Quotes About Sovereignty

. . . we should be men first, and subjects afterward.

We cannot allow the American flag to be shot at anywhere on earth if we are to retain our respect and prestige

To safeguard democracy the people must have a keen sense of independence, self-respect, and their oneness.

Nearly everywhere monarchs raised themselves further above the level of the greatest nobles and buttressed their new pretensions to respect and authority with cannons and taxation.

Where the people possess no authority, their rights obtain no respect.

Self respect is impossible without liberty.

The Persian Gulf is our lifeline ... We will respect international navigation, for us, freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf is a must.

The only ground on which a neutral State can claim respect at the hands of belligerents is, that, so far as she is concerned, their rights are protected.

Without free, self-respecting, and autonomous citizens there can be no free and independent nations.

This is my homeland; no one can kick me out.

The victory march will continue until the Palestinian flag flies in Jerusalem and in all of Palestine.

To rule the world, man has got to rule the rulers of the world.

The nationalism I grew up with is a principled standpoint that regards the world as governed best when nations are able to chart their own independent course, cultivating their own traditions and pursuing their own interests without interference. This is opposed to imperialism, which seeks to bring peace and prosperity to the world by uniting mankind, as much as possible, under a single political regime.

An order of independent nations would permit diverse forms of self-government, religion, and culture in a "world of experiments" that would benefit all mankind.

The new world they envision is one in which liberal theories of the rule of law, the market economy, and individual rights—all of which evolved in the domestic context of national states such as Britain, the Netherlands, and America—are regarded as universal truths and considered the appropriate basis for an international regime that will make the independence of the national state unnecessary

The PRC's "deterritorialized nationalism" is compatible with the commoditization of national sovereignty practice of many Mekong countries in which large-scale, long-term land concessions are granted to Chinese companies for lucrative investment in megaprojects (Dwyer 2007). Deterritorialized nationalism mobilized through xin yimin is at

Words you will never hear God say, "I did my part ... now it's all up to you."

When it comes to climate, countries are just not sovereign. They are at the mercy of actions taken by people on the other side of the planet. The Republic of Kiribati, an island nation in the Pacific Ocean, could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to zero and nevertheless be submerged under the rising waves if other countries don't follow suit.

Chad could put a solar panel on every roof in the country and yet become a barren desert due to the irresponsible environmental policies of distant foreigners. Even powerful nations such as China and Japan are not ecologically sovereign. To protect Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Tokyo from destructive floods and typhoons, the Chinese and Japanese will have to persuade the Russian and American governments to abandon their "business as usual" approach.

Even powerful nations such as China and Japan are not ecologically sovereign.

When it comes to climate, countries are just not sovereign. They are at the mercy of actions taken by people on the other side of the planet.

But if both liberalism and communism are now discredited, maybe humans should abandon the very idea of a single global story? Why should Vietnamese villagers put their faith in the brainchild of a German from Trier and a Manchester industrialist? Maybe each country should adopt a different idiosyncratic path, defined by its own ancient traditions? Perhaps even Westerners should take a break from trying to run the world, and focus on their own affairs for a change?

Cuando se trata del clima, los países ya no son soberanos. Se encuentran a merced de acciones que otras personas efectúan en la otra punta del planeta.

How many Indians today would want to call a vote to divest themselves of democracy, English, the railway network, the legal system, cricket and tea on the grounds that they are imperial legacies? And if they did, wouldn't the very act of calling a vote to decide the issue demonstrate their debt to their former overlords?