World Unity 3

Today in an interview on French television, Jean-Luc Melenchon, the founder of the Left Party (le parti de Gauche) said that France was governed by a presidential monarchy (une monarchie presidentielle). He suggests what we believe, that old-fashioned democracies in nation-states like France don’t work for most citizens and don’t work at all for those at the bottom. A postmodern state must govern  from the top down but its citizens must have enough influence from the bottom up to cancel laws that are unjust or that violate their unalienable rights. A mechanism that the American system uses to broaden democracy is judicial review. Rather than only protesting against unjust laws in the streets, Americans also challenge them in courts. Our Constitution of 1789 allows us to appeal beyond the power of all our governments to state and federal courts who can rule any law invalid guided by universal principles of justice embodied not only in the words of Constitution but also in several amendments to the Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees to all citizens in any state freedom of speech. Neither the Federal Government nor any state can make any law or take any action that prevents the exercise of this freedom. Democracy at all levels in all our many governments is compulsory and all the laws of all our governments are made by officials ruled by the dictatorship of the higher universal law that all humans possess unalienable rights. This type of top-down and bottom-up democracy can not exist in nation-states because their absolute sovereignty makes them too top-heavy to let their power sift down to those powerless at the bottom. Don’t think however that we Americans have never had presidents who acted like monarchs. It has just been more difficult than in France because our central government is not fully sovereign and the government of France is.
Daniel McNeill
The United States of the World, The Theater of the Impossible, The End of All Beginnings, books by Daniel McNeill, are for sale at:amazon.com/author/graceisall

World Unity 2

The continent of North America had no nation anywhere when the first European colonists arrived in the sixteenth century. This made subjection of the natives and colonization easy. The Spanish conquerors of Mexico met an empire with a central government in Mexico City but some conquered tribes eagerly aided the Spaniards crush the empire. States developed in North America as they had in Africa during the nineteenth century. European nations conquered the natives and outlined on maps the boundaries of their colonies. The colonies then became states when the Europeans departed. The states in Africa are now nations enclosed within frontiers established by Europeans. In North America, the Europeans left behind colonies that became at their departure provinces or states but not nations. British rule continued in Canada and united its peoples but Canadians did not begin thinking of their country as a nation until late in the twentieth century. The thirteen American colonies declared themselves sovereign states in the Declaration of Independence of 1776 which reads “that these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.” Several factors unified the thirteen states, the common use of English, their common location along the Atlantic Ocean, the common slavery of black Africans and indentured whites, the military threat in their western areas from Indians, and their eight-year war with Britain. When freed from Britain, the thirteen new American states were already unified well enough to fix their union by law by the ratification of the Constitution. But it is implicit in the Constitution that every state is sovereign and that the sovereign powers granted the new government in Washington derived from the sovereign powers of the states. Put simply, the conundrum was that the Federal Government could not have obtained limited sovereign powers unless they had been obtained from some prior absolute sovereignty belonging to the states which the Constitution also limited. The Constitution never uses the word “national” or “nation” or “Federal Government” anywhere. It says its purpose is to form “a more perfect union…for the united states of America” and it then enumerates powers that the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the new government possess. Clearly the Constitution is about delegating certain powers to a central government and this would certainly have been an odd way to set up a “national” government since the powers delegated are limited. However over time as the union expanded and faced wars and the challenge of keeping the union strong, many historians found it convenient to find evidence for America being a nation going back all the way to the landing of English colonists at Plymouth in Massachusetts in 1620. Their point of view is false. The only true line to follow to understand American history is the unity that evolved among colonists and immigrants that produced over time a glorious union of states, a union which was not a nation and never became a nation.
Daniel McNeill                                                  
The United States of the World, The Theater of the Impossible, The End of All Beginnings, books by Daniel McNeill, are for sale at:
amazon.com/author/graceisall

World Unity 1

    The shots fired at British soldiers at Lexington and Concord in 1775 meant that in North America only Canada would develop within the British Empire and the vast lands to the south would develop on their own. The colonists, subjects of the King in London and his Parliament, jumped into the unknown. The defeat of the French at Quebec in Canada in 1763 meant that the whole of North America north of Mexico might have been governed by one body of men in a Parliament in London much as the Roman Empire had been governed by one body of men, the Roman Senate. Local rule would have evolved in the British Empire so that today Canada and the US might have been united in a vast continental union of states with local democratic governments much as in the present provinces of Canada. If the British Empire worldwide had survived up to the present time, a large worldwide union of democratic states would now exist with some kind of central government somewhere where elected representatives from all the English-speaking states would gather to make universal laws binding in their worldwide union guaranteeing universal citizenship, universal democracy, and universal unalienable human rights. This is what we are for, a United States Of The World. The British colonization of the world began a great worldwide union of peoples and it is up to us Americans to finish the job. The central government of the new worldwide union, a government with limited sovereign powers, is  already established in a location, Washington in the District of Columbia, that is not a national territory. How can anyone in our world that has been tragically torn apart in the past by wars begun by nation-states and that is being tragically torn apart today by civil wars within nation-states not see that the worldwide union of all states is a necessity and is a real possibility? It can be begun today by some nation-state petitioning the Congress in Washington to become another state of the United States. All the states of the world need to jump into the unknown as we Americans did in 1776 when we declared our independence from Britain.
Daniel McNeill usoftheworld.com
The United States of the World,The Theater of the Impossible, The End of All Beginnings, books by Daniel McNeill, are for sale at:
amazon.com/author/graceisall

The World Beyond the American Political Bubble

The debacle American political life is now passing through because of Trump has a momentum to it that must lead to serious changes worldwide.  Lincoln was the first Trump. He manipulated American history and changed our political system. Wilson was the first president to understand that the Washington government had to operate for the worldwide good of humanity. He tried to unify the world’s states after the First World War. President Roosevelt  fought  a war worldwide against fascism to end the European colonial empires and people the world instead with free independent states. To fight the Cold War, the American government and military finally decided that, yes, America should unite the world. American foreign policy after Lincoln and up to Obama has been a magnificent success erected over failure after failure, political and military blunder after blunder, that did produce the economic and military unity worldwide that is now crumbling. Enter Donald Trump. He has decided that it is in the interest of Americans to destroy the imperfect worldwide unity that Washington has worked at now for two generations. There are dictatorial states in the world ready to help Trump take apart the American worldwide system of unity. Americans are protesting against Trump but they are blind to the world beyond their American bubble. It is as if they are unable to understand that Washington has been and is trying to unite the world for the good of humanity. Trump’s madness bumps up against a passionate and visionless goodness that want rights for everyone, for immigrants and Americans alike, but only in America! Americans deserve universal human rights but so does every human being everywhere. The best way we can promote rights for ourselves is to demand that Washington admit new states to our union and use its power to enforce human rights in all the states of an expanded union. But that would require a new consciousness among Americans. We would have to start suddenly demanding from Washington not only universal rights for ourselves but also for everyone else in the world. We  would have to become global thinkers like presidents Wilson and Roosevelt. We would have to understand that there are no universal human rights if they are not universal.
Daniel McNeill
Read "The United States of the World" a complete book of 12 essays on the movement within American history towards changing the central government in Washington to the central government of a worldwide union of states at: usoftheworld.com/history
Read other writings about worldwide unity at the United States of the World website: usoftheworld.com

The United States Not Uniting States Anymore

The foreign policy of the United States in 1959 when Hawaii was admitted as our 50th state might have continued and freed foreign states from domination by rich states by admitting them also as new states in our union. But Washington gave up admitting new states and instead supported and dominated nation-states worldwide for its selfish interests instead of continuing to join new  states to its union of states as it had been doing from 1790 up until 1959. The European union of states admits new states whenever it wishes. But we Americans are totally deaf to the idea of admitting new states to what we call "the nation" and most of us even believe that the 37 new states we admitted over a period of 170 years was a "once only" deal. In other words, the central global policy of America during about 8 out of every 10 years of its existence is no longer an option! The French under Napoleon controlled foreign states with their army and the Chinese are continuing the fight globally to control foreign states with their business know-how, their enormous amounts of capital, and their military. We Americans possess the only political system designed to admit new states and to unite states peacefully and democratically without controlling them by using military or economic power. But why should we bother? We succeeded in creating the largest union of states on earth, 50 of them, but who wants a union of states anyway? Even for our political system to be named "the united states" is a kind of embarrassment. Let the European Union admit new states. We don't want anything to do with "united states". If we had 50 more states in our union with our powerful military and our highly developed economy, we could eliminate the global destruction of nature on our planet and put an end forever to all wars globally. But who wants to bother with admitting new states to America? That was our main business in our past but it's over. The United States is not a union of states but a nation. Live with it.

Daniel McNeill

Read Daniel McNeill's interpretation of Genesis, the first book of the Bible, as expressing throughout the Holy Trinity at work. At: usoftheworld.com/genesis

Read about the Christian symbolism in the drama of baseball at: usoftheworld.com/baseball-metaphysics

A Deceptively Bewitching Coup d"Etat

The following is an excerpt from an article sent me today from France by the group, Mouvement 6e République. On May 8 on this blog I wrote a blog about Emmanuel  Macron, the recently elected president of France, entitled, “A New Napoleon Ruling France”. Did our red states in America try to put a new Napoleon in Washington? In any case, the description below of how democracies now elect dictators is too accurate not to translate it from the French. (Look below the French text)

Nous avons changé d’époque : la mode n’est plus aux coups d’Etat violents d’autrefois. Pour renverser la République aujourd’hui, plus besoin de prise de pouvoir armée comme celle du 18 Brumaire ou d’occupation militaire extérieure pour imposer un maréchal Pétain ; le système institutionnel et électoral de la monarchie présidentielle joue très bien son rôle. En plus, c’est pratique : bien dissimulé derrière des sourires charmants et une belle propagande médiatique d’abrutissement des masses, le putsch ne se remarque même pas. Désormais, la mode est au « coup d’État enjôleur ». Depuis la Révolution française, tous les ennemis de la République, qu’ils s’appellent légitimistes, orléanistes, bonapartistes ou vichystes, ont cherché à atteindre le même objectif : étouffer la souveraineté populaire et bâillonner le parlementarisme. L’idéologie est toujours la même : le peuple ne doit pas exercer le pouvoir, et la démocratie parlementaire est une nuisance ; il faut confier tous les pouvoirs à un exécutif fort, conduit par un homme seul, responsable devant personne, qui gouvernera – comme par hasard ! – toujours dans l’intérêt des puissants.

C’est exactement cette idéologie que l’on retrouve dans l’arrivée au pouvoir de Macron.  

   We have changed to a different age. Violent coups d’etats of ages past are no longer fashionable. To overthrow a republic today, no need to grab power with armed men as in 18 Brumaire or by a foreign military power imposing on us a Petain. The instituted system for the election of the presidential monarchy acts its role very well. What’s more, it’s practical: well hidden behind beguiling smiles and a beautiful media propaganda for the dumbing of the masses, the putsch is not even noticed. From now on, a deceptively bewitching coup d’etat is in fashion. Since the French revolution, all the enemies of the republic, whether called legitimists, orleanists, bonapartists or vichyists, have sought to reach the same objective: stuff out popular sovereignty and put a gag over the mouth of parliamentarism. The ideology is always the same: the people must not exercise power and a democratic parliament is a nuisance. All power must be given to a strong executive, exercised by one single man, responsible to no one who will govern, as if by chance!, always in the interests of the powerful. It is exactly this ideology that we find in the coming to power of Macron.

  The United States Of the World movement differs, however, with their French friends on one essential point: there will never be real popular sovereignty except in a vast union of states in which states give up a small portion of their sovereignty and a central government has enough power to impose on all states of the union popular sovereignty in each state.

Daniel McNeill

Read a complete book about American history by Daniel McNeill showing history is pushing Washington towards becoming the central government of a worldwide union of states. At: usoftheworld.com/history

Fake News About the Declaration of Independence

   Nestor Ramos, a columnist for the Boston Globe, writes today (July 7), “Coming up with a novel way to celebrate the Fourth of July is not easy after 240 years and tweeting the Declaration of Independence line by line, as National Public Radio did this week, seems as good as any….These 1300 or so words set the founding of our nation in motion ….” The Declaration does say that the “people” of 13 English colonies are behind this great document but it is fake news that it is about “the founding of our nation”. 21 days before the Declaration on June 12, the Virginia Constitutional Convention adopted The Virginia Declaration of Rights. Thomas Jefferson used it for the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. Section 14 reads, “That the people have a right to uniform government; and, therefore, that no government separate from or independent of the government of Virginia ought to be erected or established within the limits thereof.” Does Mr. Ramos expect us to believe that the 7 Virginia men who signed the Declaration of Independence 21 days later accepted that Virginia was now agreeing to being one state in a nation governed by a central government? Our great Declaration of our American freedom got rid bravely and morally of a government ruling our 13 states but it did not found a nation and clearly did in its own words create 13 sovereign independent states. The Declaration declares solemnly in its final paragraph, “that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.” The words of men pledging their honor to fight to the death for the freedom of their states do not lie. Fake news does.

Daniel McNeill

Read 12 essays by Daniel McNeill on American history at: usoftheworld.com/history