aaaaCzęsto usiłujemy ukryć nasze uczucia przed tymi, którzy powinni je poznać.aaaa [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Max Weber’s political sociology
Max Weber (1864-1920) was born in Erfurt, Prussia (present day Germany). Weber’s father
was greatly involved in public life and so his home was constantly immersed in both politics
and academia. Weber and his brother thrived in this intellectual atmosphere. In 1882, he
enrolled at the University of Heidelberg, but after two years left to fulfill his year of military
service at Strassburg. After his release from the military, Weber finished his studies at the
University of Berlin, earning his doctorate in 1889 and joining the University of Berlin’s
faculty, lecturing and consulting for the government. Weber suffered a mental breakdown in
1897 that left him unable to work for five years. In 1905 he published his most famous work,
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. He is considered the father of modern
sociology.
Political sociology looks at various intersections between politics and society. It focuses on
the problems of state and society relations and develops empirical studies of the exercise of
power both within and between states. It also analyzes the role of political institutions in
social development. Bottomore, a British sociologist popularized that “political sociology is
the study of power. One studies the political and social explanation of power.”
The starting point for Weber’s political analysis was the important distinction between power
as authority and power as coercion. For Weber, authority is the legitimate use of power.
Individuals accept and act upon orders that are given to them because they believe that to do
so is right. In coercion, on the other hand, others force people into an action, often by the
threat of violence, and this is always regarded as illegitimate.
For Max Weber, there are three ‘ideal types’ of legitimate rule. He pioneered a path towards
understanding how authority is legitimated as a belief system. His essay “The three types of
legitimate rule”, translated in English and published posthumously in 1958, is the clearest
explanation of his theory. These authority types are:

Traditional authority is legitimated by the sanctity of tradition. The ability and right to
rule is passed down, often through heredity. It does not change overtime, does not
facilitate social change, tends to be irrational and inconsistent, and perpetuates the
status quo. In fact, Weber states: “The creation of new law opposite traditional norms
is deemed impossible in principle.” Traditional authority is typically embodied in
feudalism or patrimonialism. In a purely patriarchal structure, “the servants are
completely and personally dependent upon the lord”, while in an estate system (i.e.
feudalism), “the servants are not personal servants of the lord but independent men”
(Weber 1958, 4). But, in both cases the system of authority does not change or
evolve.

Charismatic authority is found in a leader whose mission and vision inspire others. It
is based upon the perceived extraordinary characteristics of an individual. Weber saw
a charismatic leader as the head of a new social movement, and one instilled with
divine or supernatural powers, such as a religious prophet. Weber seemed to favor
charismatic authority, and spent a good deal of time discussing it. In a study of
charisma and religion, Riesebrodt (1999) argues that Weber also thought charisma
played a strong - if not integral - role in traditional authority systems. Thus, Weber’s
favor for charismatic authority was particularly strong, especially in focusing on what
happened to it with the death or decline of a charismatic leader. Charismatic authority
is “routinized” in a number of ways according to Weber: orders are traditionalized, the
staff or followers change into legal or “estate-like” (traditional) staff, or the meaning of
charisma itself may undergo change.

Legal-rational authority is empowered by a formalistic belief in the content of the law
(legal) or natural law (rationality). Obedience is not given to a specific individual
leader - whether traditional or charismatic - but a set of uniform principles. Weber
thought the best example of legal-rational authority was a bureaucracy (political or
economic). This form of authority is frequently found in the modern state, city
governments, private and public corporations, and various voluntary associations. In
fact, Weber stated that the “development of the modern state is identical indeed with
that of modern officialdom and bureaucratic organizations just as the development of
modern capitalism is identical with the increasing bureaucratization of economic
enterprise (Weber 1958, 3).
The three authority types may be re-enforced by traits that differentiate them from other
types. Traditional authority is impersonal (unlike charisma) and non-rational (unlike legal-
rational). Charismatic authority is dynamic (unlike tradition) and non-rational (again, unlike
legal-rational). Finally, legal-rational authority is dynamic (unlike tradition) and impersonal
(unlike charisma). The likelihood of retaining a particular type of authority may depend on the
ability of that authority system to retain the traits that make it unique and reject the traits that
make it more conducive to another authority type.
Weber's examination of legitimate authority led him to define an ideal-type bureaucracy. It is
a useful model by which to measure other forms of administration. This model contains the
following characteristics:

The organization is in the form of a hierarchy

Its operations are governed by a system of abstract rules

The ideal officials conduct their tasks without friendship or favour to any clients

All bureaucrats have a fixed number of recorded duties

Employment in the bureaucracy is based upon qualifications

From a purely technical point of view, this form of administration has the highest
degree of efficiency
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]