Multi-colored society with an odorless,colorless tasteless "one size fits all" answer: Love your neighbor.

 Multi-colored society with an  odorless,colorless tasteless "one size fits all" answer: Love your neighbor. 

What is absolutely most important is the maintenance of community.  It is a bargain one makes with his neighbor to ensure that personal power is subsumed by the importance of community and that the community is a safe one where no one is entitled to assert a right to absolute power. See Thomas Hobbes for more.  Even if one neighbor asserts absolute authority, they would remember quite quickly how vulnerable they are as a human being who is dependent on that community for another day of precious life. That person is really a criminal and either the whole community will support them or they will kill them. The truth is, if they threaten the community, the community does not need them.  It's just a matter of time before they see the Road to Perdition(movie 2002).    These issues arrived in discussions of legitimacy.  Thomas Hobbes had to write volumes of simple logic as someone threatened to burn existing libraries to support an anarchy.  Legitimacy has been theorized by philosophers who attempt to tell us what is just but as Rodney Barker points out "The erosion of a legitimate relationship with its people may be of more significance for the state than a similar failure with its political philosophers". This is what Venu, descendent of Virajas, found out when the Rishis slew him with Kusa Blades although the Rishis were sort of both philosophers and people. It is the people who can turn the philosophers' theory into practice. This article discusses how certain theories of legal legitimacy became practice over time . For the sake of analysis, the article will employ a light discussion of law and culture.  More specifically, it will attempt to discuss how racialization and negative coloring in attitudes blurs and skews the obvious monochrome answer to socio-legal experience with the answer being the importance and meaningfulness of human life.   For the sake of this assignment, the writer of this paper defines legitimacy as a societal and culturally specific concept that is not universally applicable.

The answer to what is legitimate depends on the society or locality in which one is situated. This follows from Anthony Wright's (1990) notion of "legitimacy-as observation-observation over legitimacy as value". Legitimacy is the single answer to two simultaneous questions of "what" and "why". Each society provides its own answers as Berger and Luckman (1967) point out through its knowledge base passed from one generation to the next. To put this all together, legitimacy , legal and political, is the encapsulation of answers to "what" and "why" questions where the answers arise from a society's values rooted in its historico-cultural knowledge base. Using this definition and Weber's analytical framework of ideal types ( types which, as ideals, seek to approximate the living reality but which do not presume to be direct accounts of reality), the writer of this paper will argue that the the nature of law has become increasingly instrumental in the last 40 years. Corresponding to this, the legitimacy of law has become increasingly self-justifying. Lastly, law has become more dominant and institutionalized. While many of these characteristics of law find their roots in the socio-legal and political theories of the period 1800-1960 and the theories of philosophers and jurists writing from the 17th century onwards, it is since about 1960 that one sees the potential of the theories of law in the modern context taking shape in practice through the autonomous workings of the state, corporate entities, and the individual.  Without a doubt,  this is what Venu and the Rishis said to the inspired God fearing philosophers who thought of what was best to ensure a native could sit safely on a street in Boston one day.  This was the essence of the wisdom behind the philosophers direction to the tank commanders. We don't need Jim Jones from Guyana and his daughter to take a podium and ask partially native people to die together for white superiority that is supported by underlying native self rejection complex as fostered by the message that God loves you only as a Catholic. But, he certainly loves you as a Hindu, as a Messianic Jew and as a Christian as far as I can see. They give property to their children, they sell dal puri at Tescos and American or West Indian natives don't. The American and West Indian natives sell coconut oil, Dr. George Washington Carver's(part Native, part African and part Puritan) peanut butter and wonder bread. So, then everybody is successful but the East Indian owns Jaguar, Typhoo Tea and Tetley Tea also and he ensures his children have his property for 12 generations so he can see how good he is. He does not exterminate his children in the expectation of favor and acceptance from a ghost protocol that only exterminates instead of a Holy Ghost that perpetuates; that is if you believe in a Holy Spirit.   But, one day, we believe a native or part native will not only graduate at the top of his English class in Ontario at 76% and Law School in England with an A grade but that he will also have a part native wife and will enjoy his greater community at large since the English could not break God's laws and loose the authority that belies(blankets, covers, curtains) the Westminster Parliament but you could do it and kill your own people.  Then what authority would you have as  it seems you have been programmed to give your money away, demean your own designers, architects, poets and artisans in the preference of an obscure variable called "white"?  Legal and Political Legitimacy evidently is a societal and culturally specific concept and  is not universally applicable but all Legal and Political systems will carry the same skeletal framework of mores, values and beliefs as based on natural law; that we should treat others as we wish to be treated.  Treating others as we wish to be treated is the essence of the "one size fits all" answer to cultural and religious pluralism in great societies with the answer being the meaningfulness of human life.  It is intrinsic in purpose in protecting the meaningfulness of all human life. As such, it is immediately pluralistic but must also be intrinsic in all application concerning all citizens who are not only stakeholders but also participants as end users.  The various ethnic groups represented in a pluralistic society will have varying degrees of influence on the moderating force in society but no group should ever raise its direct or indirect influence to challenge the one value that makes pluralism and tolerance possible.  That one value is the meaningfulness of a human life in a pluralistic society. That will mean if everyone seeks acceptance for difference then  a human life regardless of race, color, religion, gender and orientation must be valued. Is it not the teaching of Christ to save a life; that no law is broken if it means saving a life?  It does not mean that a group of marauders will take all law into their hands to save the life of the mass murderer who is subject to punishment and in line for sanction. It does not mean that the mass murderer's life will be chosen as savable over the lives of witness; to the contrary. Society has already recognized the mass murderer and has designated him as an enemy of the meaningfulness of human life such that he has to be expelled from society; not saved by it.  He is an enemy of the state. This is not only true of the mass murderer but the murderer of  single victimized soul.  The meaningfulness of a single human life regardless of ethnicity( we no longer say race), color and religion is the essence of human life.  It is not difficult but it must be done as ethnic groupings converge with trade and trading partners becoming more diverse and international to facilitate language skills and fulfill the need for a well rounded knowledge base.  The world historically was never monochrome as all ethnic groupings have provided to the knowledge base that has made a future of solved problems possible. The moderating force requires a recognition by all participants of its purpose in keeping everyone safe while everyone in their own culture has already decided how a man, a woman and a child is to be treated in public or how an ethnic man(black, red, yellow, white), woman or child is to be treated in public.  The moderating force in society has only one answer as to how a human being is to be treated.  They are to be treated with equality and you can employ any attitude you wish to achieve this.  You may call them a guest in your house and take an educative position. You may call them brother or sister and you may wish to kill them if they do not love their children and grand children; honoring their children's lives since personal feelings of power can be achieved in the home as to who gets to sit at the head of the table every thanks giving until Granddad or Grandma gives up the ghost but it should not spill out on to the street and tolerate home invasions to achieve feelings of personal power over progeny.  That does not acknowledge the power of the moderating force or its purpose.  In addition, the moderating force cannot afford hybridized attitudes to human beings of any and varying descriptions since it  is a negative impact on shared environments and spaces such as schools and other services such as the Department of Transport or the dmv.  Schools must also buttress the importance of the meaningfulness of human life. This is achieved by confirming the importance of the individual and individual identity in ensuring that individuals hand in their own work and are appreciated for their effort in a learning experience while confirming the importance of respecting the work of other individuals. Anything less than this in a school environment is anathema to the entire purpose of education which is to ensure individuals grow to know and love themselves as a meaningful life among other meaningful lives.  If you don't want to be involved in creative work, take something like musicianship or accounting and just play written music.  We do not tolerate malfunctioning mobile phones that are designed to operate based on set rules and programs so why would we tolerate any government entity that, contrary to the prevalent rules and laws, threatens and challenges the quiet existence of  any individual? This is anathema to the legitimacy of any and all societies as to the treatment of its citizens.   Monochrome descriptions of socio-legal phenomenon that use terminology such as "black" and "white" will not satisfy a multi-colored historical and social truth that provides more accurate ethno-cultural terminology for your input into society and its current disposition.  "White" and "Black" does not satisfy but deceives since our identity under a flag calls for recognition of identity in humanity first and then citizenship.  The flag is not "white" and nor are the principles that guaranteed that you would go to school for free or that you will be able to enjoy life as you express your own unique culture in a pluralistic society with respect for others cultural boundaries in public or work spaces.  Group prayer is welcome or a moment of silence since the word Jihad in an English class discussion in 1987 in Western schools was followed shortly thereafter with the removal of the Lord's prayer every morning.    The principles are socio cultural and also spiritual in respecting the meaningfulness of human life. The point of education is to fulfill this understanding that will include teaching respect for the individual, personal boundaries and also identity.  Communities labeled as "Black" may have adopted an amorphous definition of community from popular culture that says everything is shared and nothing is owned by anyone who is "Black"  but this only devalues any human being who might be considered "Black" and his right of property in creative ownership.  It may have begun with a refusal to educate oneself in the fear of leaving the group. It may have begun with gumbo music or mixed music produced by later 1970's djs that traversed usual expectations of property rights in copyright. This does not help a community that speaks about white people, institutionalized racism and systemic inequality when it racialises and devalues its own members.   An addiction to attention is not justification in its disrespect for another's identity as it dehumanizes and fails to acknowledge one's own rights to individual identity and also one's right to have personal boundaries respected.   The newer djs acknowledge the sources of samples and any community member can invite another member to collaborate since if the issue is systemic inequality, the only buffer is maximized sharing and collaboration in harnessing communal resources.  Who is to decide who is "Black", "Mixed" or satisfactory to participate? It is not a sign of progress to say the community that complains of systemic issues must also demonstrate that it is sophisticated enough to steal from its own members. Black on Black economic cannibalization is another form of Black on Black violence. There is no prize being awarded to anyone who participates in this human devaluation.  But, there is a prize for working together.  The gallery owner should invite the artist.  The artist may not know of the gallery owner. There  is no legitimacy if education fails to achieve its humanizing purpose.  It is not capable of the intrinsic pluralism in legislation that confirms the meaningfulness of any human life and is anathema to the disposition of  current society that is geared for positive realization of legislated fundamentals, new hopes and fulfillment in the simplest definition of socio-legal legitimacy which is the preservation and maintenance of the meaningfulness of human life.  The laws confirm that every Commonwealth or European state is adherent to the Brit Milah.  As such all citizens and permanent residents are considered legitimate under the law. Everyone is legitimate as an heir of the covenants and promises that give the state its  constitution and provide the state with legitimacy.  the definition of citizen does not impute any hyphenation or bifurcation. There is only one law for all citizens in code and in practice.  In the final analysis, the Western model of jurisprudence is immediately pluralistic as it officially protects, invites and entertains pluralism. It is amorphously absorbative and allows for difference in private life while allowing for some appropriate exceptions in terms of religious dress as desired in public and professional  life.   It is  colorless with  the only parameter for application being one's status as a human being or citizen and thereby provides the only solution to a multi-colored world in that it is founded upon safeguarding and protecting the meaningfulness of human life.   

By Warren Augustine Lyon, 2016.

BA(Hons) UWO, LL.B(Hons)(SOAS, University of London), PGDL.