LEGITIMACY
(3-24-11-5:00 PM)
By Enrique Artalejo
From time to time there are words that are in fashion and these days even President Obama is using, and obviously also the average repeated. So I find it interesting to go to "kill donkeys," to refresh the knowledge and understand ... "if possible, not just the president but to those who echo it.
If we are to Wikipidia, the fastest and we all have access to the Internet, find the following definition: Legitimacy is a term used in Theory of Law in the Political Science and Philosophy that defines the quality of being under a mandate legal, justice, reason or other true mandate. [1] The process by which a person obtains legitimacy is called legitimacy.
Also find the following definition: Legitimacy in legal terms
As a rule of law is obeyed without recourse to mediate monopoly law. The requirements to be met by a legal rule to be legitimate are three: validity, justice and efficiency
The
validity refers to the manner in which the standard been enacted: a legal norm is valid when it has been issued by the competent body has not been repealed, and void when it has been issued by a court without jurisdiction or repealed.
far coherent definition seems to us, we do not understand is what we hearing that the president.
Muammar Gaddafi, over 40 years in power in Libya ... has lost legitimacy "and has to go.
And you have to ask the president and those who repeat this ... When the Gaddafi regime was "legitimate" and as you can lose what you never had?
But we can say that the legitimacy under the law, political science and in philosophical terms, is defined as the quality of being a legal mandate, in legal terms as a rule obeyed without reasonable monopoly on the law and its validity depends it has been issued by a competent body. When the Gaddafi regime was legal, if it has never held elections, has a monopoly on the law and there is no competent?
And yes the Gaddafi regime has never been legitimate, during his 41 years of existence, what can we say about the tyranny of Fidel Castro and his heir?
Cuba in 52 years has never held free elections, there is only the communist party, one candidate Castro and there is no independent judiciary or agencies, to something.
Will we one day to hear, the U.S. president in office and the international community, saying that Castro's tyranny has lost legitimacy "and must leave office?
Yes Gaddafi has lost what he never had" standing " and has to go. When the Castro dictatorship has been in 52 years?
Are we not witnessing a total hypocrisy? What is the difference between the tyrant and the tyrant Castro Gadaffi?
No character elected or not, which has the power to change the constitution to perpetuate in it, control the judiciary and destroy the bodies can be recognized as "legitimate."
Muammar Gaddafi, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa, Daniel Ortega etc pedophile. Does standing to lose? Would not have lost, some for many years, and some later?
Why Barack Obama says the one hand, that the tyrant Gaddafi has to go, but it helps the tyrant Castro, to remain in power after 52 years of illegitimate states? Acting
well Can we leave a better world for our children, grandchildren etc.?
0 comments:
Post a Comment