Theories Of Bureaucracy

1612 Words7 Pages
C) According to the Western model of social structure (Marx), the lower strata of different bureaucratic professions or domains might assimilate with proletarian workers, while the high bureaucracies – with the upper stratum of bourgeoisie. And in the last decades of the Western 19th century, the classical petty bourgeoisie even saw an outstripping of representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism”.…show more content…
Actually, a mechanism leading to the constitution of both the high and middle bureaucracy was that of the professional bodies of merchants and artisans, but also of engineers. These bodies are not other social strata than those already existent, but organized structures/ institutions within these existent strata. The medieval guilds of artisans and merchants fought for acquiring or preserving not only the freedom of independent internal rules in exchange for their loyalty and taxes paid to the sovereign, but also the independent economic power of their leading members (the masters, but not the apprentice, the craftsman, the journeyman) towards the king or state (in fact, society). This is the reason they included internal stratifications and, by supporting their richest members, became a more and more reactionary element opposing (capitalist) development. But do not forget that the medieval guilds have obtained the privilege of their internal autonomy (regulation of labor, of production and commercialization) because their rich members had the…show more content…
And because the agricultural work could not absorb the whole labor force with a certain education, and since the state was the only source of the economic security for this labor force, it is obvious that the second social category having power was bureaucracy. But it differed from the Western one in that it exercised its power in a different shape: of weak rationalization, of arbitrariness and high corruption. If the landowners could sell their grain and impose a cruel domination to peasants, they never opposed to the power of bureaucracy. Max Weber’s rational authority ideal-type was here a caricature. The difference between the Western and Eastern bureaucracy was only on the level of form: very important this level, but not transforming the unstoppable power of bureaucracy in West or in East, though amplifying the dependent status of the Eastern countries. (But this behavior of Eastern bureaucracy showed only its constitutive relationship with the landowners and not with the weak bourgeoisie). F) The real shape the power of Western bureaucracy has deployed was, obviously, not that of the Weberian ideal-type. There was not
Open Document