Any government needs legitimacy.
Legitimacy - political property of a public authority, meaning the recognition by the majority of citizens of the correctness and legality of its formation and functioning. Any power based on popular consensus is legitimate.
concept "legitimacy" means recognition by the community of an indisputable basis for officials (rulers) to exercise power functions. It is opposed to the illegal seizure of power, its usurpation. Legitimacy implies trust in the authorities and support of the rulers, i.e. loyalty, on the part of the majority of the members of the community, because in any society there are always people who are in opposition to the rulers.
The main thing in the concept of "legitimacy" is the nature ("tonality") of the attitude to power on the part of the population (people) subject to it. If the population (people) accepts and positively evaluates the power, recognizes its right to govern, and agrees to obey it, then such power is legitimate. If this is not the case, and the people do not “love” the authorities and do not trust the authorities, although they obey it for the time being within the instinct of self-preservation (primarily because of the fear of mass repressions), then such authority appears as illegitimate.
Assimilation of the question of the legitimacy of state power requires knowledge of the content and sources of not only three classical types legitimacy — traditional, charismatic and rational-legal (democratic) — but also its types such as ideological, technocratic, etc. It is also necessary to answer the question of how the legitimacy of power and its effectiveness (effectiveness) correlate with each other.
As well as traditional types legitimacy of power (traditional, charismatic and rational-legal), there is also such a type as technocratic legitimacy.
For the simple reason that politics deals with the interests and destinies of millions of people, and the cost of mistakes in this area often takes the form of tragedies for entire nations, the question of the effectiveness of politics and politicians is particularly acute. It is with this question that technocratic legitimacy is connected, the core of which is the requirement for the authorities to be competent, to be professional. It should be borne in mind that for those who exercise power or hope to achieve it, politics takes on the character of a craft, a specialized occupation, which necessarily implies the presence of special knowledge and experience. If this is not the case, then politics turns into politicking and loses its effectiveness. Very figuratively, the essence of technocratic legitimacy is expressed by Russian folk proverbs: “Take hold of the tug, do not say that you are not hefty”, “Do not know the ford, do not stick your head into the water.”
The formula that reflects the relationship (interdependence) between the legitimacy and effectiveness of power is the rule: the degree of legitimacy of power is most often directly proportional to its effectiveness, i.e. the more efficiency, the more legitimacy. And vice versa. If this efficiency, as they say, “the cat cried”, then the initially legitimate government, which does not cope with the tasks assigned to it, eventually loses the trust of citizens and turns into illegitimate in their eyes.
If we evaluate the power in post-socialist Russia through this prism, then it clearly lacks professionalism. It is known that Germany and Japan, defeated and thoroughly destroyed in the Second World War, took some 15-20 years to perform an “economic miracle” and be reborn as a “phoenix bird from the ashes”. But for the same period of time (if we date the start of market reforms to August 1991), we have not even fully restored what (through thoughtlessness or malicious intent) we thoroughly destroyed.
It is no coincidence that on October 26, 2006, the day after the meeting of the President of the Russian Federation V. Putin in live with the people, during which he had to "take the rap" for all the "sins" of those in power - the then chairman of the federal government M. Fradkov gave the members of his cabinet a disappointing diagnosis: "collective irresponsibility" associated with "organizational weakness and insufficient knowledge of the subject" . That is, what you manage and what you manage.
Distinguish three "ideal types" legitimacy:
In relation to this latter type, the concept of "democratic legitimacy" is used as a synonym.
In addition to these three "ideal types", there are other types of legitimacy, namely:
Most an important factor recognition of the validity of the board favors the formation of authorities on the basis of legality. This structural legitimacy(first view). It is called so because it determines the structure of the political system. This legitimacy can take two forms. First, this traditional legitimacy, which implies public recognition of rulers who have received power in accordance with traditions and customs this community: elders, leader (the most authoritative leader), monarch, etc. Secondly, it is more common in democratic communities legal legitimacy, i.e. public recognition of the transfer of power in accordance with established laws on government elections.
However, the acquisition by the rulers of powers on a legal basis does not yet guarantee them the preservation of trust and support, that is, legitimacy. abuse of power, violation of laws and citizens' ideas about justice, the inefficiency of government bodies in managing society can cause a political crisis, undermine confidence, i.e., loss of legitimacy. In established democracies, crises of legitimacy are resolved in a civilized manner. For this, procedures are provided for the removal from power of a ruler who has lost authority. For example, the growth of extra-parliamentary forms political activity(rallies, protest marches, etc.) can lead to the voluntary resignation of political leaders, early elections, a referendum, etc.
Charismatic legitimacy is based on the belief in the special talent of a leader who claims access to political power, all charisma is a divine gift, grace. The trust of citizens in this case has an emotional character and is based on personal sympathy for the leader. At the same time, the importance of legal norms is belittled on both sides. The charismatic way of legitimizing rulers is often used during periods of revolution, when new authorities cannot rely on law or tradition.
These types of legitimacy are ideal models. In political practice, they are intertwined and complement each other. Currently, new types of legitimacy are emerging. The rise of nationalism led to the emergence of the so-called ethnic legitimacy- the formation of power structures on a national basis. This variety can be attributed to the kind of legal legitimacy, when the qualification of nationality is explicitly or implicitly used in elections.
Degree of legitimacy, i.e., trust in rulers, is difficult to quantify. However, there are certain indicators that can be used for this purpose. Among them are: the level of coercion necessary for the performance of managerial functions by the rulers; the nature of attempts to replace representatives of authorities, manifestations of civil disobedience (riots, strikes, etc.); election results; survey results; and etc.
Legitimate power is usually characterized as lawful and just. The word "legitimacy" itself comes from the Latin. legitimus- law. But not every legitimate power can be legitimate. Already in the Middle Ages, there are theoretical justifications that a monarch who becomes a tyrant and does not fulfill his destiny deprives his power of legitimacy. In this case, the people have the right to overthrow such a government (F. Aquinas spoke about this, in particular).
Legitimacy is the confidence of the people that the government will fulfill its obligations; recognition of the authority of power and voluntary submission to it; notion of the correct and expedient use of power, including violence. Legitimate power, as a rule, is able to ensure the stability and development of society without resorting to violence.
M. Weber identified three main types of political domination and their corresponding forms of legitimacy:
In addition to those listed, there are other types of legitimacy, for example: ontological, ideological, structural, etc.
Ontological legitimacy most characteristic of the ancient and traditional societies when the existing norms of being are perceived by people as a natural (non-human) way established order, and its violation is like a catastrophe, anarchy, chaos. This is the recognition by a person (society) of the existing order as a norm of being, which applies not only to society, but to the entire outer space. Such legitimacy is closely connected with the life and death of the canonized political leader of the nation. His life represents power and order, and his death represents anarchy and chaos. History knows many examples when, after the death of their leader, the people experienced fear of the future. An example is the death of V.I. Lenin, I.V. Stalin, Kim Il Sung ( North Korea) and etc.
At the core ideological legitimacy there are certain ideological "constructions" - attractive ideas, promises of a "bright future" or "new world order", religious dogmas, etc. Thus, the communist ideology and promises of the rapid construction of communism largely ensured the legitimacy of the Soviet regime of power; the ideas of national socialism contributed to the legitimization fascist regime in Germany. Some countries of the Near and Middle East elevated Islam to the rank of state ideology.
Structural legitimacy is based on the rules and norms established in society for the establishment and change of power, for example, the constitution (constitutional legitimacy). If the majority of citizens are dissatisfied with the political power existing in society, then they “tolerate” it until new elections.
The legitimacy of power is closely related to its effectiveness. The government, which has legal grounds for dominating society, as a result of its ineffective policy, can lose the trust of citizens and become illegitimate. Conversely, power that does not have legal grounds, as a result of an effective policy, can gain the trust of the people and become legitimate. The process of recognizing the legitimacy of power is called se legitimization and the loss of its legitimacy - delegitimization.
Any political power, even the most reactionary one, strives to appear in the eyes of its people and in the eyes of the world community as effective and legitimate. Therefore, the process of legitimization of power is a matter of special concern for the ruling elite. One of the most common methods is slacking off. negative results its policy and all sorts of "bulging" of real and imaginary successes. Quite often, independent media become an obstacle in such a substitution of negative factors for positive ones. An illegitimate and inefficient government is afraid to enter into a dialogue with society and with its opponents, so as not to finally show its insolvency. Therefore, it seeks in every way to restrict the activities of independent media or put them under its control.
Solutions.
The lower the level legitimacy, the more often the power will rely on coercion. legitimate an action is an act that is not disputed 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, th, th(specialist.). Recognized by law, in accordance with the law. || noun legitimacy, and L. power. (Dictionary of Ozhegov, Dictionary Russian language)
Legitimacy means the recognition by the population of this power, its right to govern. Legitimate power is accepted by the masses, not just imposed on them. The masses agree to submit to such power, considering it fair, authoritative, and the existing order is the best for the country. Of course, in society there are always citizens who violate the laws, who do not agree with a given political course, who do not support the authorities. The legitimacy of power means that it is supported by the majority, that the laws are implemented by the main part of society.
The legitimacy of power should not be confused with the concept legality power, also existing in political science.
The legality of power - its legal justification, legality, its compliance with existing in the state legal regulations. Legitimacy, unlike legality, is not a legal fact, but a socio-psychological phenomenon. Any government that issues laws, even unpopular ones, but ensures their implementation, is legal, but it may be illegitimate, that is, not recognized by the people.
In society, there may also be illegal power, for example, the mafia, which can 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, it is associated with a moral assessment. Citizens approve the government based on their moral criteria, ideas about goodness, justice, decency, conscience. Legitimacy is designed to ensure obedience, consent without coercion, and if it is not achieved, then justify coercion, the use of force. Legitimate power and politics are authoritative and effective.
In order to win and retain legitimacy, the trust of the people, the authorities resort to arguing their actions (legitimation), referring to the highest values (justice, truth), to history, feelings and emotions, moods, real or fictitious will of the people, the dictates of the time, scientific and technical progress, the requirements of production, the historical tasks of the country, etc. Violence and repression are often justified by dividing people into “us” and “them”.
Principles of legitimacy (belief) may have their origins in ancient traditions, revolutionary charisma, or current legislation. The relevant typology of legitimacy, which is widely accepted, is introduced by Max Weber. According to her, the three types of legitimacy correspond to the three sources of legitimacy of political power: tradition, charisma and rational-legal basis. Weber emphasized that we are not talking about assigning any real regime to any of the types, but about abstractions (the so-called " ideal types”), in specific political systems combined in one proportion or another.
Depending on which of the listed motives for supporting the political normative order by the population prevails in society, it is customary to distinguish the following types of legitimacy: traditional, charismatic, and rational.
Applied to political legitimacy famous English political scientist David Beetham developed a "normative framework of political legitimacy":
Legal- recognized by law, in accordance with the law.
The term "legitimate" originated in early XIX century and expressed the desire to restore the power of the king in France as the only legal one, in contrast to the power of the usurper. At the same time, this word acquired another meaning - the recognition of this state power and 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 the redrawing of state borders, against arbitrariness and ochlocracy.
Legitimacy means the recognition by the population of this power, its right to govern. Legitimate power is accepted by the masses, not just imposed on them. The masses agree to submit to such power, considering it fair, authoritative, and the existing order is the best for the country. Of course, in society there are always citizens who violate the laws, who do not agree with a given political course, who do not support the authorities. The legitimacy of power means that it is supported by the majority, that the laws are implemented 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, not recognized by the people. In society, there may also be illegal power, 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, because it is associated with a moral assessment. Citizens approve the government based on their moral criteria, ideas about goodness, justice, decency, conscience. Legitimacy is designed to ensure obedience, consent without coercion, and if it is not achieved, then justify coercion, the use of force. Legitimate power and politics are authoritative and effective.
In order to win and retain legitimacy, the trust of the people, the authorities resort to arguing their actions (legitimation), referring to the highest values (justice, truth), to history, feelings and emotions, moods, real or fictitious will of the people, the dictates of the time, scientific and technical progress, the requirements of production, the historical tasks of the country, etc. Violence and repression are often justified by dividing people into “us” and “them”.
Principles of legitimacy (belief) may have their origins in ancient traditions, revolutionary charisma, or in current legislation. The relevant typology of legitimacy, which is widely accepted, is introduced by Max Weber. According to her, the three types of legitimacy correspond to the three sources of legitimacy of political power: tradition, charisma and rational-legal basis. Weber emphasized that this is not about assigning any real regime to one of the types, but about abstractions (the so-called “ideal types”) that are combined in specific political systems in one proportion or another.
Depending on which of the listed motives for supporting the political normative order by the population prevails in society, it is customary to distinguish the following types of legitimacy: traditional, charismatic, and rational.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .
Synonyms:LEGITIMACY legitimacy of the regime, politicians and leaders, reflecting the qualities that stem not from formal laws and decrees, but from social harmony and their acceptance as legitimate, that is, corresponding to the value norms with ... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
- (legitimacy) Consists in the fact that the procedure applied by a particular system of government for creating and enforcing laws is acceptable to its citizens. The term is taken from Weberian sociology. As Weber emphasized, ... ... Political science. Dictionary.
- (from lat. legitimus legal). Legality. Dictionary foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov AN, 1910. LEGITIMACY legality, law. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Pavlenkov F., 1907 ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language
Competence, legality, legitimacy Dictionary of Russian synonyms. legitimacy legitimacy Dictionary of Russian synonyms. Context 5.0 Informatics. 2012 ... Synonym dictionary
legitimacy- and, well. legitim adj. The property is legitimate; legitimacy. ALS 1. And in general, the barbarians, the young peoples of Europe, who were at enmity with Rome, and then with the New Rome, did not even think to deny their only legitimacy in the world. S. S. Averintsev Byzantium and Russia: ... ... Historical Dictionary of Gallicisms of the Russian Language
legitimacy- Legitimacy ♦ Legitimité A concept that lies on the boundary between law and morality, on the one hand, and law and politics, on the other. Legitimacy is that which is in its own right, from which it follows that the right is not always legitimate. Legitimacy is compliance ... ... Philosophical Dictionary of Sponville
- (from lat. legitimus agreeing with the laws, legal, lawful) political and legal concept, meaning positive attitude residents of the country large groups, public opinion (including foreign) to those acting in a particular state ... ... Law Dictionary
Eligibility of an elected body or elected person. Dictionary of business terms. Akademik.ru. 2001 ... Glossary of business terms
- (lat. legitimus legal) in a broad sense, recognition, explanation and justification of the social order, action, actor or events. In jurisprudence, it is opposed to legality (actual legality) as having not legal, but ... ... The latest philosophical dictionary
LEGITIMATE, oh, oh (special). Recognized by law, in accordance with the law. Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 ... Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov
Make binding decisions. The lower the level legitimacy, the more often the power will rely on coercion.
legitimate an action is an action that is not disputed 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, th, th(specialist.). Recognized by law, in accordance with the law. || noun legitimacy, and L. power. (Ozhegov Dictionary, Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language)
Moreover, legitimacy- a political and legal concept, meaning a positive attitude of the inhabitants of the country, large groups, public opinion (including foreign) to the institutions of power operating in a particular state, recognition of their legitimacy.
1 / 3
✪ The legitimacy of the USSR and the illegitimacy of the Russian Federation
✪ Bitstamp exchange - European quality and Legitimacy.
✪ Intelligence: Boris Yulin about the state and the legitimacy of power
Applied to political legitimacy famous English political scientist David Beetham developed a "normative framework of political legitimacy":
Legitimacy means the recognition by the population of this power, its right to govern. Legitimate power is accepted by the masses, not just imposed on them. The masses agree to submit to such power, considering it fair, authoritative, and the existing order is the best for the country. Of course, in society there are always citizens who violate the laws, who do not agree with a given political course, who do not support the authorities. The legitimacy of power means that it is supported by the majority, that the laws are implemented 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, not recognized by the people. In society, there may also be illegal power, 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 a moral assessment. Citizens approve the government based on their moral criteria, ideas about goodness, justice, decency, conscience. Legitimacy is designed to ensure obedience, consent without coercion, and if it is not achieved, then justify coercion, the use of force. Legitimate power and politics are authoritative and effective.
In order to win and retain legitimacy, the trust of the people, the authorities resort to arguing their actions (legitimation), referring to the highest values (justice, truth), to history, feelings and emotions, moods, real or fictitious will of the people, the dictates of the time, scientific and technical progress, the requirements of production, the historical tasks of the country, etc. Violence and repression are often justified by dividing people into “us” and “them”.
Principles of legitimacy (belief) may have their origins in ancient traditions, revolutionary charisma, or in current legislation. The corresponding typology of legitimacy, which is widely accepted, was introduced by Max Weber. According to her, the three types of legitimacy correspond to the three sources of legitimacy of political power: tradition, charisma, and rational-legal basis. Weber emphasized that this is not about assigning any real regime to one of the types, but about abstractions (the so-called "ideal types") that are combined in one or another proportion in specific political systems.
Depending on which of the listed motives for supporting the political normative order by the population prevails in society, it is customary to distinguish the following types of legitimacy: traditional, charismatic, and rational.
Legitimacy - the concept and the word came to us from ancient times, from the time of the Great Rome and meant from the Latin language the recognition by society or the majority of society of the exclusivity or rights of a certain physical or legal entity on the commission of actions within society, which was to be supported by the execution of these instructions from a legitimate person or body and executed by all individual individuals- citizens of this society, part of society or the whole society, as well as the bodies and apparatuses established by them state system authorities.
There is a consonant word "legitimacy" - a word with the same root - legate. It has always been a person authorized by the central authority (emperor, pope) to represent in the provinces or in other areas, outside the state, this power, law, law of this state.
It was a government official! It was a representative of the law! And it doesn't matter - political, or religious or otherwise, but a representative of power! Her image. He has always been legitimate for the rest.
The issue of legitimacy is very broad in interpretation and different concepts. And interpreted or accepted different groups people differently.
Let's take an example from childhood. The leader in the boy group in the yard is either the strongest or the smartest! But, this recognition of him as such by society - a company 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, he proved his exclusivity against the background of others, by the fact that he is taller, better, stronger than them. He is able to lead them. He is their leader.
Let's take another example. There are several ways to become a team leader and become legitimate:
But it happens that in these cases you are not legitimate for another community of people who are far from your group. In this case, it is again necessary to prove one's legitimacy, one's legitimacy in various ways and actions - through legislation, through physical, political and economic impact.
It is possible to define three directions of legitimacy and, of course, three types of legitimacy formation:
The first two directions of legitimacy refer to the personal type of power, and the third - to state organization legitimacy.
