[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
. 83 And this is the freedom advanced by Hardt s andNegri s new republican people.It is a freedom specifically constituted in thesacrifice of indigenous peoples.This sacrifice was given formed, constitutionaleffect in the so-called Indian cases in the Supreme Court, cases set in that very first phase of the Constitution that is so seminal for Hardt and Negri.Thesecases decided that the momentous national settlement depended upon anexplicitly counterrevolutionary and explicitly antidemocratic exclusion andsacrificing of Indian peoples, and in so doing they created the racial ur-Constitution of the United States.84Even before Hardt s and Negri s first phase of the Constitution, the empireof liberty (borrowing the phrase in this setting from Jefferson) already excludedslaves, and the republican franchise for long after that phase would not extendbeyond propertied, white, adult males.Indeed, a revisionist historiography, onethat has some regard for detail, would show that an unexceptional American variety of empire had existed long before this first phase of the Constitution. 85The very effort to reconcile being a republic with being an empire confirmed a 50 EMPIRE S NEW CLOTHESstandard racially and nationally constituted character of both.86 The solution tothis conundrum, usually identified with Jefferson, was that, in the expandingimperial mode, new states could be acquired but that, in the republican mode,they had to be admitted to the Union on the basis of equality with other states.Arepublican federalism could hardly countenance anything else.Lands could beacquired initially as territories under the temporary control of the federalgovernment, but they would eventually have to be accorded the status of statesand then be able to enter the fold.87That scheme never applied to Indian peoples and, as an ignoble history ground on, they were subjected in regimes that came to resemble those of thesecond imperialism generally.88 Even if this exception is brushed aside, theJeffersonian resolving of the demands of empire and republic was much strainedin the latter half of the nineteenth century, when the expansion of empire wasinhibited because such an expansion threatened to include peoples perceived asracially different from the citizens of the United States, peoples whose entry intothe Union as states was anathema.In the aftermath of the Spanish-AmericanWar, this already precarious resolution was destroyed.The coup de grace was administered by the Supreme Court in the InsularCases, cases that remain good law to abuse the legal phrase.89 This was acollection of cases, variously grouped, decided in the late nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries, almost all of which concerned the colonies the United Statesacquired in the war with Spain.The basic issue throughout these cases waswhether the conquered territories were part of the United States.The particularcall for decision varied widely.It could be a question of whether customs dutywas to be levied on imports from the territories.Or it could be the questionwhether the colonized population enjoyed certain constitutional rights.Theoutcomes also varied, but the constant was that the colonized themselves wereheld to be qualitatively different from the citizens of the United States and couldnot be admitted to that select company.Such people would be utterly unfit forAmerican citizenship, and they were incapable of assuming the rights whichpeculiarly belong to the citizens of the United States. 90 In thence embracing anunabashed colonialism, in departing from the present system of republicangovernment, the Supreme Court felt that its colonized charges were nonethelessprotected by certain principles of natural justice inherent in the Anglo-Saxoncharacter which need no expression in constitutions or statutes& [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl centka.pev.pl
. 83 And this is the freedom advanced by Hardt s andNegri s new republican people.It is a freedom specifically constituted in thesacrifice of indigenous peoples.This sacrifice was given formed, constitutionaleffect in the so-called Indian cases in the Supreme Court, cases set in that very first phase of the Constitution that is so seminal for Hardt and Negri.Thesecases decided that the momentous national settlement depended upon anexplicitly counterrevolutionary and explicitly antidemocratic exclusion andsacrificing of Indian peoples, and in so doing they created the racial ur-Constitution of the United States.84Even before Hardt s and Negri s first phase of the Constitution, the empireof liberty (borrowing the phrase in this setting from Jefferson) already excludedslaves, and the republican franchise for long after that phase would not extendbeyond propertied, white, adult males.Indeed, a revisionist historiography, onethat has some regard for detail, would show that an unexceptional American variety of empire had existed long before this first phase of the Constitution. 85The very effort to reconcile being a republic with being an empire confirmed a 50 EMPIRE S NEW CLOTHESstandard racially and nationally constituted character of both.86 The solution tothis conundrum, usually identified with Jefferson, was that, in the expandingimperial mode, new states could be acquired but that, in the republican mode,they had to be admitted to the Union on the basis of equality with other states.Arepublican federalism could hardly countenance anything else.Lands could beacquired initially as territories under the temporary control of the federalgovernment, but they would eventually have to be accorded the status of statesand then be able to enter the fold.87That scheme never applied to Indian peoples and, as an ignoble history ground on, they were subjected in regimes that came to resemble those of thesecond imperialism generally.88 Even if this exception is brushed aside, theJeffersonian resolving of the demands of empire and republic was much strainedin the latter half of the nineteenth century, when the expansion of empire wasinhibited because such an expansion threatened to include peoples perceived asracially different from the citizens of the United States, peoples whose entry intothe Union as states was anathema.In the aftermath of the Spanish-AmericanWar, this already precarious resolution was destroyed.The coup de grace was administered by the Supreme Court in the InsularCases, cases that remain good law to abuse the legal phrase.89 This was acollection of cases, variously grouped, decided in the late nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries, almost all of which concerned the colonies the United Statesacquired in the war with Spain.The basic issue throughout these cases waswhether the conquered territories were part of the United States.The particularcall for decision varied widely.It could be a question of whether customs dutywas to be levied on imports from the territories.Or it could be the questionwhether the colonized population enjoyed certain constitutional rights.Theoutcomes also varied, but the constant was that the colonized themselves wereheld to be qualitatively different from the citizens of the United States and couldnot be admitted to that select company.Such people would be utterly unfit forAmerican citizenship, and they were incapable of assuming the rights whichpeculiarly belong to the citizens of the United States. 90 In thence embracing anunabashed colonialism, in departing from the present system of republicangovernment, the Supreme Court felt that its colonized charges were nonethelessprotected by certain principles of natural justice inherent in the Anglo-Saxoncharacter which need no expression in constitutions or statutes& [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]