Premium
Symbols, Stratagems, and Legitimacy in Political Analysis *
Author(s) -
Eriksen Erik Oddvar
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
scandinavian political studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.65
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-9477
pISSN - 0080-6757
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9477.1987.tb00073.x
Subject(s) - legitimacy , sincerity , politics , rhetoric , argumentation theory , epistemology , sociology , symbolic power , power (physics) , loyalty , meaning (existential) , sophistication , perspective (graphical) , the symbolic , symbol (formal) , positive economics , political science , law and economics , linguistics , social science , law , philosophy , psychology , mathematics , economics , physics , geometry , quantum mechanics , psychoanalysis
This article evaluates the new conception of symbols and rhetoric in organization theory (March and Olsen). It is a perspective that departs from the traditional instrumental view in political science (cf. Edelman}. This reorientation postulates the close connection between legitimacy and symbols, viewing symbolic language as a way of producing social integration. However, this perspective neglects the crucial aspect of legitimacy, i.e., a moral justification of power. Legitimacy concerns the cognitive and rational aspect of political argumentation rather than the expressive and symbolic aspect. Symbols, then, raise distinct analytical problems that refer to the authenticity and sincerity aspect of behaviour. Politics has to do with the just allocation of welfare, and symbols signify meaning and loyalty Thai governmental policy is merely symbolic, then, denotes that it does not produce any real effects.