A crisis of legitimacy

Since the inception of centralized authority, the foremost challenge for those in governance has been to attain legitimacy. Even when violence has been the decisive means of achieving a political end, legitimacy remains the cornerstone upon which governance sustains itself. The enduring need for legitimacy transcends time and culture. Whether ascribed to divine will, the collective will of the people, acts of heroism, or tests of character, this notion recurs in diverse mythical and historical narratives.

For instance, the legend of King Arthur and the sword Excalibur illustrates the fascination in popular imagination with the idea that a ruler’s mandate depends on virtuous character and a commitment to upholding justice and order in the realm. Excalibur serves as a test of leadership, with only the true king capable of drawing the sword from its stone.

Similarly, in ancient China, the concept of the Mandate of Heaven justified dynastic rule and explained dynastic changes. The emperor’s legitimacy rested on ruling virtuously and aligning with divine will. Failure to govern justly or facing natural disasters was interpreted as the loss of the Mandate of Heaven, leading to a claim to the legitimacy of a new dynasty. 

Despite its many strengths, democratic legitimacy can be fragile and is endangered by electoral fraud, erosion of civil liberties, and the prevalence of corruption. 

- Javed Hassan 

In post-war ex-colonial states, many autocratic regimes, such as those led by Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), Suharto in Indonesia, and Assad in Syria, to name a few, relied heavily on repression to maintain power. However, to legitimize their claim to represent the collective will of the people, they organized sham elections.

Likewise, in communist states like the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin or Cuba under Castro, the Communist Party claimed, albeit questionably, to represent the collective will of the people. It presented itself as the vanguard of the proletariat, destined to guide society inevitably toward socialism. Fascist states have also derived legitimacy through ideological indoctrination emphasizing nationalism and a unified, homogeneous nation, often combined with charismatic leadership and manipulation of mass sentiment.

These methods may work for a while, but over time citizens rejecting the legitimacy of autocratic one-party rule or one-man dictatorship inevitably rise to demand political pluralism and economic liberalization. This was evidenced by the collapse of the Soviet Union and other communist regimes in Eastern Europe, as well as the Arab Spring uprisings across the Middle East and North Africa.

In contrast, legitimacy in democratic states is solely derived from the consent of the governed. Democracies are founded on the principle of popular sovereignty, where political power resides with the people. Through free and fair elections, citizens choose their representatives, who govern with the consent of the electorate. The legitimacy of democratic governments is bolstered by adherence to the rule of law, protection of human rights, devolution of power, and political accountability.

Examining the relationship between legitimacy and economic development, prominent economists like Douglas North, Kenneth Arrow, and Daron Acemoglu propose that political legitimacy with a robust democratic institutional framework reduces transaction costs and uncertainty, thereby facilitating trade and market activities. Transparent decision-making processes that accurately reflect the preferences of the populace, political stability, and respect for property rights contribute to a favorable business environment, attracting investment and promoting economic growth.

It is likely for these reasons that East Asian Tiger economies like South Korea, Indonesia, and Taiwan, despite achieving a measure of economic progress under autocratic rule, transitioned to functioning democracies. The transition was accelerated after the East Asian Crisis, when the shortcomings of lacking institutional transparency became all too apparent. To paraphrase the Marxian economist Richard David Wolff, successful capitalism requires democracy like bread requires yeast.

However, despite its many strengths, democratic legitimacy can be fragile and is endangered by electoral fraud, erosion of civil liberties, and the prevalence of corruption. In Pakistan, since its inception, the persistent challenges to the rule of law and democracy have led to disillusionment among many Pakistanis, manifesting in a crisis of legitimacy. The widely perceived flaws in the February 8 general elections further undermined public trust in the system, which was already in short supply. The inability of the judiciary to play an adequately robust role has dented confidence in that vital pillar of checks and balances.

The government’s response in resorting to repressive measures may succeed in quelling dissent and consolidating power in the short term but also aggravates the undercurrents of political instability. The erosion of the legitimacy of state institutions to a point where there is a breakdown of the social contract between the people and the state must be avoided at all costs. Key stakeholders need to take stock and walk the country back from the brink.

- Javed Hassan has worked in both the profit and non-profit sectors in London, Hong Kong, and Karachi. He tweets as @javedhassan.