The World Economy of the Future

    Why would any state wish to maintain a military force to defend itself if it could be guaranteed security and defense by an outside military with a massive military force? Why would it need a diplomatic service if an outside government  agency could conduct diplomatic operations for it for a large union of states? If enough states unite worldwide, war and diplomacy worldwide would fade away and individual states would have sacrificed two sovereign powers now totally useless.  States in the worldwide union would be sovereign enough to assure freedom and democracy for themselves and for every citizen and every state in the union. Full state sovereignty would at last be seen for what it is, a means for a  ruthless exercise of power against state citizens and against all the citizens of all the other fully sovereign states in the world.

   How can this worldwide limitation of sovereign power come about? What state would agree to it? What state would give up its power to be independent and sovereign and become by joining the American union “a colony of America”? A state that is not afraid of the train because as soon as any state becomes an American state the train comes with it. The American economic, legal and political train. A new state would get a train roaring down the tracks into its territory right away. All American corporations blowing their whistles rushing noisily down the tracks greedy as usual to employ everyone they need to stuff their pockets with more money. The federal police from Washington hunting for interstate criminals and corrupt politicians to put into federal jails. Interference almost daily from federal agencies in Washington in the workings of their state agencies. The federal court system hearing appeals from citizens and overturning state laws that violate universal principles of human rights. The federal military, the federal navy and air force, the federal spy agencies, the federal tax agencies, the federal banking system, and on the train too people of every race in the world, American citizens, eager to buy property, eager to open businesses, eager to be citizens both of their new state and of the United States. The only serious model for the full development of the world economy is already operating in the fifty states of the American union. The union needs to be extended by adding more states. Every state everywhere should apply for admission to the US Congress which has the right to admit them. Everyone who wants a  new creative and prosperous and free world economy should get on the train.

Daniel McNeill  

 

Identity in American States

    Three of the republican candidates for President, Bush, Christie and Kasich, boast that as governors they balanced the budgets of their states by cutting budgets and eliminating large numbers of government jobs without raising taxes. That is more or less what corporate raiders do when they take over a company. They cut expenses by firing large numbers of people to make larger profits and to sell the diminished corporation for more money than they paid. State raiders like Governor Snyder of Michigan cut expenses by fouling the water supply of the people of Flint. The water systems in many states are unhealthy and even deadly because of budget cuts by state raiders in the past. Americans need to live in a state that acts in the best interests of the majority of its citizens. But an American usually does not feel an identity with the state where he chooses to live that is as strong as the identity of a citizen of a national state. Our political leaders do not always feel a strong identity either which makes a state vulnerable. We can never be sure under our political system  that a governor elected head of a state will act only in the interests of people residing in his state. People are coming in and out of our  states all the time and sometimes governors are carpetbaggers who may not have any felt interest in a state where they were not born.

   Somehow most of us believe we should not worry if we live in this or that state with this or that degree of protection against politicians with non-state interests because we have a federal government in Washington. But Washington can not and does not govern the whole of the United States as if it were one state and as though it was responsible for every political decision in it. It also has over the years done much to reduce the strong measure of sovereignty states had when they ratified the Constitution. It is a good thing that we are free to live and vote and have citizenship in any of our fifty states but it means we have often little or no authentic state identity. Our fifty states can never become well balanced politically unless other states in the world accept the same limited sovereign power of American states and join our union. In a united states of the world, the Washington government would no longer need to pretend it is the national government of a state and would become a de jure world government rather than just the de facto world government that it is now. All new states to our union would allow anyone from any state in the union to come to their state freely, to work and live and vote with full rights as citizens simply by taking up residence in a state of their choice. A governor could still be a carpetbagger and a state raider. But if less and less national states in the world gave their citizens an authentic identity using borders to keep  foreign people out and lock their natives in, the lack of national authenticity in states in a worldwide union would be a price worth paying if millions of people worldwide became as free as we are in our free and open American states.

Daniel McNeill

Daniel McNeill’s novella The End of All Beginnings is available at

https://www.amazon.com/End-All-Beginnings-Daniel-McNeill-ebook/dp/B01IO1PEXO/ref=sr

Read it free on Kindle with a free app or buy it on Kindle for $1.99.

Also available as a book for $5.99.

A powerful and very dramatic exploration of love and relations between

a 70-year-old man and four women, two sisters 18 and 19, their mother

46, and a lesbian friend 22. It is full of well-written dialogues between the five

In various situations including sexual relations. The drama moves fast right

from the start and it is impossible not to read it as quickly as possible (it

can be read in less than three hours} to an ending that is totally unexpected

and explosive. A complex drama that moves with its own momentum towards

one liberating ending to all its beginnings.

Daniel McNeill

Donald Trump May Admit New States

 

   Once in office, it may not suit President Trump’s objectives to bring as many new states into the American union as he can but that is nonetheless a powerful power that our Constitution puts in the back pocket of every president. Congress has the right given it in the Constitution to pass a bill at any time admitting a new state. President Trump must sign the bill to make it legal. He could easily make a deal with congressmen and senators to assure that he would have enough votes to admit a new state before negotiating some deal with a foreign state. He could begin by a press release making clear to every state in the world that he has such a power. Then he could go about the world making deals with the power to admit any state as a new American state as a trump card in his back pocket. Would President Trump pull out the card? Would he put it on the table? We have no evidence that any American president ever has. But Donald Trump says he will be a new kind of president. He will make America great again. America became as great as it is by admitting since 1791 over a period of 168 years 37 new sovereign states to its union. Is it conceivable that President Trump, who owns properties all over the world, will not see the possibility of continuing to do what made America great in the past? He may admit new states. Just because no President since Hawaii was admitted as a state in 1959 has played the powerful card in his back pocket, that is certainly no reason to believe President Trump will not pull it out and play it. We might as well vote for him if we want, like President Wilson, to save the world for democracy. If he could bring in,say, just ten new states it would be a mighty step towards worldwide democracy and worldwide freedom. It would be the best deal that he could make for America and the world.

Daniel McNeill

The Times That Try Tunisian and US Souls

   These are the times that try men’s souls. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered but the brave people of the nation of Tunisia threw out a tyrant four years ago and now terrorism has destroyed their tourist industry and the 40% unemployment of their young is threatening to trample down their hopes for democracy in their streets. The sunshine American patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the good things that his political system alone can give Tunisians, but the American patriot that demands that the Congress in Washington DC offer Tunisia immediately acceptance of it as the fifty-first state of the American union deserves the love and thanks of every man and woman in the world. Yes, Congress would make an offer that Tunisia may refuse for all the wrong reasons but make the offer anyway. Let America stand at last for something noble and good and let every American who hates tyranny be at least proud that they supported an act directly opposed to it. Tunisia may reject allowing the Coast Guard to run its  harbor and may not allow its possible new navy, the American navy, to station ships there. It may be against allowing the Federal Department of Justice to set up offices in Tunis and begin searching out corrupt politicians to put them in federal jails. It may not accept that Tunisian men and women will no longer have a state army and may have military careers only in the United States army which will buy lands in their state to station soldiers with advanced military technologies to defend and secure Tunisia’s borders from all foreign dangers. Every Tunisian citizen overnight would gain a second citizenship as new citizens of the United States with the right to live and work and vote in any one of fifty-one states, but Tunisians may reject that possibility because they may refuse to become a colony of America. (The government of America in Washington DC is not a state, is not located in a state, and does not have enough power to rule or colonize any state.) As the fifty-first American state, the dollar would become their currency and all the capital in all the nations of the world would look upon Tunisia, a new American state, as a perfectly secure place for investments creating the thousands of new jobs that young Tunisians need. But that may be rejected also even though the rejection can not be based on any logic and is ignoble. Tunisians would be able as citizens in a new American state to be elected as representatives to the Congress in Washington and to vote for president and run their state as before, their court system as before, their education system and their financial system as before, and experience an influx of new residents of their state from 50 other states and experience as well many other beneficial changes that may not happen if Tunisian politicians reject Congress’s offer. Tunisians may become again like most Americans merely sunshine patriots, but at least we Americans who stood by the good things our political system alone can offer the world tried. We were willing to do all we could to help Tunisians kick tyranny out once and for all and bring real democracy in forever.

Daniel McNeill with Thomas Paine, THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered...

Is Italy or Massachusetts More Sovereign?

    Italy has an enormous tax problem. Its government taxes absolutely everything it can for more revenue. Excessive taxes on businesses stifle expansion and employment. Widespread government corruption and the mafia take large chunks of public money. The only good thing about the absurd inefficiencies in its government is that at least some public money is recirculated justly into good hands as well as unjustly into bad.  Massachusetts does not need a broad tax base for revenues because some possible government functions, like having its own military and diplomacy or its own social security system, are handled by its citizens’ second government in Washington. It does not need to create a large recirculation of money  throughout its state economy by taxing extensively because federal taxes sent to Washington from fifty states create a gigantic continental-wide recirculation of money. Corrupt politicians in Massachusetts are tried and sentenced to jail in Federal courts by the Federal Department of Justice. The mafia is active in very few areas, is hunted down by Federal as well as State police, and is not a cancer in  government as in Italy. Who is more sovereign?Technically Italy. But Massachusetts possesses a more efficient sovereignty because its political alliance with Washington leaves it free to rule mainly over matters of immediate interest to its citizens and, more important, to face public problems that only a state with limited sovereign responsibilities can readily solve for the public good. The best public officials in Italy with the best will in the world  can not solve its problems. Massachusetts  officials can. Who is more sovereign in an efficient manner?  Massachusetts is as sovereign as it needs to be. Italy is totally sovereign and totally unable to function in a way that correctly manages its citizens needs.

Daniel McNeill

.

Interested in the cultural, religious and philosophical meanings symbolized in the ritual drama of a baseball game? Go to Daniel McNeill’s book on the meaning of baseball The Theater Of The Impossible at Amazon.com or click on this link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=the+theater+of+the+impossible

Daniel McNeill’s book The United States of the World is at: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1499534639

A Fleeting Vision of Statehood and Sovereignty in Washington

   President Obama gave his last state of the union speech January 12  before persons exercising all federal powers. Supreme court members,  senators, congressmen, cabinet members, department heads of federal agencies sat before him. He held the supreme power over the military and diplomacy but all his other powers, like the powers of persons who sat listening to him, were limited by the Constitution or laws passed by Congress. No one present in the chamber of the House held total power. Imagine Vladimir Putin addressing a large assemblage of government officials in Russia. All the sovereign power of the Russian state is in his hands and whatever he distributes down to officials to exercise is absolute over all Russian citizens anywhere in Russia. The American president does not have the power to distribute down absolute power because various federal powers have already been established in the hands of persons he does not control directly by the separation of powers outlined in the Constitution.

   However the assemblage listening to the President appeared grand and, if understood correctly, it was grand. If somehow every hand present holding a bit of power could come together and form some absolute and coherent unity working as just one hand, we would have something like one sovereign government. It would seem as sovereign as Vladimir Putin’s government in Russia. However none of this unified power could be used absolutely to command at will every American citizen. It would be a unity creating a sovereign power with no base and therefore a useless sovereignty. However, while the President addressed his audience, an odd and fleeting unity appeared to him as a vision. For a while, for an evening, Washington seemed, with all its great powers gathered together, a sovereign state like every other state in the world. Then the meeting broke up. The vision vanished. The Washington government was again split into parts and the momentary illusion of being a state vanished also because the Constitution does not grant Washington enough powers to be a state. The fifty American states have the right under the Constitution to consider themselves sovereign states. But they were all absent and none of their governors were invited to hear a speech about the condition of their union.

Daniel McNeill

Political Correctness and Incorrect Political Organization

   We Americans have a fundamental moral and political duty: we must make sure that every foreigner in the world lives in a secure state with a national identity and we must also be politically correct in our behavior towards foreigners who come to live in America. Everyone in the world has a right to a national identity except Americans. Our duty is to keep the foreign national identities of peoples secure and vital whether they live in foreign states or in the united states. Since we do not live in a nation and have no national identity, it makes sense that we try to make all national identities in the world obsolete but we do the opposite. We support them. We pay taxes to our government to protect worldwide the integrity of foreign states and with it the national identities of their citizens.

   Our unique and revolutionary political and financial system is rooted in our government in Washington. Without it, the vast swirl of our union of 50 states would become a jumble of independent states each like a wheel of a car detached from a hub rolling anywhere and nowhere. But our patriotic loyalty to Washington can not give us a national identity since it was established by our constitution without the fully sovereign powers necessary to be a state. People leave some foreign state and come to America to live in one of our 50 states each without the full sovereign power necessary to be a national state. They automatically assume that the government in Washington which is not a state is nonetheless their new national state. We are mostly quiet about their error. It is not politically correct to tell them that they and their descendants have cut the ropes forever that tie them to some national state. It is better to encourage them to remain identified with some foreign race or some foreign identity while they live among us and gradually become like us nationless.

   We Americans will go on creating our various identities by the way we choose to live and work, free forever from the slavery of a life ruled by a fully sovereign national government. We are forced to obey absolutely no law created by any government with absolute power because no such government exists anywhere among the thousands of governments in our 50 states. But how long can we go on spending large portions of our wealth supporting financially and militarily sovereign governments with no worldwide consciousness? Can we support forever political leaders who use their sovereign power corruptly and hold their citizens like prisoners behind national borders that prevent the new creative identities possible for them in a global world that can not thrive without some new revolutionary political reorganization?

Daniel McNeill