DOCSLIB.ORG

Political Legitimacy: the Quest For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Political Legitimacy: the Quest For Political Legitimacy: The Quest for the Moral Authority of the State, A Philosophical Analysis Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophie an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München vorgelegt von Anthony M. Musonda aus Zambia LMU Bibliothek, München, 2006 Referent: Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Vossenkuhl Korreferent: Dr. Stephan Sellmaier Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 28.07.2006 Acknowledgements I am deeply indebted to a number of institutions and people who greatly facilitated the completion of this work. First and foremost, Professor Dr. Wilhelm Vossenkuhl the supervisor of my doctoral dissertation, for his encouragement, patience, kindness, assiduity, total dedication and capability in the critical appraisal of earlier drafts of this dissertation and his helpful suggestions. Dr. Stephan Sellmaier, the head of the Münchner Kompetenzzentrum Ethik, for being generous enough to allow me use facilities and space of the resource room for doing my work. In addition, I am grateful to Professor Vossenkuhl on behalf of the Department of Philosophy and the Münchner Kompetenzzentrum Ethik for his efforts in securing me a one-year German scholarship to help me complete my dissertation with the University of Munich. Of course, I cannot forget to register my indebtedness to the Katholischer Akademischer Ausländer-Dienst (KAAD) for their having initially offered me a scholarship to enable me do my German language course, graduate course-work and research for my dissertation. I can also not forget to thank my employers, the University of Zambia in Lusaka, and my Head of Department, Professor Clive Dillon-Malone S.J., for their unwavering support and for granting me study-leave to enable me do my doctorate in Germany. Finally, I wish to express my unbounded gratitude to my wife, Valentina, and our three daughters, Mulenga, Mwenya and Domisa who had to endure several years of my absence from home but were still able to carry on with their daily lives without me. 2 Contents Introduction 4 1. The State 15 1.1. Conception of the State 15 1.1.1. Etymology of the Word 15 1.1.2. Max Weber’s Ideal Type Theory of the State 16 2 . The Origins of the State 20 2.1. The Ancient State Roman State 20 2.1.2. Background 2.1.2. The Roman Republic 21 2.1.3. The Roman Empire 26 3. The Christianisation of the State 27 3.1. The Rise of Christianity 27 3.2. The Germanic Invasions 28 3.3. The Feudal Polity of Estates 30 4. The Development of the Modern State 33 4.1. The First Stage of State Secularisation: the Investiture Controversy 33 4.2. The Renaissance: Revival of Roman Republicanism 37 4.3. The Second Stage of Secularisation: The Christian Reformation and the Development of State Sovereignty 44 4.4. Territorial State Sovereignty Imagined: Social Contract Theory 53 4.4.1. Thomas Hobbes’ Absolute Monarchy 53 4.4.2. John Locke’s Constitutional Limited Monarchy 58 4.4.3. Rousseau’s Popular Sovereignty 66 3 5. Completion of the Development of the State: Liberal Theory 75 5.1. The Social and Political Idea of Order in the French Revolution 75 5.2. The Social and Political Construction of Order of the Declaration and 77 Constitution. 5.3. The Idea of Order of the Nation 82 6. The Expansion of Modern State Sovereignty 86 6.1. The Colonial State 86 6.2. The Post-Colonial State. 87 7. Legitimacy 89 7.1. The Idea of a State 90 7.2. The Problem of State Legitimacy 93 7.3. Dimensions of Legitimacy 95 7.3.1. Legitimacy as derived from Legal Rules 95 7.3.2. Legitimacy as Normative Justifiability of Legal Rules 101 7.3.2.1 Functional Legitimacy 102 7.3.2.2 Affirmative Legitimacy 105 7.3.2.3 Moral Legitimacy 109 8. The Right to Rule 112 8.1. The Right to Command Persons within States Legal Jurisdiction 114 8.2. The Right to Non-interference by Persons, Groups or States outside 116 State’s Jurisdiction 8.3. The Right to Control a Particular Geographical Territory. 117 9. The Societal Needs Moral Justification of the Legitimacy of State Power. 118 9.1. Conclusion. 123 4 Introduction Every complex form of human society confronts the problem of what makes state power rightful or legitimate, the question of whether and why holders of state power have the authority to command and enforce the obedience of those subject to it and why the latter in turn have a corresponding obligation to obey. The problem of legitimacy of state power assumes significance once the origin and exercise of the order of domination of the state has been substantially challenged or has been widely experienced as oppressive and unjust. When the order of domination of the state is widely experienced as oppressive and unjust, people may obey the command of political authority from pre-moral motives such as fear, desire, custom or mere attachment to a ruler. However, an order of domination is not likely to be stable over time unless those subject to it recognise that when holders of state power claim the right to command, the claim is a legitimate one, that is, that it takes place in the context of values. Therefore, for an order of domination to be stable over time, the content of command must be based on valid norms that rulers share with the ruled and are justifiable to the latter. These norms prescribe the terms which are important for establishing and maintaining the order of domination, for defining the appropriate relationship between the state and its citizens and limiting state power by way of guaranteeing the basic rights of its citizens and providing for the separation of powers. Thus, the fundamental problem of the political order of domination of requires us to consider these terms in answering the question of whether and why power is rightful. But the problem is more salient and more pervasive in modern society. In order for us to better understand the problem of political order of the modern state as it presents itself today, we will first look at the historical development of the modern state in order to uncover the metaphysical foundation of values and beliefs that hold the state together, before turning to a discussion of the justification of the state to rule in terms of its purpose. To start with, we wish to state that the problem of the order of domination of the state could not have arisen in the ancient Greek times of the polis or city-state. For the city-state was experienced then as a natural cosmic order in which the citizen was situated, provided with a station and a purpose. In this community, the citizen had rights and obligations; but these rights were not attributes of a private personality and these obligations were not enforced by a state dedicated to the maintenance of a framework to protect the private ends of its citizens. Rather, a citizen’s rights in the Greek polis or city-state belonged to his station; his obligations flowed from the need to realise his own purpose in line with his station;1 and so, the obligation to obey authority was never in doubt in ancient times. In addition to this, the Greek city-state came into being for the sake of life. But once it existed, the city-state had as its purpose the good life. The good life, that is to say, the sum of all approved common purposes of religion, morals and art, as well as internal order and defence were all regarded as the function of the ancient city-state. In this sense, the city-state was not a state in the modern sense, which leaves much of the good life of citizens to social agencies and individuals. In view of the foregoing, the natural starting point for a discussion of the basic problem of the political order of domination of the state we consider is not the Greek city-state but, the 1 George Sabine, A History of Political Theory, 4th ed., Hinsdale, Illinois: Dryden Press, 1987, p. 31. 5 impersonal Roman state of republican times. The Roman state was conceived in terms of law that recognises the rights of all human beings and exists for the public good. Hence, political authorities were to be obeyed because they exercised certain offices that were conceived of as having been created for the public good, not for the person who exercised the office. Law not only formed the basis of the Roman state, whose revival in Renaissance Italy was central to the development of the modern state, as we know it today. It also supported the growth of the Roman Empire. As Roman political power and wealth grew, Roman customary law developed into the ius gentium or law of peoples based on practical universal principles of good business practice regarded as honest and fair that governed economic and political relations between Romans and non-Romans within the expanding Roman Empire. However, the expansion of the Roman Empire was followed by several centuries of eventual stagnation and paralysis. Lacking a steady supply of slaves and tribute from newly conquered peoples, it could not pay for its vast army, large bureaucracy and extensive public works. Hard measures were undertaken to meet increased costs that included an increase in taxes and the use of force to extract them which created extreme conditions of poverty of many people. As the unmanageability of the immense, far-flung imperial territory and harsh methods taken to counter it created extreme conditions, the Romans begun to turn away from the official paganism or belief in many gods.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preventing the Spread of Violent Nationalism
    ODUMUNC 2019 Issue Brief UN Security Council Addressing the Spread of Violent Nationalism ODU Model United Nations Society Introduction on international cooperation but differentiation, deliberately choosing conflict over consensus. The rising global appeal of nationalism is a The difficulty comes because of the great public challenge to the ability of the United Nations to appeal of nationalism. Emphasizing the solve problems. When Member States choose uniqueness and superiority of each nation, polices based on national superiority instead of nationalism often is the easiest way to unite the global cooperation, the UN loses the consensus largest number of people in a country’s borders. it requires to act effectively. Yet a growing It has enormous appeal to rising leaders in number of leaders find the political rewards of democracies especially, but also can be useful enhancing nationalism hard to resist. With for leaders of authoritarian governments, stronger nationalism comes a not just less ability seeking a way to enhance the legitimacy of their to solve international problems, but greater risk power. In every case, nationalism often is the of conflict and war. For the UN Security easiest way to strengthen a government, to win Council, coping with the rise of nationalism may elections and unify an electoral majority of the be essential to remaining relevant and effective. people. But it is possible? Nationalism has the advantage of unifying most The nationalism problem raises s fundamental or many of the people in a territory, making difficulties for the UN. The United Nations is them willing to sacrifice together on behalf of based on conflicting principles.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Chinese Pragmatic Nationalism and Its Foreign Policy Implications
    1 Chinese Pragmatic Nationalism and Its Foreign Policy Implications Suisheng Zhao Graduate School of International Studies University of Denver Prepared for delivery at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, 2008 2 Introduction During the standoff over the US spy plane that collided with a Chinese jetfighter and landed on Hainan Island, off China’s coast, in 2001, Washington Post used the headline “New Nationalism Drives Beijing” for front-page story.1 Such a warning reflects that rising nationalism in China has fed the roiling sense of anxiety in many political capitals of Asian and Western countries about if a virulent nationalism has emerged from China's "century of shame and humiliation" to make China’s rise less peaceful and if the Chinese government has exploited nationalist sentiments to gain leverage in international affairs or if nationalism has driven Chinese foreign policy toward a more irrational and inflexible direction? This political concern is reflected also among scholars. Although some scholars have been cautious in exploring the limits of Chinese nationalism and whether Chinese nationalism is affirmative, assertive, or aggressive,2 some others have found a reckless nationalism driven by China's traditional sinocentrism and contemporary aspirations for great power status.3 For example, Peter Gries labels the rising nationalism in China as a new nationalism and argues that an emotionally popular nationalism empowered by “victim narratives” is “beginning to influence the making of Chinese foreign policy.”4 His argument echoes an earlier warning by Richard Bernstein and Ross Munro, "Driven by nationalist sentiment, a yearning to redeem the humiliations of the past, and the simple urge for international power, China is seeking to replace the United States as the dominant power in Asia."5 It is indeed not difficult to find evidences to support these warnings.
    [Show full text]
  • Max Weber and the Legitimacy of the Modern State
    David Beetharn Max Weber and the Legitimacy of the Modern State Abstract: Max Weber's typology of Iegitimale 'Herrschaft' has provided the basis for the treatment of Jegitimacy in twentieth century sociology and political science. The thesis of the article is that this typology is a misleading tool for the analysis of the modern state, and especially for the comparative analysis of political systems. This is because of basic flaws in Weber's conceptualisation of Jegitimacy itself, and in his account of the norma­ tive basis of authority. The article offers an alternative, multi-dimensional, account of political Jegitirnacy, and suggests how it might be used to develop a typology of forms of 'Herrschaft' more appropriate to the analysis ofthe modern state. The argument of this article is that Weber's typology of legitimate 'Herrschaft' is fundamentally flawed as a basis for analysing political legitimacy, and especially the legitimacy of the modern state. If my argument is sound, then it has signifi­ cant consequences, in view of the fact that the large majority of sociologists and political scientists in the twentieth century who have written about legitimacy have either adopted the Weberian typology as it stands, or have used it as the basis for further developments of their own. Even those who have rejected it have failed to establish a wholly convincing alternative, so that Weber's typology is left holding the field, if only by default. I shall begin by briefly reviewing Weber's typology and the uses to which he put it. I shall then show why the categories he developed misrepresent the nature of legitimacy, and serve to confuse rather than elucidate its complexity.
    [Show full text]
  • How Do Non-Democratic Regimes Claim Legitimacy? Comparative Insights from Post-Soviet Countries
    Inclusion of a paper in the Working Papers series does not constitute publication and should limit in any other venue. Copyright remains with the authors. Inclusion of a paper in the Working Papers serve to disseminate the research results of work in progress prior publicaton encourage exchange ideas and academic debate. Working GIGA GIGA Research Programme: Legitimacy and Efficiency of Political Systems ___________________________ How Do Non-Democratic Regimes Claim Legitimacy? Comparative Insights from Post-Soviet Countries Christian von Soest and Julia Grauvogel No 277 August 2015 www.giga-hamburg.de/workingpapers GIGA Working Papers 277/2015 Edited by the GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies Leibniz‐Institut für Globale und Regionale Studien The GIGA Working Papers series serves to disseminate the research results of work in progress prior to publication in order to encourage the exchange of ideas and academic debate. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presenta‐ tions are less than fully polished. Inclusion of a paper in the GIGA Working Papers series does not constitute publication and should not limit publication in any other venue. Copy‐ right remains with the authors. GIGA Research Programme “Legitimacy and Efficiency of Political Systems” Copyright for this issue: © Christian von Soest, Julia Grauvogel WP Coordination and English‐language Copyediting: Melissa Nelson Editorial Assistance and Production: Kerstin Labusga All GIGA Working Papers are available online and free of charge on the website <www.giga‐hamburg.de/workingpapers>. For any requests please contact: <workingpapers@giga‐hamburg.de> The GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this Working Paper; the views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Challenges at the Centre of Government: Coalition Situations and Government Transitions
    SIGMA Papers No. 22 Management Challenges at the Centre of Government: OECD Coalition Situations and Government Transitions https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kml614vl4wh-en Unclassified CCET/SIGMA/PUMA(98)1 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques OLIS : 10-Feb-1998 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Dist. : 11-Feb-1998 __________________________________________________________________________________________ Or. Eng. SUPPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT IN GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES (SIGMA) A JOINT INITIATIVE OF THE OECD/CCET AND EC/PHARE Unclassified CCET/SIGMA/PUMA Cancels & replaces the same document: distributed 26-Jan-1998 ( 98 ) 1 MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES AT THE CENTRE OF GOVERNMENT: COALITION SITUATIONS AND GOVERNMENT TRANSITIONS SIGMA PAPERS: No. 22 Or. En 61747 g . Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format CCET/SIGMA/PUMA(98)1 THE SIGMA PROGRAMME SIGMA — Support for Improvement in Governance and Management in Central and Eastern European Countries — is a joint initiative of the OECD Centre for Co-operation with the Economies in Transition and the European Union’s Phare Programme. The initiative supports public administration reform efforts in thirteen countries in transition, and is financed mostly by Phare. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is an intergovernmental organisation of 29 democracies with advanced market economies. The Centre channels the Organisation’s advice and assistance over a wide range of economic issues to reforming countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Phare provides grant financing to support its partner countries in Central and Eastern Europe to the stage where they are ready to assume the obligations of membership of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Democracy an Overview of the International IDEA Handbook © International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance 2008
    Direct Democracy An Overview of the International IDEA Handbook © International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance 2008 International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The map presented in this publication does not imply on the part of the Institute any judgement on the legal status of any territory or the endorsement of such boundaries, nor does the placement or size of any country or territory reflect the political view of the Institute. The map is created for this publication in order to add clarity to the text. Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or any part of this publication should be made to: International IDEA SE -103 34 Stockholm Sweden International IDEA encourages dissemination of its work and will promptly respond to requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications. Cover design by: Helena Lunding Map design: Kristina Schollin-Borg Graphic design by: Bulls Graphics AB Printed by: Bulls Graphics AB ISBN: 978-91-85724-54-3 Contents 1. Introduction: the instruments of direct democracy 4 2. When the authorities call a referendum 5 Procedural aspects 9 Timing 10 The ballot text 11 The campaign: organization and regulation 11 Voting qualifications, mechanisms and rules 12 Conclusions 13 3. When citizens take the initiative: design and political considerations 14 Design aspects 15 Restrictions and procedures 16 Conclusions 18 4. Agenda initiatives: when citizens can get a proposal on the legislative agenda 19 Conclusions 21 5.
    [Show full text]
  • A Defense of Max Weber's Standard of Political Legitimacy
    A&K Analyse & Kritik 2017; 39(2):295–323 Amanda R. Greene* Legitimacy without Liberalism: A Defense of Max Weber’s Standard of Political Legitimacy https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2017-0017 Abstract: In this paper I defend Max Weber's concept of political legitimacy as a standard for the moral evaluation of states. On this view, a state is legitimate when its subjects regard it as having a valid claim to exercise power and authority. Weber’s analysis of legitimacy is often assumed to be merely descriptive, but I argue that Weberian legitimacy has moral significance because it indicates that political stability has been secured on the basis of civic alignment. Stability on this basis enables all the goods of peaceful cooperation with minimal state violence and intimidation, thereby guarding against alienation and tyranny. Furthermore, I argue, since Weberian legitimacy is empirically measurable in terms that avoid controversial value judgments, its adoption would bridge a longstanding divide between philosophers and social scientists. 1 Introduction All states seek to be legitimate. But identifying a standard for the political legiti- macy of states is notoriously difficult, and past attempts at a philosophical defini- tion of legitimacy have faced a number of challenges. Views that base legitimacy on the protection of rights are charged with making imperialistic value judgments, due to their ahistorical reliance on liberal democratic values. Views that base le- gitimacy on individual welfare are charged with an overly narrow view of the aims of politics. Meanwhile, there is a growing chasm between philosophers who theo- rize about what legitimacy is and social scientists who study and measure it.
    [Show full text]
  • The E-Parliament Election Index: A
    The e-Parliament Election Index A global survey on the quality of practices in parliamentary elections by Professor M. Steven Fish University of California-Berkeley EMBARGOED: 12 noon GMT May 8th 2009 1 pm British Summer Time 2 pm South African Time 2 pm Central European Time 5.30 pm Indian Time 8 am New York Time 5 am California Time FOR MORE INFORMATION: Please contact Jasper Bouverie on +44-1233-812037 or [email protected] e-Parliament Election Index 2008-09 0-5 = closed or no electoral process 6-8 = restrictive electoral process 9-10 = mostly open electoral process 11-12 = open electoral process This data was collected by Professor Steve Fish of Berkeley University in California. Only countries with populations of over 250,000 were evaluated Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Country Ratings 19 e-Parliament Election Index 59 Expert Consultants 64 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the modern world, national legislatures are the primary nexus between the government and the governed. In some polities, they are what Max Weber said they should be: the “proper palaestra” of political struggle. In such places, the link between state and society is often robust. In other countries the legislature is a mere decoration, rendering the link between rulers and the ruled tenuous or nonexistent. Where parliaments are strong, there is at least some prospect for popular control over the rulers. Where they are weak, there is a high probability that relations between rulers and the ruled will take the form of domination rather than governance. Where legislatures are strong, elections for them are momentous events.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition Agencies, Independence, and the Political Process
    Unclassified DAF/COMP/WD(2014)86 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 27-Nov-2014 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ English - Or. English DIRECTORATE FOR FINANCIAL AND ENTERPRISE AFFAIRS COMPETITION COMMITTEE Unclassified DAF/COMP/WD(2014)86 COMPETITION AGENCIES, INDEPENDENCE, AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS -- Chapter by William Kovacic (George Washington University, United States) -- 17-18 December 2014 This chapter by William Kovacic (George Washington University, United States) was submitted as background material for the Roundtable on Changes in Institutional Design of Competition Authorities which will take place at the 122nd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 17-18 December 2014. It is an extract from Competition Policy and the Economic Approach, edited by Josef Drexl, Wolfgang Kerber and Rupprecht Podszun. Published by Edward Elgar, 2011. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries. More documents related to this discussion can be found at http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/changes-in- competition-institutional-design.htm. This document is available as a PDF only English JT03367265 Complete document available on OLIS in its original format - This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of Or international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. English DAF/COMP/WD(2014)86 2 Graham HD:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:12764 - EE - DREXL:M2555 - DREXL PRINT 16. Competition agencies, independence, and the political process William E.
    [Show full text]
  • Legitimacy in Autocracies: Oxymoron Or Essential Feature?
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Gerschewski, Johannes Article — Accepted Manuscript (Postprint) Legitimacy in Autocracies: Oxymoron or Essential Feature? Perspectives on Politics Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Gerschewski, Johannes (2018) : Legitimacy in Autocracies: Oxymoron or Essential Feature?, Perspectives on Politics, ISSN 1541-0986, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Vol. 16, Iss. 3, pp. 652-665, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1537592717002183 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/218835 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Legitimacy in Autocracies: Oxymoron or essential feature? Johannes Gerschewski [Please cite as: Gerschewski, Johannes, 2018, Legitimacy in Autocracies: Oxymoron or Essential Feature?, In: Perspectives on Politics, 16:3, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalism, Legitimacy and Hegemony in Transboundary Water Interactions
    www.water-alternatives.org Volume 13 | Issue 2 Allouche, J. 2020. Nationalism, legitimacy and hegemony in transboundary water interactions. Water Alternatives 13(2): 286-301 Nationalism, Legitimacy and Hegemony in Transboundary Water Interactions Jeremy Allouche Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK; [email protected] ABSTRACT: This article examines how discourses of water nationalism are used to justify and legitimise a state’s water policy both domestically and internationally and how that discourse constitutes a battleground of ideas and power in transboundary water interactions. Most literature on hydropolitics takes the social construct of the nation state as a given but the construct reveals a certain degree of fragility. For this reason, legitimacy, both domestic and global, is a crucial factor in understanding these transboundary water disputes. Water-related slogans and landscape symbols can be used to reinforce the legitimising effects of these discourses and are employed as an ideology for consolidating hegemony at the transboundary level. These discourses, however, are also contested both domestically and globally. This paper uses three specific case studies around dam building projects – the Merowe Dam in Sudan, the Rogun Dam in Tajikistan and the Southeastern Anatolia Project in Turkey – to identify how these discourses create different types of transboundary water interactions. KEYWORDS: Nation state construct, legitimacy, fragility, hegemony, transboundary water relations, hydropolitics INTRODUCTION Egypt and the great river that flows through it were inseparable in the eyes of Herodotus, who declared that "Egypt is the Nile, and the Nile is Egypt" (Herodotus, 2013). The ancient sage’s assertion testifies to the influence the river has had on the identity of the inhabitants of its banks for thousands of years, and the wisdom is arguably still applicable today.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo-Saxon Constitutional History
    English Legal History—Outline (former l16) 11/5/2018 Page 1 THE DEPOSITION OF KINGS 1. The slow changes in the English constitution of the 14th and 15th centuries: a. the development of a bicameral Parliament b. its gradual growth of involvement in taxation and legislation and the of the custom of consulting it on great matters of the realm. c. the growth of the power and, at least to a certain extent, of the independence of the departments of state (the chancery and the exchequer) and of the courts d. the attempt of the magnates to control the departments of state by controlling appointments, and of the king to control both the departments of state and the magnates through the wardrobe and chamber—and of the ultimate failure, at least in the 14th century, of both efforts e. the rise in the middle of the 14th century of the importance of the council. In the Lancastrian period two lines of authority emerge, which did not conflict: one between the signet and the secretary, the other between the privy seal and the council, both leading ultimately to the great seal and the chancery. f. the experimentatation of Edward III with chamber finance and the return of chamber finance in the reign of Edward IV a hundred years later and the increasingly tight control that Henry VII had over finance. 2. The medieval depositions: a. Edward II—1327. b. Richard II—1399. c. Henry VI—1460. (Not a deposition, an act of accord, though a deposition of sorts took place in March of 1461.
    [Show full text]