4 ms·
The "rulers" are the criminals and law breakers against the only legitimate source of law: democracy and the consent of governed.
by TheCoelacanth 4y ago
The "rulers" are the criminals and law breakers against the only legitimate source of law: democracy and the consent of governed.
- _8j50 4y agoDemocracy is not the only form of government and the consent if the people is not required to form a government. But if the people want that, they must establish such a government by whatever means just like americans did 1979 after winning a bloody war to establish such a form of government. It was blood not votes that allowed american democracy to exist and it was also blood that allowed King George to rule over america to begin with and it wad blood that allowed comminists in China, Russia, Cuba and NK to establish their govenment,etc... Blood usually but always is the source that allows establishment of a military which must first accept that form of government and then the people need only tolerate the rule of law enforced ultimately through the military. Any source of law that is capable of enforcing that law is legitimate. But you can disagree with authoritatians for example and fight to replace them with a democracy (Iraq is calling, they want Saddam back! Lol jk) but even though you can do so it is unjust and under rule of law criminal to punish someone who followed the law of the land or to creatr laws that punish people for acts done before the law was passed.
- TheCoelacanth 4y agoSo, might makes right? What horseshit! Regardless, by that philosophy, they would be perfectly justified to take the king's property. If they are capable of doing it, then it's legitimate.