Diaspora

--


Within my lifetime, the population of the USA has grown by 50% -- from 200 million to 300 million. That's alarming, and brings up an issue that I've only been faintly aware of, from various works of science fiction.


From Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

diaspora

Pronunciation: dI-'as-p(&-)r&, dE-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek, dispersion, from diaspeirein to scatter, from dia- + speirein to sow
1 capitalized a : the settling of scattered colonies of Jews outside Palestine after the Babylonian exile b : the area outside Palestine settled by Jews c : the Jews living outside Palestine or modern Israel
2 a : the movement, migration, or scattering of a people away from an established or ancestral homeland b : people settled far from their ancestral homelands c : the place where these people live



There are close to 6.6 billion of us on this planet. Mother Earth can't take much more of this growth. Pretty soon we'll be forced to 'move out'.

* the movement, migration, or scattering of a people away from an established or ancestral homeland *

How many generations will it be before we know Earth only as our Home Planet, and where will we have gone? Well, maybe not far...

If we can't all live on Earth, and since nearby planets and moons offer only a temporary solution (not an easy one at that), where DO we go?

For that answer we first have to think about what technology will do for us, and we have to admit to ourselves that there is much technology that has been kept secret. It is the stuff of science fiction, but imagine if you will a device that can create absolutely anything 'out of thin air'...

Now imagine that people would get bored with that. For some of us it will take longer than others.

Okay, so now we are a people who can make anything out of nothing, at no cost -- but for the most part we only make what we need, and 'vaporize' stuff we're done with. What do we need most? We need places to live. Those places should probably not be places at all, but mobile dwellings capable of sustaining us out in the vacuum of Space.

They might as well be full-fledged spacecraft, so that we can travel.

All of a sudden we not only have the means to save our planet from overpopulation, but the answer to the question of where to go -- which is, more or less, anywhere we want.


Then we limit the 'permanent' population of our home planet, letting much of it go wild again, assisting in its recovery where we can. We visit once in a while, but most of our time is spent in our 'flying Winnebagoes'.

After all, we'll have everything we need in those hyperhomes...


Phil Smith
October 27, 2006


--

The Nation of Earth as a Global Union

Multinational unions can take decades to form. There probably isn't time for a global peoples' union to be formed and assume control before the current network of regimes manages to royally screw things up.

However the Nation of Earth already exists, and we'll be prepared when their house of cards, built without hearts, tumbles.

It is simplest to describe it as a Global Union. Unlike the United Nations, the European Union, or even the African Union, though, our GU will represent the PEOPLE -- not governments, not corporations. Our representatives will not spend months at a time in some centralized location, far away from their constituents. Instead they will spend most of their time among us, giving talks on what is happening on the global stage and listening to us about what we need and want.

Since we are bypassing many current regimes, there is no reason for us to recognize the larger ones that cause so much trouble. Besides, places like China, India, and the United States (to name just the 3 most populous countries) are simply too big to be represented by one person. What we'll have to do is break larger countries down into existing states, provinces, and large cities for representational divisions.

That's right, there's no need to redraw the maps -- not completely, anyway -- because we still need smaller governments to run things. What the people will see that they do NOT want, or need, is any large and overbearing government run by individuals who look out for themselves and one another, rather than serve the people. Local political reform will naturally follow.

Does this mean there will no longer be a People's Republic of China? No more United States of America? Whether those bodies continue to exist is not for us to determine. All we are doing is having the people elect local representatives for a global forum.

Personally, I take no pride in being an American. Any American pride I ever held has been whittled away by the actions of our government. I'm perfectly happy being a West Virginian and an Earthling, thank you. I served my time in the military, and that didn't help my attitude.

If and when the individual States of the USA decide they no longer need a Federal government, so be it. State governments can then cooperate with one another, and with other governments around the world.

Those chosen as global representatives should probably not be affiliated with any political party, and should sever any and all ties with such parties before being considered for the position. Elections will be held completely separate from existing political systems. Interim representatives can volunteer for the positions in the meantime.

Perhaps those representatives can take a break from teleconferencing with one another and actually get together in a physical location for 2 weeks every year. There's a spot in Paraguay that I would like to think the Paraguayan government would seize and apologetically donate a section of for that purpose: http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7B2DA7BAE4-061B-49B6-983F-3D69A4396E37%7D)&language=EN

By the way, the motto of Paraguay is "Peace and Justice".


There are many questions about the Nation of Earth that can't be answered yet. So far, I'm the only one I know of working to find those answers, but everything has to start somewhere.



Phil Smith
October 23, 2006



“I was the border man’s friend. Many times I have saved him and his people from harm. I never warred with you, but only to protect our wigwams and lands. I refused to join your paleface enemies with the red coats. I came to the fort as your friend and you murdered me. You have murdered by my side, my young son.... For this, may the curse of the Great Spirit rest upon this land. May it be blighted by nature. May it even be blighted in its hopes. May the strength of its peoples be paralyzed by the stain of our blood.”

- curse of Chief Cornstalk

--

Dissolution & Restructuring

A while back I came up with this slogan:

IGNORE THE ILLUSION
THE SOLUTION IS DISSOLUTION

This came from an American perspective. I may be an "Earth Patriot", but I happen to live in the so-called United States and in fact have not yet physically travelled beyond US borders, and so here I am, in this poor excuse for a country, with its controlled media and rampant blind nationalism...

The dissolution the slogan refers to is the elimination of the nation known as the United States of America, but the thought behind it was incomplete. I was merely thinking there was no need for a Federal government overseeing the individual States...

In a recent post I outlined a Global Union and proposed that larger countries be broken up into existing states and provinces for the purposes of representation within said Union. This seems only fair, since many of these states and provinces are larger than many entire nations, and should not be grouped together into huge and disproportionally influential political entities.

Smaller countries are already banding together to form unions, most notably the European Union but perhaps more ominously the African Union, which covers a very large continent. While it is certainly understandable that smaller and less influential countries should seek strength in numbers in response to the influence of superpowers such as the United States and (yes) China, what we will end up with is a few large entities that may find themselves at odds with one another, along with many smaller entities acting independently and perhaps causing serious trouble (such as North Korea).

Even if the larger entities were able to meet and agree on a course of action (i.e. what to do about North Korea), we would have the problem of major decisions being made by too few individuals. How few is too few? Good question.

Each of the 50 United States has several representatives, including 100 congresspeople and 435 voting members of the House of Representatives, and yet these 535 people are not enough to resist the pressures of large corporations -- and the pressure of the power elite. Bills pass into law without having been read -- Patriot Acts 1 & 2 were both much too long to be assimilated in the short time given between presentation and vote.

We could have one person ruling the entire world, as long as he or she wasn't corrupt. Proper representation is not a matter of numbers, but a matter of whether the people are truly being represented. Here in the relatively small state of West Virginia, we are 'represented' by not one, not two, but FIVE individuals in the House and Congress, and all of them are part of our 2-party system.

Yes, that's right, somehow we have allowed our entire country to be run by a pair of political parties. Right down to municipal elections, it is quite rare for anyone who is not a 'Democrat' or 'Republican' to gain any office, however small. This 2-party system only serves to perpetuate our lack of true representation.

Instead of 5 people elected to represent West Virginia in the United States government, I would prefer ONE person elected to represent the 2 million people of West Virginia as part of a "Global Union", and I'd really really like the Republican and Democratic parties to be left out of the process.

Then there would be 50 representatives of the former USA, plus a few from outlying territories (Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands etc) and who-knows-how-many from other places, to decide on the fate of the world. Maybe some states and provinces will feel the need for more than one representative, and perhaps each 'global city' should have one. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that there would be an even two thousand.

There are 6,550,671,884 people on Earth to be represented as of this writing, and a projected 6.6 billion by July 2007. That's an approximate average of one GR (global representative) for every 3.3 million people. Is that adequate? Can one person effectively represent 3.3 million, more or less?


The real questions and issues are not about forms of government, nor the size of government, but how much corruption we allow within it. Many current forms of government serve to perpetuate the status quo. Once again I point to the government of the United States of America...

The way they've got it set up, it really can't be changed from within. In theory, maybe, but in practice, no. The 2-party system gives the illusion of choice while perpetuating an exclusionist tradition of grooming and selection. The candidates we are presented with are not the best 2 people for the job, but the 2 people who have managed to jump through their respective partisan hoops. Yes, other parties and a few independent candidates have managed a certain amount of success, but the vast majority of 'public servants' in the USA, down to the lowest positions, belong to one or the other of the 2 major parties.

It is a system that rewards officials who do favors for one another. Screw the populace, what have you done for your fellow politicians lately? People who enter the system with the best intentions find that they have to make sacrifices to get anything done. Some soldier on and try to make a difference, but others get discouraged and do not seek reelection, while some are compromised and keep going along for the ride.

Meanwhile, our national government has turned into a monster. Laws affecting 300 million Americans continue to be passed by a mere 535 of us (or as few of that number who choose to participate). We are not consulted on how we feel about the bills they draft and sign into law, and they just keep piling on more and more legislation.

Where will it end?


It ends with a new beginning.


I'll be taking a look at the 230 countries on Earth -- and their states, provinces, and cities -- in an attempt to determine probable representational divisions. [The State of New York, as one example, has a population of about 19 million, approximately 8 million of whom reside in New York City.] A work of speculative fiction may very well follow.

Stay tuned.


Phil Smith
October 15, 2006

The Tellurian Revolution

As a child, I decided I was an 'atheist', because I couldn't accept 'God' as 'He' was presented to me. A few years later I discovered the word 'agnostic' and decided that it was much better to admit that I just didn't know, so that I might be open to discovering whatever spiritual force may exist.

Recently, I declared myself to be an 'anarchist' because I couldn't accept any form of national government that I was aware of. More recently, I decided to keep my mind open in this area as well...


tel‧lu‧ri‧an

1. of or characteristic of the earth or its inhabitants; terrestrial.
2. an inhabitant of the earth.


The phrase, "Taxation without representation is tyranny," is attributed to James Otis, and was famously repeated by Patrick Henry. Those guys were involved in something known as the American Revolution, which was more than just another colonial uprising...

Some 230 years later, times have changed. Today's tyrannical empire isn't so easy to identify. Some call it a "cryptocratic oligarchy", but when we have a billionaire former CEO in high public office, and one of his colleagues recruiting for human sacrifices in tiny nations such as Montenegro and Albania, we might be able to figure out who some of the players are.

Governments are easily corrupted. This is nothing new, but the scale of government (and the scale of corruption) has reached monstrous proportions. American revolutionaries knew that government must be kept in check, but their work was undone. We continue to trade our liberty for a false sense of security, kind of like paying 'protection' money to local thugs.

Pretty soon there will be some key questions asked and answered, for the world to see. People will begin to recognize who is really running things, and begin to understand why. Don't expect them to be happy about it.

Yet, the cryptocracy has been quite thorough, reaching its tendrils into many influential organizations, staking claim to their position at the top of the food chain. We can't very well go to the United Nations and expect them to solve the problem -- Or can we?

Well, we could try. But then, many of the problems we currently face are caused by the US administration, which thumbs its nose at the UN -- and the UN itself is far from what it was originally intended to be.

One wonders if the European Union will ever get over its ideas about supranationalism and settle on intergovernmentalism, and whether the African Union will manage to show the EU a better way. Do we dare hope for a future network of such continental unions?

Could we one day enjoy a complete absence of large, overbearing governments, having replaced them with a global, cooperative union? Do we want that?


Many oppose the idea of a global government, and with good reason. However, some form of it is inevitable -- and quite possibly desirable. Perhaps our future holds global cooperation between smaller governments, as a form of global government.

While I certainly don't support what currently passes for government in this country (and many others), we do require a certain amount of organization. There will continue to be decisions that must be agreed upon. I DO support government that listens to its people while staying out of their business as much as possible (even if such a thing is purely theoretical at present).

So, what I am indeed advocating is a PROPERLY PLANNED AND CAREFULLY MANAGED Global Union.


A Global Union would, just like it sounds, be sort of like a larger version of the EU and AU. We can think of those smaller unions as being testbeds. We can look at what works and avoid what doesn't...

Large nations such as the United States and China present a problem. Citizens enjoy less and less real representation as they are lumped into larger and larger groups. I propose that large nations be broken down into existing states and provinces (and beyond that, as far as necessary) for the purposes of representation in the Global Union. Conversely, smaller states such as Baja California Norte and Baja California Sur may choose to join together (if Mexico is deemed too large) -- but of course that would be a regional issue.

The question of how well any particular regional government represents its people is still a problem, but it is ultimately a problem for the people of that particular region. However, with each region becoming part of a global family, they may be more open to governmental alternatives...

Breaking government down into smaller regions makes influence from corporate lobbyists more difficult.


Still, no matter what form of government we have to put up with, how will we make sure we are being properly represented?


Behind the scenes, the transcendental meditation movement has been at work, improving our situation here on Earth little by little, since its inception. This is very much the 'Thought Creates' sort of thing that the late Walt Bartoo (AKA Kortron) endorsed, but on a much larger, well-organized (some would say 'cultish') level.

In the course of composing this post, I Googled 'global union' and found the Global Union of Scientists for Peace. There is apparently scientific evidence that thought does indeed create. It seems that Unified Field research has led to the discovery that INTELLIGENCE is the one force that ties everything together.

To repeat: Intelligence is the Unified Field. http://www.gusp.org/foundation.html

This makes sense to me. It explains, well, almost everything. Maybe now I know what "God" is.

And, if people can achieve a state of consciousness that will allow them direct influence on things, perhaps that is the future of governance. While in such a state, I very much doubt that anyone could or would steer things wrong. I tell you, I'd rather trust things to monks in orange robes than to any elected official.

Do our thoughts and THINGS WE SAY OUT LOUD have an effect on the world around us? Maybe they do. And, maybe when you lend voice to your doubts and fears, they can become self-fulfilling. Further, maybe if you can achieve a higher state of conscienceness a couple of times a day, you can contribute to universal harmony...


Maybe the revolution will indeed be an extremely peaceful one, wherein many of us learn the art of transcendental meditation and/or find ourselves in a sort of waking dream state, finally in touch with the Multiverse and putting an end to ignorance through the power of the Human mind.

Maybe now the "New Age" movement makes more sense, and maybe it becomes more obvious why that most famous of the Maharishi's students, John Lennon, was assassinated.

Maybe we can indeed eventually forget about any formal form of governance. Perhaps all we need to do is to look within.



Phil Smith
September 29, 2006



Disclaimer:

I have not actively pursued transcendental meditation in any ritualized form, and find it quite odd that "TM" is not something you can learn for free.

One would think that such a thing, if it is all it's said to be, would be broadcast freely instead of being sold.

However, I think there is indeed something to the general idea. That each of us is connected to everything, and that we may be able to influence the world around us through the power of thought, and that the power of those thoughts is multiplied when many of us are thinking the same thing, makes sense to me.

This is very analogous to "the power of prayer". One need not subscribe to any particular mindset of what "God" is to contribute.

If everything is indeed connected, if some cosmic intelligence is indeed at the root of all energy and matter, then everyone's individual intelligence must play a part. It then follows that we can, once we realize this, begin to control the influence of our will.

If the Maharishi, after discovering certain techniques, was compromised and left forever unable to truly share, perhaps it was meant to be. Perhaps we were not ready, and certain things on this Earth had to play out. Perhaps, without the horrors we have witnessed, we would not be able to fully appreciate the wonders that are to follow.

Still uncertain as to how it will come about, I have seen a beautiful future for the Earth and her people. In the interim, life may suck.

Namaste, and good luck.

- fil



_________________

Nation of Earth website

One good URL seems to be available for a future Nation of Earth website, and I have a host lined up.

No, we're not talking about a fan site for '90s German trance band Earth Nation, though Ralf Hildenbeutel may be contacted about the possibility of collaborating on an anthem...

The questions are: What will the Nation of Earth website be like? and, What will it do?

First, it most likely will not use Flash. Flash doesn't load very quickly for a lot of visitors, it takes time to compose, and it's simply unnecessary. A site can look great and perform very well without it. Expect it to look better and contain more content (much more, eventually) than the Unified Settlement site ever did.

As for what it will do, details are uncertain at this point.

Obviously we will have to explain what the Nation of Earth is, and visitors might like to learn how it came about. They may even like to know a bit about me, but on that page I'll have to explain that I'm not exactly a founder of the movement; I'm merely someone who gave it a name and thought it might be nice if more of us understood how much we, the People of Earth, have in common, how our interests are all intertwined (Am I Founder, or "Primary Concept Developer"?)

As for what the Nation of Earth itself will do, that is not for me to decide -- because the Nation of Earth is, by definition, a very very large group of individuals who happen to live on this planet. Even the question of its organizational structure is not one to be answered by one person. Okay, maybe it could be, but not without consultation and concordance.

The whole concept of the Nation of Earth may be only something I dreamed up, or it may be a very natural progression of Humanity -- but certainly, I cannot have been the first to imagine the dominant species of a planet uniting globally despite the efforts of a few to continue to rule the many. Revolutions are inevitable, but this is the revolution that could, if it is handled properly, lay the groundwork for change to become evolutionary, rather than revolutionary.

See, when I finally acquired regular internet access I tried to educate myself on what was happening in the related fields of antigravity and 'free' energy, only to find evidence of conspiratorial suppression in these areas. Further avenues of research revealed a great amount of suggestion concerning a broad and extremely successful legacy of conspirators -- multinational, multigenerational, multifarious. Apparently, the greedy souls of this world have collectively managed to exert a stranglehold on the general populace (and that's putting it lightly). Our society has become what it is because a relative few have decided to engineer it that way, for profit.

This will not stand. The People of Earth will discover the falsities in Falls City (and everywhere else), will learn how they and their parents and grandparents have been manipulated, and they won't be happy about it. Here is where the Nation of Earth comes in. While the revelation may cause anger, the revolution need not be an angry one...

John Lennon (who, by the way, was assassinated) tried to tell us:

You say you want a revolution, well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan.

You tell me that it's evolution, well, you know
We're all doing what we can...

But if you want money for people with minds that hate,
All I can tell you is brother, you'll have to wait...

And you know it's gonna be
All right.


And, ultimately, it IS gonna be all right. It might've been more all right in the here and now if John Lennon were still among us to continue to show the way, and that's probably why he isn't. What's that? Do I accuse the elite of arranging his death? Absolutely. He could see how things were, and he used his celebrity to attempt to wake the rest of us up, and he knew that song lyrics would be a very effective wedge. He could not be allowed to continue.

Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope one day you'll join us
And the world can live as one.


Imagine what he would have to say about 9/11 and Iraq, and about Israel and Katrina and what-have-you. Imagine people listening to songs and interviews from him over the past couple of decades. Now, imagine that there are those who will do whatever it takes to keep the People under their thumb.

Stripped of his presence and influence, we have to find another tack. We must try to imagine what it would be like if he and Martin Luther King and the Kennedy brothers had not been slain by the elite. We must join together and nullify the societal engineering that has made so many of us blind to the Machiavellian machinations of the 'powers that be'.

So, as far as I'm concerned, the Nation of Earth and its website should attempt to help the People of Earth educate themselves to their situation, and ask that we find a (nonviolent) solution. I will be more than happy to field comments and questions, and near blissful when their number requires me to recruit others for the task.


To summarize, I do not exactly know what will happen with the Nation of Earth, nor can I predict the future of its website. I do not even know whether very many will come to know the movement as 'the Nation of Earth'. I only know that the movement is already underway, and I only hope that giving it a name will help.


namaste, and good luck



Phil Smith
September 16, 2006

Narrowing It Down

Greetings, People of Earth.

Those of you who have been following the progress of the Nation of Earth (formerly known as the Unified Settlement) may have long wondered how we can have a global nation without government. I have to admit that I've been trying to figure that out myself; This endeavour has certainly proven to be a learning process. If this is your first visit to the Nation of Earth blog, perhaps this post will bring you up to speed...

Basically, the idea is to govern ourselves, without needing to find a name for what we're doing. The problem is finding a way to get there.

I've been spending some 'quiet time' away from the computer, gaining perspective. My previous intuition -- spanning most if not all of my life, as it turns out -- about how things should and will be, has gained new focus and clarity. It's one of those realizations that gives you a wonderful feeling that keeps bringing a smile back to your face every time you think about it.

The answer has been staring us in the face for hundreds, even thousands of years. There have always been peaceful tribes who revere Nature. They may have seemed primitive, but if they have lacked anything recognizable as 'government', neither have they existed in a perpetual state of chaos.

Far from being 'savages', the inhabitants of the continent that came to be known as North America had a rich culture, at the core of which was a much deeper spirituality than that of the Europeans who came to conquer them.

Is there blame to be placed? Can you curse the Roman Empire for setting off a disastrous chain of events? Never mind all that: As a species, we've made plenty of mistakes. The best we can do is to learn from them. The future is in our hands -- no use dwelling on the past.

The various Native American tribes have come to be known as Nations. It is no accident, though I was unaware of the connection at the time, that the name 'Unified Settlement' has been replaced with 'Nation of Earth'. I will not suggest that we all attempt live as they did centuries ago, but I do think it would be useful for us to think of ourselves as one very large tribe.

We would also do well to respect our elders, and care for the planet that gives us life, and keep in our minds and hearts those things which are truly important. There are many cultures dotting the surface of this globe to gain inspiration from...

...but if you are reading this, you are probably someone who only needs to look within...

At this point in my journey, I can see that I must become more familiar with Native American ways -- but of course this will only be for my own education. The Nation of Earth is something new, and its structure will not be a direct copy of anything that came before. However, somewhere in there is the key to becoming recognized as a nation.

It might not be all that long before there are Nation of Earth license plates...


For my next post, I would like to answer some questions. Have any?


Phil Smith
June 18, 2006

Face the Nation

______


The nation originally founded as the Unified Settlement has undergone a bit of a transformation, as the very concept of its nature has been refined.

The name, Unified Settlement, was a bit contrived. While it may be applied to a physical location at some point in the future, it is better to refer to this nation of Earth as, simply, the Nation of Earth. At any rate it will likely translate much better to other languages, and is certainly more descriptive.

It is often best to keep things as simple as possible.

"So," you may ask, "what is this Nation of Earth you speak of, and is it any different from the Unified Settlement?"

What it is, is a continuation, an evolution. Where the concept of the Unified Settlement seemed to always be difficult to explain, the concept of a Nation of Earth is nearly self-evident. Besides the name, there isn't really anything different from what we most recently understood the Unified Settlement to be...

...which is a Nation of Earth, THE Nation of Earth, whatever people may call it, however informal its organization, and however far-flung those who recognize it may be.

It is something which already exists, something that continues to grow organically -- as opposed to something someone thought up and is trying to get others to accept.

You might say that this conveniently takes some weight off my shoulders, and perhaps I am indeed 'passing the torch', but if it is to be one nation for all of Earth, it's probably better if it doesn't have some silly name and one relatively young man known as its 'Founder'.

As I've repeatedly stated, the Nation of Earth represents a natural and inevitable state, one of virtual 'State'-lessness. It's an EVENTUALITY, fercryinoutloud, not something that any one person can be credited for initiating.

This is not to say that all we can do is sit back and watch it unfold. There is much to be done, though I may be the last person one should ask for direction.

But, if anyone asks, my advice is to visualize the best possible future and do what you can to steer things toward it. That was my intent in February 2004 when I (somewhat arrogantly) founded the Unified Settlement. Now 2 years wiser, my stance is much more relaxed yet fundamentally quite similar.

Jim Cadle's Flag of Earth is still the official flag of this nation, as far as I'm concerned: www.flagofearth.com

Peace!


Phil Smith
March 14, 2006

______

Volunteerism

______



How do we make this nation of ours work? One word: Volunteerism.

One very big problem with our society is that most people 'needs ta get PAID' in order for them to expend any effort. This is slowly changing, and of course there has always been a percentage of the population who have been more than ready to jump in and do things that no one even asks to be done.

However the mercenary attitude persists, and for good reason. Our society demands that we earn currency, to pay taxes and feed the corporate monsters. Thus "Time Is Money". We may all know that it really isn't, but the phrase has been burned into our brains.

The thing is, when you do not ask what's in it for you, the work is more rewarding. You can replace "time is money" with "what goes around comes around", and relax and live happily. Can't you?

In an ideal world, yes you can. This is far from an ideal world at the moment, so no one can be faulted for working within 'the system' to ensure one's needs are met. I can tell you from personal experience, however, that considerable pressure may come to 'get a job' if you decide to let volunteer work become your main focus.

Do I expect to 'get paid' for founding and developing the Unified Settlement? Of course not. I never have. I've accepted payment for Flag of Earth T-shirts, but have done no better than to break even on them, and would gladly give them away. Similarly, when and if I can gain control of Flag of Earth International, I'd be happy to let it operate in the red if I could afford to make up the difference.

Unless a person is born into a community outside the influence of capitalist/consumerist society, or manages to escape from it (and unless they are financially independent), that person will continue to be pressured to 'earn a living'. Beyond that, there could very well be pressure to 'become successful'...

Why? What is the point? Would you not be happier building and maintaining your own home and helping others build and maintain theirs? Would you not be happier (and healthier) growing your own food and helping your neighbours at harvest? But that kind of life exists only in the distant past -- or does it?

Technology surely has changed things, and much of it might not exist without capitalism and a mercenary attitude. However there is much technology that has been kept hidden from us, much of it developed by inventors who received only misery and early deaths for their trouble.

By now we should have evolved past the need for money. If those hidden technologies had been allowed to develop alongside (and commingled with) all the others, the 21st Century would more closely resemble the dreams of futurists past. Everyone could have more than thy ever needed, without lifting a finger...

...Though we probably don't want things to turn out quite that way. If there is a certain amount of work involved in everyday life -- probably more physical work than most of us are accustomed to -- we can keep ourselves from becoming useless. In the future, I can see people being judged by their peers much differently. One may be able to choose to do nothing at all, and others may leave that person to it -- then again they would probably think more highly of that person if he or she found something constructive and/or contributory to do with his or her time.

The kind of possible society I'm describing here can't be labelled in current political terms. It is neither 'communist' nor 'democratic', neither 'republican' nor 'socialist'. WHEN it is allowed to exist, we will have seen the err of our ways and forever put government behind us.

Now, who among us can manage to 'earn a salary' for working toward this future? No one can -- at least not for long -- and if they do they will find themselves volunteering a portion of their 'wages' to those less 'fortunate'.

For we are all family, here on Earth, and that's how we have to look at it. Even the power elite are family -- for them, we have to stage an intervention, because they've grown too big for their britches.

So, let's get the family together and show everyone that there's a better way. Let's teach the hungry how to feed themselves, teach the angry how to calm down (or, at least, to redirect their anger to the true source of their problems), teach the greedy the true meaning of wealth.

And, let's hope they'll listen to reason.


Phil Smith
February 7th, 2006


______

Arms Against War -- Visibly United

_____

It began with this open letter, from a longtime supporter of the Unified Settlement:


Dear Friends,

I am so worried and angry about the way our world is being treated by our governments. They spy, they invade countries illegally, they are involved in torture and at no point are they doing what they were elected to do - look after the interests of the people of their countries. I can think of no decision in the past few years that was made for my good by my government. I know too that many,many people feel the same. But what is worse, we feel unable to do anything about it.

Personally, I have attended marches, been to a major International Peace Conference, written countless letters to politicians and media and signed a ridiculous number of petitions - and nothing happened. My voice is not heard. My anger with the government grew even more when I recently searched Google for anti-war/peace groups and well over 3 million appeared. All these groups have concerns about the legality of the war in Iraq and concern about impending wars in Syria and Iran . The issues move faster than the protesters can keep up with and again, no-one is listening anyway (except the 'intelligence' agencies who are spying on their own citizens).

I wondered how many it would take - how many anti-war/peace groups increase the volume and visibility enough so that governments can realise we are more against the war, than for. How can we make them see that the people who elected them disagree with the decisions they are making and the actions they are taking in their citizens' names? I don't want my tax each week to kill an innocent civilian, mis-informed soldier or anyone else - I am responsible for this war waged by my government - in my name. I wish I wasn't.

So, to finally reach the point of this letter. How do you feel about the war in Iraq ? Would you like to have an end to it? Do you oppose your tax paying for it? Do you object to the death of our young soldiers? Do you object to the reasons for war? If you do want an end to the war in Iraq for any reason then please, please do me just one favour - one concerned human being for another - wear a strip of white fabric around your arm.

I realise it sounds small, insignificant and futile - but, I truly believe, that a show of opposition is essential in order to get media and government to be in a position where they can no longer ignore the many, many people who oppose this one point in unison. I realise there are so many issues that need to be tackled, but believe that tackling just one, gives us a united start. The reason a white armband of any fabric was chosen is important. I know that not all people the world over, who oppose the war in Iraq, can afford to attend demonstrations or spare the time, many people do not want to affiliate themselves with specific anti-war/peace groups as they may not agree the rest of the agenda, many people cannot spare the time to write letters, make calls and bother their (largely ignorant) governments who rarely, if ever respond - so a simple white piece of fabric is available to everybody, all the time, without purchase, without an agenda.

If you choose to wear the white armband you are saying just one thing "I WANT AN END TO THE WAR IN IRAQ". You are not agreeing to any agenda, movement or politics – you are acting as an individual saying just one thing "I WANT AN END TO THE WAR IN IRAQ". This form of voicing your opinion is a way to make this statement at all times, peacefully, until we are noticed. I know the instant response in your heart will be "what is the point?"….but please ignore that and just make this one move, take this one step in the direction you want the world to improve. No war in Iraq would be a start – and a start is exactly what we need, at this moment, to begin. This is a highly visible way to show the governments that their people object in large numbers, to the actions they are taking. Please, please join me – if only to make one person happy J

Thank you so much for reading and thank you so much for your support, each of us is a vital part of humanity with a right to have our say.

Namaste

ONE DAY......... www.armsagainstwar.info VISIBLY UNITED

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO EVERYONE

******

Now, as you can see, this movement has a web presence -- and yes, more and more are visiting the site every day. Here are some of the sites that help by providing a link to Arms Against War:

http://rationalreview.com/land#action

http://www.rationalreview.com/content/6924

http://www.coary.com/

http://www.counterpunch.org/ (website of the day January 23rd 2006)

http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/read.php?&itemid=3659

http://news.antville.org/stories/1311211/

http://abutamam.blogspot.com/2006/01/women-under-occupations-rules-of.html

http://www.ugandannetwork.com/let1.htm

http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2006/01/113176.shtml

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/jrudy585/Index.html

https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/332228.html

http://www.Protest.Net/imcuk/calendrome.cgi?eo=1&eid=538187&auth=K1FJGU02BO
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0601/S00198.htm

http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/2006/01/832025.shtml

http://www.isil.org/fnd/

http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?list=type&type=24
Now add: Nation of Earth http://unifiedsettlement.blogspot.com/


This is, as I have told the author of the open letter (and main force behind the effort), exactly what the Unified Settlement is about.

Once again, it is not important whether anyone recognizes the name, Unified Settlement, or has a clue that it was founded nearly 2 years ago. It is not important for anyone to know who I am. I founded this nation in hopes to help bring us more gently and more quickly into our bright future. If ALL the Unified Settlement has done so far is to be part of the inspiration behind Arms Against War, then it has helped to make a difference.

All along, I've wondered what it would take to begin to get the people united. The answer turns out to be very simple. Find something that at least half of us feel strongly about, create a simple expression for that sentiment, and set it loose.


It is a beginning.


Phil Smith
January 30th, 2006


_______

Tempus Edax Rerum

______

Tempus Edax Rerum
(Time Devours All)

"...and I might not get there with you, but I want you to know, tonight, that we as a people will get to the Promised Land!" -- Martin Luther King Jr., less than 24 hours before his assassination.

Just before that, of course, he said, "...I have SEEEEEEEN -- the Promised Land."

What I feel that many people don't understand is that the Promised Land he was speaking of is Heaven on Earth. Many see him as having been a deeply religious, deeply spiritual man, and that he was, but he was also a human activist -- and a visionary.


MLK stood for the same things I stand for. I won't compare myself to him (though I'm soon to turn 39, the age at which he was so senselessly murdered, and our birthdays are only a few days apart), but if I were to choose only one hero, Dr. King might be it.


For the record, his birthday is January 15th, a fact obscured by this country's predilection for celebrating official holidays on Mondays. In case you're curious, mine's January 18th, and yes last year I declared it an 'official' Unified Settlement holiday, "Founder's Day", second only to "Settlement Day", which this year will be the 2nd anniversary of the founding of this Nation of Earth, February 27th 2004.

Realizing I'm now the approximate age of Dr. King when his activism caused 'them' to decide he should no longer live is strangely similar to my experience of the 'suiciding' of Kurt Cobain -- he was about my age at the time.

Do I feel old? A couple of my contemporaries are Janet Jackson and Tony Hawk. Are they 'old'?

There's a bit of a Logan's Run thing going on these days. No, I don't mean that people are customarily volunteering to end their lives at 30, but that there seems to be a similar obliteration of history. Maybe I don't know much from personal experience -- Dr. King was killed while I was still in diapers -- but I pay attention to history, because "Those who cannot learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."

Now, in whose interest is it that the each successive generation knows less and less about what came before? In whose interest is it to keep the general population ignorant of the lessons of history?

Does public school, and for that matter do expensive college and university courses help students understand what really happened, and why -- or do they give brief overviews and stress memorization of names and dates, instead of exploring the reasons behind events, and their impact?

If people really understood how we got to where we are and why, they absolutely would not allow the current shenanigans of the power elite. Thus, such knowledge has been closely guarded.

Excuse me, but it is my assertion (and that of many others) that the public in general has been deliberately 'dumbed down'. Some have gone so far as to track down the machinations of this process, and the source of it...

If I were to name names and point fingers, some readers of this weblog might balk at the information and label me a 'conspiracy theorist' -- which of course I would object to, because I am one who has studied the FACTs of conspiracy, a conspiratologist.


So, without naming names, even the names of groups, I'll lay the situation out once again:

Even if power doesn't necessarily corrupt, we observe that the corrupt seek power. Morally bereft as they may be, a lot of 'them' are very clever. And, just like anyone else, they seek out those of like mind. Then, instead of getting together and planning something beneficial to all, they will get together and scheme to benefit themselves -- not only with disregard to Joe Average, but with intent to exploit him, manipulate him, make him do their dirty work, give him a false ideology that serves their own purposes.

The very nature of their plans and schemes means that they must be made in secret -- defining their activities as conspiracy. 'They' thrive on deceit. They lie, they cheat, they steal, they threaten, they ruin lives, and they kill. The end, for 'them', always justifies the means.

They are heartless, almost soulless.

If you can understand that such people exist, and that some of them are very clever, and that they are able to form secret organizations, perhaps you can also understand that they have existed for a very, very long time. Maybe you can see that their organizations are made to appear beneficial, a deception that allows for their continued operation.

Can you imagine how long it's been going on? If so, expand that exponentially. Tempus Edax Rerum -- time devours all -- is a Latin phrase. Eventually, people will forget the lessons of the past -- at least, 'they' hope so, and will do what they can to ensure that it IS so.

If we can't recognize what THEY have done before, how will we know when it's being done to us again?

One thing 'they' have apparently not considered is that the concept of right & wrong is something that can be refined by LOGIC. Therefore those who are more clever than 'they' are can invariably be found within the opposition, the resistance.

It is unfortunate that those with a good sense of what is right and what is wrong tend to give others the benefit of the doubt. We are, to a fault, too trusting. It is difficult for us to see the motivations of the criminal mind. It's all too easy to view reports of conspiracy as 'crazy theory', especially when 'they' are clever enough to cover their tracks fairly well.

Yet, 'they' have become quite arrogant as they gain more and more power, nearly flaunting their actions. In this, the Information Age, they have 'blown their cover', and the word is spreading quickly.


Dr. King was right. We, as a people, WILL get to the Promised Land. It's just around the corner, and only 'they' and their deception stand in our way.

Time devours all, including the reign of the wicked.



Phil Smith
January 17th, 2006



______

What Is the Unified Settlement?

THE FLAG OF EARTH
http://www.flagofearth.com/

The Unified Settlement was founded February 27th, 2004, in response to the question, "What are ya gonna do about it?"

If a global, peaceful, freedom-based nation isn't exactly an original idea, neither was it copied from anything else. The concept is too obvious not to have been thought up by many others, however separated by time and space. I'll freely admit to having been influenced by things I've read, then and now. We reach ever higher by standing on the shoulders of our predecessors.

The idea seemed right to me, so I went with it. Given the grip the power elite have over us, here on Earth where we are SETTLED, if the many are to be free from the relative few, those many must become UNIFIED. Activism is a good thing, but if activist individuals and groups were to realize that all their causes could be served by joining together, their combined power would assuredly change the world.

Think about that for a moment. All these causes -- What is the source of the problems they are trying to solve? In nearly every case, you will find government involved, either directly or indirectly. This is not a knee-jerk reaction, but a carefully considered position.

There was a time when I thought a direct democracy would be best, but it was pointed out to me that direct democracy invariably leads to 'mob rule', bringing everything down to the lowest common denominator. When I had to admit that people were in fact easily swayed, through propaganda and other means, I began to wonder if there could be any form of government that would be immune to corruption.

Another definition of 'mob rule' might be 'under the control of organized crime'. Well? Can someone tell me that the major governments of this world are not criminal organizations? Is government not a magnet for corruption?

Yes, there are some who seek office because they genuinely wish to be public servants. Some of them even manage to keep from being bribed or coerced into 'the family' and 'their' way of doing things. That rare beast, the actual public servant, is more likely to be found at the local level. The higher up they go, the more pressure they face to toe the 'company' line.

I happen to live in West Virginia, one of the United States that all too many Americans don't seem to know exists -- they think the name of the state simply refers to the western part of Virginia, which settlers west of the mountains first attempted to become seperate from as early as 1776. In 1783 they wanted to call it "Westsylvania" -- I suppose if that were the name today it would get confused with 'Wrestlemania'... Anyway it took another 80 years and a civil war (an oxymoron if ever there was one) for statehood to finally be granted. Some of our governors haven't exactly been ones to be proud of, but now we have Joe Manchin III, who is in my estimation one of those rare beasts -- an actual public servant, a real person who genuinely cares about other people.

If government were largely comprised of such men (and women), we would effectively have 'official activism' -- government representatives would more often than not do their best to, well, REPRESENT the people and SOLVE problems instead of creating them. However, this not being a perfect world, it is the greedy, corrupt, and power-hungry who are in control.

Sad, but true.

It is very possible for local governments to be kept in check, but less and less likely that governments can be accountable, the larger and larger they get. Thus it is the largest which must be dissolved first.

Do we need a United Nations? Do we need a European Union? Do we need individual nations, or even states and provinces? Do we even need cities to operate as anything but public service corporations? These are things for the people to decide, when they finally get it through their heads that big government is a big self-serving lie.


The Unified Settlement is NOT a government. As a global nation, it knows no boundaries. As workers unionize to keep from being taken advantage of by corporations, so must we all band together to reverse oppression by the power elite.

'They' have used every trick they could think of to fool us into giving them more and more power. WE have to stand up and demand our true freedom.


WE are the Unified Settlement.



Phil Smith
January 11th, 2006

______