Translator: Nadine Hennig
Reviewer: Denise RQ Indeed, for 20 years,
I worked in finance. I knew everything about finance, for sure. I knew the global economy
because it was my life. All the topics that you could bring up
about ecology, the end of the world, etc., that I knew like the back of my hand
I didn't really believe in them. In 2007, an extremely unusual event
occurred, you may remember, the subprime crisis, the collapse
of big American banks. It was an electric shock. I had a fair few stormy conversations
with my wife about the matter, about my job, on the limits of the model. Besides the crisis, I realized
that I was completely wrong, that we were heading for disaster. The whole conception I had of the world,
all the certainties that I had until then, were all fallen apart within a few months. That's why I'm here tonight, I've realized
that, finally, it wasn't all so bad, and that it was an opportunity because we have
the exceptional opportunity of living in an exceptional period
of human history: we are going to change the world. But before changing the world,
we have to do something, we have to do some grieving,
we have to turn the page - turning the page
of the world we live in today. To do so, I need some help
from an American who goes by the name of Jared Diamond
and who published "Collapse," and soon you will see that the 5 factors of the collapse
of civilizations are reunited today. Jared Diamond has identified 5 factors in which we find the collapse
of the Mayas, the Vikings, and all of the great
Mesopotamian civilizations. And every time,
those 5 factors were reunited. The bad news is that the 5 factors are reunited only
at the beginning of the 21st century, but this time not only
a single civilization is threatened but the global village,
humanity, all of us. It's extremely important
to be aware of this. The first factor of the collapse
is the environmental factor. For two centuries, especially
the last 50 years, we have done environmental damage,
sometimes irreversible. The second factor is climate change. All the great civilizations did face
those changes in climate. This weakens the ecosystems, that weakening also results in shortage
of resources, destabilization of a society economical, geopolitical,
social consequences, you name it. Third factor, still reunited today,
the revival of military conflicts. These two first factors result in: when the ecosystems are destabilized
and there is a shortage of resources, we continue having conflicts, we make war. And let me remind you, at the moment
France is at war in Mali; let's not forget that. Fourth factor, equally important
than the last one, the cancellation of diplomatic
and commercial alliances. Things look bad, and the alliances
concluded yesterday are undermined. Today, we are all aware of the fact that the future of Europe is unknown,
we don't know what will come. And the fifth factor, not the least
worrisome: the blindness of our elites. In this whole collapse
of the civilization, the elites are not able to evaluate the fall of their world. They are incapable of changing
their prism for the analysis. And the result? The result is simple: we will have
a political caste system which emphasizes, which accelerates
the collapse of a world. After everything I just told you,
you have to know that the end of a world is not the same
as the end of the world. If I told you that we live
in an extraordinary time, extraordinary in the sense of etymology, there is no doubt, we live in
a transition period, between two worlds. In the world of today,
we are about to turn the page. And the world of tomorrow,
the world to come, the sustainable world,
about which I am talking today, starts to slighty assume its shape
but there is still nothing precise. How do we live? We live in a historical period
inspiring enough that we have to reinvent things. The nearest time period,
in which man reinvented everything, is the Renaissance. The question which comes up
in the 21st century is, "Do we experience a new Renaissance?" Let's see if the factors
of a renaissance are reunited. First factor of a renaissance is
a new understanding of the world. In the 15th century, Columbus
discovered the Americas, man discovered the immensity
of planet Earth, we discovered the immensity of the world. What happens at the moment,
for some decades, for some years? We discover the finiteness of the world. The planet is very small
in terms of resources, capacity, if we look at the current economic model. New understanding. Second factor: The Renaissance is a period
of very much creativity. We all know Leonardo da Vinci,
the Flemish painters. 2012, 2013, what has happened? Very much creativity. 3D printing is only one example.
There are lots of others. Third factor of the Renaissance: Contrary to common beliefs, the Renaissance was not
only a period of creativity, but also of much violence:
religious wars, civil wars, extermination of
the Native Americans, slavery. And how is it in 2012, 2013? Violence on a daily basis, and children which get killed
in school by automatic weapons. Fourth factor of a renaissance: The whole world knows Gutenberg
the inventor of the printing press who fundamentally changed
the distribution of knowledge in Europe, and later in the rest of the world. Imagine, today, there is
a new technological tool which allows us to distribute
knowledge in a whole new way. This tool, which we have in our hands,
provides instantaneous information. We hold the knowledge
of the world in our hands. Soon, we will see
how this is going to change. And finally, a renaissance
- that brings me to the subject of today - it's the fact that all the certainties
of humanity have fallen apart. Let me remind you, from Aristoteles through Ptolemy
in the 2nd century to the Renaissance, the Earth was flat,
man was the center of the world, and the stars turned around us. And those who dared
to question this unique thought, those who dared to dispute
this received, non-negotiable truth, - you know what came next -
had to deal with the Inquisition. At the stake, they had
to answer the question. Copernicus and Galilee had nearly paid
with their lives because they dared to say that the Earth was not flat
and it was not the center of the universe. So today, the question presenting itself
to us in the 21st century is: "Are we committing
the same mistake as our ancestors? Are we, also in making the mistake,
or in our certainties, the ones who will fall apart
over the next few years?" The next question which follows is: "What are those certainties which are
of received and non-negotiable value, which could fall apart
in 10, 15, 20, or 50 years?" There are a lot of them. As a former economist, there are at least
three certainties in economy. At first, there is the truth that growth
is the only motor of the economy. Let me remind you what
the word 'economy' means in Greek. Economy means resource management,
domain and household management. So it doesn't necessarily
mean growth. It's not a synonym. Second truth which could fall apart
is that growth is infinite. That's our consumption model in
a finite and increasingly shrinking world as the population grows more
and more but with less resources. And we don't question this dogma. Third dogma, third received truth is the necessary sacrifice
of the living in favor of this growth. But still, we have authorized the right
to pollute, to right to poison, the right to intoxicate. Why? Because growth demands it. The question that we are
confronted with today is: If we continue like this,
if we continue to sacrify the living, do we challenge this,
will we authorize this dialogue? The answer is also not that evident
because we can ask ourselves if the people who question these dogmas
of growth as motor of the economy, and of the myth of infinite growth are today maybe still seen
like yesterday's heretics. I must say that I am not sure,
that at this time, in the 21st century, we show a great wisdom to those who dare to question a system
which we all benefit from. It should be extremely important
for us to keep an open mind. And yet, we become more and more people. All here, I think,
are convinced of the fact that we know that the road
we have taken for two centuries leads us directly to - how did
the philosopher Jonas say? To a tragic impasse. The economic development on which we base
our model leads us to a tragic impasse. Hans Jonas adds
a very beautiful expression: "Nature will eventually make its ultimate
veto, anyway, and it will be over." After what I just said, another question
arises I am concerned with personally: "What will our children and descendants
think of our behavior, our stubbornness of our obsession
of a destructive economic model?" It is very likely that they will call us
perhaps barbarians of the living world, and maybe they will feel
the same contempt, the same indignation
which we can feel today about those who developed slavery
two or three centuries ago. Our behavior today is not any better
than that of those we despise today. Why? Because three centuries ago,
slavery was non-negotiable. The European and American
economic model was based on slavery. And today, in 2013, what happens? Our entire economic model,
our entire society is based on what? On exploitation,
on the sacrifice of the living. The question, which, of course,
arises is, "What are we going to do?" But before we know what we will do
we have to know why we got there in order not to commit
the same mistake in tomorrow's world. And how did we get there? The answer is simple
and can be said in a few words. The philosopher Descartes
already said it four centuries ago: "Man is the only master
and owner of nature." Period. We dominate nature, we shape
and form it. We do what we want. But what has happened
since this Cartesian thought? We consider nature as a bottomless pit, as a mine where we
draw from and throw things. And that's the problem. We consider this kind of nature as what? Finally, that puts man outside of nature. And this exteriority is our problem. In 1990, Michel Serres had an extremely
truthful thought, like always, he said: "But finally, the notion of nature
is a problem for us because nature assumes that man
is put into, surrounded by a living world. We are disconnected from nature. As long as we haven't solved that problem, as long as we haven't reconciled
with nature, it won't work. It's not about sacralizing nature, or putting it on an altar
like a sacred goddess, it's just about including nature
and not acting against or without it." Well, how are we going to do that? The conclusion of my talk is
we'll have to organize it, really simple. It's extremely simple,
we need a new controversy. What is a controversy?
It's a dispute, a global debate. What happened in Valladolid
in the 16th century, in 1550? A dispute took place in Spain as to whether Native Americans
are living beings or not. Because if we exploited
this tame workforce for free, we would develop the New World. If they were human beings
we couldn't make them slaves. That would be intolerable. So, we discussed about
the humanity of Native Americans. In the 21st century, we need
to organize a new controversy. But this time it will be about determining where are the tolerance limits towards nature compared to human activity. What can nature bear?
What kind of economic model can it bear? Do we have the right to pollute, the right to destroy the future
of our children and their common heritage? This new controversy allows us to draft the Universal Declaration
on the Duties of Man towards Nature. Yes, I said duties. Why? The Declaration on Human Rights
has been the corner stone of the modern world, of today's world. The Universal Declaration
on the Duties of Man will be the cornerstone
of the new tomorrow. The declaration will fix
the limits of our activity. But how to launch this new controversy? It needs to be organized. But before organizing
and launching it, you will tell me: "Roudaut has taken drugs. He's a utopian.
He lives in an ivory tower. it's all in his fantasy." Once more, I go back to history. Who would have thought
before Constantin and Theodosius I that the Romans would see their empire
destroyed by a handful of people from inside called Christians? Who would have thought before the French Revolution
and the end of the monarchy that a handful of men would write
the Universal Declaration on Human Rights? Today, those who reflect
about another world, who strive for new values, are perhaps
- perhaps you and I are - the first Christians of the Roman Empire. We may be about to change
the things from inside through the only aspiration
of our values to another world. How to organize this new controversy? That's very simple because
of an unprecedented challenge, we have a new tool in our hands,
and that's connection. We are all connected,
and that will change everything. The fact that we are connected
allows us to launch a controversy to consider the world of tomorrow. I finish my talk with this connection, as from tonight on, I suggest to launch
the first tweet about the new controversy. Here and now in Nantes, here we go, sent. I invite you to continue the debate
without me, after or with me. Thank you. (Applause)
