Dagmar Waters

Politics as Vocation

The questions Weber asks are, “Why and under what circumstances will the people submit? And on which intrinsic internal legal justification, and what external means does domination rely?”

The distribution of power within the community: Classes, Stände, Parties by Max Weber

This is a translation from German of Max Weber’s chapter “Class, Status, Party” from his masterwork Economy and Society (Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft). This chapter was probably written before World War I. Two German versions of Economy and Society have been published. In 1921, the chapter was published as part of a compilation edited by Marianne Weber. A second compilation of Economy and Society was first published in German by Johannes Winckelmann beginning in 1956. For more details see Waters and Waters 2010.

Are the Terms 'Socio-Economic Status' and 'Class Status' a Warped Form of Reasoning for Max Weber?

A classic definition of social inequality comes from the sociologist Max Weber, who wrote that there are three fundamental types of inequality. The first is based in the marketplace and is “social class”. The second, and more important distinction, is based in estimations of honour that Weber called in German Stand, which traditionally is translated into English as “status group”. The third type of stratification is “party” where power is distributed. Weber emphasized that the two forms of stratification emerge out of two different parts of society: Stand with its emphasis on honour emerges out of the most fundamental part of society rooted in loyalties, the Gemeinschaft, whereas class emerges out of a sub-unit of the Gemeinschaft, rationally ordered markets and legal structures of the Gesellschaft. Party emerges out of both. In Weber’s estimation, two types of social stratification, class and Stand, although related, cannot be mixed because they are fundamentally different. The former is rooted in abstract emotion and the latter in rational calculation. To do so, he writes, is a “warped reasoning”. Despite Weber’s warnings, English-language terms used to measure social inequality, particularly “socio-economic status”, conflate the two qualities, presenting them as a single variable. However, when the two are separated, analysts get a much more nuanced view of the mechanisms for how different types of inequality persist, be they in the professions, residence, ethnicity, race or caste.

Discipline and Charisma

“Discipline and Charisma” underpins Weber’s understanding of the rationalization of modern life. As such, it sets the stage for his essay “Bureaucracy,” and also, more generally, “Politics as Vocation” and The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. In “Discipline and Charisma,” Weber explicitly asks how it is that large groups of humans simultaneously restrain their psychobiological impulses to fit the demands of the industrial age. This is because the point of such rational discipline is that rationalized orders are executed when received in a predictable fashion. This happens because the execution of any received command emerges from tactical responses that are conditioned reactions to precise drills. In the context of such drills, all personal critique is unconditionally deferred, and personal convictions are constantly adjusted towards the pre-determined goal reflected in how the received order is executed. This is of course a condition that Weber marveled at in both The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism and “Bureaucracy.” From Weber’s view, it is the very basis for why humans habitually and precisely obey states, militaries, bosses, and business corporations without moral reflection.

The Distribution of Power Within the Gemeinschaft: Classes, Stände, Parties

This essay is about the roles honor, prestige, and Stand play in the organization of society. Weber wrote that prestige and the accompanying justification of Stand underpins how people organize themselves using the visible markers of rank. In the modern world, though, this can be understood only in the context of the social stratification of social class, as spread by the anonymous actions of the marketplaces. This results in an irony in the modern world, which is that while Stand is based on economic acquisition, it is also based on the pretension that naked economic power does not matter. Rather, honor, privilege, and subordination are based on ideologies about merit rooted in values emerging from within the Gemeinschaft, not the naked power of the market from which privilege actually emerges. This essay is about how this has worked throughout history, and points out bluntly that The market does not know “honor” or “prestige” [it only knows cash], but the reverse is true for the Stand. Stratification and privileges in terms of honor and lifestyles are inherent to each Stand. Therefore, the privileged Stande are threatened at their very roots by the market and its emphasis on mere economic acquisition and naked economic power—which still bears a stigma as emerging from outside the Stand.

Max Weber’s Sociology in the Twenty-first Century

Max Weber’s contributions to the social sciences remain at the heart of how we speak about ethics, status, ethnicity, class, bureaucracy, and politics. His definition of the state as being “the legitimated monopoly over the use of coercive force in a given territory” is a staple of journalists and social scientists alike. Weber is also credited with highlighting concepts such as “iron cage,” “bureaucracy,” “bureaucratization,” “rationalization,” “charisma,” and the role of the “work ethic” in ordering modern labor markets. Indeed, such concepts are so well known that they are often even cliche.

Max Weber’s Writing as a Product of World War I Europe

Max Weber’s academic writings about the nature of politics, government, bureaucracy, and social structure are, we believe, timeless. But his explicitly political writing directed toward aiding the German war effort of 1914–1918 is bombastic and at times whiny: it was directed at the emotions of his day and is not so timeless, which perhaps explains why little of it has been translated into English. Nevertheless, to understand the timelessness of what Weber wrote regarding the nature of politics and bureaucracy in 1918–1919, it is important to understand the political and personal context Weber lived in at that time.

Translation Notes—Special Highlighted Terms in Weber’s Sociological Writings

Every translation requires adjustments, and this is true here as well. German is a language ideally suited to philosophical discourse. Definitions are well known, precise, and understood—by German speakers. This is the case with English, too, but not to the same extent or with the same emphases, which is why we keep words such as Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft in German in our translation.