Independence and freedom

1. Independence and freedom of a nation from external forces are a few descriptive words of statehood. A state that is able to resist from external intervention and governs its people with all the means of its powers, with the least possible foreign interference and if there is, to a limited extent; can be said to be an independent nation. This does not foreclose however day to day international dealings and exchanges considering that globalization and economic exchanges have brought foreign and distant countries in constant communication with each other, alongside with other factors.

The declaration of independence in this regard, has shaped the philosophical beliefs and perception of many vis a vis social factors. The release of the colonies from the mighty power of England have been brought about by economic factors. While these colonies were under the control of England, each of which have been effectively governed by the latter through the appointments of governors and other officers. However, war broke between France and India, leading to the gradual downfall of England.

It has incurred debts to the extent that it could no longer effectively control its colonies which eventually resulted to the release of the colonies. Towards this end, it was thought that colonies be given the power to enact their own laws particularly on economic stability where to do so would increase the livelihood of all citizens alike (http://www. mcwdn. org/GOVERNMENT/Declaration. html, 2008). The need for the declaration became apparent.

From the foregoing discussion, it is opined that the declaration of independence has been influenced so much on the ability of England vis a vis its colonies to govern them effectively by maintaining a stable economic program benefitting not only itself but more importantly the colonies. Sustainable maintenance and growth are therefore necessary; otherwise, continued growing existence could not be maintained. The reason why the King has to release from the hands of the government the effective control over the colonies. 2.

Articles of confederation and a constitution are two different concepts, however, are aimed at one thing. An article of confederation is purely an embodiment of state policies and principles that govern the lawmakers (legislative body), the courts of justice (judicial body) and the executive in the performance of their respective powers towards the enforcement of laws though in different capacities. On the other hand, a constitution contains specific limitations of the very vast and broad powers of the state/government.

It outlines in detail the rights to which citizens and at times non-citizens alike are entitled to and the safeguards to these rights in order to protect them from undue harassment from the government, the latter being sourced from its unlimited power. Moreover, the constitution while putting a limit to the vast powers of government, establishes specific rights of the people; these could not be found in the Articles of Confederation it being an embodiment of ideals and principles.

While there are different views and concepts between the two, both are similar in the way that they are advanced as governing principles through which the state performs its functions. They are established for the purpose of effectively controlling and undertaking the roles of the state in protecting its interests without prejudicing the individual rights of the constituents – public officers or not. The articles of confederation is a declaration among the then state colonies pursuant to the establishment of then the union of the colonies.

The constitution was the instrument which strengthens the same which governs these colonies as a unified body (http://www. thedeclarationofindependence. org/, 2008). 3. Ratification of the constitution is the recognition of the people on its existence and their willingness to abide by the same and subject to sanctions if otherwise. This is important because their assent to be governed by the Constitution is the source of their obedience to the same. Moreover, knowledge on the details of the Constitution and its essence is important.

Obedience can not be extracted from the governed without them having to understand what is imposed upon them and the specific sanctions if any, it brings about. On another viewpoint however, ratification may not be necessary. A constitution is crafted by representatives of the people and so their representation is sufficient consent of the people’s assent thereto. The representatives are presumed to represent and embody the differing views and opinions of their respective constituents.

Moreover, a constitution being an embodiment of limitations on the very vast powers of the state, is the duty of the state to impose upon itself. It is humbly opined however that the ratification of the constitution is more compelling. This is in consonance of due process. The governed must know the consequences of their acts, the rights they possess and may enforce against the government. Moreover, the limitations imposed upon the state’s power is not just for the knowledge of the state itself but of all the people because it is from these limitations that individual rights begin.