POWER In politics and social science, power is the ability to influence the behavior of people.

The term authority is often used for power perceived as legitimate by the social structure. Power can be seen as evil or unjust, but the exercise of power is accepted as endemic to humans as social beings. In the corporate environment, power is often expressed as upward or downward. With downward power, a company's superior influences subordinates. When a company exerts upward power, it is the subordinates who influence the decisions of the leader (Greiner & Schein, 1988) INFLUENCE Political influence is the ability of private individuals and groups to influence, condition, shape, and thereby control the authoritative decisions and actions of those who possess the formal-legal authority to take these decisions and actions. The individuals and groups exercising political influence do not hold the relevant government offices and therefore do not possess the formal-legal authority to make the official governmental decisions they seek to shape and control; but they do have and exercise the ability to shape and control the decisionmaking behavior of those officeholders in the government who do possess the formal-legal authority to make the relevant decisions on public policy. Such individuals and groups exercise significant influence over particular policy decisions made by particular government offices and institutions. These individuals and groups have acquired and are exercising that form of political power called "political influence." A private individual or organization possesses and exercises political influence to the extent that its interests and demands have to be taken into account by the government--or an office or institution of the government-when making and carrying out decisions on public policy. Political influence, in short, is the form of political power exercised by those who do not possess the formallegal authority to make and enforce particular governmental decisions on public policy, but have and utilize the ability to condition, modify, and control the official decisionmaking behavior of those in government office who do possess the authority to make and implement the decisions. LEGITIMACY Political legitimacy exists in a political community, or society, when most citizens (1) perceive the government as having the moral as well as legal right to make and enforce decisions binding on the whole community, (2) see the decisions themselves as being legitimate, and (3) consider it the duty of all citizens to voluntarily comply with these decisions, thereby substantially reducing the government's need to employ armed force or expend other resources to compel or induce compliance. The existing political regime, or system of government, is considered to be legitimate because, according to widespread and deep-seated feelings and beliefs among the members of the political society, those persons occupying the offices and institutions comprising the government obtained their positions by legitimate means and therefore have the moral and legal right to hold these formal governmental positions and to exercise the powers legally assigned to the positions. Absent, under normal conditions, are efforts of substantial segments of the society to employ force and violence--armed insurrection, or rebellion--in order to overthrow the political regime, to prevent effective enforcement of the government's decisions, or to secede from the existing political community and form a separate and independent community and governmental system of their own. In political science, legitimacy is the popular acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a rgime. Whereas authority denotes a specific position in an established government, the term legitimacy denotes a system of government wherein government denotes sphere of influence. Political legitimacy is considered a basic condition for governing, without which a government will suffer legislative deadlock(s) and

collapse. In political systems where this is not the case, unpopular rgimes survive because they are considered legitimate by a small, influential lite.[1] In Chinese political philosophy, since the historical period of the Zhou Dynasty (1046256 BC), the political legitimacy of a ruler and government was derived from the Mandate of Heaven, and that unjust rulers who lose said mandate, therefore lose the right to rule the people. Types of legitimacy

Legitimacy is a value whereby something or someone is recognized and accepted as right and proper. In political science, legitimacy usually is understood as the popular acceptance and recognition, by the public, of the authority of a governing rgime, whereby authority has political power through consent and mutual understandings, not coercion. The three types of political legitimacy are: traditional, charismatic, and rationallegal. I. Traditional legitimacy derives from societal custom and habit that emphasize the history of the authority of tradition. Traditionalists understand this form of rule as historically accepted, hence its continuity, because it is the way society has always been. Therefore, the institutions of traditional government usually are historically continuous, as in monarchy and tribalism. II. Charismatic legitimacy derives from the ideas and personal charisma of the leader, a man or woman whose authoritative persona charms and psychologically dominates the people of the society to agreement with the governments rgime and rule. A charismatic government usually features weak political and administrative institutions, because they derive authority from the persona of The Leader, and usually disappear without him or her in power. Yet, a government derived from charismatic legitimacy might continue if the charismatic leader has a successor. III. Rational-legal legitimacy derives from a system of institutional procedure, wherein government institutions establish and enforce law and order in the public interest. Therefore, it is through public trust that the government will abide the law that confers rational-legal legitimacy.[6] Forms of legitimacy Numinous legitimacy In a theocracy, government legitimacy derives from the spiritual authority of a god or a goddess.

In Ancient Egypt (ca. 3150 BC) the legitimacy of the dominion of a Pharaoh (godking) was theologically established by doctrine that posited the pharaoh as the Egyptian patron god Horus, son of Osiris.

In the Roman Catholic Church, the priesthood derives its legitimacy from a divine source; the Church doctrines establish that the papacy based upon Jesus Christs designation of St. Peter as head of the earthly church, thus the sanctity and legitimacy of each pope. Civil legitimacy

The political legitimacy of a civil government derives from agreement among the autonomous constituent institutions legislative, judicial, executive combined for the national common good; legitimate government office as a public trust, is expressed by means of public elections.

AUTHORITY In government, the term authority is often used interchangeably with power. However, their meanings differ: while power is defined as "the ability to influence somebody to do something that he/she would not have done", authority refers to a claim of legitimacy, the justification and right to exercise that power. For example, while a mob has the power to punish a criminal, for example bylynching, people who believe in the rule of law consider that only a court of law has the authority to punish a criminal. Political authority is governmental power, the formal-legal authority of the public officeholders and institutions comprising the government to make and carry out decisions on public policy--to adopt and implement the authoritative decisions that have the force of law and are binding on all members of the society. Political authority is the legally established power of the government to make rules and issue commands and to compel obedience to them, making use of physical force and coercion when deemed necessary. Political authority, in short, is the legal right--the legally established power--to govern society. The political authority exercised by a government may be legitimate or illegitimate. b. Legitimate Political Authority. If the political authority exercised by a government is willingly and widely accepted by the population comprising the society the government endeavors to control, that government will not have to rely entirely or almost entirely on naked force to maintain order and obtain compliance with its decisions. Under these conditions, the authority exercised by the government is legitimate, and the government itself is legitimate. Legitimate political authority is the legitimate right of the government to govern the entire society, the widely recognized right of the government to adopt and enforce public-policy decisions for and in the name of the entire political community. Legitimate political authority is governmental power derived from willing and widespread acceptance by the citizenry of the right of the organs of their government to make rules and issue commands and to expect obedience to them. Legitimate political authority, in short, is governmental power based on political legitimacy. POLITICAL THOUGHT The history of political thought dates back to antiquity. The political history of the world, and thus the history of political thinking by man, stretches up through the Medieval period and the Renaissance. In the Age of Enlightenment, political entities expanded from basic systems of self-governance and monarchy to the complex democratic and communist systems that exist of the Industrialized and the Modern Era. In parallel, political systems have expanded from vaguely defined frontier-type boundaries, to the definite boundaries existing today. Antiquity As an academic discipline, Western political philosophy has its origins in ancient Greek society, when citystates were experimenting with various forms of political organization including monarchy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, and democracy. One of the first, extremely important classical works of political philosophy is Plato's Republic, which was followed by Aristotle's Politics, both created in the context of Athenian democracy. Roman political philosophy was influenced by Greek schools of thought, particularly Stoicism, in conjunction with the Roman tradition of republicanism, as evidenced by the political philosophy of the Roman statesman Cicero.

Independently, Confucius, Mencius, Mozi and the Legalist school in China, and the Laws of Manu and Chanakya in India, all sought to find means of restoring political unity and political stability; in the case of the former three through the cultivation of virtue, in the last by imposition of discipline. In India, Chanakya, in his Arthashastra, developed a viewpoint which foreshadowed both the Legalists and Niccol Machiavelli. Ancient Chinese and Indian civilizations resembled Greek civilization in that there was a unified culture divided into rival states. In the case of China, philosophers found themselves obliged to confront social and political breakdown, and seek solutions to the crisis that confronted their entire civilization. The early Christian philosophy of Augustine of Hippo was by and large a rewrite of Plato in a Christian context. The main change that Christian thought brought was to moderate the Stoicism and theory of justice of the Roman world, and emphasize the role of the state in applying mercy as a moral example. Augustine also preached that one was not a member of his or her city, but was either a citizen of the City of God (Civitas Dei) or the City of Man (Civitas Terrena). Augustine's City of God is an influential work of this period that refuted the thesis, after the First Sack of Rome, that the Christian view could be realized on Earth at all - a view many Christian Romans held. Medieval Islam The rise of Islam, based on both the Qur'an and Muhammad strongly altered the power balances and perceptions of origin of power in the Mediterranean region. Early Islamic philosophy emphasized an inexorable link between science and religion, and the process of ijtihad to find truth - in effect allphilosophy was "political" as it had real implications for governance. This view was challenged by the Mutazilite philosophers, who held a more Greek view and were supported by secular aristocracy who sought freedom of action independent of the Caliphate. By the late medieval period, however, theAsharite view of Islam had in general triumphed. Islamic political philosophy, was, indeed, rooted in the very sources of Islam, i.e. the Qur'an and the Sunnah, the words and practices of Muhammad. However, in the Western thought, it is generally supposed that it was a specific area peculiar merely to the great philosophers of Islam: al-Kindi (Alkindus), al-Farabi (Abunaser), bn Sina (Avicenna), Ibn Bajjah (Avempace), Ibn Rushd(Averroes), and Ibn Khaldun. The political conceptions of Islam such as kudrah, sultan, ummah, cemaa -and even the "core" terms of the Qur'an, i.e. ibada, din, rab and ilah- is taken as the basis of an analysis. Hence, not only the ideas of the Muslim political philosophers but also many other jurists and ulama posed political ideas and theories. For example, the ideas of the Khawarij in the very early years of Islamic history on Khilafa and Ummah, or that of Shia Islam on the concept of Imamah are considered proofs of political thought. The clashes between the Ehl-i Sunna andShia in the 7th and 8th centuries had a genuine political character. The 14th century Arab scholar Ibn Khaldun is considered one of the greatest political theorists. The British philosopher-anthropologist Ernest Gellner considered Ibn Khaldun's definition ofgovernment, "an institution which prevents injustice other than such as it commits itself", the best in the history of political theory.[1] Medieval Europe[edit] Medieval political philosophy in Europe was heavily influenced by Christian thinking. It had much in common with the Islamic thinking in that the Roman Catholics also subordinated philosophy totheology. Perhaps the most influential political philosopher of medieval Europe was St. Thomas Aquinas who helped reintroduce Aristotle's works, which had only been preserved by the Muslims, along with the commentaries of Averroes. Aquinas's use of them set the agenda for scholastic political philosophy, dominated European thought for centuries. European Renaissance During the Renaissance secular political philosophy began to emerge after about a century of theological political thought in Europe. One of the most influential works during this burgeoning period was Niccol Machiavelli's The Prince, written between 151112 and published in 1532, after Machiavelli's death. That work,

as well as The Discourses, a rigorous analysis of the classical period, did much to influence modern political thought in the West. A minority (including Jean-Jacques Rousseau) could interpret The Prince as a satire meant to give the Medici after their recapture of Florence and their subsequent expulsion of Machiavelli from Florence.[2] Though the work was written for the di Medici family in order to perhaps influence them to free him from exile, Machiavelli supported the Republic of Florence rather than the oligarchy of the di Medici family. At any rate, Machiavelli presents a pragmatic and somewhat consequentialist view of politics, whereby good and evil are mere means used to bring about an end, i.e. the secure and powerful state. Thomas Hobbes, well known for his theory of the social contract, goes on to expand this view at the start of the 17th century during the English Renaissance. John Locke in particular exemplified this new age of political theory with his work Two Treatises of Government. In it Locke proposes a state of nature theory that directly compliments his conception of how political development occurs and how it can be founded through contractual obligation. Locke stood to refute Sir Robert Filmer's paternally founded political theory in favor of a natural system based on nature in a particular given system. European Age of Enlightenment During the Enlightenment period, new theories about what the human was and is and about the definition of reality and the way it was perceived, along with the discovery of other societies in the Americas, and the changing needs of political societies (especially in the wake of the English Civil War, the American Revolution and the French Revolution) led to new questions and insights by such thinkers as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Montesquieu and John Locke. These theorists were driven by two basic questions: one, by what right or need do people form states; and two, what the best form for a state could be. These fundamental questions involved a conceptual distinction between the concepts of "state" and "government." It was decided that "state" would refer to a set of enduring institutions through which power would be distributed and its use justified. The term "government" would refer to a specific group of people who occupied, and indeed still occupy the institutions of the state, and create the laws and ordinances by which the people, themselves included, would be bound. This conceptual distinction continues to operate in political science, although some political scientists, philosophers, historians and cultural anthropologists have argued that most political action in any given society occurs outside of its state, and that there are societies that are not organized into states which nevertheless must be considered in political terms. Political and economic relations were drastically influenced by these theories as the concept of the guild was subordinated to the theory of free trade, and Roman Catholic dominance of theology was increasingly challenged by Protestant churches subordinate to each nation-state, which also (in a fashion the Roman Catholic Church often decried angrily) preached in the vulgar or native language of each region. In the Ottoman Empire, these ideological reforms did not take place and these views did not integrate into common thought until much later. As well, there was no spread of this doctrine within the New World and the advanced civilizations of the Aztec, Maya, Inca, Mohican, Delaware, Huron and especially the Iroquois. TheIroquois philosophy in particular gave much to Christian thought of the time and in many cases actually inspired some of the institutions adopted in the United States: for example, Benjamin Franklin was a great admirer of some of the methods of the Iroquois Confederacy, and much of early American literature emphasized the political philosophy of the natives.[citation needed] Industrialization and the Modern Era

The industrial revolution produced a parallel revolution in political thought. Urbanization and capitalism greatly reshaped society. During this same period, the socialist movement began to form. In the mid-19th century, Marxism was developed, and socialism in general gained increasing popular support, mostly from the

urban working class. By the late 19th century, socialism and trade unions were established members of the political landscape. In addition, the various branches of anarchism and syndicalism also gained some prominence, particularly in Spain and France. In the Anglo-American world, antiimperialism and pluralism began gaining currency around the start of the 20th century. World War I was a watershed event in human history. The Russian Revolution of 1917 (and similar, albeit less successful, revolutions in many other European countries) brought communism - and in particular the political theory of Leninism, but also on a smaller level Luxemburgism (gradually) - on the world stage. At the same time, social democratic parties won elections and formed governments for the first time, often as a result of the introduction of universal suffrage.[citation needed] However, a group of central European economists led by Austrians Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek identified the collectivist underpinnings to the various new socialist and fascist doctrines of government power as being different brands of politicaltotalitarianism.[3][4]