English Language Resources Online - series on leadership, power, politics, part 2

English Language Resources Online - series on leadership, power, politics, part 2

Welcome back to my online resource for English language essays on many topics. There are going to be many essays on the topics of leadership, power, politics and virtue here on this site. This site seeks to improve the standard of intellectual essays and analytical essays, and serves as a place where you can get ideas, English Language essays and resources to improve your essays for Knowledge and Inquiry, GP, English O and A levels, as well as any other major English essay writing module at university or junior college. This first essay in this series will be on :

"Exploring the difference between political power and political legitimacy, describe three ways in which legitimacy is conferred upon political power and how power itself can be politically legitimating."

This essay was not written by me, but written by a friend of mine called Mabel L. Q. H. First and foremost, what is the question asking? How can I approach this essay and answer the question? Remember to always ask yourself questions.

Question: "Exploring the difference between political power and political legitimacy, describe three ways in which legitimacy is conferred upon political power and how power itself can be politically legitimating."

Essay answer:

The notion of power and legitimacy has been a popular interest of study amongst scholars of different fields of study in the last few centuries as they try to fathom the way humans act in a group. As stated by Tajfel (1982), “a combination of illegitimacy and instability would become a powerful incitement for attempts to change the status quo” (p. 52). Thus, legitimacy is fundamental in any political leadership. In this essay, I will first explore the difference between political power and political legitimacy, before describing three ways in which legitimacy is conferred upon political power. Lastly, I would argue how power itself can be politically legitimating.

Political power and political legitimacy are different in many ways. Political power is seen as being a part of politics, while political legitimacy is a subset of political power. According to Heywood (2007), political power is defined as “the ability to influence the behaviour of others in a manner not of their choosing” (pg 7), while political legitimacy is described as “the rightfulness of a regime or system of rule” (Heywood, 2007, pg 219). In short, political power is the ability of the political leader to command the obedience of the people, whereas political legitimacy is the recognition from the people as having the right to govern. From these definitions, we can also see that political power has more emphasis on the forcing people to conform by means of thought control or coercion, but political legitimacy emphasizes on free will and the willingness of the people to comply with the government because they have given them special authority to govern. From Ma (2000), it is suggested that in a legitimate society, the party who disobeys is rejected socially: he has committed an act judged as bad by the others. This might be due to authority in a political legitimate society being given by the people; hence, people are obligated to obey the authority. On the contrary, the party who disobeys a leader who has political power may be rejected because his power might not be accepted by the general public.

‘Legitimate power’, which is also known as ‘authority’, is based on an acknowledged duty to obey rather than on any form of coercion or manipulation (Heywood, 2007, pg 5). The first way in which legitimacy is conferred upon political power is by what Jean-Jacques Rousseau called the ‘social contract’: “a discussion in which all would participate, and arrive to a consensus that would be called the ‘General Will’ ” (Coulter, 1991, pg 32). The people obey a regime because they believe in the wisdom of its leaders or the fairness of its policies, rather than the fear that disobedience would lead to sanctions (White, 2005, pg 3). This type of power arises from the general population, and requires the support of the people as the contract is made with the idea of how the state should be managed, and not with the leader or government itself. Hence, there is the need for a common agreement by the population to confer power to the leader, and in return for power, the population would expect certain benefits from the leader. Secondly, legitimacy can arise from “the charisma of an exceptional being” (Ma, 2000, pg 52). This unique person, such as a religious leader, is ‘chosen by heaven’, and has received power from heaven to lead the people. Nevertheless, the exceptional being still needs to conform to the values and goals of the society, or he or she would risk losing power and support from the people. This can be seen from the Imperial days of ancient China, where the Emperor, who is also known as the ‘son of god’, can also be overthrown if he does not care about the well-being of his people. Lastly, legitimacy can be given by “the authority of the customs” (Ma, 2000, pg 52). This form of legitimacy relies on peoples’ traditional belief that it is morally right to obey the leader, because such values have been instilled in them from a tender age. People who do not conform are viewed as going against the norms of society, and believed to have committed a bad act. As a result, they would be rejected and ostracized by society.

From the definition of power, we can see that power results in the ability to persuade people, and influence people to grant legitimacy. This also means that the acquisition of more power results in greater legitimacy. In an experiment, participants “acknowledged the power relations to be fairer in the high legitimacy condition than in the low legitimacy condition” (Hornsey et al., 2005, pg 220). From this experiment, we can see that power can result in perception of legitimacy, resulting in power being politically legitimating. This perhaps is due to the belief that greater power is the result of greater legitimacy and acceptance by the general public. This creates a snowball effect - with more power, more people would accept such rule as being fair. Thus legitimacy increases, and the ruler becomes ‘more powerful’. Some may argue that this form of power is not legitimate as it relies on the traditional belief of people to obey the ruler. Nonetheless, the rule of the political power is right, and thus can be considered as legitimate.

Power can become legitimating in the case of absolute power. In the situation of absolute power, “the government must thus misinform the people, manipulate them by means of propaganda, and make them believe that the power is very concerned with their situation and hopes” (Ma, 2000, pg 52). In such governance, the people are ‘brainwashed’ by the government to believe that their government is the best and that they care for the people. Opposition parties are eliminated so that the people would not know of negative information in the governance. This is a form of ‘thought control’, and the only political information people receive are sanctioned by the government, and only information that put the government in a positive light are disseminated to the public. Thus, they are no longer able to distinguish right from wrong, good from bad, and blindly trust the government. Though this form of power may seem to be illegitimating, it becomes legitimate as people decide to grant the government the right to rule, whether or not the decision was made in the light of adequate information. Nevertheless, this form of power is less common in today’s society as it is now difficult to restrict information due to the presence of the mass media and internet, where people have fast and easy access to a wide variety of information.

Tyler (2005) states that “those who have power can bribe or coerce others and are able to thereby shape their behaviour, giving the powerful the ability to lead groups, organizations, and societies” (pg. 211). Here, we realise that with power, we can attain legitimacy by means of bribery or coercion. The leader would be able to bribe people with authority, such as the police force and/or the influential people of the state to support him or her, to gain power. In other words, legitimacy can be bought with money. With the legitimacy gained after bribery, the leader would then be able to coerce the people in the state to submit to his or her authority. One example can be seen in Malaysia, where Mahathir made use of power police and the courts by jailing his planned successor, Anwar Ibrahim, in 1999 (White, 2005, pg 49-50). Nevertheless, power and legitimacy acquired by means of bribery and coercion may not be permanent. If the leader is unable to manage the country well and to bring peace and prosperity, rebellions may take place. A charismatic leader would usually arise to lead the people into overthrowing the ruler. Such example can be seen in China where Chairman Mao, the charismatic leader, was able to garner the support from peasants to overthrow the leaders of the country. Thus, even if bribery and coercion are used to control the people, the ruler must also ensure that the people are able to meet their basic needs.

In conclusion, though power and legitimacy are different by definition and action, they can be seen as inseparable entities in politics. Especially in the modern world where people are more educated and are aware of the various types of government rule, it is no longer possible to rule solely by power. Power has to be supported by legitimacy, and legitimacy is a result in the receiving of power. Even so, legitimacy is mostly partial and never complete as it is impossible for any government to be able to obtain full support from all the citizens. Power and legitimacy is present so long as the ruler has the support of most of the citizens.


A few side points to note apart from the essay and the style of the writing: why copy essay/ writing answers and buy essays from essay mills that are of low standard, or pay a lot of money to cheat and get good answers, when you can develop your own writing skills? Do not do that. This essay can be used as a model to help you improve your writing and then you can develop your skills to write better and on your own. In addition, copying without asking yourself questions and writing without knowing the skills of essay writing will always in the long run damage one's education, so do think about that. Final disclaimer: please do not copy essays - study how to improve your English skills and learn how to write better and better. It is always better for you. More to come here on my English Language Resources site!

(References/ citations will be provided in the next post.)

English Language Resources Online