Towards a Social-scientific Concept of Legitimacy

Abstract

The exercise of power by one person over others, or by one group over another, is a basic and recurrent feature of all societ-ies. Those who are subordinate experience it as constraining, often humiliating and sometimes life-threatening; and many would'"escape it if they could. Those· who hold power, or seek to do so, are themselves frequently at odds with one another over the scope of their power and the control over their subordi-nates, with potentially damaging consequences. Power, in other words, is a highly problematical, as well as recurrent feature of human societies. And because it is so problematical, societies will seek to subject it to justifiable rules, and the powerful them-selves will seek to secure consent to their power from at least the most impor.tant among their subordinates. Where power is acquired and exercised according to justifiable rules, and with evidence of consent, we call it rightful or legitimate. How far power is legitimate, what makes it so, and why it matters: these are all inherently difficult and contentious ques-tions. They have at various times and places seriously exercised those involved in power relations, especially in periods of legal uncertainty, moral disagreement or intense social and political conflict. These questions have also been the special concern of different groups of professionals -legal experts, moral or politi-cal philosophers, social scientists, to name but three -who have each approached them from a different focus of interest, and have tended to employ different conceptions or definitions of legitimacy according to the~r respective professional standpoint. ··~ 3 15 The different dimensions of legitimacy The key to understanding the concept of legitimacy lies in the recognition that it is multi-dimensional in character. It embodies three distinct elements or levels, which are qualitatively different from one another. Power can be said to be legitimate to the extent that: 16 The Legitimation of Power i) it conforms to established rules ii) the rules can be justified by reference to beliefs shared by both dominant and subordinate, and iii) there is evidence of consent by the subordinate to the particu-lar power relation. The first level is that of rules; the second that of justifications grounded on beliefs; the third that of actions. The three levels are not alternatives, since all contribute to legitimacy; all_provide the subordinate with moral grounds for compliance or cooper-ation with the powerful. Each, however, is different, and has its own characteristic form of non-legitimacy. I shall say something further about each of them in turn.