The question is: "Can an original fraud be legitimized through the passage of time?"
The goal of this treatise is to resolve whether or not British Columbia is a legitimite province within Canadian confederation; and, if it is not a legal entity; then, does its failure cause a jeopardy to Canada being recognized as a nation by the global community? You might say that this question has no merit. Therefore, thank you for your patience, herein, while the arguments and observations
Generally, law will take the position that the fundamental claim to legitimacy shall be founded within a set of rules created by the social order of the day. The public will shall rule. A party claiming an authority - such as a governing body - shall be postulated upon the "good of the whole".
And, therein, lies the rub. How does one determine the "whole"?
Hence, within the paradigms of determining the rules of this social order - the citizenry - definitions must be placed into the charter of claim.
This question of enfranchisement is postulated here for the simple exercise of determining how the social group of today will seek to justify itself through the actions of past generations.
And, the example for reviewing these claims to legitimacy will be the creation of the province of British Columbia, Canada.
Therefore, let us begin with some semblance of global social structure : The United Nations.
But, perhaps, before commencing to understand the dictates of membership in the United Nations, we should, first attempt to place some acceptable commitment to the theory amd practise of the founding political statement that will frame the ability of this UN body to come to order.
The United Nations operates through some commitment to an ideal called the democratic process.
And, there are always limits to social order by virtue of the fundamental human commitment to the hierarchical structure of survival - especially, of the most fit.
The political operations mechanism of the United Nations is in an evolutionary mode - as is the province of British Columbia; and, its host nation, Canada.
An originating group - such those who evolved through the League of nations - came into a founding common agreement of respect and tolerance: the members would abate military actions upon one another, while striving to discover the common fields of interest that could provide less warfare; and, therein, provide a higher oppotunity for international commercial ventures with a considerably lowered risk factor.
Here, we should pause, briefly, to consider the three primary tools of nationhood and its practises of survival: dominate the spectres of
Now. let us return to this matter of democracy. This is important because, this ideal in human social order provides enfranchisement to the weak and the strong. "Democracy" is a unique creature in the political and commercial worlds. No participant in the order of the entity desires that too much democracy shall prevail.
The goal of this treatise is to resolve whether or not British Columbia is a legitimite province within Canadian confederation; and, if it is not a legal entity; then, does its failure cause a jeopardy to Canada being recognized as a nation by the global community? You might say that this question has no merit. Therefore, thank you for your patience, herein, while the arguments and observations
Generally, law will take the position that the fundamental claim to legitimacy shall be founded within a set of rules created by the social order of the day. The public will shall rule. A party claiming an authority - such as a governing body - shall be postulated upon the "good of the whole".
And, therein, lies the rub. How does one determine the "whole"?
Hence, within the paradigms of determining the rules of this social order - the citizenry - definitions must be placed into the charter of claim.
This question of enfranchisement is postulated here for the simple exercise of determining how the social group of today will seek to justify itself through the actions of past generations.
And, the example for reviewing these claims to legitimacy will be the creation of the province of British Columbia, Canada.
Therefore, let us begin with some semblance of global social structure : The United Nations.
But, perhaps, before commencing to understand the dictates of membership in the United Nations, we should, first attempt to place some acceptable commitment to the theory amd practise of the founding political statement that will frame the ability of this UN body to come to order.
The United Nations operates through some commitment to an ideal called the democratic process.
And, there are always limits to social order by virtue of the fundamental human commitment to the hierarchical structure of survival - especially, of the most fit.
The political operations mechanism of the United Nations is in an evolutionary mode - as is the province of British Columbia; and, its host nation, Canada.
An originating group - such those who evolved through the League of nations - came into a founding common agreement of respect and tolerance: the members would abate military actions upon one another, while striving to discover the common fields of interest that could provide less warfare; and, therein, provide a higher oppotunity for international commercial ventures with a considerably lowered risk factor.
Here, we should pause, briefly, to consider the three primary tools of nationhood and its practises of survival: dominate the spectres of
- Military might
- Currency supply; and,
- Regulation of theological institutions
Now. let us return to this matter of democracy. This is important because, this ideal in human social order provides enfranchisement to the weak and the strong. "Democracy" is a unique creature in the political and commercial worlds. No participant in the order of the entity desires that too much democracy shall prevail.
No comments:
Post a Comment