Abstract
The terms patrimonialism and neo-patrimonialism designate significantly different conceptual instruments. They are used to identify and interpret a range of phenomena. Using as a point of departure Weberian types of partimonial rule the author reconstructs the prototype of patrimonial order. Its key element is an inherent insight of mutual patrimony or patrimonium. It is both instrumental and essential common good that helps to keep together not only the rulers and the ruled but the entire patrimonial order. This and other morphological pattern of order are nothing but ‘blueprints’ for making conflicting desires of order come actual and real. Historical achievements and current practices provide a range of patrimonial hybrids and admixtures to political setups of all kinds. All those arrangements can be interpreted as metamorphoses of the prototype patrimonial order. The author particularly highlights the tripled knot of patrimonialism, bureaucracy and modernity in the current political practices. Conceptually coherent analysis of both functions and dysfunctions of patrimonialism helps to see the potential of patrimonial patterns of order in the ongoing political process. Insufficient and blurred conceptualization of patrimonialism let its dysfunctions loose and deprive us of abilities to overcome them.
Highlights
Background paper for GIGAWorkshop “Neopatrimonialism in Various World Regions”
By that time initial reference to a specific set up for German and European hereditary monarchy was by and large marginalized. In this context it was quite predictable that Max Weber would resort to the word in his grand outline of basic types of rule
Weber’s nomenclature includes ideal type (Idealtyp), pure type, historical type, natural type, empiricalstatistical average type, border type (Grenztyp), strict type. In his “Economy and Society” Max Weber introduced a notion of patrimonialism as a sub-type of traditional domination
Summary
Terms of reference may have a range of dissimilar sorts of meaning that single out specific aspects of the phenomena they refer to. Within broadly construed realist tradition it is possible to use the terms as if they refer to abstract objects in Platonic sense. Such usage is often imbued with exaggerated similarity between an idea and corresponding phenomenon. Within a range of mid-way conceptualist approaches terms could be instrumentalized to grasp or conceive phenomena They may be treated as generalized abilities, instrumental universals, e.g. Aristotelian hylomorphic instantiations or entelechies or even as categories of a kind. Terms may be used as representations of mental models They would develop into structurally heterogeneous fuzzy sets of meanings. On the contrary it aims to clarify alternative approaches to patrimonialism in current social research
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
