Government and the Political Order     (Political satire takes many forms.  This characterization of President Clinton and the Statue of Liberty is actually a float which appeared at a parade in Germany.  Such satire, in itself, is not new, but the medium of delivery has changed dramatically.    Charges of sexual impropriety have been leveled against U.S. Presidents as early as Thomas Jefferson).      Back to Table of Contents     Links to related web sites:  The United Nations Homepage  U.S. Census Homepage  U.S. Civil Rights Law and Legislation United States Government       Contents Introduction Distinctions between Power, Force, etc. The Emergence of the State Forms of Government Liberty Versus Equality United States Power Structure      Introduction:   It is useful to begin by making a distinction between the Political Order (or STATE) and Government: One writer (Sheppard) defines the STATE as the "institution that successfully claims a monopoly on the right to use force within a given territory.   Max Weber defined it as the political unit legally permitted to use force within a specified territory.   Shepard defines Government as "the collection of individuals who happen to be directing the power of the state at any given moment."   Return to Chapter Contents Distinctions between power, force, influence, and authority: Power is "the ability to exercise one's will over others." (My definition-- (the ability to make people do something against their will).   There is a classic article by French and Raven about types of power (here are five:) --    Reward Power: the ability to obtain compliance by providing something someone else wants-- (salary, bribe, etc.) Coercive Power: This is force. Punishment can be applied to enforce compliance. Referent Power: based on an individual's attraction for another-- This is like charisma. Popular personalities-- rock stars, rappers, have loyal followings. (It also applies to cult followers of people like Jim Jones, Charles Manson, etc. Expert Power: This comes from the belief that an individual (or group) has superior knowledge about a subject. Legitimate Power: This is authority. People believe that obedience is appropriate-- that it is right to obey.   Force: As mentioned above, this is the actual or threatened use of coercion to impose one's will on another. (This can be physical force, but not necessarily. Threats to "ruin" someone by releasing damaging information is an other form of force).   Influence: This is a form of power that comes through persuasion. My favorite example (Bierstedt): "Julius Caesar had POWER. His wife had INFLUENCE.   Influence persuades; Power compels   Authority: The type of power acknowledged by the people over whom it is exercised-- i.e. the "consent of the governed."   Max Weber developed this concept. He regarded authority as LEGITIMATE POWER.   ILLEGITIMATE POWER, on the other hand, is that which the people refuse to acknowledge as having a right over them. Rather, they believe that they are forced to submit. This is what Weber called COERCION.   Weber defined three kinds of legitimate power (or AUTHORITY):   Traditional: The legitimacy of a leader is rooted in custom and tradition. "The Divine Right of Kings" religion and the "Church"   Legal Rational: The power of government officials is based on the OFFICES THEY HOLD. It is legitimated by explicit rules and procedures that define the rights and obligations of leaders-- (mayors, governors, senators and congressmen, presidents, etc.). These rules and regulations are generally written down in a "constitution." or other such document. This constitution is acknowledged by the citizens of the state. These legal rules are rationally determined to meet basic needs of the state and the people within it.   Charismatic Authority: Here, the control of others is based on personal characteristics-- "magnetic personalities" Jesus: Julius Caesar; Joan of Arc; Jim Jones; Adolph Hitler; John Kennedy; Mao Tse Tung; Abraham Lincoln; etc. Charismatic authority is the least stable Weber wrote about attempts to "routinize" charisma-- the biggest challenge of the charismatic leader.   Return to Chapter Contents The Emergence of the State-- Functionalist and Conflict Theories): Earlier in the course we addressed Lenski's model of Societal evolution. (I mentioned that it was an attempt to combine both the functionalist and conflict perspectives in describing social structure).   A "pure" functionalist perspective focuses on the basic functions that the state must serve in the preservation and maintenance of social order. Generally there are four... Enforcement of norms: Arbitration of conflict: Planning and direction: Managing relations with other societies:   The functionalist tradition in examing the state   Partly stems from the work of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) Leviathan was published in 1651 and argued for a strong state with unchallenged legitimacy. The main duty of the state is to preserve law and order among people who, by nature, are lazy, self-seeking, prone to conflict, etc.   Emile Durkheim in his Division of Labor in Society talked about the need for cooperation between the many parts of society (organic solidarity).   Conflict perspectives on the state:   This tradition stems from the French philosopher, Jean Jacques Rosseau (1712-1778).   Rosseau took the opposite tact of Hobbes. People in the original state of nature were not brutal and self-seeking, etc. Rather, they were "noble savages"-- free, happy, and peaceful.   Rosseau argued that the State emerged with the creation of private property. When the concept of "private property" was established, conflict developed and people agreed on forming a social contract to prevent or reduce social conflict.   However, the STATE protected the interests of the rich over those of the poor, and as a result, people suffered extreme misery-- slavery in the service of a small, rich class.   Karl Marx, whom we've already discussed at length in this course, drew heavily from Rosseau, developing his model of societal development-- primitive communism, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and communism. Marx must have believed that all humans were basically "good" in nature because at the final stage in his model, there would be no government-- no state.   Return to Chapter Contents Forms of Government:   Autocracy-- rule of a single individual   Oligarchy-- rule by a few individuals   Democracy--   Pure Democracy (rare)-- city states of Greece; New England Town Meetings Representative Democracy (historically recent, rare, and fragile) When do we find Democracy?   advanced economic development; urbanized, literate population; politically stable environments restraints on political power; institutionalized checks on state power; diffusion of power throughout society general consensus of basic values in society; absence of major cleavages in the population tolerance of dissent access to information   Return to Chapter Contents Liberty Versus Equality: The distinction between Liberty and Equality   In the United States we emphasis FREEDOM OF: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of worship, etc. The general philosophy that people should experience liberty or the ability to pursue their own goals with a minimum of government interference-- In western socialist countries, the emphasis is more heavily placed on equality-- which is freedom from hunger, freedom from want, freedom from unemployment, etc. In these countries (North Western Europe is a good example) there are more restraints on free enterprise, taxes are higher, regulations more stringent. There is a tension between the two concepts-- e.g., the LIBERTY to become rich and make a fortune could reduce the EQUALITY of your neighbor.     Return to Chapter Contents United States Power Structure: The Power Structure of the United States-- The Power Elite vs the Pluralist thesis: The Power Elite Thesis: C. Wright Mills' THE POWER ELITE fueled this debate.  A small "elite" controls society through government bureaucracy; large corporations; the military; A small group of very wealthy and powerful (white) men circulates between these three institutions and exerts control over American society.   Mills argued that the power elite (very small in numbers) controls society from the top; there is a larger middle class in society; and an even larger class of powerless people.   Their characteristics: American born of American parents; from urban areas; Protestant; attended Ivy League Colleges; many from the east coast; thoroughly networked-- they know each other well; they share basic values.   President Eisenhower warned that the nation was coming under the influence of a "Military-Industrial Complex" when he left office.   G. William Domhoff wrote WHO RULES AMERICA? and claimed that the power elite was very small-- .5 percent of the population occupied positions of power in corporations, banks, the diplomatic service, the CIA, the military, mass media, boards of trustees, etc.   Floyd N. Hunter in COMMUNITY POWER STRUCTURE studied Atlanta, GA and found that most decisions were made by an economic elite comprised of corporate executives, bankers, etc. who communicated informally and shared the same point of view. Basically, they determined local policies.   The Pluralistic Thesis: Robert Dahl wrote in 1961 (Who Governs) that he did not find support for the power elite thesis in his study of New Haven, CN. The power structure was much less centralized there. This supported a pluralistic theory of power distribution where many rival groups competed for control of the political institution and society itself.   (The Pluralism/Power Elite debate is much more involved and complex than presented here-- basically I want you to know the distinction between the two).   Return to Chapter Contents UNDER CONSTRUCTION