Sociology Exam 1 : Weber

Weber says that the wealthy are so financially secure that they can afford "reckless idealism"; the poor, by contrast, must focus on day-to-day survival and cannot chase idealistic dreams.

False - Weber states that "a quite reckless and unreserved political idealism is found if not exclusively at least predominantly among those strata who by virtue of their propertylessness stand entirely outside of the strata who are interested in maintaining the economic order of a given society... Either politics can be conducted 'honorifically' and then, as one usually says, by 'independent,' that is, by wealthy, men, and especially by rentiers. Or, political leadership is made accessible to propertyless men who must then be rewarded."

Unlike La Boétie, Weber does not ask "When and why do men obey?"

False - Weber states that "if the state is to exist, the dominated must obey the authority claimed by the powers that be. When and why do men obey? Upon what inner justifications and upon what external means does this domination rest?" He goes into this argument by stating "to begin with, in principle, there are three inner justifications hence basic legitimations of domination."

Domination requires obedience, not "organization"; inspiration, not administration.

False - Weber states that "organized domination, which calls for continuous administration, requires that human conduct be conditioned to obedience towards those masters who claim to be the bearers of legitimate power. On the other hand, by virtue of this obedience, organized domination requires the control of those material goods which in a given case are necessary for the use of physical violence. Thus, organized domination requires control of the personal executive staff and the material implements of administration."

The main reason that street crowds follow "revolutionary heroes," Weber says, is that they want the economy to return to normal.

False - Weber states that "the war lord's following is just as little concerned about the conditions of a normal economy as is the street crowd following of the revolutionary hero. Both live off booty, plunder, confiscations, contributions, and the imposition of worthless and compulsory means of tender, which in essence amounts to the same thing." Or in other words, thieves don't care about how the economy is doing.

Weber dismisses Trotsky's claim that states are founded on force

False - Weber states that "ultimately, one can define the modern state sociologically only in terms of the specific means peculiar to it, as to very political association, namely, the use of physical force." Further he quotes "'Every state is founded on force,' said Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk. That is indeed right. If no social institution existed which knew the use of violence, then the concept of 'state' would be eliminated..." Every government has the power of a military at its disposal.

Weber says that lawyers are too busy to enter politics professionally.

False : "The modern lawyer and modern democracy absolutely belong together. The lawyer is superior to any official. The lawyer can make cases supported by logically strong arguments. the lawyer has played an incomparably greater, and often even a dominant, role as a professional politician. [self-plug]

For Weber, charismatic leadership is new and modern; in earlier epochs, leadership was always "traditional," not charismatic.

False- There are three different pure styles of domination - Traditional, Charismatic, and legal.Traditional dominion used to be exercised by the patriarch and the patrimonial prince of yore. He fears Charismatic leadership.

Weber says that he is interested mainly in the devotion people show to law, not to the personal "charisma" of leaders.

False- Weber states that "here we are interested above all in the second of these types: domination by virtue of the devotion of those who obey purely personal 'charisma' of the 'leader.' For this is the root of the idea of a calling in its highest expression.

Politicians must choose, Weber says, between "living for" politics and "living off" politics; it is wrong to think we can do both.

False- Weber states that "there are two ways of making politics one's vocation: Either one lives 'for' politics or one lives 'off' politics. By no means is this contrast an exclusive one. The rule is, rather, that man does both, at least in thought, and certainly he also does both in practice. He who lives 'for' politics makes politics his life, in an internal sense. Either he enjoys the naked possession of the power he exerts, or he nourishes his inner balance and self-feeling by the consciousness that his life has meaning in the service of a 'cause.' In this internal sense, every sincere man who lives for a cause also lives off this cause. The distinction hence refers to a much more substantial aspect of the matter, namely, to the economic. He who strives to make politics a permanent source of income lives 'off' politics as a vocation, whereas he who does not do this lives 'for' politics. Under the dominance of the private property order, some—if you wish—very trivial preconditions must exist in order for a person to be able to live 'for' politics in this economic sense. Under normal conditions, the politician must be economically independent of the income politics can bring him. This means, quite simply, that the politician must be wealthy or must have a personal position in life which yields a sufficient income."

Weber says that city-states, demagogues and party leaders are found in the east just as much as in the west.

False- the demagogue is peculiar to the occident and especially the Mediterranean culture. Furthermore, political leadership in the form of the party leader has grown on the soil of the constitutional state, which is indigenous only to the occident.

Weber says that the state is too big to come under the power of "a single head."

False: "in the end, the modern state controls the total means of political organization, which actually come together under a single head. No single official personally owns the money he pays out, or the buildings, stores, tools, and war machine. In the contemporary 'state'--and this is essential for the concept of state--the 'separation' of the administrative staff, of the administrative officials, and of the workers from the material means of administrative organization is completed. Here the most modern development begins, and we see with our own eyes the attempt to inaugurate the expropriation of this expropriator of the political means, and therewith of political power.

Class Notes 1

Nicolae Ceaușescu Underground city His secret police, the Securitate, was responsible for mass surveillance as well as severe repression and human rights abuses within the country and he suppressed and controlled the media and press, implementing methods that were among the harshest, most restrictive and brutal in the world. Economic mismanagement due to failed oil ventures during the 1970s led to skyrocketing foreign debts for Romania. In 1982, he exported much of the country's agricultural and industrial production in an effort to repay them. The shortages that followed drastically lowered living standards, leading to heavy rationing of food, water, oil, heat, electricity, medicine and other necessities. His cult of personality experienced unprecedented elevation, followed by extensive nepotism and the intense deterioration of foreign relations, even with the Soviet Union. La Boetie predicted this Ashraf ghani - president of Afghanistan Presiding over a failed state Multiple military presences that are all legitamate A follower of Max Weber

A political group which claims but does not achieve a "monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in a given territory" cannot be seen, by Weber's criteria, as a "state."

True - Weber says that "today however we have to say that a state is a human community that claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. Not that territory is one of the characteristics of the state.

For Weber, "legitimate" means "considered legitimate."

True - Weber states that "like the political institutions historically preceding it, the state is a relation of men dominating men, a relation supported by means of legitimate (i.e. considered to be legitimate) violence. If the state is to exist, the dominated must obey the authority claimed by the powers that be." Thus, the power must be considered by someone other than the leader as legitimate, a consensus that the power is legitimate.

"Means of administration" include money, weapons, buildings, and even horses.

True - Weber states that "the power-holder must be able to count on the obedience of the staff members, officials, or whoever else they may be. The administrative means may consist of money, building, war material, vehicles, horses, or whatnot. The question is whether or not the power-holder himself directs and organizes the administration while delegating executive power to personal servants, hired officials, or personal favorites and confidants, who are non-owners, i.e. who do not use the material means of administration in their own right but are directed by the lord. The distinction runs through all administrative organizations of the past." Where all of these devises are used to maintain power.

Weber says that anarchy is the proper name for a social condition without violence

True - Weber states that if no social institutions existed which knew the use of violence, then the concept of state would be eliminated and a condition would emerge that could be designated as anarchy. Where anarchy can be defined in this sense as the absence of government and the absolute freedom of the individual.

Weber says that the domination of the old traditional patriarchs and princes was rooted in the "habitual orientation to conform."

True- "First, the authority of the 'eternal yesterday,' i.e. of the mores sanctified through the unimaginably ancient recognition and habitual orientation to conform. This is 'traditional' domination exercised by the patriarch and the patrimonial prince of yore.

Weber says that princes who "expropriated" executive power from others were the originators of the modern state.

True- "everywhere the modern state is initiated through the action of the prince. He paves the way for the expropriation of the autonomous and private bearers of executive power who stand beside him, of those who in their own right posses the means of administration warfare, and financial organization, as well as politically usable goods of all sorts. The whole process is a complete parallel to the development of the capitalist enterprise through gradual expropriation of the independent producers.

Weber says that some people seek power for the "prestige-feeling" it confers.

True- "he who is active in politics strives for power either as a means in serving other aims, ideals, or egoistic, or as power for power's sake, that is - in order to enjoy the prestige feeling that power gives