« Antidemocratic and xenophobic forces of Europe have always been attracted by the European unity dream, the mystic of the imperial Rome»
(FB - 1998)
" Being a citizen is a voluntary act "
(FB - 2009)
"Thinking about the future only makes sense if it is aimed at improving one’s thinking about the present and about the trends at work"
(FB - 1998)
"The European project is not a dream, but a hope. It is rooted in rationality, which is not the case with dreams. We Europeans have seen our dreams end in nightmares too often not to be suspicious."
(FB - 2005)
"The strength of a network is judged at the information level of the weakest link, or more precisely the link furthest from the centre of the network."
(FB - 2004)
"Europe's destiny is escaping the two "Greats" and it will come knocking on the door of the Europeans."
(FB - 1989)
"The history of Europe is a bit like a multifaceted diamond. Everyone sees the same diamond... but no one sees exactly the same facets."
(FB - E-storia project, 2004)
"Let us dare the future as the founding fathers of Europe did"
(FB - "From EU to Euroland", 2001)
"The European citizenship can not be decreed. The European citizen can only be born..."
(FB - 1992)
"Every state is a minority in the EU. In any case, let’s not forget that if all our states went into building the EU it is because they all felt too small to face alone both their future and the rest of the world."
(FB - 2003)
"From a single (EU) Currency to a single (EU) Citizenship. The euro is only an instrument."
(FB - 1997)
"An empire is always providing platforms where conflicts and wars prolife­rate... an empire needs enemies, whilst a Community requires partners."
(FB - 1992)
"Europe’s history has taught us that dreams and nightmares are the two faces of the same coin"
(FB - “Europe is Peace” 2006)
"Everybody wants to have a successful enlargement whereas it is a successful enlarged EU which is important."
(FB - 2002)
"It is clear that the existing national political parties can not serve two masters: national and European."
(FB - IDE, 1989)
"It takes teamwork to make Europe move forward."
(FB - 2005)
"There is nothing like one European. The European is a team of Europeans... the only way we can imagine a European, it is a team of people from different countries, not a single man or woman."
(FB - Enschede (NL) 2012)
"On the horizon with a heaven of freedom and a land of responsibility, this is perhaps the soul of Europe."
(FB - 1992)
"The future challenge for the European project is not about Europe anymore, it is about the Europeans."
(FB - 2005)
"The more Brussels speaks English, the less Brussels understands the Europeans"
(FB - 2004)
"Occupy the Future of Europe!"
("What do YOU want as a future for AEGEE?" Franck Biancheri at the 2012 Agora in Enschede)
"To combine new technologies and democratic principles to succeed in the entry of European integration in the 21st century or e-democracy at the service of Euro-democracy"
(FB - EUSV, 2001)
"In the years 00 of the 21st century, democratization can only take place in the perspective of the democratic election of a European executive that remains to be invented."
(FB - EUSV, 2001)
"We must build the European Community, otherwise Europe will soon be culturally Americanised, politically Finlandised and technologically Japanised"
EGEE I, 1984

The Empire creeps in: the democratic imposture – Excerpt from “Europe: Community or Empire?“, a book by Franck Biancheri, 1992L’empire s’installe: l’imposture démocratique – Extrait du livre “Europe: Communauté ou Empire?” de Franck Biancheri, 1992

What is this caricature of democracy in which one is supposed to have only one rational, moral, intelligent, responsible choice, the other choice being the one made by idiots and bad guys?

The fundamental criticism expressed by Franck Biancheri in 1992, remained dead letter, so that “the democratic imposture” became a real “betrayal of the elites” political and media … leading us inevitably to the gigantic existential crisis in which is struggling for more than 10 years the whole project of European integration. The excerpt below introduces Chapter II of the book “Europe: Community or Empire?” (special publication by Editions Anticipolis, 12/2017) in which Franck Biancheri denounces the archaism and anti-democratism of the European elite and national political classes. Re-reading Franck Biancheri’s anticipations makes it possible to understand the causes of failure and to build the next Europe on a better understood lesson. The Europeans must imperatively discover the European genius of Franck Biancheri, this great man of the history of the continent, to feed the nascent Euro-citizen consciousness.


A Community under the monopoly of archaic elites

[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s we have said, the Community process must be based on two fundamental principles: democracy and the preservation of diversity.

The current inadequacy of the Community’s democratic procedures and the low credibility of those procedures for preserving diversity represent two major political mistakes committed by Community leaders. These errors are largely responsible for the wave of mistrust, even rejection, going through the public opinion’s minds for a few months. These reactions have deep and ancient roots. The question of the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty has been the catalyst of the European Community. If these feelings are expressed more openly and loudly in the countries where a Maastricht referendum is held, they are very strong in most other member states as many polls show.

The responsibility of the leaders of the Community is total. Their refusal to consider the necessary implications of the principles on which the Community is openly based is now leading to this dangerous situation which may lead to a divorce between public opinion and leaders on the Community issue.

Alas, there is still no university, school or training institution which can train a European politician, teach him about the diversity of the Community, the variety of Europeans, the problems at the heart of each people, the way Community institutions really work, etc. So, the politician could not develop this ability in school!

His experience comes mainly from his voters. Now, our politician today, whether he is president or deputy, is elected only in his own country by people from his own country, who speaks his language, which is not that of other Europeans. He will therefore never have the opportunity to develop a European experience for lack of European voters to encourage it. Nor is it his party that will bring this experience or training to him. Indeed, political activism is a good school for teaching the realities of a Community. But since there are no European parties covering the areas between Copenhagen to Seville, our poor apprentices of Community leaders must content themselves with constantly travelling the roads of their origin country, discovering the other countries and their people only as tourists, like all their fellow citizens (who are not leading the Community).

Community leaders are aware of this risk of divorce. Everyone, right and left, in France as in Germany, in Brussels as well as in Strasbourg, insist on their populations on the terrible risk of refusing to ratify the Maastricht Treaty. But this threat remains unacceptable from a democratic point of view. It is absolutely scandalous that those who have held the monopoly of the leadership of the European Community for the last 35 years, the only architects and writers of the Maastricht Treaty, have supported public opinion: “We are great democrats, we consult our populations to know whether they are in agreement with the treaty, by direct ways (through a referendum) or indirect ways (parliament). But beware, you can not refuse it, otherwise it will be the end of the European construction!”.

What is this caricature of democracy in which one is supposed to have only one rational, moral, intelligent, responsible choice, the other choice being the one made by idiots and bad guys? …

Read more in “Europe: Community or Empire?” by Franck Biancheri, 1992.

Order the book here: Editions Anticipolis (special publication, 12/2017)

Quelle est cette caricature de démocratie où l’on est censé n’avoir qu’un seul choix rationnel, moral, intelligent, responsable? L’autre choix étant celui des idiots, des méchants?

La critique fondamentale exprimée par Franck Biancheri en 1992, est restée lettre morte, au point que “l’imposture démocratique” et devenue véritable “trahison des élites” politiques et médiatiques… nous menant inéluctablement vers la gigantesque crise existentielle dans laquelle se débat depuis plus de 10 ans tout le projet d’intégration européenne. L’extrait ci-dessous introduit le Chapitre II de l’ouvrage “Europe: Communauté ou Empire?” (publié en édition inédite par les Editions Anticipolis -12/2017) dans lequel Franck Biancheri dénonce l’archaïsme et l’anti-démocratisme des élites européennes et des classes politiques nationales. Relire les anticipations de Franck Biancheri permet de comprendre les ressorts de l’échec et de bâtir la prochaine Europe sur une leçon mieux comprise. Les Européens doivent impérativement découvrir, le génie européen de Franck Biancheri, ce grand homme de l’Histoire du continent, pour nourrir la conscience Euro-citoyenne naissante.


Une Communauté sous monopole d’élites archaïques

[dropcap]N[/dropcap]ous l’avons dit, le processus communautaire doit reposer sur deux principes fondamentaux : la démocratie et la préservation de la diversité.

L’actuelle inadaptation des procédures démocratiques de la Communauté et la faible crédibilité de ses procédures de préservation de la diversité constituent deux erreurs politiques majeures commises par les dirigeants communautaires. Ces erreurs sont grandement responsables de la vague de méfiance, voire de rejet, qui traverse les opinions publiques depuis quelques mois. Ces réactions ont des racines profondes et anciennes. La question de la ratification du traité de Maastricht en a été le catalyseur à travers toute la Communauté européenne. Si ces sentiments s’expriment plus ouvertement et bruyamment dans les pays où se tient un référendum sur Maastricht, ils existent avec autant de force dans la plupart des autres États-membres, comme le montrent nombre de sondages.

La responsabilité des dirigeants de la Communauté est totale. Leur refus de considérer les nécessaires implications des principes sur lesquels se fonde – et dont se réclame ouvertement – la Communauté, conduit aujourd’hui à cette dangereuse situation qui peut voir s’amorcer un divorce durable entre opinions publiques et classes dirigeantes sur la question communautaire.

Hélas, il n’existe toujours pas d’université, école ou institution de formation qui puisse former un homme politique européen, lui apprendre la diversité de la Communauté, la variété des Européens, les problématiques au cœur de chaque peuple, le fonctionnement réel des institutions communautaires, etc. L’homme politique n’a donc pas pu développer cette capacité à l’école !

Quant à son expérience, elle lui vient essentiellement de ses électeurs. Or, notre homme politique d’aujourd’hui, qu’il soit président ou député, n’est élu que dans son pays, par des gens de son pays, qui parlent sa langue, qui n’est pas celle des autres Européens. Il n’aura donc jamais l’occasion de développer une expérience européenne faute d’électeurs européens pour l’y encourager. Ce n’est pas non plus son parti qui lui apportera cette expérience ou cette formation. En effet, le militantisme politique est une bonne école d’apprentissage des réalités d’une collectivité. Mais, comme il n’existe aucun parti européen couvrant la Communauté de Copenhague à Séville, nos pauvres apprentis dirigeants de la Communauté doivent se contenter de sillonner sans cesse les routes de leur pays d’origine, ne découvrant les autres pays et peuples qu’en tant que touristes, à l’instar de tous leurs concitoyens (qui, eux, ne prétendent pas diriger la Communauté).

Les dirigeants communautaires ont conscience de ce risque de divorce. Tous, à droite comme à gauche, en France comme en Allemagne, à Bruxelles comme à Strasbourg, insistent auprès de leurs populations sur le risque terrible que comporterait un refus de ratification du traité de Maastricht. Mais cette menace reste inacceptable d’un point de vue démocratique. II est absolument scandaleux de voir ceux-là même, qui depuis 35 ans ont le monopole de la direction de la Communauté européenne, uniques architectes et rédacteurs du traité de Maastricht, soutenir aux opinions publiques : « Nous sommes de grands démocrates, nous consultons nos populations pour savoir si elles sont d’accord avec le traité, que ce soit directement (référendum) ou indirectement (parlement). Mais attention, vous ne pouvez pas le refuser, sinon ce sera la fin de la construction européenne ! ».

Quelle est cette caricature de démocratie où l’on est censé n’avoir qu’un seul choix rationnel, moral, intelligent, responsable? L’autre choix étant celui des idiots, des méchants? …

Lire la suite dans “Europe: Communauté ou Empire?” de Franck Biancheri, 1992.

Commander le livre ici: Editions Anticipolis (publication inédite, 12/2017)