Legitimate Political Authority Research Articles

More Talk than Walk? UMNO, “New Politics” and Legitimation in Contemporary Malaysia

The aftermath of the 2008 general election saw a series of upheavals occur in the Malaysian political landscape, not least of which was the emergence of a so-called “new politics.” Driven primarily by concerns over issues of public governance, this politics contained a set of interrelated questions involving changing notions of legitimate political authority. Although much has already been written about whether or not the post-2008 changes to Malaysia's socio-political terrain are genuine and enduring, I argue that many such analyses are too narrow in scope and fail to adequately recognise the complexity involved in such social realities. By distinguishing between the images and practices of the Malaysian state, this article aims to highlight the dynamic, contingent and contested nature of processes of legitimation. A detailed investigation of the consensus/dissensus surrounding Prime Minister Najib Razak's concept of 1Malaysia as the basis of a collective national identity reveals a more fundamental contestation occurring within contemporary Malaysian politics and society over the source(s) of political and moral legitimacy. While the opposition's challenge to Najib's administration remains formidable, of more pressing concern to Najib might be the objections arising from within his own party over the direction in which he is taking them. To define the present horizon of socio-political possibilities in Malaysia it is not enough, therefore, to simply explain how legitimation occurs; we must also be able to account for the way(s) in which it can occur.

Acting under Tyranny: Hannah Arendt and the Foundations of Democracy in Iran

Amidst the ongoing turmoil in the Middle East and the reshaping of political systems in the region, the Iranian people remain mired in difficulties on their path to democratization. The obstacles hindering them have been examined in great detail since the post-election crisis of 2009, yet little seems to have been gained in the way of overcoming them. This standstill could be blamed largely on the repressive mechanisms of the state. In reality, however, it has more to do with the gradual decline in activity within Iranian civil society and the stagnation of political imagination. If Iran is to have a future built on the solid foundation of a viable and legitimate political authority, Iranian civic actors must reimagine and revisit the notion of constitution-making through sustained dissent and deliberation. No other thinker is more useful in this enterprise than Hannah Arendt. Arendt’s analyses of revolution, terror, and violence provide a valuable framework for examining historical phenomena and a descent into the anti-political. More importantly, her conceptualizations of power, freedom, and thinking as questioning, as nonconformity, make her the quintessential thinker for dissent and the deconstruction of illegitimate political systems. The main purpose of this essay will be to explore how these and other Arendtian ideas may be applicable in the Iranian context. We begin by briefly tracing the history of Iran since the Islamic Revolution and its decline into an anti-democratic state, moving on to a comparative analysis of Arendt’s account of totalitarianism and the Iranian regime in order to assess the potential for a reawakening of democracy within the civil society. We then turn to a deeper examination of Arendt’s ideas to determine how they can foster resistance, civic engagement, and eventual legitimate authority. The focus in the end will be on what Iranians can do to begin anew, to build foundations for the future, and to tell themselves a new story about their identity.

Rereading the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Plurality and Contestation, Not Consensus

In this article, I examine the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. My analysis counters conventional narratives of consensus and imposition that characterize the development of the UN human rights regime. The central argument is that within the founding text of the contemporary human rights movement there is an ambiguous account of rights, which exceeds easy categorization of international rights as universal moral principles or merely an ideological imposition by liberal powers. Acknowledging this ambiguous history, I argue, opens the way to an understanding of human rights as an ongoing politics, a contestation over the terms of legitimate political authority, and the meaning of “humanity” as a political identity.

Gadamer and political authority

The rehabilitation of the concept of authority is one of the more contentious positions advocated by Gadamer in Truth and Method (1960). Habermas in particular challenged the universality of Gadamer’s hermeneutic project by presenting this rehabilitation as a conservative legitimation of prevailing prejudices which truncates the role of critical reflection. Given that Gadamer’s primary focus is upon the ramifications of the Enlightenment dichotomy between reason and authority for historical hermeneutics, however, and that his examples are drawn primarily from educational domains, the extent to which his account of authority sustains a political interpretation is far from self-evident. In this article I argue that Gadamer’s account can nonetheless make at least two important contributions to contemporary philosophical debates on political authority. Following a brief exposition of Gadamer’s account of authority in Truth and Method, I examine his suggestion that the basis of legitimate political authority is to be found in the normative status of the right to be authoritative, rather than in the factual status of being in a position of authority. This account, I suggest, places in question the abstract dichotomy between theoretical and practical authority which informs much contemporary debate on political authority. I then demonstrate how Gadamer’s emphasis upon the historicity of tradition offers important insights for discussions of the relation between political authority and moral autonomy.

Authority, Nationality, and Minorities: A Post-Razian View

Joseph Raz proposes that identification with one’s community can provide a reason to identify with the community’s laws and government and, by extension, a reason to accept the putative legitimacy of the state’s authority. Building on Raz's theory, this paper considers how nationality figures in the legitimacy of political authority. I argue that reasons of nationality are indeed genuine normative reasons for accepting political authority, but their normative force is inconclusive. In particular, the normative force of nationality depends in part on the democratic credentials of the government and the law in question. Nevertheless, I go on to argue that nationality has special and sometimes decisive importance for political authority; nationality provides a particularly salient solution to the problem of the personal scope of authority, i.e the “boundary problem”, a problem that is logically prior to the operation of democratic procedures. This conclusion has important implications for nationally divided societies. In the absence of a common nationality, standard democratic procedures do not provide minority national groups with comparable access to the conditions for legitimate authority. Special counter-majoritarian measures for accommodating nationalist minorities (such as federalism or consociational democracy) can therefore be justified in so far as they might allow for more equitable access to those conditions.

What is the role and authority of gatekeepers in cluster randomized trials in health research?

This article is part of a series of papers examining ethical issues in cluster randomized trials (CRTs) in health research. In the introductory paper in this series, we set out six areas of inquiry that must be addressed if the CRT is to be set on a firm ethical foundation. This paper addresses the sixth of the questions posed, namely, what is the role and authority of gatekeepers in CRTs in health research? ‘Gatekeepers’ are individuals or bodies that represent the interests of cluster members, clusters, or organizations. The need for gatekeepers arose in response to the difficulties in obtaining informed consent because of cluster randomization, cluster-level interventions, and cluster size. In this paper, we call for a more restrictive understanding of the role and authority of gatekeepers.Previous papers in this series have provided solutions to the challenges posed by informed consent in CRTs without the need to invoke gatekeepers. We considered that consent to randomization is not required when cluster members are approached for consent at the earliest opportunity and before any study interventions or data-collection procedures have started. Further, when cluster-level interventions or cluster size means that obtaining informed consent is not possible, a waiver of consent may be appropriate. In this paper, we suggest that the role of gatekeepers in protecting individual interests in CRTs should be limited. Generally, gatekeepers do not have the authority to provide proxy consent for cluster members. When a municipality or other community has a legitimate political authority that is empowered to make such decisions, cluster permission may be appropriate; however, gatekeepers may usefully protect cluster interests in other ways. Cluster consultation may ensure that the CRT addresses local health needs, and is conducted in accord with local values and customs. Gatekeepers may also play an important role in protecting the interests of organizations, such as hospitals, nursing homes, general practices, and schools. In these settings, permission to access the organization relies on resource implications and adherence to institutional policies.

Covenantal Realism: The Self-Referential Incoherency of Conventional Social Contract Theory and the Necessity of Consent

In this article I contend that conventional social contract theory is self-referentially incoherent. Conventional contractarianism therefore fails to provide an adequate foundation for the authority of the state and for the obligation of citizens to obey. The insistence on consent for legitimate political authority has usually been rendered in contractarian terms. Thus, the fall of conventional social contract theory seemingly entails that we should reject the principle of consent as well. Yet, the necessity of consent for the authority of the state and, concomitantly, for the obligation of citizens to obey seems to be an entailment of human equality. Thus, insofar as human persons are equal, the legitimacy of the state seems to require a foundation logically precluded to it. We are therefore confronted with a theoretical crisis. Even so, I will argue that we need not reject the principle of consent. The self-referential incoherency of conventional contractarianism results from its conventionalism. We can begin the work of salvaging the principle of consent from the demise of conventional social contract theory by erecting it upon the foundation of moral and ontological realism.

A Democratic Account of the Right to Rule in Global Governance

Abstract: The objective of this article is to examine the extent to which a democratic conception of legitimate political authority can be applied to global regulatory regimes. The analysis is both a response to the concerns around the putative ‘democratic deficit’ at the domestic level that results from the globalization of governance functions and the need for global regulators to demonstrate a ‘right to rule’ in conditions in which it is no longer meaningful to speak about ‘sovereignty’ as legitimating the exercise of political power in world society. The essay draws on the work of Joseph Raz and Jürgen Habermas to develop a conceptual framework for understanding the idea of legitimate political authority – as it applies to democratic societies – before going on to consider the complexities that emerge from the recognition of multiple overlapping regimes, all of which can make a plausible claim to democratic legitimacy and a right to rule on the issue under consideration.

Does the EU Need a Navel? Implicit and Explicit Identification with the European Union*

AbstractAnalysts should expect neither too much from European Union identity and its causal role in driving the integration process, nor too little, by underestimating the stabilizing force of implicit identification with the EU. Daily transactions in an EU institutional context embed an acceptance of the EU as a legitimate political authority and underpin passive consent to the continued functioning of the EU. The emergence of explicit EU identification is contingent upon the value (real and symbolic) attached to transactions, the extent to which valued goods are perceived to be under threat and whether competing political authorities are viewed as legitimate.

The King’s Other Body: María of Castile and the Crown of Aragon by Theresa Earenfight (review)

REVIEWS 241 cruciform were intrinsically important to the religious life of Anglo-Saxon peoples . Crosses—architectural, monumental, pictorial, literary, formal, and imaginary—were abundant and ubiquitous, and this implies that Anglo-Saxon religious life can be characterized as “cruci-centric.” More important, all three volumes—and, indeed, the SCHR itself—represent an example of successful interdisciplinary and collaborative academic work, the likes of which the humanities rarely see. This research initiative has been made all the more compelling by the multidisciplinarity of these collaborations. If one wants to see a roadmap of the future of the historical profession, then this collection is it. The publisher, too, deserves special accolades; footnotes are preserved, the typeset —being of an older style—gives the impression of authority and permanence , and the appendices and gorgeously-rendered plates are grouped with their relevant essays. I anticipate the publications of this research initiative— and this volume in particular—will become very important to the field of Anglo -Saxon studies. I wholeheartedly recommend this book to all students of Anglo-Saxon history, researchers of medieval visual culture, and Old English language enthusiasts. J. MICHAEL COLVIN, History, University of Southern California Theresa Earenfight, The King’s Other Body: María of Castile and the Crown of Aragon (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 2010) xii + 242 pp., maps. In The King’s Other Body, Theresa Earenfight introduces scholars of the Middle Ages to an unexpected protagonist in the political drama of fifteenth-century Iberia, María of Castile (1401–1458). Born into the great Trastámara dynasty , she is queen of the Crown of Aragon, daughter of Henry III of Castile, wife and cousin of Alfonso V “the Magnanimous” of Aragon (1396–1458). Unlike most queens of her age yet in the spirit of several of her Aragonese predecessors, she was no mere consort: she governed twenty-six years as lieutenant general appointed by her husband while he ruled from his ultramarine capital of Naples. The sixth of seven Aragonese queen-lieutenants, she held two lieutenancies, 1420–1423 and 1432–1453, during which she exercised full and legitimate political authority as conferred by the king, often amid crises domestic and foreign , with only the fewest prerogatives reserved to her husband, with whom she maintained fluent correspondence. From the administration of the three realms of the Aragonese empire (Catalonia, Aragon, and Valencia), to the captivity and ransom of her husband after the Battle of Ponza (1435), to the controversial liberation of the remença peasants (1448–1453), she governed ably and admirably , as Earenfight presents, and her conduct gives much cause for the revaluation of the queen-lieutenant. María of Castile, Earenfight argues, is a figure whose political accomplishments have not fully received their due attention. Most histories of Aragon concentrate on Alfonso and his rule, and perhaps also on that of his brother and successor John II, yet for all of María’s administration of the realm, to which ample archival evidence bears witness, Earenfight finds “no detailed study of the political events or issues in Catalunya during María’s lieutenancy” as products of María’s administration (8). While there are commendable character REVIEWS 242 studies of the Queen, such as that of Francisca Hernández-León de Sánchez, they do not discuss her role as “the king’s other body,” which Earenfight proposes to do: “long on governance and short on culture and ceremony,” her study intends to be “both empirical and theoretical, a political biography and an institutional history” (9). Composed of six chapters, The King’s Other Body proceeds in a partially chronological fashion, examining major episodes in the history of María’s lieutenancies. The first chapter serves as an introduction to the thesis that guides the work. Chapter 2, the most biographical, recounts her family history and explores the queenly preparation that would have been hers as a presumed queen-consort. The third chapter presents María’s first lieutenancy and the subsequent events, which in turn lead to her second and longer lieutenancy, of which the first part is the subject of chapter 4. Chapter 5 considers the latter part of the same lieutenancy, in which she...

China restored: the Middle Kingdom looks to 2020 and beyond

Contrary to lurid forecasts in the West that China is on track to wrest global hegemony from the United States by 2025, China is in fact positioning itself to resume its historic role as the Kingdom-a senior mentor with benign aspirations for guiding Asia into the mid-21st century. In China Restored: The Middle Kingdom Looks to 2020 and Beyond, Eric C. Anderson challenges the widespread perception of China as a rising giant whose authoritarian program to supplant the United States as global hegemony poses a grave international threat. He weighs in against doomsday prophets such as Martin Jacques, who predicts that China's economy and diplomatic influence will equal those of the United States by 2025 and will eclipse them by a factor of two by 2050. Anderson, a player in Washington's China policy debates who enjoys deep access to Chinese intelligence sources, counters with a careful argument that Beijing's overriding aim is in fact to foster a stable global environment conducive to its economic development and regional hegemony based on legitimate political authority rather than coercion. Anderson points to three principal factors that will drive Chinese behavior over the next 10 years: the Chinese Communist Party's desire to be recognized as a responsible member of the international community; China's effort to equip, train, and maintain a modern military; and Beijing's campaign to sell her governance model-from economic development to serving a domestic constituency-as a direct competitor to Washington's version of liberal democracy. Asserting that Beijing is poised to serve as Washington's peer competitor, Anderson offers insights as to what can be expected from China in the future, including facilitating U.S. nuclear nonproliferation efforts and participating in international peacekeeping operations. Original materials include Chinese documents concerning Beijing's domestic, economic, and military policies 45 sidebars explain key words, concepts, and issues simply and clearly for the benefit of general readers A bibliography provides an extensive listing of contemporary materials concerning China's future intentions

Religious Disputation and Democratic Constitutionalism: The Enduring Legacy of the Constitutional Revolution On the Struggle for Democracy in Iran

The key argument of this article is that the origins of today’s ideological conflict between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mir Hossein Mousavi can be traced back to the Iranian Constitutional Revolution of 1906–1911. One of the key disputes that emerged during this period was between a group of clerics and a coalition of constitutionalists who clashed over whether a council of religious experts should have veto power over parliamentary deliberations. While the constitutionalists prevailed in 1907 over their religious rivals in the short term, the ideological battle over this issue continued throughout the 20th century and resurfaced again after the Islamic Revolution in 1979. This time religious conservatives were victorious. They successfully wrote and passed a constitution where sovereignty was divided between religious clerics and the masses. If ever the two should clash, it was the clerics who had the final say. The present conflict in Iran today, in the aftermath of the disputed June 12, 2009 presidential election between conservatives and reformists, is rooted in this legacy of the unresolved ideological dispute over the proper location of political sovereignty that began in the early 20th century. Here I seek to explore these linkages between the past and the present and to comment on the internal struggle for democracy in Iran. The focus of this paper will be on the lessons for democratic theory that emerge from the conflict and tension between religion and politics in Iran. In particular, it will focus on lessons that can be drawn from debates over the moral basis of legitimate political authority and what role religion should play in emerging Muslim democratic polities.

Islam, secularism, and liberal democracy: toward a democratic theory for Muslim societies

Islam's relationship to liberal-democratic politics has emerged as one of the most pressing and contentious issues in international affairs. This book analyzes the relationship between religion, secularism, and liberal democracy, both theoretically and in the context of the contemporary Muslim world. This book challenges a widely held belief among social scientists that religious politics and liberal-democratic development are structurally incompatible. While there are certainly tensions between Islam and democracy - Hashemi draws on Iran as an example - the two are not irreconcilable. He affirms the need for political secularism in order for liberal democracy to flourish, and examines how Muslim societies can develop the political secularism required for liberal democracy when the main political, cultural and intellectual resources that are available are religious. Hashemi argues that democratization and liberalization do not necessarily require a rejection or privatization of religion but do require a reinterpretation of religious ideas about the moral basis of legitimate political authority and individual rights. In fact, he shows, liberal democracy in the West often developed not in strict opposition to religious politics but in concert with it. Hashemi argues that an indigenous theory of Muslim secularism - similar to what developed in the Christian West - is possible and a necessary requirement for the advancement of liberal democracy in Muslim societies.

On Legitimacy and Authority: A Response to Krehoff

In this paper I respond to Bernd Krehoff’s article ‘Legitimate Political Authority and Sovereignty: Why States Cannot Be the Whole Story’. I criticize Krehoff’s use of Raz’s theory of authority to evaluate the legitimacy of our political institutions. Krehoff argues that states cannot (always) claim exclusive authority and therefore cannot possess exclusive legitimacy. Although I agree with his conclusion, I argue that the questions of legitimacy and (Razian) authority are distinct and that we need to focus more on the former in order to really support and defend Krehoff’s conclusions.

Legitimate Political Authority and Sovereignty: Why States Cannot be the Whole Story

States are believed to be the paradigmatic instances of legitimate political authority. But is their prominence justified? The classic concept of state sovereignty predicts the danger of a fatal deadlock among conflicting authorities unless there is an ultimate authority within a given jurisdiction. This scenario is misguided because the notion of an ultimate authority is conceptually unclear. The exercise of authority is multidimensional and multiattributive, and to understand the relations among authorities we need to analyse this complexity into its different aspects. Instead of ultimate authorities we can have actors endowed with superior authority over others in one regard, but not necessarily in another. And this limited superiority is sufficient for resolving conflicts. There is no need for ultimate authorities. Having discarded the notion of sovereignty we can embrace a different conception of legitimate authority, one that is not interested in the pedigree of actors, but in their capacity to serve its subjects. If states wish to retain their central role in the domain of political authority, they will have to earn it.

The Liberal Conscience: Politics and Principle in a World of Religious Pluralism

The Liberal Conscience: Politics and Principle in a World of Religious Pluralism, Lucas Swaine, New York: Columbia University Press, 2006, pp. xxii, 215.The Liberal Conscience by Lucas Swaine represents a response from a liberal to those who affirm a theocratic conception of the good. Swaine distinguishes between logic and rhetoric, between that which should persuade and that which is likely to persuade. He suggests that a justification of liberal principles founded on conscience should persuade honest theocrats and Swaine makes the case that this should matter to both liberals and theocrats. The liberal, who founds a justification of liberal principles in conscience and accommodates those whose conscience forces them to seek exemption from certain conventional norms, in Swaine's view, is acting in a manner consistent with the authentic spirit of liberal principles. A liberal democratic state reflecting such a spirit, Swaine argues, is in a stronger position logically to expect theocrats to view it as a legitimate political authority. Otherwise, it is presumptuous, he suggests, for a liberal democratic state to expect the allegiance of theocrats.

Human security: a new strategic narrative for Europe

This article examines the potential of human security as a narrative and operational frame for the European Union's external relations. Human security is about the security of individuals and communities and it links physical and material security—‘freedom from fear’, and ‘freedom from want’. The article addresses both the lexis (language) and praxis (practice)of human security in relation to the EU. Much of the language currently used in EU external relations, particularly crisis management, civil—military cooperation and conflict management, already contains elements of a human security approach. At the same time, the concept of human security goes beyond these terms and if formally adopted and elaborated could greatly strengthen the EU's role as a global security actor. The article develops five principles of human security—human rights, legitimate political authority, multilateralism and regional focus—and makes the case that the application of these principles would increase the coherence, effectiveness and visibility of EU missions. The article concludes that the adoption of a human security approach would build on the foundational ideas of Europe in overcominga history of war and imperialism and could help to rally public opinion behind the European idea. More importantly, it would contribute to closing the real security vacuum that exists in large parts of the world today.

Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus

Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus. By David Held. New York: Polity, 2004. 216p. 19.95 paper.David Held lays out a detailed design for an “alternative” global order to the one promoted by the United States. He vigorously rejects the approach to the world of George W. Bush and instead offers a social democratic agenda, which has three main parts: economic, political, and legal. For each part, Held provides both the overarching principles that ought to guide us and a considerable list of specific steps that should advance his design. Readers should not stop reading just because the list of values that Held beseeches us to pursue is as impressive as it is lofty: He calls on us to uphold the principles of equal moral worth, equal liberty, equal political status of human beings, legitimate political authority “on all levels,” and a “deeper” commitment to social justice, among other such values. He buttresses his agenda with a list of measures to be undertaken both in the short and in the longer run, most of which deserve careful attention. It is here that ultimately the rubber does not meet the road.

O político do medo e o medo da política

Este artigo examina o papel do medo na legitimação da autoridade política. Seu argumento é que o medo é um sentimento moral importante na constituição de um soberano legítimo, e para tanto mobiliza exemplos da teoria política e das práticas políticas do século XVI para ilustrá-lo.

Between Athens and Jerusalem: Western otherness in the thought of Leo Strauss and Hannah Arendt

In understanding the meaning of the West, twentieth‐century political philosophers Hannah Arendt and Leo Strauss called for a return to “Athens” (classical political philosophy) in order to address the “crisis of the West,” a loss of a sense of legitimate and stable political authority which, in their view, constitutes a nihilistic threat to Western democracy. The only way for the West to escape this nihilistic crisis is to return to Plato and Aristotle. Implicit in this critique is the belief that the other tradition of the West, “Jerusalem” (the Bible) has contributed to this nihilism, by undermining the authority of the Greeks. Is Jerusalem, then, the fatal “Other” for the West? Which tradition—Athens or Jerusalem—is best prepared to alleviate the crisis of the West, especially the survival of democracy? As I address these questions, I shall contend that it is Jerusalem, not Athens, which is the true source of Western democracy.