Господство, легитимност, доверие: социоантропологически размишления
Domination, Legitimacy, Trust: Socio-anthropological Considerations

Summary/Abstract: Social sciences have tackled the question of legitimacy in the various forms of domination thanks to the distinction formulated by Max Weber between domination (Herrschaft) and power strictu sensu (Macht). But it was chiefly anthropologist Georges Balandier who forcefully underscored that power strictu sensu, inherently arbitrary, stands no chance to last long, whereas domination based solely on the exercise of physical force and violence is constantly at risk. Therefore, whoever seeks to govern must perforce establish his own legitimacy (not to be confused with legitimation) through the production of images, the manipulation of symbols and their organization within a ceremonial context. These social representations and practices are essential to foster in the governed that credence in their governors’ legitimacy that Max Weber called Legitimitätsglauben or Legitimitätsgeltung. Moreover, credence in legitimacy is also based on the trust of the governed in their governors. Notoriously, though, trust cannot be defined as an objective certainty, but solely as the subjective probability of not being deceived. In line with this theoretical reference frame, the presentation aims to analyze legal forms of domination primarily, which, however, display a mutual lack of trust between citizens and governors (politicians and bureaucrats). Accordingly, it centers on the organization of social relationships in societies that may be defined as societies of public distrust. These cases, therefore, display a permanent tension between legality (rooted in state law) and legitimacy since, contrary to Max Weber’s thoughts, legality is perceived as illegitimate whereas illegality is considered legitimate.

• Details
• Contents