-----Mensagem original----- De: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]Em nome de Brad De Long Enviada em: segunda-feira, 3 de julho de 2000 20:09 Para: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Assunto: Re: RES: RES: Korea's blessing
>-----Mensagem original-----
>De: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>[mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]Em nome de Lisa & Ian Murray
>Enviada em: segunda-feira, 3 de julho de 2000 11:27
>Para: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Assunto: Re: RES: Korea's blessing
>
>
From: Brad De Long <delong at econ.Berkeley.EDU>
How can you tell which governments are legitimate? It's pretty easy. Legitimate governments:
(a) derive their just powers from the consent of the governed...
(b) secure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for their citizens...
>==
-So, let´s examine Castro´s Cuba. -1-Derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. -As the common citizen of Cuba is allowed to keep it´s rifle after -the military service, we can conclude that they agree with Castro´s -regimen, or Castro wouldn´t remain on power....
Alexandre Fenelon
Minor details like freedom of assembly don't count?
Brad De Long
-They count, but I´ve put them at item 2, and discounted 25% in the legitimacy score of Cuba´s regimen. This is the part of the post you´ve deleted
Alexandre Fenelon
I would have thought that "consent of the governed was just a teeny weeny bit more subtle than that. Napoleon III ruled with Castro's kind of "consent of the governed," after all.
Brad De Long
-Did Napoleon III distributed weapons to workers??? It´s really a new information!!!
Alexandre Fenelon
You're more sophisticated than that.
-Thank you....
You shouldn't be making these kinds of arguments... Brad DeLong
-So here are some of (not very sophisticated) arguments
-Well, you´re talking about consent aren´t we? I´m just applying your legitimacy methodology to prove that it is somewhat flawed. And you deleted part of my post as it is your habit. It´s obvious I don´t think Castro´s Cuba is a democracy, but western styles democracies are largely degenerated due to classes biases. Do you know how is the cost to elect a representative in your country (or mine?). And what do you think is the consequence of this fact to the legitimacy of US democracy? About consent, all the governments work based on consent of the governed, even the majority of dictatorships. It´s simply impossible to govern based only in coercion, and even Stalin or Hitler, who used massive amounts of terror against their own citizens, were only able to remain on power due to support from large segments of the populations. But, in the case of USSR, this amount of terror was considered intolerable by the society (and by the bureaucracy too, which was tired of the lack of security in their lives-to be in permanent risk of being sent to a labor camps is not a very good lifestyle for a ruling class). So, after 1956, there was an important decrease in the repression level. How consent is expressed is another question. Take for instance my beloved president, elected in the first votation in 1998 with 53% of the votes (but 30% of people defaulted the election...). Well, this poor guy now has only 15% approval ratings....Only 20 months after his reelection. This is a indirect proof that elections don´t necessarily assure the legitimacy of a government. However, Mr. Cardoso remains on power, because here is the opposition is very weak and unable to offer the people an alternative policy. We can name this a kind of "negative consent". We hate them but, considering the absolute lack of options.....we (including me) won´t risk our lives to get rid from him. However, this delicate balance can change, depending on the stupidity and insensitivity of our ruling classes.... I would like this opportunity to ask you about some interesting aspects of your democracy. 1-What are the conditions a presidential candidate must fulfill to have a place in the in the election balott? 2-How is assured the access of small parties to the comunication means in the elections from your country?
Alexandre Fenelon
-Who believes that burgueoise democracy is a fraud, but admits that we, socialists, were unable to create a better fraud up to now...