On the edge of chaos: irreversible consequences of the power legitimacy rupture
AbstractConsidering political decision-making as the core of power implementation process, this paper suggests that the lack of legitimacy of the concrete political decisions can be a strong reason for the scenario of social frustration tendencies. The article introduces the notion of ‘legitimacy rupture’, i.e. irreversible process of the power delegitimation, that can emerge when a tension between the power-holders and society, and the inter-network disagreement inside the ruling elite regarding the decision-making, are simultaneously take place.We state that under the present conditions of the tight cross-nationalization and a legitimacy rupture in any one political system is an extremely dangerous phenomenon as it can cause a state of turbulence on a large scale, and entails unexpected consequences for concrete actors, their internal and external policies, as well as for the international system on the whole.Thus, the article refer to the analytical categories of the chaos theory and nonlinear systems when studying conditions and consequences of power delegitimation or building scenarios of/for potential one. In respect to methodological principles of the chaos theory on the examples of conflict situation in Syria and Ukraine, we illustrate how legitimacy rupture in particular cases of decision-making transformed into bifurcation points and caused uncontemplated consequences overwhelming its primary targets and scope.In order to articulate the validity of studying power delegitimation through chaos theory explications the study reveals that the current social and political trends of post-democratic development directly or indirectly effect the entropy growth.
Beetham, D. (2013). The Legitimation of Power, Macmillan, London.
Bird, R. J. (1997). Chaos and Social Reality: an Emergent Perspective, in Eve R., Horfshall S. and Lee M. M. (eds). Chaos, Complexity and Sociology, Sage Pub., London, 141–152.
Boggs, C. (2001). The End of Politics: Corporate Power and the Decline of the Public Sphere, Guilford Press, New York.
Boltzmann, L. (1974). The Second Law of Thermodynamics, in B. McGuinness, ed. Theoretical Physics and Philosophical Problems: Selected Writings, Springer Netherlands, 13–32.
Brown, L.D. (2008). Creating Credibility: Legitimacy and Accountability for Transnational Civil Society, Sterling, Kumarian Press, USA, VA.
Ceva, E. and Rossi, E. (2013). Justice, legitimacy, and diversity. Political authority between realism and moralism. Routledge.
Coleman, St. (1975). Measurement and Analysis of Political Systems: a Science of Social Behavior, John Wiley & Sons, USA, New York.
Colón-Ríos, J. (2012). Weak constitutionalism. Democratic legitimacy and the question of constituent power. Abingdon. Routledge.
Crouch, C. (2004). Post-Democracy, Polity Press Ltd, UK, Cambridge.
De Fine Licht, J. (2013). The Effect of Transparency in Decision Making for Public Perceptions of Legitimacy in Different Policy-areas. Available from: http://campus.hec.fr/global-transparency/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/de-Fine-Licht_transparency-conference-Paris.pdf [Accessed 16 Jun 2016]
Easton, D. (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. University of Chicago Press, USA. Chicago, (IL).
Fleming, P. and Jones, M. T. (2013). The end of corporate social responsibility crisis and critique. London. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Gilley, B. (2006). The Meaning and Measure of State Legitimacy: Results for 72 Countries, European Journal of Political Research, 45 (3), 499–525. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00307.x
Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation Crisis. Trans. Th. McCarthy, Beacon Press, USA, Boston (MA).
Kiel, L. D. and Elliott, E. L., (1997). Chaos Theory in the Social Sciences: Foundations and Applications. University of Michigan Press, USA, (MI).
Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. Basic Books. USA. New York.
Lorenz, Ed. N. (1995). The Essence оf Chaos, Taylor & Francis, UK, London.
Luhmann, N. (2000). Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives, in D. Gambetta, ed. Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, UK, Oxford, chapter 6, 94-107
Pabst, A. (2010). The Crisis of Сapitalist Democracy, Telos, 152, 44–67. DOI: 10.3817/0910152044
Putnam, R. D. Leonardi, R. and Nanetti, R. Y. (1994), Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton University Press, USA, Princeton (N.J)
Riegert, K. (2006). Introduction, in Politicotainment: Television’s Take on the Real. Popular (Culture and Everyday Life). Rigert, K. (ed.) Peter Lang Inc., International Academic Publishers, USA, New York.
Schneider, V. and Eberlein, B. (2015). Complex democracy: varieties, crises, and transformations. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Schoen, D. E. (2013). The end of authority: how a loss of legitimacy and broken trust are endangering our future. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Tong, Y. and Lei, S. (2014). Social protest in contemporary China, 2003–2010 transitional pains and regime legitimacy. London and New York: Routledge.
Theil, H. (1969). The Desired Level of Political Entropy, in American Political Science Review, 69, 521–525.
Volpato, Ch. et al. (2010). Picturing the other: targets of delegitimation across time. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (Germany), 4(2), 269–287.
Wolin, S. (2008). Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, Princeton University Press, USA, Princeton (NJ).
Abstract views: 107 PDF Downloads: 74