This article appears in the November 21, 2025 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Solidarité & Progrès Paris Conference
Time to Change Your Way of Thinking
The following is an edited version of the written keynote by Jacques Cheminade, President of France’s Solidarité & Progrès party, delivered to Panel One of the Nov. 8-9 Schiller Institute-Solidarité & Progrès Paris conference, “The Emancipation of Africa and the World Majority, a Challenge for Europe.” Panel One was titled, “Responding to the Cry of the People.” Subheads have been added. The video is available here.
We are all mortal, and history is tragic. If we were to remain as we are, we would become less than animals, infected by the comfort of a powerless pessimism that always leads to the worst. Today, faced with the risk of war and the effects of an inevitable financial collapse that would drag down the entire economy if nothing is done to prevent it, we must react and mobilize.
However, to do so, and to do it well, in this France and this world of autumn 2025, our minds must be prepared. That is the purpose of our two days. The challenge is, of course, within our country, but even more so on a global scale, because in this 21st Century, we are all in the same boat, like the crew in Rabelais’s The Fourth Book [of Gargantua and Pantagruel], saved by a Pantagruel who takes the helm because he knows that his responsibility is to become “a cooperator with God”—or, for those who find this word unsettling, a cooperator with the common destiny of humanity.
That is why Solidarité & Progrès invited young people from the Schiller Institute, patriots and citizens of the world from almost everywhere, to save together our share of immortality, this debt that we have contracted towards our predecessors and that we must pay to future generations, by acting for a France and a world with the eyes of the future.
The world is once again on the brink of nuclear war. “War seems to define all of humanity,” says the reality we perceive and the newspaper Le Monde.
On Netflix, A House of Dynamite imagines a nuclear attack on America. Our friend Theodore Postol shows us the consequences of a nuclear escalation: the annihilation of the world.
[U.S. President] Donald Trump has just called for the resumption of American nuclear tests because he mistakenly perceived, in [Russian President] Vladimir Putin’s announcement of the launch of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik missile and the nuclear-powered Poseidon torpedo, a resumption of these tests by the Russians.
In a world where the missiles of the major nuclear powers are on permanent alert—firing at the slightest warning—and where all the treaties signed during the Cold War have been abrogated, with the exception of the 2010 New START Treaty, whose deadline is February 5, 2026, Vladimir Putin has asked for its provisions to be extended for another year; Trump has not yet responded. There are approximately 12,000 nuclear warheads in the world and a human error can be fatal at any moment. It nearly happened several times.
You will note that, to begin with, I am not talking about the French budget, the suspension of pension reform, or the terrible crisis in education and social housing. These are very important issues, but their answers are not determined by the mood or the agendas of those who address or vote on them. They are part of the context I am describing. And, as Einstein said, we cannot answer them in the terms in which the problem is posed. The challenge is to change our way of thinking and acting, inspired by this change.
A Groundswell of Hope
This is why my commitment makes me optimistic. It is the secret to my activity at my age. I believe, like [French assassinated socialist leader] Jean Jaurès, that “in our France, on vital issues, there is an inertia of thought, a slumber of the mind that exposes us to all sorts of surprises, until the days when those luminous awakenings occur which fortunately, albeit at all-too-long intervals, save our country.” I like this quote because it tells us that we have to get started.
Hope springs from this groundswell sweeping the world. It is the demand of all peoples who have been colonized by force of arms or by money, to exercise their right to self-determination and development.
This development, which is the “new name for peace,” as Pope Paul VI reminded us in Populorum Progressio, or as the leaders present [at the Asian-African conference of the Non-Aligned Movement] in Bandung [Indonesia] in 1955 already demanded. This groundswell is manifesting itself within the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Group of 77, and indeed, in the Global Majority.
Hope springs from this groundswell sweeping the world. It is the demand of all peoples who have been colonized by force of arms or by money, to exercise their right to self-determination and development.
Vladimir Putin is calling for a “polyphonic” society, in which everyone’s voice will be heard to create a better whole. With [Brazilian President Luiz Inácio] Lula da Silva and [Chinese President] Xi Jinping, they are working to establish new platforms for development and trade in national currencies, based on common reference instruments, without the exorbitant privilege of a dollar subject to financial market speculation.
And Xi Jinping, in 2017, stated: “The community of shared future for mankind, as its name suggests, means that the future of each nation and country is closely linked to that of other nations and countries. We must share our ups and downs and live in harmony in this great common home of our planet, in order to realize the aspirations of the world’s peoples for a better life.”
We must listen to them to avoid a fatal conflagration between blocs, hoping to offer them our voice, which is unique to us and which I will discuss shortly. However, I first want to tell you what a human being can achieve when they calmly mobilize their humanity, defying all pre-established protocols. To return to the risk we face, we are talking about three men who saved the world by refusing to follow military procedures, in the name of the higher principle of humanity. I have often thought of them throughout my life.
Three Men Who Saved the World
First, there were two Russians, Vasily Arkhipov and Stanislav Petrov. In November 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vasily, a Soviet naval officer, was in his submarine off the American coast. His commander ordered him to launch a nuclear-tipped torpedo against an American target. Along with other fellow officers, he refused, thus preventing a nuclear war and the world’s annihilation.
On September 26, 1983, Stanislav was on duty at his nuclear early warning station when it indicated five American ballistic missiles heading toward the USSR, the screen displaying the flashing red “launch” signal, the order to retaliate. He did not obey the signal—he did not have absolute faith in anti-ballistic missile technology to guide a life-or-death decision—and deemed it necessary not to inform headquarters, which would logically have issued a nuclear retaliatory order. Thus sparing the world a nuclear war and its annihilation.
The third person to decide on a life-saving inaction was an American, Leonard Perroots, an Air Force officer and military intelligence agent. It was November 1983, during NATO’s nuclear military exercise Able Archer 83, an exercise involving a simulated attack on the USSR “with nuclear warheads against predetermined fixed targets,” the legend being that the Russian city in question was… Kiev. Worried, the Soviet forces began to think it was for real; Marshal Ogarkov retreated to his bunker and put his forces on high alert. Leonard should have warned his superiors, but he decided against it, weighing the consequences of what was becoming a foolish standoff. In doing so, he spared the world a nuclear war and its annihilation.
I don’t mention the behavior of these three men as an anecdote, but to try to make you understand what, in each of them, could have led them to disobey orders in the name of a higher purpose. And to relive within ourselves what they must have felt.
It was all the more courageous—Stanislav on September 26 and Leonard on November 11—because on September 1 of that same year, 1983, a Korean Airlines civilian aircraft, 007, having entered Soviet airspace in Asia, either by mistake or because it was equipped with embedded spy cameras, outside of its flight plan, was shot down by a Sukhoi [fighter jet], killing its 226 passengers and 23 crew members, which created a virtually unbearable tension.
These three examples illustrate the danger of military nuclear power, vulnerable to human error or cynical calculations. This underscores the necessity of implementing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons [TPNW] of July 7, 2017, now signed by 94 states. More than 80 have ratified it, including the Holy See, while none of the nuclear-armed states or their allies have signed it. On the eve of November 11, commemorating the 107th anniversary of the armistice ending the First World War, it is high time we upheld the sovereignty of all peoples, respect for international law and the Charter of the United Nations, in order to build peace.
Our International Coalition for Peace through Development thus joins the commitment of the Holy See and here in France, of the Republican Association of Combatants for Friendship, Solidarity, Memory, Antifascism and Peace [ARAC].
However, simply “waging war on war” is not enough to build peace. Peace must be driven by a positive dynamic, which is the new architecture of mutual development and security championed jointly by Solidarité & Progrès and the Schiller Institute.
This morning, Jose Vega and Diane Sare will speak about our struggle in the United States, and this afternoon, our African friends will speak about their desire for emancipation and a definitive break from all forms of colonialism and imperialism, by creating the economic and cultural foundations of truly sovereign nation-states. They will be the representatives of this underlying movement.
I now want to tell you why the Bandung Non-Aligned Movement of 1955 failed in the past, as did the decolonization movement of the 1960s and ’70s. France is a prime example. We decolonized in form, but not in principle or intention.
A Mission of Justice
Like the United Kingdom, we carried out color decolonizations, supporting the comprador elites of the decolonized countries, generally remaining beholden to neocolonialism and the existing financial system. We thus maintained and waged criminal wars to retain control of natural resources and the unequal exchange of raw materials. Today, as entire generations of young people in these countries rise up, the time has come—and this is why we are here—to do together what has not been done. Not out of vain, gloomy repentance, but out of a mission of justice. With, for these countries, a national currency for themselves and by themselves, which is no longer a CFA franc or a euro of the same ilk.
Once again, this requires us to change our way of thinking. Let me put it bluntly: it is the shortcomings in the behavior of those who have occupied our institutions of reference—be it the Church, the Communist Party, or the Republic—that have led us to where we are. Today, the fundamentalism and formalism of these institutions have paralyzed the spirit of creativity.
That is why I titled my book Responding to the Cry of the People, because I believe that, since Jules Vallès’s Paris Commune, no one has truly answered it. Today, in our country, everyone is talking about “the people,” but the current political regime is afraid of them, and its opposition is dividing them.
You might say, “[Charles] de Gaulle.” Remembering one of my early campaigns, “Think Bigger Than de Gaulle,” I’d like to explain what I meant by that, more imperfectly then, but which I understand better today. I certainly don’t want to diminish the immense merit of General de Gaulle, who broke with a corrupt system and attempted to build a new one; against Nazism, [Marshal Philippe] Pétain’s Vichy regime, and the AMGOT [Armed Forces of the Interior]. With comrades in his image, like Romain Gary, Jean Moulin, Pierre Mendès France, and Marie-Madeleine Fourcade, not forgetting the very harsh opposition between Communists and Gaullists in domestic politics, but with a shared commitment to human labor, economic development, and the rebirth of an industrial France. And let’s not forget Charles Tillon’s appeal of June 17, 1940.
But to simply repeat what our predecessors have already done, to become mere imitators, is to betray their creative spirit. Look at today: practically all politicians claim to admire de Gaulle and yet betray him, these administrative heirs sometimes even more so than others.
It’s the party system, with everyone submitting to external unifiers while pretending to fight amongst themselves internally—we’ve seen the NUPES [organized by Jean-Luc Mélanchon], the National Rally [led by Marine Le Pen], and the extreme center all agree to participate in this war provoked in Europe, by agreeing to supply weapons to Ukraine, this war that reduces us to vassalage to the world of money—that of the City of London and Wall Street, which by its very nature leads us to war. It’s no wonder young people don’t like it.
If we do not change course, we are inevitably heading towards war.
Our Army Chief of Staff, Pierre Schill, is considering deploying our soldiers to Ukraine; the Chief of the Defence Staff, Fabien Mandon, is considering an armed clash in three to four years provoked by Russia, in line with the logic of a high-intensity conflict in Europe, which has been our working hypothesis for several years. Hubert Bonneau, Director General of the National Gendarmerie, is ready to suppress internal unrest resulting from this state of war. Pierre Vandier, Supreme Allied Commander for NATO Transformation, is promoting the integration of European resources and urging us to stop “NATO bashing.”
While our European economies are in crisis, the financial markets continue their meteoric rise, driven by defense companies. The Stoxx Europe Targeted Defense stock index gained 102% in the first ten months of this year! Specialized defense investment funds are being created by French banks, and the Directorate General of Armaments has even created a club for investors eager to support our defense companies. It’s utterly obscene.
This is where our most terrible weakness appears, encompassing what I am trying to convey to you: a way of thinking that is a victim of Aristotelianism, keeping us at the same level—that of the incompatibility of contradictory things—without gathering the cognitive resources to reach the Coincidence of Opposites. These are the words of the great thinker of the dawn of the Renaissance, Nicholas of Cusa, who changed the way we think. There have been many academic experts on his work, but Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who is here with us today, was the one who gave it its necessary and crucial political relevance, and she will speak to you about it much better than I can.
The Evil of Aristotelian ‘Logic’
I simply want to tell you two things. The first is that Aristotelianism binds you to a level where the other, being inherently contradictory—precisely because he is the other—cannot be reconciled with me in a win-win situation. He becomes my “existential enemy,” the one I must fight in order to exist. This is the logic of “anti,” which inevitably leads to friend-enemy geopolitics, then to a war economy, and finally to war itself, and this time, everyone has “nuclear teeth.” Extracting them is a necessary struggle, but it can only be achieved by rendering them useless, through the implementation of mutual development, the convergence of opposites at a higher level of hypothesis. This was the aim of our indicative planning, but it remained linear, fixed on a given objective and without rising to a truly higher dynamic, what Chinese thinkers call self-revolution. Its aim was to reduce uncertainties regarding objectives accepted by mutual consent, but not to constantly rethink those objectives. To increase a society’s capacity to absorb new resources, the very objectives of that society must constantly rise.
This is where our most terrible weakness appears, encompassing what I am trying to convey to you: a way of thinking that is a victim of Aristotelianism, keeping us at the same level—that of the incompatibility of contradictory things—without gathering the cognitive resources to reach the Coincidence of Opposites.
Opposites are not absolute contradictions, contrary to all the prejudices expressed between peoples, as seen in our National Assembly and reflected in the face of our President of the Republic [Emmanuel Macron], a kind of algorithm functioning at best in two dimensions and a raging prisoner of these repetitive behavioral axioms. The problem is that he is merely the expression of a long series that preceded him, and from which it is our mission to liberate ourselves. By conceiving of the unity of humanity beyond multiplicity, with the same potential for each of us.
The nature of the challenge has become simultaneously greater, more dangerous, and more clearly defined since the field of artificial intelligence has infiltrated our private lives. I cannot elaborate on this now crucial point as much as I would have liked. The challenge is more clearly defined: artificial intelligence is simply the multiplication of the Aristotelian way of thinking at near-light speed. Hence its usefulness in resolving everything related to deduction and induction, everything related to the logical “already existing,” but also its inability to create. Sam Altman, co-creator of OpenAI and father of ChatGPT, himself says: “Often, we are tempted to consider it a creature, but it is only a tool.”
In a recent experiment, an AI computer competed against children aged 3 to 7. The task was to draw a circle using available tools: a ruler, a teapot, and three irrelevant objects. The computer immediately classified the ruler as a drawing instrument, like a compass, and failed to draw a circle. The children, however, thought about it and realized that the teapot was circular, and indeed drew a perfect circle with its outline. The children’s creative intuition thus triumphed over a data accumulator. Let’s add a crucial point: laughter is unique to humans, yet AI is so logical that it is incapable of telling jokes.
However, the challenge posed by AI-enhanced Aristotelianism has become far greater and more dangerous, not because artificial intelligence might surpass humans, but because its unrestrained use risks dragging humans down to its level! It’s everywhere: on the dashboard of your new car, on the rocket launched to the moon, in your household appliances, and now in the palm of your hand, via AI applications. This gives it enormous infectious power when it falls into the wrong hands. It has become an integral part of our lives. Combined with the world of screens and images, it is used to create addictions. In the financial markets, it has fueled a frenzied surge for several years, completely disconnected from the physical reality of values. It pushes market participants to all move in the same direction, whether for the value of cryptocurrencies or stock markets, encouraging the greed of the strongest and richest, with no connection to the real, physical economy!
Thus, it is logically certain that one day the accumulation of short orders will explode, as all algorithms strive to guarantee positions in the same way. This will inevitably be a free fall, with the most powerful leaving the Titanic first, to the detriment of the vast majority! Furthermore, since AI has already gorged itself on every possible algorithm, it must generate more for its own use, like a dog chasing its tail. Even worse, its own funding has become circular, with hundreds of billions of dollars circulating in a closed loop: I lend you money or invest in your company so that you buy my products or rent my services, and so that we can all operate on cryptocurrencies, which, along with the new dollar-backed stablecoins introduced by the GENIUS law, constitute an instrument for both the privatization and the corruption of the dollar.
This will further detach the markets from the real economy and, along with everything else, create the conditions for its collapse. Some are already asking: don’t you find it strange that, while the prevailing narrative is that the demand for computing is infinite and that everything will be for the best in the best of all possible virtual worlds, well, vendors continue to subsidize their customers? It’s like a machine that, the further it goes, the more fuel it needs and the more losses it incurs.
Threat of AI Annihilation
In the military, the use of AI poses, in a far worse form, the same challenge as in 1962 and 1983, which our three courageous friends successfully met. Next time, with adults who have been “processed” by AI since childhood and adolescence, will they maintain the same composure? Will they consider that the fate of humanity is at stake? Today, AI has become the usual emotional support for more than a third of young Americans and plays into their hands, making them addicted. Seventy-two percent use it. The association of AI with addictive video games, financial gambling, and pornography creates a “degraded man” who believes himself enhanced and who, thanks to chatbots adapted to the speech and verbal tics of the deceased, can even give the impression of speaking to them. This commerce with death is obscene.
I don’t know if you’ve fully grasped all of this; this possibility of participating in the destruction of the world by playing the great military-financial game. In this world where AI/GPT systems have, as they say, already “invited themselves into the processes of nuclear war.” We know, since the time of our distant ancestors’ bolas, that once invented, military technologies have always been used. This time, to continue our adventure on Earth or elsewhere, it’s time to do things differently, by heeding the wise words of Nicholas of Cusa, Lyndon LaRouche, and the power of life and thought.
This is why, faced with this imminent risk of collapse, the intervention of Pope Leo XIV, referring to Nicholas of Cusa before the crowd in St. Peter’s Square in Rome, is of fundamental importance: it lays the groundwork for a change in thinking that will allow us to escape the deadly “Great Game” currently underway.
It is obvious to all who know us that there is a coincidence, which this time is not one of opposites, between what the Pope said about the Jubilee and the writings of Helga Zepp-LaRouche over the past forty years. The Schiller Institute has prepared a document that establishes the fundamental importance of this event, provided we amplify its message. In a deeply moving message delivered at the last meeting of the International Peace Coalition, Father Harry Bury, a long-time advocate for peace and nonviolence and a close associate of Mother Teresa, emphasized that each of us has the power to change things for the better on a higher level. He stated that Nicholas of Cusa deserves to be canonized by a Church that has hitherto rejected or ignored him, and that Lyndon LaRouche should be similarly exonerated in the United States. It is essential that such a voice be raised to embody the idea that humanity is inherently good, and that good and evil are not like two geopolitical enemies clashing in the world, but rather that evil can only arise in the absence of good.
It is in this context that I condemn, in our country, the complacency of those who advocate uniting all right-wing factions in this destructive Great Game. They may not realize what they are doing, but they are doing it. These are [French billionaires] Pierre-Édouard Stérin and Vincent Bolloré, branding their Catholicism with a cult of cryptocurrencies, as seen last June at the Summit of Freedoms, with a stand run by Pierre Noizat. These are Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella in Flamanville, advocating for the use of nuclear power to boost Bitcoin, or Eric Ciotti presenting a bill to inject cryptocurrencies into the economy and create a national Bitcoin reserve, following the lead of the United States.
And here is Donald Trump, who undoubtedly sincerely wants to be a man of peace, but is building it on the quicksand of cryptocurrencies and his own personal enrichment, and who finds willing followers here. I should say that it’s in front of the real players that this [French] right wing stoops, in front of the depraved billionaires who surround Trump and speculate on everything. The same ones who push him to support the genocidal policies of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and his messianic thugs. All of this is the antithesis of true sovereignty.
France and the United States share the common trait of having no budget, a parliamentary gridlock here, a Senate shutdown there, with parties incapable of prioritizing the national interest and that of their people over their own—and more obsessed, in our case, with a presidential election than with the risk of war and the collapse of our country.
They all want, like Icarus, to fly towards the sun of power with existing technologies—feather and wax wings yesterday, and AI and cryptocurrencies today. This is how the left behaves, as if, with the wings of “anti,” it could fulfill its social promises without any real policy of creation, hating those it proclaims its enemies, and even the people if they vote the wrong way. To change any person, you must receive each human being with a beautiful face.
Lyndon LaRouche’s “Triple Curve” clearly shows where the Western economy is headed: crash and war to save its possession of resources that its policy of monetary and military runaway no longer makes it capable of generating.
A Beautiful World of Development
How beautiful the world would be, on the contrary, with grand projects like the Peace Tunnel under the Bering Strait and its development corridors, the water and energy lungs of Lake Chad and the Inga Dams in Africa, the Kra Canal in Asia, the Messina Bridge between mainland Italy and Sicily, our Oasis Plan for all of Southwest Asia, based not on the lowest common denominator or even the highest multiple, but on the convergence of opposites there, engendering what is truly creation, something that does not yet exist but which we must ensure comes into being, with hope and perseverance.
Finally, let us look with interest at what Chinese scientists, engineers, and builders have accomplished in thirty years for their country and their people.
How beautiful our France would be if we returned to the momentum of its creators, inventors as [French engineer] Jean Bertin [with his air-cushion high speed Aerotrain] and his practically weekly patents, [French scientist] Jean Robieux, with his lasers for medicine and nuclear energy, Laboulaye who, alongside [French sculptor] Bartholdi, participated in the construction of the Statue of Liberty, based on the same principles of material resistance as those of the Garabit viaduct and the Eiffel Tower, [French structural engineer] Eugène Freyssinet, inventor of prestressed concrete and, even more so, the contributions of Colbert’s Academy of Sciences and the Polytechnic School of Gaspard Monge and Lazare Carnot.
There is no way back to the past, but we must create in the image of those who created it. Consider the Social Security system of Pierre Laroque and Ambroise Croizat, the Gaullist and the Communist, both members of the Resistance—yet another example of the convergence of opposites. Today, more than ever, we have the means to elevate all human beings to the dignity of humankind, as Laroque and Croizat envisioned, while their work is gradually falling victim to financial predators who have disrupted our development momentum. It is a matter of will and political commitment.
Are we going to allow all these contributions to be wiped out? Are we going to sink into the selfish rejection of the other, under the pretext that they are migrants, instead of contributing to the development of their country so that they are not forced to leave and we are not forced to welcome them here, taking our share of all the world’s misery?
We, French people and human beings, can no longer tolerate the ongoing genocide in Gaza and the drownings in the Mediterranean and the English Channel. Borders are essential, but they cannot be a wall or a sieve. Are we, for example, going to let [French] New Caledonia drift by being incapable of decolonizing it within the Republic? The real problem with schools, hospitals, and housing is that we have allowed other priorities to be dictated to us, adapting to the global market and to a Europe that has become destructive since the Single European Act of 1986 created the conditions for the loss of our sovereignty.
The absolute priority is to restore our sovereignty, but to do so, we must fight alongside those who defend theirs, convinced that it is our own pursuit of excellence that will enable us to succeed.
We [Cheminade and his party Solidarité & Progrès] fought against it, while many of today’s sovereignists were either not yet born or were comfortably ensconced within the institutions. The absolute priority is to restore our sovereignty, but to do so, we must fight alongside those who defend theirs, convinced that it is our own pursuit of excellence that will enable us to succeed.
I began by quoting Jaurès, and I will end by quoting Lamartine: “The role of poetry is to constantly call humanity forward, pointing to utopias, imaginary republics, and cities of God,” inspiring society with the courage to reach them.
Here, at the outset, we equip our minds to explore the unknown and mobilize. There is also my 2017 program, “France with the Eyes of the Future,” which remains entirely relevant for those who wish to explore its various aspects, because what has been done, and especially what has not been done, during Macron’s Presidency has unfortunately not rendered it obsolete.
Equip yourselves to commit wholeheartedly, because if we do not mobilize more than ever before, the alternative is a financial collapse dragging down the Western economy, and us with it, and a war leading to our annihilation.
Thank you for what you will do. Hard work can overcome anything. Be confident.
