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 entity, 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

Legalization- confirmation of the authenticity of the signatures of competent officials on the documents.

Government is usually legal authority(legalized). It is based on law, legal (legal) laws. Its carriers, subjects and objects, as members of a certain state, have certain legal rights and obligations. Their activities and relations are regulated by the laws adopted in this state, as well as the norms of international law. Rights and obligations of subjects and objects state power are characterized by appropriate legitimacy. They are recognized by all the members of a given state and by other states, by their majority or a decisive part of them. This legitimacy differs from legitimacy, which is based only on personal, or personal, qualities and "emotional devotion" of subjects and objects of power, or on their belief in the significance of such "conventions" as the norms of party life and other public associations, public opinion, morals, customs, traditions, moral norms. Members of the state believe, in particular, in the importance of the rights and obligations of its other members to appropriate, retain, transform, regulate and use state power in certain interests. It is on the faith of the members of the state in the significance of laws that the legitimacy of the modern authorities of the state and the authorities is based, first of all. public institutions, subjects of state power and employees of the state apparatus, their rights and obligations, the legitimacy of the state power itself.

The legality of state power can be established in the most different forms and most different ways. In the Middle Ages, in order to look like the legitimate successors to the power of their predecessors, emperors, kings, kings and other reigning persons, and after them all the nobles, led, and sometimes invented or forged, the corresponding genealogies. State power and its highest subjects - emperors, kings, tsars, as a rule, were consecrated by the church. This gave them a status given by God.

Today, one of the most common forms of establishing the legality and, consequently, the legitimacy of the power of officials in the state is their election by its citizens. In order to fulfill this role, the elections themselves must be legitimate, including legal ones, must be held in accordance with the procedure established by law and recognized by the majority of the members of the state. Violation of the electoral procedures established by law calls into question the legality of officials elected by these procedures.

Legitimation- proof of the citizen's rights to receive payment, perform any actions, etc.

The term "legitimacy" itself is sometimes translated from French as "legality" or "legitimacy". This translation is not entirely accurate. Legality, accepted as an action through the law and in accordance with it, is reflected in the category of "legality". "Legitimacy" and "legality" are close, but not identical concepts. The first of them is evaluative, ethical and political in nature, the second is legal and ethically neutral. Any power, even if not popular, is legal. At the same time, it may not be legitimate, that is, it may not be accepted by the people, legislate at its own discretion and use them as an instrument of organized violence. In society, there can be not only non-legitimate, but also illegal power, for example, the power of mafia structures.

Today, the prevailing point of view is that the basis of legitimacy is the belief in the legitimacy of a given system. The conclusion about the existence of conviction can be made, first of all, on the basis of the free expression of their will by citizens. The stability of the system in a particular country can also be seen as a sign of the legitimacy of power. Power becomes legitimate due to its achievement of stability, certainty, the establishment of order. And vice versa, the government, formed democratically, but not able to prevent civil and interethnic wars, confrontation between the center and places, a "parade" of sovereignties, is not legitimate.

In a society undergoing a transitional state, a change of power, legitimacy exists rather as a problem, in an established society it exists as a natural quality of political relations. Speaking about state power as an object of legitimacy, it is necessary to focus on the concept of “power”. This concept is one of the widely used, with all the heterogeneity and ambiguity of this concept, one can, however, note one unifying characteristic of its many definitions - they all reflect relationships in which the will and actions of some dominate over the will and actions of others. Power is one of the main and most capacious concepts, which is confirmed both by the absence in modern political thought of one generally recognized definition of it, and by the variety of concepts of power.

Power is the main object of desires and interactions of groups, communities, organizations. But power turns out to be the most mysterious phenomenon in politics, the nature of which is not easy to reveal. Indeed, what is power - an abstraction, a symbol or a real action? After all, one can talk about the power of a person, organization, society, but at the same time about the power of ideas, words, laws. What makes a person, a society to obey someone or something - the fear of violence or the desire to obey? For all its mystery and uncertainty, the authorities did not leave anyone indifferent to themselves: they admired her and cursed her, she was elevated to heaven and "trampled into the dirt."

In political literature, the correct definition of power is the definition given by the famous scientist Max Weber, who believed that power is “the possibility that one person within a social relationship will be able to exercise his will, despite resistance and regardless of what such opportunity is founded.” The political science dictionary defines power as “a strong-willed special relationship of the subject to the object of this relationship. It consists in an impulse to act, which the second subject must perform at the request of the first. Power, therefore, is seen as a special relation of domination, as a way of influencing someone, as “power over”, as coercion, as force. With the democratization of society, power began to be seen not only as domination, but also as an attitude of subjects based on conviction, authority, as the ability to reach an agreement and resolve conflicts. Thus, power is also interpreted as a symbolic means of social communication.

The essence of power lies in the fact that this is a specific relationship of the subject to himself (power over himself), between subjects, which involves a certain interaction between them (power can be approved, tolerated or resisted), within which the ruling subject realizes his will and interests. The power based only on force, according to B. Russell, is “naked power”.

Legitimacy is a basic element of the existence and functioning of state power, as well as its consolidation in society. Everything in the life of society has a beginning. There is a beginning and the state power that dominates in a particular country. As historical experience shows, much depends on what this beginning was in its further fate. In most cases, state power can be formed as a result of free democratic elections, but it can also be the result of a military coup or a political revolution that will be a terrible tragedy for many segments of the population and claim millions or more. human lives and to the ground can destroy the economy of the country.

Since the time of M. Weber, it has been customary to distinguish three "pure" types of legitimation of power, which can also be applied to the legitimation of state power. This is traditional charismatic and rational legitimation.

Traditional legitimation is domination based on traditional authority, rooted in respect for customs, faith in their continuity, in the fact that power "expresses the spirit of the people", corresponds to the customs and traditions accepted in society as stereotypes of consciousness and behavior. Traditions are of great importance for strengthening the power of the monarch in the Muslim countries of the Persian Gulf (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc. in Nepal, Bhutan, Brunei. They determine the issues of succession to the throne, the structure of state bodies. In those Muslim countries where there are parliaments, they are sometimes created in accordance with the tradition of ash-shura (monarch meetings) as consultative parliaments.Traditions determine decision-making in the Indonesian parliament mainly by consensus.Together with religious dogmas, traditions largely regulate public life in a number of developing countries.Traditions are important for the legitimization of the state authorities in countries where the system of Anglo-Saxon law operates. Judicial precedent is one of the expressions of the power of tradition. The British monarch is traditionally the head Anglican Church(an integral part of his title is Defender of the Faith). A similar situation occurs in some other European countries, where one of the churches is declared state (for example, Lutheranism in Denmark).

Charismatic legitimation is domination based on faith in the personal gifts of the leader (less often in a narrow ruling group), in the exclusive mission of the leader. Charismatic legitimation is not associated with rational judgments, but relies on a range of feelings; it is legitimation that is sensory in nature. Charisma is usually individual. She will create a special image. In the past, this was a belief in a "good tsar" capable of delivering the people from oppression by the boyars and landowners. In modern conditions, charismatic power is much less common than in the past, but it is common in the countries of totalitarian socialism, being associated with a certain ideology (Mao Tse Tung, Kim Il Sung, Ho Chi Minh, etc.). In relatively liberal India, occupation is associated with charisma. the most important state post of prime minister by representatives of the Gandhi family - Nehru (father, then daughter, and after her murder - son). The same generation was and is in power in Sri Lanka (Banderanaix's father, then his wife, now the president is their daughter, and his mother is the prime minister).

To strengthen charisma, special rituals are widely used: torchlight processions of demonstrations in support of power in a special uniform, the coronation of a monarch. Rational legitimation of state power is based on a rational assessment associated with the formation of a conviction in the reasonableness of the existing order, laws, rules adopted in a democratic society to manage it. This type of legitimation is one of the main ones in modern conditions of a democratic legal state.

Rational legitimation assumes that the population supports (or rejects) state power, based primarily on their own assessment of the actions of this power. Not slogans and promises (they have a relatively short-term effect), not the image of a wise ruler, often not even fair laws (in modern Russia many good laws are not enforced), and above all, the practical activities of public authorities, officials, especially higher ones, serve as the basis for rational assessment.

Tragedies, closely linked to the establishment of power, the people do not forget and remember. Decades pass, generations change, but the feeling of distrust of the people in the authorities that illegally led the country remains ineradicable, the relationship between the ruling and the masses is based, as a rule, on the fear of the latter.

People have different attitudes towards power, originally legal, officially recognized by society itself and foreign states. Such an initial legal formation of power contributes to the approval of consent in relation to society and political power, the recognition by society, the people, of its right to a managerial role. It should be noted that in itself the initially legal establishment of power is not always a guarantee that in the future this political power will fully justify the trust of the people. There are numerous examples of bitter disappointment in society. There are a lot of such examples, including in the history of Russia there are a lot of such examples, especially in recent years.

So, the recognition by society of the legitimacy, legitimacy of official power is its fundamental characteristic. Speaking about legitimacy, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that we are talking about public recognition of power, about the trust and support that society and the people provide to it, and not about the legal, legal consolidation of political power in the relevant state documents. It is not difficult for those who have taken power into their own hands to obtain legal, legal legitimacy. Therefore, the price of such a formal recognition of power is not so great in comparison with the recognition of state power by the people, i.e. legitimacy of state power. Accordingly, one should distinguish between the concepts of "legitimate power" (public recognition of its legitimacy) and "legal power" (legal, formal consolidation).

The concept of legitimacy comes from the Latin word legitimus (consistent with the laws, lawful, lawful). legitimacy means the consent of the people with the government, a positive attitude towards the current government of the majority of the population, as well as the recognition of its legitimacy by the world community in order to establish official and unofficial relations. The legitimacy of power is determined by its ability to decide external and internal problems countries.

The concepts of legitimacy and legality should not be confused. Legality means only the legitimacy of power, and legitimacy is a much deeper concept, meaning that power is accepted by the masses, they agree to obey such power, considering it fair, authoritative, and the existing order is the best for the country. The legitimacy of power implies that the laws are enforced by the main part of society. Legitimate power is based on the recognition of the right of power holders to prescribe norms of behavior for other people. Legitimacy means the recognition by the population of this power, its right to govern, its compliance with people's ideas about justice, the validity of any actions of the authorities, the presence of motivation in order to obey. The lower the level of legitimacy, the more often the authorities will rely on coercion.

The term "legitimate" originated in early XIX V. in France. Initially, it was applied in relation to the power of the king as the only legitimate, legitimate, in contrast to the violent change of power by Napoleon.

Ensuring the legitimacy of power is its legitimization.

Legitimization means the recognition or confirmation of the legality (legitimacy) of any right or authority, including the right of political power to make political decisions and carry out political actions and actions.

The criteria for the legitimacy of power are either the development of democratic procedures (election of power), or the ability of power to maintain stability and order in society, even if it was established as a result of a coup or revolution.

Signs of the legitimacy of power are the conviction of the majority of citizens in the legitimacy of power and the existing system, as well as the freedom of citizens to express their will.

It is possible to identify several types of legitimacy of power :

• o power based on the right of succession to the throne. In this case, many necessary actions, unpopular with the people, could be carried out only with the use of violence;
• o charismatic tin, when power is based on a specific person, distinguished by strong leadership qualities (charisma) (examples from history: Alexander the Great, Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt, etc.);
• o liberal-democratic, or constitutional type of legitimacy, characterized by the free will of citizens, the election of government bodies. This legitimacy is most common in modern world;
• o ethnic type of legitimacy, which involves the formation of power structures on a national basis. This type of legitimacy is formed with the high activity of people of the indigenous nationality, the proclamation of the ideas of the nation state.

Power serves as the basis, object and driving force of politics. Power struggle - characteristic political life of any society, any era. The concentrated expression of power is the relationship of coercion - execution.

According to M. Weber, there are three types of legitimization:

• o traditional - a centuries-old habit of submission (to kings, emperors, princes, etc.);
• o charismatic - faith and submission to the authority of some charismatic personality;
• o rational - submission to such authority, which is clear, understandable and operates on the basis of democratic laws (legitimacy of the benefits of submission).

The following means of legitimization are used: informing about the goals and objectives of the current policy, its economic feasibility, compliance with the interests of the people, the formation of a national idea, etc. At the same time, the authorities must show that they are able to cope with this. The most universal means of legitimizing power is elections and referendums, which allow people to feel their involvement in power, the dependence of power on the people.

An important instrument of legitimization is the mass media, which allow the manipulation of public consciousness.

The means of legitimizing power depend primarily on the political regime established in a particular state.

There are the following main political regimes: totalitarian, authoritarian, democratic.

Democracy - a political regime based on the method of collective decision-making with equal influence of participants on the outcome of the process or on its essential stages. In order for power to be legitimate under a democratic regime, it must be controlled by society, and access to politics by its individual members must be difficult and as transparent as possible.

There are some basic features of modern democratic regimes. In a truly democratic society, the people actively involved in politics , and such participation is fixed by law. First of all, the participation of citizens in politics is carried out in the form of an electoral process that allows the people to accept or not accept the existing government, to show how legitimate they consider it.

In the implementation of the electoral process, the level of socio-economic development of the state, the high civil culture of the population, which determine the requirements for candidates, are very important.

As the French philosopher, writer and politician Joseph de Maistre argued, every nation is ultimately worthy of its own government. And one more quote: "Democracy cannot rise above the level of the human material of which its voters are composed" (Bernard Shaw).

Another sign of true democracy can be considered a multi-party system, which allows all representatives of social groups, even those who are a minority, to express their point of view about the actions of the authorities. Democracy must be sovereign, i.e. independent of the interference of other states or international organizations.

If the political regime is truly democratic, conditions are created for the free expression of the will of the people, justice and freedom are provided to citizens, then they consider such power to be legitimate.

In Russia, all the main means of legitimizing power are used:

• 1) legal support for the election of power;
• 2) political pluralism;
• 3) local self-government;
• 4) informatization of society;
• 5) the interaction of society and government.

Legal support of elective power . Following the results of a national referendum in 1993, the Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted, in accordance with which the political system in our state was built. The Constitution states that "...Russia is a democratic federal law-governed state...".

The task of the rule of law is to strictly maintain the measure between positive incentives and coercion. This is the politics of domination, the politics of peacemaking, the art of the possible, the creation of reasonable balances between social driving forces and social interests.

A system of normative legal federal and regional acts has been adopted that establishes the principles of electoral law and the electoral process in Russian Federation.

At the same time, when forming a democratic regime, the norms of international law are also taken into account, and, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the norms of international law take precedence over the norms of domestic law. If an international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes other rules than those provided for by law, then the rules of the international treaty shall apply. It is believed that international law more than national, reflects the ideas of humanism and justice.

If the result of the referendum had been different, the Russian Federation would not have existed, most likely, the country would have collapsed, like the USSR.

A referendum is a form of direct expression of the will of the citizens of the Russian Federation on the most important issues of state and local significance.

The Constitution of the Russian Federation determines that "the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the Russian Federation is its multinational people."

The people as a source of power exercise it:

• o directly through elections and referendums;
• o through public authorities;
• o through local governments.

Citizens of the Russian Federation who have reached the age of 18 have an active suffrage, with the exception of those who are recognized by the court as incompetent or are held in places of deprivation of liberty by a court verdict.

Democratic, free elections to the bodies of state power, local self-government, as well as a referendum are the highest direct expression of the power belonging to the people. The state guarantees the free expression of the will of citizens of the Russian Federation in elections and referendums, the protection of democratic principles and norms of the electoral law and the right to participate in a referendum.

Measures of administrative and criminal liability for violations of the norms of the electoral law are envisaged. For example, administrative offenses include: violation of the right of citizens to familiarize themselves with the list of voters; interference in the work of election commissions; failure to comply with the decision of the election commission; violation of the procedure for providing information about voters; violation of the established procedure for publishing documents related to the preparation and conduct of elections; violation of the rights of a member of an election commission, an observer, a foreign (international) observer, an authorized representative of a registered candidate, an electoral association (bloc), a representative of the mass media; violation of the rules of pre-election campaigning; bribing voters; non-provision or non-publication of a report, information on the receipt and expenditure of funds for the preparation and conduct of elections; etc.

Measures of criminal liability are provided for such offenses as obstruction of the exercise of electoral rights or the work of election commissions; falsification of election documents or incorrect counting of votes; etc.

Political pluralism implies a variety of political views and organizations, free participation of citizens in political life, competition between various political forces in the struggle for access to power.

According to the Constitution, political diversity and a multi-party system are recognized in the Russian Federation. This means that various public political associations can be created, registered and carry out their activities in Russia on the grounds determined by law.

The Constitution of the Russian Federation states that public associations are equal before the law. The equality of public associations before the law is manifested in the equality of the requirements of the state to the charters of public associations. In Russia, in addition to equality before the law, the equality of public associations among themselves is fixed. This presupposes equality of rights and obligations of public associations in both public and economic activities.

The principle of a multi-party system, enshrined in the Constitution, assumes that each party, as a kind of public association, expressing the political will of its members, seeks to participate in the formation of state authorities and local self-government bodies.

Each party has the right to adopt program documents, which are then published to the public, to nominate candidates for deputies and other elective positions. But, participating in elections, the party cannot receive financial support from foreign states, organizations and citizens. In accordance with federal law dated July 11, 2001 No. 95-FZ "On Political Parties", citizens of the Russian Federation have the right to create political parties on a voluntary basis in accordance with their convictions, to join political parties or to refrain from joining political parties, to participate in the activities of political parties in in accordance with their statutes, as well as freely withdraw from political parties. The creation and activities of political parties whose goals or actions are aimed at carrying out extremist activities are prohibited.

Local self-government should contribute to the approximation of public authorities to the population, the formation of civil society in our country. Local self-government is being formed in Russia (since the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), its legislative foundations have been created, and extensive work experience has been accumulated municipalities. The formation of local self-government brings Russia closer to a truly democratic society, because it makes it possible to get away from the monocentric model of power organization traditional for Russia.

The interaction of society and government is provided by a variety of means. The Public Chamber of the Russian Federation was established in accordance with Federal Law No. 32-F3 of April 4, 2005 "On the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation". According to this law, the Public Chamber is elected every two years and carries out interaction between citizens and state authorities and local self-government in order to take into account the needs and interests of citizens, protect their rights and freedoms in the formation and implementation of state policy, as well as in order to exercise public control over the activities of bodies authorities. The Public Chamber provides support to non-profit organizations in Russia. In 2009, due to amendments to the legislation, a procedure was established in accordance with which all socially significant bills are subject to mandatory examination by the Public Chamber.

Study organized public opinion For example, the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) was created, sociological surveys are regularly conducted, including on problems of attitude towards the current government, etc.

Informatization of society. In today's world, information is practically the main source of power. Control over information resources and flows allows the authorities to successfully pursue their policies. However, direct control is no longer possible, so often the authorities themselves produce certain information and its interpretation.

In accordance with the principles of a democratic society, citizens have the right to access information resources, including information about the activities of government bodies. No less important is the organization of feedback between the population and the authorities. Mass media play an important role in informatization of society.

Thus, in general, a democratic regime is being created in the Russian Federation. At the same time, the problem of legitimizing power exists due to the large scale of corruption, the facts of excessive administration, bureaucracy, the fear of a large part of state and municipal employees of openness and transparency in their work, isolation from the needs of citizens, etc. High social differentiation remains, the standard of living of a fairly large part population is extremely low. Local self-government is still extremely poorly developed. The apoliticality of the population, its low legal culture are noted.

Without legitimate power, it will not be possible to create a sovereign democracy, in which both the system of power and its actions are shaped by Russian citizens.

Recently, cases have become more frequent when the peoples of certain countries express distrust of the authorities of their states, 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 scientific literature you 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, the supreme power 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 apparent. At the same time, the Republicans began to use this term as a recognition of this 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 reigns 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 full right 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.

The current stage of modernization of the Russian statehood is characterized by the action of a number of political and legal factors, and is also associated with an active search for a national idea, which is especially relevant in the context of globalization transformations. In the second half of the twentieth century. The world community was offered as a universal neoliberal model of globalization, in which "the national-economic complex, sovereignty, partly even states are considered as dying categories - their fastest overcoming is presented as a guarantee of success" .

In this context, the appearance of scientific articles and monographs devoted to the search for the actual national foundations of domestic law, state power, and the organization of the management system. "Admiring" the reforms of the 90s. of the last century, the time of “expectations” of a rule of law state and, it would seem, the rapid formation of civil society in the updated legal space of modern Russia was replaced first by disappointment, and then by an understanding of the need for a different state-legal and socio-economic development. The authors began to take a critical approach to the vector and content of modernization: after 2000, doubts began to arise in the scientific community about the adequacy and, consequently, the prospects of the “progressive” transformations proposed by the power elites.

“Recently, the country is not experiencing growing pains at all, but a real comprehensive crisis of the political system created by Yeltsin, the main parameters of which are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 ... It is difficult to disagree with those who believe that today in Russia the need has ripened a very radical constitutional reform, the meaningful and purposeful implementation of which can restore the lost confidence of the population in power, restore the legitimacy of the elected head of state in full. .

At the same time, it is gratifying to note that in the last decade the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993, the principles of state building, power, administration, and the legal system enshrined in it have become the subject not only for constitutional and legal, but also for other, often very diverse studies, this is more than important and, no doubt, relevant in the current situation in Russia. This topic is far from exhausted, as it seemed at the beginning of 2000, it is just beginning to open up in its most diverse aspects.

We fully agree with those researchers who believe that at present “it is of some interest to study the value-semantic concepts of the Russian constitution, which make it possible to determine the boundaries of “getting used to” the system of legal categories that accompany the understanding of the value and significance of the constitution as a text - legal, metaphysical , symbol-forming, sociological and social, etc.” . It seems obvious that this kind of study of the Basic Law of Russia will be interesting both from the point of view of the processes of legitimization of government institutions, and in terms of searching for factors of delegitimization of state power.

In general, the state power has the most important political quality that distinguishes it from all other expressions of will - sovereignty, but at the same time, it cannot be completely independent. The authorities are influenced by various political parties, public associations, movements, which in turn force it to take certain measures or refuse them (for example, the rejection of laws, the adjustment of the rules for foreign economic activity, the election struggle for state power, etc.).

Restrictions on state power can also be achieved by legal means. Nevertheless, the relationship between power and law is quite complex. If we are talking about a democratic state, then the government not only issues laws, but also obeys them. At the same time, in order to be a genuine right, and not a legalized arbitrariness, legal regulations must comply with general democratic, general humane values ​​(observance of natural human rights, ensuring goodness and justice in society). Under a totalitarian political regime, the situation changes significantly. The state either issues laws that hide their anti-democratic nature behind the declaration of generally recognized legal principles, or violates previously adopted laws and

regulations, resorting to forceful methods and outright violence. The regulation of the activities of the state, its bodies by law, the official actions of state bodies on the basis of legal norms are the most important conditions for legality.

The term "legalization" or "legality" comes from the Latin word "Legalis", which means legal.

The history of the institute "legalization" or "legality" has its roots in ancient times. References to legalization as the basis of power and proper behavior already in the 1U-III centuries. BC. were used by the Chinese legalist school in a dispute with the Confucians, who demanded such behavior that would correspond to universal harmony. They did not forget about legalization in the Middle Ages during the confrontation between secular and spiritual authorities, referring to sacred texts or dynastic succession to the throne as a justification for their power. In modern conditions, the legalization of power (political or state) is a legal concept, meaning the establishment and support of this power by the constitution and law.

In general, the legalization of state power is the recognition of the legitimacy of its emergence, organization and activity, the legitimization of this power, which can be carried out in various ways and ways. The most important means of legalizing state power is the adoption of a democratic constitution, created with the participation of the population, approved by them directly in a referendum.

At the same time, it is known that many modern constitutions and laws were adopted in non-democratic ways as a result of, for example, military coups or the simple proclamation of new constitutions. A similar situation took place in Russia, when the 1978 Constitution was suspended by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1400.

Another difficulty in determining the legality of power in the state is the fact that under authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, constitutions can be adopted by outwardly democratic means (the Supreme Soviet of the USSR in 1977, a referendum, etc.) and contain a wide list of rights and freedoms of citizens (Constitution USSR 1936), but this will not correspond to the actual state of affairs. Therefore, the legality of state power should be assessed only in conjunction with reality.

The main document, which contains provisions related to the legalization of state power, the prohibition of its usurpation in this area, is the current Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993. Article 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation stipulates that no one can appropriate power in the Russian Federation. The seizure of power or the appropriation of power is punishable by criminal law.

Thus, the legalization of state power is a legal concept, meaning the recognition, admission and support of a particular administrative institution, body by law and, consequently, by the fundamental law. The justification for power is contained in legal acts and procedures, in legal relations. At the same time, constitutional laws in the world often legalize anti-democratic, terrorist state power. Therefore, when determining the degree of legalization of state power in a society, it is important to establish to what extent the legal acts that carry out legalization comply with generally accepted principles of law, including international legal ones.

In this regard, it seems necessary useful research another more complex category characterizing the position of power (political or state) in the state.

The term "legitimacy" arose at the beginning of the 19th century. and denoted a political movement in France, which aimed to restore the power of the king as the only legal one, in contrast to the power of the usurper Napoleon. The concept of legitimacy can be considered in two senses: narrow and broad. In the narrow sense of the word, legitimacy means the legitimacy of power. In a broad sense, the correspondence of power to legally established norms, as well as to the fundamental goals of the state and generally accepted principles and values. Thus, this concept is rather factual than legal, although legal elements can also be its integral part.

There is a distinction between the legitimacy of power by origin or by the method of establishment (by inheritance, on the basis of traditions, or under anarchist rule, or through general elections within the framework of democratic rule) and legitimacy as a certain state of power, when citizens voluntarily and consciously recognize the right of power to prescribe their behavior, follow its laws. Legitimate is the power with which the people agree. Illegitimate power relies on violence, other forms of coercion, including mental influence. But most often, legitimacy is the subject of a struggle (political, ideological) for the dominance of certain political forces, the subject of a search for special methods of justifying the power of these forces before society.

The question of the legitimacy of power in the face of its inability to prevent civil and interethnic wars, confrontation between the center and the periphery, the growth of crime, etc. is particularly acute. As for a society that functions stably with a predominant number of law-abiding citizens, for such a society, the legitimacy of power is a natural relations.

In the context of the constitutional and legal aspect noted above in the historical refraction of the latter, when considering the evolution of domestic constitutions in the twentieth century. one should point to a special “legal rhetoric” that affects the socio-psychological content of the legitimacy of state power and administration in Russia.

In particular, all Soviet constitutions at the normative and declarative levels “captured” the image of a great state, one way or another, participated in the translation of the imperial idea (which arose back in the time of Ivan III and accompanied in its various manifestations the subsequent development of domestic law and the state). “The value-semantic complex of Russian statehood is built using vivid epithets and metaphors: to wrest humanity from the clutches of financial capital and imperialism; the powerful All-Russian Soviet Power (1918), the Soviets of Working People's Deputies, which grew and became stronger as a result of the overthrow of the power of the landowners and capitalists (1937); The Communist Party directs the great creative activity of the Soviet people (1978), etc.” Is it possible to find such “verbal expressions” in the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation? It seems not. However, which of the principles fixed in it can be involved in the process of legitimizing modern presidential power and, more broadly, state power in general? This question obviously requires further scrupulous study.

The initial typology of the legitimacy of power was identified by M. Weber, pointing out its three types: rational, traditional, charismatic.

Rational legitimation assumes that the population supports state power, based primarily on their own assessment of its actions. With this type of legitimation, the practical activities of state authorities, officials, rather than their slogans and promises, acquire a greater role.

In the traditional type of legitimacy, power is recognized as legitimate, because it is carried out according to the rules rooted in traditions, hence the source of legitimacy is the traditional consciousness.

Charismatic legitimacy is based on the faith of the masses in the special properties, abilities of a political leader, a leader. The source of charismatic legitimacy is the personal authority of the ruler. Today, charismatic power is most often found in the countries of totalitarian socialism, being associated with a certain ideology.

The described types of legitimacy of power, as a rule, in real political and legal practice are intertwined and mutually complement each other. So, for example, A. Hitler used the traditional reverence of the Germans for the law and the charisma of the leader.

Understanding the real role of these types of legitimacy allows us to determine the ways and means of legitimizing power, and hence superiority in the use of force, where this is expressed in the legitimate right to use force against force.

A well-thought-out policy of legitimation is especially relevant in the face of fundamental changes taking place in the life of any society. Since even the most ardent support of the people can

be lost if the system of power does not make constant efforts to strengthen confidence in itself, to form a conviction in the legitimacy of power. The existence of several legitimacy factors for political power confirms this. Thus, legitimacy factors include, for example, time and success.

Time appears as a characteristic of the duration of the functioning of the system and should be reflected in the minds of citizens. Stable and elective political systems make great efforts to ensure that the fact of the duration of the existence of power institutions is realized by citizens. Numerous socially significant rituals serve this purpose. Thus, people get used to a certain type of power, traditional rituals and paraphernalia, as well as to its strength.

If the power is recognized by fellow citizens as successful, effective, then it quickly becomes legitimate.

From the point of view of citizens, a natural way of forming power institutions for most modern developed countries is elections. Where people choose power and give it certain powers, it is customary to obey these authorities and the laws that power takes. Direct elections are of the greatest importance, when this or that body of the state, the highest official receives a mandate directly as a result of the voting of voters (Russia). Meanwhile, this method has recently been used less and less. Presidents are elected either by parliaments (Turkey), by electors (USA), or by special electoral colleges (Germany).

The association of power with national symbols and the recognition of its popular, powered by historical roots, the conviction of citizens that it is this power in the best way takes into account the cultural and historical specifics of a given people and a given country - this method of legitimation is typical for regimes that are ineffective and even dangerous for their own peoples. So, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Il Sung, Saddam Hussein declared themselves national symbols.

Government, party, ideological propaganda is also a direct way of legitimation and is aimed at the recognition by the masses of state policy. Propaganda as a means of legitimation performs two important functions:

a) political socialization, i.e. such an impact on the masses, which is aimed at assimilation by them of social and political norms that determine political behavior within acceptable legal and political boundaries;

b) external legitimation of the government, i.e. justification to the international community that the government is fulfilling its power functions and deserves international support and approval.

It is clear that the problem of delegitimization also occupies an important place in the functioning of state power, the causes of which lie in many aspects of the legal and political life of the state.

Thus, one of the main reasons for delegitimization is the contradiction between the universal values ​​that prevail in society, the particular and even selfish interests of the ruling elite and the social groups associated with it. The deepening of this contradiction leads to the fact that the authorities become isolated in themselves, losing the support of the population. This circumstance turns out to be at the same time a symptom of the developing crisis of power, which, accordingly, does not allow it to use both law and force to support its regime; this will be perceived by the majority of the population as illegitimate, and therefore a criminal act.

Another reason for the delegitimization of power, characteristic of democratic regimes, is the contradiction between the idea of ​​democracy and real socio-political and legal practice. It manifests itself in an attempt by the authorities to solve emerging problems only by force, by restricting or not observing basic human rights. Sporadic manifestations

* For example, the speech of the throne of the British monarch at a meeting of both houses of parliament (for more than 700 years this ritual has been sacredly observed, demonstrating the inviolability of not so much the power of the monarch as the political system of the United Kingdom).

This contradiction indicates its presence in the political practice of most countries, and the strengthening of these trends will entail the replacement of a democratic regime by an authoritarian one.

The next reason for the delegitimization of power is the lack of a clear articulation of the interests of social groups in the political system, sufficient vertical mobility combined with social inequality. This leads to the radicalization of moods in society and the emergence of opposition, which puts forward an alternative vision of the social order.

Among the reasons for the delegitimization of power, one can single out bureaucratization and the merging of power with crime. The bureaucracy finds ways to enter into new relationships and structures through a kind of participation in socio-economic processes and the creation of a market infrastructure.

Among the reasons for the delegitimization of the institutions of state power in multinational states are nationalism, ethnic separatism, which rejects the legitimacy of state power or proclaims the supremacy of local norms and rules over federal law.

And, finally, the loss of faith in the legitimacy of their power by the ruling elite itself, the emergence of sharp contradictions within it, the clash of various branches of power, the struggle for power, moreover, rendered "for display to the general public" can also be a source of delegitimization of power.

Literature

1. Kollontai V. On the neoliberal model of globalization // International Economics and International Relations. 1999. No. 10.

2. Stankevich Z. It's time to unfreeze! Convocation of the Constitutional Assembly as a key problem of modern Russia // Literary newspaper. 2012. № 21.

3. Popov E.A. The Constitution of Russia as a value-semantic system // Issues of Culturology. 2012. No. 4.

4. Chirkin V.E. Fundamentals of state power. M., 1996.

5. Chirkin V.E. Legalization and legitimation of state power // State and Law. 1995. No. 3.