&gt; I&#x27;d say that the tautology of what the system agrees is legitimate is what is legitimate<p>And which is inherently fallacious, even going against Rousseau.  Slavery as an institution was systemically agreed upon by the institution.  There is no inherent legitimacy in violating the liberties of others, and while I agree that any such comparison is flawed, agreeing on slavery as an institution is no more or less legitimate due to populist demand than the insistence of taking some people&#x27;s money and giving it to others.<p>Are there benefits?  Undoubtedly; but even something mathematically proven as &quot;good&quot; (as if we could do such a thing) is not necessarily legitimate, however well founded the idea or the intent. That said, this is all philosophical, to be sure, but since we&#x27;re waxing, may as well get fully waxed.  (Don&#x27;t ask me what that means, cause I have no idea.)<p>&gt; And I believe many founders leaned heavily on Rousseau&#x27;s work<p>No argument there.