The term is generally applied to behavior within civil governments, but politics has been observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. It consists of social relations involving authority or power, the regulation of political units, and the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply social policy.
Political sociology was traditionally concerned with how social trends, dynamics, and structures of domination affect formal political processes. It also explored how various social forces work together to change political policies.
From this perspective there are three major theoretical frameworks: pluralism, elite or managerial theory, and class analysis which overlaps with Marxist analysis.
Pluralism sees politics as a contest between competing interest groups. It holds the view that politics and decision making are located mostly in the framework of government, but many non-governmental groups use their resources to exert influence.
Groups of individuals try to maximize their interests. There are multiple lines of power that shift as power is a continuous bargaining process between competing groups.
Elite or managerial theory is sometimes called a state-centered approach. It also seeks to describe and explain power relationships in contemporary society. The theory posits that a small minority—consisting of members of the economic elite and policy-planning networks—holds the most power. Social class analysis emphasizes the political power of capitalist elites. It can be split into two parts. The power structure approach focuses on determining who rules, while the structuralist approach emphasizes the way a capitalist economy operates, allowing and encouraging the state to do some things but not others.
Contemporary political sociology is concerned with the play of power and politics across societies, which includes, but is not restricted to relations between the state and society. In part, this is a product of the growing complexity of social relations, the impact of social movement organizing, and the relative weakening of the state via globalization. Political sociology is as much focused on micro questions the formation of identity through social interaction; the politics of knowledge , as it is on macro questions how to capture and use state power.
Power is frequently defined as the ability to influence the behavior of others with or without resistance. Power is frequently defined by political scientists as the ability to influence the behavior of others with or without resistance.
The term authority is often used for power perceived as legitimate by the social structure. Power can be seen as evil or unjust, but the exercise of power is accepted as endemic to humans as social beings.
The use of power need not involve coercion, force or the threat of force. The sociological examination of power involves discovering and describing the relative strengths: equal or unequal; stable or subject to periodic change.
Sociologists usually analyze relationships in which parties have relatively equal or nearly equal power in terms of constraint rather than of power. Thus power has a connotation of unilateralism. If this were not so, then all relationships could be described in terms of power, and its meaning would be lost. Power may derive from a number of sources, including social class material wealth can equal power , resource currency material items such as money, property, food , personal or group charisma, ascribed power acting on perceived or assumed abilities, whether these bear testing or not , social influence of tradition compare ascribed power , etc.
People use more than rewards, threats and information to influence others. In everyday situations, people use a variety of power tactics to push or prompt others into particular action.
There are many examples of power tactics that are quite common and employed everyday. Some of these tactics include bullying, collaboration, complaining, criticizing, demanding, disengaging, evading, humor, inspiring, manipulating, negotiating, socializing and supplicating. Recent experimental psychology suggests that the more power one has the less one takes on the perspective of others, implying that the powerful have less empathy.
Powerful people are also more likely to take action. In one example, more powerful people turned off an irritatingly close fan twice as much as less powerful people. A rally of the trade union UNISON in Oxford during a strike : Labor unions attempt to bring more balance into the relationship between employers and employees by forming large coalitions of employees who, by working together, can exert power of their own.
Give examples of the three types of authority as defined by Max Weber and what distinguishes all of them from coercion or force.
Authority is the legitimate or socially approved use of power that a person or a group holds over another. Legitimacy is vital to the notion of authority; legitimacy is the main means by which authority is distinguished from more general notions of power. Power can be exerted by the use of force or violence. Authority, by contrast, depends on subordinate groups consenting to the use of power wielded by superior groups.
These have sometimes been translated to English as types of authority, because domination is not seen as a political concept. Weber defined domination authority as the chance of commands being obeyed by a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled.
The first type discussed by Weber is rational-legal authority. It is a form of authority with legitimacy that depends on formal rules and established laws of the state, which are usually written down and are often very complex. The second type of authority is traditional authority, which derives from long-established customs, habits, and social structures.
When power passes from one generation to another, it is known as traditional authority. The third form of authority is charismatic authority. Here, the charisma of the individual or the leader plays an important role. Weber states that legitimacy distinguishes authority from coercion, force, power, leadership, persuasion, and influence. Superiors, he states, feel that they have a right to issue commands; subordinates perceive an obligation to obey.
The degree to which these rights and obligations are felt is based on the perceived legitimacy of the authority. A well-established, respected, democratically elected government typically wields more authority than an ad hoc, temporary, or corrupt government. Max Weber, in Politics as a Vocation , conceived of the state as a monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force.
This definition of the state has figured prominently in philosophy of law and in political philosophy throughout the twentieth century. Ownership of territory is another characteristic that Weber deemed prerequisite for a state. Such a monopoly, according to Weber, must occur via a process of legitimation.
The right of self-defense is a private form of legitimate violence that is recognized by the state. A Helicopter Operated by Blackwater Worldwide : Blackwater Worldwide is private military company that contracts with the United States to provide military services. States may maintain a monopoly on legitimate violence but outsource its execution by contracting with private parties such as Blackwater.
A police officer : States maintain a monopoly on violence, exercised by police officers. Lukes sees power in three forms: decision-making, agenda setting and thought control. Decision-making — associated with liberal and pluralist perceptions focussing on who actually makes the decisions. Boulding argues decision-making influenced in three ways: the stick coercion , the deal mutual benefit through negotiation , and the kiss sense of loyalty and commitment to individual, thus he has power. Different groups have a say on different aspects.
Elitist critiques argue this fails to understand unequal influence of key elites — real decisions made by a fixed elite — real power belongs to banks and military C. Wright Mills. Advocates strong, monarchical government. Agenda setting — Bachrach Baratz —idea of non-decision making. Links to influential parties who collectively agree or just block discussion — slight elitist theory.
Elite tend to dominate flow of information and media and so use this to their advantage. Look at the way demonstrations are portrayed in the media. Thought control — previous two assume that people and groups are rational and capable of knowing their own mind. The ability to manipulate human behaviour can be shaped — some argue this is where the real power lies.
Marxist ideas based on favouritism of state towards bourgeoisie and their power through economy and politics — Gramsci and bourgeois hegemony — bourgeoisie literally control popular culture and so control the way we think. Therefore we think life is only better with material goods so bourgeoisie benefit even more.
New Left ideas and Marcuse — link to totalitarianism but with media, TUs, adverts, culture replacing brutal coercion manipulating needs. Liberals reject this — individuals are rational.
Authority a form of rightful power. Weber linked authority to legitimacy — different approach from others stating that legitimacy gave power authority. Authority seldom exercised in absence of power.
Patriarchalism — links to hereditary systems. Less relevant today, although evident in one form in theocratic states — the resurgence of this type of authority can be seen as a response to the failure of other types in degenerative Western capitalism. Owes nothing to status, social position or office, yet can be used to promote the interests of society Rousseau and Law Giver.
Charismatic has an almost messianic quality — treated with suspicion — Talmon and criticism of Rousseau. Legal-rational — situation for most liberal democratic Western capitalist societies. Operates through a body of clearly defined rules — linked to formal powers of office not office holder. Less likely to be abused than other 2 as the limit of authority is defined. These officials have no rights, and their privileges can be increased or withdrawn based on the caprices of the leader.
The political organization of ancient Egypt typified such a system: when the royal household decreed that a pyramid be built, every Egyptian was forced to work toward its construction. Traditional authority can be intertwined with race, class, and gender. In most societies, for instance, men are more likely to be privileged than women and thus are more likely to hold roles of authority.
It is not uncommon for a man to be the automatic leader of a family unit; in some countries, however, it is the woman who is the presumptive leader. Regardless, most contexts provide a traditional structure of authority, even among the household unit. Similarly, members of dominant racial groups or upper-class families win respect more readily. In the United States, the Kennedy family, which has produced many prominent politicians, exemplifies this model.
The appeal of a charismatic leader can be extraordinary, and can inspire followers to make unusual sacrifices or to persevere in the midst of great hardship and persecution.
Charismatic leaders usually emerge in times of crisis and offer innovative or radical solutions. They may even offer a vision of a new world order. Charismatic leaders tend to hold power for short periods of time, and according to Weber, they are just as likely to be tyrannical as they are heroic. Some of them held formal positions of power, but many did not.
Because so few women have held dynamic positions of leadership throughout history, the list of charismatic female leaders is comparatively short. Michelle Obama, who no longer holds a formal position of authority and some might even argue that being First Lady itself does not translate into authority , is a current example of a charismatic leader. Greta Thunberg, a teenager from Sweden, has been making waves around the world, giving powerful and moving speeches about climate change.
While she holds no formal position of authority, she is influencing change through being a leader that others can relate to, to the point of now hundreds of thousands of kids calling for radical changes in climate change policy. According to Weber, power made legitimate by laws, written rules, and regulations is termed rational-legal authority. In this type of authority, power is vested in a particular rationale, system, or ideology and not necessarily in the person who implements the specifics of that doctrine.
With rational-legal authority, the power to influence does not fall on individuals themselves, but instead falls on specific, structured, bureaucratic offices, and individuals holding specific positions have the authority to act in the name of such positions.
A nation that follows a constitution applies this type of authority. On a smaller scale, you might encounter rational-legal authority in the workplace via the standards set forth in the employee handbook, which provides the employee with a different type of authority than that of the boss. Of course, ideals are seldom replicated in the real world.
Few governments or leaders can be neatly categorized. Some leaders, like Mohandas Gandhi for instance, can be considered charismatic and legal-rational authority figures.
Similarly, a leader or government can start out exemplifying one type of authority and gradually evolve or change into another type. This is not unusual—charismatic leaders often enter rational-legal authority institutions and it is their charisma that facilitates their election. Similarly, an individual in a rational-legal authority position gains exposure, which may allow them to be charismatic leaders following their exit from formal authority positions.
Skip to main content. Module Government and Politics. Search for:. Learning Outcomes Explain political power and authority Identify and describe the three types of authority outlined by Max Weber.
0コメント