In contemporary America, two distinct governance systems coexist: the traditional union of sovereign states and a corporate system that has gained prominence over the last seven decades. Many citizens unwittingly engaged with the corporate system without full awareness or disclosure.
The roots of the United States lie in a union of sovereign states, forged through pivotal documents like the Declaration of Independence (1776), Articles of Confederation (1778), and the Constitution (1787). These documents symbolized independence from British colonization and formed the basis of a system founded on the principles of sovereignty and individual liberties.
However, a significant shift occurred, particularly marked by events such as the Gettysburg Address in 1864 and the Incorporation of the District of Columbia via a de facto Legislative Organic Act in 1871, executed under emergency powers. This transformation delineated a distinction between the original sovereign states and a newly formed corporate entity, identified by names in all capital letters.
The distinction between these systems is crucial. The sovereign system traces its origins to the resistance against British tyranny, emphasizing the fight for fundamental rights, such as representation in taxation. This struggle culminated in the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary War, and the acknowledgment of American colonists as free sovereign individuals.
The emergence of the corporate system within American governance occurred through deliberate legislative acts, notably marked by the reorganization of the District of Columbia into a municipal corporation. This transformation fundamentally altered the landscape of governance, establishing a corporate entity separate from the traditional sovereign structure.
This corporate entity, identified by names spelled entirely in capital letters, represents a distinct and parallel construct within the broader American governance framework. Its formation and distinction set it apart from the original foundation of sovereign states united under a different set of principles and rules. This divergence between the traditional sovereign system and the newly established corporate structure highlights the intricate evolution and divergence of governance paradigms within the United States.
The concept of sovereignty during the American Revolution marked a pivotal shift in governance principles. Unlike European systems where sovereignty commonly vested in monarchs or ruling authorities, the Revolution in the United States triggered a profound transition. Here, sovereignty underwent a significant transformation—it transitioned from a centralized authority to the people themselves.
This shift was revolutionary; it established the populace as the true sovereigns of the nation. Essentially, the power to govern, to shape laws, and to decide the direction of the country shifted from a single centralized entity to the collective will and authority of the people.
This distinction is fundamental to the American system. It diverges from historical European models where sovereignty remained concentrated in the hands of a ruling elite or monarch. In the United States, the essence of governance revolves around the empowerment and involvement of the people, signifying a departure from traditional hierarchical structures prevalent in many other parts of the world.
Key documents shaped the evolution of these governance structures, including the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, Constitution, and the Northwest Ordinance.
Understanding the divergence between the original sovereign system and the corporate structure is paramount. This comprehension underscores the necessity of reassembling our states and reverting to a de jure governing system rooted in common law. This transition holds immense importance, especially when considering the engagement of the populace, at the local level. Reassembling counties and states becomes pivotal in reclaiming that sovereign status, primarily because many individuals have unknowingly entered into a de facto system and its corporate structure through adhesion contracts like birth certificates, Social Security numbers, marriage licenses, and other similar agreements. Returning to a de jure governance system aligned with common law becomes a means to regain individual sovereignty and uphold fundamental rights within the American governance framework.
Unfortunately, within our country, there exists a population seemingly content with being enslaved and dictated to. A significant portion lacks the capacity for self-governance, unaware of how to navigate towards freedom even if given explicit instructions at gunpoint. This stands as one of the most substantial challenges in reassembling our states—a widespread reluctance to take responsibility for oneself and the future of our nation.
I find it incredibly frustrating when I hear phrases like ‘enjoy the movie’ or ‘grab your popcorn’ while relying on the notion that ‘military white hats’ have everything under control. These phrases instill a mindset of passive reliance on others to solve our problems. The reality is that such passivity, entrusting others to do our work, has been detrimental in the long run. We cannot afford this any longer.
Hence, it becomes imperative to have an engaged and informed population, especially within our general assemblies, which are essentially the representation of free and independent states. We need individuals who actively participate and take charge of shaping our collective future, steering away from a culture of complacency and dependency.