• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When is government legitimate?

Fenton Lum said:
The constitution was designed to protect the aristocracy from (what you rightly, as in, in concert with the founder's views refer to as "the mob") the people, or “the mob”. Nothing protected native peoples, black folk, women, or the impoverished. The aristocracy wanted protection from us, still do. And that is what the police, who arose out of slave patrols do.
Click to expand...


Ho. Lee. Crap. What an attitude. And what a load of crap too.

If that's true, why did the "aristocrats" let all free men vote from the beginning? And yeah, women and minorities didn't get their freedom until later, but they DID get it. Such was the case in almost all nations.

Early policing was provided by locally elected sheriffs in America, in both free and slave states, but the first metropolitan police departments were started in London England, Philadelphia, Richmond, Boston, NYC in America... mostly non-slaveowning locations.
 
Tigerace117 said:
The "will of the people" for a century after the civil war was to deny African Americans their constitutional rights.......unless you think the government forcing the south to accept equal rights and end slavery was an "overreach".
Click to expand...


Some errors take time to correct, but the correction has been in place longer than most of you have been alive....
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I never said rightly claim, meanwhile, back to reality, the sheeple re-elect these corrupt thieves at a rate in excess of 90%.
Click to expand...

Those two things are in no way mutually exclusive, and the economic trajectory this society has been on for the past half century has been utterly bipartisan in it's handling.
 
AlbqOwl said:
"Legitimate" would be in the eye of the beholder I suppose. A monarchy is legitimate in those nations that have one. A dictatorship or other authoritarian government is legitimate when the dictator and/or the regime have the sole power to declare whether the government is or is not legitimate.

Is the U.S. government legitimate when all three branches have strayed so far from their constitutional authority? The Founders would almost certainly would declare a resounding NO. Teddy Roosevelt, who turned the Constitution on its head with his declaration that the government could do whatever the Constitution did not specifically forbid, and most of the more authoritarian Presidents since then, would probably say yes.

IMO, the U.S. government is not legitimate in anything that it does beyond the authority given it in the Constitution.

Presidents should not be allowed to make law. They do that these days and that is not legitimate. Certainly a President should not be able to overturn or change or refuse to enforce any law that was passed by Congress and a President signed.

Congress should make only laws to fulfill is constitutional authority and should be responsible for passing and/or changing and/or abolishing ALL laws, rules, regulations that bind the federal government, the states, and/or the people in any manner whatsoever including the use of their tax dollars.

The bureaucracy should respect, comply with, do, and/or enforce only programs, laws, rules, regulations that are passed by Congress. Unelected faceless bureaucrats should have no power to create and/or enforce any rule, law, regulation to which the people are required to obey.

The courts should interpret the existing law, advise Congress if there is a constitutional issue with any law passed, and settle disputes of proper application of the existing law when there is disagreement. Unelected judges should have no power to issue any ruling that constitutes a change in a valid law passed by Congress or create a new one thereby bypassing the people's elected representatives.
Click to expand...

Congress has all sorts of ways to cheat us. A prime example is passing "strict" immigration law yet allocating far to little to enforce that law. The result was absolutely predictable - a massive amount of "undocumented" immigrants and the proposed solution is simply to document them (counter to the very law that they pretend is still in force). Another example is spending more than they dare ask for in taxation and calling that a budget or giving themselves automatic pay raises unless they specifically vote to stop them.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Congress has all sorts of ways to cheat us. A prime example is passing "strict" immigration law yet allocating far to little to enforce that law. The result was absolutely predictable - a massive amount of "undocumented" immigrants and the proposed solution is simply to document them (counter to the very law that they pretend is still in force). Another example is spending more than they dare ask for in taxation and calling that a budget or giving themselves automatic pay raises unless they specifically vote to stop them.
Click to expand...

A massive amount of "undocumented" immigrants clamored and lobbied for by your "job creator" class.
 
jdog said:
What are the factors that make a government in a system of self determination legitimate?
If we truly live in a country where the people are free and enjoy the liberty we sing about in our National Anthems, then we must maintain or rights to self determination and our status of masters over our government.

What factors today support or erode our rights to self determination and the legitimacy of our government?
Click to expand...

Government, by which I assume you mean federal government, is limited to protecting the borders, fighting the wars, and facilitating interstate commerce and travel. Everything else is an overreach.
 
Fenton Lum said:
Those two things are in no way mutually exclusive, and the economic trajectory this society has been on for the past half century has been utterly bipartisan in it's handling.
Click to expand...

Party labels are simply a way of differentiating the party for a bigger federal government from the party for a huge federal government - by choosing a candidate presented by either party the voter guarantees the federal government grows in power and cost. Doing the same thing, over and over, yet always anticipating a different result is often described as insanity.
 
Fenton Lum said:
Well, we have lost the guarantee of Habeas Corpus, we are THE most incarcerated and surveilled population the planet has ever known, we are seeing voter suppression and the ability of the corporate police state to murder unarmed citizens in the streets with impunity. We've allowed private corporate state money to decide political outcomes, we go into endless wars of aggression and occupation 'without' going to war and most of what the public supports never comes up for consideration.

At some point the constitution came to be used like the bible; just another instrument with which to bludgeon political opponents, and it happened very early on.
Click to expand...

Gee buddy, considering the fact that the American people wanted the surveillance--- demanded it, in fact--- not to mention the very simple concept that there is quite a lot of crime going on in this country, which of course necessitates prison sentences, unless you want to bring back summary execution--- it's really not as malign as you seem to fantasize.

Good thing we have those "charities" you support to launch terrorist attacks and ensure that unjustified shootings--- which, when you consider the millions of interactions between citizens and the police across the country every day, really aren't all that common--- will continue.

"Wars of agression" by which you mean overthrowing your hero Saddam and the Taliban. Yawn. We all get that you love mass murderers, but you are in the minority there.

At some point you'll realize that no Americans support your delusions.
 
Goshin said:
Some errors take time to correct, but the correction has been in place longer than most of you have been alive....
Click to expand...

When an error requires one of the most battle hardened divisions in the US Army to keep kids from being badly beaten---or far worse---then it pays to remember that error in order to ensure that it will never happen again. The Confederacy worship in the south and west suggests the error is not considered an error by many.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Which is why it's so funny that the people who claim to be most concerned about "preserving their rights under the constitution" turned right around and took a giant dump all over it in their quest to oppress other Americans.
Click to expand...

You are mistaking the sheep blindly following party with people who truly believe in the constitution and the rights of the people. I don't believe our government is democracy. We are a representative government with a constitution. We elect our representatives in a popular vote which is democratic to a point. We do not elect a president and we do not elect the supreme court. That is 2/3 of our government that is not democratic. Thank God for that. The last thing I want is for my country to have mob rule where 51% of the people could vote away the rights of the other 49%. Or a country where the individual has no rights under mob rule.
 
Fenton Lum said:
A massive amount of "undocumented" immigrants clamored and lobbied for by your "job creator" class.
Click to expand...

Yep, so is the "safety net" which makes it possible for employers to pay far less than a "living wage" since we the sheeple make up the shortfall with public funds. Some call that resulting artificial reduction in wages compassionate conservatism rather than corporate welfare.
 
jdog said:
What are the factors that make a government in a system of self determination legitimate?
If we truly live in a country where the people are free and enjoy the liberty we sing about in our National Anthems, then we must maintain or rights to self determination and our status of masters over our government.

What factors today support or erode our rights to self determination and the legitimacy of our government?
Click to expand...
Taking your position to the extreme is anarchy. We put limitations in place for the well being of the majority. That's all government essentially is. It's an entity that is designed to facial ate a peaceful coexistence between people. There are many competing ideas on what best form of gov accomplishes that but they are all legitimate.

I happen to believe that our form of government is the best but just because I think it's superior to say facism does not make facism less legitimate. It's less desirable to most but it's still a legitimate way to govern people.

In the context of what is and is not legitimate in our government is pretty simple, anything that congress passes as law and the scouts does not strike down is legitimate. Even when they get it wrong, which they do a lot imo, it's still legitimate.

Here's a basic example of what I mean,
I think it's a good idea for a person to use a seat belt but I think it's absurd to make it a crime not to wear one. I'm very anti toltarism and imo that's a minor form of it.

I feel people expect government to protect them from too much.





Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Tigerace117 said:
What happens when the "will of the people" goes directly against the constitution and the rights granted to all Americans?
Click to expand...
It gets argued in front of the scotus

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Fenton Lum said:
The constitution was designed to protect the aristocracy from (what you rightly, as in, in concert with the founder's views refer to as "the mob") the people, or “the mob”. Nothing protected native peoples, black folk, women, or the impoverished. The aristocracy wanted protection from us, still do. And that is what the police, who arose out of slave patrols do.
Click to expand...

Wrong. We have the opportunity to vote for our representatives that can amend the constitution to protect the rights of all people. Instead we blindly follow party that is owned by the aristocracy. We can fund and elect whoever we want. We chose to elect the puppets presented to us by the aristocracy who own both parties. No government can fix stupid. As long as we continue to blindly elect one of their puppets from the 2 parties the Aristocracy own they will continue to rule us. Hopefully one day we will become smart enough to see through the smoke and mirrors. But it seems that day is still a long way off. Until then just pull the party lever and do as you are told.
 
Tigerace117 said:
When an error requires one of the most battle hardened divisions in the US Army to keep kids from being badly beaten---or far worse---then it pays to remember that error in order to ensure that it will never happen again. The Confederacy worship in the south and west suggests the error is not considered an error by many.
Click to expand...


Oh good grief here we go again with the Southern Conspiracy Theory....where respect for history and heritage is misconstrued as a desire to renew slavery or jim crow....


Um. no. Not for any but a tiny and vanishing minority.
 
trouble13 said:
It gets argued in front of the scotus

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

As it turned out, it took quite a few demonstrations and major efforts to force the issue.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I am not sure what you mean but many federal laws, departments and programs that appear to violate the constitution exist in which case:

Either the SCOTUS "re-interprets" a law to be constitutional, the constituion is amended or the folks (sheeple?) calm down and simply accept it (re-elect those that allowed the overreach).
Click to expand...

The last amendment was in 1992. So the government has learned that they can do as they wish with their pen and phone. Barring that there is SCOTUS, which has ruled virtually 100% along party lines for years. SCOTUS job is to interpret law, not make it.
 
Goshin said:
Oh good grief here we go again with the Southern Conspiracy Theory....where respect for history and heritage is misconstrued as a desire to renew slavery or jim crow....


Um. no. Not for any but a tiny and vanishing minority.
Click to expand...

Gee buddy, what are we supposed to think when people fly the flag of an enemy of the United States, one which murdered thousands of American soldiers and sailors, and on top of that spent the next century desperately fighting to keep
Americans from exercising their constitutional rights?

There's no reason to be proud of the Confederacy. None. It's adherents formed a terrorist group which is still around today.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
You are mistaking the sheep blindly following party with people who truly believe in the constitution and the rights of the people. I don't believe our government is democracy. We are a representative government with a constitution. We elect our representatives in a popular vote which is democratic to a point. We do not elect a president and we do not elect the supreme court. That is 2/3 of our government that is not democratic. Thank God for that. The last thing I want is for my country to have mob rule where 51% of the people could vote away the rights of the other 49%. Or a country where the individual has no rights under mob rule.
Click to expand...

It seems more like a case of the sheep blindly following those who can yell loudest about "federal oppression" at this point.....
 
jimbo said:
The last amendment was in 1992. So the government has learned that they can do as they wish with their pen and phone. Barring that there is SCOTUS, which has ruled virtually 100% along party lines for years. SCOTUS job is to interpret law, not make it.
Click to expand...

Since nearly everything that the federal government does has some relationship to general welfare, commerce or taxation - those become the only arguments needed to say that what congress and/or the POTUS wants is constitutional. Another problem is gaining any access to the SCOTUS at all - they are free to simply say we won't address that or that you lack standing.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Gee buddy, what are we supposed to think when people fly the flag of an enemy of the United States, one which murdered thousands of American soldiers and sailors, and on top of that spent the next century desperately fighting to keep
Americans from exercising their constitutional rights?

There's no reason to be proud of the Confederacy. None. It's adherents formed a terrorist group which is still around today.
Click to expand...


I'm not having this conversation with you, because you can't have it without being bigoted and hateful towards southerners, and willfully not listening to any one else's view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom