Because it is and was intended to be the common wealth¹ (coming from the ancient word 'commonweal' which means 'for the common good') of the citizens of the world, sharing is an inherent component of the Servant Nation .

As the first attempt to constitute this nation took place in 1956, the prevailing paradigm was still one dominated by ideas which can be related to prevalent concepts of management such as those emanating from Taylor and Fayol. These were predominantly hierarchical concepts where decision making was delegated to managers who felt that functions like controlling and commanding were prime functions of management.

Let us consider a more modern approach, based on the fact that in the meantime we have a much more highly educated populous than fifty years ago and have developed our understanding if not our practice of democratic organization. Taking the modern models of management, commanding is certainly no longer considered to be appropriate. Instead, one talks of empowered teams of individuals making decisions at the lowest possible level of the organization.

Applying this modern paradigm to the organization of a world people, we could imagine groups of individuals taking responsibility for and receiving recognition for particular areas of serving mankind (I have intentionally avoided the word 'government' in this context).

Using modern communication methods, this could become a platform where we could share in the greatest experiment of all time - building a serving world people. Here, blame would have no place, only the desire to experiment and share ideas in an objective yet caring way.

The only guidelines in this adventure would be the universal principles, that no-one is an enemy, no-one is foreign, service to all and to work for Peace, Equity and Justice.

The advantage of this methodology is that it opens the way to all to bring in their special expertise and interests without the need for a complicated and bureaucratic hierarchy. It can grow organically and spread and does not distract from other worthy initiatives. It underlines the prime purpose which is nation-building rather than the furtherance of organizational objectives. The partakers purely enhance their strength of servant nationhood.

The outcomes of any empirical experiment should be open-ended. We do not know what the results of our experiments will be in advance, we can only hope that they will be for the ultimate benefit of mankind and contribute to a world order based on peace and the common good.

With these thoughts and hopes in mind, I wish everybody a year of progress for mankind and this wonderful planet for 2007.

Steve

1Some definitions taken from Merriam Webster Dictionary:

1 archaic : COMMONWEAL
2 : a nation, state, or other political unit: as a : one founded on law and united by compact or tacit agreement of the people for the common good b : one in which supreme authority is vested in the people c : REPUBLIC

Perhaps you would like to comment on this paper below:

15-01-2007, 18:49	Steve
Thankyou also Doug. I have been having a lot of exchanges with Hugh Steadman and I am feeling very sympathetic towards the Simpol idea. I would encourage all Mondcivitans and others to study this idea also and to take part. Also, those who do not yet feel able to take on the full obligations of Servant-Nationhood might find Simpol a useful first step. At the same time, Simpolians wanting to deepen their commitment to the service of mankind might like to consider getting involved in the continual development of this Mondcivitan Servant Nation.

15-01-2007, 18:45	Steve
I am very pleased that you have commented here, Garry. I do remember hearing of some differences of approach between yourself and Hugh. As you can tell, it is important to me that all of us who want to work for peace find peaceful ways to work. As none of us or our movements can claim to have that kind of success which would create a mass movement towards that goal, we are forced to take a humble stance in my opinion. You will observe that I am trying to keep an open mind on this and any future form things may take. History has a weird way of riding roughshod over the plans of men. The Servant Nation idea comes partly from a different philosophical basis that the pure World Government movement, I think. This Messianic basis is what appeals and appealed to many. For me, world citizenship as such is the natural state of all humans on this planet and I see no need to register something that exists anyway. In fact, I am not even sure that the Mondcivitan practice of having registered citizens is or was the right way to go. It is more about nationhood than about citizenship. Many of us in the late 70's conveyed these thoughts to Hugh. The name remains but I think our emphasis should be on servant nationhood and personal and corporate living in accordance with our principles. Whether this should move on to some formal nationality we will see. Our previous experience showed that, had we been more successful, would have very quickly developed into a nation state. Within this framework, I see no problem with a Mondcivitan also being registered with your organisation or any other which is not in conflict with the principles, in fact, if it meets the principle 'And to work for peace' they should be encouraged to do so. We are therefore not intending to 'take a first step to world government' but to build a Servant Nation (there could be more than one) dedicated to the service of mankind and all that entails. I hope that clarifies my current thinking and that we can work together in a cooperative spirit of brotherhood - regardless of what may have happened in the past.

06-01-2007, 4:20	Doug Everingham dnevrghm -at- powerup -dot- co -dot- au
'Government' is from Latin gubernator (steersman} from Greek kubernao (steer). It need not iomply that steering or management is superior to other roles of travelers joined in a formal process. The Sociocratisch Centrum is one example of how people are developing stakeholder-governmend projects with consensus rather than politically competitive control. An example starting to lever competitive governments towards consensus is ther International Simultaneous Policy Organization www.simpol.org

05-01-2007, 17:58	Garry Davis/worldlaw -at- globalnetisp dot net
Greetings Steve, As you may recall Hugh and I have had our differences through the years about "servant nation" and "world government." With regard to the claim of world citizenship by the individual ?a choice which I am sure you support?given the manifestly interdependence of the world community of humans, world government, whether microcosmically or macrocosmically, is the self-evident corollary. Your "intentional avoidance" of the word "government" bespeaks your fear to indict the nation-state system itself, the exclusivity of which perpetuates the breeding-ground of war (example, the impotent United Nations) of international anarchy. The consciousness of humanity is today a given aided by our common genetic code and conceptual value construct. That we, as individuals partake of and add to this collective consciousness is also a given and increasingly recognized. Emery Reves in 1945 wrote that "There is no first step to world government; world government ios the first step." (Anatomy of Peace). We, who are registered citizens of the 53-year-old World Government of World Citizens, (our sovereign political choice re Art. 21[3], UDHR,) have crossed the political line between nation-statehood and the actual viable world community. We invite herewith your active participation as fellow citizens of the world.

The Hugh & Helene Schonfield World Service Trust This site is being provided by okova.com - the intuitive mobile web building system