The Idea Of Self-Government Is In The First Three Words Of The Constitution. What Are These Words? The Three Words of the American Declaration, Performing the Opening Political Act. The first three words of the Preamble of the US Constitution lay the foundation for the American system of self-government, “We the People.” These five words were the basis of the theory stating that governmental power comes from the people, not a king or a tyrant.
Despite the brevity of the phrase ‘We the People,’ the concept it embodied was the complete turn to the new way of perceiving the foundation of political authority. The governance systems in the eighteenth century were autocracies, with most of the countries being ruled by kings who had the full backing of God. From these solitary, appointed leaders, the populace derived the source of its government’s legitimacy and authority.
The framers of the American Constitution were well aware of this conception and deliberately moved away from it in the words ‘We the people.’ The phrase declared that the government was formed and functioned not by its own accord and authority but by the will and permission of the people. The power is not centralized but derives from the people, contrary to the monarchial or oligarchical system.
The Emergence of the Concept of “We, the People” and its Significance
The precise term ‘We the People’ resembled the language used during other historical periods in America. Some state constitutions during the Revolutionary War were written with openings like ‘We the people of the State of New Hampshire’ or ‘The people of Virginia.’
These phrases are meant to challenge the conventional wisdom that people are ruled from above by the government and that, instead. The government exists as a protection of rights from the people, which rises through the structures that implement it. The framers of the US Constitution encapsulated this concept of popular sovereignty into the immortalized phrase. These words, “We the People of the United States,” refer to the collective population of the United States of America.
‘We the People’ was, therefore, both a framing and a building strategy. On the propaganda level, it proclaimed a total change from monarchal rule to the rule of self. On a substantive level, it was most categorical in asserting that power would rest in the American people’s body politics as they would endorse the structures and rules articulated in the new Constitution.
Some issues with the Mission of “We the People.”
The Idea Of Self-Government Is In The First Three Words Of The Constitution. What Are These Words? After the bold proclamation of “We the People,” the following sentence lays out the central mission of the American constitutional project. ‘To obtain a perfect Union, to establish Justice, to provide for domestic Tranquillity, to promote the Welfare, and to ensure the Liberty to themselves and their Posterity.’
This mission further emphasizes the position of citizens in the political process being established. It was not meant, therefore, to sustain a monarch or the ruling elite of a given country. Thus to serve the interest of the entire citizenry population and effectively provide for forming a just, peaceful, accessible, and autonomous political community.
It is why the words “We the People” bestow rights and responsibilities. The people must participate in creating justice, preserving domestic order and defense. Promoting overall well-being. Self-government in this context is based on the ability of citizens to exercise authority. Governance of their affairs in an economically rational manner but socially responsible manner for the welfare of the society as a whole. However, if the people will not enforce the Constitution and fight for liberty and the rule of law, we are left with “We the People” only.
The Open-Endedness and Points Left Undecided in “We the People”
Despite the highly laudable tones of ambition and novelty that “We the People” brought to America’s democracy, it was vague and provoked more questions than answers.
The first and probably the most prominent issue was the uncertainty concerning who exactly is considered “the people.” Both the Constitution and the early laws adopted under it allowed the inclusion of slave states and provided political rights only to male property owners of lighter skin color. The sovereign most renowned did not at that time embrace blacks, women, Native Americans, or white males with insufficient property.
Consequently, while “We the People” was inclusive, there were apparent internal tensions between the high-sounding language and the low, practical act of limiting the franchise to a small percentage of Americans. The phrase introduced a vast democratic dream. Albeit a vision that would take centuries to refine, with an even more comfortable and fair inclusion of all citizens, regardless of color or origin, into the polity.
The suffragettes, ethnic and other minorities, and non-propertied men had to battle for their right to vote and be included, much as is seen today where the notion of ‘the people’ is argued not to extend or include women, ethnic minorities, or those who do not own property. In the abstract sense, “We the People” presented a measure of democracy and demands for citizenship. Enfranchisement that succeeding generations would fight for, frequently in the face of opposition from the people who claimed to be its beneficiaries.
The Cognitively Disabled Inclusive and the continued problem of ‘We The People’
Once amendments and civil rights legislation fixed the exclusion errors, the circle of empowered citizenship was refined towards the vision captured in the “We hold these truths” of the Preamble the Preamble does not need a change. The idealist notion of self-government of the whole people was set right from the start.
Nevertheless, the struggle for the comprehensive interpretation of the “We the People” forever remains a work in progress. Usually, voting restrictions and some political practices are designed to target either the race or the status of the voters. Economic disparity ensures that political power is relinquished to the few, especially the affluent. ‘We the People’ is the measure that determines whether it fails to allow the marginalized to have a say in the decision-making process or denies the citizens the tools for good self-governance.
These three words from the political treatise that created the American democracy today remain powerful beyond any measure. As they compel people and their elected officials to consider how much the voters can actively engage and shape the direction of the society. These three actions are juxtaposed to the formal assertion of popular sovereignty encapsulated in “We the People.”
Conclusion
The Idea Of Self-Government Is In The First Three Words Of The Constitution. What Are These Words? Today, any action, law, or practice that would seek to deny a voter or a group of citizens the rights of citizenship and enfranchisement must not only answer to the Civil Rights era of the twentieth century but also the promise enshrined in 1787. According to that yardstick, the nation still works towards the perfect attainment of the concept of government by each person for each person in the country. When the legal historian writes the preface to the Constitution. The democratic revolutionary impulse embodied in the “We the People” of the Preamble is the optimistic promise for another two hundred years of struggle ahead.
