Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T09:27:16.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legitimacy and Power in the Soviet Union Through Socialist Ritual

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Christel Lane
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Every political system must secure compliance with its commands on the part of the ruled; the methods applied to achieve this vary from society to society and within societies over time. One way of gaining compliance is for political elites to establish the legitimacy of the political system, of their position within it, and of the commands that are issued. Political power can be said to be legitimate when, in the words of Sternberger, it is exercised both with a consciousness on the part of the elite that it has a right to govern and with some recognition by the ruled of that right. Both this consciousness of the right to govern and its acknowledgement by the ruled is derived from some source of authorization which may change over time. This paper will focus on the conscious attempts of Soviet political elites from the early sixties onwards to change their strategy of gaining compliance by reducing reliance on coercion and strengthening political legitimacy. It will draw attention to their efforts to develop a new source of authorization and to employ a new legitimation procedure. In developing the theoretical argument the Weberian typology of legitimate rule will be employed, and this approach to the topic will be contrasted with that adopted by T. H. Rigby in two recent publications.

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 207 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Sternberger, D., ‘Legitimacy’, International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 2nd edn, Vol. 9 (New York: Macmillan and Free Press, 1968), p. 244.Google Scholar

2 Weber, M., The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1947), pp. 124–5.Google Scholar

3 Rigby, T. H., ‘A Conceptual Approach to Authority, Power and Policy in the Soviet Union’, in Rigby, T. H., Brown, A. and Reddaway, P., eds, Authority, Power and Policy in the USSR (London: Macmillan, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rigby, T. H., ‘Political Legitimacy, Weber and Communist Mono-organisational Systems’, in Rigby, T. H. and Fehér, Ferene, eds, Political Legitimation in Communist States (London: Macmillan, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 For details of this system of rituals, see Lane, C., The Rites of Rulers (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981).Google Scholar

5 Rigby, , ‘Political Legitimacy, Weber and Communist Mono-organisational systems’, p. 4.Google Scholar

6 Rigby, , ‘Political Legitimacy, Weber and Communist Mono-organisational systems’, pp. 10 ff.Google Scholar

7 Bauman, Z., ‘Officialdom and Class; Bases of Inequality in Socialist Society’, Parkin, F., ed., The Social Analysis of Class Structure (London: Tavistock, 1977).Google Scholar

8 Teckenberg, W., Die Soziale Struktur der Sowjetischen Arbeiterklasse im internationalen Vergleich (The Social Structure of the Soviet Working Class in International Comparison), (Munich-Vienna: Oldenbourg Verlag, 1977).Google Scholar

9 Marcus, M., ‘Overt and Covert Modes of Legitimation in East European Societies,’Google Scholar in Rigby, and Fehér, , eds, Political Legitimation and Communist States.Google Scholar

10 Brunner, G., ‘Legitimacy Doctrines and Legitimation Procedures in East European Systems’Google Scholar, in Rigby, and Fehér, , eds, Political Legitimation in Communist States.Google Scholar

11 This analysis concurs on many points with Heller's, A. in ‘Phases of Legitimation in Soviet-type Societies’Google Scholar, in Rigby, and Fehér, , eds, Political Legitimation in Communist StatesGoogle Scholar, although it was developed quite independently from it and prior to reading her article.

12 Kampars, P. P. and Zakovich, N. M., Sovetskaya grazhdanskaya obryadnost' (Soviel Civic Ritual) (Moscow: Mysl', 1967), p. 182.Google Scholar

13 Heller, , ‘Phases of Legitimation’, p. 58.Google Scholar

14 Mitchell, G. D., ed., A Dictionary of Sociology (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968), p. 15.Google Scholar

15 Rudnev, V. A., Sovetskie obychai i obryady (Soviet Customs and Rituals), (Lenigrad: Lenizdat, 1974), p. 119.Google Scholar

16 Lane, , The Rites of Rulers, pp. 153–84.Google Scholar

17 For details see Lane, , The Rites of Rulers, pp. 214ff.Google Scholar

18 Nashi Prazdniki (Our Holidays), (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Politicheskoi Literatury, 1977), p. 28.Google Scholar

19 Rigby, , ‘A Conceptual Approach to Authority’, p. 21.Google Scholar

20 Medvedev, Zh., Andropov (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1983).Google Scholar

21 See, for example Kampars, and Zakovich, , Sovetskaya grazhdanskaya obryadnost'Google Scholar, and, more recently, Zurmakulov, V. M. and Sapronov, P. A., ‘Trudovye prazdniki kak element sotsialisticheskoi kul'tury’, Sotsiologicheskie IssledovaniyaGoogle Scholar, (‘Labour holidays as an element of Socialist culture’, Sociological Studies), IV (1982), 117–20.Google Scholar