- LEGITIMATE
oh, oh, men, me, jur. Legal, in accordance with the law in force in this state. Legitimate actions. Quite l. Act … - LEGITIMATE in encyclopedic dictionary:
, -th, -th (special). Recognized by law, in accordance with the law. II n. legitimacy, and L. ... - LEGITIMATE in the Popular Explanatory-Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Russian Language:
-th, -th; -men, -me, jur. Legal, in accordance with the law in force in this state. Legitimate actions. Legitimate act of will. … - LEGITIMATE
lawful, legitimate, ... - LEGITIMATE in the New explanatory and derivational dictionary of the Russian language Efremova:
- LEGITIMATE in the Dictionary of the Russian Language Lopatin:
legitimate; cr. f. -men, ... - LEGITIMATE in the Spelling Dictionary:
legitimate; cr. f. -men, ... - LEGITIMATE in the New Dictionary of the Russian Language Efremova:
adj. Is in accordance with the law in force in the state; … - LEGITIMATE in the Big Modern Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language:
adj. Is in accordance with the law in force in the state; legal, ... - LEGITIMATE; KR. F. -MEN in the Complete Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language:
legitimate; cr. f. -men, ... - GUENON
(Guenon) Rene (1886-1951) - French thinker, researcher of the so-called. sacred tradition and its various versions. Bachelor of Philosophy. Converted to Islam in 1912. … - AIDUKEVICH in the Newest Philosophical Dictionary:
(Ajdukiewicz) Kazimierz (1890-1963) - Polish logician and philosopher. In 1920-1930 he belonged to the Lvov-Warsaw school. Major works: "On the Meaning of Expressions" (1931), ... - DISCIPLINARITY, DISCIPLINE in Dictionary of Postmodernism.
- ROMAN POPES in the Orthodox Encyclopedia Tree:
Open Orthodox Encyclopedia "TREE". List of Roman Bishops Opinion that the founder of the Roman See, who occupied it from 42 to 67, ... - THEODOSIUS I THE GREAT in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron:
Roman emperor who reigned between 379 and 395 A.D. Chr. He came from the natives of Spain and was the son of Theodosius, the brave ... - LOYAL in the Encyclopedic Dictionary:
oh, oh, flax, flax Keeping formally within the limits of legality, within the limits of a benevolently neutral attitude towards someone or something. Quite l. political leader. Loyal… - LEGAL in the Encyclopedic Dictionary:
oh, oh, flax, flax Recognized, permitted by law. legal group. legal position. Legality is a property of the legal.||Cf. LEGITIMATE, LOYAL ... - THEODOSIUS I THE GREAT in the Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron:
? the Roman emperor, who reigned between 379 and 395 A.D. He came from the natives of Spain and was the son of Theodosius, ... - PAP LIST in Collier's Dictionary:
The oldest surviving list of Roman bishops, which is given in the treatise Against Heresies (Adversus haereses) by Irenaeus of Lyons and brought to the pope ... - LEGITIMATE in the dictionary of Synonyms of the Russian language:
lawful, lawful... - LAW in the dictionary of Synonyms of the Russian language:
permissible, legitimate, logical, legal, legitimate, legitimate, justified, formalized, righteous, correct, right, ...
AT recent times cases when the peoples of certain countries express distrust of the authorities of their states have become more frequent, while such terms as "legitimacy" and "illegitimacy" appear in the press. For many, it remains unclear what these concepts mean.
Legitimacy: what is it?
The term "legitimacy" comes from the Latin word legitimus, which translates as "legitimate, consonant with the laws, lawful." In political science, this term denotes the voluntary recognition by the people for the right to make decisions concerning the entire people. In the scientific literature, one can find complete answers to the questions: "The term" legitimacy "- what is it? How to understand the expression" legitimacy of power "?" So, this is a political and legal term, which means an approving attitude of the citizens of the country towards the institutions of power. Naturally, in such countries sovereignty is legitimate. However, when the term first came into use, it meant something completely different. It was at the beginning of the 19th century in France, during the years of the usurpation of power by Napoleon. Some group of French people wanted to restore the only legitimate authority of the king. It was this aspiration of the monarchists that was called the term “legitimacy”. That this is more in line with the meaning of the Latin word legitimus becomes immediately obvious. At the same time, the Republicans began to use the term as a recognition given state and the authority established on its territory by other states. In the modern sense, legitimacy is the voluntary acceptance of power by the masses, who constitute the majority. Moreover, this approval is primarily associated with a moral assessment: their ideas about nobility, justice, conscience, decency, etc. In order to win the trust of the masses, the government tries to instill in them the idea that all its decisions and actions are aimed at the benefit of the people.
The great German sociologist and philosopher Max Weber introduced the typology of the legitimacy of power. According to it, there are traditional, charismatic and rational legitimacy.
- traditional legitimacy. What it is? In some states, the masses blindly believe that power is sacred, and obeying it is inevitable and necessary. In such societies, power acquires the status of tradition. Naturally, a similar picture is observed in those states in which the leadership of the country is inherited (kingdom, emirate, sultanate, principality, etc.).
- Charismatic legitimacy is formed on the basis of people's belief in the exceptional dignity and authority of one or another. In such countries, the formation of the so-called. Thanks to the charisma of the leader, the people begin to believe in the entire political system that prevails in the country. People experience emotional delight and are ready to strictly obey it in everything. Usually this happens at the dawn of revolutions, changes in political power, etc.
- Rational or democratic legitimacy is formed in view of the recognition by the people of the justice of the actions and decisions of those in power. found in highly organized societies. In this case, legitimacy has a normative basis.
The idea of a legitimate state comes from two things and legitimacy. A state of this type, in fact, has every right to demand obedience from its citizens, since in these societies the rule of law comes first. Consequently, regardless of the personalities of individual members of the government, the people must obey the laws in force in this state. If citizens do not satisfy these laws, and they do not want to obey them, then they have several options: emigration (departure from a given state to another), overthrow of power (revolution), disobedience, which is fraught with punishment provided for in the legislation of this country. The legitimate state is a mechanism for transferring the right of choice from one generation to another.
Any human society, whether it consists of many millions or just a few people, cannot exist without a certain power structure. People by nature are programmed to form a hierarchical structure in which some play a leading role, while others play a subordinate role.
But if among animals the issue of choosing a leader is solved simply - who is stronger and more aggressive, he will be the main one - then for people the fundamental concept is legitimacy, i.e. the legitimacy of the existing power structure.
What is legitimacy? Meaning of the word.
Social sciences call legitimacy an essential property of power, i.e. without which power simply does not exist or it remains only nominal. Word "legitimacy" derived from latin legitimus, which means "lawful, lawful" and means the degree of recognition of power by other people.
Legitimate power is recognized without objection by all the people subject to it, its orders do not cause resistance and are implicitly carried out. The lower the legitimacy of power, the more it is forced to rely on coercion to implement management functions.
History of the concept
The concept of legitimacy, the legality of power is one of the oldest in human society, but the term itself arose relatively recently, about two hundred years ago. A bourgeois revolution took place in France, later called the Great, and the population was divided: some recognized the power of the revolutionary Convention, and later Napoleon, who proclaimed himself emperor, while others were confident in the illegality of these authorities and fought against them, trying to restore the power of the deposed king.
Napoleon managed to establish his rule for a long time, pacifying dissent. Despite the fact that from the point of view of the law, his coming to power, and hence the power itself, was rather doubtful, yet it was recognized by almost the entire population of the country, which means that this power was legitimate in the eyes of the French.
Rules of legitimacy by D. Bitem
The English political scientist D. Bitem developed the structure of the legitimacy of power. 
According to his concept, power has legitimacy when:
- complies with the rules adopted in society, or established with its arrival;
- the rules that justify its establishment refer to either a philosophical worldview shared by both the authorities and the ruled people;
— there is evidence of a consensus in relations between the authorities and the people.
In the beginning, legitimacy was synonymous with legality. Today, this concept means the recognition by the population of the right to power, which is not always based on legal grounds. One should not confuse legitimacy with legality - the compliance of power with existing legal norms.
Max Weber's theory of legitimacy
According to the fundamental theory of the German philosopher and economist Max Weber, in order to legitimize power, two main factors are necessary: recognition of it as such through existing state institutions and the duty of the population to obey that authority. Weber identified three basic types legitimacy:
- traditional, based on a long tradition - for example, monarchical inherited power or the power of elders, patriarchs, etc .;
- charismatic, based on outstanding personal qualities- the power of a leader, leader, prophet, often not backed by law and formalized retroactively;
- rational, which is based on the legal procedure for gaining power through elections, which can be democratic (through the will of the governed) or technocratic (obtained through demonstrated abilities). 
In reality, none of the types of legitimacy can exist in its pure form. Government from any nation acquires its own forms characteristic of the country, which are a mixture different types legitimacy.
However, the most widespread today is the rational form of democratic power, which, in turn, can have different sources its legitimacy.
Source of legitimacy
Rational power can be based on several sources (bases) of legitimacy in the eyes of the population:
- ideological principles that convince citizens that this form of power the best way responds to their well-being;
- trust in the mechanism for obtaining power, traditions and norms that have existed for many tens or even hundreds of years;
- positive personal qualities of subjects personifying power (president, chancellor, prime minister);
- rational calculation of citizens on certain factors in relation to;
- coercion by force government agencies or the political machine;
— the influence of foreign sources of power.
It is clear that power cannot be equally legitimate for everyone. How less people recognizes it, the more often and stronger the authorities are forced to resort to forceful methods. Modern society increasingly inclined to consider the legitimacy of the acting subject of power through the prism of their own well-being, i.e. how effectively the government operates to ensure it. 
In this aspect, power can be considered either as a subject that embodies it, or as an entire system that provides preferences to one strata of society at the expense of others. The deterioration in the well-being of ordinary members of society contributes to the delegitimization of power, which has long lost its sacred meaning in the eyes of the population.
(lat. legitimus agreeing with the laws, legal, lawful) - a certain historically established, socially significant order of the origin and functioning of power, which makes it possible to achieve agreement in power structures and in their interaction with society. The history of the concept "L." goes back to the Middle Ages, when an understanding of L. is formed as an agreement with customs, traditions and established behavior. L. was predominantly interpreted as the right of supreme officials. act according to customs, but already from the middle of the XIV century. begins to be used in the sense of the authority of elective power. In scientific use, the term "L." introduced M. Weber, who pointed out that any government needs self-justification, recognition and support. This term is often translated as "legality", which is not entirely accurate, because. Weber had in mind not legal, but sociological (behavioral) characteristics of domination (power) and attached primary importance to the factor of the monopoly use of violence. In contrast to the sociological approach of M. Weber, the system analysis of power proposed by the American school of political science made it possible to create a more functional concept of L. adapted to practical needs, which makes it possible to measure L. empirically. D. Easton and his followers argue that the condition for L. political power is certain socio-psychological relations, which are based on a minimum value consensus that ensures the acceptance and submission of power, agreement with its requirements and support for its actions. L. in their view is "the degree to which members political system perceive it as worthy of its support". This value-normative approach allowed D. Easton to distinguish between the types of support both in terms of the object and content, and in terms of the time of its action, highlighting diffuse and specific L. Diffuse L., according to D. Easton, represents a general (fundamental), long-term, predominantly affective (emotional) support for the ideas and principles of political power, regardless of the results of its activities.Specific L. is situational, short-term, result-oriented and is based on conscious support for power and how it acts. In the 1980s, in political science, along with diffuse and specific L., mixed types of support were introduced: diffuse-specific and specific-diffuse, with the help of which it is possible to more accurately measure the L. of power, political regime or its separate institution. In modern political science literature, there are other approaches to the typology of L. The French political scientist J. L. Chabot, emphasizing that there are two main factors in the structure of power relations - the ruled and the rulers, indicates that political power is legitimized, first of all, relative to them. Thus, it must correspond to the will of the governed (democratic L.) and conform to the abilities of the rulers (technocratic L.). Democratic L. is the transfer to the whole of society of the mechanism of making a decision by an individual: an expression of free will, but in the sense that this free collective will stems from the individual manifestation of free judgment. In political practice, to operationalize the transition from the individual to the collective, a simple arithmetic mechanism is used - the majority principle (the majority principle). Its application in democratic regimes is universal - both for choosing representatives of the people, and for pushing laws or making decisions within the framework of executive collegiate structures. However, there are many cases in history when democratic mechanisms in certain historical circumstances contributed to the confirmation of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. Technocratic L. is associated with the ability to rule, and the latter is due to two parameters: the methods of access to power and the content of the process of its implementation. On the early stages stories human society When force was the predominant way to achieve power, the possession of weapons, armies and people was valued above all else. In modern conditions, knowledge is called such a predominant way. However, this type of L. can also have its "perversions" when "a competent elite, cultivating a taste for mystery and belief in their own superiority," comes to power. In addition, according to J. L. Chabot, political power can legitimize itself in relation to subjective ideas about the desired social order (ideological L.) or in accordance with the cosmic order, which also includes the social order (ontological L.). Ideological socialism is based on certain ideas about social reality and methods and projects for changing it. Ontological L. is the correspondence of political power to the universal principles of human and social existence. It is measured by the level of compliance with "that deep order of being that a person feels innately, but which he can resist." Political science literature also distinguishes three levels of L. power: 1) ideological: power is recognized as justified by virtue of internal conviction or belief in the correctness of those ideological values that it proclaims; the source of legitimacy is ideological values; 2) structural: the legitimacy of power follows from the belief in the legitimacy and value of established structures and norms that regulate political relations; source of legitimacy - specific political structures; 3) personal: based on the approval of this ruling person; the source of legitimation is the personal authority of the ruler. To maintain L. power, many means are used: changes in legislation and mechanisms government controlled in accordance with new requirements; the desire to use the traditions of the population in lawmaking and in the conduct of practical politics; implementation of legal precautions against a possible reduction in L. power; the maintenance of law and order in society, and so on. The indicators of the law of power are: the level of coercion used to implement the policy; the presence of attempts to overthrow the government or leader; the force of manifestation of civil disobedience; results of elections, referendums; mass demonstrations in support of the government (opposition), etc. L. political phenomenon does not mean its legally formalized legality. L. does not have legal functions and is not a legal process.
Where is the legitimacy of power in Ukraine?
Probably every adult and educated person has heard in life concept of legitimacy. But not everyone thought about the origin and meaning of this concept. In everyday and colloquial life, probably, few people use this concept. It is most used in politics when it comes to the legality of resolving any issues or situations.
The word legitimacy comes from the Latin "legitimus" and is translated as legal or lawful. Politicians use this word when the people agree with the current government and accept all its decisions in terms of legality. In other words, when the people trust the management of the state (a separate subject, city), agree with the decisions made by the authorities, obey this authority, then this authority is considered legitimate.
In history, unfortunately, there are many cases when coups d'etat took place and self-proclaimed persons began to rule the people, naturally this power was not recognized by the people and was considered not legitimate, since it was not chosen by the people and the people naturally do not trust this power. All actions and decisions, as a result, are usually called not legitimate actions. The concept of the legitimacy of power is closely connected with the recent events in Ukraine, since it was after the coup d'état that self-proclaimed persons began to commit illegitimate actions. And the power itself is not considered legitimate.
The difference between the concept of legitimacy and the legality of power
Do not confuse the concept of legitimacy and legality. These are two different concepts. Legality is a legally justified action for compliance with regulatory - legal acts. The slide below shows the concepts of legality and legitimacy.
The difference between legitimacy and legality
Types of legitimacy of power
1. Traditional;
2. Democratic;
3. Charismatic;
4. Technocratic;
5. Ontological
With values certain types of the concepts of legitimacy mentioned above can be found on the slides below. General concept legitimacy revealed.
The concept of traditional legitimacy
The concept of rational legitimacy
The concept of ideological legitimacy
