Reply #92: Ah, the heart of the problem

[Eloriel]

"Legit" doesn't signify democratic, or undemocratic either.

I take it from this post you're relying on the technicality of whether or not something is "legit" -- enshrined in law. Apparently in your mind that means it must therefore be democratic. IMO, that's a very poor definition of democratic or pro-democracy.

Please think back to a LOT of things that have been "legit" over the years -- as in backed up by law and even in some cases the Constitution, at least as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the time: Slavery, "separate but equal," Jim Crow laws, etc.

None of those were demoractic or pro-democracy, but they sure as hell were "legit."

Eloriel