Here Is The Actual State of the Union — Such As It Is, It Is Not 

January 14, 2016 in Columnists, Je Suis Spike, News by RBN Staff

By Je Suis Spike

Bennington Battle Flag Replica, San Francisco City Hall (Wikipedia)

What does that mean, State of the Union? Well the President is required to periodically report to Congress on the state- or the condition- of the Union; delivered annually, it’s become not much more than a free commercial for the President who, it seems, feels the need to tell us what sort of fantasies occupy him and how far from reality his understanding of the world has drifted.

The President’s fantasies aside, the whole exercise is not unlike my describing to you the stable in which I keep my unicorn. UNIcOrN? They don’t exist. Neither is there a UNION for the President to describe.

You see, the united states of America, at the beginning, were (not was) sovereign nation-states, that is to say that they were independent from each other, not unlike 13 houses on a block that are individually owned, controlled and occupied. If the owners of those 13 houses determine they would like to form some manner of a union for mutual benefit without giving up ownership or control of their homes this would be similar to what the union once was and was supposed to be and should still be, but is not.

If, however, the owners of those 13 houses are cheated out of the ownership of them by unscrupulous lawyer-type-tyrants who then dictate the behaviors that may and may not be exercised within those houses, that situation cannot be considered a union because a union is individuals banding together for mutual benefit, not overlords dictating acceptable behavior. These 13 houses are no longer individual though united, but are amalgamated and one entity, much like 13 snowballs mashed into one large snowball is individuality lost.

As evidence that the states were once sovereign and independent from each other, I would offer the Treaty of Paris of 1783 which formally ended what we call the Revolutionary War. In the treaty, he whom we call King George the III is called by more appellations than Apollo Creed. He is called “…the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch-treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire…” Holy Roman Empire? Yep, Holy Roman Empire. Well with whom did the prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire enter into treaty to end the war? The Treaty continues:

Article 1st: His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states…”

So whose word are you going to take in the matter of what the united states of America is to be, union or mash? Shall we trust Barack Obama who seems to fantasize himself king of all he surveys today? Or shall we trust the king who (metaphorically) knelt before the free sovereign and independent [nation-] states at their formation, they having gained independence by war from the Holy Roman Empire?

I know not what choice you would make, but make mine freedom, independence and the sovereignty of several nation-states.
Je Suis Spike