8
   

China Has an Invalid Government

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:04 am
@namdekan,
GWB was actually elected by the Supreme Court.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:14 am
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

See how easy that was, in this country we actually get to say what we think? Are you old enough to remember the iron curtain? Do you know anyone who survived those regimes, or did you ever travel to a country where your very survival depended on having a diplomatic passport? I'm guessing you simply don't know how oppressive some governments are, you may think you do, but you need to be there to understand what other nations have to endure.

Count your blessings that you live in a democracy. And be patient regarding the citizens who live in nightmarish places. People want their children and families to stay safe, you should study up on dissidents in China and how they have been treated. It may help you understand how huge of an impediment the Chinese Government is, as well as Putin's Russia. But I can't think of anything you can do except label it as illegitimate, but perhaps you have a wiz-bang solution that would restore freedom to the oppressed. If you do, make it your mission. But make sure to do extensive research before you implement your wiz-bang solution.

One more thing to think about, many members know a great deal about these issues, it's up close and personal for some of us. So please remember that this is not an all-night philosophy party for under-grads, and as long as you are thinking out-loud, that's fine. One other thing, if you believe you can state it and make it true, well that's fine also.

A. You've just made my point for me.
B. Where did you get the idea that I had a solution?
C. What do you mean " be patient regarding the citizens who live in nightmarish places?" I didn't criticize them. I criticized the government. The citizens are the victims. That's my point.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:24 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
GWB was actually elected by the Supreme Court.
That is foolishness. It shows great IGNORANCE in the imposter!

Gore HIMSELF, admitted that he lost
and he declared W to be the winner!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:29 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

glitterbag wrote:

...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts., as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten, murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that that isn't a valid government.


You can say that it is a pineapple if you choose. But that will not make it a pineapple.

The government of China is every bit as valid a government as any other valid government on this planet.

It most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates...but there are many governments that are not democracies.

Try to think outside the box to which you are confining yourself--one of the things you are allowed to do in a democracy.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:31 am
@Frank Apisa,
Do u deem the 3rd Reich to have been a valid government ?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:36 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Do u deem the 3rd Reich to have been a valid government ?


Absolutely...with no question.

The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.

It sucked, big time. The Germans who voted it into being ought to be ashamed of themselves.

But it was a valid government.


Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:06 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

glitterbag wrote:

...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts., as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten, murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that that isn't a valid government.


You can say that it is a pineapple if you choose. But that will not make it a pineapple.

The government of China is every bit as valid a government as any other valid government on this planet.

I guess that's one of those "agree to disagree" things. I think that all valid governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, not the end of a gun. This is just a case of some thugs who have people prisoner.

Frank Apisa wrote:
It most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates...

Are you saying that it might be a democracy in some way and that we just can't see it? I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:22 am
@Frank Apisa,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Do u deem the 3rd Reich to have been a valid government ?
Frank Apisa wrote:
Absolutely...with no question.

The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.

It sucked, big time. The Germans who voted it into being ought to be ashamed of themselves.

But it was a valid government.



OK. I just wanted to see if u discriminated
among totalitarianisms.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:30 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

glitterbag wrote:

...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts., as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten, murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that that isn't a valid government.


You can say that it is a pineapple if you choose. But that will not make it a pineapple.

The government of China is every bit as valid a government as any other valid government on this planet.

I guess that's one of those "agree to disagree" things. I think that all valid governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, not the end of a gun. This is just a case of some thugs who have people prisoner.


Well...as I said before, we do disagree.

The United Nations surely recognizes the Chinese government as a valid government...and the United States of America recognizes it as a valid government.

You do not.

Fine with me...you have that right.


Quote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
It most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates...

Are you saying that it might be a democracy in some way and that we just can't see it?


Yup.

Quote:

I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.


Was the United States a democracy before women gained the right to vote? Were the first "democracies" in Greece...that had very limited suffrage...democracies?

You are arbitrarily limiting things here, Brandon.

I much prefer our ideas of democracy to what others now and in the past have defined as democracies...but I am not willing to limit as much as you.

Under any circumstances, I will not accept the notion that the only "valid" governments are democratic governments.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:31 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.


We don't. (And actually democracy isn't defined by that.)
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:32 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
I thought that democracy meant a form of government
in which people choose leaders by voting.


We don't. (And actually democracy isn't defined by that.)
O, really????? Its not "rule by the people"?????
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:35 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:


OmSigDAVID wrote:

Do u deem the 3rd Reich to have been a valid government ?
Frank Apisa wrote:
Absolutely...with no question.

The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.

It sucked, big time. The Germans who voted it into being ought to be ashamed of themselves.

But it was a valid government.



OK. I just wanted to see if u discriminated
among totalitarianisms.


Nope.

I think a government can be "valid" even without that quality, though. America, and many other countries, have recognized governments as "valid" even though the government was not formed by the consent of the governed.

We are lucky insofar as the consent of the people is paramount to our form of government. Some are not nearly that lucky. But I am not convinced that a lack of the consent (in the form of voting) makes the government invalid.

Certainly willing to listen to arguments to change my mind, though.


0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:38 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.
Not really. The mandates of the Communist Party were cancelled after the election. The NSADAP (and thus Hitler) only could act as they did, because all parties besides the Social Democrats agreed to the Enabling Act of 1933.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:19 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.
Not really. The mandates of the Communist Party were cancelled after the election. The NSADAP (and thus Hitler) only could act as they did, because all parties besides the Social Democrats agreed to the Enabling Act of 1933.


It was a process that occurred legally.

If you want to suggest that Hitler's rise to power was illegitimate...make your case.

Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:41 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
If you want to suggest that Hitler's rise to power was illegitimate...make your case.
It was at least "questionable".

The Communists got nearly 13% of the votes and thus 81 seats in the Reichstag. They didn't get these mandates due to the Reichstag Fire Decree. That is at least very questionable. (But nullo actore nullus iudex)
The "Ermächtigungsgesetz" needed a 2/3 majority in the Reichstag. That was only to be if the Communists weren't there.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:10 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
If you want to suggest that Hitler's rise to power was illegitimate...make your case.
It was at least "questionable".

The Communists got nearly 13% of the votes and thus 81 seats in the Reichstag. They didn't get these mandates due to the Reichstag Fire Decree. That is at least very questionable. (But nullo actore nullus iudex)
The "Ermächtigungsgesetz" needed a 2/3 majority in the Reichstag. That was only to be if the Communists weren't there.


Walter...Hitlers rise to power was TOTALLY LEGAL...and used totally legal means under the laws in effect at that time. His appointment to the Chancellorship was as legal as any appointment to such a post can be.

The "Enabling Act" certainly helped Hitler, thereafter, to assume what amounted to dictatorial power.

But his rise to power was totally within the law...totally legal and legitimate.

Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:14 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
But his rise to power was totally within the law...totally legal and legitimate.
And I totally agree.

I was originally responding to this one of your posts ...
Frank Apisa wrote:
The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:16 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
But his rise to power was totally within the law...totally legal and legitimate.
And I totally agree.

I was originally responding to this one of your posts ...
Frank Apisa wrote:
The ascension of Hitler and his government to power appears to have been done with total legitimacy...and the stamp of approval of a majority of German voters.



I do not see the distinction, Walter.

His rise to power was totally legitimate...and done through legitimate means under the law at that time.

And there was a stamp of approval of a majority of German voters for that rise.

Are you now going to suggest that a majority did not give its approval?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:27 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
And there was a stamp of approval of a majority of German voters for that rise.

Are you now going to suggest that a majority did not give its approval?
Yes.
In my humble opinion, 43.9% of voters isn't the majority of votes. (88.74% voter turnout isn't bad - but some hundred thousands of Germans weren't allowed to vote.)
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:48 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
And there was a stamp of approval of a majority of German voters for that rise.

Are you now going to suggest that a majority did not give its approval?
Yes.
In my humble opinion, 43.9% of voters isn't the majority of votes. (88.74% voter turnout isn't bad - but some hundred thousands of Germans weren't allowed to vote.)


I stand corrected. My apologies, Walter.

I should have been using "a legally acceptable plurality of the German's who voted."

Many American elections are determined by an acceptable plurality rather than a majority. We even had a presidential election recently where the winner, George W. Bush, did not receive a majority...nor even a plurality of the vote. Stuff happens!

In any case, Hitler's rise to power was legitimate...and obtained through legal means. Your notion that hundreds of thousands of Germans were not allowed to vote means nothing. Millions of Americans are not allowed to vote also.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/28/2022 at 11:55:33