Why do we insist on confusing despotism with tyranny? let us define the right to resistance.

Abstract

This article proposes two things: for one it demonstrates that we have forgotten a distinction between these two «conceptual terms» which was clear in the past; for the other, it attempts to understand at which moment in history the confusion occurred and why. As for their restoration into contemporary political vocabulary, that is not the question. This work would simply like to encourage people to reflect on the political terminology inherited from tradition, on the correct use of concepts and of their definitions, in order to reintegrate political vocabulary and render it more useful in decrypting contemporary reality, which remains often complex and even undecipherable. Following the most reliable sources, one can thus formulate the distinction between two terms or concepts: despotism is a form of government that, while remaining authoritarian and arbitrary, remains legitimate, in other words legal in certain countries and historical situations; while tyranny, in addition to constituting an arbitrary and authoritarian government, is in every case (country and historical situation) both illegitimate and illegal, for it is exercised not only without or against the consent of citizens, but in contempt of fundamental human rights.