political science 1.2 - Power, authority and legitimacy

Max Weber (1921): concept of power

“The concept of power is sociologically amorphous”

- To vague to define it

colin hay 2002 concept of power

“Power is to political analysis what the economy is to economics”

Power and neighbouring notions, essential in order to answer questions such as: why do people obey?

-Central, cannot have political analysis if you don’t have power

pluralist approach to power in political science:

power as something that one can possess or lose

e.g voting in election, majority in election =s

The institutionalist approach:

identification of power with the State and with institutions > But distribution of authority and exercise of power must not be confused

The relational (or interactionist) approach:

power as a relation, you have power over someone.

• robert dhal (1961),

• Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz (1962)

• Steven Lukes (Power, a radical view, 1974):

- Power – democracy – in Belgium subject to the law

Robert Dahl (Who governs, 1961): power as a relation

“the ability of a person A to get a person B to do something s/he would have not done without the intervention of A” –

Key Idea:
Robert Dahl's relational approach to power focuses on how one individual or group (A) can influence the behavior of another individual or group (B), leading them to act in ways they wouldn't have without that influence.

1. Power as the Ability to Influence:

• Definition (Dahl, 1961):

  • Power is defined as the ability of person A to get person B to do something that B wouldn't have done without A’s intervention.

  • It highlights influence and control over another person's actions or decisions.

• Key Concept:

  • Power is relational — it’s not about possessing power but about exercising it in specific situations and interactions.

  • It exists only in the context of social relationships and cannot be understood without considering both A’s influence and B’s response.

2. The Dynamics of Power:

• Who Governs?

  • In Dahl's view, political power is about who has the ability to affect decisions and who does not.

  • In a democratic context, this means looking at how decisions are influenced and who has the ability to shape the outcome.

• Implications:

  • Power is not only about force or coercion but about persuasion and influence within relationships.

  • It focuses on observable outcomes, such as getting someone to act differently than they would have without the intervention.

3. Example from Dahl’s Perspective:

• Political Influence:

  • A politician (Person A) might influence a voter (Person B) to vote for a particular policy.

  • The voter, who initially didn’t have the intention of supporting the policy, changes their stance due to the politician’s influence, demonstrating how power operates relationally.

Takeaway:

In Dahl's thinking, power is about getting someone to do something they wouldn't have done without your intervention. It’s a relational process where influence and authority are exercised through interaction and persuasion, not just force.

Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz (Dynamics of non-decision-making,1962): on power as a relation

where the power of A over B leads B not to act or not to adopt a particular behaviour

Key Idea:
Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz extend the concept of power by introducing the idea of non-decision-making. Here, power doesn't just lead someone to act in a certain way but also prevents them from acting or adopting certain behaviors.

1. Power to Prevent Action (Non-Decision-Making):

• Definition:

  • Power is not only about getting someone (B) to do something but also about preventing them from acting or adopting a certain behavior.

  • This form of power is invisible because it shapes outcomes by limiting options or keeping certain issues off the agenda.

• Key Concept:

  • A (the powerful party) limits B's capacity to even consider alternatives or to act in ways that could challenge A’s interests.

2. Power and Decision-Making:

• Key Argument:

  • Bachrach and Baratz argue that power is exercised through decision-making but also through the non-decision-making process.

  • This means that power can operate by setting the boundaries of debate or by suppressing certain issues to prevent B from taking any action.

3. Example of Non-Decision-Making:

• Political Context:

  • A government (A) might suppress public debate or media coverage on an issue (such as environmental regulations) so that the public (B) does not even consider the possibility of advocating for change.

  • In this case, B is prevented from acting because the issue is kept off the agenda, preventing any decision or action from even being made.

Takeaway:

Bachrach and Baratz's concept of power extends beyond simple decision-making. It includes the ability to prevent certain behaviors or issues from coming to the surface. Power works in ways that restrict choice or limit action by controlling the agenda and what gets discussed or acted upon.

Steven Lukes (Power, a radical view, 1974):

invisible power linked to the internalization of constraint (e.g. totalitarian power) : “preference manipulation” by Crenson

Key Idea:
Steven Lukes' concept of power extends to invisible power and preference manipulation, where power operates by shaping people's desires and preferences, often without their awareness. This type of power is linked to the internalization of constraint and can be seen in more covert, ideological forms of control (e.g., totalitarian regimes).

1. Invisible Power and Internalization of Constraint:

• Definition:

  • Lukes argues that power isn't just about influencing actions or decisions; it also shapes what people think they want or believe is possible.

  • Power becomes invisible when it works at the level of internalizing constraints, meaning individuals accept certain limitations without realizing they're being controlled.

• Key Concept:

  • In totalitarian systems, for example, power isn't just exercised through overt coercion but also through shaping how individuals perceive their own desires and what they think is achievable or acceptable in society.

2. Preference Manipulation (Crenson’s Influence):

• Definition:

  • As Crenson puts it, power is about preference manipulation, where powerful actors shape the preferences of others, making them believe they want what is actually beneficial to those in power.

  • Lukes extends this idea by emphasizing that power operates by creating beliefs and preferences that align with the interests of the powerful.

• Key Concept:

  • Instead of directly forcing someone to do something, power can work by convincing people to act in ways that serve the interests of the powerful, often without them realizing they are being manipulated.

3. Example of Invisible Power and Preference Manipulation:

• Totalitarian Regimes:

  • In a totalitarian state, the government might control education, media, and culture, shaping how citizens see the world and what they think is normal or acceptable.

  • People might internalize the regime’s values, believing it’s their own preference to accept state control, without recognizing that their preferences have been manipulated by the system.

Takeaway:

Lukes’ view of power emphasizes invisible and covert forms of control, where power is exerted not through visible force but by shaping the internal preferences and beliefs of individuals. This kind of power works by manipulating desires and creating the illusion that the choices people make are their own, even though they have been subtly influenced or constrained.

Max Weber (Economy and Society, 1921) on authority

• Key Concepts:

  • Macht vs. Herrschaft (Strength/Force vs. Authority):

    • Macht: Power through strength or force

    • Herrschaft: Power through legitimate authority

  • Authority and Legitimacy:

    • Authority requires that power is exercised within a legitimate framework.

    • A legitimate framework provides stability to power relations.

  • Definition of Authority:

    • Authority = Legitimized power.

    • Rulers gain acceptance not through coercion, but because the ruled recognize their right to exercise power.

  Takeaway:
  Max Weber defines authority as a form of legitimate power where the governed accept the ruler’s right to rule, creating stability in power relations. This legitimacy contrasts with power based solely on force.

authority to max weber

Definition: Authority is a legitimate power, in the sense that rulers can produce acceptance by the ruled, not because they can exercise coercion but because the ruled recognize the right of the rulers to exercise power

legitimacy max weber

Legitimacy: the recognition granted to the one who exercises power

constraint max weber

the guarantee of achieving, through various means, the achievement of one’s will in the absence of legitimacy or when it is insufficient

• not seperated, a dual response

why do individuals show a minimum will to obey:

By simple habit (seems natural)

For emotional reasons (adhering to a leader…)

For material reasons (because of an interest…)

By ideal (obedience allows to achieve a goal which is placed above all else)

What is fundamental to the stability of power?

That individuals believe in its legitimacy.

> A successful enterprise of authority is above all a successful legitimation enterprise

Different types of claimed legitimacy > different forms of obedience, different forms of exercise of authority

legitimacy and legitimation - notion of Ideal-type to Max Weber

Key Concepts:

Ideal-Type:

Max Weber's concept of an ideal-type refers to an abstract model or a conceptual framework created to understand and compare real-world social phenomena.

It is derived from observation and sociological analysis, created by de-composing complex social situations into more manageable concepts.

How Ideal-Types Are Created:

Just as a physicist isolates atoms to understand matter, Weber’s ideal-types are stylized reconstructions of reality.

These abstractions help us understand the essence of social phenomena by simplifying and focusing on the most important aspects.

Purpose of Ideal-Types:

Comparative Analysis: Ideal-types are used to compare different real-world situations to understand their structure, dynamics, and differences.

Examples: Political parties, electoral regimes, political systems, etc. can be compared against Weber’s ideal-type to assess how closely they align with the theoretical model.

Takeaway:
Max Weber’s ideal-type is a theoretical tool used to simplify and abstract complex social realities. It helps in legitimizing and legitimation processes by allowing sociologists to analyze and compare actual political systems, institutions, and structures with an idealized framework.

what are the 3 types of legitimate authority

Traditional, Legal Rational Authority and Charismatc authority.

A precarious and limited in time situation, “inherently unstable” (Weber) >> These are “ideal-types”. In practice, these 3 modes of domination are combined (differently in different historical contexts)

 

Legitimate authority 1:

Traditional authority

• Definition: Legitimacy based on long-standing customs, traditions, or established practices.

• Source of Power: Belief in the sanctity of age-old rules and the authority of those who inherit positions of power (e.g., monarchs).

• Key Features:

  • Authority is personal, tied to the leader.

  • Resistant to change.

• Examples: Kings, tribal chiefs.

Legitimate authority 2:

legal-rational authority

• Definition: Legitimacy based on formal, impersonal rules and laws.

• Exercise of power is organized by written rules defining the right and duties of each (governors and governed)

• Depersonalization of the exercise of domination

• Juridicisation of power relation

• Source of Power: The legal framework that defines the authority of officeholders.

• Key Features:

  • Authority is tied to the office, not the individual.

  • Predictable and efficient.

• Examples: Bureaucracies, elected officials (e.g., presidents, judges).

Legitimate authority 3:

Charismatic authority

• Definition: Legitimacy based on the extraordinary personal qualities of a leader and the devotion they inspire.

 Exceptional or transitory situations, authority linked to the belief in the exceptional qualities of an invidual

• Source of Power: Followers’ belief in the leader’s vision, heroism, or sanctity.

• Key Features:

  • Unstable, as it depends on the leader’s charisma.

  • Often disrupts traditional and legal systems.

• Examples: Religious prophets, revolutionary leaders (e.g., Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr.).

The specificities of political power

• In modern societies, political power tends to become institutionalized in State structures (see next session) ‘

• The State can impose obligations and implement sanctions

• State sanctions are decided by political institutions and applied by judicial and administrative institutions, they are “institutionalized” = considered as legitimate

Political power and the State

1. Political Power in the State

- In modern societies, political power becomes institutionalized within State structures (organized and formalized).

2. Obligations and Sanctions

- The State can impose obligations and implement sanctions to maintain order and enforce rules.

3. Institutionalized Sanctions

- Sanctions are:

- Decided by political institutions (e.g., legislatures).

- Applied by judicial and administrative institutions (e.g., courts, police).

- Institutionalization makes these actions legitimate and accepted by society.

This institutionalized legitimacy differentiates modern political power from other forms of power.

The “personal is political”, implications:

1. Political Power in the Private Sphere

   Political power and forms of domination extend into private life, such as family, relationships, and personal choices.

2. Revealing Hidden Power Relations

   Exposes the political nature of what is often seen as personal (e.g., gender roles, domestic labor).

   Transforms personal issues into political problems by uncovering power dynamics and inequalities.

3. Concept of Patriarchy

   Highlights patriarchy as a system of domination that structures both public and private spheres.

4. Expanded Scope of Political Science

   • Introduces new topics for political study, including:

     • Family dynamics.

     • Sexuality and gender relations.

     • Beyond traditional areas like political parties, voters, or public policies.

This perspective broadens the understanding of politics to include everyday life and power dynamics within personal relationships.

Classical questions, new light

- Politics are not only structures, functions and activities, but also relations of power:

- Question of the consent to domination(self-discipline)

Analysis of techniques of domination:

- Naturalization (women “naturally”unfit for the exercise of political

power)

- The male « universal »