensraum for the Germans.

Anyone who has retained a minimum of lucidity knows clearly that the profoundly atheistic
approach of the National Front is like a demon in disguise, yet more frightening, because it is
unacceptable and profoundly hostile to the true national cause, that of the French people in a
changing Europe. This is a change which the National Front, like all the other parties, is incapable
of handling. It (the National Front) is merely an incurable vestige of the past. attached to obsolete
myths, and incapable of understanding, let alone resolving, the real problems involved in our
transformation. Would it not be better, if only to produce convincing results, to respect the rules of
democracy, which maintain that fifteen per cent of the voters be represented by fifteen per cent of
deputies in the Assembly. Instead of confining the hooligans of politics to the benches of those
who smash everything, would it not be more fruitful to give them access to the playing field of
the 'hémicycle' (the French Assembly takes the form of a semi-circle) to beat them. The voters,
convinced of their inability to resolve our problems adequately, would then be able to send
them packing with no regrets.

The methods of the extreme right in Europe have this in common with Nazism – they are
clandestine, subversive and distract attention from the real problems. They fish in troubled waters
by denouncing false culprits. Their bait is alluring and their prey ends up in the frying-pan of men
who hunger for power. They are men who despise the people and do not even hesitate at committing
crimes.

There is no doubt that there is a cause and effect relationship between the irresponsible European
politics of the 'alchemists' of Brussels, the attention paid to the 'Great Capitalists', and the rise of
despair, resignation, fanaticism, exclusion and the extreme right in Europe. For a wide variety of
reasons, the peoples of Europe are exasperated and are leaving the European train one after another.
Nobody seems to be in control of the situation in Europe and everybody is afraid of losing his or her
social rights. This is why the situation is so serious. It encourages a growing part of the population -
especially the young - to allow themselves be seduced by the speechmaking of the extremist parties.

This situation has not arisen by chance. For thirty years children in the schools of Europe have been
taught that 'the Europe of banks and of the countries of Europe, of Brussels', is the only valid one.
The citizen of Europe has only one choice - to keep quiet and follow passively the road that leads an
entire generation to disaster. Today, we have the audacity to reproach young people because they no
longer believe in a Europe which is anti-democratic, hostile to its citizens and which offers no better
prospects than the minimum wage or unemployment.

It should not be forgotten that the introduction of the Euro will accelerate this work of destroying
democratic republicanism. It implies the reinforcement of economies of scale, by an even more
pitiless class warfare between robots at work and members of the proletariat out of work, and
an even more unjust sharing out of riches. This will provide fertile soil for demagogy as well as the
rise of all extremist movements and can only result in a confrontation between two irreconcilable
camps. We shall be back to the thirties, on the eve of the second World War.
Karl Marx must be turning in his grave. His absurd Hegelian vision of dialectical materialism has
failed dismally, since the imperialists have finally won the day to the detriment of the workers, who
are now under the yoke of a world oligarchy which imposes its own laws upon them.

Is this not the final coup de grâce, the revenge of capitalism upon communism? Here we are very
far from the idealistic vision of a Jean Monnet or Robert Schumann of a free and unified Europe of
citizens. Who would have thought that the European Community would be responsible for a policy
of internal confrontation? This can only be the logical outcome of a policy of enrichment of the
already well-heeled, of those who swear by untrammelled growth to the detriment of employment.
They have eliminated workers from factories and have replaced them by robots. The profits from
these factories go, not to the workers, but to speculators on the Stock Exchange, who make and
unmake governments as they please. The ewer goes so often to the well that finally it breaks.

This is the position we are in, caused, no doubt, by the fact that our democracy only functions once
every five years, at the time of the elections. The day after the elections the elector loses all interest
in what happens in the National Assembly or in the Regional Councils, since, in the end, his or her
role is limited to 'grumbling and going on strike' – far from supporting and sustaining the Members
of the Assembly in their decisions on how best to serve the interests of the people and of
democracy.

No-one should be surprised if couch grass takes over the garden and ends up by making it
uncultivable when the gardeners of the nation cease to tend it and allow it to lie fallow. It was to
remedy this situation that I wrote a novel with a theme so explosive that to this day I have published
only one small chapter, a tenth of the book.

In this novel, couch grass has a name, 'La Gramigna', the world Mafia, with the most powerful
militants in all countries and the most sophisticated weaponry. It is the world-wide 'State of
Corruption', which imposes the law of crime and terrorism on all peoples. One man refuses to bow
to them - Léon Bouvier, the President of the United States of Europe.

After a take-over by a military junta determined to put an end to this situation, in the year 2025, in
the aftermath of the great flood in the North Sea, Europe was advancing with giant strides - the
mastery of nuclear fusion, the creation of a galactic force without precedent and, above all, the entry
into service of the fourth generation of computers, the artificial human brain which watches and
analyses, day and night, everything that happens on this planet. Although the State had never been
more effective, 'La Gramigna' had never been so highly organized. It was preparing to unite its
militants with those of the extreme right, become more bloody and more greedy for power than
ever, to overthrow the European Federal Government with the aid of part of the army, or about a
million armed men. The lives of 600 million Europeans were at stake.

Faced with this menace, the President of the United States of Europe unleashed the final economic
weapon to wipe out, at a single stroke, organized crime, predatory capitalism and all the subversive,
nationalist and terrorist movements whose aim was to overthrow freedom: the ECU, that is to say
the universal money standard which was going to put all the peoples of the world on a footing of
equality and to finish with injustices and economic horror. Léon Bouvier had made himself the
advocate of 6,000 million hungry men and women.

For it is also doubtless true that inequality between peoples is the cause, nowadays, of
unemployment in the industrialized countries and the influx of people demanding asylum from
persecution of all kinds. How can two-thirds of humanity continue to buy anything from the rich
countries if grotesque, unjust monetary mechanisms remove their purchasing power, holding them
virtually hostage the better to take over their natural resources and leave their countries in ruins,
without resources or hope for the future? The Asian crisis we are experiencing at the moment marks
a new step in our descent to the abyss.

It is from that abyss, and an even graver ecological catastrophe that the President of the 'United
States of Europe' wants to preserve us. Even if his Press Conference were to last six hours, the
invited journalists are in no danger of getting bored. It marks the beginning of a new civilization, of
a new era of universal brotherhood bringing with it a spirit of co-operation and sharing rather than
of conquest and confrontation to the detriment of all. This peaceful, ecological philosophy, aimed at
ensuring our survival, is also that of 'La plume verte' (The Green Pen).

                                                                          Georges Lacroix, July 1998


           P.S.   For ease of reading, the journalists‘ questions are all shown on page 61.
Press Conference by the President of the United States of Europe on the ECU
                                           Wednesday 21 June 2051, televised retransmission,1 p. m
As a corollary to the referendum in which the people of Europe were to be asked to give their
verdict on the new money, the Head of State organized a Press Conference, at the Presidential
Palace, to which several hundred journalists from all over the world were invited. All the major
television stations were to re-transmit this historic broadcast live. The Government of the United
States of Europe had decreed a public holiday, so that everyone could follow the press conference.
President Léon Bouvier was welcomed by warm applause. He sat down, brought out his pipe, filled
it and lit it so as to give the impression of a man at ease, and then spoke to the assembled guests.

' Ladies and Gentlemen of the European and international press, thank you for coming to this press
conference in such large numbers. The forthcoming referendum is on everybody's lips; I hope that I
shall be able to answer your questions. First question please.'


 'Mr. President, why do you want to change our money?'

' Before expanding on the reasons for this action, allow me to quote certain figures and to underline
two facts which will allow you to understand the situation better.

' Nobody can doubt that our economy is becoming more and more globalized. In this year of grace
2051, over 98% of the world's riches are held by only 0.2% of the population, with the share of the
northern hemisphere exceeding 80%. This means that the break between the North and the South
is now practically complete.

' These figures have as their corollary that 70% of humanity is underfed and that 90% of the youth
of the developing countries is unemployed with its only future being to join one of the terrorist
organizations. What else can it do? To die young in combat at least frees one from a premature and
unworthy death, since life expectancy in these countries has fallen to 27, whereas it is three times
this in the industrialized countries. Some see in this 'natural' extermination of impoverished people a
means of perpetuating the superiority of the white race while at the same time guaranteeing our
society cheap manpower and primary goods and maintenance of our policy of growth regardless of
its disastrous ecological consequences.

' No one will be surprised to learn that the Third World has become a veritable political and
ecological powder-keg. On a world scale, over-grazing and galloping deforestation have meant that
the desert zones have tripled in 50 years. The immense distress of the developing countries makes
the purification of water virtually impossible. No one should be surprised therefore that waste
waters are polluting our rivers and eventually our oceans, accelerating the disappearance of marine
fauna - in 50 years the volume of fish caught has fallen by 78%. I should say that industrial wastes
make a notable contribution to this damage.

' Massive pollution of the oceans is accompanied by a dramatic increase in temperature. This is
further enhanced by increasing emissions of carbon dioxide and the 'greenhouse effect', which has
quintupled during the last fifty years. All calls for moderation have remained a dead letter since the
ecological behaviour of the industrialized countries can be described in the words après nous le
déluge. I offer as proof the level of the North Sea, which has risen 56 centimetres in the course of
the last fifty years, largely outstripping all forecasts.
' Ladies and gentlemen, everyone still remembers the flood of 10th August 2025. After an unusually
hot summer, an iceberg, measuring 1,200 kilometres in length by 200 metres deep, detached itself
from the Arctic ice bank, precipitating nine billion six hundred million metric cubes of ice into the
waters of the North Sea. An apocalyptic tidal wave, twenty-five metres high, bore down on Europe.
Edinburgh, London, Le Havre, Antwerp, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Bremen, Hamburg, Kiel,
Copenhagen, Goteburg, Malmö, St. Petersburg, Riga, Helsinki and Stockholm were devastated. One
would have thought that with three million dead and fifteen million homeless, the people of Europe
would have learnt their lesson and would have altered their behaviour in an upsurge of moderation
and brotherhood. Alas, this was not the case since the only organization to profit from this tragedy
was 'La Gramigna '.

                             (There was silence for a moment. The President could not retain a sob).

' I also recall the reactions of the political parties of the time, when, three weeks before the flood,
the geophysicists of all countries announced the imminent catastrophe - they described the
announcements as agitation among the ecologists, media pressure, manipulation of public opinion,
political connivance, sabotage of tourism, etc. etc. Nobody was prepared to conceive the
inconceivable or imagine that one day nature might punish us for our irresponsible ecological
behaviour. It needed a Greenpeace aeroplane, filming live, in the hellish cacophony of the iceberg
breaking up, for all the television stations of Europe to sound the alarm - only forty-eight hours
before the floods arrived. Panic spread among holidaymakers on all the North Sea and the Baltic
Sea coastlines. Their flight was headlong and caused total chaos, innumerable traffic jams, chaotic
scenes and even a series of suicides. Airborne assistance was also rapidly overwhelmed. The
nationalist governments of the Europe of Nations, had only one slogan - me first. They were
incapable of efficiently co-ordinating their efforts. NATO and the Americans, thank God, came to
our rescue and averted the worst. This was how the Generals came to take power in Europe, to put
an end to the lack of care, the nepotism and the protectionism of national governments, whose only
thought was for predatory capital and how they could best fill their pockets. The Army, at least, was
capable of assuming its responsibilities and of proving that it was the only intact power on which
the people could count in an emergency.

' If order and security are one thing, the economy is another. In the end, the old rules about trade and
money remained intact. Successive governments perpetuated the same error in sticking to the
principle of the capitalist 'plus-value', which involves a waste of resources and has become fatal for
the environment, involving more unemployment than can readily be absorbed.

' A recent study has just revealed that massive deforestation and the increasing desertification of
what was once the Amazonian Forest has reduced considerably the rate of flow of the Gulf Stream,
whose temperature falls to dangerously low levels in winter, despite a general warming of the
waters in summer. If nothing is done the single degree centigrade which prevents its being caught in
the ice of winter will have disappeared and the Gulf Stream will be gone for ever. In that case, it
will not be an iceberg but 80,000 square kilometres of ice that will pose a threat to northern Europe.
According to forecasts by the fourth generation computer, which have always been accurate up to
the present, Spring 2070 will be the last one experienced by the Scandinavian countries. In twenty
years the territories of Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Baltic countries will disappear under a
sheet of ice several metres thick. The glacial steppe will swallow up Moscow and even reach the
Danube for six months of the year.

' This transformation will be lasting and will affect the whole planet. The course of the Gulf Stream
will be altered once and for all and will join the Guinea current, thus short circuiting the Northern
Hemisphere and giving free rein to the icy current coming from the Sea of Labrador. This means
that the port of New York will also be icebound for a good part of the year.

' Such a climatic change will have a serious effect on our agriculture and our transport, since the
entire North Sea will be frozen in winter. Some 60 million people will have lost everything and they
will have to be transferred elsewhere in the United States of Europe. Faced with such huge
problems, will we still have the effrontery to say: “foreigners out?”

' Should not the word nationalism make us blush with shame? What is a country worth when its
people have lost everything - their housing, their land and the tombs of their ancestors? Let us forget
all our petty internal quarrels while there is still time to save what can be saved. It is a question of
our own and our children's survival.

' We have, therefore, just twenty years to prevent an irreversible catastrophe. On the initiative of the
United States of Europe, and with the backing of North America, we have succeeded in obtaining,
through the Convention of Lima, a moratorium on all forest exploitation in the Amazon for a period
of twenty years. In exchange, the United States of Europe have undertaken to pay to countries party
to the agreement an indemnity of 700 billion dollars, not to mention the substantial payment to be
made by the North Americans, over a period of twenty years. Altogether we shall be paying the
modest sum of 14,000 billion dollars. This money will be used in large part for reforestation and the
restoration of the Amazonian ecosystem.

' This is a sacrifice which will involve an entire generation in Europe. This is the bill that has been
left us by the egotistical governments of the past century, who have dug the ecological graves
of their own children without the slightest compunction. This is a bill we will have to pay unless
we are prepared to commit collective glacial suicide.

' Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press, I see from the expressions on your faces that a sum such as this
is far beyond our capabilities. It is not a matter of tapping the predatory capitalists who are
incapable of repairing the damage they have inflicted upon us. Nor is it a matter of sending them to
the gallows, for this would not resolve the problem. The time has come, not for vengeance, but
for a great effort of solidarity and the concentration of all our strengths. This will require great
imagination.

' The only way forward is to separate ourselves completely from an economic system which is the
cause of all our ills. It is no longer a question of conquering new economic space, but of seeing to it
that habitable ecological space is capable of supporting us. Boldness and courage alone are not
enough. What we need is a real economic revolution.'

 'How do you envisage this economic revolution?'

' I recognize that the economic system of the ancien régime had reached the end of its tether. After
the collapse of communism which was, after all, only a form of State capitalism, we witnessed a
crisis and then a decline in that private capitalism which had gloried in the free market. This meant
control by a number of parasites enriching themselves at the expense of the immense majority. In
the end we owe all our woes to these parasites. Ineluctably we have to divorce ourselves from this
form of predatory capitalism if we do not wish to sink with it. The main criticism which I have
against it is that it does not reflect the economic activity of the people, but only that of a handful of
speculators who think of nothing but their profit.
' Throughout time, men have sought to standardize exchange of goods by some form of yardstick.
Now the economy is the only sector of human activity which has no objective, stable, and therefore
viable, unit of measure with which to harmonize exchange. This is why violence has always made
the difference. To maintain that money is the sole economic mechanism of demand and supply is an
idea that just doesn‘t hold water. We have to recognize that money has always been put to the fore
by politicians simply because money makes it possible to finance armies which protect those who
hold power. Without armies there would be no money. But the reverse is also true—no money, no
armies. The true basis of capitalism is violence, that is to say, the prolongation of war by other
means. The objective of our reform is therefore to put an end to this state of war by means of a
universal monetary standard, the same for all peoples, based on the energy involved in making a
product or a service. This a standard that no sword can ever increase or decrease.'

 'Does this mean that you are going to do away with money?'

' This is the version that has been put about by certain economic and political scandalmongers. I
hasten to add that it has nothing to do with the truth. Here we must establish a clear distinction
between the instrument of measure and the object being measured. Under predatory capitalism, the
instrument of measure is power and the object being measured is the product of the interplay of
forces. It follows then that this type of capitalism not only engenders a form of confrontation, which
is discreetly known as competition, but it also generates an interplay of forces which expresses itself
in the exploitation of men by men. In the end, predatory capitalism is a modem form of slavery.

' Instead of a world of confrontation and the concentration of riches in very few hands, we propose a
world of conciliation and sharing of resources to enable the community to survive. Money, of
course, will continue to exist, but it will only reflect economic value. In itself it will have no
intrinsic value, even if, on the day after the referendum, everyone continues to pay his or her
bills with the same banknotes. This point is crucial, since money can only be related to an
economic activity. It will no longer be possible to lend it against the payment of interest.

' What will gradually change - I emphasize the gradually - is the relationship between your
banknote and the basic economic value of money. From now on, money will reflect, not the
unstable relationship between supply and demand, but a real value. Economics will become an exact
science since the unitary value of a banknote will henceforth be unalterable. This is what I call
numerical capitalism. The huge advantage of this type of money is that it will be possible to make
viable long-term forecasts. The task of our administrators will be greatly simplified and they will be
free to fight more effectively against distress wherever it may occur throughout the world.

' Under numerical capitalism, man will no longer be the slave of money. Money will become a
neutral economic tool in the service of man. The main changes will take place in the Central Bank,
in its relationships with the banking organizations, rather than in the purse of the citizen. In the end,
this new type of capitalism will alter the structure of the State.

' As I have said, it was claimed that, until now, value was established when supply and demand
reached equilibrium. This would have been true had the various economic entities had the same
opportunities, if competition had been perfect and if the mechanisms of free exchange had really
functioned - in short, if homo œconomicus had behaved as theory demanded. Yet this has never
been the case, because money has always reflected the interplay of forces between master and slave
and between lord and vassal. It is untenable to claim that money which emerged from the free play
of supply and demand was a unit of measure. I defy anyone to demonstrate the scientific nature of
such a proposition, when we are daily faced with fluctuations and with inflation, often induced with
no other motive than to gain a speculative profit.
' I make no secret of it, predatory capitalism generates crime and cannot exist without crime. We
should not, therefore, be surprised that it is involved in the political game. To eliminate this form of
money means, therefore, to eliminate the politics of confrontation, which means quite simply the
elimination of politics, which becomes transformed into nothing other than balanced management
of the public affairs of the great universal family of which the human race consists - hence the
principle of universal brotherhood on which our economic doctrine is based.'


 'There are those who claim that this monetary reform will put an end to the cult of money?'

' When I hear certain politicians complaining of the rise of religions, sects and beliefs of all kinds, I
wonder whether they would not do better to ask themselves whether the cult of money is not
the worst of all possible devotions, especially when one has not got any. If money was spread
equally, everybody could get used to this kind of idolatry. The problem with money, under predatory
capitalism, is precisely that it is the result of other people's work. Whoever has only his two arms
with which to enrich himself will remain poor all his life, for riches have always, by definition,
been the product of theft.

' I believe that all men are born good by nature, since they have been created in God's image. In his
infinite goodness, God gave man knowledge, that is to say the capacity to understand the laws of
nature so as to benefit from them and to live in harmony with them. Men were happy when they did
not have money. This was paradise. It was only when man turned away from God and said, 'this
is my property', when he ceased to see in Creation a gift from the Creator, refused to receive
others in his house and at his table, began to accumulate riches and gave himself up to trade
and slavery to acquire money, that this earth became hell. Money is, in substance, an extension
of the Golden Calf, the object of worship of a profane religion. Let us recall that men constructed
the Golden Calf when they turned away from God. Man must choose between God and Mammon,
between Love and the Sword. The United States of Europe wants to be a land of love and
brotherhood and not a land of cupidity and idolatry.

' Humanity certainly has no future save in a revolution of love, the end result of which can only be
the elimination of money resulting from the interplay of force. Violence and money are the two
gates of the hell which the right of property and the exercise of violence, whether judicial or by
war, entail. Man-made laws have only ever been the product of victory of, or conquest by, the
strongest. Wanting to live in a region of universal brotherhood and without violence, means
renouncing ownership of others or of the product of their labour.

' Formerly, men had only their physical arms with which to fight. Today they fight with machines,
whether their battles be economic or real war. Man has finally become a slave of the machine.
Governments can only curb violence if they tame money and set to work for mankind and not
for machines. This is the objective of our revolution, which aims to modify the structure of the
economy and not men. All previous revolutions have failed because they aimed to change men.
We know that man is essentially perfect, since he is only man because God gave him the instrument
of knowledge the better to know Him and to sanctify Him in all things.

' The big mistake of all revolutions has been, up to now, to attack men and the physical right to
property instead of replacing money with a new monetary standard. The humanism which inspires
our policies places man above money. Its objective is to give mankind back its divinity, which
distinguishes him from animals, whilst abolishing that of money. The United States of Europe is not
a nation serving the Golden Calf but serving mankind as a whole, that is to say with no restrictions
or exceptions. In so doing we admit man's right to be able to do more than merely function, a
God-given right as opposed to the right to be an animal. The enormous difference between a
machine and man is that the latter is capable of loving, of recognizing in his neighbour a brother and
not a machine for getting richer or imposing the reign of iniquity by violence.

' I believe money to be the root of all evil and of the domination of Hell. Money is the Original Sin
of civilization. Moses broke the Tablets of the Law on the Golden Calf and put to the sword all
those who turned against him. Christ, however, gave us the example of love by his own
self-sacrifice. Law by the sword and Love by sacrifice marks the difference between the old and the
new Covenant. The solution, therefore, is not to give us laws to make money dominant over man,
but to create an area of brotherhood, of understanding and of solidarity by reducing money to what it
is - an economic yardstick of work accomplished, for which we give thanks to God that we are to
share the fruits together.

' The solution, therefore, does not lie in fighting against a method of sharing out money whilst still
acknowledging its primacy over man - as did atheist communism by sacrificing the proletariat to the
benefit of the potentates of the Party in whose hands was concentrated the power of money.
Numerical capitalism has banished, once and for all, the class struggle and the idolatry of
money, for without money there will be no classes.

' Our reform calls into question the very nature of money and, more precisely, its divine nature. This
we must abolish if we want to get away from a world made into a Hell, which places money above
all the other values and which, worse still, constitutes the sole foundation of all laws and all crimes.

' The day after the referendum, money will become a simple instrument of measure enabling
us to quantify the value of work, that is to say, an economic yardstick, no more, but no less. This
is where the money proposed by numerical capitalism differs from that of the Golden Calf of
predatory capitalism. If human relationships are freed from money, men will be able to see
themselves as brothers.

' I would like to draw your attention to the fact that economic circles close to the Vatican have
already condemned this economic reform which threatens their interests, proving their attachment to
the Golden Calf. I am beginning to think that, in the hands of political factions and financial
pressure groups, religion, whether Jewish, Catholic or Protestant, has not only become a heresy
serving the Golden Calf, it is above all the opium of the people in the service of predatory
capitalism, which has always consisted of tyrants whose only thought is to subjugate man by
subjecting him to the slavery of the machine.'


 'These are the words of Karl Marx. Is your revolution a Marxist one?'

' Marx had nothing against money, he was simply revolting against the exploitation of the proletariat
by the bourgeoisie. Thus he was against a product of the interplay of forces, but not against force
itself. After all, it was he who proclaimed the class struggle. This was as absurd as it was sterile
since the solution lies not in the concentration of power and confrontation, but in power- sharing
and conciliation in all things. I told you that the Party appropriated the monopoly of this interplay of
forces, with the results we all know. In fact, communism had nothing to offer in place of the money
of predatory capitalism, except capitalist power in the hands of a single, despotic party which
arrogated to itself full powers. It did nothing to change the nature of money. We must not confuse
the dictatorship of the proletariat with monetary reform in the service of democracy. A
member of the proletariat who becomes a capitalist is just another dictator exploiting the same
people. Wherever the communists seized power, they created a new bourgeoisie and the members of
the proletariat quickly became aware that the new people who were exploiting them were even more
perfidious and unjust than the old ones. I emphasize this point - we do not want a revolution
against men, we just want to change some things once and for all. The entire European people
will be allowed to vote, democratically, by means of the referendum, since what I am asking for is
not just a change of money, but of an entire civilization.

' Communism didn't really change anything in the mechanism of making money. All it did was to
create an immense bureaucracy to administer the market of poverty. The dictatorship of the
proletariat did not turn out to be very different from that of the bourgeoisie. It just surpassed it in
cruelty and in the inequalities it spawned. The only equality produced in the communist paradise
was the impoverishment of the masses, from which the potentates of the Party managed to detach
themselves. The planned economy collapsed because there were too many unproductive mouths to
feed, beginning with Party civil servants and the secret political police. The immediate result of
our reform will be simply a drastic reduction in the number of civil servants and of police. We
are going to privatize wherever we can to establish a democratic equilibrium in favour of free
competition. This will be competition with a human face, which will respect the rules of the game,
and, of course, under the control of the State. Our policies will be guided by a single slogan - As
little State control as possible, but enough to ensure respect for law and Federal democracy.

' Our reform has nothing to do with Marxist trickery. It starts with a simple observation - when you
take out a car, it is only common sense to make sure it is filled up with petrol.
                                                                    (outbursts of laughter in the hall)
' No. You shouldn't laugh, because this phrase contains a grain of truth that has escaped politicians
and all the economists of the past. What is obvious in the world of machines is less evident in the
world of human beings. The human machine, for example, has no right to be filled up, that is to
eat, until work is over. This is where the exploitation of man by men and machines begins. It is
this principle of the exploitation of man by man that numerical capitalism will abolish once and for
all, by giving food before work (that is, by supplying an enterprise with the necessary money to
invest, which will be transformed into value added by work).

' Predatory capitalism which is based on barbarism and slavery, sees human work as a cost
factor which is harmful to profit and which must be excluded from the economic process and
replaced by machines. It is better to exclude than to repress. If it is necessary to have recourse to
labour, predatory capitalism prefers those who receive a bare subsistence wage. Since the Trade
Unions are an obstacle to this policy, predatory capitalism puts them on the bread line by throwing
as many unemployed as possible on the street. Many of them join the F.E.P., (le Front pour
l'Europe des Patries, the Front for a Europe of Countries), which works specifically against the
Trade Unions whom they accuse of being the root of all evil. This explains why, in an economy in
which capitalism and fascism work hand in hand, profit has always been given priority over man,
whom predatory capitalism attempts to replace by machines. We saw the results of this policy in
2035, when the Federalists came to power - 46% of the work-force unemployed.

' This, however, was where predatory capitalism dug its own grave. One cannot increase profits to
finance capital interests and unemployment indefinitely without growth which will, one day, reach
its limits. Without such growth the process of the exploitation of man by man reaches breaking
point, beyond which economic wars begin, with the destruction they bring, in order to bring a
resurgence of growth.
' In our consumer society, tens of millions of unemployed will not be able to give new impetus to
the economy, since they can barely meet their most elementary needs. Neither will computers or
robots increase consumption - indeed, quite the contrary. It is no wonder that this system leads to
civil war, when the economy is unable to pay the unemployed. State bankruptcy and the end of
democracy are the logical consequence of predatory capitalism.

' 0ur monetary reform frees the notion of economic value from the mechanism of supply and
demand and of the interplay of forces by proposing an added value without growth, which
comes simply from the transformation of energy into work, that is to say in value. In obedience
to the laws of superfluity in economic life, it creates more added value than man can consume.
There will come a day when production, consumption and free time will come into equilibrium with
full employment and zero inflation. This optimum level of production of a system is also the
point at which both the economy and ecology are at their most efficient. '


 'If I have understood you aright, this new monetary standard is based principally on the value
  added by the transformation of energy by machines and not by men?'

' You are exactly right - and this point is fundamental. As I said, this added value consists above
all of the energy transformed by machines. Until now, this has not been taken into account at
its true value because it was evaluated at cost price rather than as the quantity of energy
transformed by work. Traditionally, plus value was limited only to human work added and this
was the basis for the calculation of its economic value on the market.

' The value added of predatory capitalism has always meant violence added. Its intention has always
been to deduct from the worker part of the fruit of his labour. Although the condition of the
worker has improved, this is only because of the growth induced by the industrial revolution.
Once that growth ceased, the plus value of capital from sources of finance and rents could only lead
to the impoverishment of the worker.

' Without growth, predatory capitalism is condemned either to sink without trace or to reduce
workers to slavery - until the day that they revolt. Predatory capitalism is always the cause of
social tensions, conflicts and wars. This is not the case with numerical capitalism, which
generates and consolidates social peace among peoples. And this should make it possible to
reduce the budgets of police forces and the Armed Forces.

' This is a point I must emphasize - under numerical capitalism, value added is obtained without
growth and without taking anything away from the workers' purchasing power. This is so for the
simple reason that the size of this value added amply rewards the sources of money and of rents.

' I would draw your attention to the fact that the value added resulting from the work of machines is
quantitative. It is therefore differs from that engendered by man's work, which is qualitative, and
affects the concept of the product. Some, perhaps, will see as mere quibbling the distinction I have
drawn between value added and plus-value. There are grounds for this since the energy value added
is much greater than the qualitative plus-value of man's work. This explains why numerical
capitalism is one hundred times more dynamic than the old form of capitalism which only
recognized plus-value in terms of an enhancement of quality in terms of increased quality at the
point of sale, that is to say, of fixing the price on the market.

' We should not here confuse economic plus-value with fiscal plus-value which is determined solely
in terms of the marketing of a product and not the effort required in its manufacture.
' The moment that a metric monetary standard quantifies this value added, the quality of this
standard, that is to say, its variability, plays no part. This was not the case in the days when the
American dollar served as a guideline for other currencies. This stability of the universal monetary
standard should greatly simplify commercial relations on a world scale.

' I cannot repeat often enough that the value of a product or a service will no longer be determined
by an interplay of forces, and therefore of violence, but solely on a neutral, objective, scientific basis
which is numerical and identical for all the peoples of the planet, regardless of race or religion. If
we, who are a civilized people, admit that all the peoples of the world are entitled to the sacred
rights we claim for ourselves—the Rights of Man and of the Citizen - then we are entitled to
believe that universal peace is at hand.

' The most serious weakness of predatory capitalism has always been the need to withdraw money
from the consumption circuit by drawing on savings in order to invest. We want to be logical about
this and to ensure that the economy is sufficiently capitalized before going to work. It will no longer
be necessary to draw on the value added before investing since the Central Bank will advance the
necessary funds to businesses so that they can operate. This means that the State, in return for the
usual guarantees, will guarantee the money invested as well as the value of banknotes issued. This
has never been the case before since money has always been eaten away by inflation. In the absence
of growth, predatory capitalism cannot guarantee both full employment and monetary stability
without inflation. This is the contradiction that our reform will eliminate.

' This was the gamble that was lost by those who introduced the Euro and who wanted to ally
growth and monetary stability. In imposing the rigorous Treaty of Maastricht they hoped to
achieve an artificial stability. The price they had to pay was increasing unemployment which
led to the rupture of democratic institutions and civil war.

' For years the authorities tried to hide the truth by a whole series of tricks intended to reduce the
numbers of unemployed by creating imaginary jobs for people who were nothing other than salaried
unemployed, providing no plus-value. In order to pay them, the State was obliged to become further
indebted by borrowing money which could only come from speculation and the plus-value of the
automatic machines that were, in turn, destroying their employment. Machines were therefore
generating unemployment and the indebtedness of Governments - an interminable vicious circle
whose only possible outcome was the bankruptcy of the State. This led to a growing concentration
of capital by business mergers, which, every time, led to corruption. Catastrophe was the inevitable
result.

' Our monetary reform envisages, in effect, two types of money—a virtual money reflecting
added value, which would be limited to the industry involved in the production of this value
added by work, and a national money, sound and solid, to be used by the consumer and
creating no plus-value. To be specific, I should state that our reform will affect only the
investment circuit and not the consumer.'




 'Your adversaries claim that your notion of added value is simply another version of the Marxist
  theory of plus-value. How does your theory differ from those of the Communists?'
' Either you have not understood what I have just said, or you have not read Karl Marx's Das
Kapital. Your remark is, however, pertinent and I thank you for it. Everybody knows that Karl Marx
never completed his work since the third tome of Das Kapital was compiled by his friend Friedrich
Engels from scanty notes. Karl Marx himself did not succeed in consolidating his theory of
plus-value before his death. Seen in this light the Marxist theory of plus-value never existed.

' Let us be logical about this. Since the aim of Marxism was to eliminate the scandalous exploitation
of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie, the Party was not going to do any such thing openly and Karl
Marx, a fortiori, could not announce, there and then, that he intended to do anything seen by his
companions as so perverse. Without this erosion of the wages of the proletariat, what was left of the
theory of plus-value? What the theoreticians of Marxism had conjured up out of what was left when
the Party had taken its share, that is to say - a few crumbs.

' Let us make no judgement on Karl Marx. Rather we should judge those who used his name to
undertake a patching up job which was more like monetary adventurism than economics. Let us say
that Karl Marx had no notions of political economy and nobody holds it against him that he
interpreted David Ricardo's theory in his own way, just as he did, additionally, the philosophy of
Ludwig Feuerbach in other circumstances. Like many people of his generation, who admired Hegel,
Karl Marx thought it was enough to turn a rickety theory around to put it right - thesis, antithesis,
synthesis - with absurdity at the end of the line. Or you could move backwards - one step forwards
and two steps back, as Lenin said. Well, it might have been two steps forwards and one step back.
Marxism never stopped advancing by retreating. What the Party gave with one hand it took back
with the other.

' Let us just say that Karl Marx in all this was a victim of the Hegelian dialectic. From the start, Karl
Marx was opposed to Pierre Joseph Proudhon. This was a pity because in I849, just 200 years ago,
the latter was urging, like us, the granting of free credit. For his plan to succeed, however, he lacked
the secret of our numerical added value, which is based, not on qualitative plus-value, but mainly on
the quantity of work added, expressed in kWh. It is true that he could not rid himself of the principle
of supply and demand - otherwise the way would have been open for the adoption of a numerical
valuation. His era simply was not ripe for this. Nevertheless, Pierre Joseph Proudhon was one of the
most visionary and the most fertile thinkers of his day.

' The so-called dialectic of history was invented by Friedrich Hegel and taken up by Karl Marx. It
was merely a philosophical extrapolation to which he gave an eschatological dimension - thus
betraying his religious upbringing and his biblical memories. We should not be surprised that the
Marxist notion of plus-value was the fruit of a fantasy worthy of a romantic, for Karl Marx was a
romantic, as were most Germans of his day. His bastard form of Hegelianism really changed
nothing. I think that this is the only fair criticism one can hold against him, as against a good many
other German economists of the ancien régime - an excess of romanticism and naivety. The
Germans have always been too romantic to think rationally.

' According to the Hegelian dialectic as revised by Karl Marx, and to which the latter
attributed miraculous powers that Hegel had never even dreamed of, it was enough to fight
evil for good to come out of it. Manichaeism on this scale is enough to blow the mind.
Translated into Trade Union terms today, this means that it is enough to come out on the
streets to create employment. We now know where this blunder has led us. Activism, whatever
else it may do, does not create jobs. However, if we are to believe the Marxists, Marxism is so
pure a doctrine that it is in principle always polluted by the mentality of the capitalist bourgeoisie...
                                                                      (Uproar and laughter in the hall)
'... and it has never been put into practice, so pure are its concepts. Let us admit that such purity is
not of this world. The notion of purity, in all its forms, betrays its idealistic cradle. For my part, I
am more touched by those who say that the heart has its reasons that reason knows not of.
What is at stake is nothing less than the notion of perfection, for this is the cause of all our ills. Let
us not forget that the Euro was invented by a German, a Bavarian known for his romanticism.

' To get round the criticism that communism offered no alternative to the plus-value obtained by the
exploitation of man by man, under which the proletariat ends up enslaved by the Party, German
Marxist theorists did not hesitate to speak of 'Stamokap', the monopolistic State capitalism, thus
bringing their true totalitarianism out into the open. This form of State capitalism, with its
implication that individuals are lost in the mass and that the rights of individual human beings are
subordinate to those of the Party, was nothing more than a form of totalitarianism which could only
lead to the national-socialist reaction. This was a form of socialism under a nationalist banner.

' Although the corporatism of Hitler's economic doctrine was less totalitarian than Bolshevik
collectivism it was much more successful. I should explain that its virtues were such that they were
taken up by capitalist America after the Second World War. This explains the closeness of the
friendships of the Waffen S.S. of Reinhardt Gehlen, Hitler's chief of the Secret Service and an
intimate friend of Dr. Frey, who in turn was a former ally of the French National Front and future
Editor of the National Zeitung of the D.D.R. and collaborated with the Americans after the war in
the struggle against Stalin. With the support of the Americans, Hitler's Secret Service became the
Secret Service of the BRD. and a supporter of N.A.T.O. The Nazi staff had merely changed
uniform. All of this is just to say that predatory capitalism has always been allied to fascist
economic doctrine. In West Germany this was with the blessing of the bishops, always looking for
anticommunist allies, who felt themselves threatened in some curious way by a socialist doctrine as
bastardized as it was repugnant.

' In fact, Marxist plus-value is only to be found to a rather hazy extent and only has substance in the
higher realms of the planned economy, in the upper branches of the Party. Let us say that this
plus-value has always been the prerogative of Civil Servants faithful to the old principle that 'charity
begins at home'.
                                                                                 (Laughter in the hall)

' Marxist plus-value has always been a nebulous concept that no one has ever seen or is likely to see.
In practice, it withers away and history has proved that the proletarian paradise is first and foremost
the realm of bureaucratic incompetence and despotism which has nothing to offer except slavery
and hardship and dictatorship by the incompetent and corrupt.

' Karl Marx totally underestimated not only the impact of machinery, but also the effects of
automation and information science. He should have been able to foresee their coming since his
illustrious ancestor, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, had already predicted them. Without the latter,
modern information science would be inconceivable. The grandfather of the computer was Leibniz.

' With regard to our numerical capitalism, added value is perfectly clear—it is the amount of
transformed energy added to a product to enrich it, that is to say the value added to satisfy a
need, whether this is mechanical or human energy, that is to say, the work of a human being.

' In the case of a manual worker, such as a baker who kneads dough to make bread, this equivalent
will be his physical work. If the worker is an intellectual, such as a computer expert or an ideas man
improving a method of production or a system, it will be the service rendered or his art.
' As soon as we convert any transformation of energy into kilowatt hours we undertake the inverse
process to that of Marxism. Aware only of the work of the proletariat, the work of machines is
assimilated to that of the workman. This is clearly a grave error.

' Marxism dug its own grave by inciting predatory capitalism to replace the worker by
machines. The biggest error Karl Marx committed was not to revolt against the working conditions
during his lifetime, but to combine the concept of the work of men and machines. This reduced the
everything to a class struggle for the ownership of machines by the proletariat. He should have
understood that even a socialist State could not equip itself with machinery without entering into
competition, in one way or another, with the work effort of the worker. Whether the capital be
owned by the State or by a capitalist oligarchy, this in no way reduces its original defects.

' Marxism has never revealed how the proletariat can escape from its condition except by
eliminating its oppressions. This explains why certain Marxist theoreticians invented the notion of
the permanent revolution. Any Marxist revolution could thus only lead to a new class struggle
between the Party and the people. This, at any rate, is what history showed us till the day arrived
when the proletariat, dreaming of a capitalist paradise, got rid of the Party.

' The class struggle was suicide for the working-class, who had forgotten that, one day, it would be
replaced by machines and that, with the totalitarian Party turned capitalist State, it would be doubly
enslaved - by the Party and the machines.

' From then on, employment could only be maintained by payment of wretched wages. Not being
able to buy anything, and with the economy unable to offer them anything either, this was the
Socialist economy of penury, for the plus-value could only be deducted from the purchasing power
of the worker. This was even harder to bear since a large part of this plus-value went to pay the
police, who were Party faithfuls.

' No. Our added value has nothing in common with the Marxist theory of plus-value. As far as
we are concerned, the share of added value due to the worker is always proportional to the
amount of work added, that is to say, transformed energy. It therefore includes the
mechanical value added which is far higher than that of the worker.

' The Marxist theory of plus-value becomes patently absurd once capitalism puts the worker in the
street and replaces him by automatic machines. The great disadvantage of predatory capitalism is
that it becomes alienated from the people - its only function is to repay the money the State has to
borrow from capitalists to pay ―benefits‖ to the unemployed. Seen in this light, predatory
capitalism is the enemy of the people and a parasite on the State.

' Herein lies the over-riding superiority of our proposals. In our system, the notion of value added
lies essentially in the difference between the energy needed to produce raw power, its cost
price, and the effective calorific power invested in the work added to produce a better
product.

' Since this added value is a gift of nature, which belongs to everybody, it is only right that it should
be shared out evenly between men and women to the benefit of all. Nobody, whether an
individual or the State, has the right to claim any entitlement to the ownership of energy, since
it comes to us from the sun.
' The equitable re-distribution of transformed energy is undoubtedly the source of all prosperity and
an economic driving force infinitely more powerful than predatory capitalism. This really bears no
relationship to Marxism or to any form of communism It is simply an exact science.

' Let us take, for example, the question of oil. What are the cost factors in this source of energy?
First of all we need geologists to identify sites and locate the oil. Then we need mineralogists to
examine the sample drillings. Finally, we need industrialists to supply the extraction equipment.
There remains the refining process and the transport and distribution to the points of consumption.
Considerable though this investment is, it is as nothing compared to the final calorific power of the
end product. For every 100 calories transformed, the energy required to produce the equivalent in
combustible material would be, at the most, of the order of five per cent. That is to say that the
gross value added would be 95 calories. In fact, the value added would be lower, since only a
fraction of this energy is converted into work. However, it would still be the equivalent of from 25
to 30% of the energy consumed.

' This means that the potential value added of numerical capitalism represents five times the
capital investment, or 500%. It is therefore at least one hundred times superior to the value
added of predatory capitalism, which emanates solely from the effort of the work force.

' This advantage will, perhaps, be even greater with transformed solar or wind power. The value
added by numerical capitalism is so great that it makes it possible to gain a profit from all forms of
non-polluting energy, which have hitherto been written off as unprofitable.

' This point is of primary importance for the future of our planet and for future generations. Sources
of energy, hitherto reputed to be uneconomic, will become profitable when total costs of production,
maintenance and decontamination are taken into account in the estimation of total price. No one will
be able to cheat because the norms used for evaluation of price will be scientific and universal and
therefore not falsifiable. If past governments had been obliged to include in their budgets the costs
involved in stocking and maintaining nuclear waste for twenty thousand years, there is every reason
to suppose that not a single nuclear power plant would have been seen the light of day. We now
have nuclear power stations over which we have perfect mastery and which produce no nuclear
waste. But is the game worth the candle? This is a question that each of us must answer within his
heart.

' Nevertheless, a thousand generations will have to pay for this mad luxury that our
civilization has allowed itself—that is, if there still is a human species on earth in 20,000 years
time, which is highly doubtful. At the present rate of ecological spoliation of our planet, the
human race has just two centuries to live - at least that is what Nostradamus said and there is every
reason to suppose that his view was accurate.

' With our new monetary standard, which will allow us to wallow in money without fear of inflation
and with full employment guaranteed, we shall be able to intensify measures for the protection of
the environment by favouring clean energy sources and reducing the waste of energy. This will also
have the effect of reducing pollution.'

 'Does this mean that gold will lose its value?'

' The purpose of money, as an economic instrument, is to serve mankind and not the reverse.
As the value of money will be based on the amount of work invested, the price of any merchandise
will depend simply upon its design. This can only reinforce the quality of human work, which in the
end will make all the difference on the market, for at a given price the design and production of an
article can differ greatly.

' Any growth will produce more money than the industrialized countries can spend. This should
enable them to help the developing countries generously. There can be no doubt that this is a
powerful driving force which opens up to those now living in distress the prospect of a rapid
improvement in their economy and, by the nature of things, of access to an acceptable standard of
living. This should also result in a decrease in population growth, since the poorest nations are those
with the highest fertility rates.

' Gold, which was once the cause of all wars and of all crime, will lose all monetary value according
to our theory. This I freely admit. But when one considers under what inhuman conditions gold is
produced, there is no shame in wanting to abandon it. The market value of gold will simply be that
of the work involved in producing it.

' What will count, in future, will be the energy transformed in obtaining a product and not its
rarity. If the chemical industry needs gold as a reactive catalyst, so much the better. If we need gold
for jewellery, that's fine. But apart from industrial or domestic applications, gold will become
superfluous. The more an economy transforms energy, the richer it will become. The wealth of a
country will no longer be measured in terms of its reserves of gold, but in its ability to work and to
consume. Which means that the more the people of a country work, the higher will be its standard
of living.

' One thing is certain. That is that industrialization is the source of all wealth. We already know this.
And it is in this context that the unproductive expenditures of the State constitute a serious
handicap, beginning with the police, justice and the army and not to mention all the politicians and
other useless drivellers.'
                                                                                     (laughter in the hall)

 'In other words, the poor countries of today will be the rich countries of tomorrow?'

' If they have fossil energy under their feet or sun over their heads and in their heads a few ideas,
yes, in so far as they are capable of transforming primary products into commercially viable ones.
That is, if they succeed in meeting a real market need. For numerical capitalism is a truly liberal
doctrine. It is here that technological advance and automation come into play. The great advantage
of our theory is that, by definition, value added belongs to everyone whilst energy is given to us by
nature - it is a gift of God.

' As soon as anyone takes the place of God and claims proprietary rights over what nature has
given us, we have to pay a price which is greater than the intrinsic value of the product - what
might be called violence added. This gave rise to the notion of property and to the class struggle.
Like it or not, the notion of money is linked to that of private ownership of natural wealth. For this
there is no justification except in the denial of God, that is, in the religion of the Anti-Christ.

' No Party claiming religious links could exploit man in any way whatever. Judging by the past
these so-called Christian parties were nothing more nor less than national-democrats or
liberal-democrats in disguise and whose sense of democracy was nothing more than that of profit.

' In a technologically advanced society, automation must necessarily result in a reduction in
working hours and in increased purchasing power—that is to say, progress. It should be noted
that, in the predatory capitalist system, based on slavery and barbarity, violence and crime, the
inverse is what happens.'

 'Trade Unionists claim that you want to introduce the twenty-hour week and retirement at fifty to
  be able to guarantee full employment?'
                                                                           (the President smiled)

' That is what they dream of. And I do not blame them. One thing is certain, as I have said, that
technological progress is meaningless unless it leads to a reduction in working hours, but at
the same salary. On this point, I am entirely in agreement with the Trade Unionists. This apart, any
reduction in working hours could only result from effective economic growth and not the reverse. It
is not enough to fold one's arms to create jobs. It is, however, unacceptable to demand a salary
increase or a reduction in hours at the same salary without an added value element. Our numerical
capitalism is, in this respect, far superior to predatory capitalism, since it offers the prospect of real
progress.

' Despite all its promises, predatory capitalism has not led to a substantial reduction in working
hours, for the simple reason that the machines act as competitors to workers and extract low salaries
for them, thus imposing low purchasing power. Machines never go on strike and are rarely sick.
When they are worn out, they are replaced, and they do not claim pensions either. So it is not
surprising that predatory capitalists do the same with old people, from whom they want to take their
savings by confiscating their pensions.

' The financing of the unemployment of retired people is only made possible by the increasing
indebtedness of the people as a whole, that is to say the State, towards the financiers, who are
always predatory capitalists, and whose blackmail is very close to euthanasia, to the genocide of old
people

          (the President, who had raised his tone in hammering out these words, received a round of
                                                                                         applause).

' The share of capital tied up in machines is not available to the work force to bring pressure to bear
on the employer. In the end, under predatory capitalism, machines reinforce the position of the
employer and automation renders strikes virtually impossible, particularly when men are wholly
replaced by artificial intelligence. It is certainly a fact that fear of unemployment is the prime
weapon against strikes and the legitimate raising of salaries. In short, predatory capitalism is no
more than an association of evil - doers.

' Everything changes when, under the new system, machines strengthen the arm of the worker
as well as of the boss. Thanks to the dynamism of our system of value added by work, and to the
fact that this must be totally redistributed between the various economic entities involved,
automation becomes a source of wealth to both the work force and the community, rather than the
cause of their ills. To create a workers paradise is to offer the worker the possibility of
devoting half his time to his family, to cultural activities and to pleasure. But, I repeat, to
achieve this, wealth has to be shared amongst all the economic players. This, I admit, is an
eminently political choice which will determine the nature of social relationships within the heart of
a nation. I announced a revolution. This is a revolution which will resolve our problems.

' It is not just by chance that, under the predatory capitalist system the family life of the worker is
virtually non-existent. What predatory capitalism has always wanted is slaves and not men. As
soon as the latter start to think and claim their share of the value added, they are replaced by robots,
i.e. real slaves. In our advanced technological society, man has the choice of only two alternatives -
slavery or unemployment. We Federalists, who claim to be part of humanity as a whole, say on the
contrary that the worker must earn enough in the morning to be able to spend his money in the
afternoon. In so doing, we are creating new employment in the leisure sector. To answer your
question, the worker will have his working week of twenty hours when we have the means to
achieve it. We will do our utmost to ensure that this happens in the shortest possible time.

' What is the point of working if we haven't got time to spend our money? Common sense requires
that the consumer has time to spend his or her money. This is why my Government intends to
promote culture, leisure-time activities, sports and private consumption. This will be good for social
peace and will encourage a reduced crime rate. I would like to point out here that predatory
capitalism has produced more delinquents than any other system. We shall put a stop to
criminality when social harmony has been re-established between the State and society by
means of an economy that achieves a just redistribution of the value added to wealth.

' The first men in this earthly paradise were good and just, since they had no notion of property, and
thus of the slavery of profit. I repeat, paradise on earth only exists at the gates of the hell of
property and money, which begins with the right to appropriate for oneself the lives, the
liberty and the product of the work of others. The original sin was to open the gates of the hell of
property to know what lay behind it. That was the how slavery, wars and human distress began.'

 'In the end, what you want is a planned society in which value added will be shared out, in
  advance, in accordance with a plan?'

' Not at all. As I have already said, under the predatory capitalist system there is no objective,
scientific relationship between the work invested and the saleable value of a product. It is all a
matter of politics, on the one hand, and monetary speculation on the other, the two aspects being
closely linked. Under the new system, the intrinsic value of a product or a service is, by
definition, a measurable amount which faithfully reflects the amount of work invested. It is
expressed, as I have said, in kilowatt hours of energy or, if you prefer, in units of economic
equivalents. The economy would be solely regulated by the interplay of supply and demand. which
will determine the nature of the goods and services offered to consumers. There will be no public
planning organization. 'There will be no pay for superfluous planners. If a five year plan exists, it
will be more like a geographical map of our economy so that, in the general interest, we shall know
where we are going.

' I don't really see what the State could plan here. I grant you that, as surety and guarantor the
State will have an increasingly important role to play in the future. It could, for example, guarantee
risk capital and, above all, help young people to get a start in life. The moment that a society sees
itself as a family, the State is obliged to assume its paternal role, looking after the interests of its
children and making sure that replacements are assured. It should be noted that, today, predatory
capitalism condemns youth to unemployment, drugs and suicide, to crime and to revolt. I
would remind you that the Front for the Europe of Countries and the 'Gramigna' have succeeded in
enrolling hundreds of thousands of mercenaries in their paramilitary militias, posing a serious threat
to our internal security. If we have succeeded in avoiding the worst, this is due to the quality of our
secret services.
                         (there was a moments silence. All the journalists remembering perfectly well
                          the 4,000 men who died during the commando raid against the 'Gramigna'.)

' The fact of introducing a unit of measure in no way implies any planning. Take for example the
signs on motorways. They are usually there to announce an exit or a petrol station. If you add the
distance in kilometres, I cannot see that this would cause you to stop, unless, of course, you want to
fill up.
                                                                                  (laughter in the hall)

' You fill up solely depending on your needs, and it will always be so - whether or not there is a
milestone. Your needs are visible on your mileage recorder and when your tank is running dry. The
mileage recorder changes in accordance with the distance you have covered. There is free choice for
each one of us. It is not for the public authorities to tell people what they should do. A planned
society is not on the cards for tomorrow, especially while we hold the reins of power.'

 'How do you intend to measure the contribution of human manpower in terms of energy?'

' As soon as we postulate that the amount of energy needed for the production is the same, whether
it be a machine or a manual worker, it becomes possible for us to determine a unit of work as being
the energy necessary, for example, to lift a mass weighing ten kilograms for one hour at a speed of
one metre per second at sea level. The energy consumed by an electric motor is measured in
kilowatt hours and can be read on the meter. One can, of course, round off these quantities. It is all a
matter of convention. When an unskilled manual worker (the basic worker) has worked in this
way for one hour, he will be considered to have added to the merchandise produced one Unit
of Labour (UL).

' This constitutes the basis of the energy equivalent of work, whether it be human or mechanical, on
which the Universal Monetary Standard is based. In English this is known as the Equivalent
Currency Unit (ECU).

' If we agree that an engineer is no more than an enhanced worker, in whom society has invested a
training period, which is expressed here by an enhancement coefficient, n, the net result is that the
unit of work of the engineer will be that of the basic worker multiplied by this coefficient. You
then have a universal system of evaluation into which to translate kilowatt hours of transformed
energy, or, if you prefer, in Economic Energy Equivalents, which can simply be expressed by the
letter E.

' The value of an engineer will therefore be E = n x UL, n being the coefficient of an engineer's
enhancement and UL the unit of work expressed in kWh. All economic activity will thus be
expressed in kWh of added value.

' The value added to a product is thus always identical to the work added. The proportion of energy
will be very high in leading edge technology products. Since all these values can be added one to
another, the calculation of the cost price of a product will be extremely simple and, above all, easily
controllable. This system also offers a reliable basis for comparison. The consumer will very
quickly become aware of the value of various products and free competition should rapidly lead to
stability of prices. Huge profits and inflation will become impossible.'

 'Does this mean that sportsmen, artists and intellectuals will die of hunger?'

' I yield to no one in my admiration for the achievements of our sportsmen, but I wonder whether the
pursuit of records justifies their payment. It is to be regretted that sport should have become a
sub-product of predatory capitalism in the service of a handful of media magnates. In my opinion, a
good performance would be better rewarded by long-term competition contracts - with clubs or with
the State - which would enable our sportsmen to live decently without ruining their health. I do not
understand why society should create unparalleled champions only to indemnify high quality
invalids. I fear that sportsmen seeking records and astronomical wages are the losers. Do you not
find it curious that no one talks about them when they are seated in wheelchairs or have had their
brains destroyed by boxing.

' What about artists? ‘ This is one of the favourite comments of our detractors: 'You want to ruin our
artists and get them eating dry bread.' This criticism does not deal with the reality of the situation. I
would like to point out that most great artists lived and died in poverty - to quote but one, Van
Gogh. Not all artists are Picassos - far from it. The question therefore is simple: is there a right to
posthumous speculation on works of art, the answer is a resolute no. When predatory capitalists talk
of artists and refer to their liberty, it is primarily of their own profit they are thinking. Speculative
plus-value on works of art is plain theft at the expense of the community.

' When a gifted artist leaves as his inheritance works of great value, common sense dictates that they
should become part of the universal heritage and be accessible to the community. Their true value
lies in being admired by many people rather than being locked up in bank vaults. If, however, an
artist is successful and can sell his works to a publisher who can reproduce and distribute them in
large numbers, or exploit them for advertising, so much the better for the artist who benefits from
his works during his lifetime. Our motto is: Fine work deserves a good reward.

' But please do not come to the defence of vultures of all kinds who think only of enriching
themselves at the expense of the dead. I reiterate, work is, and must remain, the sole criterion of
any economic appreciation. This means that rarity or shortage of a commodity will have no
role to play in price fixing. This implies that, in the future, the economy will have to create
compensatory funds of all kinds in order to iron out fluctuations in production, rather as shock
absorbers absorb shocks.

'' To answer your question clearly, any posthumous speculation on works of art will be
forbidden by law, for the simple reason that art is sacred. The spiritual or artistic heritage of a
human being, like his corpse, cannot be the object of any kind of trading.

'' Believe me, any artist who is truly qualified will have no difficulty in finding work, since it will
always be art which makes the difference between a product that pleases the consumer and one
which does not. Our monetary reform seeks nothing other than to render man his dignity. In this
sense numerical capitalism has a human face - it is humanist.'

 'So nationalizing works of art means the abolition of the right of inheritance?'

' Let us not exaggerate. If the inheritor finds himself forbidden to sell a work of art acquired by the
laws of succession, he nevertheless keeps his status as owner of it. He can, therefore, reproduce it
and commercialize it as he wishes. The right of exploitation remains intact and can be transmitted
without limitation, even if the work inherited is entrusted to a museum. The rights of inheritance
attaching to products derived from a work of art or of an invention remain intact. This is of
particular importance with regard to author's rights, whether the property be intellectual or
industrial.

' What is true for an artist or an engineer is true for all those activities ennobled by the mind,
whether by a scientist, a writer or an artisan. Our monetary reform aims to reward work at its true
value and the principle of equality among citizens remains the same. The State has no intention of
appropriating to itself anything that does not belong to it.'
 If I have understood the new system correctly, all citizens will be equal but qualified workers and
  gifted people will be more equal than the rest?'

' Not at all. All qualified workers will have to give back to the State part of the supplementary
payment they receive for their qualification. This contribution will be used to pay for the training of
the young. The money will be recovered at the tax level by means of a tax recovered at source.
Whoever has a paid, independent activity, whether he be artist, writer or artisan, will have to declare
it to the local Chamber of Commerce.

' The gap between salaries will be reduced to a minimum, so as to allow a satisfactory spread of
wealth and purchasing power. Social and family charges should also be taken into account. I
propose, for example, that housewives should receive an allowance, since bearing a child and
educating it is work that deserves payment. This was not the case under the predatory capitalist
system. Man was merely an animal to be exploited for the benefit of the owner. Mothers had no
other value than to bring children into the world. Seen from this angle, predatory capitalism is
the enemy of the family, the woman and the child.

' It will be noted that the capitalist countries with the best results on the stock exchanges of the
world generally had low birth rates. This is why it is only equitable that each mother, whether
married or not, should be entitled to a temporary housewife's allowance. Why should the rich be the
only ones able to guarantee economic dignity to a mother and her offspring.

' The sight of millions of excluded and homeless people gives pause for thought. When a citizen
ceases to be profitable, or has lost his or her job to a machine, he or she is thrown on the garbage
heap of society. This is how the Rights of Man operate in the 'paradise' of predatory
capitalism—which for many is simply the hell of exclusion and alienation.

' As I have already said, there will be a whole range of compensatory funds and guarantees to iron
out fluctuations in the market. Our motto is very simple: happiness for all and to each his
measure. Thus we are far from egalitarianism. We have no intention of changing mankind.'

 'Will the ECU allow us to put an end to the scandalous subsidies which the taxpayer pays to
  farmers to do nothing?'

' I beg you to moderate your language. Agriculture is the mother of every nation. It nourishes us
and guarantees us our existence and we owe it respect. It takes only three weeks to recycle the
capital invested in a pair of shoes, but it takes three years before a calf becomes a bullock. Hail can
destroy a crop. If there is an agricultural crisis, it is because industrial capitalism has imposed laws
which have nothing to do with the laws of nature. It is quite normal, therefore, that it should pay an
indemnity. The cows in our villages no longer bring Golden Calves into this world, but just animals
that have to be fed for many years. The earth cannot be fertilized by speculation on the Stock
Exchange, but only with the sweat of one's brow.

' I recall that under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) the taxpayer was penalized by being
forced to pay farmers to leave land fallow, whilst hundreds of thousands of people were dying of
hunger in this world. This was a shameful period which speaks worlds of the people into whose
hands were entrusted the destiny of the peoples of Europe. This was one of the most shameful
practices of predatory capitalism. It also proves that the technocrats of the European Community
were both inept and corrupt.
' The ECU completely modifies the situation, since agricultural products are henceforth financed
and paid at their correct value. If we offer farmers the just reward of their labour, they will no
longer need subsidies. When a State is obliged to give subsidies to a trade, whatever it might be,
just to exist, then that trade is underpaid.

' If, instead of paying farmers to prevent them cultivating their land, we had paid them the true value
of their product, these same subsidies could have put food into millions of hungry mouths. It should
be noted in passing that many of these farmers, bitter and disgusted, are joining the ranks of the
extreme right.

' In the end, just remuneration not only relieves the community of useless burdens but also brings
the economy back into equilibrium whilst guaranteeing full employment. This also means fewer
taxes for the taxpayer.'

 'People are saying that it is your intention to eliminate taxes?'

' This is just another myth. Didn‘t I tell you that taxes will be paid at source?

' Anyone who studies what happened in the twentieth century will know that fiscal fraud was only
possible because governments wanted it that way, so that the rich could fill their pockets at the
expense of the people who had to cover budget deficits. From the start, there was connivance
between defrauders and governments, because there were the same swindlers behind them. My
government believes fiscal fraud should be made impossible and intends to see that it is made
impossible. The simplest means of achieving this goal is to advance the money due in the form of a
virtual loan to companies from whom tax can be claimed. I will explain.

' To simplify the procedure and to make any fiscal fraud impossible, taxes will henceforth be
deducted at source, that is to say, on the bank account of the company. Small companies
without technical equipment, such as companies that provide services, will pay little. Companies
that are highly mechanized and automated will, however bear the biggest burden. Take, for
example, an engineering design bureau. It has to invest in a considerable infrastructure and a
considerable amount of work to develop a product. We are not going to penalize it for having
designed and developed a product worth producing. It is natural and fair, therefore, that it should be
the industrialist reproducing this product and producing it on the production line who bears the
major part of the tax due, since it is he who is transforming the major part of the energy. The State
will recuperate the fiscal debt of the company via the Central Bank, fed by regional and local banks,
who will in turn raise the tax from the enterprise automatically. At the end of the accounting year
companies will have to adjust their fiscal payments in proportion to the results of the past year.'

 'Does this mean that the State will advance to companies the money paid in taxes?'

' In a manner of speaking, yes. At the beginning of the accounting year the State will agree a 'fiscal
loan' based on the results of the previous accounting year, or the forecast results if it is a new
company. The State will feed the 'horse' (the company) before making it work. This is so that it can
pay back the confidence the State has shown in the company through its bank loan. It is quite
normal that the State should advance the value added by the company, which will, by its
work, have increased the value of the product, so that it can repay the State, with the money
going, in the end, to consumption. I should point out that under predatory capitalism this worked
in the inverse sense. First it took the money from the company and then from the consumer, thus
spiking both investment and consumption.
' The banking operation will be automatic, with the bank acting as the partner of the company.
This will have the result that the State will have available to it the funds needed to operate its
institutions. The money debited against the company's account - provided that it is enhanced by the
work of the company - will, in the end, be the money that has entered the cycle of consumption.

' This 'virtual' money advanced by the State is nothing other than the potential value added in the
energy or capacity to work. It exists in the same way that a chick exists within the egg - it can only
be hatched out by means of work. The State, as it were, buys in advance from the company the value
added, which legally belongs to it, in just the same way that one buys bread from the baker before
eating it. For this added value will be that which is transformed by work, that is to say, the value
which is marketable, which is, in the end, paid to the worker in the form of money to be used for
consumption. Thus the money cycle will be completed without the State having to become indebted.

' The fiscal debt will thus be repaid to the State in the form of automatic bank levies. Should trade
be negative, a re-adjustment during, or at the end of the financial year would, of course, be possible.
The effect of this will be that the State will no longer have to borrow money from the banks
nor to ruin itself by paying interest to cover its expenses. It goes without saying that every
company will have an interest in limiting its fiscal debt and do everything in its power to keep its
books well. Fiscal controls will be reduced to checking that the accounts of each company are
properly kept, but these will have to be more numerous and more meticulously kept than in the past.

' This system simplifies tax system to the extreme and makes fraud impossible, since tax will be
raised, not on profits, but on value added - which will be easy to control - which will be taken at
source by taxation. In fact, the only tax will be V.A.T., for which different rates will be applicable
according to the categories of activity.

' Generally speaking, it can be said that a large majority of citizens will no longer pay taxes, or only
indirectly. This will enable the State to dispense with the services of thousands of civil servants,
who are as useless as they are costly. The same will apply at every level of public administration.
We are going to slim down the Mammoth and reduce our administrative structures to the benefit of
State finances.

' 'This does not mean, however, that civil servants will be out of work. They will be semi-privatized.
The moment that a publicly-owned company produces a product or a service, it will be subject to
the same market rules as a private company. The difference will only be that the State will provide
the capital or the bank guarantees. Their employment will be assured but they will no longer be paid
to do nothing. The value of their services will be calculated on the same basis as that of anybody in
the private sector. The less these services cost, the more efficient they will be and the better will be
the state of the national economy. Public enterprises will no longer be sheltered from competition
and they will have to think about productivity and rationalisation, just like everybody else.'

 'Which means that profitability will be favoured to the detriment of quality?'

' This kind of language means only that the Union mentality of the past is still alive and well. The
fact that privileges accorded without consideration for other people's rights have been abolished and
the use of modem, more efficient management methods, above all, the institution of an ISO standard
and systematic quality controls for the civil service, does not mean that quality will be lowered -
quite the contrary. What many civil servants fear is the introduction of quality control of certain
public services. If controls were better carried out there would, for example, be fewer accidents on
the railways.'
 'How could you combine rationalisation and full employment?'

' Rationalisation does not imply the elimination of jobs. If it offers new possibilities it is a source of
enrichment. First of all it implies optimization of all the systems and processes of production and
consumption, whether it involves a product or a service. Rationalisation will mean, for example,
avoiding any wasted energy, since all energy use will inevitably be reflected in prices. The
State will present its tax bills in proportion to added value, that is to say transformed energy.
If only for that reason, the employer will no longer be able to cheat on prices. It will be impossible,
therefore, to create jobs if resources are being wasted. This implies better qualified personnel, the
harmonization of structures, follow-up of a product and quality control. Then comes the adequacy of
services in relation to needs. It is not for the State to dictate that citizens must adapt to
administrative structures, but the reverse. The disadvantage of most public services is their rigidity
and clumsiness and their inability to adapt to the needs of the public and of the market. I repeat, in
the future the public services will be at the service of the citizen and not the reverse. Since machines
cannot compete with the work of humans and since the State will be, in the end, the owner of a large
part of the value added, and thus of work added, the United States of Europe will be able to
inscribe a guarantee of the right to work in its Constitution, something no former capitalist State
has been able to do.

' Rationalisation creates jobs so long as the basic calculation of the work of machines and the work
of humans is identical. The aim of any rationalisation is not to replace men by machines, but to give
machines work that would be harmful to men or which men cannot do for various reasons.

'I shall quote you a specific example of rationalisation. Take, for example, a yoghurt. Everybody
eats it but no one has yet asked how the production of yoghurt could be rationalized. When you
think that a good dozen ingredients are needed to make a yoghurt and that each yoghurt made has to
be transported, up to twenty miles for a single yoghurt, you will realize how it is possible to
rationalize - by reducing the energy used in its transportation, which will be a major factor in
its cost of production. With the ECU, rationalisation will not affect men but machines. It seems to
me wiser to concentrate in the same area a number of small or medium-sized companies, which
create jobs, rather than to construct giant industrial complexes that are completely automated,
destroy jobs and are energy hungry. Not to be forgotten is the massive pollution which results from
industrial concentration and the necessary road transport which is harmful to the environment.

'Increasing the volume of stock held on site, for example, is another means of rationalisation which
is to the advantage of a diversified industry when you have industrial complexes concentrated in a
single region. Not only will transport routes be reduced, but larger stocks can be carried in larger
containers. This should reduce costs by reducing the transport required.

'Seen from this angle, rationalisation can be the opposite of automation. Reform will thus
trigger a restructuring of the whole of industry, with a view to reducing transport to the
minimum, which means at the same time a reduction in the amount of pollution, whilst conserving
our reserves of fossil fuels. What right have we to deprive future generations of what God has given
them?

' In the same order of ideas, we should envisage closer co-operation between teaching, research,
public management, industrial production, trade and consumption, in short, between all the active
entities involved. To rationalize is above all to think 'optimization', the improvement of the
functioning of a structure with a view to reducing waste and costs at all levels. Rationalisation
creates employment when it is aimed at improvement of the quality of our lives, with the goal of
arriving at a balance between the time devoted to work and the time devoted to leisure activities and
cultural pursuits. This is possible the moment that the common good replaces the hunger for private
profit which should never be the aim of all activity. The private and public sectors have to learnt
that they are complementary and must share tasks in the interest of the nation.

' To sum up, I would say that the boundaries between the public and the private sectors will become
blurred. The State is going to become closer to the citizen who will have to assume his
responsibilities at the heart of the community, with the sum of private interests balanced by
collective obligations in a spirit of universal brotherhood and solidarity.'

 'How will the consumer’s money be calculated in relation to the new monetary standard?'

' I would first like to make it clear that the introduction of a unit of measure in itself does not make
the thing measured disappear. In this case it is the economic activity of a nation and support of its
value by banks. A neutral system of measurement of the work invested in a product has no effect on
Government policy, which is always budgetary in nature. Let us not then mix up the political world
and the world of banking.

' There is, on the one hand, the product of labour and, on the other, the use which is made of it by
the government. At all events, there is no question of eliminating the hard cash of the consumer.
The latter will know nothing of these changes, except that prices will be stable, inflation will
disappear and full employment will be guaranteed by the Constitution.

' Any increase in the Gross Domestic Product will have an immediate impact on the standard of
living and on the length of working hours, which should diminish. Automation, well managed,
should enable purchasing power to be maintained for fewer hours of work whilst maintaining the
guarantee of full employment. This, after all, is the aim of technical progress.

' Broadly speaking, the money standard will suffice to complete transactions between the State
and the banks and between banks and enterprises, that is at the production level. All
international trading will be in ECU.

' The policies of the Government will be limited to redistribution of value added, in accordance with
defined rules of sharing. Consumers' money will be confined to the consumption sector.

' If the money committed to production is virtual money, that of the consumption sector is
real. Investing money comes down, in the end, to investing in a promise to produce. It is quite
natural that the money devoted to this operation should be virtual. That is to say that the State, via
the banks, will provide enterprises with the means needed to finance investments on the basis of
guarantees supplied by the latter. The State will provide paper backing to an enterprise which will,
by its work, transform it into money. The product of this work will, it is true, be re-distributed
among the various economic entities involved, including the State. The political side of things will
be limited to defining the share going to the State to ensure the proper functioning of its
institutions.

' It goes without saying that the company will have to have a running budget. The share of money
that is transformed into real money, i. e., the money that will leave the production circuit to be used
for consumption, will be that paid to employees in the form of salaries. For a short time, invoicing
between companies will be transformed into real money simply for purposes of accounting. All
transactions between companies will be in terms of ECU, since they will be transmitted by
electronic means. They will take place in a closed circuit between banks and companies, with the
consumption sector being in no way concerned.

' The consumer's money, which will be that circulating in the open air of the consumption sector,
will reflect the policies of a government and not only the product of a national economy. In our
context it will play only a secondary role and will have no effect on the national economy.

' If a Government lives beyond its means, paying too many civil servants, for example, it is clear
that its money will visibly collapse as compared to that of other nations, but this will only concern
consumers who will have to work harder to obtain the same product or service. At this level, the
impact of national monetary policy is undoubtedly important. If the value of consumer's money is
depreciated, nobody will be able to camouflage this loss by means of political manoeuvring or
speculation on the Stock Exchange, since the degree of depreciation will be expressed as a function
of the new standard of reference and not of the Stock Exchange - the paradise of monetary fraud and
of those who live on the work of others.

' Suffice it to say that on D-day, when the new system enters into force, a dollar will be the
equivalent of a certain number of units of work, that is to say of transformed energy expressed in
ECU. You will have, as I have said, the value in ECU and, by extension, in hard cash expressed in
ECU, the universal monetary unit which we will try to get adopted by all countries of the world by
means of a Charter. Once adopted, this index will be fixed and can only change if the monetary
mass of the consumer and the economic activity, expressed in ECU, changes. If this relationship is
constant, then public affairs are well run. If not, then the Government will have to change its
policies. This indicator will thus be a guarantee of monetary stability and a basis of comparison
between currencies.

' If necessary, the richer countries, through the medium of the world bank, should guarantee, through
the central banks of the developing countries, the convertibility of their national currency. From that
time all the currencies of the world will convertible between themselves in proportion to the same
unit, which will be unalterable for all time, the ECU. All values in international transactions will be
expressed in ECU.

' The American dollar will cease to be the leading currency, although it will continue to exist as the
consumer currency in the United States. Nobody will be able to use the American dollar at the level
of international banking operations, unless it happens to be a country in the dollar zone. If it is used
within the framework of international transactions, it will be expressed in ECU like any other
money.

' Prices on price labels will always be accompanied by the equivalent in ECU so that the consumer
has a notion of how well his own money is doing.'

 'Does this mean that there will no longer be fluctuations between currencies?'

' This will not be the case. It would be too much to ask. The objective of a currency is not to restrict
liberty but to protect it. To measure a currency in terms of the ECU is one thing, to manage a
currency , that is to say the affairs of a country, is another matter altogether. The relationship
between the ECU and a national currency will be neither fixed nor stable. The latter will reflect the
good management of public affairs and will simplify the relations between the various entities
involved. However, the fact that a currency loses its value in no way affects the validity of
transactions effected in ECU.
' As I have said, any depreciation of money destined for consumption will be the result of an internal
policy that will effect only consumers in the country concerned.

' Theoretically, a government should not put more banknotes into circulation than its
economy produces units of work. But it is to be feared that they will do so anyway in order to
allow the privileged to twiddle their thumbs or by paying them exorbitant salaries. In this way we
shall see fluctuations in the value of currencies linked to violations of the rules of good
management. It will be up to the electorate and the media to keep an eye on those elected. One
thing is certain, politicians will have a much tougher time of it than in the past, as the control
commissions will be following their every move.

' The balance of payments in commercial dealings will have an important role to play. If a nation
imports more than it exports its internal currency will also depreciate because it will have to
compensate for its deficit in ECU by printing money, for the simple reason that this is what
governments always do. You see, the introduction of the ECU will not put an end to the weaknesses
of our politicians.
                                                                             (Laughter in the hall)

' But their errors will in no way modify the ECU. It will be up to the citizens to keep an eye on them.
The ECU gives the citizen for the first time a means of direct intervention the better to control the
politicians - a power he did not have before. If democracy finally foundered, under predatory
capitalism, it was because the political parties thought of nothing other than filling their pockets.
When the extreme right came to power, they did the same on a massive scale and using the
totalitarian powers they had given themselves.

' Cheating on monetary policy will become all but impossible. When a government commits errors
of management, it will no longer be able to hide them. Our aim is not, therefore, to change men, but
to quantify their activities as a function of a scientific value that is both universal and unalterable
and thus integrate the economy into the metric system. This is why our monetary reform is neutral
and threatens nobody except the bad guys.


'Given, however, that gross domestic product will be expressed in ECU and not only in the national
currency, the greater the amount of currency in circulation, in proportion to GDP, the more the
national currency will be reduced in relative value. There is nothing the Government of a country
can do about this. It should be noted here that the World Bank will have the right to examine the
monetary management of States. We are moving inexorably towards a world economy and this can
only facilitate exchanges in a planetary market without frontiers. This should make it possible to
equalize standards of living between all peoples. Let us have no illusions, the people will be eager to
entrust power to competent, honest men and women, so that tricksters and charlatans of all kinds
will not be able to cause harm.

' There can be no doubt that this will be an important factor in the reduction of conflict. This is
where universal brotherhood comes into its own. This reform will make it possible to compare the
management of States on an objective basis. It will be up to the citizen to watch out for wise
judgement in public affairs and to recognize that the State is not a milch cow that never runs dry.
The citizen, in return, can only expect from the State what he is prepared to put into the common
fund to be re- distributed.
'This will be the only thing at stake in political and democratic life, which will gain in quality and
credibility. In a climate such as this, it will be easy to guarantee full employment without the State
having to burden itself with debt to a usurer.

' It is a pity that John Maynard Keynes did not think of this. It would, perhaps, have persuaded him
that it was not enough for the State to put itself into debt so as to make the economy work and to
guarantee full employment. His theory postulated rapid growth without which the indebtedness of
the State would have had the opposite effect to that which he was seeking. Keynesianism is thus a
theory that only works in time of growth, in the aftermath of a war, for example. Hence the
necessity of going to war in order to maintain a certain level of growth. Milton Friedman, that great
naïve, thought he had noticed that an increase in the monetary mass always preceded growth. If
there was no growth, this increase in monetary mass always caused inflation. To remedy this,
interest rates had to be increased, that is to say, causing a slow down in growth by acting on
purchasing power. The next step was to conclude that the most sure method of financing was to
reduce the monetary mass by reducing salaries to increase profits and thus the monetary mass
available for investment which was to supposed to trigger growth. So the capitalists put the work
force out of employment and replaced them by machines. But in so doing, they reduced
consumption which halted growth and the whole vicious circle started all over again.

' The best investment of all put the government in a situation in which it had to increase its
indebtedness to finance unemployment, until the day came when the State found itself in the
position that it was no longer able to pay. This was when the extreme right came to power to start
growth up again by preaching a policy of war. This led to a civil war which demolished everything
and thanks to which slight growth was restored. But this new growth benefited primarily the
capitalists, who, once again, invested in machines and unemployment never fell below 40%. We
were on the eve of the great flood.

' See the dilemma as you may, the traditional theories have always been incapable of getting out of
this contradiction. Whether we are talking of John Maynard Keynes, or of Milton Friedman, of
Irving Fisher or of Jean Silvio Gesell, none of the great economists has imagined the existence of a
monetary standard based on economic greatness, stable and integrated into the metric system—i. e.
the ECU, or work expressed in kWh, which is why their theories, without a world war to revive true
growth, have been incapable of halting unemployment and economic catastrophe. Note that if, after
the First World War, the German economists had listened to Jean Silvio Gesell, instead of
denigrating him, the Weimar Republic would have survived, and Hitler would not have come to
power. We should, perhaps, think quite seriously about this.

' To all these considerations I would add the growing ecological impact which not only acts as a
brake on growth, but renders it illusory as well as costly .... when one thinks about the Convention
of Lima.'

 'How will this reform allow States to guarantee full employment? What makes you think you will
  succeed where John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman failed?'

' I have told you. Since the machine and man will be equal in terms of production costs, that is to
say of work invested, there will no longer any reason to replace man by machine, except when the
machine is irreplaceable. It will be forbidden by law. It will no longer be necessary, or possible, to
seek cheap labour in foreign lands to remain competitive. The worker, wherever he comes from,
will have the same intrinsic value in all countries. This is not to say that workers will have
everywhere the same qualifications, or the same quality, but with equal qualifications, the value
of labour will be the same everywhere and the remuneration should be comparable. The one
argument that will incite capitalists to invest in a foreign country will be the abundance and
proximity of energy and raw materials, which will reduce the costs of transport, and the abundance
and quality of the work force. My Government will ensure that this work force is equitably paid.
The ECU is thus a factor of social justice of incomparable weight.

'' What Keynes and Friedman lacked to succeed, was the economic yardstick of our ECU. The
essential thing is to consolidate our currency by avoiding waste, beginning with that of energy. We
should ban lorries from our main routes so that cars can run.'

 'Does this mean you are going to put lorry drivers out of work?'

' Of course not. Reducing long-distance transport and replacing it by rail, river transport and ships
will strengthen the latter and create employment in those sectors. In any event, lorry drivers will
always be needed to collect containers from road stations and take them to their destination. This
aside, this lightening of road traffic should reduce the number of accidents, which are always more
lethal when lorries are involved. It will also protect the environment. Don't forget that after aircraft,
lorries are the worst polluters on the planet. We have to know what we want—to guarantee our
children a future or asphyxiate them, not to mention the greenhouse effect and the destruction of
the ozone layer.

' This aside, a transfer such as this can only create jobs in railways, canals and coastal traffic, with
all the favourable repercussions for industry and future employment. Lorry drivers can rest assured -
not only will most of them keep their jobs, but immense possibilities will be open to them, since to
drive a lorry, a locomotive, a barge or a cargo ship comes to the same thing, in terms of
employment, with one difference, it is less dangerous.

' The ECU should, therefore, encourage diversification in employment qualifications and persuade
States to encourage university, technical and professional training at all levels. This would be
beneficial to various countries and enable them to create employment and thus diminish the
numbers coming to seek employment here. The ECU will be a source of enrichment to the planet
which should put an end to misery in the Third World.'

 'This reform should, therefore, resolve the problem of asylum-seekers?'

' Distress in this world is the work of predatory capitalism, which is the cause of all ills. The
moment that all governments are in a position to offer a decent existence to their people, thanks to
the same basis of evaluation of economic activity, workers will no longer need to search for work
elsewhere. It will, therefore, be in the interest of the industrialized nations to promote, as quickly as
possible, the economic improvement of developing countries. This will be the best way to put an
end to the demagogy of nationalist parties, who are surprisingly voluble on this point. It is, above
all, the only way to guarantee peace on the planetary scale.'

 'I suppose that there will be a universal scale of values which will applicable to all countries?'

' Our services have elaborated a whole host of norms which will, effectively, enable us to quantify
the amount of work invested in a product, and thus its intrinsic value in ECU. Imported products
that do not comply with this norm, should be returned to their country of origin or be subject to a
compensatory tax at the frontier if the difference in the price in ECU exceeds authorized
limits. This is the only way TO FINISH WITH THE ECONOMIC TERRORISM OF
PREDATORY CAPITALISM. This will have the effect, in future, that it will be madness to
import goods under the pretext that they are cheaper. The export of cheap products
emanating from slave labour having been rendered impossible, the under-paid work force in
developing countries will be paid at their true value and the work force will be able to
purchase our products in return. The ECU will thus enable us to create equilibrium in the
relations between countries, which can only revitalize economies and guarantee full employment.

' 'The entrepreneur will, on the contrary, have a vested interest in giving preference to the work force
on the spot, if only because they are better qualified and also due to savings in the cost of transport.
It is precisely the quality of a product that will determine its chance of success on the market. The
more a product suits demand, the better it will sell on the market.'

 'Which makes one think that this reform will not affect the market economy.'

' On the contrary. Never before have the conditions for free exchange come together in such a
happy conjuncture. Seen from this point of view, the ECU should enhance free trade on a
planetary scale, enabling all peoples to share in economic prosperity. When all the countries of the
world have adopted this system, commercial frontiers will, de facto, cease to exist. We shall have a
single world market, without frontiers. As I have told you, the advantage of this reform is that it
puts the workers of the entire world on an equal footing by giving them comparable purchasing
power, which was not the case before. The United States of Europe want to contribute in this way to
the economic and social aspirations of all the people. We are, and want to remain, the country of
universal brotherhood.'
                            (long and loud applause in the hall, all the journalists rising to applaud).

 'Does this mean that the Government of the United States of Europe is going to subsidize
  investment in the developing countries?'

' Yes and No. The United States of Europe are going to encourage investment by guaranteeing the
amounts committed, that is to say to finance the goods and equipment which will be exported.

' It should be remembered that money invested in production is always 'virtual' at the outset, for the
simple reason that you do not know if your investment will have the desired result. In fact, it will
result in finished products, and therefore in a consumable value paid for in hard cash, which will be
exported.

' Countries benefiting from this aid can either opt for a share in the profits of local companies or for
a formula of repayments spread over time, in raw materials - the latter is likely to be the most
common. We could, of course, agree to repayable loans, without interest it goes without saying, for
the other sums of money needed, for example, advances of salary. If business is handled well, each
beneficiary country should be able to honour its bank loans under the agreed terms.

' This policy should result in a rapid improvement in the standard of living in the countries
concerned and guarantee full employment for us. If our monetary reforms produce the beneficial
results expected, it is certain that some debts will not be repayable, and this should speed up the
recovery of the beneficiary economies of the Third World.'

 'I come back to your 'hard cash'. The day that everybody pays by credit card, will all
  transactions be made in ECU?'

' You are absolutely right. But we can't replace national currencies from one day to the next by the
ECU. This will, perhaps, be the case when we have a world State, when all currencies are based on
the ECU and when all governments - inspired by the same principles of universal brotherhood -
adopt just and equitable management of public affairs. But I fear that this will not come about
overnight. So long as governments are not totally perfect, we will have to get used to national
currencies that vary in value in relation to the ECU. Perhaps this is all the liberty they will have left.
Can you imagine perfect politicians and perfect citizens?
                                                                      (Smiles and murmurs in the hall)

' To reply to your question, the fact of paying with a credit card in ECU would not stop a trader
showing his price in his national currency, since the ECU will be, by definition, the common money
of banks throughout the world.'

 'Is it true that money will no longer produce interest?'

' The problem of money which multiplies without doing anything is as old as the hills. Aristotle
condemned it. In more recent times, St. Thomas Aquinas, following in the footsteps of Aristotle,
wanted nothing to do with it either. Islam also rejected it. Until a relatively recent date, the Catholic
Church also rejected it and left the trade in money to the Jews, which caused them no little trouble.

' The ECU, which will put an end to predatory capitalism, condemned by the hard line factions in
Islam, should help to improve our relations with Muslims and perhaps even to bring to an end the
growth of fundamentalist liberation movements, since these peoples will have been liberated from
predatory capitalism. Seen from this angle, the ECU is a money/measure which will liberate
developing countries.

' The matter of ‗renting out‘ money, commonly known as usury, is, in fact, a false one, since the
plus value that results from ‘renting out’ money always comes from the work of others. It is
therefore money stolen. It would be more correct to speak of interest stolen. To my
knowledge, to live as a parasite on the work of others is not a right that one would be justified
in invoking or which is worthy of the protection of the State. The interest which comes from the
possession of money is immoral and should be condemned. In this sense Proudhon was right when
he said that 'property' is theft.

' This is, perhaps, the most political aspect of our reform and those who fight against it know what
they have to lose. The fact that the barons of organized crime and the bloody fanatics of the
extreme right are fighting us only strengthens our resolve. They will in future be condemned to
work like everybody else. In a democratic society, nobody will be able to claim the right to enrich
themselves from the work of others, since the right of slavery will no longer exist. The ECU will
put an end to the slavery of predatory capitalism.'

 'You won't need savings for investment?'

' No. This money will not be needed and can go in its entirety to consumption. As I have explained,
it will not be necessary to save to invest. I should point out that I have not said that savings will
cease to exist. If you have children, for example, you will have the right to build up a savings
account for them. It will be the same if you don't want to consume, immediately, the money you
have earned. These savings will go to consumers who are prepared to take on debts to consume
more, through the agency of banks through bank loans for private people. The money put into a
savings account will be the money banks loan to consumers, and only to them, never to companies.
However, savings could fulfil the function of guaranteeing a loan to a company. Savings will thus
play an indirect role in an investment, but it will not be the money saved that companies will
borrow.
' When you have too much money, you will be able to put it into a current account or a savings
account. Current accounts of private persons will, by definition, be limited to a certain ceiling.
Anything above this ceiling will have to be placed in transaction accounts, that is to say investment
or savings accounts. This ceiling can be fixed by mutual consent between the bank and the holder of
the account, but the law will impose its regulations. Any citizen will be able, in principle, to place
his or her money for a certain time in a blocked savings account. This will bring in no interest, but
this will be compensated for in the form of a tax rebate.

' Although the consumer will no longer pay taxes, this will not be the case for those who use their
capital as a guarantee and receive income from the profits made by companies. I would remind you
that this tax will affect only the money that the citizen is unable to spend. Making fortunes will be
of no interest because all citizens will be required to spend their entire income, that is to say, to
recycle their money in the circuits of production and consumption. This is the sine qua non of any
balanced management of the national economy.

' Building of fortunes will be penalized by the printing of bank notes which will have no value after
a certain date. Savings 'under the bed' will die as will excessive savings and 'dirty' money. that one
dares not put in circulation. This will be an additional arm against criminality. I would like to stress
the fact that predatory capitalism was finally asphyxiated by the mass of artificial money which
could not be consumed because it had been subtracted from the legitimate salaries of the workers.

' If you decide not to use your money to the benefit of a third party, who could borrow it and spend
it for you, it is quite natural that this money should be exempt from tax. This tax advantage will
encourage lenders to save, which will allow the banks to give loans to private individuals, thus
making possible additional consumption. Private saving will have a role to play as a regulator of
consumption and will limit the harmful effects of the building of fortunes. Whatever the effects may
be, this will be money to be spent by private individuals for consumption and not by companies as
part of their investment.

' I repeat, let us not confuse money destined for consumption with that devoted to investment. If a
consumer's money is placed in an account, it can only be used as a guarantee for a sum advanced to
a company, since the money lent for investment will be virtual money. Once the notions of money
and work are seen to be identical, it will not be necessary to immobilize or to save money to invest
it. It will be enough to invest one's working strength, which the State must protect and promote to be
able to guarantee full employment.'

 'But you have just said that you could place your hard cash to cover the loan to a company.'

'That's right. This is money that you have to spare and which otherwise you would have to pay taxes
on - your income from capital. If you have immobilized this money with a view to promoting
professional investment, that is to say employment, you will be exonerated from tax. The State will
do everything in its power to ensure that the money remains in circulation, so as to guarantee
full employment and a maximum of consumption. The rule is simple - either you spend your
money, or you lend it to somebody else, without interest, so that he or she can spend it in your place,
either as a private person, or as a guarantee for a company. In either case, your money will remain in
circulation.'
 ' If I have understood you correctly, the company will not need to repay the money it has
  borrowed to increase production, since the State will have only made a paper transaction.'

' Hold on a minute, if you please. If you have understood what I have just said, money will only be
advanced against the usual guarantees - possessions or property - which will be supplied by the
beneficiary, a third party or the State, according to circumstances. When one invests, it is to buy the
means of production, raw materials or prefabricated items entering into the final design of the
product. You will, of course, have to pay for these products or services in real, not virtual money,
which will appear on your bank account, even if it is expressed in ECU, since, by definition, the
money circulating at the consumption level will always be hard cash, whether this consumption be
private or comes from an investment company. There is no contradiction here with the ECU, which
is simply a monetary standard used as a measure. This explains the need for a guarantee.

' The essential difference as against the old monetary systems is that the plus value no longer
comes from the money subtracted from consumption through the interest paid to the lender,
but from the work/value added, expressed in 'enhanced energy' or in kWh - in other words in
ECU.

' When a company borrows hard cash as a guarantee, it has to pay to the lender, as a reward, part of
the value added as a result of this investment, since the money received for investment is not just
paper money. However, I should make one thing quite clear - this money, paid as a reward, will
be subject to heavy taxation if it is not consumed. If it is not to be taxed, it will have to be
re-invested.

' Loans which the Central Bank agrees to give to commercial banks for investment will be simple
paper transactions - flowers not yet fertilized by work - whose convertibility (fertility) will be
guaranteed by the State. They will always be covered by a banker's guarantee which the transacting
bank will keep, even if it cedes the title to the Central Bank to cover its borrowings. In this sense,
the Central Bank will not have a single real silver dollar in its coffers. It will only have ECU, that is
to say, virtual money. This was not the case before, when banks had to deposit part of their reserves
with the Central Bank.

' So long as the money stays in the production circuit, with no connection with the consumption
sector, we will speak of fiduciary money. As soon as it enters the consumption circuit, we will speak
of national currency, hard cash, real money or consumption. The ECU will only be concerned with
fiduciary money and will never leave the circuit linking the banks among themselves or to the
Central Bank. It is inconceivable that a single piece of money will be struck in ECU. Hard cash will
always be delivered in the national currency, subject to the official exchange rate.

' Money destined for investment, that is to say fiduciary money is nothing more than a promise of
work, which must be held to under pain of losing the guarantees entrusted to the bank in hard cash
or in title deeds. At this level, there is nothing really new. It is only when the share of the value
added has received its counterpart in work (whether human or mechanical) and your product has
been sold, that the loan from the Central Bank will be transformed into hard cash. It will therefore
be possible to repay your bank guarantee when the value added as a result of your work, that is to
say, the product or the service rendered, have been sold, and your bank account has been credited
with the same amount.

' It follows that the Central Bank never loses any money. The Government can emit hundreds of
thousands in Treasury notes and distribute them throughout the world as an incitement to work. This
requires no engagement on its part, unless it declares itself guarantor of the sums invested.
' 'The important thing is that you receive these funds free of charge in the sense that, apart from the
banker's right to cover the costs of the transaction, the money lent will not attract any interest. This
is a point that must be made. I recognize, however, that whoever gives his savings to the State, in
the form of a guarantee, will find himself find himself favoured in terms of investment and of fiscal
debt. In the case of management error which is not the responsibility of the borrower, it would, for
example, be possible to conceive a plan to bring into play a compensatory fund, a kind of
investment insurance, so as not unjustly to ruin a livelihood. Our programme to re-launch the
economy and full employment can only work if we establish a minimum of confidence
between the State and the company. This was not, far from it, the case in the past.

' So you can repay the loan when you have sold the merchandise or the service produced with this
money. This repayment can, of course, be staggered and the bank charges will increase with the
length of repayment, which will depend upon the success of your business. It is purely a matter of
convention and this loan will enable you to add a value added to your credit, in other words, to
make a profit.

' If, however, contrary to the terms of the banker's agreement, you spend the money borrowed for
your personal ends, you will have to repay the debt from your own pocket, since you will have no
income from sales with which to repay your debts. In other words, an investment loan should be
used solely to invest.

' I repeat, anyone who wants to borrow money for private purposes, must also deposit - as in the past
- some form of guarantee, usually a pay slip, shares or any other title, and, whatever happens, repay
the loan plus any bank charges. Nevertheless, without interest. As up till now a local bank cannot
receive funds from the Central Bank unless it is in a position to give guarantees, in this respect,
nothing has changed. As I told you, the ECU has no negative effects for the citizen.'

 'If you think about it, this system is a form of capitalism under another name?'

' At the beginning of our discussion I spoke to you about numerical capitalism, that is to say, of
capitalism with a human face, which I opposed to predatory capitalism. Capitalism will always
remain the accumulation of work in the form of money, whether in terms of a bank account or in
banknotes. However, through usury, or interest payments if you prefer, the cost of predatory
capitalist money always removes a part of the purchasing power of the consumer. This is not the
case with us.

' If I take you at your word, a non-capitalist society would be that in which private capital ceased to
exist and the State was the only holder. Everything practically would be nationalized. This is a
concept widely held by Utopians. We have dismissed this as not practicable. Capital, whether
numerical or not, is by definition the accumulation of a value which always comes from
labour and, in this sense, it is an incontrovertible economic reality that no socialist,
communist or anarchist utopia can abolish.

' The only problem that bothers us is to evaluate work at its true value in correctly judging the share
due to the work of the machine, which man should not compete with unjustly. Predatory capitalism
is based on this unjust calculation, which works, primarily, against man. The ECU is not capitalism
in the sense of those who live by money, that is to say from the work of others. By the very fact of
the lifting of bank secrets, our numerical capitalism is more transparent than all the systems that
have preceded it. In fact, there is nothing to hide.
' When the State is the sole holder of capital, one thinks of a capitalist State monopoly, or more
simply of a collectivist regime, whether it be socialist or communist. This is far from being the case
with us. The monopoly of the State under our system is limited to guaranteeing monetary stability,
surveillance of prices and control of foreign transactions in ECU. The World Bank must give its
consent to all the great international markets, whose financing it covers. For the rest, the State will
control all investments through the Central Bank as well as - and this is an important point - the
development of the national currency, whose value and whose convertibility into ECU it will
guarantee.

' This value and this convertibility are dependent, as I have said, upon management of public
finances and price stability and therefore of inflation, our aim being to achieve zero inflation. What
distinguishes us from predatory capitalism is that, in our system, the notion of value is based on
work and not on speculation, should I say money stolen through interest payments and property
rents. The immediate result of change will be zero unemployment.

' Up till now, illicit profits from financial speculation hit the worker through rising prices and
inflation. This scandalous situation is now a thing of the past. What has always shocked me under
predatory capitalism is that it puts quantity above quality, since a product cannot sell unless it offers
the maximum quality at the lowest price. It is not surprising that everyone is incited to lie in
advertising and that everyone tends to cut prices in an attempt to win markets.

' Let me explain. Predatory capitalism is based solely on profit, which, it is said, results in the free
mechanism of supply and demand. Herein lies a major contradiction, since even if this profit is the
result of a reduction in production costs, and therefore of wages, and implies an increase in
purchasing power of consumers, who just happen to be these same employees. How do you think
you are going to increase the purchasing power of a consumer if you reduce his salary? If, in
addition, you put the worker out of work by replacing him by machines or investing abroad, the
support given him by the payment by the community of unemployment benefit to cover his essential
needs is another cause of recession. The State has to borrow this money at a price which is passed
on to the taxpayer, which in turn represents a diminution of his purchasing power and thus a
slowing down of the economy, and, by the same token, of investment.

' If the economy and consumption are to be re-launched, during a period of stagnation or
weak growth, then there must be massive reduction in unemployment. This calls for a
restructuring of industry which should promote consumption by increasing salaries, not only
without raising prices, but in lowering them. This is unthinkable under predatory capitalism
which is caught in its own trap of the mechanism of plus value.

' This restructuring must be accompanied by a massive reduction in the waste of energy and, above
all by emphasizing renewable energies, which will have become profitable to use and the most
economical in the long term. They will be ecologically sound because human work is, by definition,
less polluting than machines and less costly if expressed in ECU, especially if multiple tasks are to
be carried out. Any lasting reduction in unemployment thus requires a modification in the
machine/work force cost relationship in man's favour.

' One of the aims of our reform is to remedy the defects of predatory capitalism by introducing
numerical capitalism. This corrects cost relationships. In future, the worker will benefit fully from
his work and will be able to cover all his needs without risk of inflation. The State will no longer
have to borrow money to finance industries that pollute and destroy jobs.
' As I said earlier, our economy will be able to fill up with petrol before setting out on its
journey. This implies a re-distribution of the roles played by the public authorities and private
enterprise. In the past, the State acted as a parasite, in the name of predatory capitalism, to exploit
the people, getting as much tax from them as possible to finance a heavy and costly State machine.
These times are past, since the State and the people - rather I should say the Federal State and the
Federated people - will henceforth be equal partners, mutually controlling themselves, with the
regulation of institutions being assured by balanced structures.

' The State has no intention of substituting itself for the people and telling them what they
must or must not do. It aims to be simply an impartial and conscientious umpire of the
activities of the people. The final decision will remain with the people so long as the accounts are
balanced, which they will be if the people do not live beyond their means or demand from the State
public services which it cannot finance. The people will have to create for themselves a new work
ethic and understand that this has no sense unless it allows them to enjoy their free time more; that
is to say to improve the quality of their lives.

' State and people can only exist for each other. As soon as we admit that the people are the sum of
all our differences, and thus of our liberties, the State becomes the expression of the community
and, above all, of our duties towards it. It is therefore a matter of a new division of tasks and not of
conflicting structures as in the past, when the State was, in reality, subject to an oligarchy in power
which only served its own interests at the expense of the community. This explains why democracy
collapsed at the beginning of the 21st century, in the aftermath of the introduction of the Euro,
which finally allowed the extreme right to blackmail all governments into imposing the rule of
imposture.'

 'Mr. President, do you think that the ECU could have saved the European Union?'

' I am certain of it. The Euro, as everyone knows, was fathered by the Bundesbank which cried from
the roof-tops that 'the next two generations in Germany' had already been given a summons to
refund the public debt of a State handicapped by an over-numerous civil service which was too
cumbersome and which enjoyed disproportionate privileges.

' With our ECU, five years would have been enough to finish with unemployment - I admit that this
would have required a vigorous slimming down of the mammoth - and twenty years to line up the
whole world with our universal monetary standard. But we know that it was the enemies of
democracy who won, those who, from the start, gambled on the weaknesses of the Euro to crush the
European Union. Rumour has it that circles close to the Ku Klux Klan and the Church of
Scientology played their part. However, these rumours have never been verified.

' Let us re-trace the events. At the fall of the Berlin Wall, Helmut Kohl already saw himself seated
on the throne of Bismarck, reigning over a Greater Germany reaching from the Urals to the Atlantic.
In this, Chancellor Kohl simply took General de Gaulle at his word, that, at all costs, he wanted a
Greater Germany beside him... to finance his strike force. However, Ludwig Erhard, at the time,
demanded in counterpart the right of co-management and Mon Général had said no. This did not
prevent German nationalism from becoming presentable. Had not de Gaulle himself said to the
Germans that they were a 'great people' - a formula dear to Goebbels and his Führer.

' To obtain the adhesion of the German people, Chancellor Kohl promised a second economic
miracle to the people of East Germany who, for forty years, had endured a totalitarian regime.
Blinded by the heavenly prospect of 'enchanted lands' (Blühende Landschaften), this same
impoverished people happily agreed to change its savings into West German marks at an excessive
rate, which enabled it to buy from the West everything it had dreamt of during the Soviet
occupation. Some 500,000 million marks, literally printed on toilet paper, benefited only the
companies of the former Länder in the West, which filled their pockets ... with inflationary money.

' This trickery had the effect of a thunderbolt, since it was essential that this 'empty' money should
become 'full' if it was not to compromise the stability of the Westmark, despoiled by a worthless
Ostmark. To achieve this, the Bundesbank raised the base rates of the Westmark brutally. As a result
of the European Monetary System (EMS), this had an effect on all the other members of the
Community. And this is where the cheating began. Not only had the other members of the
Community not seen the toilet paper banknotes printed by the Bundesbank, but they had to fulfil
their obligations to the EMS by adjusting their monetary policy to that of the Bundesbank which
raked in the money from both sides - on the one hand, the toilet paper money cleaned up in the
name of German re-unification, and, on the other, the support of their European partners in the name
of the EMS.

' Attracted by the wonderful rates offered by the German banks, all the European investors placed
their money in Germany, thus depriving their own economies of investments which could have
consolidated employment. Instead, deflation and rising unemployment, with the fatal consequences
for social peace the we all know of, became inevitable in most countries of the European Union.
Today we know that the impact of German reunification will weigh heavily in the European
economic crisis. At the time, nobody was prepared to admit this.

' Not only had West Germany concentrated all its investment effort on East Germany, thus depriving
its European partners of investment opportunities there and to which they owed a part of their
prosperity, it had also grabbed the capital they needed for investment by offering attractive rates of
interest. The European crisis was thus planned and it was not surprising that while returns on capital
went through the ceiling in Frankfurt, millions of unemployed were choking the corridors of
employment agencies. It was not surprising, therefore, that young people, the first to be affected,
ended up by starting a revolt. The rising tide of criminality, which the re-establishment, in 2005, of
the death penalty did nothing to stop, could only end in the nationalist parties taking power in 2010.
They were also unable to restore order, since the roots of the trouble lay elsewhere.

' It would have been a different story had the European partners of Germany, from the start, had the
same opportunities as the West Germans to invest in the Länder of the former DDR. Any child can
read in the history books that it was the West Germans who took the best pieces of the cake leaving
only crumbs to their European partners. The formula was: ' Us first '.

' And this is where we experienced an unforeseen turn of events. Instead of investing their super
profits in Europe to strengthen it - which would have been both logical and honest - the Germans
preferred to place them in Asia at fantastic rates. It was only when these Asian countries were
unable to pay the rates promised that the whole house of cards collapsed, triggering the Asian crisis.
Predatory capitalism was caught in its own trap. The German super profits could not be placed in
Europe, because they had disappeared.

' This was when we saw the same thing happening in Asia as had happened in Europe a few years
earlier. The uncertain future persuaded Asians to place their capital in Europe and elsewhere, which
bled their economies even more. Deprived of purchasing power owing to unemployment, and with
governments over-indebted, the Europeans were unable to profit from this phantom capital. The
improvement was of short duration before the money went to the United States, always a winner
whatever happens. This is what happens when money is not related to work. The first to suffer are
the people of the States that have to settle the bill left by the ravenous capitalists.
' Meanwhile, the investments in East Germany and the huge profits anticipated in West Germany
not having been realized, or only in insufficient proportions, East Germany remained a sick child
that needed the feeding-bottle of solidarity, thus depriving West Germany of its capacity to consume
and invest in Europe to re-launch the economy and to stem the rising tide of unemployment in the
European Union.

' If we add to this the terrifying public deficit and the mass of seven million unemployed, it is not
surprising that the German money-men agreed to the Euro, since they knew very well that one day
their money would implode. The speech of the minister of Finance at the time was one big lie. The
Deutschmark was a moribund money which owed its survival to an accountant who cooked his
books so as to satisfy the Maastricht criteria. The BRD thus exported to Europe a currency that was
sick and condemned the European Union to an artificial, unbearable strait-jacket, to unemployment
that was impossible to absorb and to the building up of a host of marginalised people who swelled
the ranks of dissent, de-stabilizing democracy, and preparing the ground for the nationalist parties.

' Whose fault was this? Certainly that of François Mitterand and Jacques Delors who gave way to
unacceptable pressure on the part of Chancellor Kohl so as 'not to bother him'. They should have
coupled together German monetary union and European Monetary Union by making East
Germany the 'Taiwan of Europe' until the year 2000 and, why not, a fiscal paradise for ten
years, which would have attracted European capital and created employment without
destroying the links which bound the former DDR with the COMECON countries, which West
Germany wanted to destroy at all costs, even at the cost of a major economic crisis.

' Deprived of its markets in the East, the former DDR could only go under. A strange policy which
yet received the support of all the European governments. Worst of all, however, is that the German
people were fooled to the end. They were too attached to the 'stability' of a money which had
become a myth and which represented the economic miracle of the past. And all this time, acres of
ruins held the promise of fabulous economic growth.

' Ten years after reunification, 30% of marginalised people were dreaming of the 'socialist paradise'
in East Germany. It is not surprising that the youth of East Germany, desperate and disgusted by
predatory capitalism, should have smashed everything up and gone to swell the ranks of the
neo-Nazi parties, to end up by wiping out the institutions of a once exemplary democracy.

' The crisis was made worse by the fatal effects it had on the economies of the former COMECON
countries, which only finally linked up with the Western economies when they were in decline and
when all these States were also obliged to go bankrupt and to recognize that the Euro had failed.

' In fact, the reactionary Government of the time had encouraged this crisis so as to provoke the
social disorders that we know about and to rule by laws of exception with the aim of abolishing
democracy, leaving the field free for the racist and extremist rearguard of 20l0.'

 'If I have understood you correctly the European Union failed because of a German monetary
  Union which was premature and badly managed?'

' If the President of the European Central Bank had said to me: 'Léon your money won't work', I
should not be here. I would have thought twice before asking 600 million Europeans to approve a
reform destined to fail. This is indeed what happened to German monetary union in 1990. It was the
first time that the President of the Bundesbank had resigned, because he disagreed with the
irresponsible policy of his Chancellor. Instead of changing policy, Helmut Kohl preferred to change
the President at the head of his central bank and replace him with a sheep-like figure who blindly
approved his irresponsible policy.

' Let's be logical. If you put water into wine, its concentration is diminished. Well, exactly the
opposite happened to the Deutschmark of the time. Everybody rushed to buy it because of the
attractive rate of interest available on the capital market. After having artificially blown up the
monetary mass of his country to astronomical proportions with a moribund communist money,
imbued with its 'original sin', any honest central bank would have devalued its own money. This did
not happen in Germany. Indeed, quite the contrary occurred. Without this fatal trickery, the Euro
might have had a future. Historians are unanimous on this point - you can't build a strong and
durable Europe with a currency which has miscarried. We now know that the country that gained
most from this operation was the United States, which never misses an opportunity to benefit deftly
from the crises of the Euro and of European institutions.

' Taken hostage by a nationalist and deflationary German policy, the only thing that the
Europe of Maastricht could offer to the people was to tighten their belts. This, however, did not
prevent the 'Gramigna' from accumulating a fortune which made it one of the world's greatest
economic powers.

' If the Euro failed, it was because it did not serve the interests of the peoples of Europe, but only
those of speculative capital which invests abroad, where labour is cheap, and in technical matters
here, to replace the work force with automated machinery, thus condemning ever more workers to
unemployment. They too were condemned to 'tighten their belts' since the State had finally to admit
that it could not feed them without getting deeper in debt. Everybody remembers that this is what set
light to the powder keg of Europe, although the Mafia and the extreme right already made the law in
2010.

' One of the major failings of the European Union was the absence of centralized power. How could
the people of Europe manage their affairs without the State as co-ordinator whilst the older nations
refused to surrender any of their sovereignty? The European Union died because it had
everything in its stomach and nothing in its head. Everything was seen in terms of quantity of
money and not in terms of quality of life. The State, it seems, thrived when the capitalists were
happy.

' I shall never tire of repeating that the needs of Federated peoples and those of the Federal State are
different. The role of the Federal State is merely to create a harmonizing framework so that the
Federated peoples can fill it with something. In the Europe of Maastricht, the contrary was the rule.
One put the cart before the horse and economists even claimed that it was the cart of the economy
that pulled the working horse. This was a world turned-upside down, a world of madmen led by
dishonest, irresponsible people.

' My Government will have no hesitation in telling the people of Europe that they can only harvest
what they have sown with the sweat of their brow. I am no merchant of dreams and you should not
ask me for anything I cannot promise.

' To reply to your question, I would say that the ECU would have enabled the European Union to
have corrected the failings of the Maastricht Euro, because it offers all the advantages of the market
economy without the defects of predatory capitalism. This is true at the planetary level. Finally, one
has to say a categorical 'no' to the racists of the extreme right, who already see Fortress Europe
invaded by hordes of asylum-seekers.
' Contrary to the Euro, the ECU demands no sacrifices on the part of consumers and includes no
sanctions, since any error of management implies the devaluation of the national currency and not of
the ECU, other national currencies being in no way affected. It is precisely this interdependence of
disparate national economies, linked to the Maastricht criteria, which stifled Europe and provoked
the uprising of the European peoples.

' The ECU is a neutral monetary standard whose only role is to promote and harmonize exchange. It
was here that the Euro failed since the gaps between European nations got steadily greater, not to
mention the tensions on the international market and, finally, the confrontation with the United
States of America, which reserved for the European economy the same fate as for the Asian
economy - to bring it to its knees to implore mercy from the American giant

' By letting the U.S. dollar float as it saw fit, America finally sank Europe with its ‘strong’
money, which became too heavy to navigate in troubled waters. The Euro was, in fact, from the
start, a suicidal money since it was incapable of manoeuvre. The only solution would have been to
devalue the Euro, on the 1st of January 1999, by 10% to I5% in relation to the U.S. dollar to
put an end to public indebtedness and to re-launch the European economy.

' This crack of the whip would have resolved all the problems of the European Union by sparking
off a spectacular reduction in unemployment and initiating sustained growth. The Americans would,
of course, have howled like polecats, but they would finally have got used to it. What does Europe
owe them anyway? But the Germans would not hear a word about reducing unemployment - full
employment threatened income from capital and thus liberal and Christian-Democrat electors. Of
course, they had taken the precaution of putting another sheep at the head of the Central European
Bank to perpetuate the policies of the Bundesbank, which saw no evil in the rise of unemployment
and of the extreme right in Europe.

' I repeat, the ECU does nothing to preclude a national currency from adapting to market forces or
manoeuvring as it thinks fit. Instead of brandishing the threat of sanctions, the Europe of Maastricht
would have done better to equip itself with the necessary Federal institutions, without which any
monetary policy is unthinkable. The European Central Bank cannot take political decisions for
a government which does not exist. Was this the reason for its failure? At the time,
schizophrenia had reached such a degree that national governments, to save their 'sovereignty', had
practically renounced their powers in favour of this Central Bank and of the multinationals, who
really held the reins of power.

' It is on this point that the United States of Europe and the ECU differ from the old model
Europe of countries and its still-born infant, the Euro. In the end, the Euro failed because it
claimed that it was up to the market and the banks to dictate law to governments, thus
subjecting the people to the whims of predatory capitalism. In so doing the Central European Bank,
which was in reality simply a connecting link for the German regional banks, merely alienated the
sovereignty of member States of the European Union and condemned them to stagnation. The big
problem was that the Central European Bank had proved incapable of creating employment. In
truth, this was a gift to the extreme right, which, with increasing public indebtedness and galloping
unemployment, had little difficulty in denouncing the inability of democratic institutions to master
the crisis. This was nothing more than the work of 'foreigners', in this case a German policy to
weaken democracy and the basic economic and republican institutions of their partners. It should be
remembered that the first two countries to crack were France and Italy.
' If the European Union failed, it was because it robbed people of their identity, the legitimate
exercise of their basic rights, by imposing on them the alienating dictatorship of the machine and of
predatory capitalism. The ECU would have been its only way out.

' Let's call our system the humanist market economy, since it recognizes that man has priority over
both machines and money. It is not by condemning youth to repay the debts of the past that we can
offer them a future and reinforce their confidence in democratic institutions.

' Ten years ago, two thirds of the people of Europe approved the Constitution of the United States of
Europe. This was because it brought the people closer to the State by reinforcing the prerogatives
and powers of the institutions and the autonomous regional governments within the framework of
the Federal order, which limited its mandate to defining the political framework in order to
harmonize it. It was essential to put an end to the nationalist cacophony of the extreme right. At the
time, I admit, we had the backing of the armed forces. We should remember that the United States
of America were also born in blood. It could not be otherwise because, alas, the people had lost all
reason.

' I admit that it would have been impossible to set up the ECU without a Federal State at its head.
During the last century, the Europeans should have begun at the beginning. Prior to monetary union
there should have been political union to give Europe a solid constitutional framework, showing
clearly the powers of the individual States and of the Federal Government, thus bringing the citizen
closer to his Parliament and his Regional Government. A unified Europe could only be that of
citizens and not of bankers, profiteers or cheats.'

 'What in your opinion, would have made it possible to avoid an economic crisis in Europe
  following the reunification of Germany?'

' We should recall first that the European Commissions demanded that all new candidates for
admission to the European Community should agree to a transition period to enable them to adapt
and to fulfil the conditions of entry. This was not the case with the DDR.

' According to Chancellor Kohl, this was an internal German matter which only concerned the
DDR. What is even more surprising is that Jacques Delors should have agreed to so surprising a
thesis. Everyone knows that the DDR was a communist State much further removed from a western
democracy than was the Spain of the time. Did Mr. Delors agree to this exception? Only he knows.
If he were still alive, he could tell us.

' Be that as it may, this favour allowed Federal Germany to interpret as it saw fit the act of faith of I8
million East Germans. 'Wir sind ein volk', we are one people, they cried in the streets of Leipzig. In
the mind of Chancellor Kohl, this meant the swallowing up of the DDR and the wiping out of a
socialist community which had to renounce, overnight, its identity and all its social gains. The body
of the sick man had to be emptied, without pity, of all its defective parts: brain, heart, lungs, liver,
spleen, stomach, intestines, kidneys and bladder. The only difficulty was to reanimate the patient.
As we know, he never recovered from the operation.

' In reality, this was social and economic massacre - the brutal seizure of one State by another, since
the complete breaking of commercial links with its partners in COMECON could only mean a
complete breakdown of the whole East German economy, causing its socialist partners grave
difficulties at all levels. The inevitable result was the collapse of the economies of the former
Soviet Union and the crisis that followed. In other words, Chancellor Kohl excised the essential
organs of an entire people and implanted those from a foreign body. This was the fruit of the
rapacious mentality of ruthless capitalism in the West, which saw no more in the new Länder of
East Germany than a private hunting ground and game to be captured.

' If Jacques Delors had been the servant of the European Commission and not that of Greater
Germany, in which he saw the Europe of his dreams, he would have applied the rules applicable to
all new members and would have imposed on the DDR a ten-year transition period. True he was
supported by François Mitterand - a sick man who had lost control of the situation. In any case, the
DDR could not be assimilated de jure by Federal Germany. In that case, monetary union with
Germany would have taken place at the time of European monetary union, in the year 2000. It
would thus have spared Europe a crisis and many useless sacrifices, which, in the end, were only of
benefit to the nouveaux riches, which goes to show the fragility of the former European institutions
- simply a free hand-out to the multinationals.

' This socialist State, which, let us remember, was the best performer in the East, had at its
disposal a high level of technology and cheap, skilled labour. The only chance it had of
redressing the balance rapidly was to use these trump cards in the new European market. But
it was precisely this that, by mutual consent, was prevented by Jacques Delors and Chancellor Kohl,
almost all the companies of the East having been dismantled and salaries in part adjusted to those in
the West. One remembers that West Germany rushed to eliminate key staff, scientists, technicians
and hospital staff to hold down salary claims in the West, to such an extent that hospitals could no
longer look after their patients in East Berlin. Under pressure from the powerful trade unions in the
West the BRD was obliged to raise salaries - at the expense of the West German taxpayer.

' Deprived of its infrastructure and its élite, not to mention a work force almost as dear as in the
West and not yet so productive, the former DDR lost all interest for foreign investors.

' The only hope for East Germany to extricate itself rapidly from this position would have been to
become a European 'Taiwan' for ten years. Instead of the East Germans going to the West to shop,
the contrary would have happened. The consumers in the West would have gone to the East to buy
their goods much more cheaply. The radical operation would not have occurred and the East
Germans would have kept their identity and all their social infrastructure. There would have
been less unemployment, less crime, less Mafia and less corruption at all levels. In this climate
everybody would have placed their money in East Germany which would have lifted the economy
by its own bootstraps and also given a lift to the European economy. The movement of the
COMECON countries to liberalism would have been greatly facilitated. The West Germans would
not have had to pay their solidarity tax, which raised the total tax burden. This would have
brought about further savings. Without the 500,000 million of toilet paper money, there would have
been no European crisis. Ten million Europeans, at least, would have kept their jobs, thus relieving
the finances of the partners in the European Union.

' Today we know that the contrary happened. It is not surprising that the bitter, desperate people of
the former DDR have become a prey to extremist parties and the international Mafia. All historians
are today unanimous on this point. Chancellor Kohl wanted simply to get his revenge on
communism and to punish 18 million Germans for forty years of socialist sin by throwing
them defenceless into the ravenous mouths of the wild beasts of capitalism which swallowed
them.

' But crime does not pay, since the Euro, the product of this monstrous machination, has sunk ,
dragging the European Union down with it'.
 'With the Constitution of the United States of Europe, the ECU is in the end, just a better Euro, a
  life insurance for the rich?'

' I will not deny that your question embarrasses me, since it is, in part, true. Whoever has money will
keep it. But money will no longer produce interest. You will have either to make it work by
purchasing shares to get a part of the value added in exchange, or place it in a savings account and
thus earn fiscal advantages, or else spend it and enjoy life. Profit not re-invested will go straight to
the public purse.

' This demonstrates the extent of the defamation campaign of which my Government is at present
the object. It has never been our intention to expropriate anyone or to confiscate anything. All
we want is to recycle permanently all the funds at present immobilized and thus remedy the
failings of a monetary system which has lost sight of the fact that the mass of money in an
economy must always be balanced by an equivalent mass of honest work and not by
speculative values or criminal manoeuvring.

' Humanity has seen a lot of change in monetary matters. First there was barter, then came precious
metal, after that there was the American dollar and, finally, the Treasury bond, with all the bad
effects that can have when the government is obliged to contract public loans to pay for
unemployment..

' A nation cannot both pay interest on the money it has borrowed from the banks, which in
fact means from industry, to pay benefits to the unemployed, so as to guarantee them minimum
purchasing power, and at the same time finance industry by fiscal gifts to an industry which
automates its factories here and places its profits elsewhere, where cheap labour spells
astronomical profits. This again brings pressure to bear on salaries through the threat of
unemployment. Never have workers and the State been subject to blackmail like this.

' The situation had become untenable, unacceptable, scandalous, and it had to be brought to an end.
Money should serve men and not the reverse. It is in this sense that our reform constitutes a
social revolution.'

 'Is it true that the ECU will result in a massive reduction in the number of civil servants?'

' We are going to slim down the mammoth by giving him a tonic to increase his efficiency—
the ECU. It is by improving his performance that he will lose weight.

' When the value of a currency has no automatic system of regulation behind it, for the simple
reason that it results from the anarchic play of supply and demand, which is always dictated by the
big barons of the market, it is only natural that the State should be constrained to implement a whole
system of controls, at all levels, to ensure a certain stability of prices. The Central Bank will thus no
longer be an institution serving the speculators or the magnates of finance, but will be at the service
of the people and the State. 'He who has ears to hear, let him hear.'

' The value of the ECU having been defined once and for all within the framework of a
Universal Monetary Convention, the State will no longer be obliged to intervene. The policy it
will practice with regard to the national currency, in other words hard cash, will express the electors
choice, but in no way will it affect the value of the ECU. Whatever the value is of the national
currency, that of the ECU will not be affected, neither will our external trade. The ECU will also
protect us, in return, from crises abroad, which will not affect our money.
' Since the only modifications will be quantitative and not qualitative, and since the ECU is an
unchangeable value, the State will be in a position to delegate many of its powers to private
organizations, such as banks and professional trade unions, to keep a eye on the correct functioning
of competition and, for example, the fight against cartels. We are going to introduce cybernetic
and robotic principles into our administrative structures. Henceforth they will be subject to the
processes of servo- and auto-controls. Overall, our institutions will be more polyvalent and better
balanced. I should add that, thanks to the quaternary computer, computer controls now offer us
immense possibilities. In addition, our inspections will also keep an eye on the market.

' I shall not hide the fact from you that our Secret Services will lend a hand whenever necessary. Let
it be known that organized crime will no longer be able to impose its will as in the past.

' The State will also reinforce the prerogatives of the Federal Institute for Statistics so as to intensify
controls. The lifting of bank secrecy should also limit abuse. The entire economic life of the
country will become more transparent, more stable, more serene. The breaking of rules will be more
severely sanctioned than in the past. I would like to emphasize that any form of speculation will
be formally forbidden and henceforth will constitute a severely punishable offence. Any
serious infringement of this rule will be subject to penal proceedings and will result in a ban on
professional activity, or even the seizure of all goods or profits obtained by dishonest means.

' The simplicity, clarity and transparency of the institutions resulting from the introduction of the
ECU, will enable us to make a considerable reduction in the numbers of civil servants who can then
be returned to the private or semi-public sectors. This in itself will constitute a revolution when one
thinks of the weight of the civil service of the past and all the money wasted on it. The State is not
there to give the idle a living. The big winner will be the tax-paying companies, which means the
whole of society, since part of the savings will come back to it in the form of higher salaries.

' The moment the State puts an end to the law of the jungle and to the criminal practices of property,
financial and Stock Exchange speculation, everything should rapidly fall into place and make
possible a further reduction of controls. The ECU, therefore, means undoubted progress towards
economic stability.'

 'Mr. President why not admit it and confess that you are the enemy of civil servants?'

 ' Well, that's the best one I have yet heard.
                                                                           (General laughter in the hall)
' A civil servant is not a citizen belonging to a sacred caste with the right to demand inadmissible
privileges and, a fortiori, to take the people hostage to conclude abusive salary demands. Just like
the State, a civil servant is first and foremost a servant of the people. Enjoying obvious privileges
linked to his status, he or she should first cast an eye on the least favoured people and ask in what
way he or she is not aggravating their condition. Cutting off water supplies or current to hospitals,
depriving sick people of the care that is their due, stopping the collection and distribution of mail,
preventing people from going to work by immobilizing buses and trains, are not actions worthy of a
servant of the people. I admit that, in the past, some governments only understood the language of
blackmail and violence, but this is no justification for the fact that this still goes on.

' Since the civil servant is a citizen like any other, with the same rights and duties especially towards
the State, his employer, there is nothing degrading in being treated like all the other workers on the
basis of the same criteria of productivity and profitability.'
 I think you did not understand my question. I wanted to know how the State/Boss will treat his
  employees?'

' I think I can see what you are getting at. Under the old regime, I admit that the State took a harder
stand against the incessant salary claims of its civil service, to such an extent that it only reacted
under pressure — violence was king, the more violent you were the better you were heard. This was
the lot of all State/Employers, not to be able to satisfy the salary claims of their employees without
increasing the taxpayers‘ burden. It was an untenable situation which could only lead to discontent
among both civil servants and taxpayers.

' With the ECU, everything changes. Prices being stable once and for all, the State/Employer can
take refuge in the evaluation tables of the various activities. A civil servant could not, by definition,
ask for more than his professional category allows him. If an enterprise is working well and is
making a profit, it will be able to improve the remuneration of its employees. This, however,
implies a certain competition between the different services and that the products or the services
rendered are justly rewarded. May I remind you that all public services of a commercial character
which can be privatized, will be. This privatization will, however, affect only the internal workings
of a company and its relations with the market, never those relating to the State which can only
delegate certain responsibilities.'

 'Do you think that all civil servants will be able to be re-classified?'

' Don't let us over-do it. The State will employ as many civil servants as are necessary. We are, after
all not going to send them all packing. The public services, as I have said, are going to be paid just
like other services in the private sector - on the basis of the evaluation tables for all other
professional categories. Our personnel is not produced 'made to measure'.

' Nobody should have any illusions about this, an excessive number of civil servants is the cause of
all our economic crises. Nevertheless, I am convinced that our reform should release sufficient
funds to re-classify everybody and to ensure full employment, for not only will you no longer have
to withdraw hard cash to invest , which was formerly the case, but you will also save all the funds
absorbed by the rate of interest as well as that of property.

' I will cite just one figure. In the year 2040, when my Government came to power, 95% of the
money circulating in Europe was speculative money, in other words phantom money, which means
that only 5% was covered by real economic activity, that is to say in some form of productive work.
The number of phantom jobs was linked to the percentage of phantom money. It was
necessary, therefore, for the State to employ civil servants to lower artificially the unemployment
figures, at the risk of getting further into debt.. But, in the end, it was becoming indebted in
phantom money that nobody could repay. It must be admitted that the monetary system of
predatory capitalism was sheer madness and we just had to go our separate ways.

' While the Federal Government has reduced this relationship in Europe by half, we shall have to
redouble our efforts. We want a relationship of one to one, that is to say zero inflation and zero
unemployment. This would mean doing away with poverty, with homelessness and social
exclusion, since purchasing power will, in the future, be more equitably spread among all the
citizens. This is the pre-condition, a sine qua non, for full employment and monetary stability.
Only the ECU will allow us to reach that point.

' The amassing of funds and speculation having disappeared, with money being better managed and
the 'Gramigna ' finally muzzled, all money, without exception, will go to consumption and this
will have to be satisfied. The work of my government will be limited to applying the accelerator of
growth when we are travelling in a straight line and to apply the brakes on the dangerous curves.
This how I conceive of the direction of an economy. The more we reduce working time, the more
jobs there will be in the leisure sector, since the people will be obliged to spend all the money they
earn.

' The in-depth restructuring of industry should also lead to the creation of many new jobs. Under our
new system, it will be more economical to process raw materials on the spot, using local manpower
to carry out these complex operations, since big computerized systems will no longer be profitable.
We are going to witness a restructuring of geo-economic structures. I have said, and forgive me if I
insist on this point, that to develop automatic machines that throw men into the street, to engender
criminality and dissent, is not progress. Above all it costs too much to the State. The cause of all this
is, in the end, speculative money, and the community will no longer have to finance this.'

 'When you speak of speculative money, are you also thinking of property speculation?'

' I can't repeat it too often. In the future, it will not be possible to sell or buy property without the
authorization of the law, which will be intransigent on this point. It is unacceptable in this day
and age that 95% of property values result from interest on capital financing. Who will be able
to afford a house or an apartment? If Europe is hit by a low birth-rate, this is due, in large part,
to property speculation, for having children has become an unthinkable luxury and a social
handicap as well. It is a question, no less, of putting an end to the capitalist genocide of our
population.

' What right have we to demand of the younger generation that they surrender almost all their
income to paying the old age pensions and the property interest and capital of old people and
astronomical unemployment, not forgetting the servicing of the public debt and the ecological debt
linked to the nuclear waste sites? In this way we are depriving them of the resources required to
bring up their own children. This comes down to condemning the family and the nation since
young couples can no longer afford the luxury of having children. This is national genocide, A
CAPITAL CRIME which the government of the United States of Europe is not willing to
tolerate for a single instant. The family will therefore be one of our top priorities.

' If, in the future, we are going to cancel all rents, any property owner will retain the use of it, that is,
his personal right to it which he can transmit to his heirs or successors. The value of these properties
will be re-adjusted. When a young person wants, for example, to create his own enterprise or obtain
a loan to found a family, this property title could be used as a bank guarantee. This legal disposition
is aimed primarily at protecting the family and our nation which predatory capitalism is now
destroying. We must hope for a substantial fall in the value of property. The more people there are
who are able to buy a house, the more houses will have to be built and the more jobs there will be in
building.'

 'Your policy amounts to expropriation. What will happen to the interest on existing capital,
  interest payments, and so on. How will you replace the lack of earning power of people who will
  have nothing to live on?'

' I emphasized this point from the start, on the day after the referendum, and nothing has changed.
The consequences of this reform will be gradual so as to provide a smooth conversion of our
economic structures. The modification of the value added will, however, be immediate for the
whole of the public sector. This will free enormous amounts of capital which we shall immediately
invest to provide the neediest with a decent standard of living. The monetary transformation will be
global at this level.

' We shall, therefore, be consulting our international partners, starting with China, Japan, India and
the United States of America. We have no intention of creating unfruitful tensions. If it was up to
the United States of Europe, monetary and economic warfare would not occur.

' To reply to your question. People who have money, so much the better for them, will be able to
spend it or invest in accordance with the new rules, that is to say, by sharing in the actual, not the
speculative, profits of a company. I want to explain that numerical capital will only be inherited
within certain limits and in accordance with certain clearly defined rules. We want riches to be fairly
distributed, which is the sine qua non of all social harmony.

' With regard to rents from property, the contracts in hand will run until they expire or are
cancelled, but they will not be renewable. The same applies to all investments made in
accordance with former capitalist rules. Money will have to be released and integrated gradually
into the new productive circuits of the economy so as to create jobs. There are some people who
would prefer violent revolution. I am one of those who think that enough blood has already been
spilt. '

 'This means that most contracts will be cancelled and that it will no longer be possible to place
  money in a bank and live off one’s interest?'

' Current contracts and obligations will remain in force until they expire. But, as I said, new loans
will be free. It will no longer be possible simply to place one's money in a bank and then sit back,
twiddling one's thumbs, and living off one's interest.

' With regard to old age pensions, I repeat that The United States of Europe will respect its
engagements and do everything in its power to see that not a single retired person will need to
have any worries. The State will always have enough money to ensure payment of retirement
benefits.

' Under the new formula, a pension fund will be nothing other than a savings account of a special
nature. You will place your money for which you will receive a fiscal reduction. Your investment
will merely serve to guarantee the full consumption of all levels of the population, including
retired people, since when you consume, you make the wheels of production turn and thus
add to the value added. In future, then, you will be able to build up a nice little sum to add to your
pension. This form of capitalization will have no effect on production capacity or consumption in
our economy since full employment will be guaranteed.

' If you are a salaried person, your employer will pay your salary contributions as in the past. This
placement will be used to pay the pensions of retired people and will give you the right to a pension
when you have reached the age of retirement. At this level, nothing will have changed. Our
monetary reform will hit only those people who have too much money, that is to say, more than
they can spend, or 5% of the population at the most. In exchange, the purchasing power of the
consumer will increase and the time spent at work will decrease. This decrease will, above all, mean
a reduction in the retirement age to leave room for the young.

' Let there be no misunderstanding, it will no longer be possible to enrich oneself by speculation, a
fortiori to live and to do nothing. If you place your money in a company, then you must personally
follow the affairs of that company or hand over this task to an enterprise specializing in such work,
since you will have to give a responsible opinion on all questions of day-to-day running and
investment. It goes without saying that this new model favours the employees, who can invest in
their own companies, thus making their own employment more secure. The aim of this initiative is
also to make the means of production more democratic.'

 'This means that there will be no reason for the Stock Exchange to exist?'

' I grant you that the Stock Exchange will have to undergo a reconversion and adapt to the new
situation, but I would, however, just like to point out that investing money is a trade. The banks will
thus always need brokers to place their money and make it work. Real products can only come from
the real profits of a company and not from speculation. If a company wants to distribute its profits to
its investors, so much the better for the happy investors. They will either pay more tax, or they can
re- invest their money elsewhere. In a work environment such as this, the room for manoeuvre will
be too small for speculation, and the weight the State can bring to bear will be much greater than
before. It too will have every incentive to become a shareholder and participate in the profits of the
big companies to finance scientific research, culture and the arts, for example, without having to
penalize the small taxpayer by imposing more tax. Generally speaking, surplus money must
either be consumed or invested. It will thus be continually recycled to remain in circulation.
This is a prerequisite for a healthy economy and full employment.'

 'Does this mean that the factors which cause inflation will disappear?'

' I am not trying to make you say this. Zero inflation is possible in times of prosperity and with a
growth rate adapted to the needs of society and not those of predatory capitalism living off the
people. More important, however, is that the government achieves, in the shortest possible time, a
zero rate of unemployment, a prerequisite of all social progress.

' We are going to proceed with very big investments to achieve this and to re-launch the economy.
We make no claims beyond this. Once the situation is re-established on the work market, the
Government will hand over the investment market to the private sector. For the moment we are like
a train leaving a station. We can only start off slowly. We shall have to go slowly at first, to run in
our economic machine and to keep control of the situation. Only when all the structures of reform
are in place, will we be able to run our economic locomotive at full speed. That is when it will be
possible to impose the ECU on the whole economy.'

 'If there is no inflation, prices should theoretically be stable. How do you think you will be able
  to limit, or even stop abuses.'

' We are counting on free competition, encouraged by free exchange and the absence of customs
duties for those countries that adopt the same system. This is a point. The norms established are
easily verifiable and the role of the State will be, just as today, to watch over the proper functioning
of the market by watching that of our competitors.

' If, following in the footsteps of monopolies or cartels, abuses arise, they will be dealt with
severely. Generally speaking, all price-related infringements - too wide a gap between the bottom or
the top of the authorized margins will be punished by fines compatible with the illicit profit that
may have been made. Dumping will also be prohibited and severely punished. Prices should vary
within a range of prices and we shall encourage Associations and professional Trade Unions to
adopt a form of self-regulation to counter abuse in various sectors.'
 'Concretely, how are you going to set about putting the ECU in place?'

' It is no exaggeration to say that moving to the ECU is comparable to introducing the metric
system, although its impact at all levels will be much more important. It marks the irreversible
passage from a society of confrontation and conquest to a society of conciliation and sharing. It is
thus an historic revolution on which depends the survival of the human species in an acceptable
environment.

' It is true we had the 'Social Contract ' at the beginning of the French Revolution. But it was not
enough simply to say that man is 'a good savage' to put an end to his eagerness for power and
tyranny. The instrument of power remained intact. It is precisely this weapon that the ECU will
modify by domesticating the economic weapon of the 'good savage'.

' By laying the blame squarely on the mystical power of money, the ECU, which is now placed on a
stable, numerical footing, has removed all the power from the quasi-religion of capitalism.

' The ECU has given back to the economy its human face. Man has ceased to be an economic
predator and has become a civilized being, imbued with the universal spirit of brotherhood.

' Since energy plays a large part in the fixing of prices, the ECU will impose savings by favouring
the most economical forms of transport. We are therefore going to sustain and rationalize rail
transport. The same applies to river and marine transport. Finally, we are going to intensify
telecommunication of all kinds. Above all, we are going to reduce air transport, partly because it
pollutes the environment and partly because no company can be competitive if has to include the
cost of air transport in its prices. Air transport for tourists will be exonerated from taxes to make it
accessible to holidaymakers. Aerial transport of merchandise will, on the contrary, be taxed, because
it must be reduced to save our environment. In future, marine transport will be favoured.

' As I have implied, all the big industrial groups will be dismantled. We shall encourage the creation
of regional complexes to reduce the distances between the various production sites.

' Protection of the environment will take a special place, since on this depends the quality of our
lives. We are going to encourage all clean energies, including solar power and wind power. Within
this framework, we are going to sign contracts with very sunny countries for State contracts on a
grand scale for the implantation of solar industries. This should give new life to this sector of the
economy, because it is a matter of long-term investment. This new industry will also make it
possible to intensify water treatment in desert regions and create a new industrial infrastructure.
There are so many contracts in sight.

' We shall finance projects for intensive development in all the developing countries. The share of
our budget to finance these activities will be increased to 10%. Economic exchange will increase in
proportion as the standard of living of these peoples increases.

' Training will be at the heart of our preoccupations and we shall encourage exchanges between the
young of all countries, so that they know that the United States of Europe is the country of liberty,
equality and brotherhood.

' If we add the public sector to this long list, more than half our economy will, from the start, be
expressed in ECU. In view of the high value added of the ECU, I have no doubt that within five
years, at the most, the conversion will have been made in Europe, with unemployment having
totally disappeared with no risk of inflation. All the countries of the world will have joined the ECU
within 20 years.

' From the outset, the indebtedness of the State will have disappeared. Taxes should therefore be
reduced which will have the effect of enabling working hours to be reduced, and this in turn will
have the effect of allowing time spent at work to be reduced, for the same salary, and thus accelerate
full employment for all whilst raising the standard of living.

' Monetary stability and full employment are the two providers of prosperity. The Government
of the United States of Europe will win its bet at no cost to anyone else, and all the peoples of the
world will be grateful to us for this. This, perhaps, is the miracle of the ECU — to make possible
the impossible so that the earth becomes a paradise of universal brotherhood, a land of peace where
it is simply good to be alive.'

 'Your detractors say that you intend to nationalize all banks?'

' I am glad you used the word 'detractors'. You should not be surprised that they use such excessive
language. Today, all credit organizations are subject to the European Central Bank, which, as
everybody knows, has its headquarters in Frankfurt. Let me reassure monetarists from every side
that, at that level, there will be no change. What will change is the wide range of new powers that
local and regional banks will enjoy.

' As I have said, the Central Bank will be the only place at which the Public Treasury, that is to say
taxes, will be banked. This will enable the State to save thousands of millions by closing local tax
offices and getting rid of hundreds of thousands of civil servants who will be redundant. These
former civil servants will be able to offer their services to the banking sector. It is natural, therefore,
that the State has some small right of oversight.
                                                                                   (Murmurs in the hall)
' I see that you have understood me. The most important item is investment, since the banks will
have physically replaced the Stock Exchange, whose activities will be re-structured. In future all
Stock Exchange activities will be totally computer-operated and Stock Exchanges as we know
them today will have disappeared. Anybody will be able to visit the 'Stock Exchange' via his
computer. This 'Stock Exchange' will merely consist of a series of inter-connected servers linking
the various banks.

' This aside, the banks will all be private and they will have more autonomy than they had before.
We want to see competition between them intensifying for the greater good of the consumer. All-out
competition between banks will slim down management and maintain equilibrium in prices. Those
who fear the nationalization of banks need have no more fears. It will not happen.'

 'What will the relationship be between the State and the Central Bank?'

' Apart from its role involving taxation at source, The Central Bank will keep its affairs in order
with regard to current deals. In the future, it will have to take on board any instructions from
the Federal Government regarding deposits and entries, since the State will assume entire
responsibility for them. In our eyes this is the only way to put an end to corruption. You will not
be unaware that, today, the banking world is tied up by the 'Gramigna' and has become the
repository of its interests. This is, without doubt, one of the most painful aspects of the ECU.
                                                                                              (Laughter)
' For my part, I think that we are going to have to talk to a number of people who do not appreciate
our reforms. But we are prepared to enter into discussions with all economic entities, quite
independently of any political option, to see what we can do for them.'

 'If I have understood you, it will no longer be possible to launder dirty money?'

' As I have said, the ECU is both a universal monetary standard, and a unit of measure like the metre
or the litre. You can no more buy an ECU than you can buy metres or litres. We buy a litre or a
metre of something, but not a litre of nothing. It is the same for the ECU.

' In the same way, you will only be able to buy a national currency on the basis of its value
calculated in terms of the ECU. If you wish to travel, you will ask your bank to give you a cheque,
made out in ECU, and your account will be debited in the currency of the country in which you are
travelling. Traffic in currencies will not be possible by means of the ECU. It will no longer be
possible, therefore, to take clandestine money in a suitcase and place it in a foreign account. The
laundering of money will thus become impossible.

' If a European goes to a bank with a suitcase full of banknotes to be placed in his account, the
employee at the counter will press a button and the tax inspector working at the bank will ask him
where the money comes from. In extreme cases the bank staff could block the entrance and call the
police.

' In principle, all commercial operations will be made in ECU throughout the whole world. The
consumers banknotes will not be directly convertible into another currency, but only through a
cheque made out in ECU. The effect of this is that all transactions in specie will made out to bearer
and thus linked to an account whose owner will be known. Anonymous dealing in money will thus
be finished.'

 'What if the Mafia operates in ECU?'

' Well, the mafioso or the bandit will be obliged to give his identity and register his business at the
Chamber of Commerce, giving details of his business activity: drugs, arms traffic, crookery and
receipt of stolen goods, kidnapping, the financing of terrorist organizations, prostitution, ordered
killings, white slave traffic, paedophilia ... not to mention the payment of VAT.

                                                                      (Outbursts of general laughter)

' The ECU being a virtual currency, subject to permanent and unfailing control by the State, which
will extend to all banking operations, it will be impossible for organized crime to finance its
operations through the banks without being noticed. The ECU will therefore constitute an
insurmountable obstacle to organized crime.'

 'If I understand you right, the ECU will be running a bank dictatorship. Will this mean the end of
  democratic liberties?'

' I am not aware that the existence of the metre, the litre, or the kilo in any way invalidates the
exercise of our rights or democratic liberties. For my part, I can't imagine that one can live today
without a universal system of measurement. For the first time, the economy joins the ranks of other
activities and becomes an exact science. This single fact means that the value of money will no
longer be measured 'by the weight of one's sword', but solely by the amount of work invested in a
product. This quantity is objectively measurable and leaves no way open to organized crime. Since
it cannot be stored in a bank, it will no longer be necessary to combat organized crime since it will
have simply disappeared.

' If you think that democratic liberty means the right to give oneself up to criminal activities, well
that changes everything. It is just a matter of definition.

' Organized crime has existed up to now because governments and institutions benefited from it.
The moment that the United States of Europe no longer tolerates crime and decides to attack
it through the banks, then it will have ceased to exist, and for good.

' Generally speaking, we have to know what sort of world we want to live in. Either we want a
society which respects our rights and our liberties, in which case we must act to bring this about, or
we openly take the side of the assassins. All things considered, I would prefer to be subject to the
control of the banks, under the aegis of the State, rather than that of a bunch of criminals.'

 'Under such a controlled economy the trade unions will surely have served their purpose?'

' They will never have been so useful. Although the trade unions as we know them will have no
purpose to fulfil, since predatory capitalism will have disappeared, yet their existence will be
indispensable as representatives of the workers and to protect them from the possessive instincts of
the State, which, I admit, have never been so powerful.

' If you have really understood what I have said to you, the State will ipso facto become the owner
of the value added to be shared out. But this sharing out will be subject to the policy of the
government, designed and controlled by parliament and the other chambers. In this context the
formal owners of numerical capital will not weigh heavily in the scales against the State because the
State is going to demand a large slice of value added. Since the predatory capitalists of the past will
no longer rule the roost, the new owners of numerical capitalism will have to count on the trade
unions to support them in their defence of their rights against the morbid hunger of the State.

' This holds promise for the foundation of a new alliance between the bosses and the work force,
who will be in the same camp and opposed to the State. When you think about it, the liberty
which the predatory capitalist formerly had at his disposal was limited to fixing prices as he saw fit
without respecting any scientific or ethical norms. Let's be honest, the notion of liberty under
western capitalism was just that. The owner of numerical capital will not enjoy that liberty since the
economic value will be subjected to an economic decimetre.

' The management of a company and its personnel will, however, have many common interests,
given that, under numerical capitalism, the human factor holds a decisive place, at the level of the
profitability of a company. No company can survive and impose itself on the market unless, at a
given price, the design and quality of its products are equal to, or superior to, those of its rivals. At
this level the position of the trade union delegate will, no doubt, be strengthened vis-à-vis the
management.

' This climate of co-operation between the management and the work force will extend even to the
running of the company, since the work force will be more inclined to have confidence in the
management if it keeps the work force informed of the policy of the company and rewards it by
allowing the workers a share in profits. And here we come back again to the common front of the
bosses and the work force against the State, since the bosses will also need the support of the trade
unions to ensure that the greater part of the added value remains in the company, since the less the
State takes from the company the higher will be the salaries.
' The State always has a tendency to help itself generously and only a united front at the company
level will be able to prevent this. Indeed, it is arranged that the trade unions will be represented in a
Federal Chamber which has the right of veto on any decree or decision of the government.
Generally speaking, this Chamber could block any fiscal law provided it has a two-thirds majority.
Contrary to what happened in the past, the trade unions will weigh heavily in the life of institutions,
of which they will be practically an integral part.

' There is yet one other domain in which the trade unions will be able to defend the rights of the
personnel - when, for example, the management wants to introduce robots. This will only be
possible in the absence of unemployment, or to take on tasks that are dangerous or harmful to
human health. But a robot will never be able to replace a worker against the wishes of the trade
unions. Public power, numerical capital and personnel will finally end up as single, interactive
whole, in which all the players are complementary. In a climate such as this, I doubt that the
workers will want to go on strike. This may have been justified when predatory capitalism and the
State were in cahoots with each other to exploit the workers. This will no longer be the case with the
ECU, which will henceforth be a factor for social peace.'

 'Does this mean that the workers are going to lose the right to strike?'

' Not at all. Just because the trade unions don't want to go on strike, because they are happy, does
not mean that they have lost the right to strike.

' In terms of constitutional law, the Federal Chamber of the trade unions will protect us from the
ravenous appetite of the State, and the right to strike is their last resort to press trade union claims of
all kinds. But this right will be clearly regulated and be subject to a whole conciliation process.
Trade union delegates will not be able to brandish at any time the threat of strike, as they could in
the old days, so as to defend the interests of the staff, because they will be much better represented
and protected than they are now.

' Delegates should remember, however, that, with the ECU, competition in the market will be much
more serious, because all those concerned will be on an equal footing. The health of a company will
depend upon the cohesion and, above all, the solidarity of the management and the personnel
vis-à-vis the competition. In a harmonious social climate, the workers will be able to give of their
best, since they will have no fear that a robot will put them out of work.

' At the company level, conflicts of interest between staff and management will be settled by
councils of 'wise men'. With regard to collective agreements, the regional trade unions of a Federal
State will be able to come to an agreement with their equivalents among the management. As I have
said they will both show more solidarity, against the State, and should be able to count on each
other. Here again, we can expect a real revolution in social relationships.'

 'But what happens if a Council of 'Wise Men' dismisses a trade unions case?'

' The Federal Chamber of Trade Unions will then examine the case to see if there are grounds for
letting the case go forward to the Supreme Court which will then decide the case. But this is going
beyond our subject and will be the subject of another conference when we shall ask Europeans to
adopt the new Constitution of the United States of Europe, which will be more social and closer to
the citizen than the preceding one.'
 'Who will protect the citizen against your all-powerful State and who will guarantee our liberties
  and rights, apart from a magistracy corrupted by the 'Gramigna ' ?'

' Allow me to point out that it is not my State but the State that citizens wanted, since the State
represents all the citizens just as much as those elected, and that means also you.

' Do what is necessary to give people confidence in you and then you will be able to have
confidence in others. The moment that institutions and the social order become credible, the citizen
can rely on them, of that there is no doubt. Without ethical order, no system of law is conceivable,
for human law can only spring from respect for man's dignity, that is to say the sense of fairness,
and not from the interplay of force. The sense of fairness derives from the law, and this we must
discuss together.

' To reply to your question, I think it is up to the citizen to watch over the institutions. This is the
work of journalists. You are the guarantors of the Democratic State.

' I admit that the pressure that the 'Gramigna ' exorcises over the magistracy is the weak link in our
structure and, believe me, it is also a headache to know that our judges are more concerned to find
their families alive when they return home at night than they are to apply the law.

' 'In the worst case, Parliament can demand a vote of no confidence to get rid of the government.
The people also, by petition, can demand new elections. But, as I said, all this is a matter of Law.
There is still work to be done and we shall be seeing each other again shortly. Our jurists are
working on these problems as fast as they can.

' 'Meanwhile, I believe that the ECU fulfils all the conditions necessary to guarantee the rule of law
in the fairest way. The advantages of the ECU are such that the people will not be slow to rally
round it to change the face of this world in which it has become impossible to live.'

 'What will you do if another country does not respect the rules linked to the ECU?'

' The United States of Europe will suspend commercial relations with that State. If its behaviour
constitutes a serious threat to our interests, the United Nations will be empowered to impose a
commercial embargo to put an end to these activities.

' Believe me, the United States of Europe has at its disposal sufficient galactic strength to enable us
to bring any recalcitrant State to reason. Henceforth, we shall have to assume responsibility as the
economic and monetary policeman of the whole world, but we shall do so within the framework of
Law and international institutions.

' 'We have to choose between the Law and the 'Gramigna '. My Government has made its choice. It
will not give way to the world Mafia and it will do everything in its power to combat it, everything.'

 'Have you any idea of the budget that the United States of Europe will release to finance the
  programme of monetary reform and the re-launch of the economy?'

' 300,000 billion dollars, spread, to start with, over five years. At the end of the first five-year plan
the government will take stock of the situation and the Government will take the necessary
decisions.'
The reply fell like a thunderbolt in the hall. Foreign reporters looked at each other in stupefaction.
The message was clear. This was the final collapse of the former capitalist economy which would
be unable to resist such a massive monetary offensive. The survival of the United States of Europe
was at stake. International partners, starting with the United States, were faced with only two
alternatives - fair, fraternal co-operation, or bankruptcy.

Many journalists would have liked to ask for more details on this point, notably on the real
intentions of the government, for there was something troubling in the President's determination.
But the political stakes were so high that they felt they had to consult their editors.

Seeing that no more questions would be asked, President Léon Bouvier thanked the reporters for
their attention.

The United States of Europe had just regained the initiative on the economic world stage. Hitherto
tom by divisions, feeble and ridiculed, always fawning on those more powerful than itself, Europe
had become the world's leading power. The trials it had been through had finally welded it solidly
together.

Europe was to continue this performance by a Treaty constituting the great Eurasian Confederation,
which created a political and economic space, with no frontiers, stretching from Brest to
Vladivostok, a market of more than a thousand million consumers, thus balancing the Asian bloc,
which henceforth numbered six thousand million men. This was followed by the Mediterranean
Pact, which was to seal the alliance between the United States of Europe and all the Islamic States
of the region, opening the way for a vast industrial project for the large scale use of solar power.

Confident in the power of universal brotherhood, President Léon Bouvier wrote a letter to his
equivalent in the United States of America to assure him of his undying friendship and his will to
co-operate at all levels, recalling the ties of friendship that had united their two great nations for
several centuries. In his eyes it was less a matter of a struggle between great powers than of a
redistribution of riches to strengthen the purchasing power and to improve the standard of living of
the developing countries. It was, therefore, a matter of establishing a new equilibrium and
harmonization of all countries within the framework of globalization, which he considered to be the
only way of halting the population explosion and the destruction of the environment on a global
scale. It was a question of the continued existence of the two countries which could only survive if
they spoke the same language, that of the heart.

The European press was enthusiastic about this press conference - that of the international press was
more mixed. The contrary would have been surprising. Some even accused Léon Bouvier of
megalomania. For him, the press conference was virtually a plebiscite, since the monetary reform
was adopted by referendum with 82% of the vote in favour. The F.P.R., the Federal Party for
Renewal, could enter the general elections calmly and face up to the reactionary forces headed by
the 'Gramigna' and the Front for the Europe of Countries.

This victory encouraged the supporters of the President to take part in the general election which
was to take place two weeks later. No effort was spared during the rough electoral campaign. The
voting surpassed all the forecasts - the F.P.R. won the elections with 67% of the vote. It had a
two-thirds majority in the Federal Parliament and thus could alter the Constitution as it liked to
ensure the success of monetary reform.
The political game was well and truly lost for the extreme right and its lackeys of the 'Gramigna'.
Only a coup d'état and a ruthless elimination of the men in power could still reverse the situation
and re-establish the old, corrupt, tired, regime of the Front for the Europe of Countries.




        To know what happens next, read the highly explosive political thriller

                         Secret mission AMANDA
                 French edition available free of charge on this web-site
                                The Journalists' Questions
Mr. President, why do your want to change our money?                                       Page 7
How do you envisage this economic revolution?                                              Page 9
Does this mean you are going to do away with money?                                        Page 10
There are those who claim that this monetary reform will put an end to the cult of money   Page 11
These are the words of Karl Marx. Is your revolution a Marxist one?                        Page 12
If I have understood you aright, this new monetary standard is based principally on the Page 14
value added by the transformation of energy by machines and not by men?
Your adversaries claim that your notion of added value is simply another version of the Page 16
Marxist theory of plus-value. How does your theory differ from those of the Communists?
Does this mean that gold will lose its value?                                              Page 19
In other words, the poor countries of today will be the rich countries of tomorrow ?       Page 20
Trade Unionists claim that you want to introduce the twenty-hour week and retirement at Page 21
fifty to be able to guarantee full employment?
In the end, what you want is a ' planned society in which value added will be shared out, Page 22
in advance, in accordance with a plan?
How do you intend to measure the contribution of human manpower in terms of energy?        Page 23
Does this mean that sportsmen, artists and intellectuals will die of hunger?               Page 23
So nationalizing works of art means the abolition of the right of inheritance?             Page 24
If I have understood the new system correctly, all citizens will be equal but qualified Page 25
workers and gifted people will be more equal than the rest?
Will the ECU allow us to put an end to the scandalous subsidies which the taxpayer pays Page 25
to farmers to do nothing?
'People are saying that it is your intention to eliminate taxes?                           Page 26
Does this mean that the State will advance to companies the money to be paid in tax?       Page 26
Which means that profitability will be favoured to the detriment of quality?               Page 27
How could you combine rationalisation and full employment?                                 Page 28
How will the consumers’ money be calculated in relation to the new monetary standard?      Page 29
Does this mean that there will no longer be fluctuations between currencies?               Page 30
How will this reform allow States to guarantee full employment? What makes you think Page 32
you will succeed where John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman failed?
Does this mean you are going to put lorry-drivers out of work?                             Page 33
This reform should, therefore, resolve the problem of asylum-seekers?                      Page 33
I suppose there will be a universal scale of values which will be applicable to all Page 33
countries?
Which makes one think that this reform does not affect the market economy?                 Page 34
Does this mean that the Government of the United States of Europe is going to subsidize Page 34
investment in the developing countries?
I come back to your 'hard cash'. The day that everybody pays by credit card, will all Page 34
transactions be made in ECU?
Is it true that money will no longer produce interest?                                     Page 35
You won’t need savings for investment?                                                        Page 35
But you have just said that you could place your hard cash to cover the loan of a company Page 36
If I have understood you correctly, the company will not need to repay the money it had Page 37
borrowed to increase production, since the State will have only made a paper
transaction?
If you think about it, this system is a form of capitalism under another name?                Page 38
Mr. President, do you think that the ECU could have saved the European union?                 Page 40
If I have understood you correctly, the European Union failed because of a German Page 42
monetary union which was premature and badly managed?
What, in your opinion, would have made it possible to avoid an economic crisis in Europe Page 45
following the reunification of Germany?
With the constitution of the United States of Europe, the ECU is in the end, just a better Page 47
Euro, a life insurance for the rich?
Is it true that the ECU will result in a massive reduction in the number of civil servants?   Page 47
I fear you did not understand my question. I wanted to know how the State as employer Page 49
will treat its employees?
Do you think that all civil servants will be able to be re-classified?                        Page 49
When you speak of speculative money, are you also thinking of property speculation?           Page 50
Your policy amounts to expropriation. What will happen to the interest on existing capital, Page 50
interest payments, and so on? How will you replace the lack of earning power of people
who will have nothing to live on?
This means that most contracts will be cancelled and that it will no longer be possible to Page 51
place money in a bank or live off one's interest?
This means that there will be no reason for the Stock Exchange to exist?                      Page 52
Does this mean that the factors which cause inflation will disappear?                         Page 52
If there is no inflation, prices should, theoretically, be stable. How do you think you will Page 52
be able to limit, or even stop abuses?
Concretely, how are you going to set about putting the ECU in place?                          Page 53
Your detractors say that you intend to nationalize all banks?                                 Page 54
What will the relationship be between the State and the Central Bank?                         Page 54
If I have understood you, it will no longer be possible to launder dirty money?               Page 55
What if the Mafia operates in ECU?                                                            Page 55
If I understand you right, the ECU will be running a bank dictatorship. Will this mean the Page 55
end of democratic liberties?
Under such a controlled economy, the trade unions will surely have served their purpose? Page 56
Does this mean that the workers are going to lose the right to strike?                        Page 57
But what happens if a Council of 'Wise Men' dismisses a trade union case?                     Page 57
Who will protect the citizen against your all-powerful State and who will guarantee our Page 58
liberties and rights, apart from a magistracy corrupted by the 'Gramigna'?
What will you do if another country does not respect the rules linked to the ECU?             Page 58
Have you any idea of the budget that the United States of Europe will release to finance Page 58
the programme of monetary reform and the re-launch of the economy?
                                          Dear Readers,
Allow me to thank you for reading this book. As you know, it represents only one chapter of a much
bigger novel, which brings into play a new literary genre. Through this service, La plume verte aims
to meet the needs of the majority of its readers, who often dream of becoming authors themselves
—which, after all, is quite natural.

Judging by the bookshops, which are splitting at the seams with books, there are grounds for asking
oneself if it is really reasonable to swell even further the stocks of unsold masterpieces. It is
precisely here that La plume verte has found an answer to the problem of how to ensure that the
publication of a book does not constitute a commercial risk for a Publisher without seriously
penalizing the author by depriving him of the right to express himself

It goes without saying that this can only happen if the author writes, in the first place, for the
pleasure of writing and being read, and is prepared, at first, to give up any thought of income, and, is
faithful to the principle that whoever wants to grow a crop must first sow the seed. One gets nothing
for nothing. This is one of the fundamental rights that every constitution should protect, the right to
read, which is synonymous with the right to publish. When one knows that the chances of a young
author finding a publisher are less than one per cent, the extent of our 'liberty of written expression'
is seen in its true light.

La plume verte is thus an electronic publishing organization open to all those who want, more than
anything else, to be read - and right away. The first problem to be eliminated was the commercial
risk. As far as we are concerned, any author can - for a modest sum - find shelter at La plume verte
subject to his giving readers the right to read his book or books without charge.

In time, La plume verte will become a non-profit making association for the promotion of culture.
Its aim will be to act as a trial publishing house as well as a literary and journalistic Stock Exchange
for publishers of every type. For La plume verte will be open to all currents of ideas without
distinction. It should become the essential meeting-point of publishers, authors and readers.

La plume verte offers the additional advantage of not appropriating to itself the copyright of the
writer. In other words, it allows him to publish his writings, at world level, in the shortest possible
space of time, whilst offering him the opportunity later to find a publisher of books, magazines or
newspapers. This formula should attract and retain the attention of writers and journalists from
every walk of life. It will be a platform for dialogue.

If, by definition, any author assumes entire and indivisible contractual responsibility for his
writings, this puts him under an obligation to La plume verte not to contravene the laws applicable
to publication on the territory of the French Republic - a liberal, tolerant nation, if ever there was
one. Any abuse of the law brings with it the risk of immediate cancellation of the contract, without
damages, since La plume verte will not hesitate to comply with any judicial decision ordering it to
withdraw a work from its site.

'The term infraction covers any attack on human dignity and any lying allegations that could cause
grave harm to the reputation of an individual. If an author or a journalist wants to formulate
criticisms or accusations, then they must be well founded. In time, La plume verte will have a
Judicial Affairs service at the disposal of readers.

If writers or foreign journalists are threatened in their country of origin, they can have recourse to
the benevolent support of a citizen or an organization, whether here in France or abroad. In any
event, these citizens or organizations will assume entire responsibility for the writings and
publications of their protégés.

We would like to draw your attention to the fact that we only carry out a summary check on our
publications. We recommend, therefore, that you take great care to pay attention to presentation and
style. Should it turn out that a publication makes a serious attack on human dignity or on public
order, and readers or the authorities inform us of this and lodge a complaint, La plume verte
reserves the right to recognize that there has been breach of contract and to withdraw this
publication from its site. Madmen, paedophiles, sadists, inciters to racial hatred or to murder are
therefore asked to abstain.

No institution, however tolerant, generous and liberal it may be, can function without a minimum of
respect for itself and for others. We are confident that all those who wish to call on our services will
avoid any needless complications from the start. It is perfectly possible to state one's case effectively
without coming into conflict with the laws of our democratic Republic.

If you are a writer or journalist and you want to publish a work or an article, you will be able to
select at your leisure the options you want. You will be asked to make payment by credit card. The
contract between the author and La plume verte will come into force when the payment has been
credited. A written copy of this contract will be sent to you through the post.

If you are simply a reader, you will have nothing to pay. All you will have to do is to consult our
Forum, or our Gazette, according to whether you want to read an entire book or an article.
Remember, you are authorized to download these documents for your own personal use, any
commercial exploitation being, in principle, forbidden without the written consent of the author,
whom you can contact through Internet. In the event of illicit publication or violation of his rights,
the author reserves the right to claim an indemnity.

Herein lies one of the original aspects of La plume verte. Not only does it offer the author a chance
to publish his writings on trial with a view to contacting a possible publisher, it also is a way of
getting advice and the opinions of his readers and of making ties of friendship with them.

Since this small book inaugurates La plume verte, you can from now consult and download the files
of the novel 'AMANDA, secret mission' onto your computer. Since it is a book of about 900 pages,
or 18 megabytes on your hard disk, printing it will cost you about the same as the book itself when
this appears on the bookstalls. You will thus have all your time to read it, without cost, on your
screen. The fact that you are able to download it free of charge does not, therefore, mean that
publication via your computer is free, since that will cost you money in paper and ink.

Seen in this light, La plume verte is in no way in direct competition with publishers or bookshops.
What it does is to complement them harmoniously by offering all those potential writers and
journalists and all those who have a razor-sharp pen, the opportunity to make themselves known. La
plume verte is simply an organization for trial electronic publishing which allows the author to
modify his manuscript along the way in accordance with any criticisms and opinions expressed
before it comes out in the form of a book or an article in the press.

In the hope that La plume verte will have the success it deserves and thanking you in advance for
your visit to our site,

Yours cordially,
Georges Lacroix

								
To top