But, not all the governments of the world are democracies, even. Are you referring to the People under all of the 192 hic nation’s wildly varying laws? And “legitimate legitimacy” is just tautological nonsense. I just don’t understand what you’re trying to say here, between your fuzzy philosophical propositions or any evidence or actual point you’re trying to draw from reality.
Legitimacy in and of itself, will embue an individual with absolute power, how exactly?
Okay.
Does your Illuminatus have a corporeal existence, or is he a representation of power above political considerations?
There are 204 nations competing in the Olympics. So what does that mean for our drinking game?
Plus those independent athletes - I bet they’re up to something.
Is anyone in this world truly independent?
You’d need a coherent argument. So far, most of your posts have been [obvious fact] + [obvious fact] = [unicorns are real!]. When this is called to your attention, your response is usually “but it could happen!” If this thread lasts 50 more pages, it’ll probably be 50 more pages of that. This is not the best way to get people to understand your beliefs.
I’m referring to the collective will of the 192 countries. As Jean-Claude Juncker, prime minister of Luxembourg, said, “no one should doubt the collective will of the 17 countries”. Mr. Juncker was, of course, referring to the Eurozone. How would it work for the G-192 summit? The collective will of 192 countries?
I am asking the question - What is the legitimacy of legitimacy?
Yes, I need a coherent argument and in order to do that I need to draw from reality (see what cymk wrote). At least now I am only using obvious facts (although I don’t think that they are all that obvious). What else do I need for my argument besides facts? Perhaps after cymk answers my questions and I take my time to reply then I will have a coherent argument.
From looking over this post, I wonder - Who would doubt the collective will of the 192 countries? The people? It seems not the people, because the people less the heads of government is the 192 countries (I realize that some people are stateless). The Illuminati? Then the Illuminati would be, as DrFidelius posits, a representation of power above political considerations. I also wonder how a representation of power above poliical considerations relates to the legitimacy of legitimacy.
I have a small suggestion that might help in our understanding the ideas you are putting forth-instead of using Babelfish to translate your missives from English to Urdu to French to Klingon and back to English, just post it as is.
What is the redness of red? What is the whichness of the why? What is IS?
Dude.
Are you suffering under the impression that that question actually means anything?
Omigod, that’s it! The 193d member is…
THE ILLUMINATUS! :eek: RUN!!! :eek:
The collective will of all 192 (drink!) countries points in all sorts of directions. You may notice that a few of them are in armed conflict with each other, and some are in the process of civil war. I think the best you can hope for is “Oxygen is good” but even that is controversial in parts of South America and the Balkans.
Since there are 204 countries in the olympics and 193 in the UN, every time someone says 192 you have to drink 12 shots of beer and 1 shot of Cafe Patron.
Sorry, Kozmic, I can’t answer questions that are nonsensical.
See, Smeghead’s post 1109.
What is the wetness of wet?!
In the words of Master Shake from ATHF, ‘Why is anything anything?’
There actually could be something in it, in a serious discussion of sovereignty and other poli-sci foundations. Today, we hold “legitimacy” to be a very basic need in a state…but not absolutely universal. There is still room for minority governments, such as Syria’s or Iraq’s – so long as they aren’t too egregiously brutal, a kind of “assent” legitimacy can stand in place of full and proper “consent” legitimacy.
Then there is still that tiny handful of people who believe in the Divine Right of Kings! Harold Camping (famous for mis-predicting the end of the world) condemned the Arab Spring uprisings, saying that if it was God’s Will to send a new ruler to Egypt, God would do so, but that open rebellion against the leadership is open rebellion against God. (!)
But, no, alas, Kozmik is just a yutz.
You realize, Trinopus, that you’ve just become captain of Team Kozmik in his mind. You are his new staunchest defender and ally, and you understand his deepest thoughts.
Truth is just truth; you can’t have opinions about truth. The redness of my hand. One cannot Grok Spock without heading the mind off at the past. What’s zone is zone. My personal Dilbert number is 192.
Fate is for those who have no destiny.
An argument.
And facts.