cits ([info]garamgajejs) rakstīja,
@ 2016-05-22 11:09:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
"Cromwell, Jefferson, or Danton were all clearly guilty of treason, according to the laws under which they grew up, just as much as they would have been had they tried to do the same thing again under the new regimes they created, say, twenty years later. So laws emerge from illegal activity. This creates a fundamental incoherence in the very idea of modern government, which assumes that the state has a monopoly of the legitimate use of violence (only the police, or prison guards, or duly authorized private security, have the legal right to beat you up). It’s legitimate for the police to use violence because they are enforcing the law; the law is legitimate because it’s rooted in the constitution; the constitution is legitimate because it comes from the people; the people created the constitution by acts of illegal violence. The obvious question, then: How does one tell the difference between “the people” and a mere rampaging mob?"


(Ierakstīt jaunu komentāru)


[info]gnidrologs
2016-05-22 13:32 (saite)
Tas nav ''obvious question''? Might makes right. Ja attiecīgais pūlis pārstāv pietiekami populāru kustību un ir spējīgs uzspiest savu kārtību, tad tas ir sevi leģitimizējis.

(Atbildēt uz šo)


Neesi iežurnalējies. Iežurnalēties?