@ Cret, the question of legitimacy of money means "is the dollar bill legal tender?"
As far as the hatred thing goes, I think hatred could be genuine without being legally enforceable or justifiable. Hell, the hatred might not even be logical or reasonable or morally justifiable. So just because hatred is genuine does not mean it's legitimate either by the primary nor the secondary definitions.
It seems to me the use of the word "legitimate" is most in line with its primary definition when it is used to refer to the legality or illegality of something or someone.
I just want to clarify again, I'm not saying that arguments can't be made against laws on moral or logical grounds, but to call a law illegal is nonsensical to me. How can a law be illegal? It might not be enforced. It might not even be consistent with precedent or the underlying law of the land, but it's still a law. I'm not really arguing against the concept of disputing laws here as much as I am against the language that's used in these arguments. Call a law logically inconsistent or immoral or undesirable or economically damaging. Don't call it illegitimate.
If you believe all law only comes from positivism I could see why you would take that position. Ultimately it comes down to authority however. If I arbitrarily make a law which makes my neighbor clean my swimming pool, he would probably consider it illegitimate, even though I call it a "law". If person does not recognize the authority of the party creating the laws, it's easy to see why they would call it illegitimate.
filc: If person does not recognize the authority of the party creating the laws, it's easy to see why they would call it illegitimate.
If person does not recognize the authority of the party creating the laws, it's easy to see why they would call it illegitimate.
I guess that makes sense. I dunno, the language still bothers me. Not the underlying concept mind you, just the language.
bloom:I dunno, the language still bothers me. Not the underlying concept mind you, just the language.
I'm sorry.
lol i forgive you
btw, just to clarify, are you saying that you don't recognize the Congress's authority to make law, or the Executive's authority to enforce the law or the Judicial's authority to uphold and review the law?
It seems to me that, as a general matter, it helps to start with the presumption that different words were coined to refer to different things. So, for instance, I don't presume that the law - the stuff in books that the courts read - is the same as morality, and thus I try not to say things like "the law is illegal."
By the way, it seems to me that many attempts are higher law are themselves nothing more than another form of positivism. For instance, what is an appeal to religious law but the transference of the writing to God?
@ Katz, I agree with you, when someone appeals to higher laws (like God's Law) they're basically just saying God is the ultimate authority.
They don't want to give up the language for the same reason they try so hard to defend the most incoherent and outright goofy philosophical positions in the name of Libertarian morality: they want libertarianism to be all-inclusive and required of everybody, leaving only the Righteous and the Fools. This is because Libertarianism is a species of Progressivism, which is a species of Liberalism, which is the dominant strain of Atheistic Calvanism, which is to say evangelical Christianity with political pretensions. There is a direct line of descent from this stuff, and their language hasn't really changed at all; they just bicker among their various denominations for the 'rights' to their sacred terminology. Communism and libertarianism, whatever their differences, have more in common than not.
“Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.” - Benito Mussolini"Toute nation a le gouvernemente qu'il mérite." - Joseph de Maistre
must....not...take....bait....
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
i guess its similar to when "I see a lot of people throw the words..."
now i have never seen anyone throw words. to me legitmate has alwys been a synonym for genuine or authentic.
it appears that the latin, or whatever langurage, root for legal and legitimate are the same.
but i suppose the word has taken broader meaning over the years.