home Audience 3 Illegitimate behavior. What does the concept of “Legitimacy in political power” and “Legitimacy” mean in a general sense?

Illegitimate behavior. What does the concept of “Legitimacy in political power” and “Legitimacy” mean in a general sense?

It will rely on forceful coercion. Legitimate an action is an action that is not contested by any of the players who have the right and opportunity to challenge this action. An action ceases to be legitimate when the subject of the action has to make special efforts to protect his right to act as he did [ ] .

Legitimate, oh, oh(specialist.). Recognized by law, in accordance with the law. || noun legitimacy, -i, g. L. authorities. (Ozhegov’s Dictionary, Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language)

Besides, legitimacy- a political and legal concept that means a positive attitude of residents of a country or state, large groups, public opinion (including foreign) towards the institutions of power operating in a particular state or country, recognition of their legitimacy.

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 3

✪ Legitimacy of the USSR and illegitimacy of the Russian Federation

✪ Bitstamp Exchange - European quality and Legitimacy.

✪ Intelligence interrogation: Boris Yulin about the state and the legitimacy of power

Subtitles

Political legitimacy

Applied to political legitimacy The famous English political scientist David Beetham developed a “normative structure of political legitimacy”:
1. power corresponds to the rules accepted or established in society;
2. these rules are justified by reference to the faith shared by the governed and the rulers;
3. there is evidence of consent to existing power relations.

Legitimacy- originally the same as legality. In political science - recognition of power by the population. Legal- legal, consistent with legal norms (law or regulations).

The relationship between legitimacy and legality

The term “legitimacy” arose at the beginning of the 19th century and expressed the desire to restore the power of the king in France as the only legitimate one, in contrast to the power of the usurper. At the same time, this word acquired another meaning - recognition of this state power and the territory of the state at the international level. The demand for the legitimacy of power arose as a reaction against the violent change of power and redrawing of state borders, against arbitrariness and ochlocracy.

Legitimacy means recognition by the population of a given government and its right to govern. Legitimate power is accepted by the masses, and not simply imposed on them. The masses agree to submit to such power, considering it fair, authoritative, and the existing order the best for the country. Of course, in society there are always citizens who violate laws, who do not agree with a given political course, who do not support the government. The legitimacy of power means that it is supported by the majority, that laws are executed by the main part of society. Legitimacy should not be confused with the concept that also exists in political science legality authorities. The legality of power is its legal justification, its legality, compliance with the legal norms existing in the state. Legitimacy, unlike legality, is not a legal fact, but a socio-psychological phenomenon. Any government that makes laws, even unpopular ones, but ensures their implementation is legal. At the same time, it may be illegitimate and not recognized by the people. There may also be illegal power in society, for example, the mafia, which, in principle, can also be perceived by the people (or part of it) as legitimate or illegitimate.

Legitimacy is the trust and acceptance of power by the public consciousness, the justification of its actions, therefore it is associated with moral assessment. Citizens approve of the authorities based on their moral criteria, ideas about goodness, justice, decency, and conscience. Legitimacy is intended to ensure obedience, consent without coercion, and if it is not achieved, then to justify coercion and the use of force. Legitimate authorities and policies are authoritative and effective.

In order to win and maintain legitimacy and the trust of the people, the government resorts to argumentation of its actions (legitimation), turning to the highest values (justice, truth), to history, feelings and emotions, moods, the real or fictitious will of the people, the dictates of the time, scientific and technical progress, production requirements, historical tasks of the country, etc. To justify violence and repression, dividing people into “us” and “strangers” is often used.

The principles of legitimacy (beliefs) may have their origins in ancient traditions, revolutionary charisma or in current legislation. A corresponding typology of legitimacy, which is widely accepted, was introduced by Max Weber. According to it, three types of legitimacy correspond to three sources of legitimacy of political power: tradition, charisma and rational-legal basis. Weber emphasized that we are not talking about classifying any real regime as one of the types, but about abstractions (the so-called “ideal types”), which are combined in one proportion or another in specific political systems.

Depending on which of the listed motives for the population’s support of the political normative order prevails in society, it is customary to distinguish the following types of legitimacy: traditional, charismatic and rational.

The term "legitimacy" had several meanings. It arose at the beginning of the 19th century in France and was initially practically identified with the term “legalite” (legality). It was used to denote legally established power, as opposed to forcibly usurped power (legitimacy originally came down to its legality, i.e. the presence of a legal source of power and a legal basis for its possession).

Over time, the concepts of legitimacy and legality have become separated. Legitimacy – This is the legal formalization of power, the correspondence of this power to objective law. Legitimacy(classical definition - M. Weber) - the moral justification of the existence of a state from the point of view of the majority of its citizens, expressed in the voluntary acceptance of state power by this majority.

However, the term “legitimacy” does not have a strictly legal content and is not fixed in constitutions. In contrast to legality, which is the legal justification of power, its norms and laws, legitimacy reflects the degree of compliance of power with the value concepts of the majority of citizens.

Legality of state power - This is a legal concept, which means the legal justification of power and its compliance with legal norms. The form of legalization of power is legislative (the Constitution or, for example, the Act of Succession to the Throne).

For citizens, the legality of government consists of obedience to laws and their implementation. Any government that makes laws, even unpopular ones, but ensures their implementation is legal. The legality of state power is the recognition of the legitimacy of its emergence and the action of power within the framework of legality. The term “legality” allows us to distinguish legally established power (based on elections or succession to the throne) from usurper power, i.e. forcibly captured as a result of a coup, riot, etc.

Legitimacy of state power– this is the quality of the relationship between power and those under power, which is expressed in: 1) its basis on universal moral values; 2) voluntary recognition by the population of the right of the authorities to govern and psychological readiness to obey its orders and consent to the use of coercive measures by the authorities.

Therefore, legal power can be simultaneously illegitimate. Legitimate power, in contrast to legal power, is power that is accepted and approved by the population. Legality and legitimacy may diverge over time.

Legitimacy has no legal content and is not enshrined in the Constitution. Legitimacy reflects the degree to which the authorities comply with the value concepts of the majority of citizens, i.e. This is a special moral and psychological assessment.

Legitimacy can be true and false (social demagoguery, deception). The concept of legitimacy does not coincide among different segments of the population. Legitimacy must be constantly maintained, as it is a matter of consent, obedience and political participation without coercion. The legitimacy of state power leads to trust and authority, and hence the effectiveness of state power.

The question of legitimacy is a question of boundaries, of the legality of coercion applied by the authorities to individuals and legal entities.

Political history shows that legal power can be illegitimate and, vice versa.

Modern state power that wants to be effective must be both legal and legitimate, or simply legitimate, if this concept includes the legal aspect (legality) of the existence of state power.

Types of legitimacy (Max Weber).

Based on the fact that different types of power achieve authority with the help of different resources, M. Weber proposed to identify three ideal types of legitimacy of power: traditional, charismatic and rational-legal. He based this classification on the motive of submission.

1. Traditional type of legitimacy. This type of legitimacy was a historical first. It is based on faith in the sacredness of customs and traditions, their unshakability. The ideological form is a reference to the divine origin of power and the sacredness of the right of succession to the throne. Monarchs receive their power from God. In this way, a conviction is created in the legitimacy, greatness of power and the need to obey customs and traditions. Not only subjects, but also holders of power must obey customs and traditions. If the holder of power allows a violation, then divine law allows for rebellion and even regicide. Such power was called acquisitive, and from here it can be overthrown. Thus, the authority of leaders, monarchs, and kings is based on the habit of submitting to authority, belief in its divine character and the sacredness of the right of succession to the throne. The traditional type of legitimacy has survived to the present day, although it has been noticeably transformed. This includes royal regimes in countries such as Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Jordan, and Kuwait.

2. Charismatic type of legitimacy. The charismatic type of legitimacy is based on “the authority of an extraordinary personal gift (charisma), complete personal devotion and personal trust caused by the presence of leader qualities in a person.” "Charisma" translated from Greek means "divine gift, grace." The personality cult of a leader or leader is charismatic. Submission and consent are emotional and personal. The effect and significance of legal norms have been weakened. The charismatic leader's entourage and his army do not have a clearly defined legal status. The charismatic type of power is characterized by absolute legitimacy, since it is based on the population’s faith in the exceptional qualities of a political figure. Often the image of such a leader is consciously formed in society on the basis of the desires and ideas that prevail among the majority of the population. The charismatic type of legitimacy is also attributed to Soviet political leaders (Stalin). The charismatic type of power predominates in economically and socio-politically backward states. In modern conditions, the charismatic legitimacy of power is preserved mainly in African countries, where charisma is a form of organized political worship, i.e. a kind of political religion that deifies the personality of the leader.

3. Rational-bureaucratic type of legitimacy (legal). It is based on faith in the legality and fairness of the existing rules for the formation and functioning of institutions of political power. Belief in universal, equal, direct suffrage by secret ballot. Government institutions are subject to the law in their activities. The motive for the subordination of the population to power is the rationally conscious interest of the voter, who expresses it in elections, voting for one or another party or leader. Leader turnover is a consequence of mistrust that he will not abuse power. The main sign of fairness in government is following the laws, but both citizens and holders of power must follow the laws. No subject (political, religious, etc.) should evade the execution of laws. To realize its goals, such power creates a rigid, branched organization, i.e. bureaucracy.

from lat. "legitimus" - legal) - the legitimacy of political power, its public recognition, approval by the majority of the population and consent to obey the authorities.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

LEGITIMITY

from lat. Legitimus - agreeing with the laws, lawful, lawful). The meaning of the concept "L." translated into Russian. language as the authority of power. History of the concept "L." dates back to the Middle Ages, when an understanding of love emerged as agreement with customs, traditions and established behavior. Mainly law was interpreted as the right of supreme officials to act in accordance with customs, but already around the middle of the 14th century. begins to be used in the sense of the authority of elected authorities. This term was introduced into political science and developed in detail by M. Weber. German the sociologist and political scientist pointed out that any power needs its own self-justification, recognition and support. It is the recognition of power, faith in its fair nature, agreement with the established division of rights and responsibilities that, according to Weber, constitutes the basis of L. The subordination of the main “mass” to the dominant groups is based on the predominantly emotional nature of the acceptance of power. Thus, L. reflects mainly the subjective - irrational attitude of persons and structures subject to power itself. In the 20th century, category “L.” actively used in Western political science. First of all, it is used to characterize political stability and analyze the effectiveness of political institutions. In America In political science, the concept of L. was intensively developed by S. Lipset (“Political Man”) and L. Binder (“Iran. Political Development in a Changing Society”), in French. political science M. Duverger. In the late 60s - early 70s. the problem of L. was studied in close connection with the theory of domination by representatives of the Frankfurt School, primarily J. Habermas (“Problems of Legitimation of Late Capitalism”), as well as K. Eder, K. Offe and M. Foucault. L. is not only a theoretical problem of modern political science, but also the most acute practical task of any power system. The absence of broad legal institutions of power inevitably leads to the refusal of those in power to recognize any acts of power, regardless of their rationality, to political instability, tension, and increased conflicts. The most problematic is ensuring broad political power during the period of transformation of social systems, the transition from one political regime to another, when the old ways of justifying power are destroyed and rejected by the majority, and new ones have not yet been created and do not work. In such a situation, the authorities begin to “slip” - decisions are made, but not implemented. As experience shows, the legislative expansion of the executive branch of government does not contribute to its effectiveness or overcoming the crisis of government institutions. A way out of the state of “anarchy” is possible through the search and creation of broad political power, a necessary condition for which in a democratic society is free elections on a multi-party basis.

Literature: Ozhiganov E. N. The concept of “legitimation” in the theory of the political system // Development of political systems in the modern world. M., 1981; Ozhiganov E. N. Political theory of Max Weber. Riga, 1986; Shpakova R.P. Legitimacy of political power: Weber and modernity // Soviet State and Law, 1990, No. 3.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

concept meaning: 1) moral and social justification of power, political processes and institutions; 2) consistency of decisions and actions with legal laws. The legitimacy of political phenomena does not automatically mean their legal validity. In modern conditions, the legitimacy of power is associated with its formation on the basis of democratic electoral procedures and further functioning in the legal and regulatory field.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

LEGITIMITY

the legitimacy of the regime, politicians and leaders, reflecting qualities arising not from formal laws and decrees, but from social consent and their acceptance as legitimate, i.e., corresponding to value norms on the part of the citizens themselves. Legitimacy is the long-term agreement of the majority to accept the rule of a given class, hierarchy, power as legitimate and has many interpretations. Plato's idea of justice and the Aristotelian distinction between monarchy, aristocracy and democracy are forms of legitimation of power. In modern times, D. Locke, in his analysis of the nature of government, shifted the source of legitimacy, replacing the divine right of kings with the consent of the people.

Today, no discussion of the concept of power can be complete without reference to its legitimacy. In modern political systems, in which popular participation is the criterion of their political value, legitimacy has become a fundamentally significant concept. Thus, S. Lipset defines legitimacy as the ability of a system to form and maintain the belief that existing political institutions are the most adequate for a given society. D. Easton connects legitimacy with the diffusion of support for the regime in society. The most famous definition of legitimacy was given by M. Weber, who formulated the ideal types of legitimation of power, identifying the traditional, charismatic and rational-legal form of legitimacy. Although democracies are not related to each other in Weber's typology, historically the traditional type and the charismatic type are found in authoritarian regimes. In democratic states, rational-legal legitimacy is especially important, since the preservation of democracy ultimately depends on the support of the majority of the population, or at least on whether the majority perceives democratic institutions as legitimate. In dictatorships, although gaining support from the people is one of the goals, it is not so important, since the authority of Ch. O. relies on coercive power. Authoritarian regimes do not always have the necessary legitimacy, but, as a rule, they also feel the need for it. M. Weber implicitly recognized the idea of mixed legitimacy, when power relies on the support of the people, motivated by different types of legitimacy in some proportions.

Legitimacy - the concept and word came to us from ancient times, from the times of Great Rome, and from the Latin language denoted recognition by society or the majority of society of the exclusivity or rights of a certain individual or legal entity to carry out actions within society, which should have been supported by the execution of these instructions from the legitimate person or body and be executed by all individual individuals - citizens of this society, part of the society or the entire society, as well as bodies established by them, apparatuses of the state system of power.

There is a consonant word “legitimacy” - a word with the same root - legate. It has always been a person authorized by the central authority (the emperor, the Pope) to represent this power, the law, the right of a given state in the provinces or in other areas outside the state.

It was a representative of the authorities! It was a representative of the law! And it doesn’t matter - political, or religious or otherwise, but a representative of the authorities! Her image. He was always legitimate to others.

The concept and interpretation of legitimacy

The issue of legitimacy is very broad in interpretation and different concepts. And is interpreted or accepted differently by different groups of people.

Let's take an example from childhood. The leader in a boy group in the yard is either the strongest or the smartest! But this is recognition of him as such by society - a group of boys, which he had to prove to all of them in competition with other peers, where he defeated them, got ahead of them, that is, proved his exclusivity compared to others, by the fact that he is taller, better, stronger than them. He is capable of leading them. He is their leader.

Let's take another example. There are several ways to become a team leader and become legitimate:

You were chosen by the collective, by a majority vote, which means other people transferred their powers to you, giving you their right, the right to vote too. And the right to lead them for various reasons (higher level of education, greater horizons of the surrounding world, more developed mental abilities, greater connections and acquaintances with other people, layers and communities of people), which will benefit everything - a given circle of people and each individual, to an individual in particular, etc.;
You, a strong personality, and through physical or psychological, or other types of influence, convinced your rivals that you are capable of leading them and again - in this case you are legitimate;
You were appointed as a leader in accordance with the laws adopted by society or its representatives, which everyone around them recognized and recognizes. In this case, you are legally legitimate.

But it happens that in these cases you are not legitimate for another community of people who are located at a distance from your group. In this case, it is again necessary to prove your legitimacy, your legality in different ways and actions - through legislation, through physical, political and economic influence.

What are the types of legitimacy?

It is possible to define three directions of legitimacy and, naturally, three types of formation of legitimacy:

Conservative – formed on character, principles passed down from generation to generation, customs, etc.;
Psychological – emotional, based on the selection of the use of the concept of the pair “like-rejection”, mental – volitional;
Legal – based on the existing legal order and legality.

The first two directions of legitimacy relate to the personal type of power, and the third - to the state organization of legitimacy.