A Crisis of Democratic Legitimacy? It's About Legitimation, Stupid!

No. 21 No. 2 March 2014 June 2011 Published in the framework of the Egmont project A Crisis of Democratic Legitimacy? It’s about Legitimation, Stupid! Eline Severs & Alexander Mattelaer period when opposing regimes were seen to Are we witnessing a crisis of democratic threaten each other’s existence. It was only from legitimacy? While citizens may lose the late 1960s onwards that questions over trust in political authorities, democratic political legitimacy were being raised. The principles and ideals continue to geopolitical pacification of the European exercise considerable appeal. This continent and the increased economic Policy Brief argues that this paradox interdependence of nation-states allowed for must be understood as a crisis of alternative concerns to be raised, pertaining to legitimation. Research suggests that the relationship between citizens and their legitimacy is inherently subjective and rulers. By the late 1970s, scholars like Joseph must be constantly re-earned. Low Rothschild began to discuss nation-states’ levels of political trust can be explained growing difficulties in evoking a sense of trust as the result of the complexity of and belonging among the populations being globalised yet fragmented societies. governed. Popular interest for political The present feeling of malaise calls for legitimacy has increased exponentially ever a redefinition of the relationship since. Today, a growing number of instruments between citizens and the authorities by such as the Eurobarometer and the Economist’s which they are ruled. If popular Democracy Index are devoted to evaluating the sovereignty is to mean anything in state of political legitimacy in contemporary today’s age, it requires a new democracies. These polls indicate that levels of legitimising narrative. political trust are worryingly low. What are we to make of these figures? Are our The issue of political legitimacy did not always political systems nearing a point of collapse? dominate the political agenda. In the aftermath The ‘legitimacy deficit’ hypothesis is certainly of the Second World War, political concerns not devoid of controversy. Contrary to the sense were predominantly centred on the economic of disillusionment prevalent in the public debate, and political viability of nation-states. These support for the principles of democracy is both concerns endured throughout the Cold War EGMONT Royal Institute for International Relations high and widespread. As recent events in the disillusionment with politics reveals both European neighbourhood have shown, citizens’ citizens’ growing political sophistication and the aspirations for democracy remain high. Citizens’ pressures on popular self-governance. The satisfaction with their democratically elected growing complexity of politics has eroded the authorities (parliaments, governments and belief that citizens are capable of democratic parties), by contrast, appears low. Scholars who control – either through authorising their study trends in political support come to governors or controlling them. We conclude by different conclusions depending on the suggesting that citizens need a popular narrative methodologies they use and the cases they that reconfigures the expectations they may hold select. However, they generally agree that low toward power-holders in function of today’s levels of political support constitute reason for politics. Narratives are like social contracts: they concern. The erosion of support for hold the key for enabling trust in political representative institutions – especially institutions. The present malaise is therefore not parliaments – is particularly discomforting. It only about political performance, but also about suggests that states are finding it increasingly identifying new, shared grounds for political difficult to forge meaningful connections with legitimation. those governed. This difficulty may well lie at the heart of the perceived crisis of legitimacy POLITICAL LEGITIMACY: WHAT’S IN A that plagues contemporary democracies. NAME? This Policy Brief takes a closer look into the Today’s debates on legitimacy express an relationship between citizens and the political underlying concern for the stability of political authorities by which they are ruled. It argues systems and their capacity for solving problems. that changing state-society relations and the As popular protests on Tahrir Square and the opening up of non-parliamentary avenues for streets of Kiev have shown, governments only political representation are crucial to exist by the grace of their citizens. All political understanding the feeling of political malaise in regimes ultimately depend on their subjects’ advanced industrial democracies. More than a recognition and compliance: citizens must generalised crisis in legitimacy, our democracies accept the rules and laws imposed by their face a crisis of legitimation: political choices are government and indeed choose to abide by in dire need of an explanatory narrative that them. A sufficient reservoir of goodwill among binds citizens together. This discussion proceeds the population is considered necessary for the in four parts. First, we elaborate on what we government to enforce binding decisions. If mean by ‘political legitimacy’ and discuss its use levels of trust fall below a critical threshold, the in public debate. Second, we discuss empirical stability of a regime is endangered. Under such evidence on citizens’ low levels of trust and conditions, the status of its political authorities consider the possible explanations for this trend. becomes fundamentally contested. In many Whether a state is governed well (or not) does ways, the Tunisian street vendor Mohammed not always influence the legitimacy of the Bouazizi set not only himself on fire but also regime. This means that institutional reform is burned the very idea of the citizen that no panacea: politics is as much about emotions recognizes his or her government. Of course, as it is about effective governance. We therefore advanced industrialised democracies are more need to pay more attention to the subjective sheltered from such violent outbursts of dimensions of politics, including culture, shared dissatisfaction by greater reservoirs of political norms and attitudes. Third, today’s growing trust and structures that allow citizens to express EGMONT Royal Institute for International Relations 2 their discontent within the system itself. Yet political legitimacy can also be approached However, low levels of citizens’ trust fuel as a normative question. Instead of merely anxieties over the possibilities for violent describing declining trust levels, one can specify protests in Western capitals. the features a polity must possess for it to be considered legitimate. In other words, one can One can distinguish between two different focus on the moral appropriateness of different meanings of political legitimacy. Harking back to forms of rule and of people’s obedience. In the writings of Max Weber, political legitimacy contrast to descriptive approaches, approaches can be analysed descriptively, i.e. by making of this kind do elaborate on the conditions reference to people’s willingness to obey the under which citizens’ trust may be justified – as rules enforced on them. People may put faith in opposed to mistaken. Generally, normative a particular regime because they have grown scholars introduce a differentiation between de accustomed to it (tradition), because they have facto authorities and legitimate authorities. faith in its rulers (charisma), or because they While the authority of political bodies to enforce trust the legality of the regime. Descriptive decisions may remain uncontested, their power approaches to political legitimacy are typically may not be morally justified in the sense of not concerned with discerning whether citizens meeting democratic principles such as equity, are right or mistaken in trusting their procedural fairness, transparency and government. As David Easton famously accountability. Theorists such as Ronald remarked: ‘Whether the basis of acceptance is Dworkin have argued that under such legitimacy, fear of force, habitat or expediency is conditions, authorities fail to generate genuine irrelevant’. political obligations. Failure to comply with Measuring political legitimacy is tricky. these democratic principles may legitimise the Indications can be found in different forms of choice of citizens to resist and rebel against their support, such as citizens’ levels of political political authorities. This line of reasoning is also participation, their active support for evident within the widespread support for the government actions, or alternative forms of so-called ‘Arab Spring’ in 2011. adherence (such as the payment of taxes or the Beyond the descriptive versus normative absence of protests). Despite these various dichotomy it is possible to focus on the question manifestations, political legitimacy is most often of how legitimacy comes to life and is expressed measured as political trust. As a latent belief in the in democratic regimes. Jürgen Habermas first appropriateness of the political regime, trust is drew attention to the social dynamics of considered vital to the effectiveness of states. As legitimacy and the active part which citizens and argued by Sofie Marien and Marc Hooghe, trust political leaders play in producing and reduces the (monitoring) costs of politics: it challenging political legitimacy. While discussing allows citizens to delegate

Load more