Whose Authority? What Legitimacy
Global Norms, Indian Traditions, and the Conceptual Crisis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20081707 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Keerthiraj Keerthiraj (0000-0002-2536-8579, Nitte University), Prashanth S P (0000-0002-6812-3950, G.S. Science, Arts And Commerce College), Ashutosh Misra (0009-0009-0476-8125, Alliance University), Apoorva Misra (Alliance University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Pages | 1-22 |
| Publication date | 2026-05-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | CHAPTER |
| Venue | Digital Governance, Democracy, and Inclusion in Developing Countries (SOURCE_BOOK) |
| Publisher | IGI Global Scientific Publishing (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.4018/979-8-2600-1618-3.ch001 |
| OpenAlex | W7160062587 |
| ISBN | 9798260016183 |
| Language | EN |
The modern vocabulary of authority and legitimacy pretends to universality while carrying the weight of its parochial European past. From Hobbes's Leviathan to Habermas's public sphere, theories fashioned in Europe parade as global truths. Yet, when imposed upon India, they obscure more than they illuminate. Colonial consciousness entrenched this distortion, making Indians see themselves through alien eyes. Against this backdrop, the chapter retrieves India's civilizational grammar—dharma, seva, rajadharma, and plural community orders—as alternative grounds for legitimacy. Authority here rests not on a contract among atomized individuals, but on duties within a cosmic and moral order. The aim is not civilizational chauvinism but conceptual pluralism: a call for political theory that allows multiple traditions to speak in their own voices, rather than repeating the conceit of one history masquerading as universal truth
Alien · Chauvinism · Legitimacy · Plural · Political philosophy · Politics · Proposition · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Indian and Buddhist Studies · South Asian Studies and Conflicts
| Highly cited | No |
|---|