While updating the “Letter to the Generals of France“, some videos exacerbated me. I can only see how deeply damaged France is and sadly, this is not new. There is a class system in France which is deeply rooted in the culture and it is difficult to dissociate this class system from the history of religions in Ravenna, Italy. I have talked a lot about the army in my previous posts and maybe I shall talk more about the religions, how the “religions of the book” have emerged from a juridical system and how this juridical system should be able to assemble rather than divide. I personally believe in the virtue of the UN and its role to build a better world.
That said, we can see in the news that all countries are not on the same path and the people are not all on the same path. I am not sure if I am right in affirming the following, but I tend to believe that there are two categories of people. People who are dependent, who need a structure to exist and people who are not dependent. Among the not-dependent people, there are two sub-categories of not-dependent people, those who like to do things their way independently of the rest of the population (in-dependent) and people who are structuring, who will put their energy into finding resources for the rest of the community (out-dependent). In this arborescence, there are different grades of people that could be ratted with stars to determine their vulnerability. The society results from the inter-dependencies between dependents and not-dependents, and vulnerable or not-vulnerable.
Usually, we find not-dependent people in leadership position and the characteristics of a country will depend of its altruism. For example, an out-dependent country will contribute into the development of its people and maybe other people while an in-dependent country will focus on its own leadership and its personal development despite the culture and the interests of others. Here again, the balance between in-dependencies and out-dependencies will determine a global environment.
The nerve of all societies is to find the right balance between dependent and not-dependent people. Most often, dependent people are numerous while not-dependent people are more scarce and again, the question of vulnerabilities will be an important factor since it is not related with the factor of dependencies, but rather the personality of individuals, groups of individuals and communities. People who are isolated are more dependent and more vulnerable than people who are not isolated, what explains that UN is a place of arms where associations are played.
All states, what ever their regime, will play a role in the society and just as people, there are different kinds of states. Some states will function like an engine. Some other states will function as a regenerator. Some states will be a fuel. With those three levels of differences, you can have as many kind of states as maths do permit, especially because some states will try to cumulate functions, but the end result will depend on “who buys the engine”. Again, who buys the engine will depend of the people, rather dependent or not-dependent.
Dependency is natural up to a certain level and not-dependency is also natural up to a certain level too. The role of the state will play in between to define the law that permits dependent people to depend on not-dependent ones and vice versa. One common factor of dependency that most people acknowledge is money and there are three kinds of money, the money people earn, the money people spend and the money people capitalize through their assets or their savings. Money can exist in various forms, such bank notes, bank accounts, but not only. As an example, the Egyptians used stocks of grain as a money to retribute labor and materials. By holding a rare commodity, they were able to trade this commodity against products and services.
Since the Egyptians, nothing has really changed except maybe, who holds the grain. Some states hold the grain and some other states prefer not to hold the grain, leaving the society to organize itself into inter-dependencies. When the state holds the grain, there is a limited space and ressource to administer the stock. Therefore, the state can specialize in a limited quantity of resources and not really diversify. When the state does not holds the grain, therefore the stocks are split into smaller entities and each can specialize in their stocks. When the state produces its own stocks rather than acquiring it through purchase, we can talk of an industry. Some states will develop an industry for its capacity of self-sufficiency. Some other states will create over-stocks to sell or trade the surpluses. An economy can emerge from selling or trading surpluses.
Most political struggles emerge between the state and “the people” at large and precisely because the large notion of a people includes people who are dependent and people who are not-dependent. Therefore, in some cases, the state can be in competition with its not-dependent entities and some regimes are even governed by not-dependent entities. If we translate the notion of dependency, we would say that an employee depends on an employer to get a wage, and the employer depends on the government to limit the dependency. The employee also needs the government to enforce the dependency and make this dependency a right. The right emerges from how much a dependent person needs a non-dependent and how much an non-dependent person needs a dependent. The right limits abuses from both sides and abuses can emerge with different notions such wages, rest, holidays, schedule, timing, fatigue, risks, security, retirement, access to medical assistance, etc…
An employer is usually someone who has an expertise and will develop this expertise into sub-smaller-expertises where dependent people can learn easily how to perform the tasks in their own domain. This involve that despite their dependencies, employees get trained to access a level of expertise and such, a certain level of not-dependency. For exemple a plumber will acquire a general basic expertise that could be used as a self-dependent business to perform small handyman tasks. In the contrary, a plumber who works for an employer will lose his self-dependency to only follow the direction of an employer which can mean the direction of the tasks, the timing, the materials. As long as a dependency is created, there is a relation in which the state will regulate the roles.
From the different roles will emerge different politics that will leave more or less freedom to the people. The three pictures above show the three different scenarios when the state is the engine, the regulator or the fuel. On the first system of dependencies, the state is the full engine. It will take an idea, transform it into a process, and dispatch the process between the dependent and non-dependent people without them to necessarily be related. For example, the state will specialize in a limited scope of essential industries and orchestrate those industries to balance the different roles.
On the second system of dependencies, the state is only the regulator. Its role is to facilitate the inter-dependencies between dependent and not-dependent and make sure that no one is left vulnerable. Therefore, its role is to compensate the vulnerability of the dependent people and to regulate the non-vulnerability of non-dependent people in order to insure that in-dependent people remain limited and non-predatory. Regulations are made by laws but not only. There are some cases where law may not be just because the level of vulnerability weights in the balance that makes people human, for example when people have mental disabilities, when they are exposed to extreme poverty, when they are under medication, etc. The role of law and therefore the state, is to create the tools that prevent the law from being excessive and/or abusive.
On the third system of dependencies, the state is dependent of the not-dependent and therefore, it regulates on demand from what the not-dependent needs to articulate its mechanism with dependent people. The vulnerabilities are exposed to the predatory not-dependent governance. If I shall compare those three systems, I would say that the first one is China, the second one is the United-States and the third one is France. In the case of France, which is a republic with a constitution, the people can vote to chose the colors of the state but not really the system unless the not-dependent decide to correct it. To choose the color of the state, more or less, is purely decorative, because the vulnerability of the dependent is optimum. As we see with the hierarchy of this system, the state has limited power to regulate and balance inter-dependencies and to compensate the vulnerabilities of the people.
The first system is state capitalism. The second system is individual capitalism. The third system is a plutocracy that tends to state capitalism when the color of the state meets with the not-dependent governance. In the third system, the state is purely administrative and dependent. Now, lets see what happens with the third system in an international context.
The level of dependency of the state toward not-dependent entities has weaken the state and made it dependent toward a full class of its population, but not only. Since this class finds its balance abroad with other dependent people, the state has become dependent from outside forces and when those forces are an engine state, then the fuel state just run without a portion of its own population.
Lets say, France has assets that China may want such its international electricity network, its communications, its harbors, its influence on Europe, its armament technologies, its nuclear technologies, its concessions in Africa, its oak and beech, its oil, its innovations, its luxury products, its brands, and a certain “European holyday dream” which leads the Chinese people toward motivational expectations that keep them focused on the Communist system. With huge bridges and boulevards, the horizontality and mega size of Paris, its architecture, its “joie de vivre” with cafés and restaurants represents a “wish” with a beautiful façade.
Similarly, the not-dependent class of France entertains a nostalgy over cheap labor and “Grand projects”. This class is attracted by the Chinese workers system of dependent people and the Chinese State is attracted with French assets that belong both to the state and to not-dependent entities. To access those assets, the Chinese State will trade dependents against assets, because Chinese dependents keep French not-dependent dominant over an unstable French state.
Since the level of trade is unbalanced, France is losing assets and French dependents become even more vulnerable. The French State is already dependent on French not-dependent entities, which are dependent on foreign dependent labor. There is an inevitable balance of power between France and China, but France is isolated by choice from the United-States and it is dependent in its relation to Europe which majority of countries was ruled by a Russian communist party between 1945 and 1989. Half Germany was ruled by a communist party while the other half was ruled by Americans. France has declined the help of the United-States despite a political assembly largely dominated by communists in 1945.
France had lost the war in 1940 and could not have regain any power without the United-States. Despite having lost the war, the United-States have let France in control on the French and the African territories and this mainly to prevent having two fronts in Europe, losing allied seats in the UN and increasing an economical crisis that had shaped Europe during the whole half of the XXth century. The relations between France and the United-States have always been stiff under Gaullism but after the war of 1991 in Iraq, the bilateral relations have completely changed, France building a Secret Network to completely break relations with the West.
The question at stake here, is how the French dependent people perceive this change and how to level and restore a balance that would eventually favor better relations with the United-States. There are various possible approaches using the engine, the regulator and the fuel system and several of them are already included in the French political program of several parties.
The regulator: Taxing the rich
If we consider the French not-dependent class as the fuel of the system, one proposition consists in taxing the not-dependent class, which is richer, to benefit the dependent one despite the risks of creating more dependencies and more vulnerabilities.
I am going to develop this approach by using French data of 2019. I am using € 384.5 milliards as the total of social cotisations paid by the working class for 2019 as found on an article of Le Parisien, and I split this total into the percentage of wages according to Statistita. Social cotisations can be a regulator between the rich and the poor. I calculate the hourly wage accordingly to the highest amount of a monthly salary in order to simplify this study.
|Monthly salary||% of the workers||€/hour||Annual cotisations in milliards €||N° of people|
|< € 1,500||22.2%||€ 9.89||85.359||4,742,166|
|€1,500 – €2,000||30.7%||€ 13.18||118.0415||4,918,395|
|€2,000 – €2,500||18%||€ 16.48||69.21||2,307,000|
|€2,500 – €3,000||10.3%||€ 19.78||39.60||1,100,000|
|€3,000 – €4,000||9.9%||€ 23.07||38.0655||906,321|
|€4,000 – €6,000||6%||€ 39.56||23.07||320,416|
|€6,000 – 8,000||1.6%||€ 52.74||6.152||64,083|
|> €8,000||1.4%||€ 52.74||5.383||56,072|
There are 52.9% of the population who live with a salary of less than €15/hour and 47.1% of the population that live with more than €15/hour. With a salary of €15/hour, and 35 hours worked each week, the annual budget for one person is €27.300. In France, the level of poverty is determined at 60% of the median wage which is $1710, what would put the hourly median wage to €11.27/hour. In the following table, I am going to compare the monthly and annual budget of a person living with a wage of €15/hour, compared with the actual wage of the table above. To establish the budget, I refer to the average cost of living in Los Angeles, where large disparities do exist, and calculate the budget with essential goods only, evaluated in $. This is columns 2, 3, 4 and 5. On column 6 and 7, I adjust the percentages with an hourly wage of 15 euros per hour. In columns 8 and 9, I do the same with an hourly rate of €9.89 as referred on the table above. Lastly, on columns 10 and 11, I adjust the percentages with an hourly wage of €13.18.
|Kind of expense||Monthly cost||Annual cost||% of wage/h||budget/hour||Adjustment for wage of €15/hour||Monthly budget with €15/h||Adjustment for real wage of €9.89/h||Monthly budget with €9.89/h||Adjustment for real wage of €13.18/h||Monthly budget with €13.18/h|
We clearly see on this table that with a wage below €15/hour, essential food, electricity, water and gas can only be paid by sacrificing on cloths, hobbies, savings, eventually health insurance and communications. This is the condition of living for 52.7% of the French population while only 18.9% of the French population is living with a decent wage that would allow to buy a home, furniture, sustain local services and stores with activities, hobbies and savings. Many people survive because they inherited patrimony and they can save on housing, but the value of labor has declined what force them to work more than 35 hours a week.
This economical context has created a vulnerability on a category of population which is extremely dependent, in a context of politics where the state is now controlling small businesses as part of the not-dependent class ruling, which has taken control of the state by eliminating the competition and creating new dependencies among not-traditionally-dependent people. This extreme vulnerability exposes France to a social implosion and the risk of a revolution. To solve this crisis, the state would have to inject €60.39 milliard each year into 52.9% of the population’s wallet for them to be able to spend locally on French made products and services. The question is, are 7,625,245 workers, 11.31% of the population, worth the government’s efforts, as long as they survive? The answer was sent with the severe and brutal response of the police during the yellow jackets protests.
The fuel: changing the not-dependent system
The dominant not-dependent system is an old problem with old technologies that emerged before and after the war of 1991 in Iraq. To change the fuel of the economy, several businesses have tried to flirt with ecology to create new needs and new products. The problem of this tactic is the source of the products, accelerating the dependencies abroad. Solar panels were imported from China. Softwoods were imported from Germany. Many technological equipment such cogeneration were imported from Asia, always depending on boats and harbors to develop an economy where the industry is essentially abroad. This tactic aborted. It is unclear how many businesses have tried to develop local industries but the landscape of France as remained under the same dominance which was reinforced and empowered by the state with new laws in favor of secret services.
The engine: creating a new state
The yellow jackets are suggested and tried to develop a parallel state with independent magistrates and lawyers, but this initiative has no real ground of legitimacy.
Another strategy: forestry
I think that a solution can only emerge from the multitude of actions, using the regulation system, the fuel system and the engine system to disrupt the environment in which France and China are colluding and I do believe that the number of attacks against my work shall be taken very seriously to understand how disruptive forestry can be, both to France and China. Forestry is and remains an access to rare earth or other agricultural products, but it is also a powerful political tool and I believe that China had understood how my innovations could overturn the priorities in France and around the world, how forest gardens could disrupt their predatory industries.
It is no surprise that President Xi mentioned “biodiversity” with President Macron during their talk this week, and I can only refer to the number of Chinese visitors following my posts on forestry. There is obviously a real concern from them which I can only underline to suggest a strategy. There is no surprise that President Xi mentioned Africa during his talks with President Macron, and again forestry is a central peace of the puzzle. Forestry can politically kill or reinforce a country, and President Xi already knows how fragile China can be, playing proxy to colonial France.
I do personally hope that the United-States along with the United-Kingdom and Australia will see their extraordinary advance on forestry. We have more than 200 years of knowledge on technologies, environment and people. We have an army of biologists and experts. We have a large technological advantage and as I demonstrated with my work, we can innovate and continue to bring more technical, financial and social innovations.
Forestry is an industry where China has no control and knowledge on the management of the land, on the cultivation, on sawmills, cutting, drying and all the first transformation process. China has absolutely no control on the financial tools we can implement on forestry and they don’t have the knowledge either. This technical advantage we have on forestry can transform a predatory Chinese economy into a more docile one.
Think if we remove bed slats to the Chinese industry, we have the means to leave the country sleepless, forced to run on its own forest, disrupt its own environment and fragilize its power because it will trigger the question of ownership on the land between the Chinese government and its local communities, raising concern and internal conflicts. China is rotten from inside, pollution, autoritarisme, social disparities and it is buying its wood abroad because local exploitations would break the communist party. There is a log in the middle of Chinese road of conquest. Simply a Chinese log from a fallen Chinese tree.
Trees don’t fall in silence.china_x.wang_