Warren/Bill's "Giving Pledge" & the World Citizen's "Receiving Pledge"

Warren Buffett, Bill Gates and their billionaire buddies are trying to give away most of their money. No kidding. In letters to Buffett from the converted philanthropists (now numbering 73), [1] after all the years of struggle, enriching and distributing bits and pieces here and yon, it finally not only dawned on them they couldn't take it with them anyway when they cashed out of the Here and Now but that the world could go BANG! even before they reached the Pearly Gates...Besides, given that the majority of humanity is—what was that number again: 99%? —"disadvantaged", this 1% with their out-of-sight loot cannot but feel somewhat embarrassed if not humiliated to be counted in such a minuscule minority of humankind. So now they are professing publicly for all to know how happy they would be, thanks to Warren and Bill, to meet their Maker dead broke or near enough (as if He/She cared).[2]

In brief, the Nos. 1 and 2 (and spouses, no doubt) of this loaded hierarchy–excepting Carlos Helu of Mexico who tops both by an astounding $18 billion—considered it was high time what with all the irritating, public "Occupying" souls everywhere you looked.

Buffett/Gates calls it "The Giving Pledge."[3]

Their real problem, however, isn't the millions of deprived of the world but that the world’s people en masse are in danger of totally disappearing in a nuclear cloud, them (and their foundations) included. (See Ted Turner’s "problems" that concern him the most in the appendix of "quotes" from their letters to Buffett)

(Note: Warren, Bill, and all your flush if restless crowd: We proposed in 2007 a more relevant survival program[4]. I dubbed it "The Receiving Pledge" kind of) But nobody blinked so far

To those of us who are already broke, or slowly getting there, yet who have worthy humanitarian projects en route requiring serious funding, if there is new hope it is yet mixed with frustration. How to revive our own "Receiving Pledge" for this vaunted membership sheathed in layers of highly-salaried defenders?

We appreciate that giving billions away is hard, if highly rewarding work. First of all, how do you actually do it? Well, you don't. Your Foundation does except for drips and dabs. That spreads the work. It also complicates it. The staff takes the first bite. Then the board of directors. Next the lawyers, investment counselors and accountants. After that, the web masters, Facebook & Twitter coordinators and finally the public relations and media team. Finally, who or what is worthy enough to justify your largesse? OK, universities are a safe and obvious choice. Besides, you get a building, stadium or scholarship grants named after your demise. The U's are always seeking a handout especially from their own alumni. Then there are the never-ending religious supplicants, another safe choice, from the faithful. (with relevant quotes from the scriptures). Now the difficult part: who or what else do you donate to? I mean, most everyone else wants a handout, some more desperately than others. Choices, choices. And what kind of organization or individual can actually handle that much do-re-mi?

Well, for one, we world citizens could use a mite, say, a mere billion...for a start. What for? You see, we are intensely interested in surviving on the planet. (Many of you profess the same in your letters to Warren). And to do that we need a global code of conduct called "laws". World laws, to be blunt, to outlaw war which we consider the ultimate crime, not to mention insanity. And for that, we desperately need our own world court to defend our human rights, since our very lives are now threatened by the entire warring nation-state system.[5] We're talking here about World War III, the FINIS. It will kill us humans whatever our fictional nationality, religion, cultural linkages, or indeed, wealth or indigence.

After all, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights acknowledges that "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law." But where is and what is the law for "everyone"? Sounds like world law to this writer (who in a former national life was a B-17 bomber pilot in WWII[6]). But law must be adjudicated. And, having been hauled into 31 national courts (and jails) since 1948 following my claim of world citizenship after becoming "stateless", I myself became "World Litigant No. 1" but with no world court to plead my case.[7]

Yes Siree, that billion bucks, (euros, yen, pesos, pounds, riyals, wons or whatever) would be a big start to staking our own World Court of Human Rights to the world map just for we humans, NOT nation-states. After all, it's our planet not the fictional nation-state and though we share it with millions of other species, we call ourselves "sovereign" which, in my Thesaurus, means "supreme." Indeed there is already uniform and enthusiastic agreement re the vital need for a world human rights court among all jurists of whatever ilk for a world community where war is still insanely considered a legitimate option despite its now genocidal character as of August 5, 1945. And there are already thousands of out-of-work judges for hire to exercise their legal expertise on such a court. Where is Judge C.G. Weeramantry when you need him? And, incidentally, what’s Sandra Day O’Connor doing now for heaven’s sake? Or Judge Goldstone? Indeed, the world-renowned City Montessori school in Lucknow has been having yearly meetings since 2001 of national Supreme Court judges conferring on and enthusiastically supporting the subject of "international law." Then the International Association of Women Jurists, 4000 members are devoted to justice for women (and men) sanctioned by human rights and world law yet has no court to adjudicate horrendous violations of womankind all over the world.

But Judges have to be paid, and operate in a court in a heated building with clerks and running water (maybe next to the ICC in The Hague or on an island in the Mediterranean) and a cluster of regional courts chaired with associate justices, etc., etc. A billion would do for a start but just think what a bargain if that court (ours) OUTLAWED WAR. (the Statute of which already does just that!)[8]

The nations' global military budget for 2011 was $2,157,172,000,000! That's 2 trillion, etc. And that doesn't count the environmental damage to the planet which is incalculable. A world without war would be a world of abundance. A metamorphic change in human affairs. A paradigm shift in human evolution. A blessing to all the kids of the planet who wonder now whether we adults are not stark raving mad to even contemplate genocidal war and why did we bring them into the world anyway if only to blow them up?

So, nothing to lose, I downloaded the letters the "Giving Pledge" member were obliged to write to Buffett explaining their reasons for wanting to participate, an extraordinarily revealing read. As I perused from letter to letter the intimate thoughts of these fellow humans, I realized to my astonishment (and some chagrin) that here were real concerned people, (like you and me) and many were couples. Indeed many were concerned about the state of the world. Take Joyce and Bill Cummings for instance who wrote that 1) "The lessons of the Holocaust are too vital to be forgotten or denied"; 2) "Genocides are still occurring around the world"; and 3) "We cannot simply sit quietly and let them happen.” Frankly, after reading that, my mind raced to find out what they intended to do about stopping the “Biggest-Holocaust-in-the-Making via The Bomb”. Alas, though they continued that “Convinced that real change can come from the next generation of world citizens, we created the interfaith ‘Cummings/Hillel Program for Holocaust and Genocide Education’ at Tufts University.” (Emphasis added) In short, let’s leave it to the next generation to make world peace cause we, the living, don’t know how to do it. (Note to Bill and Joyce Cummings: There may not be a “next generations of world citizens” if this generation of world citizens, you and your progeny, are blown away by WWIII).

The Cummings couple, however, did seem to recognize that peace and justice were corollaries since one of their subsidiaries, formed in 2010, is an Institute for World Justice, LLC. “which we hope will play a role in reducing genocide, as well as all the societal problems that lead to it…”[9] (Emphasis added) .” No further mention, however, in the web site of the Institute of the practice of “world justice” and its framework or adjudication process: “the maintenance or administration of what is just according to law.”[10]

The letter concluded: “…we welcome the support and partnership of others who share our belief that genocide should be a matter of great concern and responsibility for all people.” We heartily agree Richard and Joyce. Please make your check out to the “World Court of Human Rights Fund”[11] and forward to World Government House, POB 9390, South Burlington, VT 05407. Thank you in anticipation.[12]

Not to single out this concerned couple, I read every letter underlining passages relevant to our global project of world peace through adjudicated law. (Appended)

Thus for the rest of the “Giving Pledgees” (including, of course, Warren and Bill) we, world citizens, can employ your largesse beneficially as well for humanity’s benefit. Because the sooner the WCHR takes shape and begins adjudicating the inalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” along with the other inalienable rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the happier you all will feel and maybe even thank us for our initiative in unburdening you from a modicum of your earthly gains so that you can depart peacefully in good conscience before meeting face-to-face, as it were, with YOUKNOWWHO.

Appendix:

PAUL G. ALLEN

As our philanthropy continues in the years ahead, we will look for new opportunities to make a difference in the lives of future generations.

JOHN & LAURA ARNOLD

We view our wealth…not as an end in itself, but as an instrument to effect positive and transformative change. We are blessed to embark on this critical endeavor at a relatively early stage in our lives and with a great sense of urgency.

ELI AND EDYTHE BROAD

Those who have been blessed with extraordinary wealth have an opportunity, some would say a responsibility—we consider it a privilege to give back to their communities, be they local, national or global...We view our grants as investments, and we expect a return.

STEVE CRANE

…what really drove us was the mission of building a new medium that could empower individuals…we seek to inspire individuals to realize their potential to create change…We want to use all the tools available to us, to have the greatest impact, and to achieve the greatest good....We share the view that those to whom much is given, much is expected.…we also want to reaffirm our ongoing commitment to encouraging a citizen-centered approach to philanthropy…

LEON A. COPERMAN

…Andrew Carnegie said “He who dies rich, dies disgraced.”…Sir Winston Churchill observed that “We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.”…it is written in the Talmud that “a man’s net worth is measured not by what he earns but rather what he gives away.”

BARBARA DALIO

When we earned more money, we experienced relief and then the diminishing benefits of having more money...We experienced directly what the studies on happiness show—that once the basis are covered there is no correlation between how much money one has and how happy one is...We had planned to give most of our money to those it will most help anyway.

JOHN PAULK DEJORIA

Living is giving. I won’t deprive my family of knowing how good it feels to help those in need with some of the basics we already have…food, shelter, care and a future.I plan to help the world now and in the future…with half (if not more) of what I have been blessed with today.

LARRY ELLISON

I have already given hundreds of millions of dollars to medical research and education, and I will give billions more over time.…I have done this giving quietly….So why am I going public now? Warren Buffett personally asked me to write this letter because he said it would be ‘setting an example’ and ‘influencing others’ to give.

CHARLES F. FEENY

I cannot think of a more personally rewarding and appropriate use of wealth than to give while one is living—to personally devote oneself to meaningful efforts to improve the human condition....The challenges, even set backs, I have experienced in my decades of personal engagement in philanthropy pale in comparison to the impact and deep personal satisfaction we have realized.

SUE ANN HAMM

We have always felt a strong obligation to lead by example. Through our giving pledge, we hope to encourage others to commit their time and resources to worthy causes that will enable other people with ambition and tenacity to achieve their goals.

MISS LYDA HILL

I wish to make the world a better place….At my death my entire estate and my foundation will be distributed to charities I have designated....“Science is the solution to most of the world’s challenges, be they food shortage, energy, medicine or pollution. These matters have become my life’s interests….the (Hockaday) women who will solve many of these problems. I thought it would be fun to set the bar high.”

MARK ZUCKERBERG

People wait until late in their careers to give back. But why wait when there is so much to be done? With a generation of younger folks who have thrived on the success of their companies, there is a big opportunity for many of us to give back earlier in our lifetimes and see the impact of our philanthropic efforts.”

TOM & CINDY SECUNDA

We're honored to be in such great company and we pledge to do our small part to make the world a better place for our children and grandchildren.

CARL C. ICAHN

…those who have benefited the most from our economic system have a responsibility to give back to society in a meaningful way.

GEORGE B. KAISE

I suppose I arrived at my charitable commitment largely through guilt....I am entranced by Warren’s and Bill’s visionary appeal to those who have accumulated unconscionable resources, to dedicate at least half of them back to purposes more useful than dynastic perpetuation....If enough acolytes follow Bill’s and Warren’s example, then maybe we will more closely approach the idea of equal opportunity throughout the United States and the world

NANCY KINDER

…when we set up our personal foundation and committed to give 95% of our wealth to charitable causes whether during our lifetimes or at our deaths, we never dreamed that there would be such a gathering of like-minded individuals who firmly believe in the favorable impact of giving on the world.

KENNETH G. LANGONE

…..your graceful letter…conveys a spiritual purpose that has long been close to our hearts…It is inspiring how such a simple idea puts faith into action for the community as a whole.

LORRY I. LOKEY

I began to realize the importance of money consists of buying what is worth the price...Throughout the world without an exception, education is the determinant of a person’s intelligence level and possible success. And success is not making a million a month or a year. It’s earning enough to live comfortably and being able to finance children’s education...As we went into the 21st century, I began quipping that I want to die broke...The larger the estate, the more important it is to revitalize the soil.

GEORGE LUCAS

Storytellers are teachers and communicators who speak a universal language...Good storytelling is based on truths and insights, and a good storyteller is ultimately a teacher…We are the facilitators….This level of engagement dates back to the beginning of human life…There have to be universal standards…We need to build new foundations, fostering independent thought and a desire to keep learning….We need to promote critical thinking…prepare our children for the real world….working together and building character…as a means to a greater end.

DAVID & BARBARA GREEN

…God gifted me with a mind for understanding business, and that gift would allow me to carry out His work through contributions to great missions throughout the world…

TED FORSTMANN

…you save one life and you save the world.

THOMAS S. MONAGHAN

I came into the world penniless and as a Catholic Christian, I know I cannot take any of it with me...I knew that all these things would pass away and that the only think that really mattered was the state of my soul…I now began to look for how I could really be effective, really make a difference in what truly mattered; in people’s eternal lives….I realized that to have a more global impact, I would need to focus on Catholic higher education…

DUSTIN MOSKOVITZ

(Helped create Facebook) Today, I view that reward not as personal wealth, but as a tool with which I hope to bring even more benefit to the world...We will donate and invest with both urgency and mindfulness arriving to foster a safer, healthier and more economically empowered global community.

PIERRE & PAM OMIDYAR (Ebay)

Our view is fairly simple…There’s no need to hold onto it when it can be put to use today, to help solve some of the world/s intractable problems…Our common challenge is not necessarily about dollar’s raise, it’s about discovering the most efficient and effective use of our resources and leaving a legacy of hope for those to come.

RONALD O. PERELMAN

I have always been interested in giving to projects that may not get done otherwise. If the research wasn’t productive, I would have spent money to no avail, but if the idea worked, the potential was enormous—it was a risk I was willing to take…I can think of no greater example as to why giving now and seeing the benefits first hand can be the single most rewarding thing any of us can do.

DAVID M. RUBENSTEIN

…I recognize that to have any significant impact on an organization or a cause, one must concentrate resources, and make transformative gifts—and to be involved in making certain those gifts transform in a positive way. And I am heading in that direction…Everyone can and should give, and everyone can and should feel that their gifts may make the world a little bit better place...My hope, again, is that individuals of all levels of resources will also increase their giving, and feel they are helping their countries and humanity by doing so….so as to bring whatever benefits come from giving to the world a bit sooner.

HERBERT & MARION SANDLER

When you think about it, no other approach seems to make sense. Passing down fortunes from generation to generation can do irreparable harm. In addition, there is no way to spend a fortune. How many residences, automobiles, airplanes and other luxury items can one acquire and use?...The Buffett/Gates initiative is likely to be a major “game changer.”.Believe it or not, the psychic income — the highs if you will — associated with giving money away thoughtfully and effectively has even been more gratifying than running a successful business.

LYNN SCHUSTERMAN

…I also pledge to continue working to encourage others, including emerging philanthropists of all ages and all capacities, to join us in seeking to repair the world; the further we broaden our reach, the more we will benefit from a diversity of people, perspectives and approaches we strive to tackle problems of common concern.

SANFORD & JOAN WEILL

In the years we have left, we want to continue to try and do whatever small part we can to leave the world a little better that we found it. That return on investment would be unquantifiable and something we would cherish the most...We are firm believers that shrouds don’t have pockets.

TED TURNER

My experiences with organizations like the Better World Society opened my eyes to the power of assembling a team of international leaders to address global issues.…it was time for me to get out in front of the parade...After the billion dollar pledge, I challenged my fellow billionaires to do more.I’ve discovered that the more people you meet, the more you learn, and the more you learn, the more you want to help, and the more you help, the better you feel...These days I’m putting my resources and energies toward tackling the worlds more important issues...The three problems that concern me the most are the threat of nuclear annihilation, climate change and the continuing growth of the world’s population...“Ted, it could be that these problems can/t be solved, but what can men of good conscience do but keep trying until the very end.” (Cousteau to Turner)…at the time of my death, virtually all of my wealth will have gone to charity...I’m particularly thankful for my father’s advice to set goals so high that they can’t possibly be reached during a lifetime and to give help where help is needed most. That inspiration keeps me energized and eager to help keep working hard every day on giving back and making the world a better place for generations to come.

=============================================

[1] There are 1210 billionaires worldwide according to Forbes, Inc

[2] “He who dies rich, dies disgraced.” (Andrew Carnegie)

[3] http://givingpledge.org/

[4] See View From My Space, Memo To The World’s Billionaires, March 15, 2007 “I tell you what. Let's start a World Citizens' Billionaire's Club and you can all become members. The membership fee will be a paltry $50 million. That'll give it a starting net worth of $473,000,000. Then we'll start a bank, a world bank, and use the fees as capital, minus expenses and overhead, to print and issue world money against national currencies. (A Bucky Fuller idea, incidentally, who wrote that money was only 'crystallized energy' and proposed 'kilowatt dollars' as the world currency*). After all, national currencies are 'floating' out there between nations anarchically with no real solid base like goods and services….Then there’s wars to get rid of. Who can afford them anymore?....And besides, If WWIII starts, your billions won’t be worth the paper they’re printed on…”

[5] “Peace is order based on law. There is no other imaginable definition.” (Emery Reves, The Anatomy of Peace, 1946

[6] And before that an actor on Broadway who went to high school in a Rolls-Royce.

[7] See http://www.worldservice.org/cat.html?s=4#books

[8] See http://www.worldservice.org/wsalstat.html

[9] Another reason for a court on the world level which adjudicates violations of human rights including arbitrary detention only protected by the habeas corpus principle.

[10] Webster’s College Dictionary, 1991

[11] Peoples United Bank, Account #097802533335,

[12] See www.worldservice.org/cat.html?s=4#books

IS IT POSSIBLE TO GIVE UP
NATIONAL CITIZENSHIP?

Can you Become a Citizen of the World… Legally?

Garry Davis

"We are living in a geocentric world of nation-states. We look upon economic, social and political problems as 'national' problems. No matter in which country we live, the centre of our political universe is our own nation." -- The Anatomy of Peace, Emery Reves

People write to me at the World Service Authority from time to time asking if it is possible for them to legally and officially withdraw from the nation-state system and raise their allegiance to the global level. In other words, can they legally give up US citizenship and declare themselves World Citizens?

The answer is yes...But why? Before I answer that question, let me tell you that in 1948 I renounced United States Citizenship -- to prove that it is possible to exist in a new space, legally, above and beyond the nations that divide us, i.e., a world space! Well I’ve proved it. For 64 years I’ve been a citizen of no nation, only the world! Legally![1]

How did I do it? Following my stint as a B-17 bomber pilot in WWII, first I read the U.S. Nationality Act of 1940, an update of an act of 1868 when the United States was receiving tens of thousands of immigrants from Europe streaming into the US to take advantage of Lincoln's Homestead Act: Stake out 111 acres of land in the wild West, build your own log cabin, till the soil for 5 years, (don’t kill anyone except maybe some indigenous natives who might resent your presence on their ancestral land), and lo and behold, you could become a bona fide US citizen. However, due to the hallowed principle of reciprocity in law, a natural-born United States citizen could legally renounce his or her nationality but to do so represented a certain number of problems, the first three being, how, when and where?[2]

Now when we are asked this primordial questions, we have a totally different take on the answer.

"Why renounce your national citizenship," we ask, "when it no longer exists legitimately?" We receive blank, bewildered stares. "Or put it this way," we continue, "Shortly after the turn of the century around the time of the airplane’s debut but certainly after Hiroshima at the start of the nuclear age when wars became omni and genocidal, the United States ‘renounced’ you as viable citizens. It became a garrison state, a mockery of "We, the people..". Example: The oath of allegiance now incoming migrants must take today to become US citizens:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

"The reference to God," we note, "as the sanctifier for this modern garrison state exposes the shameless mockery of 'e pluribus unum,'  the underlying basis of the USA's founding two centuries prior. The code now is, 'From many, blind obedience to one'!"[3]

"Or look at it another way even more basic," we continue "Take a human birth. Did you choose your own place of birth? Can you be born into a political fiction? I mean, birth is a biological not a political fact. After all, you come out of your mother's womb into the world itself, a human being, member of humankind, not in a fictional state which claims you, body and soul. And since the technological, then electronic breakthroughs at the turn of the 19^th century-with so-called world wars starting in 1914-followed by the "Nuclear Age" and then space travel, wasn't the 18^th, 19^th century divided system of nation-states rendered increasingly obsolete not to mention totally dysfunctional and now mortal?"[4]

Our fellow human questioner, his (her) eyes wide with bewilderment and anguish, remonstrates, "Yes but they're in bloody power over us what with the national laws, police and damn armies."

"Yes, we know all that," we reply. "But the word 'power' brings up the idea of sovereignty. And most people don’t really know what that means. We haven’t yet figured out what really happened in that Philly hall in the summer of 1797 when those 55 citizens of their brand-new 13 states bordering the Atlantic Ocean, exercised sovereignty (or political choice) by artificially creating out of sheer imagination a new level of government.[5]

"Are you suggesting, Garry, that United States citizenship is a fiction and not real?" we are asked in astonishment.

"Let me give you a simple example of reality versus fiction," we respond. "When driving a car anywhere in the world you come to a crossing and the traffic light is red, what do you do?"

"I stop of course." is the instant reply.

"And why do you stop?" we ask.

"Because when it's red, that means stop. Green means go. Everyone knows that."

"Does everyone throughout the world stop at the red light at a road crossing?"

"They do if they have a brain in their head."

"Ah, you’ve just 'renounced' your United State citizenship," we reply, "by stating that 'everyone' knows that when a traffic light turns red, that means "Stop", therefore, not only a local "law," or a United States or even inter-national "law," but a universal traffic reality! In other words, a code of conduct for us human drivers. And no matter where you are in the world when you come to a traffic crossing and the light is red, you stop. and go when it turns green. But the traffic light itself is a "fiction". For instance, did you ever consider that principle behind that everyday global event?

"What do you mean, the principle? It’s just commonsense."

"And there you’ve hit on another 'renunciation' of nationality: 'commonsense.' And does not everyone at that crossing exhibit the same knowledge of commonsense?" we ask.

"Of course."

"Then haven't you defined a universal law based on commonsense or even justice since the traffic light is regulated for every driver who comes to that crossing and for the community of drivers taken together?"

A glimmer of light begins to shine in my friend’s eyes. "I'm beginning to see what you’re getting at," (s)he says. "The one and the many principle."

"Bingo! E pluribus unum on a world scale![6] Just like a symphony orchestra or a flock of birds. Or humankind. Now let’s go back to that meeting in Philly," we continue. "When the so-called Founders carved out a tiny part of the coastal area in the North American continent-part of the world territory actually-in which around 3 millions of their fellow humans resided, and circumscribed it with millions of 'traffic lights' called 'frontiers,' (continually expanding) weren't they denying the self-evident universality, both of their own humanity and that of everyone else's humanity?"

"Yes, but at that time the British, French and Spanish man'a'wars were still out in the Atlantic ready to knock off the states one by one if they didn't unite," he replies.

"The fictional 'states' yes, but not the people, and because of this fundamental difference, the founders were obliged to make a crucial and fatal compromise in the legal text they were preparing to impress on the 3 millions inhabitants now living no longer in mere colonies."

"I'm listening," he returns nervously no doubt wondering where all this led.

"Now a major dilemma had arisen: Who was going to represent the new fictional nation they were creating vis-a-vis the nations poised in the Atlantic and the rest of the world of similarly fictional nations, large and small? Well, they figured it had to be the president when he was acting as the 'Commander-in-Chief' of the army and navy in time of war. But then, who would be representing the citizen's rights? In short, which was 'sovereign,' the people or the nation? Remember, there was no bill of rights in the original Constitution they wrote. In time of war between nations, only the nation was considered 'sovereign.' And as the army and navies of the world operate in the anarchic space between nations, the national citizens were left without civic representation but on the contrary became mere subjects to the imperial state in which, as the prime executive, the president would be a virtual dictator. The people, in brief, in time of war would at his singular command. But the nation-state, by definition, is a war state. The rational? "National Security."[7] Now, are you beginning to understand why and when the United States 'renounced' the entire citizenry…right at the very beginning of its founding. Now today, when wars between nations have become global and genocidal since 1945, you want 'out' when you were always 'out' right from the start since in a world of anarchy, the fictional nation-state is in a continual state of war….with the people."

"Wow!, s(he) replies. “That’s quite a revelation!"

"But happily, there's an antidote, not only rational but the only road to a world without war. James Madison proposed when drafting the famous Bill of Rights between 1787 and '89 that there had to be included a legal remedy for the people when the president put his Commander-in-Chief war hat on. And it bears directly on your question of renouncing your United State citizenship because in effect it recognizes your already inalienable right to claim your own sovereign humanity."

"So what is it exactly," s(he) asks eagerly.

"It's the Ninth Amendment in the Bill of Rights, the most revolutionary right ever included in any national constitution.[8]"

"And why is that?"

"Because it refers to that right we already discussed when stopping and going at the traffic light at the entire discretion of the driver of each and every car in the whole world community. In other words: world law at the command of each national citizen!"[9]

"Amazing! World law! Part of the US Constitution? How do you figure that?"

"Ah, because of Madison's genius The Ninth Amendment doesn't spell out any particular rights. But what it does reveal is that the eight rights he did spell out are not all there are BUT all the other human rights —and here is the universality built in to the US Constitution—are 'retained by the people.' That simply means they are inalienable which in turn means universal. So, you see, the United States of America 'renounced' or rather, recognized you right from the start as a sovereign human being! But, and here's the catch: Since inalienable rights belong to the people, YOU MUST CLAIM THEM YOURSELF AS THE SOVEREIGN IN QUESTION. AND THESE ARE BRIEFLY, 'LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS' AS PRESCRIBED IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.[10]

"And in political terms that simply means claiming world citizenship as the Founders claimed national citizenship in the 18^th century to embody those inalienable rights. And, almost miraculously, that claim is the beginning of a higher level of government.[11] So rather than renounce that now invalid and deadly national allegiance caught historically in an anarchic political world,, simply exercise your inalienable sovereign power by claiming the higher one relevant to fundamental and inalienable human rights.

"That's 'world government!' And that's what law-making is all about!"[12]

"Where do I sign up?"

"At www.worldservice.org"

Postscript: "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government..." Article 21(3), Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

**************************

---

[1] "…a reverence for our great Creator, principles of humanity, and the dictates of conscience, must convince all those who reflect on the subject that government was instituted to promote the welfare of mankind and ought to be administered for the attainment of that end." Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, 1775; "Every man... possesses the right of self-government. Individuals exercise it by their single will." Thomas Jefferson, 1790

[2] My latest book, World Citizen Garry Davis goes to Court, (World Government House, 2011) (www.worldgovernmenthouse.com) goes into these questions in detail

[3] "Any method of maintaining international peace today must eventually fail if it is not grounded on Justice under Law and the protection of the Individual under due process of law." World Habeas Corpus, Luis Kutner, 1968, p. 73

[4] [12] "Our so-called 'contemporary' political systems are copied from models invented before the advent of the factory system...They were designed in an intellectual world that is almost unimaginable -- a world that was pre-Marx, pre-Darwin, pre-Freud and pre-Einstein." The Third Wave, Alvin Toffler, Bantam Edition, p. 414

[5] Tom Paine, who sparked the revolution with his essay "Commonsense," wasn't taken in by the subterfuge noting that "Independence is my happiness and I view things as they are without regard to place or person; my country is the world; my religion is to do good and all men are my brothers."

[6] "Government can be safely acknowledged a temporal blessing because, in terms of the power it wields, there is nothing inherent in it. Government is not an end in itself but a means to an end. Its authority is the free and revocable grant of the men who have promised conditionally to submit to it. Its organs, however ancient and august, are instruments that free men have built and free men can alter or even abolish." Earl Warren, Chief Justice, Supreme Court.

[7] When the so-called "enemy" is "terrorism" the war becomes total virtually incriminating the human race itself as exclusive national citizens.

[8] The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. --The Ninth Amendment

[9] "The inalienable human right of the United States citizen to add world citizenship -- as the founding fathers added United States citizenship to that of their state allegiances -- is incontestable and indeed the highest act of patriotism. For only in that planetary social and political level can the lesser members be protected and nurtured. The US Constitution itself, in the Ninth Amendment, provides for the rational extension of civic rights and responsibilities to the highest level as foreseen implicitly by the original founders." (From Dear World, A Global Odyssey, World Government House, 2000)

[10] "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…"

[11]"I no longer find it compatible with my inner convictions . . . by remaining solely loyal to one of these sovereign nation-states. I must extend the little sovereignty I possess, as a member of the world community, to the whole community, and to the international vacuum of its government . . . I should like to consider myself a citizen of the world." (Original renunciation of US nationality May 25, 1948)

[12] "As nations are torn apart and restructured, as instabilities and threats of war erupt, we shall be called upon to invent wholly new political forms or ʻcontainersʼ to bring a semblance of order to the world – a world in which the nation-state has become, for many purposes, a dangerous anachronism." Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave

Sovereignty & Humankind

New Year's Statement

Friday, December 30, 2011

The nation-state system, imported from former pre-industrial/electronic centuries, has become dysfunctional due to a condition of anarchy between each and all states which is the breeding-ground of war.

World wars, therefore, began in 1914. The so-called Nuclear Age, however, exploded on our human psyches and hearts with the bombing of Hiroshima changing the dimension of war from relative to absolute, i.e. genocidal. Therefore "sovereignty" in today's instant communicative world pertains to humankind itself. This in turn involves each and every human on planet earth, not to mention most other creatures co-inhabiting the planet.

The Ninth Amendment to the US Constitution refers to "unenumerated rights retained by the people."*

James Madison added it after providing the first eight rights.

If rights are "retained by the people," they are "inalienable." i.e. sovereign human rights and universal.

Madison's foresight in adding the 9th Amendment was to provide an antidote to the US president's power when acting as the "commander-in-chief" in time of war by virtue of article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution: "The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States..."

The US president – as all heads of state - thereby has become a legal dictator as Commander-in Chief "in time of war." All lower level officials in the government thereby become involuntarily complicit and obedient to his command in the name of "national security."

Thus, having declared a war on "terrorism" in 2001 which is a condition and not an enemy, the United States today is not only a virtual garrison state but an indictable "enemy of humanity."

The only document defining sovereign human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations December 10, 1948 as a "Common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations..." Article 21(3) provides that "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government..."

In conjunction, Article 6 of the UDHR, provides that "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."  Ipso facto, the law before which "everyone" has the right to recognition must be world law.

All humans, as "sovereign citizens," therefore are already world citizens.

The World Government of World Citizens (see www.worldservice.org) has founded the "World Court of Human Rights" on June 12, 1974. (See www.worldservice.org/wsalstat.html).

The evolution and statute of this court is described in the author's book: World Citizen Garry Davis goes to Court." (See Catalogue, sites above and below).

Conclusion: The essence of "sovereignty" is political choice. As we humans are all "planetary citizens," our claim to sovereignty is not only legitimate but essential for survival itself.

-- World Citizen Garry Davis


*"The enumeration of certain rights in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

**www.worldgovernmenthouse.com

Oh, It's Human Rights Day Again

Friday, December 09, 2011

December 10, 2011

Oh, it's Human Rights Day again!

Some scattered thoughts:

Ask a hundred people in any street in the United States or in France, England, Egypt, India or in fact anywhere on the planet if they can quote any of the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed 63 years ago today as a "common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations…" by the General Assembly of the United Nations sequestered at the Palais de Chaillot, Place Trocadero, Paris.

I'll wager that not one has a clue. I've asked thousands. The general ignorance about a document which is THE VERY FOUNDATION OF PEACE, COMMON WELFARE AND FREEDOM IN THE WORLD is not only startling but frightening. Why? Because if you don't know your human rights, YOU CAN'T CLAIM THEM.

"Occupiers" take note: THE UDHR IS YOUR GLOBAL PROGRAM OF ACTION AS WELL AS YOUR GLOBAL MANDATE TO TAKE OVER!

Your worldwide protests against the so-called "1%", however, fall on deaf ears. Why? Because you haven't claimed what you are FOR. So long as you acknowledge them as the "winners" of the economic pile, you are admitting you are already the losers. Don't you know yet that you are HERE AND NOW the SOVEREIGN PEOPLE OF THE WORLD? That's what the UDHR opens with: "Whereas recognition of the inherent DIGNITY and of the equal and INALIENABLE RIGHTS of all members of the HUMAN FAMILY is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world….:" That you, members of the human family. (emphais added). And it gets better as you read on: "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government……" (art 21[3])

I know, I know, the schools don't teach it; the parents never heard of it; the politicians, God forbid, never mention it, the writers and pundits – smug in their ivory intellectual towers – mention if, if at all, as pie-in-the-sky never to be brought down to the crowded alleyways of the struggling, depressed common peasant herds who are unconditioned to think of themselves as bona fide members of the entire human race and even if they did, what to DO about it?

Before you can DO anything, you have to BE someone! Claim your inalienable global citizenship NOW!

My last blog was pointed directly at you millions of courageous "occupiers" in your tents and crowded street mobs using "mike checks" and pointing you tent poles at the complacent "1%" in their penthouse suites smugly overlooking the cities with their drinks in hand ignoring the noise from the crowded streets. I advised you to "VERTICALIZE" your movement, or more precisely, yourselves from your horizontal, therefore, supine position on the planetary soil. In short, STAND UP AND CLAIM YOUR REAL PLACE IN THE WORLD! Article 6 of the UDHR states that "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. EVERYONE!!!!! No exceptions. Male or female, Jew, Christian, Moslem, Buddhist, black, white, yellow or red, or whatever.

But, wait a mo, what law? Where is the law which covers EVERYONE? Where is the court adjudicating such a law? Gotta be a world court, that's for sure. The Preamble of the UDHR even states that "…as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law." Should be? Why not "shall be"? But more to the point, human rights must be protected by the rule of law…but that means WORLD LAW, brothers and sisters. Yes, world law But…I don't hear any of you shouting for world law in your "mike checks." I hear a lot of shouts for "justice" and "democracy" along with the beefing about "injustice" and "monopoly." "You never change things by fighting the existing reality," wrote Buckminster Fuller. " To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." A World Court of Human Rights was founded in 1974. Professor Luis Kutner became its "Chief Justice." We declared it de juris on July 27, our 90th birthday. Check out http://www.worldservice.org/cat.html?s=4#books Thanks for your attention.

Garry Davis

Founder/President

World Government Of World Citizens

Washington, DC

---

Message to All "Occupyers": "Verticalize," then "Syntegrate"!

By Garry Davis

"As nations are torn apart and restructured, as instabilities and threats of war erupt, we shall be called upon to invent wholly new political forms or 'containers' to bring a semblance of order to the world -- a world in which the nation-state has become, for many purposes, a dangerous anachronism."

--Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave

  When I placed my hand on the Gideon Bible in the US Embassy in Paris May 25, 1948 and took the Oath of Renunciation of US nationality, I became a legitimate "occupier" of planet Earth!

The words I then recited were simple but prophetic reaching back thousands of years to the ancient Greeks, Stoics and Raja Rishis of South India:
  
"I hereby swear that I desire to make a formal renunciation of my American nationality, and pursuant thereto hereby absolutely and entirely renounce my nationality to the United States and all rights and privileges thereunto and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to the United States of America."
 
When I dropped my hand, I had legally freed myself from the 19th century Age of Nationalism...and war itself...at least in this lifetime.
  
But it wasn't enough. Though I was in my own stateless "space," the national myth no longer binding me, I was still a full-bodied member of the human race and eager to fulfill that sacred and challenging destiny wherever it would lead me.
  
That same day, therefore I issued a press statement, carried by AP, Reuters, INS and other wire services, that "I should like to consider myself a citizen of the world."
   
In short, I had "verticalized" myself to the global level. Who, indeed, could deny me that sovereign right? Moreover, I became a "world citizenship government-in-microcosm." "Every man possesses the right of self-government. Individuals exercise it by their single will." (Thomas Jefferson, 1776) "My country is the world." (Tom Paine, 1776)
   
No longer "in" a nation, when I walked out of the US Embassy "territory," and onto the Champs Elysee, I started my personal "occupying" of "world territory"!
   
I was happy and felt free as a bird in full flight!
   
But the French government immediately roared: "Out! Or our national gendarmes will put you 'inside.' Permanently!"
   
Out, but where? Out to sea? Up in a balloon? The moon? Que faire?
   
As my final date for departure arrived, I was surprisingly if contradictorily "saved" by the United Nations which "verticalized" in the middle of Paris: Place de Trocadero, the Palais de Chaillot where its General Assembly was to hold its session. In brief, France had ceded a tiny piece of alleged French territory to the UN...for three months! The absurd charade was on!  With pack on back, on the morning of September 11th, I "left" France taking the Metro to Place Trocadero and, "entering" the UN's "international territory," claimed to be its "first citizen."
   
In short, I "occupied" it as a human being!
   
A New Age for citizenship was born! We had a "proper home!" Seven thousands journalists were in Paris awaiting the opening sessions. I became the "story" of the day...and even that year.
   
That first sojourn on the UN "territory," however, lasted only 7 days. French gendarmes in collusion with the UN’s Secretary-General staff, "invaded" the territory, bundled me and my tent into a police car (familiar?) and transported me "back" to France. Illegally! (Or perhaps "allegally"). But 7 days were enough. The issue was joined: world citizenship inclusivity versus national exclusivity.
    
I became world famous.
    
But if I, still "stateless," could claim to be and function as a world citizen on world territory, why not everybody else? Indeed, as I wrote in my last blog, we, humanity, are already THERE! Rather, HERE!
   
The letters started trickling in, but soon became a torrent. Three years after WWII with Europe still in ruins and Hiroshima fresh in everyone's minds, the "cold war" starting between the USA and the USSR, the refugee world proliferating, many recognized world citizenship as the "way out" of the war game entirely. And it is! Even the UN proclaimed it on its final day in Paris.
   
On December 10, 1948, the General Assembly unanimously voted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a "common standard of achievement for all people and all nations."
   
As legitimate members of the world's "people," we World Citizens eagerly grabbed it and ran.
   
Over 750,000 fellow humans joined me by registering at the International Registry of World Citizens I founded on January 1, 1949. "World territory" was filling up!
   
Then on July 10, 1949, a giant leap forward occurred and is the real lief motif of this blog: The city of Cahors in Southern France passed a resolution signed by the mayor declaring it a "world city." Thus began the "Mundialization" movement which has since spread to over 900 cities throughout the world. (See, www.worldservice.org/mund.html).
   
From that day when Cahors "mundialized," every citizen in a "mundialized" city "verticalized" to world territory!
   
Lastly, on September 4, 1953, from the City Hall of Ellsworth, Maine, after numerous jail visits thanks to my stateless status, on the advice of top civic rights lawyers, and with the mandate of the UDHR, based on our claimed global sovereignty, I declared the World Government of World Citizens. ("The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." Art. 21[3], UDHR).[1]
   
Fast forward to 1986. On August 22, 1986, I filed with the DC Municipal Office my "world citizen" candidacy for mayor of the capitol of the United States!
  
Mayors, I thought then and now, (2011), legally responsible for their citizens welfare and safety, are the veritable key to a world of order and wellbeing, NOT the now totally dysfunctional nation-state system. Luis Kutner, the passionate advocate of World Habeas Corpus[2], wrote that,

"The time-clock of World-Man is now ever-set at one half-hour from annihilation. Man, who has achieved the ever-expanding greatness of physical science, of ultimate outer space Satellite control, of intercontinental missiles, can annihilate total World-Man in minutes...Since total man is a unified being, with an international dimension, a basic unifying principle is necessary to unify the freedom and liberty of man."

    My candidacy for mayor was formally accepted by the DC government despite the fact that in 1977  I had been classified an "excludable alien" by the US Immigration Department and succeeding courts clear up to the Supreme. (See www.worldservice.org/petition.html).
   
My platform in brief was "World peace through world law" claiming that Washington, like Moscow, was targeted by nuclear bombs and could only be protected by the world government.
    
I received 585 votes.
    
My rationale was simple: Most people lived in cities throughout the world. That's why we're called "citizens." Cities are real; nations are fictions. Cities have become the prime targets since WWII. Think Hiroshima, Nagasaki, London, Coventry, Tokyo, Berlin, Jerusalem, etc. Cities are now targeted...everywhere. That's where we, or most of us, live. Nations don't "die." They have no blood, no heart, no being. They are man-made creations usurping part of the planet's territory. But cities "die," or are destroyed in national wars.
   
You can't live "in" a nation. Because a nation is a passive fiction of pure imagination whereas a city is dynamic with ancient codes of communal living based upon the "one and the many" social philosophy. One could even describe national citizenship given today's instant communication and space research as not only oxymoronic and transient but mortal. After all, World War II was the first war where cities gained the deadly status of "targets" on war's "front lines."
   
I know. From the pilot's seat of a B-17, at age 23 I bombed some of them myself. (The victims, incidentally, were civilians, man, women, children, not Nazi soldiers.)
   
And that brings me to mayors of cities, God bless 'em...elected by the citizens...responsible to the citizens...no matter where on the planet.
  
On November 2, 1985, for instance, the World Conference of Black Mayors[3] passed a Resolution stating in part that "...it is unconscionable that spending of the arms race consumes more of the world's resources, while human needs go unmet; and...the increasing militarization of the world and the threat of an arms race in space is unacceptable...and the cost of the arms race has endangered the economic and social resources from domestic needs such as housing, jobs, public transportation, health care, human welfare, and education..."
   
Talk about 99% vis-a-vis 1%!
   
And on Saturday, June 18, 2011, the United States Conference of Mayors gathered in Washington and passed a resolution calling for the "speedy end of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."
  
All mayors talk the same human language: water supplies, traffic problems, street and electrical maintenance, recycling waste, local administration and on and on. Today over 900 cities throughout the world have "mundialized," that is, declared themselves "worldly" like Cahors. Makes perfect sense. When you can fly around the globe in two days and the Space Station does it in 1 and 1/2 hours, We, humanity, "left" the nation-state system over 200 years ago when the horse was the fastest way to get around. Are we crazy to continue the war game when, as the good and wise mayors are now complaining, it is killing our cities (not to mention our world) with us in them?
   
The message is clear:
    
MAYORS OF THE WORLD ARE ALREADY UNITED! AND HAVE BEEN CLAIMING IT!
   
In brief, they are ALREADY de facto World Citizens.
   
Read what the City Council of  Burlington, VT claimed on June 20, 1992 after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in my last blog: "Occupy...Earth?"
   
Brave, relevant and inspiring words, but what is missing? Like all good resolutions, it is static, not dynamic. Nothing happens. Where's the "beef?" How do the good citizens of Burlington or Shanghai or Berlin or Rio de Janeiro "declare their citizenship responsibilities BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF OUR CITY, STATE AND NATION? " And to what should they declare it to? The UN? Sorry, neither cities nor citizens allowed. (I found that out personally). Only nation-states...eternally talking.  There's got to be something "out there" to ACCEPT that global responsibilities.
    
Here then is the simple yet revolutionary answer: Citizenship and government are corollaries! There was no recognition formerly of the overall world government to sanction the citizens' good will pledge... "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government..." provides art. 21(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The authors of the UDHR unfortunately didn't use the present tense. They assigned peacemaking as a "shall be..." not as "is."
  
But to the mayors of all the cities of the world, and to their citizens gathering today in town squares and parks, the World Government of World Citizens NOW IS! How do I know? Because, following the sanction of the UDHR declared by the entire body of nations in the UN, I myself declared it on September 4, 1953 from the City Hall of Ellsworth, Maine! (See www.worldservice.org/ells.html).
  
If the mayors of our cities recognize their avowed responsibilities to represent their citizens' wellbeing, given the "global village" they actually live in this century, they must REGISTER THEIR GLOBAL ALLEGIANCE TO THE ONLY DECLARED AND OPERATING WORLD GOVERNMENT EXTANT.
  
Moreover the over 900 cities already declared "global" are thereby inhabited by literally millions of already declared "world citizens" as have the citizens of Burlington, Vermont.
   
The wait is over. Our human future is at stake. We are at that historic juncture where it is all or none in terms of survival. THE BOMB is ticking away! It is pointed at US the real "occupiers" of world territory. The species itself is in danger of annihilation...and by its own hand. The "shift" in consciousness is taking place NOW.
   
Citizens of the World, we are already the human occupiers of planet Earth!
   
Claim it before it is too late!
   
Only then can we passengers communicate to one and all via the internet and all the myriad technical marvels finally eradicating space and time between humans the "operating manual" for Spaceship Earth.
   
And that's known as "Syntegration." 

***************************
[1] See www.worldservice.org/ells.html
[2] Oceana Publications, Inc., 1962
[3] Founded by Johnny Ford, Mayor of Tuskegee in 1972

Occupy...Earth?

By Garry Davis

It's our world; when do we get our turn in running it?

Last Saturday, as I walked out of "World Government House" where I live and work in South Burlington, and climbed into my Accord to join the local Vermont group at the Burlington City Hall park supporting the now global "Occupy Wall Street" movement, I wondered what would be appropriate for me, a world citizen since 1948, to contribute in a meaningful way. Following Amy Goodman's daily "Democracy Now!" reports of the same happenings in cities around the United States and the world, I was struck by the lack of positive programs brought forth by speakers and signs. Everyone knows what we are against, but what are we for?

But even more basic, who are we...together?

In my briefcase were copies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, applications for registrations of world citizens, my World Government Passport and a dwindling supply of "I am a World Citizen" buttons, as giveaways, always gratefully accepted by young and old alike. Was it enough? What key element was missing? Then I had a flash of inspiration. Cities! We were all gathering in cities around the world! That's it! I remembered that almost two decades ago the Burlington City Council unanimously adopted the Resolution declaring itself a WORLD CITY! Eureka!

Jumping out of the car, I reentered World Government House, ran upstairs to my office and IMac, hit the "Q" button and typed: "World City Burlington." Up flashed the Resolution of June 20, 1992 adopted by the City Council of Burlington declaring it a "World City" following the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. I quickly printed up a bunch of copies and drove down to city hall for the rally. A few dozen people had gathered milling about some with signs "We are the 99%!" and "Down with Capitalism!" I went to the speaker area and said I had a short but relevant announcement to make. Given the no mike system, I simply announced to the crowd that the City of Burlington 19 years ago had already taken a major step required, if we, the people were to take back our planet from corporate control. I then read the opening paragraphs of the Resolution:

"WHEREAS the City of Burlington, Vermont, recognizes the greatly increased interdependence of the people of the world in this age of pollution, deforestation, natural resources depletion, overpopulation, and hunger; and WHEREAS, we seek to free humanity from the scourge of war, and to use the world's resources of energy, and knowledge for the benefit of the people; and WHEREAS, we realize that the common interests of the world's people can only be advanced through cooperative effort on a global scale, as exemplified by the recent Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro; and WHEREAS, we affirm that we can best serve our city, state and nation when we also think and act as world citizens:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
That the City of Burlington hereby recognizes its status as a

World City

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the citizens of Burlington recognize their sovereign right to declare that their citizenship responsibilities extend beyond the boundaries of our city, state, and nation; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the citizens of Burlington are urged to pledge their efforts to the establishment of world peace, economic justice, and ecological security based on just world law..."

Burlington was not the first "World City," -- that honor goes to Cahors in central France on July 7, 1949. Since that historic moment, more than 1000 cities and towns have declared themselves World Cities including Boston, Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Toronto, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Tokyo, Nivelles, and Konigswinter. See list at http://www.worldservice.org/mundcity.html. Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundialization.

As soon as I finished, I was mobbed by people reaching for handouts of the resolution.

"We are already actual citizens of planet Earth at birth." I said to one and all. "So we have a right to claim it, and to govern it. But as long as we are kept locked behind these invisible lines called nations, we are artificially divided, and senselessly war against each other. But as soon as we recognize our common human sovereignty, and realize that we are all one, all citizens of planet Earth, we gain enormous power, the power of the sovereignty of the whole. Only then can true justice and democracy prevail.

"Thomas Jefferson and America's founders," I added, "argued that corporations need to be regulated for the public good. Just as good cells in the human body, vital for our growth and well being, turn cancerous when the mechanisms of regulation fail, so corporations, can become the source of our destruction, unless we find the human power to bring them into balance and proper regulation for the common good. Our only hope of bringing them into balance is for we, the people, to take responsibility for governing our world.

"It's one thing to militate about what we don't like," I concluded, "war, injustice, the failing economy, devastation of our environment--and hope someone else solves it for us. But we are the leaders we've been waiting for! We are the sovereigns, we, the people, are the ones who create governments."

I handed out the "I am a World Citizen" buttons. The kids especially love them. "Cool," they would say fastening them to their coats.

"At our web site," I added, "you'll learn how you can join with your fellow humans in taking back our planet, even to setting up our own World Court of Human Rights and more. You can even download its Statute and the apps for the human rights documents we issue."

Buckminster Fuller reminded us: "If you want to change anything, don't fight the existing reality; create a new reality and you render the existing reality obsolete..."

And Mahatma Gandhi wrote "Be the world you want," while Renaissance man Steve Jobs had boldly suggested: "Be the future you want."

"Occupy Wall Street"? OK, but it's high time for us to take the Big Leap to land on the political space beyond so-called national frontiers.

In fact, guess what, we, humanity, are already occupying it!

CALLING ALL WORLD CITIZENS!

WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR?

IT'S ONE WORLD NOW!

   Citizens in the streets of the world are crying out for “JUSTICE, HUMAN RIGHTS & DEMOCRACY”   
   Yet even when the old rulers fall, they’ve been replaced by the military or other rulers who just dish out more of the same – oppression, bureaucracy, riches for the few, exploitation of nature, and money policy based on unsustainable growth, debt, and war.  Why?  Because such universal concepts as “Democracy” and “justice” cannot be realized in an 18^th century, dysfunctional, war-dominated and artificial political entity called a “nation".  
   As long as we allow the old order to artificially divide us into nationalities, the true power of the people will never be realized. Humanity entered the 21^st century with its survival in question. But humanity also entered this century with the knowledge and tools to make a successful "Crossover" to One World Now! Today, we must think and act as citizens of the world on behalf of all generations to follow. The only way we can truly claim our power is to move beyond protest and rebellion and become the creators and founders of a new way for we-the-people to run our small planet. We must choose a positive way to transcend the entire broken system of nation-states and ask the question, “How can we, as sovereign world citizens, govern our world?”

   The first step has already been taken. In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted unanimously by the United Nations, stated “Everyone is entitled to a social and international order” which can protect human rights and freedoms.  It called on “every individual” to take “progressive measures both national and international” to secure these rights.  

   Eleanor Roosevelt, the US delegate to the UN, went further and wrote  “How very much better it would be if Mr. Davis would set up his own governmental organization and start then and there a worldwide international government…”  

   So, in 1953, with 750,000 people signed up as World Citizens, I declared the “World Government of World Citizens.”

   The new government established the World Service Authority (WSA) in Washington DC, as the microcosmic beginning of a new model for a people-powered world.  It started by providing a service for individuals to identify themselves as world citizens by obtaining world ID’s, Passports, Birth Certificates and other documents based on the UDHR. The declaration of Human Rights was the great gift of the 20th century to human governance.

    Buckminster Fuller, design-science philosopher, wrote that “"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." In 1993, inspired by the genius of Buckminster Fuller, cybernetician Stafford Beer, Commissioner of World Cybernetics  (1987-1994) invented a protocol for self-organization and self-government of we, citizens of Earth. Its formal title is "The World Syntegrity Project." You can observe the results of the grassroots "Infoset" meetings from 14 cities on 4 continents--with over 500 volunteers "syntegrating" to answer the question: How can we, sovereign world citizens, govern our world?  (See http://www.worldservice.org/syn.html. )
    "Syntegration" is a transparent, proven method to unite our wills, both as individuals and together as members of a world community of fellow humans.---much like a symphony orchestra is composed both of individual instrumentalists and functions as a whole at the same time.
   The aim of the worldwide grassroots meetings was to provide subject matter for the eventual elaboration of a flexible, ongoing and dynamic “world constitution” wherein each and every citizen could play a vital and useful part.

   With the digital one world technology, world citizen agreements, knowledge and actions are today already inter-connected in the frontierless “technosphere”—the planetary real-time knowledge-enriched collective intelligence commons of humanity. With satellites, we are experiencing the first waves of citizen-centered connectivity, and the World Syntegrity Project 4.0 offers world citizens a ready tool to go from unstructured  NO  to coherent  YES.  The basis of YES for humanity is already expressed and codified in the above-mentioned Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." (Art 21[3], UDHR) Our agreement to think and act as a world citizen is expressed in the Statement of Allegiance  (see appendix 1 or  web-site registration form for world citizen registration).

   The aim of WSP4.0 then is to provide a world governance space to enable world citizens to focus on and achieve specific Crossover actions based on the recognition of humanity and Planet Earth as sovereign.

   When you meet in a "World Syntegrity" gathering, you are already in the “Global Commons” as world citizens seeking the agreements and actions that realize the challenges of the core question ([3]).  When connected with the communication power of the ‘one-world technosphere’,  it unites  those who “enter”  OUR  GLOBAL SPACE with all other world citizens who together acknowledge and affirm its legitimacy. The collective intelligence of humanity can thus be focused effectively to find and enact the Crossover actions that enable individuals-in-society to make it successfully to a viable 21^st century future.

   The totally democratic structure of the meetings in the geometric form of the icosahedron allows 30 individuals of diverse backgrounds, cultures and social status to join in a disciplined framework to arrive at a whole-system answer to the World Citizen Question: [4]

   The protocol is available from WSP 4.0 for world citizen use. We are looking for co-researchers-in-action to build the continuous learning system that connects the syntegrity follow-throughs with other world citizens to enable coherent, transparent, sociocratic, simultaneous Crossover.

   The results of the  original 1993 “Infosets” were transferred daily  to the WSA’s site, www.worldservice.org for all the world to peruse. What became most striking from the first round of World Syntegrity Project “Infosets” was the similarity of concerns addressed in diverse parts of the world.[5][3] In many cases, infoset participants in far-flung locales arrived at nearly identical conclusions. Ecological preservation, multicultural diversity, drug legalization and economic responsibility were just a few of the issues addressed in common by the various infosets. This was in 1993—before the omni-presence of the World Wide Web.  These same issues are now real-time, front-line news—20 years further along, and, mostly, 20 years further down the wrong road. The nuclear option, for one, is still ticking away on the national Armageddon clock.
   Any group of world citizens are offered to use the WSP protocol within the terms of reference of the world government principles inherent in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Pledge of Allegiance. 

   Let us suppose that in Cairo, Alexandria, Tunis, Tripoli, Damascus, Tokyo, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Gaza City, Tehran, Baghdad, Riyadh, Jeddah, Geneva, Manchester, etc., etc., 30 people gathered for three days using the icosahedron as model to “play” the game, “Syntegration,” generating answers to the prime question:

 “How can we, sovereign world citizens living in world cities co-govern our way forward to a viable society/world partnership?

   

   WSP 4.0 will connect the answers, concepts, people and action, over the next 3 years to:    make explicit, measured, forward movement on core societal needs/goals relating to the survival and benefit of humanity living in/travelling through our cities; locate the principles and policy agreements that make sense to align Crossover initiatives;  seek global world citizen legitimization of these results; develop capacity and competence for citizen-centered societal governance; co-operate fully in enabling a successful Crossover of all our World Cities to a viable future; join other world citizens and create the outcomes that matter together.[6]

      

   Article 19 of the UDHR, to which all Member-States of the UN are subject, provides that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion…” while Article 20 provides that “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”  The issue is one of sovereign right. Every national constitution with the exception of Saudi Arabia, provides that its original power derives from the people themselves.  

  As “World Citizen No. 1”, I here (re)announce this updated world peace-affirming program. We are enjoining a citizen-centered world future to enable World Citizens, at all levels, to tackle the issues of human survival facing humanity.   Having worked 60 years to articulate the principles, practices, and protocols of world citizenship, we are now re-activating the World Syntegrity Project to amplify and integrate the values of human sovereignty in transcending the nation state prisons we are all in.  


   We are already FREE and our POWER IS NOW!

   All aboard Spaceship Earth!

   Launching of WSP4.0 Crossover Facility.

   Resourcing  Offer from World Syntegrity Project.

   Each  world citizen syntegration increases the value of all world citizen syntegrations.  To establish the effectiveness and viability of the WSP in its Re-Activate phase (2012-2015), a resourcing schema is presented below.  The start-up funding requires a Booster funding to achieve and sustain the Momentum required for effectiveness in the 21^st century.  That funding will evolve in a 3 year agreement with our key allies.

   Foundation Stewards:

   These are individuals /groups of individuals who identify themselves as world citizens and commit the funds necessary to implement the syntegrated agreements around a Core Crossover question that matters to them most.  They participate in the Launch Event and make available the requisite resources for the 6 month follow-through to bridge the time between launch event and next resource infusion.

   These will identify themselves on a case-to-case basis.  We seek a launch fund of 480.000 euros to ensure the competence and capacity of our digital socio-infrastructure. For 2012.

    Viable Future Investors.

    These are individuals and organizations who will partner with world citizens to accomplish a priority Crossover.  (e.g. From heavy to light footprint;   FROM fossilized infra-structures TO renewable infra-structures. ETC>)  They co-create the solution with a high-talent  world citizen team and are entitled to claim a R * 0 * I * achievement in  ROI currency[7].    We seek only partnerships with for profit organizations willing to take responsibility for their own organization’s  Crossover mandate(s). 

   Problem-Holders.

   World Syntegrity Project is available to enable world citizens in world cities to make significant Shifts in their city-planet relationships.   These problems, held by local governments, and addressed by local world citizens, provides feasible answers for citizen-centered responsibility in major Crossover issues. (eg. migration; eg. C02 reduction; disaster resilience. Etc.   We invite urban leadership to use the world talent living in their city to integrate a citizen-centered whole planet element in their Crossover strategy.

   Local Champions.

   Six world citizens can host a World Syntegrity project. 30-42 people have the breadth of experience/influence and depth of commitment to liberate the social energy required to make rapid social-system Shifts.   At the moment, we can only provide the quality service the ReStart Up of WSP 4.0 demands for a minimum market price of 30.000 euros.  This is an extremely low service fee—for a protocol that cuts Start to Results time by more than 50%; delivers 30 -40 high-agreement  solutions; and is immediately eligible for significant large funding.

   The lowly-resourced.

   If you are six world citizens with a Common Quest of world citizenship, and have the involvement of the key people you want to succeed with,  send us your question, the participants who have agreed to join in, and the place FROM which the six of you want to move TO the place you want to get to as world citizens in the coming 2-3 years.   We’re already seeking funding for you!

   For further information, contact:

   Garry Davis at worldlaw@globalnetisp.net

   David Gallop at davidgallup@worldservice.org

   David Beatty at: david@reflection-action.nl

==================================================================
 APPENDIX

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

I, the undersigned, do hereby, willingly and consciously, declare myself to be a Citizen of the World. As a World Citizen, I affirm my planetary civic commitment to WORLD GOVERNMENT, founded on three universal principles of One Absolute Value, One World, and One Humanity which constitute the basis of World Law. As a World Citizen I acknowledge the WORLD GOVERNMENT as having the right and duty to represent me in all that concerns the General Good of humankind and the Good of All. As a Citizen of World Government, I affirm my awareness of my inherent responsibilities and rights as a legitimate member of the total world community of all men, women, and children, and will endeavor to fulfill and practice these whenever and wherever the opportunity presents itself. As a Citizen of World Government, I recognize and reaffirm citizenship loyalties and responsibilities within the communal state, and/or national groupings consistent with the principles of unity above which constitute now my planetary civic commitment.

---

[1][1] If you want to see a prime example of 18th century thinking, read Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ statement of June 10th on the subject of NATO).

[2][2] "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." Buckminster Fuller

[3]

The generic question is always:   How can we as sovereign world citizens govern our world?  The current 21^st version of that question is: How can we, as world citizens living in (a large city..or a watershed.. or around an ocean.. or… or..) ____________, Crossover FROM ______ national   TO  -global   government  in the shortest possible time without ecological offense of the disadvantage of anyone?  

[4] "Crossover" signifies that the dimension of World is core to where we are moving as a species.  WSP 4.0 focus  for the next 3 years is to enable citizens of the world to make the specific, significant FROM-TO decisions relevant to their situation and its place in the World.   All Crossover Questions include Planet as relevant recursion and all Coherent Sets are government-in-action experiments.   WSP 4.0 is in a learning-in-action phase and is currently designing a Continuous Improvement Learning System for syntegrated world citizenry.

[5][3] See the Universal Declaration of Human Rights attached

[6] This, of course, has to be designed and implemented. Thus a Crossover Question:  How can we, as sovereign world citizens, co-create a reciprocal value-exchange economy  to accelerate successful Crossover to  self-governing non-hierarchical systems of government on planet Earth?  Each question comes out of the hosts of the event, a unique variation of our Earth generic question:  How can we as sovereign world citizens govern (in) our  world together?   This question is asked in an area of application (e.g. Artic Ocean; e.g. Moslem country. E.g. World Tourism Association,  etc.)  and is open to others to join, co-create, co-own responsibilities and rewards, etc.

[7]  R*O*I* is Release & Realization of Inspiration.  It is measured in terms of the distance covered from the present outcomes of the system TO the whole system solutions located and leveraged in the opening event.  Return-on-Investment indicates that there will be a share-holding structure which enables all participants (and sponsor) shareholders to convert their holdings back to national currency.