François Le Berre for Premier Commissioner | February 2021

An Interview with Le Berre: Conducted on Zoom - Abridged

INTERVIEWER: M. Le Berre, you served for over 14 years as Minister of Propaganda and Censorship under the totalitarian regime of Areai. This obviously does not reflect on you well; how do you justify this?

LE BERRE: I do not justify this. However, I did not work in her government willingly. As we all very well know, Areai had a penchant for giving out the death penalty. When the constitutional convention was dissolved, she knew me to be the publisher of L'Humanité - which was very popular before the - how do I say it - events of 1993. So she came up to me and quite simply threatened me. She said that if I did not work for her, was not totally obedient to her, she would have me slowly immersed into a bath of hydrochloric acid. She went as far as to show me the bath and the acid. Where she got it from I don't know, nor do I want to know, but that's not the point. I worked for her - my life was on the line. My experience under her tyranny further underscored this; she would have people put to death in horrific ways for the most ridiculous reasons. A typist in the Ministry, for example, was eaten alive at the order of Areai simply because he wore red socks on a Thursday.

INTERVIEWER: Did your actions as a minister in Areai's government ever lead to anyone's death?

LE BERRE: Most likely. I was responsible only for advising her, and conveying information and orders she had given me to the rest of the Ministry and the public. What I said, what I conveyed, probably led to the reporting of many people, the discovery of "negative" messages in letters and other material, and so and so forth. And that most likely led to death for many people. I tried my best to stop her, fed her false information whenever I could; but I don't know what impact this had. She wanted absolutely no dissent; she wanted a nation totally loyal to her, a nation completely dependent on her. But I remain terribly angry with myself. I let so many die; I can never make up for that. I have apologized, over my years, so many times; I must apologize once more. Perhaps I will never be forgiven, never forgive myself; but I probably deserve that.

INTERVIEWER: Why do you support the current government, in spite of your support for the free press?

LE BERRE: 30% of the population is part of a cult that wishes to kill everyone that is not a part of it and, afterwards, return the country to a primitive, agrarian state. No fully representative government can stand in such situations. The Federal Council is doing its best to maintain order and what it can of republican norms in these times; it is forced to impose restrictions in order to keep what is left of our old democracy.

INTERVIEWER: You supported market reforms in 1992. Why, especially considering that they were highly unpopular?

LE BERRE: I'd hardly call them market reforms. They simply allowed for a greater role for the self-employed, who were previously working illegally. In fact, most people support it now, after what happened in 1993. The only reason they were unpopular then was simply because those were unstable times - times which culminated in the terrors of 1993, which we all can remember.

INTERVIEWER: What is your ideology?

LE BERRE: As I have said many times, I consider myself a social democrat. In the long term, I support the development of socialism; but this is not really possible except on a gradual and popularly-supported basis. In the meantime, one can support basic reforms that allow for better conditions for all. At the basis of my ideology, however, is the idea of a republic. Governance, whether economic or political, should be for and by the people, taking into account reason and rationality. It should free the people, allowing them to act as independent citizens, giving them each equal rights and equal treatment under the law.

INTERVIEWER: If you are to become Premier Commissioner, would you impose socialism on Europe?

LE BERRE: No. Europe remains firmly capitalist; it is impossible to change that due to popular opinion. At the same time, the development of socialism must first take place on a national basis if it is to maintain itself.

As Premier Commissioner, as such, I would simply strive to create an inter-European democracy. The voices of all should and must be heard and taken into account; the people should rule. Economically, I would give greater power to workers, as well as small and medium-sized enterprises; however, simply because of their scope, I would continue to give some representation to the largest companies, albeit on a much reduced basis and on one that is not so....corrupt as it is now.

INTERVIEWER: You support some level of cultural autonomy. If a culture opposes equal rights for all, should it be allowed to do so?

LE BERRE: No, not always. While adjustments and accommodations can be made in certain areas, in others, they cannot. For example, cultural autonomy cannot be used to justify, for example, eugenics, or a dictatorship.

Poster No. 1

alt text

RALLY NO. 1: Kiel, Union of Syndicates

(The crowd cheers as Le Berre emerges from the darkness into the spotlight. He waves, smiling at all)

Welcome, welcome to all! Living in a broom closet was fine, but I'm happier to be free, so to speak, again! But on to the point.

Our country, our homeland has been racked by terror for so long. Many of us can remember 1993; more the horrors of Areai's regime, of the evil of the People's Assemblies. And yet we remain free, in many ways, although we continue to face great adversity.

Our creativity is unbridled; our labor is liberated - an expression of our desires, our powerful imaginations, not those of an elite! It is this freedom, so rare in our world, in our Europe, that is at the core of our nation, of our very souls. And it is this freedom I seek to protect and to give to all Europeans!

No longer shall we be besieged by foreign interests wanting to turn our country into a cheap source of labor! No longer shall the people of Europe be oppressed by the elite!

For the first time in their lives they will be able to freely enjoy the freedoms we have, and many more! For the first time, they shall be able to celebrate their culture without fear of repercussion; for the first time, their labor shall not be viewed as disposable but as being important, a very part of themselves and of greater society!

The small business, the cooperative, the union, the worker, the entrepreneur; all these sources of creativity, shall be upheld and represented in our European Union for the very first time!

So too shall be the nation, the linguistic group, and the cultural group, those that give to us a core part of our very identity and those that those above us wish to eliminate!

Each person will be able to celebrate who they are in all ways! None shall be oppressed; all will be heard!

(Le Berre pauses as the crowd cheers).

But it is time to turn to more serious topics. Europe has become a kleptocracy. Those in power are incompetent and without any true knowledge of the ever deteriorating situation throughout Europe. I point to the violence in our own nation, to the Duxburian Union where many are at grave risk of unemployment, and to many other nations which are threatened by desertification, by poverty, and by much, much more, all of which have been largely ignored by the present political establishment.

Meanwhile, when those in power do decide to do anything, they do so poorly. Much of what has been done to rectify important issues, especially discrimination, has been done without input from groups benefited and groups affected, nor from those groups with expert knowledge on the situation. On those issues which everyone wants something to be done in exactly one - albeit vague - direction, there is repeated waffling, extreme opposition, and many other such things, all of which in the end stops anything of importance being accomplished.

This must change. European government must be by and for the people; when developing policy, it must take into account the opinions of those possibly affected, of the minority, of the majority, and of experts, and through consensus or at the very least the agreement of as many as possible, integrate all these into one solution that benefits all.

That is all I wish to accomplish. I promise no massive, money-consuming projects; I promise only just representation and sane policymaking.

Thank you for listening.

POLICY ADDENDUM

In light of recent criticisms, I am releasing this policy addendum.

I. The European Council will be limited to passing legislation that upholds the spirit of the Constitution - that is, of the republican ideals of liberty, equality, justice, and solidarity. It also will have the responsibility of enforcing the spirit of laws passed by other chambers.

II. The European Assembly will be composed of representatives for the governments of member-states and of linguistic, ethnic, cultural, and vocational groups. It shall have the responsibility of proposing legislation to the smaller chambers to be created, as well as of approving it. It is freer in creating legislation than the European Council; however, it may only do so on political, cultural/social, and economic issues that affect all nations, and on the basis of consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, to be determined by the Premier Commissioner if discussion has already lasted for over two weeks, legislation may be passed by majority. At the same time, it will have the responsibility of creating basic guidelines for the work of the European Council.

III. The Political, Cultural, and Economic Councils will have the responsibility of drafting and reviewing legislation in their specific areas. They are not required to do so; however, what legislation they propose will be approved by either the European Council or the European Assembly dependent on which is relevant to the subject of the proposed material.

IV. Vocational groups will be constituted on a federal basis, with each having one autonomous "branch" in each member-state. They shall have the responsibility of acting to influence and create legislation on the behalf of and in the interests of those they represent. Each group shall be given an allocation of the European budget if they wish to, which it may re-allocate to other agencies or spend for itself. They are encouraged to facilitate the sharing of resources and ideas, as well as the further development of "third-place"/"second place" hybrid facilities on a basis which benefits all equally and which does not further penalize struggling nations, to be developed by a joint meeting of the Political and Economic Councils.

V. Separate groups of representation shall be created for workers, independent workers, managers, entrepreneurs, cooperatives, small businesses, medium-sized businesses, and large businesses. These will be represented on the Economic Council.

VI. Opposition to an all-European single market. Europe is in a state of transition; the creation of a single market would disrupt this, possibly funneling the resources of developing or liberalizing economies towards the richest. A single market can only be created when all nations agree and are on some level of developmental parity, having well established domestic enterprise. Nations may voluntarily join such a thing if they are willing to.

VII. Support for individual liberties. All people should have the right to bodily autonomy; to do as they wish so long as they harm no one, including themselves. Discussion shall be done with the reformed European Assembly in order to further expand and possibly modify this concept to the liking of all member-states.

VIII. Openness to petitions. It should be simple for all in Europe to petition the Commission or any other institution of the Union; as many as is possible should be answered in some way.

IX. Opposition to European bureaucracy. As much as is possible should be put into the hands of individual nations and of the people. (ie, to specialized vocational groups in place of established appointed councils).

X. Earthquake preparedness. The events that took place in Granada are worrying; I sympathize for all affected, and hope that they will be able to recover with great speed. In order to prepare for possible future incidents, Europe must prepare disaster plans in the case of damaging earthquakes. Discussion will be held with the European Assembly on this issue.

Rally No. 2: Rutte am Mainz, Fremet

The first time - no, the second, really (he had traveled to Europolis all the way back in 1991 for a convention) - he had ever spoken outside of his country. It was his responsibility to do well here. He was speaking in a more conservative city than his native Kiel, one that had only recently begun to move towards social democracy, and even then only as a result of foreign policy. Jeopardize anything and it would not simply mean loss for him but for the movement as a whole.

He sighed; he would have to begin soon. He left the backstage and walked, again from the darkness into the light of the sun.

"Hello, Rutte am Mainz! Hello, Fremet! I have to get the point - something very obvious to us all. We all have been under the boot of a Union blind and deaf for far too long! It has refused to take into account the interests of many, from a multitude of nations to those belonging to ever so many vocations, from miners to furniture-makers. But it is unable to do so, in its current state. Many of our representatives in the institutions of the Union are trying their very best to represent us in all our diversity, in all our different vocations and cultures and languages. Yet they can never do so fully. Each representative is but one person - they can never convey the full range of opinions that exist in a single nation. Many people are ignored; the corrupt find an opportunity to gain ever more power for themselves.

We can see the consequences. Our politics have been taken over by demagogues. Ridiculous projects are proposed regularly, projects that would benefit few but would demand great sums of money from even the most disadvantage! Virtue signaling abounds!

Important issues are ignored. Coups are ignored; repression as well. The global poor remain poor and unfree, unable to take their place as equals in the great exchange of ideas, of creations. Those who have or are about to lose their jobs from climate change, from the move into a post-industrial economy, from recession; they are ignored entirely. Those who try to adapt, who find middling work in new and exploitative industries - the "gig" economy, especially - they are abandoned, forced to fend for themselves in a world that is much crueler to them than to many others.

If we are all to thrive, this must come to an end. Representation must reflect the true and multifaceted diversity of Europe, whether it is national, cultural, ethnic, linguistic, or even vocational! Irrationality and demagoguery must come to an end; experts - not performance artists - must be deeply involved in the formulation of policy. Only then can the unheard and ignored of Europe be finally heard, finally seen, and finally able to act.

We must establish for ourselves a Europe where all are heard, where policy is not formed by the few but by all, recognizing our great diversity in almost everything! Where all are equal in dignity and rights; where no one is exploited; where all are truly free!

This is the hope that I carry; that this wonderful world can someday come into being. And I hope that I may be able to begin to set. the foundation for it
Thank you for listening.

SECOND POLICY ADDENDUM

For the purpose of clarifying policies which I believe to be essential but which I have not yet touched on (perhaps unwisely), I will be adding a second addendum to the policies I plan to implement.

I. Strong support for unionization. Encourage the creation of collective bargaining agreements, especially of a sectoral nature, in individual member-states; propose legislation banning forms of "union-busting." Campaign to increase unionization across Europe, especially in the technology and "gig" industries.

II. Strong support for creative unions, professional associations, and artisan guilds. Allow these to be allocated spending in place of wasteful bureaucracy or through vocational groups if more cost effective; encourage and aid them in improving and constructing infrastructure as to facilitate the sharing of ideas and possibly resources.

III. Encouragement of the formation of mutual-aid societies, especially in cooperation with vocational groups, unions, associations, and artisan guilds. Included is the creation of "third-place" institutions for the purpose of the exchange of information, socialization, and supplements to existing welfare throughout Europe.

IV. Strong support for the open source movement. Encourage adoption of open-source alternatives in place of currently existing and expensive products; attempt to expand their usage in existing European institutions.

V. Strong opposition towards the creation of monopolies without regulations. An exception is made for dirigist/etatist economic policies. Discuss expansion and creation of anti-trust legislation with the European Assembly.

VI. Encourage grassroots support for the modernization of failing industry, so that it may continue in a more environmentally friendly one while still serving as a source of employment. Involve vocational groups, unions, associations, and guilds in this effort.

VII. Move Europe away from dependence on appointed bureaucracies towards advisory councils elected by experts.

Rally No. 3: Alfur, Alkharya

He had had a very, very long day. Exhausting, as well. But he had formidable opposition. Cocx and Leeson - they were both moderates, associated with democracy. As for him, he was left-wing, associated with violence, cannibalism, hatred, and, worst of all, a tyrannical dictatorship that he had (reluctantly and only when threatened) provided support to. The current state of his home country certainly did not help with his image. But that had to be overcome. Europe was suffering; he could begin to heal it, give it back to the people. He walked onto the stage he was to speak from as a woman announced his name.

Hello, Alfur and Alkharya! While I do have much to say today, I'll try to make it short. Bear with me.

The European Union is not particularly representative of those who live in it, as we all know very well. One delegate per nation, as exists in its highest body, cannot possibly convey the total set of interests that exist in a single nation, whether between differing cultures, regions, or even vocations.

This inevitably leaves people angry and opens the way for, as I said just a few hours ago, demagoguery. Seizing the anger of many, some try to manipulate the population into supporting them. A faction of these people does so by proposing ridiculous projects; another seizes upon ultra-nationalism and bigotry of various kinds. This year, they have almost succeeded. Look to Mr. Trump and Attorney Winston. Both of them are almost perfect examples of this!

If this is to be stopped; if our tax money is not to be wasted and if the European Union is not to be torn apart; reform is necessary. We need representation for those who are not well-represented right now - representation for individual vocations, for example, or for different cultures, for different linguistic groups.

Look, for example, at the crisis in the Duxburian Union. Many are unemployed; others are angered by proposed restrictions on all manner of things. If there were representation for those specific groups facing the same crises elsewhere - factory-workers, for example, or miners, as well as teachers - a solution likely would have come about by now. But very, very few people have mentioned it, and as a result nothing concrete has been done.

Turning away from that, we also need expert input into our affairs, as well. Just a few months ago, a performance artist, so to speak, was appointed head of the ESA. I will admit that he presented good credentials; however, if experts were better involved in the situation, I doubt he would have ever been appointed head. In that situation, we probably would have been left off with someone much less controversial and someone much more competent and experienced.

Of course, we also need expert input into situations where politicians do not have the requisite knowledge to do anything. Climate change, for example, is a massive danger; it threatens to destroy much of Europe's infrastructure and possibly cause crises, including famines, on the African continent and in the Caribbean. I doubt the vast majority of politicians have the technical know-how to develop a solution to such a thing single-handedly; in this, of course, we also need experts.

Here is what I propose: on an inter-European scale, we need a new political system - one operating on the basis of consensus, one which considers the opinions of all, individual nations, experts, vocational groups, cultures, and so on and so forth, and based on those and with their input, integrates them all into one, unified solution. Of course, this is utopian and will not happen in the near future, if ever - but perhaps part of it can be accomplished. In any case, we certainly need to gain the approval of as many different groups as possible, rather than simply pushing through policies with a simple majority and angering quite a few people.

On a sub-European scale, I advocate for much more. The corporation, as of now, seems to rule. It has a near stranglehold on everything in many nations; it must be countered. Our unions, which stand as one of the few forces against their power, must be strengthened and empowered, so that no one is exploited.

At the same time, we must allow our creative unions and our artisan guilds to flourish. Art, inexplicably, or perhaps not, often plays a major role in the advancement of technology. By encouraging it, by allowing for the exchange of ideas between artists around the world though their unions, we may very well be setting the stage for a new wave of innovation.

The same must go for all other industries. If people are able to share and create ideas, innovation will almost necessarily take place, as it has done so many times in the past in that way. If facilities are built to facilitate this, then it is even better - it creates what are known as "third places" across Europe, allowing for more community interaction and mutual-aid.

I am sorry for taking so long; I apologize. Goodbye and good day to all!

On the Earthquakes near Granada

I am deeply concerned about the recent spate of earthquakes near and around the city of Granada, Spain. While the vast majority of them were of low magnitude, their sheer number is in itself worrying.

I realize that there has been a great deal of damage. Many people may now be living in damaged homes; some may even be on the street. Stores, whether small or big, have likely lost some of their goods to damage. I have the greatest sympathy for them, and hope that they will be able to recover soon; that the damage will be repaired, that everyone will be able to return to their normal lives.

Of great danger, however, is the possibility that these earthquakes may be preludes to something much stronger, much more destructive. We must all hope that this will not happen; hope that the greatest danger has passed. But there is still always a possibility that something terrible will come. We must be careful; we must be prudent, in the case that such a thing will occur. Please prepare; please stay safe.

Wishing good health to all, I sign off.

On the Strikes in Azrekko

I stand in solidarity with the protestors in Azrekko. Europe for too long has ignored their protests against its policies; the people are now fighting back yet again.

To them, I can say nothing but this: keep protesting. It is imperative that you do. You must make Europe scream if it is to take any action at all. Shout, scream, publish newsletters, do anything and everything to show everyone your sadness, your anger, your needs; to show everyone that the elites of Europe have stolen everything from you. You are close to doing so.

Labor is the right of all. In our modern age, everyone, or at the very least the vast, vast, majority, should be employed. Those in Azrekko have been denied this right by so many, from those that own the businesses they work for to the traditional politicians of the Union.

We, together, must make sure that this never happens again; that those who are meant to represent us take the rights of others away; that in the name of justice, whether social or environmental, so many find themselves living in a justice-less world.

Europe, listen! Listen to the cries, the screams! Hear them, and act!

THIRD POLICY ADDENDUM

In light of recent criticism, I am adding a third addendum to the policies I am in support of.

I. In their encouragement of the sharing of resources and ideas, as well as the development of "third place" facilities, vocational bodies are asked to work with existing unions, professional assemblies, and guilds. If these are not in existence, they are encouraged to attempt to form them while temporarily taking on what roles they would normally play.

II. Groups of representation for workers, independent workers, managers, entrepreneurs, cooperatives, small businesses, medium-sized businesses, and large businesses will play a similar role to vocational assemblies.

III. Strong support for national self-determination. The European Union is not a state of its own; it is a union of states. Its purpose is to foster agreeable relations between member-states while protecting basic democratic norms and improving prosperity for all. It is not meant to be used as a political structure for the proposal of major infrastructural projects. Individual member-states should be able to conduct their own affairs as they wish so long as they do not infringe without consent on the principles of the autonomy and freedom of individuals as well as the affairs of other member-states.

IV. Strong support for minority cultures. In many places across Europe, minority languages and cultures are marginalized, sometimes even actively persecuted. These violations of human rights should not be tolerated; all cultural and linguistic groups should be valued and represented. If possible, they should be given autonomy as to manage their own affairs as according to their cultural norms.

V. Strong support for vocational autonomy. Those in a vocation know it best; at the very least, they should have influence over regulations regarding it.

FOURTH POLICY ADDENDUM

It has come to my attention that I have ignored a number of key issues. I am thus including them here.

I. Strong support for smallholder agriculture. While larger farms may be able to do better in terms of yield, smallholder agriculture serves as the basis for several economies in Europe. A special vocational chamber shall be created to defend smallholder interests and directly aid smallholders, through previously set out methods; discussion with Economic Council, vocational chambers, and other economic groups regarding research into ways to further protect and improve existing smallholder agriculture.

II. Strong support for urban agriculture. In many place, urban agriculture has been neglected or even obstructed, despite its role in community building as well as in providing sustainable produce to food deserts. Discuss, with the European Assembly, the possible creation of laws protecting and potentially encouraging community urban agriculture efforts. Investigate creating a special vocational chamber for those who engage in the activity as to protect their interests.

III. Strong opposition to rogue states. States that make no attempt to follow democratic norms, or in the case of unrest, do not plan to return to them, must be condemned by all Europe. Discuss the creation, with the European Assembly, of a "treaty of solidarity" in which nations collectively agree to take action against states which are defined by the Union to be rogue or totalitarian.

IV. Strong support for a united Commission. The Commission should be one institution, not three entirely separate offices as it currently is. There should be an attempt to unify its aims for the streamlining of governance.

Reaffirming my support for the open-source movement

I reaffirm my support for the open source movement. The current structure of the world of technology is far too centralized. A few corporations control almost everything, stifling competition, stifling innovation. The open-source movement acts heroically against them, developing on its own alternatives, as well as entirely new innovations, not simply for those who are privileged but for truly everyone.

In order to challenge the current state of stagnation and corruption and to create a new and better world, they are needed. We are and will be forever indebted to those within the movement.

The advances they have made, however, must be made clear. They have contributed to the movement for freedom, championing the principle of federation and the decentralized and open internet; they have challenged, as I said previously, seemingly every monopoly in the industry of technology. With the emergence of new technologies - 3-D printing comes to mind - they have begun a movement to decentralize ultralight industry, away from large and inhuman companies to individuals and small businesses.

Europe, as a whole, must always support them. I must reiterate that their endeavor to take away power from those at the very top - from the corrupt elite, which has led to so much suffering in our Union - and give in to the common person will in the end benefit us all.

Radical Leftism

I have been accused of being a radical leftist. This is delusion on the part of whomever suggested it.

To be fair, however, it would be true, if we were living in the 19th century. In those times, radicalism was a center-left movement which strove for a sort of equality. It was not anti-capitalist; far from it, it was a liberal movement. All that it wished for was a spreading of ownership - for a more equal distribution of property and wealth in a free-market system.

However, we do not live in the 19th century. We live in the 21st. What I propose, as such, is not radicalism. It is a common-sense implementation of social democracy for Europe.

Now, let us see for ourselves what exactly the accuser believes is "radical leftism:"

representing minorities in European governance
involving experts in formulation of policy
seeking consensus in policy, ignoring no one
support for small and medium scope business
encouraging people to make things themselves rather than buy them, by encouraging new technology that allow them to do so
supporting artists
supporting STEM
supporting struggling industries
supporting modernization of business without the destruction of employment
supporting trade unions because workers' rights, in some areas, remain abysmal
opposing large, hegemonic business because it stifles innovation and disconnects the worker from their work.
supporting the sharing of ideas and resources between workers and businesses to further spur innovation
supporting the creation of "third place" facilities shown repeatedly to build community bonds and reduce crime
fiscal responsibility

I'm not entirely sure how any of this is particularly terrifying, nor even leftist. If anything, it is very close to being a Christian-Democratic - yes, Christian-Democratic! - platform, one that would not be out of place in the home country of the accuser.

In fact, I will be using this as an example, from now on, of demagoguery. Provocateurs trying to terrify people into voting against better representation
by screaming and repeating as many buzzwords as they can while proposing the exact same thing that they are denouncing not a moment afterwards.

Really, all this shows is that only two competent - no, in fact, sane - people are running for Commission - Cocx and I.

Please do not vote for the ridiculous person who shouts this slander; this demagogue. Vote for anyone else. Scribble in the Cookie Monster, write in the name of the old lady down the street, just vote for anyone but him.

Rally No. 4: Gijón, Spain

Hello, Gijón; hello, Spain! In the past I have rambled; you have all had to bear with me. Not today.

My platform is simple. I want to return power to the people.

For too long, we have been underrepresented in the European Union. Yes, we can vote for our Councillors; but do they really represent us all. There is but one per nation; yet within a nation, there can be a great deal of diversity of opinions and needs - between languages, between cultures, between even vocations!

As a result, under the current system, many of us have gone ignored. It is as though some are entirely invisible to those who are meant to govern for us all.

We desperately need one that is better. Every linguistic group, every culture, every vocation, has different needs and different interests. Not a single one should go unheard, unrepresented. All of them should have some level of power over their own interests; all of them should be valued as near-equals to nations that currently make the basis of our union, for they play just as

But onto something entirely different.

Asturias is, from what I have understood, not doing very well economically. The mining industry has collapsed; while the service industry has expanded, it cannot generate the same amount of profit.

I cannot promise a reversal - the mining industry to return. What has happened has happened; we cannot go back. Yet the transition was unjust - very. Many other places in Europe are suffering from similar issues, from the Duxburian Union to my home country.

In those areas which must transition - and I truly mean must - there must be input from all - from those at danger of losing their work to those who may be affected by the sudden decline in growth - as to create a solution which may benefit all. This must occur not simply here but across all Europe, so that for those who could be impacted by the many changes being wrought by climate change, by the exhaustion of minerals and resources, and much more.

The same would go for all Europe, as to find policy for everyone.

A new world will be dawned, one not of silence but of acknowledgement, discussion, and of solutions.

A note: we must also prepare for disasters, on a national level. In the vicinity of Granada, there have been a great many earthquakes; although weak, they may signal something to come. I sympathize with all those affected, and continue to hope for a fast recovery.

Thank you for listening.

FIFTH POLICY ADDENDUM

In order to further elaborate upon my platform, as well as to explain my reasoning in adopting these policies, I am releasing this fifth of policy addendums.

POLICIES:

I. Strong support for the modernization of industry and agriculture. The Union should encourage modernization in all sectors of the economy in order to allow for a green and more efficient economy that remains able to maintain full employment.

II. Strong support for the expansion of "organic" agriculture. Forms of agriculture that may be able to expand yields while maintaining soil integrity (ie, agroforestry, permaculture) should be promoted by the Union as a whole, through agreements with existing agricultural institutions and related vocational chambers.

III. Strong support for just transition. Workers who work in sectors and industries that are unsustainable should be involved in the process of transition; they should be guaranteed equivalent jobs in stable industries.

REASONING:

I. Why am I opposed to large, non-state supported business? Large business has the tendency to form monopolies. It is true that others are often free to compete; but because of the resources that large, monopolistic businesses may have, these smaller businesses are often unable to gain traction. As a result, large business results in technological stagnation while at the same time forcing those who could have innovated to work as drones for them.

II. Why do I believe in vocational autonomy and representation? Those in a vocation generally know what is best for it. Medical doctors, for example, would be the most knowledgeable about their field; the same goes with all other professions and fields of work. As a result, it is those within a vocation who should have some autonomy over themselves. Doctors should not dictate to farmers regulations on their work, and vice versa.

I support representation for a different reason. Vocations often have different interests. A farmer may be worried about drought; a doctor may be worried about access to medical supplies. Neither would have much more than a cursory level of knowledge regarding the concerns of the other. It is thus best to allow vocations to represent themselves.

III. Why should linguistic, cultural, and ethnic groups be represented? As I stated earlier, none of these will ever have exactly the same interests. They may have very similar interests, but certainly never exactly the same. In my own country, for example, a speaker of Italian may be concerned regarding the dwindling number of schools and teachers specializing in the language; on the other hand, a speaker of French may be overjoyed that their language is again gaining popularity in the educational system and in the state apparatus. Both should be represented on a country level; however, their interests diverge to the point where they should receive at least some representation on a European level.

IV. Why should people be encouraged to make things themselves? It is simple. When one makes an object by oneself, one is proud with it. One does not want to throw it away, as one would be more inclined to do had one bought it. To make things oneself, as such, is to reduce waste - it increases the chance that one will reuse rather than simply throw something away.

Rally No. 5: Verington, Duxburian Union

Hello, Verington and to all those who may be watching! I'll get directly to the point.

Our Union - or rather, the Union that is meant to be ours - is not representative of us. Our nations are represented, yes - but our nations are diverse in interests. Doctors, for example, have different interests from farmers; farmers from miners, and so on and so forth.

But I am digressing. To achieve a more representative union, all interests must be represented - the nation, yes, but also the vocation, and many others. At the same time, there must be a move towards a consensus based system. No longer should you or me or anyone else be silenced because a so-called majority votes to do so. Everyone has the right to voice one's opinion; everyone has the right to both provide input into and shape the legislation that they will be ruled by.

But legislation is not the only problem. Large sums of money are poured into agencies which have accomplished little of substance. What I say - leave this to the experts. The ESA, the EHO; neither should be controlled by a Commission which may very well end up one day headed by an idiot. Both should be under, or even integrated into, what I call vocational chambers, consisting of all those in a certain vocation. Then the EHO will be directed by doctors and others in the field of medicine; the ESA by astrophysicists, engineers, and many others - hopefully reducing waste through competence.

There is also another way in which waste would be reduced. My complete plan for reform, which I unfortunately have not mentioned as of date - I will be releasing it soon to all, you'll see - is to make the vocational chambers directly accountable to those who elect them. Delegates will be instantly recallable, making them beholden to their constituents - organized, of course by nation, in recognition of the nature of our Union. Concerns about demagoguery are few - because each vocational chamber has power over that which it should have the greatest expertise in, it should be difficult for such manipulators to trick those who would elect them. You would thus have direct control over a large portion of European spending.

The vocational chambers also have additional benefits. Part of what I intend for them is for them to work with unions, professional associations, businesses, and governments in the role of a mediator, "coordinating" all as to create policy that works for all across all Europe while not stripping power away from existing institutions and member-states.

I would like to digress a bit here. All Europe is hurting under the ongoing transition towards a "cleaner" world; towards a more "just" world. And yes, there must be modernization, there must unfortunately be change. But this change, this modernization, should not come at anyone's loss. Those who must unfortunately change should not be abandoned; they should be at the forefront of transition. What I hope is that the vocational chambers I have just described, in all the functions I have described them in, will allow for justice - for those who have been abandoned to finally have a voice, not simply on moving ahead but also on their future, so that they may again return to a stable, healthy, and happy life.

Be assured, I am not for European integration - the member-state must continue to hold sovereignty. National governments shall always have the right to conduct their business as they like - so long as they do not deny their citizens the basic rights of freedom - of speech, of writing, of movement, and so on and so forth - and do not attempt to wantonly attack nations without reason whatsoever.

Any attempt to infringe upon the right of sovereignty will be ferociously attacked. We cannot have a single European country, for our Union is not one but multiple nations with different interests and cultures. Everything that the Union does must not be in the name of integration but in coordination and wellbeing, and even then only when necessary.

Thank you for listening.

SIXTH POLICY ADDENDUM

I promised those listening in Verington that I would soon add to my policy what I had stated there; I now deliver.

I. Vocational chambers should be composed of instantly recallable delegates. With an equal delegation from each country, vocational chambers should operate on the principle of consensus. Both of these measures are meant to ensure greater accountability as well as control by ordinary citizens over the internal workings of the European Union, as well as on how budgets are allocated.

II. Vocational chambers should be decentralized; a great deal of power should be given to more local branches. These, which will operate in as democratic a way as possible, as to be defined by agreements to be made with member-states, will carry the primary burden of improving and expanding existing working facilities.

III. Vocational chambers should work with business, government, whether local or national, and government agencies in their attempt to develop unifying policy through discussion.

IV. Vocational chambers should not overrule the policies of the member-states they are operating in.

V. There should be an attempt made to merge as many European bureaucracies with vocational chambers as to increase efficiency and accountability while ensuring that experts remain in control, regardless of the state of a given Commission.

VI. National sovereignty is sacrosanct.

The Deranged Shrieks of Leeson Continue to Haunt Europe

Mr. Peter Leeson continues to demonstrate his evident disconnection from reality with his latest batch of tweets.

He accuses me of all number of things, the vast majority of which I have repeatedly denounced. He firstly accuses me of being extremist and far left. As I stated on the 28th of January, nothing could be further from the truth, unless, of course, Mr. Leeson believes that the year is 1875.

He then claims that my policies will lead to a failed transition to a greener economy. If anything, they would not, given that I, unlike him, have focused on ensuring that said transition will be just - that is, able to employ workers who would otherwise be unemployed in strong and growing industries that would be able to maintain the economy, based upon input from those transitioning, from those in other industries, from experts in the matter, and from member-state governments.

He also makes the very strange assertion that large business leads to more efficiency. However, large companies generally denote an oligopoly or a monopoly. In both conditions, technological stagnation prevails due to the lack of competition; at the same time, those in control have the power to gouge prices. There is no need for industry to be efficient, either, for similar reasons.

He then proceeded to repeat what was almost exactly the same argument yet again, arguing that monopolism leads to employment and stability. I have no idea what alternate reality he must be living in to believe such a thing. The failure of a large business is much more catastrophic than that of a small business; in the first, power is concentrated in a small few but affects tens of thousands; in the second, power, while nominally in one person, is shared, to an extent, with those below; if there is failure, it will only affect a few.

It was then that he appeared to become trapped in the world of his twisted imagination. He first asserted that I would increase taxes. I will do nothing of the sort; the budget will remain the same - that, I promise.

As for his claim that we will be thrust into class warfare, it is simple insanity, to which I have no response but shock. I have no idea where or how he managed to manufacture this idea; I advise him to seek help.

Then came his assertion that I would place everything under the control of some "government." I have never, even in the days of my youth, been in support of such a thing. This, too, appears to have come from the same mysterious and terrifying part of his mind as that of the class warfare insanity.

He then went as low as to blame a genocide - which I lived through - on the policies I have proposed. This is obviously an awful assertion to make. I saw my wife and many of my friends killed in that genocide in horrific ways that terrify me and haunt every waking second of my existence to this day. His apparent derision towards such a horrific series of events was callous and morally bankrupt.

He then returned from this filthy and awful assertion to continue to manufacture bizarre accusations. He claimed first that "Berrism," which does not exist, will result in unemployment and poverty. Given everything that I have said, everything I have written, every part of my platform, and the fact that my plan is simply to return power to those who make up and give strength to our Union - the member-states, the linguistic and cultural groups, the vocations, and the people as a whole, this makes absolutely no sense.

Finally, he made the assertion that I would oversee a Europe of apathy in terms of work. Given that everything that he has described are phenomena that can very easily be found in the nearest local office of whatever generic monopolistic or oligopolistic corporation you choose; that I have repeatedly called for a Europe of creativity and innovation and have provided detailed plans on how to achieve such a thing, I simply have nothing to say.

It is clear that Mr. Peter Leeson lives in an entirely different reality from the one we live in. I realize, again, that many people may not be willing to vote for me. But I beg of you, please do not vest control of the European Union to a morally bankrupt man who has invented his own world to live in.

Rally No. 6: Nyetthem, Vayinaod

The Rally

Hello, Nyetthem! Hello, Vayinaod!

I'm here and not with those representing you for one reason - I'd simply like to talk with you, those who I hopefully will be working for. I'm not even entirely sure what I'm supposed to say anymore - I feel exhausted. But I think I can use this time to go over my policy. No more shouting for today.

At the heart of my platform is the idea of governance by and for the people. This is not something that the European Union's political institutions have achieved. None of its supposedly representative institutions from the Council to the Assembly, capture the full range of interests that exist.

Minority groups, linguistic, ethnic, and cultural are ignored in many cases; the same goes for vocations, which often have massive differences in interest. The oil field worker will not have the same interests as the nurse, for example. In recent years, individual governments have also gone ignored in the shaping of policy, which has been problematic to say the least.

In order to fix this major issue, as such, the first step would be to establish representation for all of these ignored groups. Nations will remain, of course, the backbone of the Union; but now, for the first time in its history, other perfectly valid and existing interests now may be involved.

An audience must also be established with individuals, with political parties, with unions, and with the many other organizations that make up a great part of our Union. Currently, it is somewhat difficult for these to petition any part of the European Union's institutions; however, I will be open. I will, in fact, set up a direct audience with them all!

Secondly is the problem of autonomy. Nations must retain their sovereignty - the purpose of the Union simply should be to uphold the basic rights of democracy, to coordinate efforts between different nations in certain and necessary areas, to be decided by the nations, and to work with nations and the many diverse interests and groups of the Union, not dictate, to uphold the principle of human dignity.

At the same time, however, we must ensure some level of autonomy or at least decision making for other interests. Those in a vocation, for example, are most likely to know it best - they should at the very least be involved in the making of regulations regarding their vocation. The same goes with cultural, linguistic, and ethnic minorities.

Thirdly is the issue of inefficiency. European bureaucracy is prone to this; at the same time, it is very much possible that someone incompetent could be appointed to the head of a given agency. What I wish to do is to integrate these bureaucracies into vocational chambers elected by all those in the vocation represented. These vocational chambers would provide better and generally more experienced candidates to lead bureaucracy; the experience of those within it may further increase efficiency. Finally, because of the form of accountability provided through the form of elections I plan these vocational chambers to have - detailed in my platform - individuals will have direct control over a large portion of European spending.

Moving on, these vocational chambers will have many more responsibilities. Decentralized as to ensure that local communities have more power, they are meant to coordinate workers' unions, professional associations, businesses, and governments in developing policy that works for everyone. More interestingly, they are also meant to provide a place for the free exchange of ideas across Europe - facilitated by inexpensive projects to expand workplaces and construct "third places." The hope is that this, coupled with anti-trust laws developed with the consent of European nations and other important interests that I have previously mentioned, will contribute to European innovation and creativity.

Fifthly is the issue of the transition to a green economy. It is necessary; but we must ensure that it is just. Everyone who risks being unemployed should be guaranteed a new, equivalent job in a stable and growing industry; the transition itself should be agreed upon by all groups involved.

The promotion of technologies and innovations that may contribute to a transition - permaculture, agroforestry, smallholder agriculture, urban agriculture, 3D printing technologies with bioplastics - must also occur. Of interest to me is possible funding to research - however, this will need to go through a cost-benefit analysis and be discussed thouroughly by nations and the many other interest groups I plan to involve.

Sixthly, Europe must work with existing associations, unions, and so on and so forth to promote such things as art, as research, as independent innovation as comes from the open source community. The sharing and creation of these two are almost inextricably linked to innovation; by encouraging both through existing and organically formed structures, Europe will itself advance.

Thank you for listening.

The Dinner

"Welcome, welcome," said Le Berre, "to the table. It'll be a small meal today, unfortunately, but filling. Native food from my home country. Of course, I am of French descent; but this is made of what best grows in the country, so generally what we eat."

He paused.; in f

"The appetizer is small - a salad of sorts, called "ūmjan." It is a bit minty, so be aware."

The politicians before him began to eat; he followed suit, before stopping to speak again.

"Now, I'm very much aware that my policy has been criticized by many. Yet some of those criticisms are false; others are simply misguided. I can assure you that I am not some extremist who wishes to steal Vayinaod's treasury. In fact, I believe in financial stability, frugality, and balance. Everything that I propose I have weighed to make sure it does not take a toll on the budget; everything I have weighed to make sure that you nor anyone else pays a penny more. At the same time, I have tried to support policies for greater accountability and efficiency in European bureaucracy; in fact, to partially de-bureaucratify European agencies as to make them more effective."

He paused again to eat; they were soon finished.

"Next, the main course. Flatbread, very light and a bit crunchy - our famous kusjur. There is a root vegetable paste - spiced and quite savory - kūshajur that you should eat it with. Take small pieces of the flatbread, pinch it around a bit of the paste, and eat. I'd advise you not to pour the paste on the bread - that is usually quite hard to eat."

He again paused, and began to eat, before stopping again to speak.

"Of course, I have other issues that I would like to discuss. As you may very well know, I am quite strongly in favor of unionization and small business. I am, however, willing to moderate if necessary - that is, regarding business, not unionization. I will, however, be very open to dialogue.

I understand that much of your economy is dependent quite heavily on oil and natural gas. I'd assume that there is likely a state or state-supported monopoly in the industry - which, of course, per my platform, I am not against. However, a transition is necessary - oil and natural gas will become very expensive in the future, unprofitable. If we wait until then to prepare, we will be facing a crisis. Yet unlike other candidates, I will be offering you a better deal regarding this. A just transition, as I have said many times. Members of the Vardic government, representatives of its oil and natural gas business, workers in the industry, economic experts regarding this sort of transition, representatives for possible industries to diversify into will be invited to a pan-European meeting on the topic. For all countries, of course, there will be specialization; a special meeting will be held with your country in that case. Europe will, I promise you, help in this."

They continued to eat, talking occasionally, until finally they had finished.

"Last course - very, very small. It is our native "yogurt"-type food, so to speak - ōljūsjol. Flavored with something familiar to us all - mango. Enjoy!"

They again ate; Le Berre began to speak when there were finished.

"Just a bit more, I'm afraid. Part of my platform involves working extensively with existing structure - professional organizations, artisans' guilds, creative unions, and so on and so forth. You get the gist. As I have said ad nauseum, I want to encourage discussion with workers, exchange of ideas, creativity, so that Europe may become more innovative. And that is it, now. Thank you for listening; thank you for eating with me. Have a very nice night!"

He shook hands with all those he had invited, speaking with some who had questions.

Rally No. 7: Kazmurbirha, Ruthund

Hello, Kazmurbirha; hello, Ruthund!

I stand for the common person. Wherever you work; whatever you do; I stand for you.

If you are a farmer - I stand for you. My commission will work to make sure that your interests are represented in European institutions; it will, working with you, give you the social infrastructure needed to improve if you so desire.

It will also provide a source of advice to you. With your input, as well as those of those establishing new technologies in the industry of agriculture, it will provide advice on how to improve yields; advice on much more, if you request it.

Do not worry about your traditional structures being uprooted; my commission will work tirelessly with them, respecting their existence and autonomy, as to create better policy for us all.

If you are a worker in a factory - I stand with you as well. My commission will work to make sure that your rights remain protected; that your unions are strong and respected, playing a role in the formation of policy regarding you. You, too, will be represented in all European institutions; you too shall have access to the same social infrastructure - again, within constraints.

In fact, I will say this for all professions, farmer, factory-worker, laborer, artist, artisan, member of the intelligentia, of the liberal professions - my commission will stand with you, give you representation in Europe, listen to you, help you, but also respect your society, the structures and organizations you have already created; respect their integrity, working with them. Your labor will be protected; my commission, working with you, will ensure that Ruthund's domestic industry remains protected; that foreign companies may not buy it off for their own profit.

You likely already know how, if you are here. Through the vocational bodies, which will be elected and accountable to you - actually, that is poor phrasing, the EACA is nowhere near what I propose - the vocational bodies, directly accountable to you, which will work with you, with your unions, your professional associations, your guilds, and many others as to create better policy.

Also important to me, however, is national sovereignty. The Union is not a single country; it is a union of nations, and should be treated as such. The sovereignty of each nation will be respected and defended; never will my commission allow any nation to infringe upon it.

I work, in essence, for a Europe for you; for everyone; a Europe which is able to aid those in need, but also one which understands nations, respects their culture, and respects their ultimate sovereignty.

Thank you for listening.