joi, 23 decembrie 2010

Politics as they really are

Mama ei de teorie, cum da jos coaja amagirii, voalul iluziei si arata balaurul asa cum este. Politica. Putere. Violenta. Resurse.

Restul e panglicareala, facere din vorbe, dulce limbism.

:wink:

* * *

What do we understand by politics?

The concept is extremely broad and comprises any kind of independent leadership in action. One speaks of the currency policy of the banks, of the discounting policy of the Reichsbank, of the strike policy of a trade union; one may speak of the educational policy of a municipality or a township, of the policy of the president of a voluntary association, and, finally, even of the policy of a prudent wife who seeks to guide her husband. Tonight, our reflections are, of course, not based upon such a broad concept. We wish to understand by politics only the leadership, or the influencing of the leadership, of a political association, hence today, of a state.

But what is a 'political' association from the sociological point of view? What is a 'state'? Sociologically, the state cannot be defined in terms of its ends. There is scarcely any task that some political association has not taken in hand, and there is no task that one could say has always been exclusive and peculiar to those associations which are designated as political ones: today the state, or historically, those associations which have been the predecessors of the modern state. Ultimately, one can define the modern state sociologically only in terms of the specific means peculiar to it, as to every political association, namely, the use of physical force.

'Every state is founded on force,' said Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk. That is indeed right. If no social institutions existed which knew the use of violence, then the concept of 'state' would be eliminated, and a condition would emerge that could be designated as 'anarchy,' in the specific sense of this word. Of course, force is certainly not the normal or the only means of the state -- nobody says that -- but force is a means specific to the state.

Today the relation between the state and violence is an especially intimate one. In the past, the most varied institutions -- beginning with the sib -- have known the use of physical force as quite normal. Today, however, we have to say that a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.

Note that 'territory' is one of the characteristics of the state. Specifically, at the present time, the right to use physical force is ascribed to other institutions or to individuals only to the extent to which the state permits it. The state is considered the sole source of the 'right' to use violence.

Hence, 'politics' for us means striving to share power or striving to influence the distribution of power, either among states or among groups within a state. This corresponds essentially to ordinary usage. When a question is said to be a 'political' question, when a cabinet minister or an official is said to be a 'political' official, or when a decision is said to be 'politically' determined, what is always meant is that interests in the distribution, maintenance, or transfer of power are decisive for answering the questions and determining the decision or the official's sphere of activity.

He who is active in politics strives for power either as a means in serving other aims, ideal or egoistic, or as 'power for power's sake,' that is, in order to enjoy the prestige-feeling that power gives.


Max Weber, Politics as Vocation

3 comentarii:

Itzic Baseanu spunea...

Ba Turi, bag sama ca nici dracu' (Doamne iarta-ma!), nu-ti mai da tarcoale!...Turi, imi place tipu', baiat giorno, cu barbitza, cu buzitze etc!...Da ce ma taiasi ma Turi?...Asa tare doare Par...na , dracu'(Doamne iarta-ma!) s-o ia da treaba!...Auzi, ia zi ba tatare, taiasi porcu', facusi ghiudemu,(Itzi dau io da batal daca n-ai!) ca io maine fac carnatzii?... Facusi pa....Tii Doamne, ce ti-e si cu astia da la balcon!...Odata vezi ca pica si nu stii da unde li sa trage!...

Itzic Baseanu spunea...

Hai ma Turi, ca in sfarsit, ai si tu unul!...(N-ai mai avea, asa zici tu!...Bine....!).Da tot e bine ca ai macar unu...comentarii, zau ca da mai bine ca "0 comentarii".

Pongo spunea...

Aia cu power-prestige e pe aproape, da nu ala e mechanismu :-). E nitel mai subtil, mai periculos si mai lipsit de Dumnezeu.Cica (zic unii, rai) e cea mai nashpa ispita picabila pe capul omului, prin prisma greutatii refuzului.
Catchul e ca odata cucerita puterea asta absoluta (nb: intotdeauna cu un pretz- inchinarea, sau aplicarea vreunui program test de exemplu) respectivul nu mai are decat un singur lucru de facut: sa pice din postura puterii. Prin moarte (vezi cazul lui d. Sidious si cu ce se ocupa el) sau prin alegeri, cazul mai fericit in care "chinul" respectivului e scurtat la niste ani.
Orice intentii bune (belirea mogulilor de ex:) devin subduse necesitatii perenizarii starii.

Legaturile cu persoane si fapte din prezent sunt,evident, pur intamplatoare si in mod cert, neintentionate