Legitimacy is not defined by individuals, nor by their conduct. It is not a transactional benefit to be exchanged for personal gain.
Legitimacy is a fundamental principle. It embodies the state, sovereignty, and the national framework itself.
Loyalty to one's country is, by definition, loyalty to its legitimate institutions—and vice versa.
Legitimacy represents an uncompromised right, free from ambiguity or qualification.
One either stands with legitimacy—regardless of the individuals who temporarily represent it—or becomes aligned with the militia. In this context, neutrality or refusing to take a position is, in essence, a rejection of national responsibility.
Many argue that the legitimate government is corrupt, it is defended only by those who benefit from it, it is weak, it is dependent on others, or it lacks independent decision-making. These criticisms may contain elements of truth and deserve serious discussion. Yet they do not invalidate the broader principle of legitimacy itself. One does not abandon one's homeland simply because it falls short of expectations.
The fundamental question remains: Where does your allegiance lie?
Standing with legitimacy against armed groups, militias, and narrow political projects is the true measure of national commitment, regardless of what the state may or may not provide in return. In that sense, legitimacy is the expression of a nation's living conscience.
There is a clear distinction between criticizing the legitimate government—its officials, policies, or decisions, even harshly—while remaining committed to the values and institutions it represents, and elevating an armed group to the status of the state simply because it is more forceful or more capable of imposing its will. If coercion alone becomes the standard of legitimacy, what happens if that same force also claims to be more just?
Today, people generally fall into four broad categories regarding legitimacy:
- Those who stand with legitimacy and the idea of the state, whether or not they personally benefit from it. They support the principle while openly criticizing its shortcomings. They are the nationalists.
- Those who remain neutral, waiting to see who prevails while justifying their inaction with abstract theories. They avoid commitment and should reflect on the depth of their national responsibility.
- Those whose support for legitimacy depends entirely on personal benefit. Their loyalty is conditional, and their positions are shaped by self-interest rather than principle.
- Those who turn against legitimacy after once representing it or benefiting from it, simply because their interests are no longer served. They abandon principle when personal gain disappears.
