Read section 17.1. As we just read in the previous article, to study politics is to “study power – who gets what, and how”. This section explains that power can be conceptualized both in terms of “domination” and “collective capacity”. In other words, “power” can refer to the ability to get someone to do something they normally would not do, but it also refers to the capacity institutions and people have to act or create. Authority is “accepted power”. People accept the authority of a government or ruler when they believe that the government or ruler can rightly and appropriately exercise power over them. Accepting the authority of the government gives the government legitimacy. This reading introduces the three primary types of authority: traditional, charismatic, and rational-legal. Why do you think legitimacy is such a critical component in the ability to govern effectively? What happens when a government is not seen as legitimate by its citizens?
As completedSince “power” is such an important concept in political science, political scientists have categorized power into three categories: hard power, soft power, and “smart” power. Hard power is the most traditional conceptualization of power and involves force or coercion. Soft power, popularized by scholar and U.S. government official Joseph Nye, is power through persuasion or attraction. Lastly, “smart power” involves the strategic use of soft and/or hard power, depending on the situation.This article offers critiques of the concept of soft power in contemporary international relations. Hallam questions whether the debate over hard and soft power is outdated, particularly considering the Obama administration’s emerging emphasis on “smart power” and the challenges of national security in an unstable international system. As you read, consider the importance of power in political science and think about how power can be exercised. What do you think is the most effective: hard, soft, or smart power?
As completedThis section discusses the three authority types as defined by Max Weber, one of the foremost social theorists of the twentieth century. Weber outlines three primary types of authority: traditional authority, rational-legal authority, and charismatic authority. As you read, ask yourself the following questions:
Which type of authority leads to the most stable form of government, and why? Which type leads to the least stable form of government?
How can one form of authority eventually lead to another? For example, in how can charismatic authority evolve into traditional authority?
Why is the U.S. government primarily characterized by rational-legal authority? Can either of the other two types of authority apply?
Leave a Reply