Passage Summary: Claude wants the public to vote directly on foreign policy because elections are too messy to show what people really want. Lorraine disagrees, arguing that the public is too uninformed to make these decisions without causing a disaster.

Conclusion: France should hold referenda on foreign-policy issues to ensure public accountability.

Reasoning: Elections are decided on too many different issues to provide a clear mandate for any specific foreign policy.

Analysis: To counter Lorraine, Claude needs to undermine her premise that the public is inherently uninformed or that their lack of knowledge will lead to disaster. Look for an answer that suggests the public can become informed when given the chance, or perhaps that the current system (without referenda) is already disastrous. If referenda actually motivate people to learn about the issues, Lorraine's objection about the public being 'unwilling' to learn loses its sting. Claude's best move is to show that the 'uninformed' state is not a permanent obstacle.