Max Weber: politics as a vocation
necessarily produces. After all, "politics as a vocation" is a speech more than a century ago, in the midst of German defeat in war, an eventual revolution in the country and in a very different context.
More than 100 years of its publication and counting, Max Weber’s essay remains of great current and enormous help for personalities interested in understanding the political phenomenon. From his reflection, he provided a series of tools and instruments of analysis that are rigorous and moldable at the same time to follow.
Max Weber was in German economist and sociologist very recovered in his native country and in the world, Weber worked as a university professor at the University of Friburg, and then at the University of Heidelberg. The people who knew him, cataloged him as an intellectual and polemic tireless person. As a great observer of the innovations of his time, Weber focused his work on crucial changes, such as the birth of modern nations based on a professional bureaucracy, and on the expansion of capitalism throughout the world.
It was learned through the years that Max Weber had a short political career, not so efficient in directing politics, but very successful from the knowledge he acquired while in it, he knew how to understand and understand how theworld of politicians and the knowledge that an individual must possess to get involved in that world. Following this experience, he took the initiative for the creation of a book entitled "Politics as a vocation" where he details all the sacrifices and attributes that a person must possess with interest to want to carry a public office.
At a conference given in 1919, at the invitation of Munich’s students, all information about politics explanatory, giving all young tools and formations that the politicians of tomorrow, and of course what they should not do also do also do, and they should not do too, Following all that, I speak of corruption in politics and that many individuals use it as a protection barrier to do a legality, and start from this, it gave rise to the essay that men’s prices of this trial.
We would not like to engage in everything bad, we must also mention the good and all the contributions give us Weber to political theory, and how today, they are still current in the world’s politics. Weber defined politics, as difficult., as the direction on the trajectory of a political entity. The policy consisted and will consist of an extensive and difficult task, that not all people are willing to run. I specify that within it we fight against strong resistance to overcome, at the same time requiring passion and a lot of seriousness.
It never gets to the possible if the impossible is not attempted, but to exercise politics, it is essentialto do, even, everything that is still possible.
Weber in his essay stipulated that “only who is sure not to bend when, from his point of view, the world is too foolish or too abject for what he is offering;Only who, given all adversities, is able to oppose a ‘however’;Only a man constituted of this fate can demonstrate his vocation for politics ’” (Weber M. 1919, p. 7)
The concept of politician is the aspiration to take part in power or to influence its distribution, whether between the different states, already concerned, within the State itself, the different groups of individuals that integrate it.
For Weber, there will always be 3 types of politicians, some encasilla as “the occasional”, who are the people who vote, who protest or do any other political activity, others name others as “semiprofessional politicians” that are those who sporadically try to launchHis candidacy and sometimes optimal them, but he does not have the passion for her and they do it because they always look for a benefit. Finally, but not least are the "professional politicians", which refers to those who perform a position for necessity. In turn, I also mention that in politics there are two ways, living in politics or living for politics, although generally who lives for politics lives on it. But Weber referred to a sense of economy, income. Professional politicians try to achieve power through the vulgar and peaceful recruitment of the party in electoral traffic.
People since time immemorial tend to see politics as a means to achieve money, so a struggle for political power that led to the fact that the mechanisms of this struggle for power are structured throughout history. Weber expressed that those interested in political life are made of nearby followers that provide economic means and ensure the conquest of votes in the political struggle.
Who lives on politics depends on her sustenance of her and the benefits she can receive, will always be in the search to get money from where there is no, you could say that it is from there where the call corrupt political is born, where they often useThose of the law and the power to commit crimes that are penalized by the laws of their own countries, but as they are occupying high charges within it, they will not have any repercussions.
But what they live for politics, have the necessary economic resources for their livelihoods extracted from their personal income that have nothing to do with politics, which allows a legal economic freedom, and this kind of politicians are at the service of somethingbigger, in turn these are not interested in politics to obtain material or economic goods, but are interested in aspects linked to the well -being of their country. Not having that need to obtain benefits from politics, they try to erase that image of political corruption that exists in countries
According to Weber, a politician should have three basic attributes to achieve policy efficiently. One of those attributes is the passion for what it does, this is the ideals that a person possesses. It should be noted that the passion does not make someone politically if it is not given to a reason, reason or circumstance. For this it is necessary to have an aptitude to let reality enter them. In other words, it is essentialA fight against resistances that must be overcome to achieve power.
The second attribute refers to the sense of responsibility, a politiconce he said if he came to power, in this way a politician would develop efficiently in order to convince more people, who for some reason did not do so.
The third to attribute is the moderation, which is also as key as the others, this is that a politician must act and express himself in a controlled way, p
The three aspects that Max Weber mentioned for a politic. If all politicians in the country had, even if it is a little passion for their work aimed in the good of their country, a little sense of responsibility with the position they occupy for development and some seriousness, which for us would also cover thesanity, to make the decisions, then we could have politicians that the inhabitants of a state would like. The policy seen from any perspective is a struggle for power, and against any obstacle, which, in parallel, demands more effort on the part of the politician, a double effort compared to that of any other person. That is why politics becomes something that must be dominated to succeed.
In the conference we appointed at the beginning of this essay, being more specific that of Munich, Weber explained that he will refer to politics as an address and an influence on a political entity, that is to the State. Weber defines the State as "that human community that, within a certain territory claims for itself the monopoly of legitimate physical violence" (Weber M. 1919, p. 10)
It is important to highlight that the State is a relationship of domain of people over people, sustained through the legitimate violence. The State is also considered a human community within the limits of a territory already previously established, and this is an element that distinguishes it, requesting for itself the profit of the legitimate physical violence.
When dealing with the concept of modern state, this arises from the moment when the prince proceeds to the expropriation of private holders of administrative power that he has with him, Weber points out that it is a unit of domination of an institutional nature, successfully in theResults, have been monopolized, as a means of domination, the legitimate physical violence within their territory, “for which it has gathered all the material elements available to its leader, expropriating all the state officials who in their own right had from them andreplacing them with their own hierarchical superiorities ”
After making a general tour of the different forms of state arising in Europe mainly throughout history, Weber begins to talk about the constitutional state, reinstating democracy, making demagogue the classic figure of the West politician. Demagogue is no more a set of strategies to achieve power in one way or another.
“Modern demagogy also uses discourse;But even when he abuses him in overwhelming amounts. It is the present, the political publicist and especially the journalist are the most notable representatives of the figure of demagogue ”(Weber M. 1919, p. 16)
Politicians are those who aspire to the direction of the State, which can be defined, in a more complex way, as follows “the modern state is an institutional domination association that has successfully treated, monopolizing withinA territory legitimate physical violence as a means of domination and that, to this end, has gathered all material means in the hands of its leader and has expropriated all the state officials who previously had them in their own right, replacing them with their own hierarchiesSupremes ". Weber assumed the changes produced from feudal systems to the modern state, from local controls or in relatively small areas to broader territories that allowed a unified direction in political society.
The political development of a nation is achieved through the construction of a State in which the whole of its institutions operates for the benefit of the general interest. The scenario of democracy allows this operation to be carried out with the majority voice of citizens and with the opinion they have about priority problems and issues to address. Weber always alleged the need to make free popular choices that allowed new political leadership to give birth.
In the first years of America, what is called the “Caucos-System” was used that was nothing more than assemblies with all the assembly members who decided which candidate were going to vote, these gathers could last many hours in a row, andthat personally it is not very practical. “Caucus-System, however, is nothing more than a weakened form of the modern structure if compared to the organization of American parties, which the plebiscitary principle coined in an especially early and purely."
The political parties had managed to be ideological and promoters of positions, the latter, by gaining weight against ideology, allowed a process of successful bureaucratization, the bureaucracy was not professionalized. This picture was what in the end prevented the emergence of new political leaderships.
Weber glimpsed that the politicians of the time went from living for politics towards politics. The distinction is not exclusive, but it works to make a first cut that allows us to observe that an official is not equal to politician, which interested Weber to make it clear.
However, following this, politicians’ classes emerged, which could be said that they were not a good example to follow, and these occasions we talked about the Boss.
The BOSS is considered “a capitalist entrepreneur who brings together votes at his own risk. Your first connections may have achieved them " . "The Boss has no firm political principles, it lacks completely convictions and just asks how votes can be achieved".
This type of politicians does not care about anything, nor does it have intentions to learn to do politics, he just cares to win and ready, then he will see what he does. What will you do with politics? Well, not that person could answer that question, this happens when people have erroneous convictions, and simply want to meet egocentric needs without any reason, reason or circumstance.
Political activity must necessarily have an ethical framework, Weber explained it as “all ethically oriented action can be adjusted to two mainly different maxims from each other and irremediably opposite can be oriented according to the ‘ethics of conviction’ or according to the ‘ethics of theResponsibility ‘Despite the irremediable, it is not that conviction implies lack of responsibility or vice versa. The problem occurs when they are raised exclusions, in which case the ethics of conviction acts in politics as testimony, regardless of the results, and the actions have a value.
There are three justifications of the legitimacy of domination: the traditional, charismatic and legality. He focuses exclusively on charismatic, which is when people follow a leader because they believe in him and his qualities. Every leader needs two things: administrative person and administrative material, which must be separated and detached, need people who work with and for him and need resources. For people to be supportive, two things have to give them: material remuneration and social honor.
Now, so that a domination, a power, with an authority that is worth legitimate, can be given in three ways: under the traditional legitimacy that is of the eternal yesterday or the custom;Through the "charismatic legitimacy", of personal, extraordinary grace and finally there is the "legitimacy based on legality", rationally created norms.
There are two categories of state officials, there are professionals and politicians, politicians change as the government is changed, therefore, they develop a sense of demagogue discourse, in order to continue maintaining their power or position, especially make use of thewritten speech of the press, they look for followers to support them, give them their vote and the necessary economic resources.
Weber argues that "whoever gets into politics, that is, who agrees to use power and violence as means, has sealed a pact with the devil". And this implies suffering consequences, acting so that many times the good does not produce good or evil evil, understand that everyday politics is full of ethical paradoxes to which you have to respond in real life, without appealing to the maximumof the sermon of the mountain or the heroicity of the Holy of Assisi. That was one of the explanations for which the man of science could not be an active politician, as aron summarizes: “The vocation of science is unconditionally the truth. The political trade does not always allow it to say ".
We consider that what weber said is totally true, each and every one of his knowledge and theories are true and more than anything, time has proved him right, in Venezuela we could say that much of politicians live from politics, they passFrom one charge to another and simply rotate to continue living from politics, and use it as an instrument to control masses. This of course gives a negative image to politics, because children grow up with the idea that if they become politicians they have their resolved life or that to live well they have to be politicians, which instead of benefiting the country,It harms it, since it is politicians who determine the course of the country, and these do not care about fixing it if not to obtain benefits, and it has nothing to do with political parties, whatever their ideology, it has already become customaryReach a political position only to inflate your income and that is where the root of corruption is.
Unfortunately, in our country Venezuela there are many politicians like this. That is why I believe that what the country really needs politicians who live for politics and that in some way or another can contribute more to the country’s growth. Weber having never exercised a public office, he has more idea of how a politician should be than many who have moved for years in a public office, and this is achieved through the vocation, there are people who were simply born and were born to serve withoutSee first whether or not, they just care about doing things as possible.
Leave feedback