Help


+
Collocation
Ask AI3: What is sovereignty?
Votes: 1 promote
Edit
Promote Demote Fix Punctuation

Sentences

Reference to two other concepts -- nationalism and sovereignty -- may help to reveal the contours of the new principle.
Complementing the political principle of nationalism is the legal principle of sovereignty.
While sovereignty has roots in antiquity, in its present usage it is essentially modern.
Austin's nineteenth-century view of law and sovereignty still dominates much of today's legal and political thinking.
To him, law is the command of the sovereign ( the English monarch ) who personifies the power of the nation, while sovereignty is the power to make law -- i.e., to prevail over internal groups and to be free from the commands of other sovereigns in other nations.
These fundamental ideas -- the indivisibility of sovereignty and its dual ( internal-external ) aspects -- still remain the core of that concept of ultimate political power.
The nation-state, then, exemplifies the principle of nationalism and exercises sovereignty: supreme power over domestic affairs and independence from outside control.
That is particularly true of sovereignty when it is applied to democratic societies, in which `` popular '' sovereignty is said to exist, and in federal nations, in which the jobs of government are split.
Nevertheless, nationalism and sovereignty are reputed, in the accepted wisdom, to describe the modern world.
The North and the South were in greater agreement on sovereignty, through all their dispute about it, than were the Founding Fathers.
Nothing can show more than this the immensity of the danger to democratic peoples that lies in even relatively slight deviation from their true concept of sovereignty.
I think it is essential, however, to pinpoint here the difference between the two concepts of sovereignty that went to war in 1861 -- if only to see better how imperative is our need today to clarify completely our far worse confusion on this subject.
They recognized that slavery was a moral issue and not merely an economic interest, and that to recognize it explicitly in their Constitution would be in explosive contradiction to the concept of sovereignty they had set forth in the Declaration of 1776 that `` all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
One is tempted to say that, on the difference between the concepts of sovereignty in these two preambles, the worst war of the Nineteenth century was fought.
If the Union conceded this to them, the same right must be conceded to each remaining state whenever it saw fit to secede: This would destroy the federal balance between it and the states, and in the end sacrifice to the sovereignty of the states all the liberty the citizens had gained by their Union.
The fact that the Americans who upheld the sovereignty of their states did this in order to keep many of their people more securely in slavery -- the antithesis of individual liberty -- made the conflict grimmer, and the greater.
They differed in the balance they believed essential to the sovereignty of the citizen -- but the supreme sacrifice each made served to maintain a still more fundamental truth: That individual life, liberty and happiness depend on a right balance between the two -- and on the limitation of sovereignty, in all its aspects, which this involves.
Its appeal from ballots to bullets at Fort Sumter ended by costing the Southerners their right to have slaves -- a right that was even less compatible with the sovereignty of man.
`` The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them.
Referring to Britain, he says, `` We see a nation that traditionally values sovereignty above all else willing to give up its economy, placing this authority in Continental hands ''.
If we want to preserve our sovereignty, this is the way to do it ; ;
`` On trial in Jakarta for having flown for the Indonesian anti-Communist insurgents, U.S. pilot Alan Lawrence Pope boldly told the court that in supporting the freedom fighters, he was actually defending the sovereignty and independence of Indonesia.
On the other hand, it is no interference with sovereignty to point out defects where they exist, such as that a plan calls for factories without power to run them, or for institutions without trained personnel to staff them.

0.109 seconds.