Max Weber’s Conception of “Rationalization” and the 21st Century

W. Outhwaite
{"title":"Max Weber’s Conception of “Rationalization” and the 21st Century","authors":"W. Outhwaite","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2019-2-16-27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Weber’s concept of “rationalization” is rightly seen as the core of his mature thought. At the same time, there has been increasing attention to his “ambivalence” towards the rationalization of economic, administrative and political process-es, and of the conduct of life altogether. The themes of his nationalism and the irrational tendencies of his complex personality have also become increasingly prominent. While nationalism may not be per se irrational, any nationalist is logically compelled (at least in principle) to recognize the legitimacy of other - possibly opposed - nationalisms. Weber attempted to avoid this paradox of nationalism by stressing the particular responsibility of larger states, albeit with the problematic concept of the “Herrenvolk.” This article explores Weber’s nationalism and current nationalist and populist tendencies, in the light of his conception of sovereignty, democracy and plebiscitary leadership (Fuhrerdemo-kratie). “Sovereignty,” I suggest, has become a shibboleth in the twenty-first century, notably in the US, Russia, Tur-key, Hungary and Poland, and in the current debacle in the UK. Although Weber uses the word “sovereignty” very rarely, the concept is at the centre of his sociology of the state and also, I suggest, of his conception of rationalization. There is a parallel with his use of the term “nation.”","PeriodicalId":128581,"journal":{"name":"The Contemporary Relevance of a Classic: Max Weber in the 21st Century","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Contemporary Relevance of a Classic: Max Weber in the 21st Century","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2019-2-16-27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Weber’s concept of “rationalization” is rightly seen as the core of his mature thought. At the same time, there has been increasing attention to his “ambivalence” towards the rationalization of economic, administrative and political process-es, and of the conduct of life altogether. The themes of his nationalism and the irrational tendencies of his complex personality have also become increasingly prominent. While nationalism may not be per se irrational, any nationalist is logically compelled (at least in principle) to recognize the legitimacy of other - possibly opposed - nationalisms. Weber attempted to avoid this paradox of nationalism by stressing the particular responsibility of larger states, albeit with the problematic concept of the “Herrenvolk.” This article explores Weber’s nationalism and current nationalist and populist tendencies, in the light of his conception of sovereignty, democracy and plebiscitary leadership (Fuhrerdemo-kratie). “Sovereignty,” I suggest, has become a shibboleth in the twenty-first century, notably in the US, Russia, Tur-key, Hungary and Poland, and in the current debacle in the UK. Although Weber uses the word “sovereignty” very rarely, the concept is at the centre of his sociology of the state and also, I suggest, of his conception of rationalization. There is a parallel with his use of the term “nation.”
马克思·韦伯的“理性化”概念与21世纪
韦伯的“理性化”概念被正确地视为其成熟思想的核心。与此同时,人们越来越注意到他对经济、行政和政治进程以及整个生活行为合理化的“矛盾心理”。他的民族主义主题和复杂人格的非理性倾向也日益突出。虽然民族主义本身可能不是非理性的,但任何民族主义者在逻辑上(至少在原则上)都被迫承认其他可能反对的民族主义的合法性。韦伯试图通过强调大国的特殊责任来避免民族主义的悖论,尽管他提出了有问题的“Herrenvolk”概念。本文根据韦伯的主权、民主和公民投票领导(fuhrerdemokratie)概念,探讨了韦伯的民族主义以及当前的民族主义和民粹主义倾向。我认为,“主权”在21世纪已成为一种陈腐的说法,尤其是在美国、俄罗斯、土耳其、匈牙利和波兰,以及当前英国的崩溃中。虽然韦伯很少使用“主权”这个词,但这个概念是他的国家社会学的中心,我认为,也是他的理性化概念的中心。这与他使用“国家”一词有相似之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信