Under rational-legal authority, legitimacy is considered to result from a legal system and the laws promulgated in it (see also natural law and legal positivism). Weber`s belief that rational legal authority did not exist in imperial China was heavily criticized and did not have many followers in the early 21st century. In the U.S. Senate, it is customary to assign each senator a rank based on years of government service and the population of the state he or she represents. A high-ranking ranking gives the senator priority for assignments to offices, committee chairs and Senate seats. What kind of authority best illustrates this example? Adherents accept the power of charismatic authority because they are attracted to the personal qualities of the leader. The attraction of a charismatic leader can be extraordinary, inspiring followers to make unusual sacrifices or persevere in the midst of great hardship and persecution. Charismatic leaders usually emerge in times of crisis and propose innovative or radical solutions. They may even offer a vision of a new world order. Hitler`s rise to power in Germany`s postwar economic depression is an example of this. Let me give you an example of the legal system.
Indeed, in communist societies – and probably to some extent even in China today, much less than thirty or forty years ago – now, when the court serves justice, the court is not blind to who the people accused of committing a crime are. The communist legal system called itself a class law; That the purpose of the legal system is not to be blind – is it? – who committed the crime. The purpose of the legal system—that was the kind of claim to legitimacy under communism—is to defend the interests of the working class. And that is precisely why it was a legal system based on material rationality. Right? Protesters in Tunisia and civil rights protesters in the days of Martin Luther King Jr. had influence alongside their position in a government. Their influence came in part from their ability to champion what many people believed to be important values. Heads of government could also have that kind of influence, but they also have the advantage of wielding the power associated with their position in government. As this example shows, there is more than one type of authority in a community. What are the main characteristics of a system based on a legal-rational order? There is continuous rule-related behavior. Again, I don`t think this needs too much clarification.
They are always the same rules. The rules change slowly and with great difficulty, as we can see Congress struggling to pass a health care reform bill. It takes months or years for important new legislation to come into force. And, as a rule, new laws with legal-rational authority become acquired rights. Right? When you pass a new law, you change the rules of the game, you usually have them with vested rights; Those that came into play before the new law are still under the rule of the old law. We do it all the time in universities. Right? For example, if the requirements for a degree at a university change, it is almost always those degree requirements – this new law is a vested right. You know the terminology. Right? It does not apply to individuals who are already participating in the program. It is only valid for people who participate in the program.
Or a way to overcome it, that we give people a choice. Do you know? If you want to work according to the new rule, you can opt for the new rule. Or if you want to stay under the old rule, you can stay under the old rule. Only those who now enter the system are bound by the new rules. So that`s very important, isn`t it? – that it is continuous and subject to rules. According to Weber, the power of traditional authority is accepted because it has been traditionally; Its legitimacy exists because it has been accepted for a long time. Queen Elizabeth of England, for example, occupies a position she inherited because of the monarchy`s traditional rules of succession. People cling to traditional authority because they are invested in the past and feel compelled to perpetuate it. In this type of authority, a leader usually does not have the real power to carry out his will or maintain his position, but depends mainly on the respect of a group. If society as a whole approves of the exercise of power in some way, then power is considered a „legitimate authority.” The purest form – the ideal type – of Weber`s type of legal-rational authority is bureaucracy.
Legal-rational authority means that authority is vested in a set of rules-based rules and institutions, and that the creation and modification of rules are beyond the control of those who administer them; However, this does not mean that the authority is democratic. Monarchs and even authoritarian rulers who recognize a number of laws beyond their power rule with legal-rational authority. Characteristics of bureaucracy include fixed salary, positions based on technical skills rather than personal relationships, a clearly defined hierarchy, and ongoing rules that bind the behavior of administrators and citizens or customers. Well, there are a number of contradictions in the bureaucracy. It is very formalistic. And he said there was another interesting trend. Although it is formalistic and simply intended to abide by the rules, bureaucracy sometimes tends in all systems, not only under socialism, to have a certain sensitivity to substantial rationality, to the well-being of people who are under bureaucracy. And then it can be transformed into a clientelist system; Bureaucracy can have these tendencies. And think about welfare bureaucracies – right? – which carry many clientelist tendencies.
Professor Iván Szelényi: Good morning. Today`s topic is Weber`s theory of legal-rational authority and his theory of bureaucracy.