Monday, April 23, 2012

Politic as a Vaction

Max Webber “Politics as a Vation”
 “'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.”
Max Weber a German sociologist provides the speech “Politics as a Vacation” to students at the University of Munich in 1918. In his speech he raises questions that concerns importance of political action in the way of life. This speech relate to nihilism in regard to concept of the will to power. German uses power as a role to accomplish their self-interest, political, socially and economically.
The passage that is appealing is where he quotes “Every state is founded on force”. Here he describes a state as an authority having control to the legal means of organized violence with in a define territory. He indicates that the use of physical force is designating an important attribute of the state’s sovereignty. This means that the police and the military are the main mechanisms that support a claim on “monopoly of legitimate physical force in enforcement of its order.”  It shows that the state is important notion in politics; it demonstrates the link between the state and authority.  
This statement seems to be true in past and present society. Many nations have been taken by physical force.  Nation has use force as a means to an end; in which the state uses violence as legitimate to achieve its end. Violence, such as war and crime is used to accomplish their goal.
It is interesting, this subject relate to today’s situations in many countries, especially in country like Iraq. Where nation are dominated and government expresses desire to reign with military group. This can be seen in the case of the “Anbar Awakening” found in the New York  Times under the heading “In a Force for Iraqi Calm, Seeds of Conflict” written by Alissa J. Rubin and Damien Cave  December 23,2007. It states that “In Ramadi, Iraq, improved security provided by local tribes has allowed greater movement, but questions remain about their loyalty and sustainability.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/world/middleeast/23awakening.html?ei=5090&en=93b15c431c7f9bbe&ex=1356066000&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
In Addition, private individuals and organization have use force to protect themselves and their property.  Organizations continue to use power with an administrative staff to carry out the needs and demands of the organization in order to maintain its objectives.

2 comments:

  1. It is very true that politics was derived through the striving to share power among the politicians

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Gloria,

    Good analysis of Weber. The passage you took is the most famous passage from the speech. The concept of a "failed state" is a state cannot claim the monopoly of violence this has been used to describe states like Somalia and as you suggest as well, Iraq (and Afghanistan). However some question the use of this concept. Also as you suggest it is not clear why Weber defines power so closely with the state when it is clear that other non-state organizations use (and have always used) power as well.

    ReplyDelete