American Sovereignty in the 21st Century
The Declaration of Independence makes the agreement, “That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance” (Jefferson 265). Thusly the Declaration of Independence is consider by most to be the foundational statement of national sovereignty by The Thirteen American colonies and now the United States. The Declaration of Independence is a formal statement by the thirteen American colonies, which provides a list of their grievances against the king, and declares the freedom of the thirteen American colonies from Great Britain. The Declaration of Independence does not tell King George III, the Parliament of Great Britain, or any …show more content…
Jeremy Rabkin, the author of "Freedom and The Nation-State" speaks about violation also speaks about sovereignty by globalization or “a one-world authority” (29) when he says, “For if a world authority has enough power to guarantee every nation against its enemies, it must be more powerful than any of its component nations” (Rabkin 29). If this statement is true then any one-world authority is going need overwhelming base its power to ever create globalization, or a one-world authority. Rabkin may be trying to argue that it is the United States should have to fill the roll. However, could any one nation or collection of nations in Rabkins’ words “guarantee every nation against its enemies” (1) ever be the absolute truth?
Winston Churchill once spoke about democracy, saying "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" (qtd. in Karl). Churchill lays it out for the reader with this statement, even though the statement itself is an ironic statement about democracy since Great Britain is a constitutional monarchy (which still had an Empire, oh by-the-way). What Churchill is truly getting at is that it is worst to have no government or a tyrannical government then when that makes mistakes and is fallible (i.e. a
The Declaration of Independence makes the agreement, “That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance” (Jefferson 265). Thusly the Declaration of Independence is consider by most to be the foundational statement of national sovereignty by The Thirteen American colonies and now the United States. The Declaration of Independence is a formal statement by the thirteen American colonies, which provides a list of their grievances against the king, and declares the freedom of the thirteen American colonies from Great Britain. The Declaration of Independence does not tell King George III, the Parliament of Great Britain, or any …show more content…
Jeremy Rabkin, the author of "Freedom and The Nation-State" speaks about violation also speaks about sovereignty by globalization or “a one-world authority” (29) when he says, “For if a world authority has enough power to guarantee every nation against its enemies, it must be more powerful than any of its component nations” (Rabkin 29). If this statement is true then any one-world authority is going need overwhelming base its power to ever create globalization, or a one-world authority. Rabkin may be trying to argue that it is the United States should have to fill the roll. However, could any one nation or collection of nations in Rabkins’ words “guarantee every nation against its enemies” (1) ever be the absolute truth?
Winston Churchill once spoke about democracy, saying "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" (qtd. in Karl). Churchill lays it out for the reader with this statement, even though the statement itself is an ironic statement about democracy since Great Britain is a constitutional monarchy (which still had an Empire, oh by-the-way). What Churchill is truly getting at is that it is worst to have no government or a tyrannical government then when that makes mistakes and is fallible (i.e. a