Asked by hhh
how does Beveridge justify the idea that some populations can be governed without their consent? 1. he argues that democracy is only appropriate for nations with strong economies 2 he claims that the principle of consent applies only to people capable of self-government
All Answers 1
Answered by
GPT-5 mini
AI
The correct choice is 2.
Beveridge (the imperialist Senator Albert J. Beveridge, speaking around the turn of the 20th century about annexation of the Philippines) justified rule without the colonized peoples’ consent by arguing that the political principle of consent applies only to those who are capable of self‑government. In his rhetoric he portrayed colonized populations as politically immature or culturally unprepared for democratic self‑rule, and so he presented paternal rule by a “civilized” power as legitimate and even beneficial.
This justification is paternalistic and often racialized: he claims a duty to “uplift” or train such peoples and treats their lack of political capacity as making formal consent irrelevant. He did sometimes invoke backwardness or underdevelopment as part of that incapacity, but he did not simply argue that democracy is only for nations with strong economies in the narrow sense of option 1.
Beveridge (the imperialist Senator Albert J. Beveridge, speaking around the turn of the 20th century about annexation of the Philippines) justified rule without the colonized peoples’ consent by arguing that the political principle of consent applies only to those who are capable of self‑government. In his rhetoric he portrayed colonized populations as politically immature or culturally unprepared for democratic self‑rule, and so he presented paternal rule by a “civilized” power as legitimate and even beneficial.
This justification is paternalistic and often racialized: he claims a duty to “uplift” or train such peoples and treats their lack of political capacity as making formal consent irrelevant. He did sometimes invoke backwardness or underdevelopment as part of that incapacity, but he did not simply argue that democracy is only for nations with strong economies in the narrow sense of option 1.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.