Search

In this paper I explore the ramifications of charismatic sensitivity, i.e., the propensity to impute charismatic qualities to actions, persons, institutions and cultural objects. My analysis takes its point of departure in Max Weber's analysis of charismatic authority, in trying to analyze charismatic authority more systematically than Weber was able to do, I have concluded that he was dealing with one particular variant of the charismatic propensity, which has more far-reaching, more permeative manifestations than his analysis has hitherto led us to believe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The subject of charismatic leadership has been attacked by a number of scholars and many supposed shortcomings have been pointed out. Lowenstein (1966) argues that it is difficult to apply the concept to historical figures since all the researcher can rely on are the reports of the individual's contemporaries. In other words, it is not strictly a testable theory. Batnam has argued that charisma as a concept of leadership "has not in any substantial manner improved our understanding of the problems it touches on," and considers the concept "largely valueless" (1964:341). Ake has voiced similar misgivings and suggests that the concept lacks rigor and clarity, distorting rather than illuminating political reality. Wolpe has argued, "… the concept of charisma is not analytically useful," and has tried "to make explicit the contradictory and ambiguous features of charisma" (1968:306). In spite of these criticisms, the concept of charisma continues to be used in a variety of studies and has even penetrated the field of political journalism. It is, however, the argument of this paper that neither those who denigrate it nor those who have used it are doing justice to the notion of charismatic authority and leadership. For Weber it was one type of leadership, and authority among other types, and in the course of the voluminous output of his short scholarly life he left the details of his typologies unspecified. It is therefore the task of latter day students to specify them and apply them to concrete instances. While many have done this, there are two basic flaws: a) they have been loathe to escape from the limits set by Weber himself, and b) they have not tried to integrate Webers notions with other relevant perspectives and theories, so as to enlarge and/or supplement them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since its first systematic treatment by Max Weber in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft in the early twenties, the concept of charisma has been of only limited use to the social sciences. This is so because of fundamental disagreement concerning its meaning and application. In response to this, the present paper offers (1) a brief examination of Weber's contribution, (2) a critical analysis of this position based in part on the recent literature, and (3) a final formulation of the concept. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on a structural perspective of modern religious movements, first by explicating the assumptions underlying current sociological research of "fringe" religions, and secondly by proposing an alternative strategy. Its thesis suggests that "as cultural entities we have catalogued "deviant" religious forms in detail but that as social structures only the bare skeletons of most groups at one point in time have been analyzed, depriving us of much valuable information for understanding them." The problem of possessing a theoretical scheme is actually less an obstacle than a vacuum due to the previous lack of interest in structural variables. There exist a number of theoretical approaches taken from the study of complex organizations which might be fruitfully applied as models to investigate religious movements. For example, one particular theoretical basis for research utilizing a structural approach is provided by Amitai Etzioni's elaboration of Max Weber's theory of charisma. Weber believed that charisma existed in its natural "pure" form, residing in the character of dynamic leaders, and that it could be "routinized" so as to be confined in organizational positions and transmitted from incumbent to incumbent.

Half-a-century after his death Max Weber's name is becoming more of a household word within the scholarly community and, perhaps, even beyond, for there is a rock-music band named Max Weber and His Charismatics surviving now for over five years. The mass media today increasingly prostitutionalize some of his carefully formulated concepts of charisma and charismatic leadership, e.g., the labeling of everybody and everything odd or that which is not understood as charismatic, including a loud-mouth reactionary household name of the (hopefully early) seventies. The greater interest in Weber's work among social scientists is justified by several propositions, a few of which will be briefly pointed out. To this writer at least the most important among them is that there seems to be absolutely nothing in his work which could even remotely serve as a source for a messianic doctrine of salvation for mankind in contrast to the writings of many well-known names. No messianic or millennial movements could possibly carry his name, and this appears to be a blessing today in the midst of so much utopian emotionalism. Even a more limited ideological preaching is absent from his legacy. Also, because of his unqualified and absolute humanitarianism, conservative defenses of the established order cannot be hidden behind Weber's name in spite of some attempts made by certain American sociologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article attempts to estimate the importance of political attitudes in voting behavior. It is observed that in the realm of political behavior, such factors as a candidate's personal appeal, a family or a local tradition, or local political or economic pressure have often been assumed to be more important elements in gaining and holding the support of the electorate than any of the policies announced by the candidate himself. During the two weeks immediately preceding the 1932 presidential election, members of "The National League of Women Voters" obtained, through personal interviews, the political attitudes of 8419 voters, scattered throughout 37 states, in addition to information as to their sex, occupation, intended vote in the 1932 election, vote in the 1928 presidential election and certain other matters. The attitude most closely associated with bolting the Republican Party in 1932 was approval of tariff reduction. This relationship is not at all consonant with the frequent assertion at the time of the election that people not voting in favor of the Democrats, they are voting against the Republican Administration.

Max Weber's view of history was not unrelated to that of Nietzsche. While rejecting the mixture of fact and value-judgement inherent in over-all historical theses and refusing to give pre-eminence to an irrational personality-cult, it was nevertheless based on the assertion of the central dynamic of the individual, drawing his strength from religious ethics and the conflict between rationalizing bureaucracy and creative charisma. Weber feared an ultimate victory of bureaucracy which would rob the concepts of individual responsibility and freedom of their meaning. His attitude to the politics and economics of his time was coloured by these views; he endorsed the ‘will to power’ in both spheres, for the individual as for the nation, and adopted an aristocratic liberalism based on democracy tempered by ‘plebiscitary leaderships’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Weber's views on authority are examined from the point of view of Freudian psychology. On the whole the two fit well. Traditional, charismatic, and legal authority appear to rest, respectively, on re-Oedipal, Oedipal, and post-Oedipal psychological levels. Webers account of prophetic (charismatic) leadership has much in common with, and receives support from, Freud's. However, the point made by several authors, that Weber failed to distinguish sufficiently between personal and institutional authority, seems to be correct. Weber appears to view the latter as a straightforward transferral from the former, but in fact institutional authority rests on a much more complex set of identifications, giving it a very different character. This is especially clear for modern secular institutional authority. Also, the classical and early modern cities may not, as Weber felt, have been characterized by non- legitimate domination but instead may have exhibited a special form of (legitimate) institutional authority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses some aspects of "charisma". Social processes can be explained in terms of the qualities and actions of individual "heroes". In much sociological and political analysis, particularly of underdeveloped countries, theory of charisma, in one form or another, has been used uncritically to explain the power and authority structure in those countries. The term "charisma" will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. An individual may be "treated as leader" when he is believed to have supernatural powers or qualities, irrespective of whether or not these are morally approved. In this case, if the actors believe that an individual has extraordinary powers or qualities which enable him to realize his will, they will obey him. That is to say, the actors' beliefs about an individual's power give that individual a coercive power and the moral evaluation of these qualities is irrelevant to this power. Implied in the theory of charisma is, of course, the assumption that actors follow the leader "blindly" because of his extraordinary powers or qualities and that consequently the means or actions are not related to any ends in a rational way as is characteristic of legal-rational authority.

Argues that political choice takes the form of a choice between two alternatives. Information on the ideological and institutional bases of party charisma in the Third World; Types of party systems; Characteristics of charisma in the post-revolutionary period; Peculiarity of authority structure in the Third World.

Weber's concept of charisma has not been empirically useful to sociology even though it has influenced sociological thinking considerably. The reason is that Weber dealt with charisma more as a psychological than a social phenomenon. The concept can be useful, however, in the analysis of social change if the focus of attention is concentrated on the social context within which charisma develops rather than on charisma or charismatics. Utilizing the example of modern African leadership in Tanganyika, charisma appears in situations where (a) leaders formulate inchoate sentiments deeply held by masses; (b) the expression of such sentiments is seen as hazardous; (c) success--as defined by the relevant social groups--is registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents two abstracts of articles in the field of communication and market news, including "How America Makes Up Its Mind" and "Effects of Personal Qualities on One-Way Communication."