In his exile in New York, where he taught at Queens College, Maneli was the author of many books, such as Juridical Positivism and Human Rights, Freedom and Democracy and Perelman's New Rhetoric as Philosophy and Methodology for the Next Century dealing with the philosophical basis of a democratic society.

[7] Maneli later explained his turn toward Communism as a reaction to the Holocaust, arguing the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question" revealed deep flaws within the cultural edifice known as "Western civilization", making a return to the values of the pre-war era unacceptable for him.

After the Second World War, he joined the Polish United Workers' Party formed in 1948, studied law and economics and worked as an assistant to a philosophy professor, Czesław Nowinski.

The North Vietnamese officials were unhappy about losing so much of their population to South Vietnam, but the ICC, pressed by the Canadian delegation, ruled in favor of allowing people the freedom to relocate, should they wish.

[9] Maneli wrote that the orders for the Polish delegation were to co-operate with the Canadians against the Indians in allowing the refugees to emigrate, on the grounds that the voluntary clearance of most of North Vietnam's Catholic population would eliminate the most likely source of future unrest and opposition to the Communist government.

[10] The Poles also persuaded the North Vietnamese that a violation of the freedom of movement provisions of the Accords could be used by the South as an excuse to cancel the elections, scheduled for 1956, that were intended to reunite the two administrations.

[14] In 1956, Maneli supported the Polish October revolution that saw the nationalist faction of the United Workers' Party led by Władysław Gomułka overthrow the Stalinist leadership in Warsaw over the objections of the Soviet Union.

In his article "On Tolerance" published in July 1956 in the youth magazine Po Prostu, he wrote:  "To compel someone by force to change his ideas or to hide something in which he truly believes-this is contradictory to the most fundamental human feelings which have been formed and developed over the course of centuries....Every act of intolerance, every physical or moral persecution of those who think differently, results in demoralization of society and brings about hypocrisy".

[17] Maneli's lectures, calling for the rule of law for everyone and for the meaningful practice of the theoretical freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution, made him popular with the students, but unpopular with the authorities.

Mao, in turn, was looking to challenge Nikita Khrushchev for the leadership of the Communist world, and invited a Polish delegation to Beijing to discuss a Sino-Polish alliance, with the promise of aid as bait.

[7] The North Vietnamese leaders told him in frank detail about the Ho Minh Chi Trail that they been constructing through neutral Laos and Cambodia to supply their forces in South Vietnam, saying "Indochina is just one single entity".

"[30] At the same time, the French President Charles de Gaulle had launched a diplomatic initiative to make South Vietnam neutral in the Cold War as a way of forestalling American intervention.

Italy had no particular interests in Vietnam, outside of the general Western hope of maintaining a reasonable balance of power in Southeast Asia and of making decisions in a more thoughtful and restrained way than was the habit of the impetuous and inexperienced Americans".

[34] And as for Lalouette: he "had even more reason for arranging and watching over [Maneli's] future relations with Nhu...His stakes in the game were incomparably more higher and more portentous as he wanted to open a dialogue between Saigon and Hanoi and then token cultural and economic exchanges between the two regions.

[34] The French could not afford to support South Vietnam to the same extent as the Americans had and Maneli noted: "Thus, they advise this mistress to change her style of living to a less extravagant one: to make peace with the North and the National Liberation Front.

Lalouette met with the Ngo brothers, who seemed interested, and armed with this information, Maneli left Saigon for Hanoi to meet the North Vietnamese Premier Phạm Văn Đồng.

[28] The French plan called for a ceasefire together with cultural and economic exchanges between the two Vietnams with the final political status to be settled later after some years of peace, possibly as a federation.

[36] Maneli later wrote that he had the impression that the North Vietnamese were still angry with the outcome of the Geneva conference in 1954, believing that the Soviet Union and China had imposed an unfavorable settlement on them for the sake of better relations with the West.

[41] Ho told Burchett he was willing to consider a ceasefire with South Vietnam, and dropped his standard demand for the overthrow of Diem, implying he might be allowed to stay in office as part of a peace deal.

[41] In The War of the Vanished, Maneli wrote that neither Ho nor Đồng was keen on allowing Diem to stay in power, but he pressed them to make that concession, saying it was the best way forward to peace.

[44] As Rapacki had ordered Maneli not to become involved in the ceasefire negotiations, he was initially hesitant to do so, but changed his mind in July 1963 when he became convinced that there was a real chance for peace in Vietnam.

[37] Nhu spoke to Maneli in French in a mystical and dreamy tone, claiming he was waging a spiritual crusade to save his nation and that as a Catholic his real enemy was not Communism, but rather "dialectical materialism" of which capitalism was the most dangerous expression.

[50] Nhu claimed that what he wanted was an alignment of Catholicism with Marxism, saying he envisioned the "withering away of the state" that Marx had predicted, and this was the real purpose of his Strategic Hamlets policy, which had created so much controversy.

[6] From his exile in the United States, Maneli tended to be critical of the Communist regime: an essay he wrote in 1971, published in Dissent, was entitled "From Gomulka to Gierek: The Moral Decay of the Polish Bureaucracy".

[67] He argued: "The philosophy and methodology of Perelman are instruments, which can help elaborate new ways of thinking and acting, new critical approaches to every social, political and judicial institution, be they in the east or the west.

[65] Maneli wrote that in the Second Republic era, Perelman was confronted in Poland with "a backward and undemocratic state that was also a country where many nationalities lived together and where creative liberal thought and art flourished...The strange and unbalanced conditions there, nevertheless, were a source and inspiration for the Poles and the Jews.

[65] The American scholar James Crosswhite observed that there was a fundamentally optimistic quality to Maneli's writings in exile as he wrote about Perelman that he "was able to transform all the disadvantages of his origin and his background to powerful advantages and to a source of inspiration".

"[72] Maneli argued that to produce a history "fruitful for the future" required examining what laws did the most to promote human dignity, happiness, freedom, creativity, and justice over the course of the ages.

[75] Maneli was deeply committed to his humanist project, writing that history was neither automatically progress nor retrogression, but was decided by the actions of people, thus making the struggle for humanism an endless battle.

[75] Maneli wrote towards the Perelman's "New Rhetoric: "We are sure that the development of democracy and the culture of society and its involvement in the process of argumentation and counter-argumentation can create a climate where a return to despotism is impossible.