Assembly versus convention encodes radically different sovereignty claims

Evidence

The major split was over how to re-found the country. Many people wanted an assembly to decide the future of the country, rather than a convention. In the first scenario, it would be the people that would dissolve sovereign power in Chile and constitute a new government. A convention—the road favored by the actually existing government—would recognize the legitimacy of the actually existing government and rely on its rules to define the steps forward. — Vincent Bevins, If We Burn, 807

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Sovereignty differs from domination by making rather than obeying principles — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism: A Critique of…, 193; Sovereignty and the modern state dialectically constitute each other; Sovereignty by institution is founded on representation, not on transferred rights — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 110 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Sovereignty by institution is founded on representation, not on transferred rights #expands (0.85) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 110
• Sovereignty differs from domination by making rather than obeying principles #corroborates (0.80) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 193
• Sovereign power makes principles rather than obeying them #corroborates (0.80)
• Sovereignty and the modern state dialectically constitute each other #expands (0.75)
• Sovereign will is by definition arbitrary and inconsistent by nature #corroborates (0.75)