3 ms·

What rules? Is there a rule that says if you have enough guns and people and can storm the parliament you can usurp a democratically elected president?

tty 13y ago
Not saying you're wrong but there are many issues with "democracy" in states under Russian control. Yanukovych's main opponent during his first stint as a presidential candidate was "miraculously" poisoned. Federal units within Russia that are clearly against Russian rule regularly give 100% of all their votes to Putin during "democratic" elections (with turnouts reaching above 100%), and so on and so on.
- Demiurge 13y ago
  Sure, there are these problems with Chechen region (not Ukrain). But the last presidential elections of Yanukovich, because of the 2004 fiasco, were extremely closely watched by very many groups and were internationally acknowledged as legitimate.
GoodIntentions 13y ago
The oldest rule in the world: http://www.dict.cc/german-english/Faustrecht.html http://www.dict.cc/german-english/Faustrecht.html Doesn't make it right, but we're about to see it in action.
- gaius 13y ago
  "Of the gods we believe, and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can. And it is not as if we were the first to make this law, or to act upon it when made: we found it existing before us, and shall leave it to exist for ever after us; all we do is to make use of it, knowing that you and everybody else, having the same power as we have, would do the same as we do" -- Thucydides, 431 BC
danbruc 13y ago
If the majority of the people agree that they no longer want the elected president to be their president and he does not follow this request, they definitely have the right to remove him. What I don't know is if their was actually a majority in the Ukraine.
- Demiurge 13y ago
  They don't. You don't know if they do. The majority of people who voted for Yanukovich are the people in the east, pretty far from Kiev. It is THOSE people, in Crimea, and the rest of the east, who are not acknowledging new Kiev revolutionaries. It is the act of allowing this revolution to transpire, as opposed to a democratic process, that is really inviting war and division. If they waited a year and then elected a pro-Western president, none of this would have happened.
  - danbruc 13y ago
    The people are the state. Whatever the majority of the people wants is what the government has to do. So IMHO the right thing to do in such a situation is to conduct an out of order referendum to establish what the majority wants (and I would argue it should be a clear majority like 2:1 to justify exceptional measures) and if the majority agrees that they want to replace their elected president immediately then the president has to resign immediately. If he does not follow the will of the majority, the people have the right to remove him with force. I am of course aware that it might be quiet hard to conduct a representative referendum about a highly controversial topic and probably even without support of the current government.

tty 13y ago

Not saying you're wrong but there are many issues with "democracy" in states under Russian control. Yanukovych's main opponent during his first stint as a presidential candidate was "miraculously" poisoned. Federal units within Russia that are clearly against Russian rule regularly give 100% of all their votes to Putin during "democratic" elections (with turnouts reaching above 100%), and so on and so on.

Demiurge 13y ago
Sure, there are these problems with Chechen region (not Ukrain). But the last presidential elections of Yanukovich, because of the 2004 fiasco, were extremely closely watched by very many groups and were internationally acknowledged as legitimate.

GoodIntentions 13y ago

The oldest rule in the world: http://www.dict.cc/german-english/Faustrecht.html http://www.dict.cc/german-english/Faustrecht.html Doesn't make it right, but we're about to see it in action.

gaius 13y ago
"Of the gods we believe, and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can. And it is not as if we were the first to make this law, or to act upon it when made: we found it existing before us, and shall leave it to exist for ever after us; all we do is to make use of it, knowing that you and everybody else, having the same power as we have, would do the same as we do" -- Thucydides, 431 BC

danbruc 13y ago

If the majority of the people agree that they no longer want the elected president to be their president and he does not follow this request, they definitely have the right to remove him. What I don't know is if their was actually a majority in the Ukraine.

Demiurge 13y ago
They don't. You don't know if they do. The majority of people who voted for Yanukovich are the people in the east, pretty far from Kiev. It is THOSE people, in Crimea, and the rest of the east, who are not acknowledging new Kiev revolutionaries. It is the act of allowing this revolution to transpire, as opposed to a democratic process, that is really inviting war and division. If they waited a year and then elected a pro-Western president, none of this would have happened.
- danbruc 13y ago
  The people are the state. Whatever the majority of the people wants is what the government has to do. So IMHO the right thing to do in such a situation is to conduct an out of order referendum to establish what the majority wants (and I would argue it should be a clear majority like 2:1 to justify exceptional measures) and if the majority agrees that they want to replace their elected president immediately then the president has to resign immediately. If he does not follow the will of the majority, the people have the right to remove him with force. I am of course aware that it might be quiet hard to conduct a representative referendum about a highly controversial topic and probably even without support of the current government.