A Sovereign Shield: What the Swiss Canton Model Can Teach American State Assemblies

 

Empowering Communities to Safeguard Borders, Infrastructure, and Resources in Times of Crisis

 The Swiss Canton model is highly admired for its decentralization and community-driven approach to protecting cantons from natural and manmade catastrophes. This model offers valuable lessons for American State Assemblies, particularly on how to organize and maintain State Defense Forces (SDFs) to safeguard borders, infrastructure, and vital resources. While nearly half of U.S. states no longer maintain sovereign defense forces, Switzerland’s commitment to local control and participatory citizen defense offers a realistic blueprint for eliminating this deficit. Moreover, the Swiss approach provides insights for other foreign State Assemblies operating upon Land and Soil Jurisdiction who are just beginning to establish their own defense systems.

 

The Swiss Way of Border and Community Defense

Switzerland’s Canton method rests on empowering local communities to take responsibility for their own defense, with the Federation providing coordination and support. Each canton has autonomy to prepare for its specific hazards—ranging from avalanches in mountainous regions to floods in river basins. This decentralized governance ensures disaster preparation and response are tailored to local circumstances while remaining organized at the national level.

 Key elements of Switzerland's strategy include:

1. Mandatory Citizen Participation:
   Switzerland requires all able-bodied citizens to serve the nation through compulsory service in its militia system. This ensures that every individual is prepared for disaster relief, infrastructure repair, and border defense.
2. Civil Protection System:
   The Swiss Civil Protection system integrates five major services—police, fire brigades, medical services, technical services, and civil defense—into a functional emergency response framework that operates at both cantonal and federal levels.
3. Infrastructure Resilience:
   Cantons invest heavily in protective measures such as avalanche barriers, flood defense systems, and resilient transport networks designed to withstand disasters.
4. Border Defense as a Community Responsibility:
   Switzerland’s decentralized militia system allows cantons to actively engage in defending their borders while ensuring regional independence. This arrangement underscores the belief that local communities are best equipped to understand and resolve their unique security challenges.
5. Water Resource Management:
   Water excavation, collection, and distribution are critical tasks during crises. Switzerland prioritizes sustainable water management by ensuring clean water is accessible even during emergencies. Cantons oversee systems that collect water safely, store it effectively, and distribute it efficiently to communities—a vital component of disaster resilience.

 

The Case for State Defense Forces in America

Unlike Switzerland—where every canton possesses resources for self-protection and disaster relief—nearly half of American states no longer maintain independent State Defense Forces (SDFs). These forces—distinct from the Army National Guard—are essential sovereign assets that allow states to protect their borders, infrastructure, and citizens without relying on federal resources.

Historically, SDFs served as a cornerstone of state sovereignty by providing locally controlled mechanisms for responding to emergencies, defending borders, and preserving public order. However, many states have disbanded these forces due to budget constraints or shifting political priorities. This leaves significant gaps in local preparedness during crises.

Restoring SDFs would empower American State Assemblies to regain control over border defense operations while addressing critical needs such as disaster relief and infrastructure protection.

 

Swiss Solutions for American Challenges

The Swiss Canton model offers practical solutions that American State Assemblies—and other foreign assemblies operating on Land and Soil Jurisdiction—can adopt when establishing or revitalizing their own SDFs:

1. Decentralized Governance:
   Just as Swiss cantons manage disaster preparedness strategies tailored to local risks, American states could empower their assemblies to oversee SDFs with a focus on regional challenges such as border security or natural disaster mitigation.
2. Mandatory or Incentivized Service:
   Switzerland’s mandatory militia service ensures all citizens contribute to community protection. While mandatory service may not be feasible in the American States, states could incentivize voluntary participation through tax benefits or educational opportunities tied to SDF membership.
3. Integrated Civilian Protection Systems:
   The Swiss model integrates multiple services—police, fire brigades, health facilities—into one cohesive civilian protection framework. States could replicate this system by coordinating SDFs with local emergency responders for streamlined disaster management.
4. Border Defense as a Priority:
   Swiss cantons actively contribute to border security through their militia system. Similarly, American states could use SDFs to bolster border defense efforts without relying solely on federal agencies like Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
5. Infrastructure Investment:
   Switzerland’s emphasis on building resilient infrastructure—such as avalanche barriers and flood control systems—ensures long-term safety against natural disasters. States could prioritize similar investments using SDFs as part of their implementation strategy.
6. Water Resource Management:
   During crises or disasters, access to clean water becomes a lifeline for communities. States should prioritize water excavation systems that safely collect water from natural sources (e.g., aquifers or rivers), ensure proper filtration and storage, and distribute it efficiently during emergencies—a practice central to Switzerland’s resilience model.

Civilian Protection Systems

Swiss Emergency Plan

Tasks Undertaken by Switzerland That Inspire Action

The Federal Office for Civil Protection (FOCP) outlines several key tasks undertaken by Switzerland that could serve as inspiration for American State Assemblies:

• Disaster Preparedness: Regular training exercises simulate responses to floods, avalanches, earthquakes, industrial accidents, and other emergencies.
• Defense of Strategic Infrastructure: Cantons protect energy supplies, communication networks, transportation systems, and other critical installations.
• Civil Defense Shelters: Switzerland maintains shelters capable of accommodating its entire population during crises—a system other states might emulate.
• Community Involvement: Public awareness campaigns educate citizens about risks and preparedness measures.
• Water Management Systems: Ensuring access to clean water during emergencies is a cornerstone of Swiss disaster resilience.
• Federal-Level Resource Coordination: Efficient allocation of resources ensures cantons receive timely support during mass emergencies.

For more information about these tasks, refer to the FOCP Tasks Page.

 

Conclusion: A Call for Revival

The Swiss Canton method highlights the importance of decentralized governance and citizen involvement in safeguarding communities from disasters and attacks. For American State Assemblies seeking greater sovereignty and resilience—or foreign assemblies operating upon Land and Soil Jurisdiction—establishing or restoring State Defense Forces is not just an option but a necessity.

By adopting lessons from Switzerland’s proactive approach—including community engagement in border defense operations; investment in resilient infrastructure; emphasis on water resource management; and integration of civil protection systems—states can strengthen their preparedness while empowering citizens to actively participate in defense missions.

Switzerland’s success proves that when communities are given the tools, they need to protect themselves during times of crisis or disaster, resilience becomes a shared responsibility—and sovereignty is preserved.

It’s time for American states—and others around the world—to restore this vital element of self-governance before it is too late. There is no better time like the present to begin assisting with the collective effort of offering to protect and defend ourselves at a community level against natural and manmade disasters.

The Sovereign Identity: Unveiling the Corporate Origin of Surnames

Striding ever closer to the demise of the "Sovereign Citizen" corporate illusion

 Down through the centuries, sovereign men and women lived freely, addressed by their given names and family line, without the need of the artificial tool we now call the "surname." In earlier times, prior to the advent and proliferation of corporate feudalism, the practices of sovereign families were founded on a natural and lawful system of identification: a man's given name, followed by "son of" his father's given name, and carried further to his grandfather's given name. For example, the actual given name of the researcher and writer of this article is Joseph, son of James, son of Curtis.

This simple but effective custom was sufficient in ancient times to distinguish men and their offspring from one another within families or between other families within neighboring communities. But with the advent of corporate and centralized government institutions, surname arrived—a manufactured concept for foreign interests and not of independent individuals.

The Origins of Surnames: A Corporate Creation

Surnames did not evolve from any organic or customary way of addressing family members. Instead, they were forced upon living men and women by external agencies—governments, feudal regimes, and other corporate bureaucracies—for purposes of administration and politics. The surname was not chosen by parents as part of their natural family traditions but forced as a way of creating an accepted standard identity for the purposes of cooperative purposes, legal control, and organizational convenience in society.

This corporate "family name" was employed as a tool to track individuals in growing populations. It allowed for the compilation of lists by rulers and institutions for taxation, land-holding, census, and legal purposes. While surnames may appear innocuous on the surface, their true origin was in the interest of government and control of individuals or families and not in respect for the sovereignty of individuals or families.

The Unlawful Practice of Imposing Surnames

The use of surnames on independent persons is an unlawful practice if one looks at natural rights. Independent families previously identified themselves according to their lineage—a given name, then the father's name and the grandfather's name as a direct part of the essence that embodies their true identity. This pattern recognized the natural independence and autonomy of people in their family structure. It required no external interference or man-made labels.

Conversely, surnames are a foreign corporate identity that entrap living men and women in obligations that further political or economic agendas. These obligations are often tied to land owner excise systems, by-law constraints, and other means of monarchal control that are not conducive to the principles of sovereignty. The appeal to adopt surnames for oneself or one's posterity can be seen as an exploitation—an entrapment into systems that further corporate agendas at the loss of individual freedom.

Awareness: Deconstructing Corporate Entanglements

It is a significant step in deconstructing the shroud of corporate constructs that have been thrown over breathing men and women to become aware of the history and purpose behind surnames. Knowing that surnames are an artificial addition to familial nature but rather employed as an agency of control, individuals can reclaim their sovereignty. By discounting the fictional corporate identity attributed to surnames, individuals can begin to untangle themselves from obligations that do not contribute to their natural liberties or rights.

This acknowledgment also leads to further debates about sovereignty in modern society. It forces individuals to question other corporate affiliations—such as legal systems, tax systems, and contractual arrangements—that might supplant their inalienable freedom regarding self-governance. It ultimately leads to the restoration of traditions grounded in natural law and the removal of systems that seek to exploit living persons.

Sovereign Citizen Pejorative: Narrowing In On Its Inevitable Dismantling

The term "sovereign citizen" has been widely used as a pejorative label by media outlets, government entities, and critics who wish to discredit those seeking lawful recognition as sovereign individuals. This label often conflates legitimate efforts for sovereignty with fringe ideologies or pseudolegal tactics. However, it is essential to distinguish between peaceful movements advocating for lawful status correction—such as those led by American State Assemblies—and isolated incidents involving misuse or misinterpretation of sovereign principles.

The inevitable dismantling of this pejorative lies in education and awareness. As more people understand that sovereignty is rooted in lawful traditions rather than contrived theories or pseudolegal practices, they will reject misleading narratives designed to undermine legitimate efforts toward reclaiming personal autonomy. Sovereignty is not about rejecting law but about restoring alignment with natural law principles free from corporate entanglements.

A Path Toward Harmony

The surname is not a natural appellation for free men and women; it is a corporate institution that was created for political purposes.

By understanding its etymology and renouncing its illegitimate application, individuals can meaningfully act toward reclaiming their organic identity and unraveling corporate entanglements. A return to traditions commemorating family lineage—whereby the name of a man is augmented by "son of" that of his father—replaces acknowledgment of sovereignty without removing that which is extraneous that was inserted there to gain benefit at alien expense.

Awareness is the answer to this task.

As increasingly large numbers of people realize that surnames and other corporate identity labels are artificial, they can altogether remove these cover-ups once and for all. Independent men and women have ever possessed the capacity to define themselves naturally; it is time to reassert that capacity in its fullness and move toward a peaceful future grounded in harmony with natural law.

Moving Forward with Sovereign Recognition

As part of this movement toward reclaiming sovereignty, initiatives like those led by the American State Assemblies are paving the way for lawful recognition of status-corrected sovereign men and women. These assemblies emphasize identifying individuals according to their true family origins without reliance on corporate feudalism practices such as surnames tethered throughout daily life.

This effort has gained traction through training programs offered by the Peacekeeping Task Force as part of its 2025 Public Service Outreach and Education initiatives. Municipal and Federal Law Enforcement entities are being prepared to train in these standardized approaches for recognizing lawful sovereign identities. As these training aids develop further, follow-up programs will be implemented across all County and State-of-State Law Enforcement agencies nationwide.

The Peacekeeping Task Force has been actively working on these, and other similarly constructed international outreach projects since resuming service operations in 2023. By fostering awareness through education and training, this initiative seeks not only to dismantle harmful corporate entanglements but also to establish a foundation for peaceful coexistence rooted in sovereignty and natural law principles from coast to coast.

Share Awareness with Others

We encourage readers of our blog to share this article—and others like it—with friends and family. By spreading awareness about these important topics, you help amplify our free work aimed at restoring sovereignty and dismantling harmful systems rooted in corporate control.

Together, we can build a brighter future founded on peace, harmony, natural, and American Common law principles as part of Public Law!

Thank you to everyone who have contributed to, and who have expressed encouragement of our free work and dedication to peaceful service since 2023. Your genuine kindness has not gone unnoticed.

Pathways to Self-governance Excellence

Federation Fiduciary Office Requested Notice of Completion for Pilot Project of International Ombudsman Think Tank

 The Federation Fiduciary Office has issued a request of notice to acknowledge the successful completion of the six-month pilot project conducted by the International Ombudsman Think Tank. Held biweekly from September 2024 to March 2025, this education-only initiative provided participants with opportunities for open dialogue and foundational discussions on professional Ombudsman Services.

Overview of the Pilot Project

The pilot project brought together volunteers from State Assemblies across multiple continents. Participants engaged in:

Baseline Discussions: Introducing fundamental concepts of Ombudsman Services.

Scenario-Based Content: Exploring both real and imagined situations to better understand professional conflict resolution methods.

Intermediate Talking Points: Laying the groundwork for future professional training that will ultimately be conducted by Assembly members themselves, rather than relying on resources from the Federation or its Peacekeeping Task Force.

The goal of these sessions was to familiarize participants with formal conflict resolution methods while fostering a deeper understanding of how Ombudsman Services can support self-governance and shield State Assemblies as independent organizations.

Key Highlights

Scenario-Based Discussions: Participants delved into practical examples, including actual-life scenarios and thought experiments, to better grasp professional approaches to conflict resolution.

Intermediate-Level Topics: Beyond basic concepts, discussions touched on ideas that will naturally evolve into advanced training opportunities initiated by Assembly members themselves.

Interest in Certification: Many participants expressed enthusiasm for pursuing advanced training and certification independently, as such resources are not currently provided by the Federation or its Peacekeeping Task Force.

Importance of Professional Ombudsman Services

A professional Ombudsman Service is vital for any organization seeking to resolve internal disputes impartially and effectively. These services:

Promote transparency, accountability, and fairness.

Strengthen governance mechanisms by addressing conflicts professionally.

Help organizations maintain harmony while fostering trust among stakeholders.

Discussions during the pilot project highlighted how adopting professional Ombudsman practices can help State Assemblies address internal challenges in a way that aligns with their self-governance principles.

Next Steps and Resources

The next phase of this initiative will transition from introductory education to practical applications of Ombudsman Services. For those interested in learning more or pursuing training certifications, replays of past meetings are available on the Dedicated Rumble Channel. This platform also serves as an archive for future training series, offering valuable resources for individuals aiming to become certified Ombudsmen within their Assemblies.

Federation’s Role in Supporting State Assemblies

The Federation Fiduciary Office emphasizes the importance of allowing all State Assemblies to address their challenges in a professional and concise manner while maintaining autonomy. While the Federation does not provide internal conflict resolution training or services except in rare circumstances, it remains committed to supporting the safe development of all State Assemblies.

The Federation’s fiduciary role includes offering validation and seatment to Assemblies once they declare readiness to advance their sovereign self-governance structures. This approach ensures that Assemblies can evolve independently while fostering professionalism and accountability within their governance models.

This notice reflects the Federation Fiduciary Office’s awareness of the success of this pilot project and encourages continued engagement in future opportunities that promote professionalism and effective governance practices within State Assemblies.

Freedom or Facade? Rethinking Emancipation and Its Legacy in America

 A Discussion on Manufactured Consent and Historical Narratives

 The Emancipation Proclamation is often trumpeted as a turning point in the struggle for liberty in America. However, when critically analyzed, it raises profound questions about whether it was truly a step toward freedom or a strategic move to maintain control under the guise of liberation. The Peacekeeping Task Force challenges readers to delve into this complex history, questioning accepted narratives and encouraging more nuanced discussions about the nature of freedom.

The Emancipation Proclamation: A Strategic, Not Moral, Decision

Issued by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation declared enslaved individuals in Confederate territories free but left slavery untouched in Union-controlled regions. This selective application reveals its purpose as a wartime strategy rather than an uncompromising assertion of human rights. By undermining the Confederacy’s labor system and recruiting freed individuals into the Union military, the proclamation bolstered the Union cause without addressing broader societal integration or welfare for the newly freed.

This approach reflects a historical pattern: systems of control adapting to maintain dominance while shifting responsibility. The narrow scope of the proclamation ensured that while enslaved people were technically "freed," they were left without meaningful support, making them vulnerable to systemic exploitation.

Emancipation Before the Civil War: A Rare Practice

Prior to the Civil War, emancipation in America was largely confined to legal cases involving guardianship termination for adults deemed capable of managing their own affairs. These cases were rare and individualized, in stark contrast to the broad yet constrained nature of wartime emancipation. This context highlights that early America had little precedent for large-scale liberation efforts, complicating the narrative of emancipation as an act of pure benevolence.

Fighting Manufactured Consent Through Dialogue

The Peacekeeping Task Force recognizes significant gaps in how history is taught and discussed. Too often, historical narratives are shaped by persuasive tactics that promote partial truths while obscuring systemic inequities. This reflects what scholars like Noam Chomsky have identified as "manufactured consent," where public opinion is carefully engineered to align with specific agendas.

Through its recent restructuring, the Task Force has embarked on an open-ended mission to engage directly with these issues. By reexamining historical events like emancipation, we aim to challenge simplistic narratives and foster critical discussions about freedom and control.

Expanding Topics for Exploration

This article is part of a broader initiative addressing topics that challenge prevailing narratives, including, but not limited to:

> The origins and corruption of early American monetary systems.

> Architectural discoveries and technologies that defy conventional historical timelines.

> The development and misunderstood origins of movements like "sovereign citizenship."

Redesigning Sovereignty and Freedom - and Where Might the Bogus Concept of "Emancipation" Tie in to This Similar Topic

A key focus will be dismantling the purposefully dismissive and obviously thin veiled pejorative label "sovereign citizen." Too often dismissed as conspiratorial or extremist, until now, this term obscures legitimate concerns about government overreach and individual autonomy. The Task Force will provide balanced discussions on these issues, promoting a clear distinction between lawful dissent and mischaracterizations designed to stifle dialogue.

Discussions and the research that supports healthy debate concerning them have already begun. This paper tiger topic actually began during mid 2024. Much more discussion on these and other relative topics listed above will resume where they left off soon and others will pick up fresh as new talking points this year onward.

Creating Platforms for Expanding Discussion

To amplify these conversations, the Peacekeeping Task Force will utilize platforms such as Substack and Patreon to publish exclusive content. These platforms allow researchers to present nuanced perspectives on underexplored topics while engaging directly with readers seeking deeper understanding. By fostering open dialogue on issues like historical revisionism, entrenched corruption, and alternative interpretations of freedom, we aim to generate critical thinking and public interest.

Join Us in Redefining the Narrative

This effort marks the beginning of a larger undertaking to reassess history—not as a static record but as a dynamic conversation shaped by observation and inquiry. Collectively, we can challenge deceptive narratives and analyze what true freedom means—not as manufactured consent but as informed autonomy rooted in truth.

The Federation has also explored similar sensitive topics designed to respect people’s perceptions of their time while acknowledging how truth has been suppressed through deliberate obfuscation after the fact—blurring lines between reality and deception. Articles like this are meant not only to break the monotony of organizational business but also to spark compelling discussions that directly or indirectly support freedom's cause.

Stay tuned for future articles tackling these pressing concerns. Subscribe on platforms like Substack and Patreon for free to join this vital discussion about history, truth, and freedom’s ongoing fight for authenticity.

We look forward to your commentary contributions to these and other compelling discussions and revelations in the coming months.

Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) and Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) - The Difference

 PKTF - Assembly Liaisons: Consolidating LEAs and State Assemblies

The Peacekeeping Task Force (PKTF) Assembly Liaisons play an instrumental role in advancing cooperation and comprehension between Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) and the American State Assemblies. They operate towards building dignified relationships, establishing emergency communication networks, and ensuring respect for the unique roles of land and soil jurisdiction under legitimate self-governance practices. Below is a detailed overview of their mandate:

Core Responsibilities of PKTF Assembly Liaisons

Networking and Communication:
Facilitate communication between State Assemblies, LEAs, and neighboring assemblies to build bridges of coexistence and cooperation.

Information Sharing:
Notify LEAs of State Assembly militia peacekeeping functions operating under land and soil jurisdiction in alignment with constitutional principles.

Emergency Communication Networks:
Initiate coast-to-coast communication systems to foster collaborative efforts during emergencies and enable harmonious coordination across jurisdictions.

Jurisdictional Education:
Encourage education about American State Assembly governance under land and soil jurisdiction while respecting the statutory authority of LEAs.

Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs)

LEAs include a broad range of organizations such as:

> Police Departments

> Sheriff’s Offices

> State Police/Highway Patrol

> Tribal Police Departments

> Special Emergency Tactics Dispatch Units (local assets)

Special Jurisdiction Agencies (e.g., park rangers, transit police)

These agencies operate under statutory law to enforce public safety measures within their jurisdictions.

State Assembly Militia Functions

State Assembly militias are community-based defense organizations sanctioned under constitutional provisions. Their primary roles include:

Aiding civil authorities during emergencies.

Defending land and soil jurisdictions.

Operating as unorganized militias when needed.

Law Enforcement Administration's Role

Law Enforcement Administration ensures effective functioning of LEAs by focusing on:

Policy Development: Establishing operational strategies for statutory adaptation.

Personnel Management: Recruiting and training officers to uphold professionalism.

Oversight Committees: Ensuring accountability through governance at the state level.

This administration distinguishes LEAs from State Assembly militias by emphasizing statutory law enforcement rather than constitutional self-policing.

Building Respectful Bridges

PKTF Assembly Liaisons actively work to:

Clarify jurisdictional differences between land/soil governance and statutory law enforcement.

Foster cooperation during emergencies or public safety challenges.

Respect all known jurisdictions, including counties with superior concurrent general jurisdiction, while maintaining peaceful collaboration through lawful practices.

Coordination in the Nexus Region

The United States is divided into 10 Nexus Regions based on Postal Service Areas. PKTF liaisons are trained to collaborate within these regions to ensure clear communication and coordination among assemblies at county, state, and regional levels. This regional approach strengthens inter-state cooperation while respecting each assembly's autonomy.

Fidelity to Peaceful Self-Governance

By these means, PKTF strives to:

Build strong reputations for honoring all jurisdictions, including land and soil governance.

Exercise fiduciary responsibility for peaceful cooperation through lawful self-governance at county and state levels.

Foster collaboration with neighboring assemblies within their Nexus Region to ensure harmony across borders.

Commitment to Emergency Communication Efforts

PKTF liaisons also focus on developing robust coast-to-coast emergency communication networks to enhance disaster response capabilities and ensure seamless coordination between assemblies and LEAs during crises.

Through comprehensive training in these essentials, PKTF Assembly Liaisons empower State Assemblies to peacefully collaborate with LEAs while upholding constitutional principles of land and soil jurisdiction governance. This mutual respect for lawful self-governance and inter-agency cooperation strengthens public safety systems across the country while promoting harmony among all jurisdictions involved.