what gives a government legitimacy?
is it the vote of the people?
is it the rule of force?
is real legitimacy possible?

The answer is situation dependent.

Examples:

The nature of the electoral process as defined in the US Constitution gives the United States Government legitimacy. It is irrelavant whether the rest of the world 'likes' our government or its leaders.

The Magna Carta and subsequent laws have given the British Government legitimacy. I could continue down the list of governments with documented governmental structures.

Now we go to monarchies. Different breed of cat but still quite similar to the British example. The monarch is in place for multiple reasons. The acceptance of the individual in that particular leadership role is what gives that government legitimacy.

Dictators/President for Life: Simply stated (by Chairman Mao) "Power emanates from the barrel of a gun". In this/these situations, legitimacy depends on where in to political system you are. If you are in government ... it's obviously legitimate.

One man's opinion.

Nox

what would have to happen in an american election to make the government illegitimate?
the 2000 election came damn close. or would it have to be more wide spread? doesn't doesn't the sheer power that corporate funding have delegitimize our govt. somewhat?

quote:

---

Originally posted by 4ot:
what would have to happen in an american election to make the government illegitimate? the 2000 election came damn close.

---

How so?

Nox

I think he might be reffering to the President not having the popular vote and therefore not having the bulk of the people behind him and a consequential lack of legitimacy.

Obviously divine right.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NukeChild:
I think he might be reffering to the President not having the popular vote and therefore not having the bulk of the people behind him and a consequential lack of legitimacy.

---

And if he is, then he didn't pay one bit of attention to my first post. The electoral college is specifically spelled out in a little document called the Constitution of the United States.

How many ten thousand times do you people need to be reminded of that little tiny, itsey bitsey, teeny weeny, hard core FACT.

Nox

governments rule by there ability to maintain control over a populace. this can be accomplished in a varieties of ways, the consent of the governed, brutal represion, consent or consolidation of major power bases such as military, industry, media.

I don't think the constitution covers recounts etc.

Besides, does the constitution alone give a government legitimacy? Because, if so, then the majority of unpopular absolute monarchies, past and present, could claim legitimacy (even if they were so unpopular and incapable of governing they were subsequently overthrown).

You all seem to be missing my point. it is not whether a government IS ruling, or IS recognized, it is whether said government is legitimate. The difference may sound small, but it isnt.
example: The government of taiwan, though hardly internationally recognized, is a lot more legitimate than the government of China.
The difference is between having the right to rule and the power to rule.

PS the election in 2000 was broken not because Gore got the majority of the popular vote and lost but because of the disenfranchisement of a large number of black voters in florida due to a certain list that a Bush cousin sent to a Bush brother. On said list were the names of supposed felons whose voting rights were taken away. despite the fact that mostly they were not felons.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 4ot:
PS the election in 2000 was broken not because Gore got the majority of the popular vote and lost but because of the disenfranchisement of a large number of black voters in florida due to a certain list that a Bush cousin sent to a Bush brother. On said list were the names of supposed felons whose voting rights were taken away. despite the fact that mostly they were not felons.

---

False. And when you talk about disenfranchisement in Florida, you really hit a nerve with me...what about the mainly military voters who were disenfranchised because they voted absentee ballot. And this example that you cited about black disenfranchisement is bogus and just the perpetuation of Democratic Party spin and flagrant lies.

Nox

it is neither spin nor lies. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,406485,00.html

With that link 4ot has just got another believer in how bush won the elections unfairly.

I don't know much about these elections so i leave the debating to 4ot and Nox... Round 2 begins.

I accept the challenge for round two, but my participation will be short.

I have trouble accepting "facts" about US politics as presented by 'The Guardian' for two reasons. First, that newspaper lacks a good reputation for objectivity and correctness in material presented (it has the reputation of being a gossip rag). Second, this newspaper has a consistant Anti-American bias. There is nothing wrong with having an advesarial newspaper, but if that is the only source of your information, the you might consider a subscription to al-Jazeera to round out the bias.

Nox

what do you think it would take to delegitemize the american regime?

I do not understand the question.

Nox

whaat would have to happen, in an election or otherwise, for you to not recognize the US government as your government?

To delegitemize the American regime someone would need to show the masses (and I mean the masses not just you guys) how corrupt they are.

he he he he.
it would have to fuck up. Even more then it has now. all republicans should be killed or deported and one man should stand up from the crowd of angry rioters and form a party. that party will consist of the population. but you will still be ruled by a governement.

Kinda reminds You of the russian revolution doenst it?
But it will never happen. sit back and enjoy the ride that Bush is giving u.

In the worst case scenario u could assasinate him.

Screw this country
--------------------------------------------
|------------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * |
--------------------------------------------

You know jsaxton, there are only 32 stars on that flag.
Although I do agree with you.

--------------------------------------------------
|------------------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------------------|
|------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * * *|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * * *|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * * *|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * * *|
|-----------------------| * * * * * * * * * *|
-------------------------------------------------

Homer

[This message has been edited by HomerJay603 (edited 12-14-2002).]

[This message has been edited by HomerJay603 (edited 12-14-2002).]

Here is a good inverted flag for the detail oriented.

-------------------------------------
|-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------|
|-----------------------|* * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * |
|-----------------------|* * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * |
|-----------------------|* * * * * * |
|-----------------------| * * * * * |
|-----------------------|* * * * * * |
------------------------------------

[This message has been edited by jsaxton14 (edited 12-15-2002).]

quote:

---

To delegitemize the American regime someone would need to show the masses (and I mean the masses not just you guys) how corrupt they are.

---

This can almost be interepreted as the rise of demagouges, who whip the mob into a fury and the senators come running out throwing bread and circuses.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 4ot:
whaat would have to happen, in an election or otherwise, for you to not recognize the US government as your government?

---

I have given this some thought, and I guess my response would be in the event of someone assuming power by other than the established procedure.

I will give an example that has almost happened in recent history which got under my skin then and still irritates me today.

Ronald Regan shot by John Hinckley Jr. on March 30, 1981. When the cabinet was called together and briefed, megamoron (then and now) Alexander Haig (former 4-Star General and current Sec. of State) made the bold announcement that "I am in charge".

Everyone present blew him off, but the point is, had Al taken over, that would have been a 'US Government' that I would not have recognized.

There are a couple other examples in the twentieth century where we have had truly questionable 'governments' because the Presidents wives assumed responsibilities which they were not legally entitled to assume:

Edith Wilson, second wife of Woodrow Wilson, has been called the 'Secret President' because of how she handled affairs after WW's health failed in September 1919; a stroke left him partly paralyzed. His constant attendant, Mrs. Wilson took over many routine duties and details of government. But she did not initiate programs or make major decisions, and she did not try to control the executive branch. She selected matters for her husband's attention and let everything else go to the heads of departments or remain in abeyance. Her "stewardship," she called this.

Elainor Roosevelt did essentially the same things at the end of FDR's life.

Many rumors exist about the actual role that Rosylin Carter played in Jimmy's government.

And then there's Hillary baby ...

So long story short, If I knew what was going on, I would be yet another typical American who would take to the streets to end that flagrant usurption of power.

Nox

What about if a man used family ties to rig the elections and become President of the United States unfairly. Then proceed to take over the world in a series of invasions poorly disguised legitimate wars. Would that work?