ماکس وبر و بنیادهای سازمانی – اقتصادی پیدایش سیاستمدار رسالت‌مدار

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

2 دانش‌آموخته دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

سلطه مشروع مهم‌ترین مشارکت وبر در جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی قلمداد می‌شود. تفسیر غالب از پیدایش و تحول انواع سلطه مشروع تأکیدی یکسویه بر مسائل اعتقادی دارد. پشتیبانان این تفسیر استدلال می‌کنند که مطمئن‌ترین راهنما برای فهم تنوع و تفاوت نظم‌های سلطه مشروع، شناخت نظام باورها و ارزش‌های حاکم بر آنهاست. پرسش پژوهش این است که در دریافت وبر از سلطه مشروع نوع ادعای مشروعیتی که برای کسب یا حفظ سلطه ارائه می‌شود، چه نسبتی با شرایط و ملاحظات بیرونی دارد. در فرضیه پژوهش استدلال می‌شود که اگرچه نوع مشروعیت ادعایی با عوامل بیرونی تحمیل نمی‌شود، ولی شانس موفقیت دعاوی مشروعیت با عوامل بیرونی مشروط می‌شود؛ نحوه سازمان یافتن سازوبرگ‌های خارجی سلطه به‌ویژه دستگاه اداری، شانس موفقیت ادعای مشروعیت را مشروط می‌کند و خود به‌وسیله عوامل اقتصادی به‌ویژه شیوه تأمین هزینه‌های مالی دستگاه سلطه مشروط می‌شود. برای آزمون فرضیه با بهره‌گیری از تحلیل کیفی داده‌های متنی، در آغاز بررسی می‌شود که پیدایش هریک از اشکال سه‌گانه مشروعیت، مشروط به تحقق چه نوع سامان سازمانی-اقتصادی است؛ سپس پیدایش «سیاستمدار رسالتمدار» به‌عنوان گونه ویژه‌ای از رهبر کاریزماتیک تبیین می‌شود. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که پیدایش منظم رهبران رسالتمدار به‌وجود یک سامان بوروکراتیک استثنایی وابسته است که به‌ اندازه‌ای حرفه‌ای است که با خلع‌ید از قدرت‌های پراکنده، تمرکز قدرت و وحدت رهبری سیاسی را میسر سازد، ولی آن اندازه قوی نیست که قدرت را از رهبری سیاسی بستاند و در اختیار دیوان‌سالاران قرار دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Max Weber and the Organizational-Economic Foundations of the Rise of the “Vocational Politician”

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hojjat Kazemi 1
  • Sajjad Ahmadian 2
1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran
2 A PhD Candidate in Political Science, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Legitimate rule is widely regarded as Max Weber’s main contribution to political sociology. The predominant interpretation of Weber’s account of the legitimate rule puts a one-sided emphasis on belief systems. Using a descriptive-explanatory approach, the authors try to establish the limitations of this predominant interpretation. An argument put forward is that for the purpose of understanding the variations in the forms of legitimate rule which had emerged across time and space one needs to understand the values and beliefs of the people in question. The legitimate rule in this interpretation is (or is expected to be) a direct reflection of people’s values. In this study, the authors tried to investigate the limits of the predominant interpretation, and did not intend to find an alternative for the one-sided emphasis of the cultural interpretation, or for an equally one-sided emphasis on organizational and financial factors. Basically, the main objective had been to shed light on the proper place of the belief system explanation of the legitimate rule.
The primary research question is as follows: In Weber's understanding of legitimate rule, what is the relationship between the type of legitimacy claims, that is presented to achieve or maintain dominance, and the external apparatus of the rule? In the hypothesis, it is postulated that the form of the claimed legitimacy is not imposed by the external factors, but the probability of success of the claim of legitimacy is contingent on the external factors. The way of organizing the external mechanisms of domination (especially the administrative apparatus) is contingent on the chance of success of the claim of legitimacy, which is itself determined by the economic factors (especially the method of financing the expenses of the domination apparatus). Of the external constraints, the organizational and financial factors are more important to Weber. The former concerns the organizational structure of the external apparatus of rule, especially the administrative organization, and the latter focuses on the ways by which the financial costs of the administrative staff are met. These two factors determine the likelihood of the success of legitimacy claims by influencing the balance of power between the rulers, the administrative staff and the society. To test the research hypothesis, the method of qualitative textual analysis is used. First, Weber’s account of the legitimate rule in Economy and Society is carefully examined to demonstrate how each of three forms of legitimacy are explained in close association with the organizational-financial factors. Then, the significance of the organizational-financial factors as manifested in Weber’s account of the rise of vocational leaders is described. The analysis of Weber’s Politics as a Vocation demonstrate that the rise of vocational politicians depends on an exceptional bureaucratic order, which is professional enough to dispossess the local contenders of power, but is not too professional to strip the political leaders of the actual power in favor of the top bureaucrats.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Legitimate Rule
  • Organizational Structure
  • Professional Politician
  • Vocational Politician
  • Weber
  1. References

    1. Alexander, J.C. (1987). Classical Attempt at Theoretical Synthesis: Max Weber. London: Routledge.
    2. Almond, G.A. (1965). “A Developmental Approach to Political Systems,” World Politics 17, 2: 83-214, 2307/2009347>.
    3. Almond, G.A. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    4. Almond, G.A; Powell, G.B. (2002). Siyāsat-e tatbighi, Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach, trans. Alireza Taieb. Tehran: Markaz-e amoozesh-e modiriat-e dolati-ye riāsat jomhoori. [In Persian]
    5. Beetham, D. (1991). The Legitimation of Power. Basingstoke, UK: MacMillan.
    6. Bendix, R. (2003). Simā-ye fekri-ye māx weber, Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait, Trans. Mahmood Rambod. Tehran: Hermes. [in Persian]
    7. Collins, R. (1986). Weberian Sociological Theory. New York & Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    8. Easton, D. (1965). A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.
    9. Giddens, A. (2004). Siyāsat, jāmeʿeh’shenāsi dar andisheh-ye māx weber, Politics and Sociology in the Thought of Max Weber, Trans. Majid Mohammadi. Tehran: Qatreh. [In Persian]
    10. Giddens, A. (2002). Siyāsat, jāmeʿeh’shenāsi, nazariyeh-e ejtemāʿi, Politics, Sociology, and Social Theory: Encounters with Classical and Contemporary Social Thought, Trans. Manoocher Saboori. Tehran: Ney. [In Persian]
    11. Habermas, J. (2001). Bohrān-e mashroeʿyat, Legitimation Crisis, Trans. Jahangir Meini Alamdari. Tehran: Gam-e no. [In Persian]
    12. Kalberg, S. (1994). Max Weber’s Comparative-Historical Sociology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    13. Lipset, S. (1963). The Social Bases of Politics. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
    14. Parkin, F. (2016). Max Weber, Trans. Shahnaz Mosamaparast. Tehran: Qoqnoss. [In Persian]
    15. Parsons, T. (1942). “Max Weber and the Contemporary Political Crisis: The Sociological Analysis of Power and Authority Structures,” The Review of Politics 4, 1: 61-76. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1404277 (Accessed 2 June 2022).
    16. Parsons, T. (1947). “Introduction” in Max Weber. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Trans. A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press.
    17. Parsons, T (1949). The Structure of Social Action. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press.
    18. Schluchter, W. (1984). The Rise of Western Rationalism: Max Weber's Developmental History. Berkely, CA: University of California Press.
    19. Weber, M. (1946). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, ed. Hans H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    20. Weber, M (1994). Political Writings, trans. Ronald Speirs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    21. Weber, M (2008). Max Weber's Complete Writings on Academic and Political Vocations, Trans. Gordon C. Wells. New York: Algora.
    22. Weber, M (2019). Economy and Society: A New Translation, ed., Trans. Keith Tribe. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.