In order to understand the United States of America, one must understand the qualities that make her unique from all other nations in the world. Understanding these qualities is a must for all Americans as this answers so many of our questions today as far as the laws our government imposes on us, our relationships with other countries and with our fellow countrymen. But is goes much, much deeper than that. To understand American’s uniqueness in the world is to understand both the powers of influence and the limits to those influences in the world, in the just and unjust causes we take up as a people and those things we should do for ourselves, for others and those things that are best let alone. All of these things come together in the Principle of Individual Sovereignty.
As I have researched on many of the political issues American has faced and is facing today, I have come to realize that many of her woes are due to this sever lack of understanding of Individual Sovereignty. I have heard many pundents try to explain this concept. I have read about it in many current event books to some degree and I have heard it discussed, is some small measure in our current presidential primary campaign speeches. But, I am convinced that almost ALL politicians today have only scant understanding of the concept and almost NO understanding of history in the context of Individual Sovereignty. And, sadly, I know this is not being taught in schools today as I am a frequent tutor in my daughter’s own pursuit of American History in her daily studies.
In this first blog posting, I want to explain the basic concept of Individual Sovereignty and then build upon this foundation in future postings. I would invite those to run across this to please post comments as I would enjoy the debate and hope to continue a learning dialog on the subject.
First, let’s define what a Sovereign is and understand the concept. Websters defines a Sovereign as 1) one possessing rule or supreme political power or sovereignty, 2) one who exercises supreme authority in a limited sphere, 3) an acknowledged leader. In political terms, a Sovereign often referred to a King or Lord as they typically had supreme rule over all the people in their country or land. They made all decisions concerning the land, the people, the resources, monies and the life and death of all citizens under their rule. For centuries, nations ruled with some sort of monarchy or supreme ruler, all power held in a single person or individual. In rare cases, this power may have been shared with a small group of rulers, but usually ended up back in a designated Sovereign or supreme ruler.
So, how does this help explain Individual Sovereignty. I will use an example that I believe helped the Founders in the direction of structuring the American government as well as defining their ideals that resulted in the “Great Experiment” they embarked upon. If we look in the Old Testament of the Bible, there is the well known story of King Saul and King David and the antagonistic relationship that existed between Saul and David as well as the respect David had for King Saul and his position. This is a well known story that all Christians know and study in Sunday Schools around the country. But aside from the relationship and stuggles David had with Saul, I want to go all the way back to why there even was a need for a King Saul and a King David. You see, according to the Bible, prior to King Saul, there were only the heads of family or Patriarchs in which God choose to develop and lead his nation. If you follow the main characters in the bible, you go from Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham and Moses. But once you get past Moses and Joshua, which is where God called his people Israel out of Egypt and settled them in the Promised Land, you get a rebellion of the people who did not think it enough to have God, a being that they could not see (per say or was in their daily lives like a physical person) they wanted a King , “like all other nations of the world.” And so, God gave them over to have a king and the first the people chose was King Saul. Later, God chose David after King Saul became corrupt. The lesson here is, however, not that God knew best, which he obviously did, but that he had already given them something greater than a King, he gave them Individual Sovereignty, the right to rule over themselves as individuals, or as Webster stated, “one who exercises supreme authority in a limited sphere.” You see, from the biblical point of view, God wanted a relationship with each individual, not through a king and he did not want the entrapments of a physical ruler between his people and him. The only distance they currently had between him, at this time, was Sin and that is what the priest interceded for. But the rule over the individual was the individual and Him.
Again, this story is important because the Founders were very religious, despite what modern revisionist historians teach today and this concept was the cornerstone of the founding of the country which was summarized in one of the greatest documents ever written to describe man’s relationship with man in which is states, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that hey are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Unalienable Rights, meaning rights that are impossible to take away or impart with, or more to the point, those rights that No person, government or entity, other than God can grant or take away.
So, if a Sovereign has all power over an individual, than what is Individual Sovereignty? Individual Sovereignty is just what it states, it is the power and right to rule over one’s self. Remember, prior to the American Revolution, people were ruled mostly by some sort of Sovereign King or Queen, a supreme ruler. Most people in England did not own their own property but worked on the land of a Lord or other noble, their Sovereign, and that Lord was directly under the King or Queen, but retained certain rights under the King and Queens authority. But for the most part, people, as individuals, were not free and had little to no liberty to do what they want, say what they wanted and even have true ownership of anything.
But to have rule over one’s self, was the essence of Liberty and Freedom and was the biblical picture of the true nature of man’s relationship with man the Bible depicted and the founders came to realize was possible. Why? Because for over 100 years before the American Revolution, the colonist were already practicing self rule, self government. There was no Sovereign on the shores of American to tell the people what to do, to protect them, to help solve their problems. These things, the colonist did for themselves. As Thomas Jefferson once stated, “…what we have stated are things that were already here.” They had already tasted the fruits of their labor, their freedom and when the British tried to impose the crowns will, the colonist revolted.
But, there is another component to Individual Sovereignty that is where our politicians, statesmen and general public often misunderstand and misinterpret. Having rule over ones self does not mean to rule over others. Meaning, a person cannot just do what they want, when they want. There is a relational component to Individual Sovereignty that must be respected and is what is most often misunderstood, that is the respect of the rights of others. In other words, everyone in American should have Individual Sovereignty, but to exercise that Sovereignty also means that you do not violate your neighbor’s Individual Sovereignty. Again, you see this in the Bible with the Ten Commandments. The first 5 commandments deal with man’s relationship with God, the other 5 deal with man’s relationship with man. Regardless of your perspective on the Bible, the last 5 are hard to argue with just in terms of Man’s relationship with Man. Think about it, “You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his mail or female servants….or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” - Holy Bible NIV. This is the fundamental laws that are the foundation of civilization and are also the foundations of individual Liberty and Freedom OR Individual Sovereignty. They are the limits that are placed on freewill.
But, does this mean that man can restrain man further to protect his Individual Sovereignty. The simple answer is yes, but the real question is, should he? To answer this, we must look more closely at the nature of man and the tendency he has towards power, control and domination and why those characteristics should be guarded. We will cover this in my next blog post.