Power, Domination, Legitimation, and Authority
1. Introduction
Classes, status groups, parties are considered by Weber to be associated with power, attempting to achieve one’s will, even in the face of opposition from others. Weber argues that status honour is a more important source of group social action than is class or relation to markets. Status groups can do this in various ways. First, status may be a means of maintaining the position of a group that does have privilege. The status group may be closed, with privileges available only to those in the group, and denied to those outside the group. Further, a status group may lead to the development of parties to further some specific interests of the status group. Thus, status groups may become the means by which power or authority is exercised (e.g. old boy networks, professional status groups and organizations, religious or ethnic groups). Social honour may be accorded those who behave in the manner considered desirable by the status group. In this way, the ends of a status group may be furthered. Social approval is a means of achieving the ends of the group while social disapproval may be used as a means of disciplining those who do not behave in the approved manner.
Second, people who have limited power to begin with may form a status group in an attempt to gain greater control over economic and social resources. That is, if resources are scarce, forming a group which is able to exercise some control over the distribution of these resources may be a means of increasing the power of that group in society. The professionalization of the medical profession in the twentieth century could be an example of this and, in general, the professionalization of any occupational grouping is a means of achieving these ends. The restrictions placed on entry may be partially economic, but they are also partially social in nature, having to do with status honour and prestige. For example, some professions which have been male dominated have excluded women. It would appear that this is not so much for economic reasons as an attempt to perpetuate status distinctions constructed on particular views of what are appropriate gender relations. Parties may be formed to rationalize some of these procedures, and pursue goals of the group.
2. Power and Domination
Weber defined power as the chance that an individual in a social relationship can achieve his or her own will even against the resistance of others. This is a very broad definition and includes a very wide range of types of power. In order to make this definition more useful in the study of history and society, Weber suggests domination as an alternative, or more carefully defined concept. Weber defines domination "as the probability that certain specific commands (or all commands) will be obeyed by a given group of persons" (Weber, p. 212). Features associated with domination are obedience, interest, belief, and regularity. Weber notes that "every genuine form of domination implies a minimum of voluntary compliance, that is, an interest (based on ulterior motives or genuine acceptance) in obedience" (Weber, p. 212). Examples of dominance could include parent-child relationships, employer-employee relationships, teacher-student, domination within the family, political rule that is generally accepted and obeyed, or the relation between a priest and church member.
That is, a power relation which is one of dominance involves the following
Voluntary compliance or obedience. Individuals are not forced to obey, but do so voluntarily.
Those who obey do so because they have an interest in so doing, or at least believe that they have such an interest.
Belief in the legitimacy of the actions of the dominant individual or group is likely (although this is defined by Weber as authority). That is, "the particular claim to legitimacy is to a significant degree and according to its type treated as ‘valid’" (Weber, p. 214).
Compliance or obedience is not haphazard or associated with a short-term social relationship, but is a sustained relationship of dominance and subordination so that regular patterns of inequality are established.
When dominance continues for a considerable period of time, it becomes a structured phenomenon, and the forms of dominance become the social structures of society. Temporary or transient types of power are not usually considered to be dominance. This definition of domination also eliminates those types of power that are based on sheer force, because force may not lead to acceptance of the dominant group or voluntary compliance with its orders. Situations of overt conflict and force are also relatively unusual. For example, Weber considers overt forms of class conflict and class struggle to be uncommon. While Weber’s definition of domination may be narrow, it is a useful way of examining relationships that do become structured. While employer-employee or other types of relationships characterized by domination and subordination often involve conflict, the use of force is not always, or is not normally, an aspect of these and subordinates do obey and implicitly accept this subordination.
Giddens (pp. 154 ff.) discusses various levels of legitimacy, and how these might become established over a period of time. Where people develop uniform types of conduct, Weber refers to this as usage. Long established usages become customs. These can emerge within a group or society on the basis of continued interaction, and require little or no enforcement by any specific group. A stronger degree of conformity is convention, where the compliance is not just voluntary or customary, but where some sort of sanctions may exist for those who do not comply with convention. These may be informal sanctions, leading to mild disapproval, or they may be strong sanctions associated with discipline or ostracism. For example, various forms of dress associated with the workplace can become convention, or even be enforced as rules. Usage and custom often become the basis of rules, and violation of these may ultimately have some sanctions applied.
Where convention is adopted by an individual or a group that has the legitimate capacity and duty to impose sanctions, the convention can become law. This can begin to create a legal order where a group assumes the task of applying sanctions to punish transgressions, for example, a clan, priesthood, or elders. Where this can be applied over a territorial unit, with order safeguarded by threat of physical force, then this can create a political order, the threat and application of physical force by an administrative staff with legal, administrative, military, or police functions.
3. Types of Authority
Weber defines authority as legitimate forms of domination, that is, forms of domination which followers or subordinates consider to be legitimate. Legitimate does not necessarily imply any sense of rationality, right, or natural justice. Rather, domination is legitimate when the subordinate accept, obey, and consider domination to be desirable, or at least bearable and not worth challenging. It is not so much the actions of the dominant that create this, but rather the willingness of those who subordinate to believe in the legitimacy of the claims of the dominant.
Weber outline three major types of legitimate domination: traditional, charismatic, and legal or rational. These three forms do not constitute the totality of types of domination but they show how it is possible for some people to exercise power over others. Authority extends and maintains power and shows a study of its origins can show how people come to accept this domination as a regular and structured phenomenon. Also note that these are ideal types, with any actual use of power being likely to have aspects of more than one type of authority, and perhaps even other forms of power such as the use of force or coercion.
Much of the sections that follow are based on Ritzer, "Structures of Authority," pages 128-136 of Sociological Theory, third edition.
a. Traditional Authority. This is the type of authority where the traditional rights of a powerful and dominant individual or group are accepted, or at least not challenged, by subordinate individuals. These could be (i) religious, sacred, or spiritual forms, (ii) well established and slowly changing culture, or (iii) tribal, family, or clan type structures. The dominant individual could be a priest, clan leader, family head, or some other patriarch, or a dominant elite might govern. In many cases, traditional authority is buttressed by culture such as myths or connection to the sacred, symbols such as a cross or flag, and by structures and institutions which perpetuate this traditional authority. In Weber's words, this traditionalist domination "rests upon a belief in the sanctity of everyday routines." (Gerth and Mills, p. 297). Ritzer notes that "traditional authority is based on a claim by the leaders, and a belief on the part of the followers, that there is virtue in the sanctity of age-old rules and powers" (p. 132).
Traditional forms of authority existed in many societies throughout much of history, and Weber analyzed why this form of authority was maintained, and what were the barriers to the development of more rational or legal forms of authority characteristic of western societies. In particular, Weber was concerned with how these traditional forms of authority hindered the development of capitalism in non-western societies.
Different types of traditional authority might be (i) gerontocracy or rule by elders, (ii) patriarchalism where positions are inherited.
Patriarchalism is by far the most important type of domination the legitimacy of which rests upon tradition. Patriarchalism means the authority of the father, the husband, the senior of the house, the sib elder over the members of the household and sib; the rule of the master and patron over bondsmen, serfs,