- It's 08:33 and you are on BlablaTv.
Hello L.
- Hello.
- Thank you for being on this microphone this morning.
So I would like to point out to our viewers that you have decided not to make your first or last name public. And you asked us to call you by the letter "L".
- There you go, that's it.
- Why? Why not make your first name public at least and why call yourself by the letter "L"?
- Because there are lunatics everywhere and I like the letter "L".
- Well, that's an answer like any other. So, if you are here this morning, it's because the Blog you run has set the web on fire in recent months.
I would remind those who don't know your Blog that you publish opinion articles that flirt with the extremes. Hence your dazzling success.
How did you get the idea to create this Blog?

- Well, first of all, I publish articles that revisit current events: the form is fictional but the content is based on sources from big mainstream media, like yours for example.

So, what is extreme comes from you and your competitors. I only invent the form.
To give a little pep ...
- We only report the facts. We do not invent anything.
- ... and then, I can reassure you: I am neither far right nor far left. I am even more extreme than these clowns!
- These terms are your own.
- Well, it's obvious: I'm the one who says them!
- Let's try not to utter insults out of respect for those who listen to us.
- You know, "extreme" for the system is anything that is not it. And if my Blog is so successful, it is because it is published in everyday language. A "normal" speech. Everyone's language. We have to stop rhetorical romanticism and capitalist-libertarian theatricalism.
We are neither in the theater ...
- L.
- ... nor in the circus.
- L, let's try to move forward: you just said that you were more extreme than the far-right and far-left parties.
What do you mean by that? And what are your political opinions if you are more extreme than the extremes?
- My political opinions? That's not the most important thing.
In any case, not here.

- Excuse me L but you are on BlablaTV this morning for your political positions. Not for anything else.
What else do you want us to talk about? The Olympic Games? The Last Supper and Drag Queens?
- It's interesting that you talk about it.
- It's just the news, you know.
- It's the very example of the society of the spectacle that you and your colleagues in the media contribute to perpetuating.

So of course, it's not "you" personally. I'm referring to the owners of these media who make the news.
Because you're not going to tell me right here that you don't deliberately choose what should be "news" or not. There is clearly a bias of opinions and interests in the very choice of the subjects that you address.
We can also see the thought experiment of Schrödinger's Cat: observing the subject alters the object.
- Let's move on please: we're not going to do the whole interview on the media.
- No, but it's interesting.
- It may be interesting, but that's not what interests us this morning. You'll come back another day to talk about it.
- Wait, wait: why all the fuss about the Last Supper? The last meal of Jesus Christ in the company of his apostles, recreated by drag queens during the opening of the Olympic Games? I mean: it was funny for some, less so for others. Besides, I would like to point out that when we make fun of the Christian religion, in the end everything is fine: just a few remonstrances from the episcopate and it's over. On the other hand, when we make fun of other religions, as Charlie's editorial staff did about Islam, then we're talking about deaths.
- What does that have to do with our subject? I think we should refocus our interview there.
- On one hand, "freestyle" and we don't give a damn about Christians; on the other hand, we call racist/xenophobic and we reprimand those who touch Islam.
Do you know what this type of favoritism can cause?
A blood awakening.
When a minority is instrumentalized to the detriment of a majority (whether on a cultural, religious or political basis), the result is a bloodbath. We only have to see what happened between the Hutus and the Tutsis in Rwanda; between the Sunnis and the Shiites in Iraq and so on.
Well, let's move on, but I observe a huge "double standard".

I also observe that this whole story of the Last Supper and the Drag Queen is not important. That all these false controversies are only there to hide the elephant in the room.

- What elephant are you talking about?
Tell us what THE problem is. And if you have identified a problem, then you have a minimum of political opinions.
- No.
Correction: I am here to talk about the system that allows precisely the politics that we have been living for ages.
- So go ahead. Talk about it.
- I am here to talk about the form, not the content. And that is exactly the problem.
The problem is not politics as such.
The problem is these structures that allow these aberrant politics that has been in place since Methuselah!
- What would your solutions be if we accept your diagnosis?
- Radical decentralization ending its momentum in Localism.
Constant referendums and activated according to certain thresholds and available to citizens of the locality, using the Blockchain.
Voting by tax.

- What do you mean by "voting by tax"?
- It's very simple: on the one hand, you pay your taxes by choosing what you want to finance and on the other hand, you don't pay them if you consider that the politicians or administrators of your locality are not doing the job they should be doing. They will then be forced to resign.

- We know very well where this type of measure would lead us: no one would pay taxes!
- Don't infantilize people, ma'am. Don't take them for fools.
- I'm not infantilizing anyone! I'm just saying that quite naturally, people will not pay taxes.
- Ma'am, people will end up paying taxes if they want to live in good conditions. And they have a very clear understanding of what tax is and the amount they can and should pay if they want to live in good conditions.
No need for pseudo-experts constantly breathing down their necks.
Speaking of pseudo-experts, I also propose the legal accountability of civil servants, whether elected or not. Moreover, these civil servants will have only one task: to apply what the majority of a locality has decided through its referendums.
There would be no more parties, no more governments, no more ideology.
Only a majority and civil servants applying to the letter what this majority has decided.
No more X-year terms, no more National Assembly, no more Senate, no more tutelary organizations explaining to people how they should live and think.
No more need for government, politicians and media polluting our lives.
No more need for such nonsense.
Only local civil servants.
And at the slightest misstep: direction, jail!

People's lives and their management are too serious to leave cynical clowns in charge.
- ... it is quite extreme indeed, even impossible and ridiculous.
- For you yes! Obviously ... you live lavishly at the expense of a majority. You especially do not want this majority to wake up.

Besides, I think that the owner of this channel will no longer invite me for reasons that I completely understand.
A mistake for you certainly.
But a godsend for us.
For the people.
- L ...
- That the people understand that their voice finally speaks and that it is directed towards those who subject them to their most vile needs and interests ...
- ... let's move on to the next question.
- ... that it is no longer the infantilizing voice filled with daily reproaches coming from these elites who pollute people's lives.
- ... L, please. We have to move on.
- I think that we have to leave people alone and that they also leave each other alone.
And I ...

[Sudden cut of the channel. Live broadcast hazards.]

To be continued ...

Written on July 29th, 2024

----

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/28/sports/olympics-opening-ceremony-last-supper-paris.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26875506
https://www.npr.org/2007/02/15/7411762/iraq-war-deepens-sunni-shia-divide
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/blockchain.asp