Abstract
The elite theory of Max Weber has recently been rediscovered by political scientists and political theorists who have sought to explore both the heuristic and the normative potential of plebiscitary leader democracy. Notwithstanding the merits of this wave of studies, this paper argues that attention should be shifted from Weber's context-specific defence of plebiscitary leadership in post-WWI Germany to his broader conception of charisma as an attempt to grasp the enigma of significant social and political change. Contemporary democratic theory, this paper contends, can fruitfully draw on Weber to sink into the antinomies and ambiguities of a transformative democratic politics.
Highlights
Elite theory occupies a rather ambivalent position in political studies
Despite most elite theorists’ own claims to the contrary, Green submits that competitive elitism is not merely a realist account of how modern mass democracies work, but is a normative theory of democracy, whose moral dimension and progressive potential he seeks to unfold
András Körösényi and his associates have taken the bold step of defending leader democracy on the grounds of its greater realism compared to classical models of democracy, and emphasizing its normative elements (Pakulski and Körösényi 2012)
Summary
Elite theory occupies a rather ambivalent position in political studies. On the one hand, the sociological study of political elites and ruling groups stretches back to the founding generations of modern social science in the late nineteenth century. In contrast to the main thrust of the literature, I propose a change of focus from Weber’s quite specific and context-dependent defence of leader democracy (Führerdemokratie) in post-WWI Germany to his broader concept of charisma To be sure, both Green and Körösényi do not fail to point out the crucial role played by charismatic authority in their theories of plebiscitary/leader democracy. Both Green and Körösényi do not fail to point out the crucial role played by charismatic authority in their theories of plebiscitary/leader democracy They subordinate the former concept to the latter, treating charisma as a specification of the type of leadership implied in their visions of democracy. In the final section, I step beyond the controversies regarding plebiscitary leadership to indicate a different, novel sense in which Weber’s conception of charisma might fruitfully be read by contemporary democratic theorists (4.)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have