the righteous tyrant

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

the righteous tyrant

Post by Advocate »

First you establish legitimacy, then you use whatever force is necessary to accomplish your objectives.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:34 pm First you establish legitimacy...
How?
Age
Posts: 6634
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Age »

Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:34 pm First you establish legitimacy, then you use whatever force is necessary to accomplish your objectives.
This describes the founder of another philosophy forum.

They even claim to be legitimately righteous, BUT THEN do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they say and claim to "fight for".

They CLAIM EVERY one has A RIGHT to 'free speech', but then BLOCK some people from speaking. Usually, by the way, when they are being PROVEN Wrong.

The "righteous" tyrant does NOT like to be shown up as being False, Wrong, and Incorrect.
Age
Posts: 6634
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:27 pm
Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:34 pm First you establish legitimacy...
How?
They use 'argumentative' and/or 'persuasive' form. Once they have a 'following', people agreeing with and accepting them, thus are seen as being 'legitimate', then they use whatever force necessary to accomplish their objectives. Which is usually just to be seen as being RIGHT, and as being in CONTROL.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Age wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:01 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:27 pm
Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:34 pm First you establish legitimacy...
How?
They use 'argumentative' and/or 'persuasive' form.
Precisely how? i.e. "on what basis in legitimacy established"?
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Advocate »

[quote="Immanuel Can" post_id=506607 time=1617891878 user_id=9431]
[quote=Age post_id=506601 time=1617890514 user_id=16237]
[quote="Immanuel Can" post_id=506587 time=1617888452 user_id=9431]


How?
[/quote]

They use 'argumentative' and/or 'persuasive' form.
[/quote]
[u]Precisely[/u] how? i.e. "[u]on what basis[/u] in legitimacy established"?
[/quote]

Someone did a thing about that which i remember as the three pillars of legitimacy but i don't have access to my data cache ATM and Google isn't cooperating.

It's not the Max Weber thing. Anyhow, i find it to be a stable foundation for understanding the dynamics at play. I'll try to find it more.
Last edited by Advocate on Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:18 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:24 pm Precisely how? i.e. "on what basis in legitimacy established"?
Someone did a thing about that which i remember as the three pillars of legitimacy but i don't have access to my data cache ATM and Google isn't cooperating.
Don't you just know? :shock: If you don't, how do you recognize ANY government as "legitimate"?
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Advocate »

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Advocate wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 6:22 pm Image
Something like that.
"Neutral," "respect," "voice" and "trustworthiness."

Well, here's the problem: "neutral" with regard to what, that are regarded by whom as the extremes? "Respect" as detected how, by whom? "Voice," as in "all voices equal, regardless of such things as intelligence, rightness, morality, and so on? And "trustworthiness," how much, "trusted" by whom, to do what?

In other words, these so-called "pillars" simply take for granted that whomever is advocating them ALREADY has the objectively correct moral perspective, so that satisfying them on these four points would turn out to be right. But what constitutes "neutrality" to the whole spectrum of political "voices" is not at all the same thing. Neither is "trustworthiness": for the right might "trust" DT and the Left, JB...but neither finds the other's candidate "trustworthy," or even the electoral process "trustworthy" anymore -- the Left knows they subverted it and wants to be able to keep doing so; the Right knows they did it, and so neither finds it "trustworthy," even though one side is glad the process isn't "trustworthy" and the other is not. As for "respect," is "respect" of body dysmorphic individuals identifying them as such and getting them help, or normalizing their malady as "trans-identity"? Which perspective is "respectful"?

So those answers turn out to be pretty dusty. They give us nothing on legitimacy, really.
Age
Posts: 6634
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:24 pm
Age wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:01 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:27 pm

How?
They use 'argumentative' and/or 'persuasive' form.
Precisely how? i.e. "on what basis in legitimacy established"?
Whatever 'you' agree with.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:51 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:24 pm
Age wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:01 pm

They use 'argumentative' and/or 'persuasive' form.
Precisely how? i.e. "on what basis in legitimacy established"?
Whatever 'you' agree with.
Doesn't work, for two reasons: one, you need a prior principle that shows that consent is the basis of legitimacy (in things like monarchy, or in totalitarianism, it's not), and two, other people are likely to be less impressed by "your" wishes, and more by their own, which are often different from "yours." Legitimation has to be on some universal principle, not on personal preference.
Age
Posts: 6634
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:57 pm
Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:51 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:24 pm
Precisely how? i.e. "on what basis in legitimacy established"?
Whatever 'you' agree with.
Doesn't work, for two reasons: one, you need a prior principle that shows that consent is the basis of legitimacy (in things like monarchy, or in totalitarianism, it's not), and two, other people are likely to be less impressed by "your" wishes, and more by their own, which are often different from "yours."
OBVIOUSLY.

But what 'you' find is 'legitimate' is whatever 'you' agree with. As I was just saying and pointing out.
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:57 pm Legitimation has to be on some universal principle, not on personal preference.
So, you go and make this CLAIM here. But, are you at all able to explain EXACTLY what this 'universal principle' IS?

Also, how do you KNOW that legitimacy HAS TO BE on some 'universal principle'? Is this some personal opinion of yours, or is this CLAIM based on some ACTUAL evidence and/or proof?

If it is the latter, then WHERE and WHAT is this evidence and/or proof that you have?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:15 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:57 pm
Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:51 pm

Whatever 'you' agree with.
Doesn't work, for two reasons: one, you need a prior principle that shows that consent is the basis of legitimacy (in things like monarchy, or in totalitarianism, it's not), and two, other people are likely to be less impressed by "your" wishes, and more by their own, which are often different from "yours."
OBVIOUSLY.

But what 'you' find is 'legitimate' is whatever 'you' agree with. As I was just saying and pointing out.
And I pointed out that you were wrong.

But now I remember you.

Bye.
Age
Posts: 6634
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Age »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:18 pm
Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:15 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:57 pm

Doesn't work, for two reasons: one, you need a prior principle that shows that consent is the basis of legitimacy (in things like monarchy, or in totalitarianism, it's not), and two, other people are likely to be less impressed by "your" wishes, and more by their own, which are often different from "yours."
OBVIOUSLY.

But what 'you' find is 'legitimate' is whatever 'you' agree with. As I was just saying and pointing out.
And I pointed out that you were wrong.

But now I remember you.

Bye.
ONCE AGAIN, "another one" who when questioned and challenged in regards to THEIR CLAIMS runs away when they can NOT answer nor explain.

This just SHOWS and PROVIDES another example of when one makes claims but can NOT back up and support THEIR CLAIMS.

By the way I did NOT mean, nor even say, what you were claiming I was wrong about.

Once more, you were way off and missing the mark, completely.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: the righteous tyrant

Post by Immanuel Can »

Age wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 2:36 pm ...when questioned and challenged in regards to THEIR CLAIMS runs away...
No.

It's just that there's a minimal, very low bar for quality of conversation in order for it to be worth going forward. You always seem to find a way to be below the bar. It's probably a function of your age. So maybe you'll learn. We can all be optimistic about that.

But it's not today.
Post Reply