On the Nature & Origin of Citizenship; Truth vs Ignorance

No one comes into this world with an understanding of the nature of citizenship, but they do come quickly to an understanding of the nature of belonging because they know with every fiber of their being that they belong to or with their mother.

Belonging, or natural attachment, is the root of everything in all social groups.  Without it no group would exist because no one would belong to or with anyone else.  Everyone would be a solitary individual.  Families could not exist.  Tribes could not exist.  Societies, countries, and nations could not exist because no one would have any connection to anyone else.  Everyone would be a foreigner to everyone.  But even the reality of human beings could not exist either because it springs from two things which cannot exist without belonging, and they are marriage and pro-creation.

Belonging is the glue that holds all thing together, and that glue goes by the name of  “citizenship” in the context of nations.  Nations are societies held together by a natural glue and that glue is the origin of the connection between the people.  In clear examples like Korea and Japan, that glue is familial, i.e., blood, -as it also is with all aboriginal tribes.

All natural groups increase in size not via the accretion of conquest but via births to female members at a rate greater than the death rate.  Their children are new members of their group and naturally belong to it from birth .  That belonging is something so primal and universal that it has never been questioned by any government that ever existed.  It is the glue that holds the government together, and the basis of its “rights” over its citizens.  After all, if one does not belong to the group that the government rules, then it has no intrinsic authority over such a one since they would be an outsider and belong to another group.

What no one is born understanding is that one belongs to their parents, their clan, their tribe, their society, and their country & nation naturally and without any intervention or permission of government.  Belonging is automatic because it is natural.  It is transmitted from parents to their children just as life itself is transmitted.

And that is one of the terms that governments use in describing natural membership.  Transmitted, conveyed, passed down, inherited.  Those terms define the actual nature of natural national membership.  In many countries, those described by those terms constitute over 99% of the population, but in immigrant-rich nations that figure might be a low as 97% because they allow membership that is not natural but is merely legal.

Outsiders are allowed, permitted, i.e., given membership regardless of being outsiders not connected to the natural members of the group.  They then possess legal membership or citizenship.  They can point to a statute or high court opinion, constitutional provision or oath of Allegiance & Renunciation that is the basis and origin of their inclusion in the nation.  Natural citizens cannot because no such thing exists since no such thing was ever needed.

Transmission or conveyance by nature requires only the knowledge of the government, (-knowing the fact of a birth to its members) but not its permission in order for membership to attach.  Membership is not via law but via life.  Just as biological nature is transmitted from the parents, so also is their political nature.  Membership is via blood and not via birth within borders.

Those whose membership (the 1-3%) is dependent on where they were born (rather than to whom they were born) have foreign citizenship conveyed to them naturally.  Their new American citizenship is conveyed to them legally, by the imposition of law, even if it begins when they are born within the boundaries of the nation’s borders.

It begins for those born of aliens when they exit the womb within the sovereign borders of the United States but only if those aliens are present in the USA via its granting of permission for permanent residency, -the issuance of a Green Card.*

Those born of aliens who are in the U.S. illegally or only temporarily via a Visa card are not born as members of the nation by its actual law because they are not born subject to the full jurisdiction of the government.  That is also why native-born children of foreign ministers and (formerly) Native Americans are (were) not acknowledged as being U.S. citizens by birth on U.S. soil.

Their fathers were not subject to the full authority of the American government and thus no such subjection could be  transmitted or conveyed to or inherited by their child.  Full subjection is required in order for citizenship to be allowed.  That is the requirement of the 14th Amendment as well as its construence by the Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark, 1898.

Only children of immigrants are granted the gift of American citizenship, –not the children of criminals and transients.  That is the truth of the matter but that truth is not known to the U.S. government because group-think constitutes the consensus, status quo view established as a consequence of the high court opinion when the then Attorney General decided to illegitimately extend the court’s holding to every baby born in America except the children of foreign ambassadors.  But his understanding of the nature of nationality was deeply flawed because of the lingering influence of the rejected British system of common law subjectship.

Under the British system, it did not matter whether or not one’s foreign parents were on British soil for a decade or for a day.  Their baby born on the King’s soil belonged to him as his subject for life.  Our founding fathers abolished such authority over free people and returned to a sane and reasonable and justifiable system.

Under the system followed by the American government, if one was a subject of a foreign power then one could not be an American, nor could their children, -but the individual States could and did continue with the practice of ascribing their citizenship to the native-birth children of their valued immigrants.  Thus there existed an unacknowledged divergence between the State governments and the federal government.  Both had their own and conflicting rule for the legal provision of citizenship to children of foreigners.

The national government had the international arena to contend with while the States did not and thus had no reason to be concerned with it.  But neither State nor national governments held the view that they could conscript foreign visitors or guests into their militias and make them fight against their own government (such as Great Britain and France) nor did they hold that they had the authority to accuse and convict foreigners of the crime of treason.

Only Americans and permanent immigrants could be guilty of treason because it requires that one be a member of American society and not be a foreigner still fully subject to his own homeland’s government as all visitors and guests remain since their home is still where it was before their trip to the USA and they remain as members of that country and nation.

They are subject to civil laws in America but not to the sovereign authority that its government can and does exercise over its citizens and immigrants.  It can exercise that authority because such persons belong to the country and are not subject to the sovereign authority of a foreign government.

So the truth about citizenship is unknown even to this day, and few comprehend its nature and origin.  When the human mind turns to the subject it does so from the orientation of considering that which is the legal position of the government, and what has been the opinion of those who came before them, but for some 97% of American citizens, that perspective is a huge mistake since the government is essentially irrelevant to natural belonging.  It exists regardless of the existence of the government, its laws and legal opinions.

Understand this; no government that has ever existed has ever mandated that national membership is not determined by blood relationship.  No government has ever conceived of imposing a statute that de-legitimized natural membership.  All governments have always recognized natural membership as conveyed from parents to children.  Children of members are the next generation of members and it is they who perpetuate the nation and the government.  The government does not need to legitimize them.  Rather, they need to legitimize the government via their consent since they are the actual sovereigns, and the ruling plutocrats are not.

But ignorance of the origin and nature of citizenship results in thinking that is almost the opposite of the reality.  The sad situation can be illuminated via an analogy.  Suppose that in a large tribe, a stork actually flew in with a baby wrapped in a blanket.  A legend would be born and parents would use it to avoid the real explanation of where babies actually come from.

Now suppose that the stork with a baby appeared every year instead of just the one time.  It could then be said to children that babies actually do come from storks and they would see that not as a strange story but as a fact because they remain in the dark about the truth.  Well just such a situation is the one we face regarding views about citizenship.

We are raised to conceive of citizenship as coming from the stork of government and not from natural transmission because it does come from government for that small percentage born of aliens.  We believe the fairy tale that is oblivious as to how human reality actually works, -how it begins and grows from pro-creation, birth, and belonging.  We think that we were given our national membership based on our fantastic good fortune of winning the national membership lottery by being born on U.S. soil.  But the truth remains hidden from us just as the truth about babies would remain hidden from the tribe’s children.

Just as the truth about sex comes as a shock to many children, so the truth about citizenship may come as a surprise to many citizens who have lived like all of us have lived… in the absence of the truth.  It does not matter much how highly educated a person is, including educated in Law School because the ignorance of the truth is nearly universal.

But the truth is that government rules have nothing whatsoever to do with one’s national membership unless one was born of outsiders or born abroad.  Then government has everything to do with one’s inclusion into the national family.  Then the alien-born must conform to the rules, regulations and opinions of government’s statutes and authorities.  But if one was born being a natural citizen, (the 97%) then all of that is irrelevant except to the extent needed to validate the foreign birth of an American couple’s child.  The government cannot recognize the citizenship of a child that it does not know exists.

They, once birth and paternity are established, are automatically members, (-like every natural member of every nation that has not allowed the violation natural law) -and were predestined to be so from conception.

Understand this, no elected government of the People has ever had a statute that declared that children of its members, based on some arbitrary criteria such as place-of-birth, were not also members but instead were aliens.  In fact, it’s safe to assume that no government of any type has ever had such a law.  It would be inconceivably unnatural.  It would be in complete violation of the primal right of belonging.  And yet… many Americans today hold to just such a view.  Mario Apuzzo, Esq. is perhaps the leader of the pack.

His position, his misconception, his ideology and philosophical doctrine is that natural born children of American parents are aliens regardless of the fact that the founding fathers who were the framers of the Constitution and/ or members of the first Congress expressly mandated that foreign-born Americans are to be understood to be “natural born citizens”.  Not simply citizens, but presidency-eligible “natural born citizens” as is required by the Constitution in order to wield the power of the office of President and Commander-in-Chief.

They imposed that mandate in the first naturalization act of the new government (1790).  What that meant was that natural citizenship is not transmitted by some law or government rule but by the blood of parents.  They thereby established as the rule and law of the United States the natural system of recognition of membership and national belonging as something that is passed from generation to generation naturally and not via the gracious permission of the government oligarchy and its laws.

But religiously zealous devotion to a bastardized idea of national belonging grips the mind of many and won’t let go because some souls hold a reverence and worship of “American soil” that is deeply patriotic, -elevating it almost to a quasi-divine thing, all while self-blinded to the simple truth about the real basis of belong. That is understandable if you have no children and did not have any love for your parents.  Why give them credit for your precious United States citizenship when you prefer to not give them credit for anything?  It seems that Mario is as childless as yours truly and perhaps was not very fond of his parents either.  He is bound by a deep subconscious motivation that neither he nor I understand.  Reason and facts cannot remove the bonds that his mind is bound by as I’ve discovered a hundred times over.  His nativist religion creates a blind spot that he is too blind to acknowledge.

For all those like him, the simple truth is too close to their eyes for them to be able to focus on it.  It is the same basis as their membership in their own parents’ family and their children’s membership in theirs.  They are members by nature and not members by law.  Adopted children, like naturalized immigrants, are members by law and not by nature.  But natural parents are members by Nature and not members by law because no such law was ever needed nor written.

“The Law of Nature and Nature’s God” is written in our DNA and it is a law of natural belonging which is not dependent on the permission of government or written laws because it precedes and supersedes the authority of elected lawmakers.

By that fact, Barack Obama is not, and can never be, a natural born citizen and one who is therefore eligible to serve in the one restricted office in America, -the office of the President.  But all who were born of American parents (plural) are eligible because they were born as natural citizens.  They are citizens by nature and not by natural-ization.  They do not need to re-made via natural-ization into fictional natural citizens.  They are born with American political DNA and it is recognized by every nation on Earth.

But those born of one or both foreign parents are not.  They are unnatural political hybrids, -crossbreeds, or half-bloods, -so to speak.  Their legal citizenship, even though possessed from the first day of their entrance onto American soil via birth within her borders, is from a different universe than that of natural citizens, and thus they can never be eligible to serve as President.  But their children can.

Barack Obama is not such a child because his father was not a member of American society, -was not a domiciled permanent-resident Green Card holding immigrant but was merely a temporary guest of the government allowed in on a one-year student Visa.  He remained subject to the British government, -“along with his children” per the British Nationality Act of 1948, -as was openly stated on Obama’s campaign website in 2008.

Why would his people state something that clearly revealed him to not be a natural citizen of the United States?  Because of the universal ignorance of what constitutes presidential eligibility.  He relied on that ignorance by referring to himself as a native-born American, but the location of his birth is irrelevant to the presidency.

A natural citizen can be born anywhere in the universe and still qualify to be President as long as he or she meets the other two requirements (35 years of age and 14 years of residency).  But native-birth has come to be an imitation of the truth about national belonging, an artificial substitute.  Like an artificial sweetener or flavor.  They are similar to the real thing but they are not the real thing.  Diet Coke is not the real thing and the difference can be detected immediately by the taste buds.

What can’t be detected is artificial drugs given during a drug trial.  One group gets the real thing while another gets a placebo.  One is something and the other is nothing.  Obama is a placebo President.  He looks just like a real President, but he does not act on the body politic the way a real American would.  Actually, he’s worse than a placebo, because a placebo will do no harm, and might even do some good thanks to psychological effects, but Obama is more like a poison pill that one takes thinking they are getting a beneficial medication when in fact they are being poisoned.

Let see… which is better… taking a new natural but experimental antibiotic or taking an arsenic tablet?  Obama has introduced socialist authoritarian arsenic into American society and the effect of that poison will be felt in the economy and individual lives unless his executive orders strangling private businesses, and religious groups and individuals, are rescinded, -which he won’t do, -in addition to the manifold increases in the cost of health care and the national debt.

The American public is like a disabled elderly patient who is being slowly poisoned by her guardian and caretaker.  If the poisoning is not stopped, our republic, as we know it, will cease to exist as it will have suffered a frightful, painful, and untimely death.

by Adrien Nash  November 2014  obama–nation.com

*(-a Green Card such as Barack Obama required and received when he returned to Hawaii at 10 years of age, lacking a birth certificate from any American State, after living in Indonesia for four years as the Indonesian son of his adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro.  That explains his greater concern for the “dreamers” who are not citizens even though they are “Americans”like him, -as apposed to members of his own “race” whose well-being he has completely ignored.)


About arnash
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.” - Mark Twain - Politicians and diapers - change 'em often, for the same reason. "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." Ronald Reagan "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley, Jr. “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell The people are the masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it. Abraham Lincoln “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison”.

3 Responses to On the Nature & Origin of Citizenship; Truth vs Ignorance

  1. davidfarrard says:

    Hi Arron.

    I have just run across some of Thomas J. DiLorenzo work: “Until You Understand Your United States Citizenship”, or see his video” “Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution”?

    What do you think?

    ex animo

    • arnash says:

      Thanks for the links. I’ve now read them both and found they are very enlightening. The US citizenship exposition is somewhat seriously flawed, although it contains important insights and facts. But it’s central premise is inaccurate regarding the authority of Congress.

      It claims that Congress can pass any legislation it chooses as long as it is understood to apply only to the territories and citizens of the federal government, but such a view is disproven by the Constitution itself. When it states: “Congress shall pass no law…” it is not followed by any kind of “except regarding governance within its own federal jurisdiction”.
      All of the protections of the Bill of Rights are similar and are plainly written to protect “the People” from federal authority, -meaning all people.

      What is most fascinating about the exposition is the mention of the total disconnection of the Amish people from the government. It’s like they are in their own semi-sovereign universe, like the native Americans once were. I’ll want to learn more about their situation and independence because it appears to be rooted in a prior unalienable rights that are superior to the authority of government, and that is an area which is the subject of my final exposition, part two of which I have yet to write.
      It will continue with the task of showing that nationality, -tribal and national membership, are before, beyond, and beneath (underlying) the authority of man-made rules of government, making natural “citizenship” inviolable, untouchable, and beyond the constituted authority of legislative bodies. Like the authority of judges, it cannot be judged or legislated since it precedes the authority of the legislature.

      • davidfarrar says:

        Thanks for the heads up. I will re-read that section, but on its face, I would agree with your assessment.

        Thank you.

        ex animo

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: