Which is the source of the state power legitimacy?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by azagani, Nov 8, 2004.

  1. azagani Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    Which is the source of the state power legitimacy?

    1. The strength (the power itself)
    2. The justice of its laws
    3. The history
    4. The recognition of other states
    5. The democracy
    6. Other thing (which?)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. azagani Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    Sorry, I've forgotten:
    7. The consensus of its population
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Clockwood You Forgot Poland Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,467
    In the most basic sense, the very ability to hold onto that power.

    In my personal opinion, however, the ability to stay in power without the use of violence against its own people makes a state legitimate. A little bit of crowd control and the enforcement of sensible laws is ok, but once you start using heavy artillary on protesters or forcing people into reeducation camps, it all slips from there.

    there is definitly a grey area between legitamate and iligitimate.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. azagani Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    If the source of legitimacy is the ability to hold the power, dictatorships must be more legitimate than democracies, because in them people remain in the power for a longtime, or at least equally legitimate, if we consider the state and not the people. Do you agree?
     
  8. alain du hast mich Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,179
    8 being of benefit to the population
     
  9. Dreamwalker Whatever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,205
    I agree with Alain, and combine it with #7
     
  10. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    A government is effective and legitimate as long as it has its people's support. People are generally satisfied with their government if it protects their life, liberty, and property (property is what's implied by "pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration of Independence). You may say that's the Enlightenment idea, but those philosophers merely put into good words the truths that were there all along ever since there was some sort of a leader in a group.
     
  11. azagani Registered Member

    Messages:
    10
    If the consensus of its population is the source of legitimacy, if in a country there was consensus about end democracy and human rights, must they be ended? A dictator could sort of convince people about defending better life and property e.g.
     
  12. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    The recognicion of the state's power by the large majority of its citizens.
     
  13. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    The current events in Ukraine are interesting if you consider what was said above. Not only is the people's recognition necessary, but also the recognition of other gov'ts (referring to US's opinion on the events).
     
  14. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Not really. That has more to do with sovereignty (sp). At least so I got from my studies.
     
  15. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    Well, if US doesn't like the gov't, it can easily overthrow it (has been seen many times through history).

    Study ahead, you won't be bored.

    /ducks.
     
  16. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    That has nothing to do with legetimacy, little volk. State's legitimacy comes only from its people. If some other state is interfering with the legitime stance of the population then it is oppression of that state's inner (duno the english term) sovereignty.
    Of course there can't be a fully sovereign state (international sovereigny/recognicion needed too), but if only one other state doesn't recognize some other state then that is just bullying and is not serious.

    p.s. I know my constitutional rights (9/10), thank you.
    Of course there are other constitutional theories, but mine is the one most accepted in Europe and also by me (whichever is more globally important).
     
  17. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    Mhh, I only made an attempt to think beyond what was said in class. You should try that sometimes, big drakonchik.
     
  18. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    [cold voice] I think on everything I'm being told and in this case I agree on what I was told. [/cold voice]
     
  19. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    I agree too.
    But look at what was said about Arafat (let him freeze up there); Israel thought Arafat wasn't a legit leader so negotiations were useless. Well, of course such ideas were meaningless, but still, international recognition has to be there since there are international relations. Would you talk to someone you thought was not a legitimate leader of a group but presented himself as such?

    [cold voice] well, let me see your questioning process [/cold voice]
     
  20. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    I'm tired repeating. Two different things. What Israel thinks is nothing to do with state's legetimacy, but with international (only if a weak de facto) relations.
     
  21. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Take Ukraine for example. People there still recognize themselves to be Ukrainians (sp) and even if they'd want to form another country from a part of it, it's still Ukrainians that think different. That's legitimacy screwed.
    Israel arab case has to do with an entirelly new state Palestine in it's infancy and any official Israel relations with palestitian authoroties lean more towards international relations.
    Of course theory is one thing and reality is rarely as clear as it and it's harder to draw the line, but that's how I see it. Eat it or leave it, I don't care.
     

Share This Page