California Psychologically Secedes From The Union

A decent respect for the opinions of mankind requires that Californians should declare the causes which impel us to the separation from a malignant and fascistic government in Washington.

Political revolution and “sovereignty” are not realistic, or necessary, but self-determination for Californians, Ukrainians, and people everywhere, is essential. Conflating these two distinct things is the cause of much of the conflict and violence in the world.

The word “sovereignty” means supreme, and logically there cannot be nearly 200 separate sovereignties in a global society, each with their own national interest that takes priority over the interest of humanity as a whole.

Sovereignty once pertained to kings, and was believed to be derived from God. The only sovereignties now are humanity as a whole, and whatever one feels a higher power to be.

With respect to California, if we were an independent country, our gross domestic product would rank fifth in the world. And the rest of America largely views us as another country. So it’s high time we start to act like one in the global context, since California is punching below its weight in America, and the world.

Trump hates California as much as he hates Europe. With respect to the EU, as recently reported, “Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, flew to the US last week, having finally secured an audience with the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio. While she was in the air, Rubio cancelled the meeting.”

Just as bold new thinking after the failure of the League of Nations and before the devastation of World War II led to the creation of the United Nations, bold new thinking is required in the wake of the failure of the UN and multilateral organizations such as the EU to meet the present crisis.

Saying multilateral organizations are “more vital than ever” is like saying the League of Nations was more vital than ever in 1935. The United Nations, like the League before the Second World War, is hamstrung by its own charter, which subordinates the UN to its member states, and paralyzes it by the most powerful nations of the Security Council.

And yet, despite the UN’s impotence to adequately respond to the multi-faceted crisis facing humankind, right-wing extremists in the USA and elsewhere attack it as a “globalist” organization and seek to destroy it completely.

Assumptions like group identification, national sovereignty and coercive power have to be questioned and overthrown. That’s the true revolution, which is psychological rather than political. It’s an authentic response to the present crisis, rather than another violent and militaristic reaction.

An Observer weekend editorial exhibits the same WWII/Cold War, need-for-enemies mindset that’s making matters much worse. It comes close to warmongering in its fearmongering: “A wider conflict with Russia – and without US support – is not unthinkable but must be actively prepared for.” Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was evil and illegal, but Russia does not have the desire or the capability of invading the Baltic States, much less Poland and Europe.

Europe now faces a choice. Continue in the same nationalistic mold that has put the world in these dire straits, or unify, within or outside the current EU framework, and redefine security in global terms in a global society.

These two strands are inextricable. If European nations react to the vicious autocracy that has emerged in America by doubling down on dead tropes about “security and defense,” there will be no unity, there will be no response, and there will be no way out of this growing chaos for Europe and the world.

To say, “In a crisis, the 27-country EU is not nimble enough, and is too easily paralyzed” is a laughable understatement. To say, “Thirty of NATO’s 32 members are European…so an alliance liberated from Trump could eventually produce the ‘army of Europe’ that Ukraine and leaders like Macron talk about. It could deter Russia. And the US, if need be.”

It appears that the worse things get, the more thought leaders in Europe cling to such outdated, square-the-circle thinking.

In any case we no longer have the luxury of “eventually.” Besides, deterrence is the language and mentality of the Cold War, when the US and the USSR held each other in check, and the world hostage, through Mutual Assured Destruction by thousands of thermonuclear weapons.

To believe that forming “an army of Europe” can act as a deterrent when nuclear weapons still hang like the sword of Damocles over the world, and the world is on the cusp of much wider proliferation, is willful blindness and naïveté.

As the League of Nations gave way to the United Nations (which has succeeded to the degree that it has prevented another world war, but has failed since the genocide in Rwanda to act effectively), so too humankind now needs a new, genuinely global body of great moral suasion to declare the sovereignty of humanity, supersede petty national interests, and promote the shared interests of humankind.

Underwritten by a sufficient minority of world citizens that have ended man’s atavistic identification with particular groups, the keystone for an effective and feasible global architecture is the creation of an independent, non-power-holding, non-bureaucratic global body.

Such a superseding “Global Consultum,” by whatever name, would uphold the sovereignty of humanity and ongoingly propose policies to national governments and the UN to meet the challenges facing the totality of humanity. A GC could be ratified by a two-thirds vote of the UN General Assembly, help break the logjam of the Security Council, and be located in the evolutionary birthplace of humans, south or east Africa.

Without a genuinely global response, the fragmentation of the Earth and Humanity will continue and quicken. But paradoxically, in their race to the bottom, Trump, Putin and their ilk are making a true global response more necessary and possible every day.

Martin LeFevre: lefevremartin77@gmail

© Scoop Media