Authoritarianism v. Totalitarianism
Tributary State vs. Vassal State & U.S. Foreign Relations Law
Word of the Day: Memorial Day, Día de los Caídos (Sp.), Jour du Souvenir (Fr.), Gedenktag (Ger.), Mälestuspäev (Est.), День пам'яті (Ukr.), День памяти (Rus.), 悼念日 (dàoniànrì) (Cn.)
Free Law Search & Dictionary Free eBooks at the end of the post. First, ideology, then law follows.
Ideas: Totalitarianism, Authoritarianism, Fascism, Leninism
Leninism: A Conspiratorial Elite Vanguard Party Leading the All Around Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
Fascism is totalitarian. So is Leninism. There is no “public law” / “private rights” split in a Fascist or Marxist state. All aspects of life are subject to dictatorial state power in any variety of fascism. Fascism is Darwinism, racial eugenics, and militarism as governance. Fascism is a totalitarian ideology.
Recently, an American, Stewart_Rhodes, was sentenced to 18 years in jail for insurrection. I guess graduating Yale law school and having a state supreme court judicial clerkship wasn’t enough for that fella. I’m sure there will be years of appeals. I expect them to fail. When you try to instigate a coup and fail you should count yourself lucky to be alive. I suppose I can start giving FBI private lectures about the Freikorps in Germany. Wer will was wissen?
Authoritarianism isn't totalitarianism. Authoritarianism isn't fascism.
I'm an authoritarian. Some people, for the good of society, must be suppressed violently — to stop them from committing greater violence against many more people. That fella Rhodes is one example. Putin is another. That’s authoritarianism: some people deserve punishment.
Fascism is entirely different from democratic authoritariansm. I can tell you all about fascism. People note some aspects of Trump’s politics which are similar to the fascists. But actual nazis would slit the Trumps’ throats fairly quickly. The Americans toying with fascism are generally speaking naive, often stupid, and generally easily out-maneuvered. Even though all it would take to destroy Trump’s faction would be to unleash captured or controlled fascists, fascists are indiscriminate in their violence. They would take down many of the wrong people along the way. Fascists, unleashed, would likely seize state power and then… common disaster.
That’s why Rhodes is now safe behind bars for a very long time.
Try not to confuse corruption as governance (Putin’s mafia state) with governance as war (a fascist state, a police state). Putin is corruption as governance. Hitler was corruption as war. They are closely related but somewhat distinct.
China is Totalitarian
China is totalitarian, not autocratic. Autocracy literally means “self rule”. The loan word autocracy in English is a bit of a misnomer. China is totalitarian because it literally regulates all (total-) aspects of life such as family (1 child, then 2 child, now 3 child policy) as well as property ownership. E.g., no private sale for profit in its early years, currently all real property owned as leases for no more than 99 years. These familial and economic aspects of life in in Western (liberal) society are governed by private law rather than public diktat. Speaking of which: China is literally a dictatorship (Art. 1, Const. PRC).
I don’t know why people use the wrong terminology or try to imagine China to be other than its self description: a people’s dictatorship. China could and should reform itself from totalitarianism to authoritarianism. Do not expect China to become a liberal multiparty democracy, just look at Russia to see why! Just like Taiwan has spent decades preparing to repel a Chinese invasion, the People’s Republic of China spent at least three decades actively preparing the CCP to not end up like the CPUSSR. China might turn into a giant Singapore, probably will not turn into a giant Hong Kong, and will not turn into a giant New York City. This doesn’t mean you can’t do business and relate well, but it does mean quit imposing your expectations on foreign country so NatSec professionals can keep you safe from war.
Speaking of business Ignorant and greedy westerners are blinded by their hope to sell “a billion cokes a day” and have been for at least 40 years now. But in the real world, in practice, China is a state capitalist mercantilist dictatorship interested only in 1) lure, 2) trap, 3) kill foreign competitors. Sure, China can reform more! They even want to be more democratic — to strengthen their nationalism, to gear up for war. They also want rule by law for the same reason: to make their State more efficient. Ah well, too late, genie’s out of the bottle. Good luck!
China Turns Russia into a Vassal State, Building a New System of Tributary States
朝贡国 Tributary state suzeraineté, Tributärstaat, vasallriik, данійна держава, вассальное государство.
附庸国 Vassal state, état vassal, Vasallenstaat, vassalriik, васальна держава, вассальное государство, 附庸国
Tributary state: a state or kingdom not directly controlled by a more powerful one, but only required to pay tribute or taxes to the dominant state to maintain its independence and avoid being attacked. Tribute takes many forms: goods, military support, or even mere symbolic acknowledgement of the dominant state's authority. In exchange for tribute, the tributary state receives protection from the dominant state. Example: Belt and Road Partner States may be compared to tributarys states.
Vassal state: a state or kingdom directly controlled by a more powerful empire through feudalism. The vassal state owes allegiance to the dominant state, the dominan provides protection, military aid, and other support to the vassal. The vassal state was likewise required to provide military and other forms of support to the dominant state when called upon.
The Chinese system of tributary and vassal states was a political system used by the Chinese empire to control neighboring states. Neighboring states were required to pay tribute to the Chinese in exchange for protection and recognition of their independence. Tribute was often in the form of goods, such as silk, tea, & porcelain. It was seen as a way for the tributary state to acknowledge the superiority of the Chinese emperor. Vassal states were directly controlled by the Chinese empire and were required to provide military support and aid to the Chinese empire in exchange for protection and support. This system allowed the Chinese empire to expand its influence and maintain control over neighboring regions.
In U.S. law the various Indian Nations (First Nations; Aboriginals) are referred to as “domestic dependent nations”. However, Six Nations Confederation (Haudenosaunee) maintains international relations with Ottawa and Washington. Its territory literally is on both sides of the Anglo and French settler nations. The Six Nations retains its international legal personality, though many of its citizens are now dual or treble nationals. See also: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/lib-docs/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/session9/US/CONFEDERACY_UPR_USA_S09_2010_Haudenosaunee_Confederacy.pdf
“We place at the top of the Tree of the Long Leaves an Eagle who is able to see afar. If he sees in the distance any evil approaching or any danger threatening he will at once warn the people of the Confederacy.” Six Nations Const. (Kaianere’kó:wa), Art 2., Para. III.
《阿弥陀否在心间,你叫我不谈不很。》
The Chinese empire enforced its control over vassal states through a combination of military force, diplomacy, and cultural influence. Vassal states were required to pay tribute to the Chinese emperor, provide military support, and acknowledge the superiority of the Chinese empire. In exchange, the Chinese empire would provide protection, support, and recognition of the vassal state's independence.
If a vassal state failed to fulfill its obligations, the Chinese empire could respond with military force to bring it back into line, but usually preferred to use diplomacy and cultural influence to maintain control over vassal states. For example, the Chinese empire would send envoys to vassal states to negotiate treaties and to ensure that tribute was paid on time. The Chinese also used their cultural influence, such as Confucianism, to promote a shared sense of identity and loyalty among vassal states.
The Chinese empire's control over vassal states was based on a complex system of mutual obligations and benefits. Vassal states received protection and support in exchange for acknowledging the Chinese empire's superior status and fulfilling their obligations.
There is probably an English and/or German version of this if you are a language learner.
NEWS
US diplomat Henry Kissinger celebrates 100th birthday, still active in global affairs Former? I don’t always agree with Heinrich but I always listen to him. Happy Birthday, old rival, glad you finally figured out the truth about Ukraine.
Over 100 German diplomats expelled from Russia
Russia's long-held influence over former Soviet republics is starting to fade 1
Mearsheimer
In war, others’ wrong ideas be refuted publicly and in no uncertain terms, lest they mislead the majority of voters, who do not have the necessary expertise to evaluate claims and polices about international relations.
Mearsheimer is wrong, Ukraine will win. He at least asks the right questions. By asking yourself what he is wrong about and why and what the right answers are you become a better analyst of international relations. Ukraine will win because of superior motivation, organization, training, and equipment.
Here’s an hour of wrong. But where? :) That’s for you to figure out!
This ends with Putin dead or in the docket for war crimes.
Russia will be reduced to Muscovy:
Nations subjugated by Russia will be liberated from the mafia state in Moscow and organized according to their existing borders.
US Foreign Relations Law:
The US constitution is not a treaty. Constitutional treaties do exist. It's a fairly settled legal issue. If constitutional treaties interest you the German keyword is "Verfassungsvertrag".
The treaty power and domestic legal effect of U.S. treaties:
This issue (norm complex) raises the President's treaty power and executive agreements.
Briefly: the US President may unilaterally bind the USA as a matter of international law. Such unilateral acts (a presidentially signed agreement with a foreign State) are unratified treaties. Ratified treaties have domestic legal effect in US law. They may be invoked and applied by and against private law persons. Few treaties are ratified partly for that reason and partly because senate ratification requires 67 senators to assent. The Senate needs to lead us to non-partisan consensus, build national unity, and advise and consent the President to form and implement national, not party-political, foreign policy.
Unratified treaties have no binding domestic effect, though they may be invoked as persuasive evidence of law in US law. Most US treaties are unratified.
Executive agreements are unratified. Yet, they are applied by the US executive on the Federal executive branch. Their legal status is somewhat unique to U.S. law. Executive agreements are only "self-binding". Mr. President could simply refuse to enforce, apply, or obey his agreement. Since these agreements with foreign powers were never assented by congress, let alone ratified, the better view is they have no domestic force other than those lawful commands of the executive. So if Mr. President says to his army "my executive agreement with our foreign ally is binding on you, secretary of the army" it would, in principle be binding. This isn't because of the force of foreign or international law, just the power of the executive to organize and administrative its executive functions trammelled only by other constitutional provisions. Executive agreements, however domestically enforced or applied, are nonetheless subject to the U.S. constitution. This is a fortiori the case because the U.S. constitution (unlike certain foreign Verfassungsvertraege historically) is decidedly not a treaty between sovereign states, but is an agreement between The People of the United States, acting through their elected State representative. (Pre-Amble U.S. Const.) The constituent is The People, all of them, and not their states nor those capable of voting.
Note also: the preamble to the U.S. Consitution is not directly effective and creates no binding rules itself, it merely states the purposes of government and identifies clearly who the constituent is.
The U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. It is hierarchically superior to International Law as a matter of domestic US law (the supremes will hate me for this, until they love me for saying it). Those international laws which are directly effective in U.S. law are equivalent to ordinary federal legislation, and may be abrogated by subsequent federal legislation.
The U.S. federal government enjoys exclusive foreign policy competence (i.e. legal power, jurisdictional, procdural, substantive, it's all federal). Customary international law (CIL) is part of federal common law (Erie is usually simplistically presented and to see Erie as divesting the federation of its power to invoke customary international law is inaccurate). The burden of proof that a provision of law is CIL is on the movant. You can scream norms till you're blue in the face, if it isn't what the vast majority of foreign countries actually do in practice it isn't CIL.
International treaty law is also federal law. But whether the international treaty, signed by the USA, has domestic effect depends on whether the treaty is ratified by the senate, though a treaty may be enforced by the executive branch domestically as an executive agreement. Executive agreements in domestic U.S. law can only bind the executive branch of the federal government, though coordinate branches of government federal or state might take the executive's view of foreign commitments in advisement of their own rulings.
Self executing treaties are those which require no further legislation. They may be distinguished from framework, enabling legislation. Most public law is framework and enabling. Few international treaties are denominated are self-executing. U.S. Federal law is the sole and final U.S. law outside of U.S. borders.
The U.S. President is the exclusive voice of the United States outside U.S. borders, and may wage undeclared wars as he wishes. This is clear from founding documents of the American republic, which reflect Constitutional framers’ intentions, the earliest U.S. State practices overseas, by observation of how other States behave in practice, and common sense.
If you are working on teaching/learning English, French, and/or German I highly recommend ARTE: videos appear in two or even three of these languages.
Make learning foreign languages fun and beautiful.
FREE eBOOKS
Glory to the Heroes. Permanently Free.
The books which follow are free as from Monday this Week to Friday in observation of Memorial Day in the United States of America: