5 responses

  1. tannim
    April 10, 2012

    This misses a major point.

    The Declaration also spelled out a radical and revolutioanry departure from the Divine Right of Kingship style of rule of the European monarchies in that no longer were the people the subjects of a king “ordained by God” to rule over them without their consent, but that the people themselves posessed the right from God (or by existence for the atheists) to rule themselves instead by their consent. It made government not thrust upon the population by another in monarhcial form, but upon themselves by democratic consent in republican form.

    It also spelled out the right of the people to tell their government what to do instead of the other way around, and it turned government from master of the people to its servant. “Serf-us” to “service”, to coin a phrase.

    (Unfortunately, it has devolved from that since then, and the people have forgotten who works for who anymore!)


  2. randomthought
    September 28, 2014

    Agreed, missed the point but not surprising, that’s what a public education will do to you.

    Beyond what tannim said, the DOI (Declaration of Independence) laid the foundation of what government must do, protect our unalienable rights, what we must do when government is bad, suffer violations of those rights until it is insufferable and then alter or abolish government. It is our “Duty” according to the DOI.

    The gap between what the Constitution says, esp the pre-ratified version of it, and the DOI is significant. The Constitution does not link itself to the ideas of the DOI except for a brief homage in the preamble where it implies that the People are agreeing to everything the Constitution says. The original Constitution doesn’t address protecting the “Rights of the People” that the DOI talks about, that comes in the Amendments, aka “The Bill of Rights” added after the States refused to sign. It was written, my opinion, to create a central superstate that could eventually consume the States.

    The original USA government was the Confederacy of States in Perpetual Union and it treated each State like a country, more like the EU of today. That was transformed into the Constitution in 1789 or so after complaints that a confederacy was not strong enough. Ironically, when the South left the Union and returned to a Confederacy (as some States were promised was their right before signing the Constitution) the Southern Army almost won in the early days of the Civil War.

    The Constitution is really about how to setup a government and not about the People or the Country. It was written by the current politicos of the time to make a government that fit them, not necessarily the People. And they gave themselves powers that the people never had, further divorcing themselves from any link to the People they allegedly received their powers from. Some of those extraordinary powers, like the regulation of interstate trade, have made Government incredibly more powerful and dangerous. More so because the Government, as lawmakers, is supposed to be self-regulating which has not worked out very well.

    So I would say that there are significant differences between the DOI and the Constitution. The first is what was promised, what the ideal was, and the second is the compromise delivered.


    • Mark Mondoro
      March 26, 2019

      I agree as any student of history should. I have a rebel flag. Some say displaying that is racist. My reply is “whats race have to do with that flag?” Now I’m from NJ, not the south. I say thus as it has nothing to do with geography. The “original” US was exactly that a union(presserve the union) of states. A unuon of free and independent states. The framers of that constitution believed that power should not be in the hands of so few as we have grown to do. Even the electoral college does not vote the way it was written. This ciuntry moved so far away from what the original point was. The State if New Jersey cant say we arnt doing this or that. Not from fear of military but of money, another problem. I would enjoy sitting with you. I believe our conversation would be one not to forget.


  3. gyanada
    February 27, 2018

    it was reallllly good it niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.


  4. nbhgtfrvgbhj
    October 1, 2019

    oh so lonley so wont come it is so lony ohforme up above


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
mobile desktop