On Mon, 13 May 1996, Nikolai S. Rozov wrote:
> I also prefer MULTIPLICITY of bourg.democr.states integrated by
> voluntarily accepted GLOBAL LEGAL SYSTEM over all kinds of visible and
> invisible mafias that seem to be first in grasping benefits of any World
> State Power.
First of all, who the heck advocated the mafia? Did you read what I wrote?
What Gospodin Professor Dr. Rozov calls (excuse me for replacing the
capitals with lowercase letters) a global legal system either (1) has
coercive power to enforce laws, (2) is territorially defined and (3) is
legitimate, in which case it is a state, or any one of those does not
apply, in which case you have the same as before, an interstate system
(which, with all the legal jingo of international law didn't exactly stop
two world wars, hundreds of local wars, military invasions, occupation,
counter-occupation, imperial state formation, colonialism, the shooting
of civilian aircraft, genocide, etc.) or a mafia.
Furthermore, I would appreciate if you were kind enough in not confusing an
analytical point (i.e., my insistence that legality cannot exist without a
public authority to enforce the law) with a political program which you
seem to attach to my posting.
>
> Further comments on the problem
> State or Law?
>
> Nikolai
No, thank you. No further comments. None at all.
I sure appreciate the scholarly tone though. Spasibo bolshoye.
"And-a the same-a to you too-a." (Jim Jarmusch: _Down by Law_)
Jozsef Borocz