Why Constitutions Are the Safeguards of Freedom – The New York Times

Another force Colley identifies was the spread of new communication technologies (the pen). (Here Colleys work echoes that of the great scholar of nationalism, Benedict Anderson.) During the early modern period in Europe, literacy expanded while the cost of publication decreased, leading to an explosion of newspapers, pamphlets and books. These made it much easier for reformers to exchange ideas with one another and with mass audiences. As Colley puts it, the growing ease of communication made it possible for men and women and not just in the West to become better and more regularly informed about political personalities and projects in different parts of the world. It became easier for people to compare and contrast conditions, including political conditions, in different countries and continents.

Interestingly, Colley shows that early constitutions were not simply the result of demands from below. Rather, increasingly aware of and influenced by Enlightenment ideas, rulers like Catherine II of Russia, Frederick of Prussia and Gustaf III of Sweden wrote constitutions in order to signal their modern status to their people and to one another. And in another reflection of the influence of the new communication technologies, these rulers often custom-made their proclamations for print reproduction and had them translated into different languages so they could be easily disseminated at home and abroad.

Which brings us to the final, interlocking force identified by Colley: globalization (the ship). Accompanying new communication technologies was the growing ease of travel. As is the case today, these forces combined to facilitate the spread of new ideas. And since, as Colley notes, it is easier to borrow than invent, the ability of political elites and intellectuals in South America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East to learn about constitutions in Europe, the United States and elsewhere as well as to travel to these places contributed to a contagion of constitution-making beginning in the mid-19th century.

The Gun, the Ship, and the Pen stresses that constitution-makers in non-Western places did not merely copy existing constitutions but rather adapted them to their own regions particular needs. As Colley says, the growing ease of communication and travel meant that constitution-makers across the globe could study and select between ideas, institutions and laws set out in an expanding print array of different countries constitutions. They could then meld and combine the borrowings of their choice with their own ideas, aspirations and legal and political conventions. Unfortunately, despite the geographical breadth of The Gun, the Ship, and the Pen, Colley fails to explain how constitutions changed across time and space. At one point, for example, she states that between 1776 and 1850 the most oft-mentioned constitutional rights were freedom of the press and religion. Was this still the case in the late 19th and 20th centuries? Did countries or regions differ systematically in the type of rights included in their constitutions? Such questions are left unanswered.

Nonetheless, The Gun, the Ship, and the Pen has important lessons for anyone interested in political development today. One is the value of taking a long-term perspective when trying to understand contemporary events. Colley demonstrates that even failed attempts at implanting constitutions often had important consequences. For instance, she shows that in many cases of successful constitution-making, reformers built upon previous efforts and learned from the mistakes their predecessors made.

Colley also reminds us of how revolutionary and inspirational constitutions were and still are. Constitutions let people define and delineate power, to shape the way governance occurs and authority is exercised in their countries. At a time when many are questioning the future of democracy, it is worth remembering how important and precious these things are. At the end of The Gun, the Ship, and the Pen Colley recounts some words of Thomas Jeffersons that are particularly apt today: Tho written constitutions may be violated in moments of passion or delusion, yet they furnish a text to which those who are watchful may again rally & recall the people.

See the original post here:

Why Constitutions Are the Safeguards of Freedom - The New York Times