The most important announcement on this thread.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

Walk into any pub in Dublin and tell them the Brits "gave" them independence, I dare ya. See if your Catholicism saves you.

Britain gave independence in some cases, in others they had no choice but to cede it. Regardless one government department does not an entire government make. The head of the CSIRO doesn't get to become the Prime Minister in the event of an apocalypse, nor does the head of NASA become president when America finally implodes. That's stupid!

Regardless of how the territories achieved independence, Britain eventually  legally recognized them as independent nations. And in the event of government collapse, any surviving insutition does inherit the powers of the government because there are no other remnants left.

This assumes that any organ of government is the sum of the parts of the rest of the government, that the War Graves Commission has the requisite expertise and authority to run a Federal Bureau of Investigation or a Centre for Disease Control.

It doesn't, the official religion of the Roman Empire was not given explicit authority to command the military, to make laws or to govern regions. It's job was running a state religion, period.

[dpareja]

Recognition of independence is not the same as a grant of independence.

The US, in particular, was not initially recognized as independent by anyone since nobody wanted to piss off Great Britain, until some of the First Nations (at the time recognized as fully sovereign) recognized the newly-formed United States as sovereign. (It's a precept of international law, by my understanding, that a country is sovereign when they are recognized as such by another sovereign country.) Only after that did other nations begin to recognize the US as independent.

(Which makes the mistreatment of the First Nations by the US as even more disgusting--they're why everyone recognizes you as independent, you ungrateful dipshits.)

[Jacob Harrison]

Walk into any pub in Dublin and tell them the Brits "gave" them independence, I dare ya. See if your Catholicism saves you.

Britain gave independence in some cases, in others they had no choice but to cede it. Regardless one government department does not an entire government make. The head of the CSIRO doesn't get to become the Prime Minister in the event of an apocalypse, nor does the head of NASA become president when America finally implodes. That's stupid!

Regardless of how the territories achieved independence, Britain eventually  legally recognized them as independent nations. And in the event of government collapse, any surviving insutition does inherit the powers of the government because there are no other remnants left.

This assumes that any organ of government is the sum of the parts of the rest of the government, that the War Graves Commission has the requisite expertise and authority to run a Federal Bureau of Investigation or a Centre for Disease Control.

It doesn't, the official religion of the Roman Empire was not given explicit authority to command the military, to make laws or to govern regions. It's job was running a state religion, period.

While it is not a sum of the parts before the government collapses, it becomes a sum after the collapse because it inherits the functions of the other parts when those other parts are gone because it’s the only remnant left and someone has to perform the other functions when the other parts are gone.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

You are assuming something the church itself didn't, their core mission was always maintaining and spreading a religion, not assuming the functions of the Roman state. They obtained power by getting close to those in power, not by supplanting them and introducing a fully fledged theocracy. Indeed the fuedal system was premised on a balance between the power of the church and the noble class, it depended on both groups knowing their place in the system and sticking to it.

[Eiki-mun]

While it is not a sum of the parts before the government collapses, it becomes a sum after the collapse because it inherits the functions of the other parts when those other parts are gone because it’s the only remnant left and someone has to perform the other functions when the other parts are gone.

Let's use this logic for a minute. Let's say a man dies, as men are weirdly wont to do. His brain, liver, heart, and other vital organs are all unsaveable, but doctors are able to recover the man's spleen and use it in an organ transplant. Hooray! Now, obviously since the spleen has inherited the rights and responsibilities of the rest of the body, the doctors rule that everything that belonged to the dead man now belongs to the man who took his spleen. Common sense, right?

No, it's not common sense. As I said earlier, the very idea is absolutely absurd on its face.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

Lets not forget that the church depended throughout it's existence on a bargain between it and whatever king, lord or Emperor it glommed onto. These guys didn't want would-be Pharoahs challenging their power, the church assumed certain functions but left temporal authority to their patrons. It couldn't take on the role of the Roman state, not if they wanted to keep their status.

Or their heads!

[Jacob Harrison]

Lets not forget that the church depended throughout it's existence on a bargain between it and whatever king, lord or Emperor it glommed onto. These guys didn't want would-be Pharoahs challenging their power, the church assumed certain functions but left temporal authority to their patrons. It couldn't take on the role of the Roman state, not if they wanted to keep their status.

Or their heads!

They didn't take all the roles, but they had enough remnant power to crown Charlemagne Emperor of the Romans and later the Holy Roman Emperors.

[Askold]

And here's where you are wrong. If the state collapses there is no reason to assume or claim that the remnants hold the full authority. Of USA or UK collapsed today and the only remaining institution left was the postal office, it would not mean that the postal office has legal power over the former nation nor does it mean that they have some sort of mandate to take the powers of the institutions and government that collapsed.

The powers of a specific institution are always limited and derived from a different source. The Finnish military for example is specifically forbidden from taking part in politics and they have no authority over civilian government. If the government collapsed the military would not be able to claim that they have the legal right to control Finland.

The power is always based on something, in a democracy the mandate comes from the people. The voters in the country have voted for politicians to represent themselves and that is where their power ultimately comes from though always, for reasons of simplicity and to keep things functional, the politicians have been given several types of powers to decide things and write new laws without requiring a vote from the people over every single detail.

In a kingdom there is either a claim to power by the ruling family, some sort of deal from noble families or like in ancient Sweden the people voted for a king to rule them and have the power to vote for a different king later. In a military junta the power is derived from the barrel of a gun but even there there are laws that are written though it varies whether the laws are followed or not.

The Catholic church did not "inherit" anything from Rome. There was no law written that would say that the church or any other organization gets to take the powers of the state if the senate falls. Go read the laws of UK and I'm pretty sure that there's nothing similar there either or in any other country.

If you really want to move goalposts then I suppose we can argue that de-facto there are occasions where the government has collapsed and another institution has taken over, but I don't recall any where this was anything short of a coup. The military took over Eqypt when they determined that the president is unfit to rule but even they then told the politicians to make things right and organize a vote because they knew not only that military juntas never end well for anyone as well as that their rule would not be legitimate and the voters needed to have a say at who leads the country.

[Jacob Harrison]

And here's where you are wrong. If the state collapses there is no reason to assume or claim that the remnants hold the full authority. Of USA or UK collapsed today and the only remaining institution left was the postal office, it would not mean that the postal office has legal power over the former nation nor does it mean that they have some sort of mandate to take the powers of the institutions and government that collapsed.

The powers of a specific institution are always limited and derived from a different source. The Finnish military for example is specifically forbidden from taking part in politics and they have no authority over civilian government. If the government collapsed the military would not be able to claim that they have the legal right to control Finland.

The power is always based on something, in a democracy the mandate comes from the people. The voters in the country have voted for politicians to represent themselves and that is where their power ultimately comes from though always, for reasons of simplicity and to keep things functional, the politicians have been given several types of powers to decide things and write new laws without requiring a vote from the people over every single detail.

In a kingdom there is either a claim to power by the ruling family, some sort of deal from noble families or like in ancient Sweden the people voted for a king to rule them and have the power to vote for a different king later. In a military junta the power is derived from the barrel of a gun but even there there are laws that are written though it varies whether the laws are followed or not.

The Catholic church did not "inherit" anything from Rome. There was no law written that would say that the church or any other organization gets to take the powers of the state if the senate falls. Go read the laws of UK and I'm pretty sure that there's nothing similar there either or in any other country.

If you really want to move goalposts then I suppose we can argue that de-facto there are occasions where the government has collapsed and another institution has taken over, but I don't recall any where this was anything short of a coup. The military took over Eqypt when they determined that the president is unfit to rule but even they then told the politicians to make things right and organize a vote because they knew not only that military juntas never end well for anyone as well as that their rule would not be legitimate and the voters needed to have a say at who leads the country.

When a government falls, any remnant of the government is supposed to fight back to restore the fallen government. When it does so. it becomes the successor to the fallen government, so even though institutions don't have certain powers before the government collapses, they can gain those powers after. The Catholic Church kept Europe unified after the fall of the Roman Empire, so it gained some of the powers of the former Roman Empire.

[Jacob Harrison]

Interestingly the post before this was my 962nd post and it was about succession to the Roman Empire. 962 was the year Pope John XII crowned Otto the Great Holy Roman Empire.

[Askold]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Neither legally nor de-facto you don't inherit legal powers like that. The laws of succession exist for specific political positions (like, in case of sudden death of a king or president there are usually laws to decide who takes over the position though even then there may be an election needing to be called ASAP.) but not for organizations.

[Jacob Harrison]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Neither legally nor de-facto you don't inherit legal powers like that. The laws of succession exist for specific political positions (like, in case of sudden death of a king or president there are usually laws to decide who takes over the position though even then there may be an election needing to be called ASAP.) but not for organizations.

But in the event of government collapse, those laws of succession don't work, so some remnant is going to have to fight back and succeed the fallen government so it is de-facto succession. Otherwise, who else will succeed?

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Neither legally nor de-facto you don't inherit legal powers like that. The laws of succession exist for specific political positions (like, in case of sudden death of a king or president there are usually laws to decide who takes over the position though even then there may be an election needing to be called ASAP.) but not for organizations.

But in the event of government collapse, those laws of succession don't work, so some remnant is going to have to fight back and succeed the fallen government so it is de-facto succession. Otherwise, who else will succeed?

Maybe nobody, certainly the Roman Catholic Church never expressed any desire to recreate the Roman empire. Your desire to see that fallen state continue doesn't even appear to have been a concern of theirs.

As I said, both Catholic and Orthodox churches entered into arrangements with powerful patrons, they didn't seek to supplant them.

[Jacob Harrison]

That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Neither legally nor de-facto you don't inherit legal powers like that. The laws of succession exist for specific political positions (like, in case of sudden death of a king or president there are usually laws to decide who takes over the position though even then there may be an election needing to be called ASAP.) but not for organizations.

But in the event of government collapse, those laws of succession don't work, so some remnant is going to have to fight back and succeed the fallen government so it is de-facto succession. Otherwise, who else will succeed?

Maybe nobody, certainly the Roman Catholic Church never expressed any desire to recreate the Roman empire. Your desire to see that fallen state continue doesn't even appear to have been a concern of theirs.

As I said, both Catholic and Orthodox churches entered into arrangements with powerful patrons, they didn't seek to supplant them.

"I am Caesar, I am the Emperor." Pope Boniface VIII

[dpareja]

The Pope says a lot of things.