The Ellsworth Declaration

"There is no first step to world government. World government is the first step."
- Emery Reves, Anatomy of Peace

4 September, 1953

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable. There is no salvation for civilization, or even the human race, other than the creation of a world government." - Albert Einstein
(Delivered at the City Hall, Ellsworth, Maine, U.S.A.)

Note: The page numbers have been left in this text for reference purposes.

Good Evening, dear friends:

This meeting has its origin about five years ago in Paris when I 
walked out of the United States Embassy as a sort of political 
nonentity, or stateless person.  My story, that is, what led to that 
action, what happened afterwards, and where I find myself today 
have become matters of public interest, if only because anyone who 
has the audacity to deal with nation states directly as if he were 
equal or even superior in sovereignty, whether he is considered a 
fool or a sage, is at least an object of curiosity.

It is my experience however that much misunderstanding and even 
misrepresentation has occurred in the public mind concerning me.  
This is, to a great extent, my own fault.  I have found myself unable 
many times to explain clearly and concisely the basic reasons for my 
actions.  Perhaps I shouldn't have tried.  Actions speak for 
themselves, and so-called reasons often confuse as much as clarify.  
P. 21

also, the general press often print but half the story or sensationalize 
what is ordinarily quite a commonplace happening to entice the 
buying public.  Flashy headlines replace objective and full coverage.  
This in turn gives rise to the cry of publicity seeker, and the man 
stands condemned whatever his motives or sincerity.  Mostly 
however I think that the subject itself is confusing and lacking in 
precedent, the subject being the wholeness of individual man, or his 
inherent total sovereignty with full authority and rights contrasted 
today against the seeming absolutism of the sovereign state 
expressed in nationalism. . .and his inherent cooperative urge as 
contrasted with a fiercely competitive economy. . .how he can 
reassert himself in modern terms, what techniques he can use, what 
philosophy he can call upon, what moral fibre he can evoke in the 
face of giant immoral pressures and fears, what historical precedents 
he has, and finally what human support he can command around 
him, both individually and institutionally.  The subject in short is 
unlimited man's revolt against a limited society and demands full 
command of every ounce of an individual's spiritual, intellectual, and 
physical stature.  In the light of this problem, my personal 
limitations become glaringly obvious.

But once more I find it necessary to speak in public knowing full well 
the dangers just mentioned.  I may confuse as much as clarify:  the 
press may mock or cry publicity-seekers, or merely ignore;  and 
again I may reveal my limitations in not embracing the full subject.  
But it is necessary first of all because I find myself in my homeland, 
America, and in fact in the very seat of my birth, Hancock County, in 
very unusual circumstances, and I want those about me, my fellow 
Americans, to know what I am about;  exactly what these 
circumstances are, and what I intend to do about them;  and 
secondly, I feel a duty and responsibility to my many friends in 
Europe and throughout the world who have supported me in the past 
and shown me their hearts and minds with openness and deep 
conviction, a duty which I have not always fulfilled and a 
responsibility which I have not always accepted, but which tonight I 
will try to fulfill and accept to the full measure of my ability.

To introduce my subject, let me say that though you and I here are 
friends and from the same soil, we are separated by as wide a gulf as 
man has ever artificially created.  I was a bomber pilot during the 
last war, and I first discovered this artificial gulf between men when 
flying over Germany bombing German civilians and cities.  Till then I 
hadn't thought much about my fellowman, or myself as a member of 
a world community.  I had been too busy growing up, having fun, 
and trying to earn a living.  But in that starkly realistic situation, 
behind all the emotion and hysteria, I was literally forced to 
consider, for the first time I might add, the seeming foolishness of 
one group of human beings dropping bombs on another group, all 
members of the same human family.  Certainly like them I had good 
reasons for my participation in the fight.  Fascism was a public 
menace, a social disease, a cancerous scourge, and had to be wiped 
out at all costs. . .even
P. 22

at the cost of my death and that of my buddies-in-arms.  But even 
so, I had to wonder what was wrong with the organization of our 
human community when a social disease like Fascism was allowed to 
become so plague-like that only an opposing plague, no matter how 
justified, could halt its advance.  I confess my political naivete while 
flying that engine of destruction, but I couldn't really understand 
why our leaders had let things get that far.

I wasn't alone in this wondering of course.  Millions of young people 
were rudely shocked into the naked awareness that the social plague 
called war was a real part of their life.  If nothing else, we were 
forced to start thinking about our responsibilities in this regard.

After the war I returned to my profession in the theatre.  But the 
wondering continued underneath. Though we had a supranational 
organization called the United Nations supposedly to solve the 
problems of war and peace, poverty and plenty, the still absolute 
sovereign states, after a flurry of postwar disarmament, continued 
more hysterically than ever their superarmament race, especially my 
own and Russia, developing superbombs and super methods of 
killing off human beings.  Taxes were increasing on individual 
citizens, relief budgets were cut as defense budgets were increased-- 
though eminent scientists kept telling us that there was no defense 
against the absolute weapons now developed-- more and more 
people went hungry, or were illclothed, or illhoused, refugees were 
dealt with apathetically or begrudgingly, the world's children were 
neglected, and general fear and insecurity were becoming 

Was it possible, I asked myself, that once again I was to be uprooted 
from my everyday life, this time to become a part of an even greater 
plague called World War III?  Hadn't we learned anything from the 
last war, or the one before that, or the multitude of wars stretching 
back throughout man's bloody history?  Does each generation have to 
go through this superfoolishness?  Are we all so bankrupt of reason 
and moral fibre that we can't live in peace and cooperation with one 
another in one physical world?  These questions and many more 
pounded at me with increasing urgency during the years of '46 and 
'47.  What should I do? I kept asking myself.  Where could the 
common man like me, the man-in-the-street, the fundamental 
integer without which there is no society, register his protest against 
this insanity?  Where could I vote against war and poverty, and for 
peace and wellbeing?  Who represented me, not only in the United 
States, but in the world community as well?  In the U.S., there is law 
and order, government, a central control or brain, direct 
representatives of the people therein, if only in a political sense.  
Outside there is chaos and anarchy, a jungle world wherein raw force 
is the deciding factor, where individuals are helpless, and where only 
armies move in sinister and secret patterns.  There is no World 
Parliament, no world constitution, no world law, or world economy, 
in short, no world brain or government.  Instead on our one planet, 
there are about 80 separate and fully-sovereign political and 
economic units, all attempting to govern and provide securi-
P. 23

ty for their individual citizens.  Some are rich, some poor;  some are 
large, some small.  But all are absolute in their political power over 
their citizens, just as the original 13 American colonies or States were 
in 1780.

It's as if your body had 80 or so separate, and uncoordinated 
compartments, each with its individual command posts or brain, and 
each acting at crosspurposes and giving opposing orders to the 
various organs.  What would be the result?  Well obviously, we call 
such an uncoordinated man an idiot, and because we know he can't 
provide for himself, but eventually will either starve or be destroyed 
in some way, we put him into an institution for his and the public 

But an objective observer on Mars, or indeed even on Earth, might 
very well apply the same idiocy to the organism we call humanity 
and of which we are all integral parts or cells whether we like it or 
not.  He would see quite clearly that it lacks a unified coordinating 
center, or world brain. . .or government.

But what about the United Nations?  Isn't that set up to do the 
coordinating job, to be the brain of humanity?  The answer of course, 
divorced of sentiment and ideals, is implicit in the actions of the very 
nations which are members of the U.N.  Behind the inspiring ideals, 
the noble convictions, and imposing facade, and discounting the 
paralyzed specialized agencies set up to deal with real human 
problems, or the educational aspects, the United Nations is merely a 
meeting place for the representatives of some, not all of the 
nationstates to try to win world public opinion for their particular 
interests.  As such, it is an effective smokescreen behind which the 
most powerful nations carry on their absolute nationalistic policies.  
In short, it is neither united, nor is it inclusive.

I am aware in making these remarks of the high regard that the UN 
as such is held by many here in the US, but it is vitally necessary to 
divorce ourselves from false sentiment and vain idealism so that the 
naked reality of the world's condition can be faced if just and 
reasonable solutions to human problems are to be found.  Certainly 
the United Nations is of immense value to me, the utterly neutral 
man, for by it I can see in startling clarity just what we lack and 
need.  I might add that my experience indicates that there are few 
within the UN itself who are not being made increasingly aware of 
this lack and need.

After I became aware of the world's basic anarchic condition, which 
was certainly a spiritual as well as a political and economic anarchy, 
I like millions of others, was faced with the personal problem of 
what was my responsibility to the total world community?  How 
could I relate myself directly and realistically with my fellowman, 
spiritually, socially and physically, not only as a protest, but as a 
practical way to fill in the vacuous area of world anarchy?  I was 
truly an American, by birth, by upbringing, by forefathers, by 
conviction and by ideals, but I wanted no part of nationalism.  But 
could the two be separated?  And if so, what then was the position of 
the individual who managed such an unprecedented separation?  In 
other words, how could he make an effective protest against a 
nationalism turned violent which thwarted and perverted 
humanitarian tendencies
P. 24

till men turned into mobs killing each other mercilessly and at the 
same time build his life on the constructive principle of social 
cooperation rather than on the jungle competition for bare 
necessities he saw all around him?

I wanted a corporate or federal or unitive world government to 
resolve the social organizational problem which in turn would 
resolve the economic problem with a world unitive economy;  but 
first of all, I wanted a spiritual kinship, an awareness of a 
community of men derived from the same source, one human 
Organism, One Total Man, or more popularly, a world religion or 
universal church based on brotherhood, truth and love.  From this, I 
knew and felt, would flow the other worldly institutions.  Naive and 
oversimplified perhaps, but nonetheless sincere and heartfelt.

In personal revolt against nationalism to which I no longer wanted to 
contribute, and against raw competition with my fellowmen which I 
didn't understand and wasn't trained for, I went to Paris in May of 
1948, and on the 25th of that month, before a U.S. Vice-Consul in the 
Embassy on the Champs Elysee, I took the formal oath of 
renunciation of my national citizenship, which is allowed by the 
Nationality Act of 1940.  I did not deny being an American, which 
was an inherent part of me anyway, but I declared what I truly was 
in a larger worldly sense:  . . .I claimed to be a world citizen.

This of course was no new declaration, no original thought.  Socrates 
made it.  Tom Paine made it.  Most philosophers, sages, and spiritual 
leaders have affirmed its principles of unity in one way or another.  
But there is no monopoly on such a universal truth.  And so, now a 
common man had made it.  To me, world citizenship expressed 
positively and clearly man's individual wholeness or completeness, 
his personal uniqueness and individuality, plus his fundamental 
unity with all other men, spiritually as well as physically.

The general press however, mockingly referred to me as "the self-
styled world citizen."  It is a fitting commentary on our present-day 
political institutions when an ordinary citizen must style himself that 
which they presume to represent, but cannot, and then be mocked 
for it in the nation's press.

Here in America, where national citizenship is idealized and 
sentimentalized beyond all reason, I was publicly ridiculed.  Many 
called me simply a crackpot with a harebrained idea;  others thought 
I was merely one more publicity seeker of which America 
apparently had hundreds of thousands, though this was a pretty 
desperate way merely to get publicity.  Others, less emotional and 
more objective, called me simply unrealistic, or impractical, or ahead 
of the times, though at the same time they usually were obliged to 
add that the world was in pretty much of a mess and something 
should be done.  But generally, I was considered merely one more 
symbol of youthful confusion, and a sort of international orphan. . .or 
world waif. . .and very unAmerican.

I argued that to be an American meant infinitely more than just to 
be a United States citizen.  Americans, I said, held fast to principles 
of liberty, democracy,
P. 25

public welfare, and world peace, principles for which my forefathers 
suffered persecution, worked and died and upon which the nation 
was founded.  Who was the true American, I asked, the man who 
stood for the above principles, or the chauvinistic nationalist or war 
profiteer?  But my voice was drowned out in derision.

I must add here that I did not ask others to follow or even not to 
follow my particular action.  I merely said that it was my way, and 
that if others were concerned about the same problems, they must 
find their particular way of renouncing absolutist nationalism and 
extending their loyalty to the total world community since at that 
time there was no one central and neutral organization to which all 
could belong as universal as humanity itself.

But even so, my birthplace hadn't changed, nor my upbringing, nor 
my ancestors.  Also when I dropped my hand no longer a US citizen, 
I was no wiser, no more industrious, no more patient.  The sun still 
shone on me, and the rain still fell on me;  I still had to eat, breathe 
and work;  I still like music and dancing and the theatre;  I could still 
laugh and cry, or be serious or tell a joke;  my friends were still my 
friends, and people who didn't like me anyway, still didn't like me 
anyway.  In short, I was still very much me, despite my loss of 
national citizenship, and still very much a part of the total human 
community, and in fact, now a more direct part.  In the real things, I 
hadn't changed a whit.

But like the pebble dropping on the surface of the water, I did make 
a ripple...on the surface.  And to many people here in America 
especially, failing to distinguish the surface from the actual body of 
water, or the illusion of reality from the Real Itself, here in this 
dualistic society, I had dared to call into question the fundamental, 
the essential, and so, the secure.  To these, US citizenship was 
absolute security, despite A-bombs, and two world wars.  Also I had 
renounced "the American way of life" meaning principally the 
security of physical comforts and even luxuries.  And so I was 
considered an outcast and a heretic on two counts, politically and 
physically.  Morally, few in America, questioned my motives or 
actions.  Needless to say, I was a great trial to my family and friends 
during this period.

Well, what happens to a man who finds himself plumb in the middle 
of the world anarchy, where there are no political representatives at 
any level of government, where no authority is prepared to accept or 
identify you, where you have no stable home and no legal right to 
live, where you have no influence because you have no political 
status and so where friends are either afraid or reluctant to come to 
your aid, where human rights are laughed at, and one is mocked for 
presuming to affirm even that he or she is a human being, where 
every petty official becomes your master before whom you must 
bow and scrape if you find yourself obliged to ask for some meager 
necessity till you are screaming inside and ready either to kill, or ask 
God's help, torn between the two, where indignity is mixed with 
contempt and pity, where life is a series of waiting-in-line at a
P. 26

window marked "Alien" or "Stranger" behind which sits an 
indifferent clerk with only rubber stamps in front of him which 
determine your very existence, where the human spirit is crushed 
out of all shape and recognition until it withers of its own accord, 
where finally apathy and resignation nibble dumbly at the mind and 
heart till hope is gone.

Is this an exaggeration, coming purely from my imagination?  Is the 
situation so bad?  Ask the over 15,000,000 refugees in Germany, 
many living in madeover concentration camps.  Ask the hundreds of 
thousands of stateless people in France and England who are allowed 
to live there but legally not allowed to work.  Ask the North and 
South Koreans made homeless by a "foreign" power's war.  Ask the 
stateless people of Africa and Asia whose very homes, miserable 
hovels that they are, are owned by colonial masters, and whose 
rights as human beings are ridiculed and scorned till they seethe in 
indignation and revolt and are ready to accept any tyrant who 
promises them freedom and more bread.

Ask me even.

Directly after my renunciation, my learning about these things began.  
The little clerk at the French police station had fifteen stamps in 
front of her, and nowhere to use them when I presented myself at 
her desk.  She couldn't handle an ex-U.S. citizen who called himself a 
world citizen, born in America, yet residing in France, and without 
papers of any kind.  That situation was in no lawbook or regulations 
manual she knew of.  Legally I was outside the framework of the 
sovereign state of France.  But physically I was inside.  I had 
committed no crime or harmed anyone.  My interests were purely 
humanitarian, positive, and outgoing, yet, being outside the law, I 
was considered a criminal for merely existing and subject to 
imprisonment.  Such is the extraordinary position of a man caught in 
the lawless area outside of national sovereignty.  Such also is the 
position that each powerful nation finds itself in in regard to other 
nations.  It becomes suspect by another nation simply because there 
is no legal control of its actions by the other nation.  By stepping 
outside the control of any nation-state, I discovered gradually that I 
had actually become sovereign in much the same way.  And so I was 
suspect by that frustrated civil servant and by every government 
official I came up against thereafter.  Finally in some desperation to 
keep me from jail, she stamped the back of a letter I had from the 
American Embassy in receipt of my passport.  This gave me three 
pseudo-legal months to live in France.  I asked her what I should do 
after three months.  She shrugged and waved me out.  After all, it 
wasn't her affair.

Just before the three months were up, the United Nations took over 
the Palais de Chaillot in Paris declaring that property international 
territory in a symbolic ceremony between Robert Shumann and 
Trygve Lie.  Facing jail in France if I remained there, and jail in any 
other country I went to, I was literally forced to seek political 
sanctuary at the headquarters of this highest political authority in 
the world.  It was the world organization after all;  I would be 
privileged to
P. 27

present it with its first real citizen.

I remained on the steps of one of the U.N. Buildings for 6 days and 
nights.  During this time, the curious but kind people of Paris 
supplied me with bread, cheese, fruit, and vin ordinaire.  During that 
period I wrote a petition to the delegates through Mr. Lie asking for 
simple recognition of world citizenship.  On the seventh day, I 
received my answer.  I was expelled forcibly.  The U.N. Secretariat, 
not having any police, requested the French Ministry of the Interior 
to please "invade" their so-called international territory and remove 
this piece of international flotsam.  So on Sept. 17th about 50 French 
policemen wearing their sternest looks, came in, took me against my 
will and deposited me in France again, a distance of about 10 yards.

The U.N. could have done the job of course, but it might have looked 
a bit foolish for a squad of U.S. or Russian marines carrying out such 
a nonmilitary objective.

This somewhat ludicrous removal was the U.N.'s way of saying to me, 
"We don't represent you, so how can you expect us to recognize 
world citizenship? But further, we can't represent you because 
you're a stateless person, and we're composed only of states.  As 
such, we, the United Nations, represent division and fear, and 
eventual war, whereas you, a neutral human being, obviously 
represent unity and peace.  You have a sort of human sovereignty 
inherent in you, whereas we have only state sovereignty to link us, 
but contrarily we have private or vested interests to protect at all 
costs;  you don't, because you have nothing to lose.  You are able to 
take our ideals, aspirations and hopes and apply them directly in 
human affairs.  We are unable to do so because they conflict with our 
sovereign statehood.  Now you can see why we must get rid of you 
even to calling in a national police force and facing ridicule for doing 
so.  Your naive but natural request for recognition of world 
citizenship exposes our limitations, and that we can't afford."

This is the major lesson I have learned.  The world's greatest 
statesmen, the ablest politicians, the national policy makers, the 
Presidents, Kings, Congressmen, Parliamentarians, and all lesser state 
servants, can only mark time until we, on the very bottom of the 
pile, the socalled man-in-the-street, the John and Jane Does of the 
world, the simple human being with nothing to lose but his fears, 
make a concerted, cooperative, and determined effort to move into 
world peace and prosperity.  By "into" I mean we must actually 
declare freedom and security an inherent part of our essential 
humanity, and then apply it scientifically, technically and spiritually 
in our daily lives.  Until that is done, the statesman remains trapped 
between principle and practice;  he has nothing to lead or govern 
except that which exists, and we all remain chained to our 
insecurities, poverties, and fears.

That concerted and cooperative one world movement until now has 
been undefined and unorganized.  But it has been generating in 
parts.  Hundreds of non-governmental international organizations 
reflecting every facet of man's interests
P. 28

including innumerable peace and welfare organizations are ready for 
a coordinated, cooperative, corporate one world organization.  
Millions of ordinary people everywhere are certainly ready to 
recognize their essential kinship, to cooperate in harmony, share 
their labor and services, pool their resources, both intellectual and 
physical, and benefit each other individually and mutually.  Many 
small nations even are ready to relinquish a part of their sovereignty 
to such a supranational authority having provisions in their 
constitutions for such.

I myself quite by circumstance became a focal point for such a 
common and neutral meeting-ground in Europe in 1948-49 and '50.

After my formal ejection from the U.N. territory, and from 
subsequent events such as an organized interruption from the U.N. 
balcony on Nov. 22nd wherein with friends I asked that humanity be 
given a representative in the affairs directly affecting us, and after 
two large meetings in Paris which were attended to overflowing, a 
spontaneous one world and world citizenship popular movement 
came into being which was genuinely planet-wide.

I was flooded with hundreds of thousands of letters from all corners 
of the globe, and from peoples of all nations, colors, sects, races, 
occupations, and origins.  Only the Americans and Russians were cool 
to or skeptical of the idea, not because of the American or Russian 
people themselves, but because their leaders were too busy fearing, 
insulting and arming against each other to pay much attention to 
such an unrealistic third force as one world and world citizenship, 
especially if it began in the giant middle world between the two 
opposing forces.  "Not economically practical," said the American 
businessman;  "Not politically practical," said the Russian communist.

I was personally attacked from Pravda and the U.S. press alike, one 
with vitriol and personal character assassination, the other wish 
patronizing spankings or veiled suggestions of mental derangement.  
Pravda called me a U.S. bought dupe, exporting American world 
government along with detective stories and powdered eggs.  The 
U.S. press inferred that I was naively and unwittingly playing into 
the hands of the Communists by creating a giant peace movement in 
the West, and why didn't I go to Russia to begin my movement there, 
or if not, then come home and go into a defense plant...while I was 
being psychoanalyzed.

But to the rest of mankind, caught in the middle of this two-
dimensional dialectic between two mighty physical forces, the reality 
of one world was overwhelming and the fact of world citizenship was 
grounded in truth.

But even if there were millions of one worlders and world citizens, 
very few agreed on general one world strategy and practically no 
one agreed on world citizenship tactics.

From the podium of the General Assembly of the United Nations on 
Dec. 10, 1948, came an appeal for help, which contained both one 
world strategy and world citizenship tactics.  It came in the form of a 
document called The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  In 
effect, it was the greatest mandate to organize ourselves
P. 29

rationally ever given to mankind as a corporate body.  On the other 
hand, it implied with uncompromising clarity that the United Nations 
as such is not that rational organization.  The mandate was given to 
everyone on the planet.  No one was excluded.  When declared, it was 
hailed as a milestone in man's collective efforts to achieve freedom 
and security.  But so far, five years later, it has not achieved freedom 
and security.  So far, it's just another piece of paper with stirring 
words on it.  Why is this?  Why didn't men and women take this 
document, affirm the rights therein, and oblige their leaders to have 
them properly secured in a world organization?   The reason is 
simple.  But it may be a hard one to accept.  Human rights apply only 
to humans, and until you and I throughout the world declare 
ourselves as such and organize that declaration so that wise and 
practical leaders can represent us as human beings, we can only 
expect less than human treatment in world affairs from our present 

The very first article is a tool of mighty power cutting through 
prejudice, dogma, artificial beliefs, and general ignorance like a giant 
scythe cuts through weeds.  For it is the expression of the Prime Law 
of Unity which binds all men as brothers both spiritually and 
naturally.  All the other articles flow from it.  It throws into bold 
relief all those who divide men artificially.  It says:  All men are born 
free and equal in dignity and rights;  they are endowed with reason 
and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of 

Here is no sectarianism, nor chauvinism.  First of all here is the 
affirmation of the spiritual truth that all men are directly connected 
with their divine source or origin through individual conscience.  This 
is the ontological approach to religion, that is, that each and every 
human being is immediately and intimately related to the Spirit or 
Deity, and can perceive that relationship intuitively without outside 
intervention.  In other words, it reaffirms Christ's words,  "The 
kingdom of God is within you,"  or Socrates' admonition to "Know 
thyself,"  or the Hindu Bhagavad Gita's constant references to the All 
Self in every man. Then this article affirms that all men are endowed 
with reason, or the ability to think and solve problems of physical 
survival and social relationships.  What is this but a clear go-ahead to 
organize in a reasonable manner the affairs of our common social 
community?  But how much reason is applied today in the political 
circles of the world?  How reasonable is this foolish national pride, 
this organized manufacture of lies and half-truth and artificially 
created hates between tribes of humans in the world community, 
this hypocrisy called diplomacy which any child could expose, and 
which wouldn't last a minute in a town meeting?  How much reason 
is there to areas of surplus food rotting on wharfs and railroad 
sidings and other areas of pitiful and unnecessary starvation, or 
periods when millions are unemployed, yet factories lay idle because 
it doesn't pay to produce?  It is needless to go on.  The facts are 
unlimited to demonstrate that not reason but utter foolishness 
actually governs our world community despite our most fervent 
aspirations and lip-service to ideals.
P. 30

But if men are reasonable and guided by conscience, it is clear that 
men in general have no representatives in the world area.  No one 
yet speaks for humanity in toto.  We, as a world's people, are 
inarticulate, inchoate even, because we are unorganized.  The  
Universal Declaration of Human Rights  recognizes this for it gives us 
the green light to organize a world electorate to elect such world 
representatives from our midst.  Article 21 (3) says:  The will of the 
people shall be the basis of the authority of government;  this shall 
be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be 
universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by 
equivalent free voting procedures.

There is no mention of what people. . .just the people.  That only 
means all the people there are.  Do you begin to see, however, how 
this One People is denied in the very council chambers of this so-
called world organization?  That the reality of human community 
includes not only all those nations and peoples of the UN but also 
Germans, Italians, Africans, Ceylonese, Japanese, Chinese, Rumanians, 
Bulgarians, and of course all stateless people and those under colonial 
domination?  In short, everybody?

We all belong to this One People whether we like it or not and 
despite our external differences.  Though I am an American, 
technically I am a stateless person, so I fit into the World's People 
category directly, with no intervening citizenship.  This is by no 
means a unique situation, but in fact quite common.  And that, while 
it might seem to be a sign of utter chaos and despair, actually is a 
condition of great hope.  In other words, there are millions like me 
with nothing to lose.

But what about our collective will.  Is there such a thing?  This is the 
most difficult thing I have experienced to make people believe. . .that 
in fact everyone wants just about the same things.  These are 
expressed usually by slogans such as world peace, universal 
wellbeing, and personal freedom.  But slogans like this have hidden 
other things.  So people have become skeptical and cynical and bitter.  
It is the disease of our generation.  But nonetheless, the collective 
will for such things exists and in greater quantity and power than 
any single man dreams.

If this is true, how then is it to be gathered, proclaimed, manifested, 
and secured?  The Universal Declaration in Article 28 gives us a clue.  
It says that:  "Everyone is entitled to the social and international 
order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this declaration 
can be fully realized."   In other words, social and international 
order, not anarchy, are conditions under which rights pertaining to 
all human beings alone can be secured.  Order of course means law 
and government.  International order means international law and 

Obviously, there is no such thing today.

Human rights and freedoms apply only to select few today.  Yet 
Article 2 states that:  "Everyone is entitled to the rights and 
freedoms set forth in this declaration, without distinctions of any 
kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other 
opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."   
This only affirms what any reasonable man and every mother knows 
from time immem-
P. 31

orial, that all men and women are indeed members of the same 
human community, and that subsequently there are no second-class 
world citizens.

No second-class world citizens!  Do you realize what that means?  It 
means that as well as being Greek, French, German, Russian, Indian, 
Chinese, Brazilian, Yugoslavian, Swedish, Italian, Malayan, Japanese, 
American or any other group, as well as being white, brown, black, 
red or yellow, as well as being an artisan or a craftsman, a merchant 
or a technician, a common worker or a king, a housewife or a queen, 
a national citizen or a stateless person, a man or a woman, a 
democrat or a republican, a Catholic or a Protestant, or Hindu, or 
Buddhist, or Moslem or Taoist or Jew, we are all united in world 
citizenship because we're all united in freedoms and human rights, as 
yet uncodified in world law.

There are other rights defined.  But these few mentioned are enough 
to go ahead full steam with the actual organization of our one 

If you agree with me up to this point-- and I have really said 
nothing very extraordinary, nothing new certainly, perhaps even 
things which are so obvious and simple that they don't bear 
repeating-- but if we are agreed at least in principle, let us be 
convinced as I am, from bitter and sometimes humiliating 
experience, that we must now help ourselves.  No one will hand us 
freedom and security on a silver platter.  No one can.  Who can 
exercise your reason or conscience for you?  Who can put them to 
work but you?  Each man and woman here is absolutely and solely 
responsible for his or her thoughts and actions regarding his or her 
personal welfare.  Let us first then secure ourselves deep within our 
own reason and conscience for only then will we be able to find a 
practical way to the wide glorious world of sovereign humanity.

In short, we must personally, each one of us, recognize ourselves as 
individually sovereign, that is, a world unto ourselves, an 
authority, sure, capable, self-motivated, self-contained, and self-
governed, a full awareness of that part of us which is conscience and 
its servant reason.  Let us realize fully that each one of us throughout 
the world, endowed with this very same conscience which links us all 
to the same Spirit or Origin, and reason, which links us all to each 
other, is in real fact then a world sovereign, and as such stands 
whole and free in the one community of men, above nations, 
sectional prides, narrow prejudices and jealousies, a World Patriot.

This is what I wish to affirm here tonight, world sovereignty.  As 
human beings, we are all world sovereigns, the social and physical 
popular expression being world citizens, and no nation or power is 
able to deny that sovereignty or to deprive us of one iota of it.

This alone is democracy, for it includes all.

I have gone through five years of intense personal and public 
experience since my renunciation in Paris, and my affirmation of 
world sovereignty here tonight has been reached after most careful 
and serious consideration.  It is not a gesture of childish impulse or 
maudlin sentiment:  it is not abstract idealism
P. 32

or fanatical necessity.  It is a simple and obvious fact recognized now 
by peoples and governments alike.  Further world sovereignty linked 
with world citizenship is at last that undefined concept which relates 
spiritual, social and physical fact together to make a totality of man.

I said that it is grounded on sound spiritual, social, and physical fact.  
What are these facts or Prime Laws which are recognized universally 
by peoples and institutions alike?  Well, I have already stated them 
here in many ways, but in brief they may be expressed as follows:

1.      There is but One Deity or Ideal, Goal, Vision, Absolute, Origin, 
Source, Mind, Spirit, Reality, Understanding, Wisdom, Truth, and so 
on, unitively conceived and intuitively, that is, by conscience, 
perceived, of which I am a living and integral part, as is all mankind;  

2.      There is but one world, which is ideologically or intellectually 
understood, as my and mankind's natural home despite social 
groupings such as tribal, communal, regional, geographical, cultural, 
historical, ancestral, lingual, or professional and which constitutes my 
total social environment or community;  and

3.      There is but one physical human family, which is instinctively 
felt by common fundamental needs and wants, despite color, race, 
sex, birth, property, economic or other physical status, and thus one 
common citizenship.

Further, I am convinced that the full recognition of these three 
fundamental or Prime Laws constitute a spiritual, social, and physical 
trinity, in that the first represents personal or individual freedom, 
the second, social or communal justice or fairness, and the third, 
physical security and well-being, upon which the rational 
organization of human society must be based for the increased 
happiness of all.

It is on these three laws that you and I and the rest of our fellow 
men and women can move together out of the foolish, wasteful, 
chaotic, poverty-stricken circumstances we find ourselves in today 
into the prosperity and happiness of a new world of complete and 
joyous humanity.

I have said tonight that we must help ourselves to peace, security 
and well-being.  I have said that our leaders were stuck and needed 
our help.  I have affirmed world sovereignty and world citizenship as 
a spiritual, social, and physical fact;  I have given the trinity of Prime 
Laws in confirmation of this fact.  I have shown that people 
everywhere are ready for peace and prosperity, that the world is in 
dire need of these two.  Then I have shown that only an international 
authority, a world brain, a supranational government can coordinate 
the immense diversity which is humanity, and make it live and 
breathe as it must if we, its coordinate parts, are to live and evolve.  
Further I have shown that the nations themselves, through the 
United Nations, have given We the People, the mandate to create this 
world government through the Universal Declaration of Human 

Here in this Town Hall in Ellsworth, Maine, in the sovereign United 
P. 33

of America, I, a world citizen, exist in a world anarchy.  I am no 
longer able to tolerate such a condition.  By the authority vested in 
me as a world sovereign, it is my duty and my responsibility to 
myself and to my humanity to hereby proclaim for myself a world 
government with full legal powers and prerogatives based on the 3 
Prime Laws of One God, One World, and one Mankind.  This 
government for the moment exists only in my person, but since all 
men are world citizens with full world sovereignty based on a full 
recognition of the 3 Prime Laws if they but affirm them, the 
proclamation of world government is everyman's right, privilege, and 

Presumptuous undertaking?  Not at all, for nothing less will serve us, 
and we must risk being called presumptuous by narrow minds and 
closed hearts.  I will answer that all new-borns are presumptuous in 
their demands for sustenance and attention and I am no exception.  
The world is certainly filled with wiser and better men, and I am the 
first to admit personal failings.  But that confession doesn't alter my 
need.  A world government is here born and if there are wiser and 
better men, let them come forward challenged by its obvious failings 
and helplessness.  Let humanity have their services by all means.  
Let the spiritual leaders and Gurus, the World Teachers come from 
their ashrams, their meditative retreats and monastic centers in this 
grave hour of our common need, and give us their moral counsel and 
guidance.  Let them breathe into this newly born government, given 
life by one insignificant man-in-the-street, the spiritual substance it 
must have if it is to prosper and serve men wisely.

It must have material sustenance as well if it is to grow in health, 
substantial physical nourishment.  In fact, ideally, it must have all 
the resources of our common Mother Earth if it is to benefit all the 
citizens thereon;  and a world government by definition excludes no 
one from its benefits.  Materially speaking, our planet and our 
human community is like a giant factory supplying all the material 
needs to all who live at once on it and in it.  And the sooner we short 
circuit the road that is travelled by millions daily to satisfy the 
world's material needs, the sooner we will all have more leisure and 
means for recreation, whether social, intellectual, artistic, or physical.  
Obviously the less effort we give to the means of life, the more time 
and energy we have to enjoy the ends of life, according to our 
individual interpretation.  So our scientists and technicians carry the 
banner of progress for the human race, as they lighten the means 
and increase our opportunity to enjoy the ends.

Thus to solve the problem of managing our common factory for the 
mutual benefit of all, the most able scientists, technicians, managers, 
and administrators must come forward to give us their services. 

Without this scientific management on the physical level of human 
activity, gross and criminal waste, inefficiency, giant unrests between 
workers leading to class struggles, bitter divisions between 
management and labour, and finally, when the national politicians 
can no longer govern the two opposed factions, the
P. 34

explosion of international war in the anarchic areas, leading to all the 
plagues of the uncoordinated or idiot man referred to earlier.  In 
short, no sane business man would or could run his organization for a 
minute the way our world factory is run without going bankrupt.

Already many cooperative communities and industries exist, as well 
as large corporations in which complete coordination or cooperation 
plus scientific management is the guiding principle.  The higher the 
degree of coordination by scientific management, the more successful 
the business.  These understand fully the tremendous benefits which 
accrue to each member of a corporate or cooperative body.  Full 
material protection within the corporate body is guaranteed.  The 
largest corporate body of course, though still utterly uncoordinated, 
is the human species itself, and like the human body, only thrives in 
health and happiness when its various component parts are 
coordinated and working in harmony with its brain and spirit.

Therefore the third Prime Law of One physical human family must 
equate integrally with the first and second unitive laws.  One for all 
and all for one must be the prime basis for a World Citizen's 
economy.  This economy must evolve without disturbing one present 
law, but in fact utilizing certain economic laws now existent in every 
country for its prerogatives.  Thus a World Citizen's Corporation must 
come into being which has as its purpose the complete integration 
and coordination of all the physical resources, means of production, 
and labor of the entire planet, for the direct benefit of all the 
consumers thereon, which excludes no one.  Such a one world 
consumer's cooperative, linked to no politics or private interests 
because of its very inclusive nature, would allow each and every 
working world citizen to benefit directly from his or her labor and 
the labor of his or her neighbor throughout the total world 
community.  But further, it would at last give complete material 
security to those who were unable to work due either to age or 
physical disability.  It would eventually link up all existent 
cooperative and corporate endeavors, all specialized 
nongovernmental world agencies now paralyzed due to national and 
competitive tensions, to one scientifically but democratically-elected 
World Parliament or Corporate Congress whose sole duty would be to 
run our world factory efficiently and harmoniously for the benefit of 
all the producers and consumers therein.

The World Government here proclaimed and open to all, with 
undertake to initiate such a World Citizen's Corporation as its proper 
corollary on the physical or economic level of human activity.

For moral and physical support of this endeavor, it calls upon the 
mothers of the world, who are so intimately connected with the 
physical continuance and well-being of the human race.  If men be in 
fact World Citizens, so every mother is a World Mother since her 
child is born first into the Family of Man itself.  And so, they are the 
great heart of humanity, the well of infinite compassion, love and 
pity that nurtures us from our very birth.  They are the breast of 
P. 35

and without their blessing and heartfelt support, we will remain in 
the realm of idle words and vain idealism.

Then we call to the common citizenry from which we have come, to 
our brothers in the world community.  We call them in all corners of 
the globe, in every marketplace, in every secluded retreat, and from 
all walks of life.  We call to the reason and conscience which we 
know to be a part of every man.  In the name of Humanity of which 
he is an integral and valuable unit, we ask him to identify himself, 
not only as a citizen of his own hearth, his local community, his 
region, and his nation, but also as a citizen of the entire world as his 
natural and fundamental right as well as duty.  Until we do this and 
begin to work together, we will continue to deserve the slaveries, 
both spiritual and economic we today endure.  In short, we dare to 
proclaim mankind's total existence as the highest allegiance and the 
most noble and elevating duty of its separate component parts or 

And in Humanity's name, in which any reasonable man may speak 
without fear, I, a World Sovereign, hereby claim the territory of the 
entire earth as the proper home and the rightful possession of all 
mankind.  As an actual symbol of that ownership, and for the now 
existent World government, I claim here in the soil of my birth, the 
dot of land on which I now stand, as World Territory.  Let it be 
henceforth known as World Citizen's Point, and marked only as 68 
Degrees 25' 30" Longitude, 44 Degrees 32' 30" Latitude.

Let all World Citizens accept this point as a territorial symbol of their 
highest allegiance, whereas this World Citizen claims it as the only 
legal territory within the continental limits of the United States of 
America whereon he can reside.

As I stand before you here, no national law covers my very 
existence.  Since that day when I was brought back into France from 
the United Nations, I have lived in five fully sovereign nations, yet 
not one of those nations was able to represent me legally.  But 
further, merely to handle me physically, they were all obliged to 
violate their own national laws.  The most recent violation occurred 
when the U.S. Immigration authorities admitted me to this country 
last July 27th, frankly confessing to me at the time that no law 
covered my entry since I was not a U.S. citizen, not an immigrant, not 
a returning resident alien, and not a visitor, which four categories are 
the only lawful means of entering and residing in the United States.

According to the laws of this land, therefore, I am non-existent, a 
political and legal non-entity.  Yet here I stand, in the City Hall of 
Ellsworth, a respectable community, in a conservative stronghold of 
the United States of America, the strongest power in the entire 
world, and though my very existence here calls into fundamental 
question that sovereign government, I remain untouched and 
unharmed.  Just as the Immigration authorities were unable to 
refuse me though legally they were obliged to, so the law officer 
standing in the rear of this hall though legally obliged to arrest me 
because technically I am an illegal person, is unable
P. 36

to do so because my authority as a sovereign entity unto myself is 
manifestly greater than his as a representative of the sovereign 
nation.  This does not mean that I must not obey reasonable laws of 
conduct, and that if I disobey them, I will not be arrested by this 
same officer.  It means only that the State as such is the servant of 
the sovereign individual, which is the basic principle of democracy, 
and when the individual, according to his reason and conscience, 
secedes from the State because he considers it no longer able to 
protect him and yet give him the freedom he requires, the State 
must follow him as his very shadow, because eventually his fellow 
human beings and neighbors, also individually sovereign and 
democratic, as well as the servants of the State itself, will recognize 
him as the fundamental integer upon which a greater and more 
inclusive State must be built if the whole community is to thrive.

Thus, as the territorial cornerstone of that Greater State, this dot I 
claim as the only piece of legal land on which I am now able to 

A point has no dimensions however, and therefore no physical 
existence, so neither can I actually live here, nor can the United 
States government claim it as national territory.  Further, it having 
no physical existence, my claim needs no confirmation on the part of 
the national authorities as such, but only recognition from citizens 
throughout the world.

As a world sovereign, existing legally only in a worldly sense, I am 
able to give this point a legal existence based on the three Prime 
Laws of Mankind.  So be it.  Now every national citizen throughout 
the world is able to make a valid extension of his loyalty to the world 
community through this legal world territory without at the same 
time renouncing any humanitarian local or national responsibilities 
which are a part of the Whole.  World citizenship is not incompatible 
with lower levels of citizenship so long as the duties and 
responsibilities of those citizenships reflect that of the greater.

At this moment, this is the only neutral but inclusive government in 
existence.  It has no foreign policy, no political parties, indeed no 
politics even, no army, navy or air force, though civil armies, navies 
and air forces can perform many humanitarian duties once the threat 
of war is removed, no axes to grind, no special interests to protect, 
and no private profits to make.  Its door is open to all and will be 
closed to none.  With the firm guidance of a representative council of 
the World's Teachers and the World's Mothers, this government will 
be able to command the services of the most capable and farsighted 
men in order that humanity might be best served, and that positions 
of public responsibility not be usurped by lesser men.  Methods of 
just selection can easily be incorporated into a World Constitution or 
Charter whereby humanity's real leaders may rise to the top without 
fear and without hindrance.  Thus would evolve a World Parliament 
or Corporate Congress gradually to replace in the public mind the 
absolute nationalistic sovereignties of today.  Through a World 
Citizen's Corporation, problems of food, shelter, clothing, health, 
education, labor, production, distribution, management
P. 37

and the like will be dealt with as a whole, scientifically and 
cooperatively.  A unified world currency will evolve in due course 
based no doubt on a labor value rather than the unrealistic gathering 
and stockpiling of inert metal by  separate nation-states.

The completing of mankind, so long talked about by philosophers and 
spiritual leaders, so long dreamed of by the persecuted down the 
ages, is at hand.  It is started here tonight.  A world government 
exists. . .if only in one common man and having but one dot of 
territory.  No longer need we collectively hesitate.  No longer need 
we argue about how long it will take, or whether the neighbor will 
come in.  This neighbor is in, and it but remains for everyone to 
recognize and apply his own inness, or oneness.

The remaining task therefore is but a cleaning up one, a simple 
duplication.  The main job is over, that of completing the microcosm.  
Each microcosm completed brings the macrocosm that much nearer 
completion.  Borrow if you wish this global vision and determination.  
But do not be indifferent to your own survival and happiness.  
Examine these ideas and words with the searing blade of your own 
conscience and reason.  They will stand even then.  And do not 
hesitate for lack of experience.  This work is unprecedented in these 
modern terms.  Thus we are all youths in this task.  But experience 
can only be gained by living our goal from the outset, by being 
members of the world community.  And if we stumble, falter, even 
fall, there are others to carry on, for the reality of Man's Unity is a 
truth that cannot die.

I am a world sovereign. . .a forefather of the Human Race.  Its 
government is here proclaimed.

Brothers and sisters, fellow World Citizens, join me in this glorious 

Return to World Government documents page

Home Definitions Forms Documents
World Citizen Referendum World Syntegrity Project

Copyright (c) 1997 World Service Authority. All rights reserved.
If you would like to send mail to World Service Authority,
please use this address:

The World Service Authority, and the human-in-globe logo are
service marks or registered service marks of the World
Service Authority throughout the world.