Theories of subjectivity Free Essay Example, 2250 words

Butler’s take on this matter is both compatible and a little critical. To start with, Butler shares Foucault’s insistence that subjectivity, the experience of the â€Å"interior† self, is but an effect. We have Sonia Kruks (2001) insight to underscore the point: †¦ for Butler, as for Foucault, there are only two possibilities: the subject is conceived either as fully constituting or as constituted tout court. And like Foucault – at least in his explicit pronouncements on this issue – Butler conceives the subject as entirely constituted. (p. 72) When Foucault (1979) concluded that â€Å"the soul is the effect and instrument of a political anatomy; the soul is the prison of the body, † (p. 30) Butler did not object. She extensively analyzed this statement along with centuries-old arguments of Aristotle, particularly highlighting that the soul as described by Foucault, â€Å"is an instrument of power, forms and frames the body, stamps it, and in stamping it, brings it into being. † (p. 34) On the other hand, Butler faulted Foucault for elaborating an overly passive conception of the body as the surface of disciplinary action. She particularly argued that gender is produced through a series of acts that are always internally discontinuous, rather than knit closely together in the lived intentionality of a body-subject. We will write a custom essay sample on Theories of subjectivity or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now (Kruks p. 72) However, Butler followed Foucault, in studying the subject as a contingent identity category where is continually being produced instead of a pre-defined or pre-existing object that is finally represented. On Feminism Foucault’s position contributed to most of Butler’s arguments on the issue. As with the other sectors in the issue of sexuality, feminism is addressed by Foucault using his desexualization approach. The objective of this strategy, according to Simons, is to detach people from their sexually defined identities, such as â€Å"hysterical† women. We quote: The validity of Faucault’s position for feminism rests on an argument that women in particular are constrained by oppressive sexual subjectivities. Effective desexualization requires an analysis of how sex and subjectifying power are linked. The strategy of desexualization for Faucault is thus not only a question of feminism, but of a wider resistance to our subjection primarily as sexual subjects. (p. 107) Here, we draw some parallel to Butler’s arguments, who for her part, refused to join most feminists adhering to the humanist theory calling for extra-political grounds of exposing the plight of women and advocating feminism.

The Renaissance And Italian Renaissance - 961 Words

The Renaissance (rebirth), was a time in which all art became more personalized and represented more than we see. There were two major stages in the Western European/ Italian Renaissance: Early Renaissance and High Renaissance. It gave patrons a new outlook on art and the world. Styles such as Mannerism, Fresco, and Parietal help advance art in western Europe. Most of the Renaissance works were religious,or had had something to do with the ancient times (ancient greece and roman culture). Not only was is a re-birth of art, it was a re-birth of scientific thinking and studying architecture. Although there are two major sections to the Renaissance, there are very few differences between the two periods of time in the 15th and 16th†¦show more content†¦Mannerism was huge in Italy. One of the greatest pieces created in this style was Leonardo’s ‘Mona Lisa’. Leonardo uses mysterious elements for the background, it recalls one of his other lesser known painting s named ‘Madonna of the Rocks’. The reason this piece is so fascinating is because Leonardo finished very few of his works. He did, however have a notebook of â€Å"Renaissance Drawings†. Since Leonardo was an architect as well as an artist, this led him to create some of the greatest technology man has ever known. They also resembled his ideas of what the Renaissance meant to him and the ideas he gained from this re-birth. Some of Leonardo’s tactics are still used today. Take cutaways for example. This style of imagery was used long before the age of X-Rays. Leonardo was not the only one with Renaissance Drawings. It was common for a lot of Renaissance artists to have notebooks full of drawings. Artists usually used silverpoint stylus when drawing in their notebook. For other works, artists used different materials (ink pen, chalk, charcoal, brush, graphite/lead). This has lead me to believe that artists used different materials to create different moods , and to give each piece a different meaning. Another big name in the Renaissance was Raphael (Raffaello Santi). It is said that Raphael mostly likely learned his tactics and roots of Renaissance art from his father, Giovanni Santi.Show MoreRelatedThe Italian Renaissance And The Renaissance1424 Words   |  6 PagesThe Italian Renaissance was an explosion of art, writing, and thought, that roughly lasted between 1300 to 1600. In this time each citizen, countrymen, or villager had and performed different jobs and careers. Humanism the study of Greek and Roman writings, art, and architecture, initially jump started the Renaissance, and the need for art. Artists now were inspired to use life like art and linear perspective, so art seemed and was more realistic. The start of the Italian Renaissance was theRead MoreRenaissance And The Italian Renaissance1396 Words   |  6 PagesThe Italian Renaissance had two distinct periods during its lifetime. The first being the â€Å"Early R enaissance†, which took place between the late 13th and the early 14th centuries. The second period was known as the â€Å"High Renaissance†, which took place during the 15th and 16th centuries. These two periods had very distinct foundations and styles behind the art and architecture of their respective periods. The Early Renaissance revived many old themes which later became the foundations for the HighRead MoreItalian Renaissance And The Renaissance910 Words   |  4 PagesIn the late 14th century to the 16th century, the Italian Renaissance was taking place and moving from the Middle Ages at a time when the Catholic Church was indomitable to a period called The Renaissance. After this â€Å"rebirth† in Italy began, it started spreading to other countries to then produce a French Renaissance, an English Renaissance, and so on. Italy served a sort of birth place for the Renaissance in European culture. During this time period, more and more people were placing humans asRead MoreThe Italian Renaissance And The Renaissance1158 Words   |  5 PagesThe Renaissance period is known for the revival of the classical art and intellect born in ancient Greece and Rome. The Renaissance is also a time that is marked by growth, exploration, and rebirth. The Italian Renaissance started in Florence and progressively made its way into Venice and then into the great city of Rome. During the Renaissance, Rome was home to some of the renowned works of art and the finest architectural masterpieces in the world - too many that still holds true today. Along withRead MoreThe Italian Renaissance1558 Words   |  7 Pages Julianna Plunkett Ms. McGuire British Literature 11 06/10/15 The Italian Renaissance began in the mid-fourteenth century, and was marked by a turn from medieval life and values dominated by the Church toward the philosophical principles of humanism. The Italian people, especially the educated middle class, became interested in individual achievements and emphasized life in this world, as opposed to preparation for life in the next world, which was stressedRead MoreThe Italian Renaissance870 Words   |  4 Pagescentury, Italy was divided into many self-governing city sates. Florence, an independent republic and third largest city in Europe at the time, was the motherland of the Italian Renaissance. This was an enlightening time of â€Å"rebirth† that began directly after the Middle Ages (History.com Staff). Florence was the birthplace of the Renaissance due to its location, prosperity, and cultural amalgamation. WHY IS ITS LOCATION SO SPECIAL - why not somewhere else? Italy consisted of communes, or city-states, ruledRead MoreThe Italian Renaissance1228 Words   |  5 PagesThe Italian Renaissance was a time for great cultural change and achievements, which began in Italy approximately during the 13th century and lasted up until the 16th century. It marked the transition between the Dark Ages and Early Modern Europe. The European Renaissance originated in Central Italy, and centered in the city of Florence.i The distinctive characteristics of northern Italian states such as art, literature, philosophy, and culture produced an atmosphere of learning and artistic expressionRead MoreComparing The Italian And Italian Renaissance1748 Words   |  7 PagesNorthern Renaissance and Italian Renaissance Differences between the Italian and Northern Renaissance The Renaissance was a period of great cultural and technological changes which swept Europe from the end of the 13 century. It was integral in developing Europe into a powerhouse. Although, each part of Europe was subjected to different changes, there were two primary renaissances which were most notable. They were the Italian and the Northern renaissance. Both of these renaissances had a profoundRead MoreChildbirth And The Italian Renaissance1741 Words   |  7 PagesChildbirth and Childbearing in Renaissance Italy for upper status woman, was far different than what childbearing is compared to today’s standards. In renaissance Italy it was said that woman only had one purpose and that purpose was to have many legitimate babies, especially for the nobility and upper status couples. From having these babies, the family could inherit a lot of wealth (King, M. L., 2003). This differs greatly in todays society, as now woman’s primary function is not only to produceRead Mor eThe Rise Of The Italian Renaissance1287 Words   |  6 PagesThe Italian Renaissance, in contrast to the conservative attitude of the Middle Ages, introduced a society dominated by a secular, humanistic spirit. One of the most historically significant events of the Renaissance was the Reformation. Some people argue that the Reformation was a rejection the secular spirit of the Italian Renaissance. Others assert that the Reformation was an embracement of these secular ideas. However as with many questions, this issue cannot be given a definite answer. The events

Max Weber Free Essays

Max Weber on Religion Max Weber, a German social scientist born in 1864, felt religion played an important role in society. Weber attended the University of Berlin where he studied economics and law, along with several other subjects including philosophy, religion and art. He had three tools of sociological inquiry that focused on explaining human actions. We will write a custom essay sample on Max Weber or any similar topic only for you Order Now Weber’s first principle of Verstehen is the German term for â€Å"understanding. † This principle states that we cannot explain the actions of humans because they are not driven by external factors but by internal values held by the individual. The second is Ideal-Typus, which states that we form a purposeful exaggeration of what should be. And lastly, his principle of Values states that when dealing with science, values should not be mixed in. Also facts and values are very different things. In Weber’s first major work on religion, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, he claim’s â€Å"that there is a close connection between religion, the rise of economic capitalism, and the birth of modern civilization in Western Europe† (Pals 160). He observed that the Protestants were leading in business and he concluded that they did everything following the will God in their lives. Therefore, Weber believed that religion does affect ones behavior causing it to affect the economy. In, Sociology of Religion, Weber focuses on three different religious leaders. The first is a magician. For Weber, religion is something that is fixed with special experiences, or â€Å"ecstatic states†, and magicians are those that are put â€Å"beyond the realm of everyday activity and disclose themselves to another realm of reality† (Pals 166). Magicians would be called to cure illnesses or assist in the growth of crops. Weber thinks that they are â€Å"permanently endowed with charisma† which is key in a religious leader. The second religious leader that Weber talks about is a priest. They are usually in charge of religious rituals held in a temple. And lastly, the third of the religious leaders is the prophet. They are the bearers of charisma. Weber’s theory on religion is not one that I completely agree with but it is one that I found interesting. How to cite Max Weber, Essay examples Max Weber Free Essays string(133) " ideal lying behind this is that if the official has any source of income apart from a salary he will not reliably follow the rules\." POL264 Modern Political Theory MAX WEBER: ON BUREAUCRACY John Kilcullen Macquarie University Copyright (c) 1996, R. J. Kilcullen. We will write a custom essay sample on Max Weber or any similar topic only for you Order Now See Marx on Capitalism Reading Guide 8: Max Weber ‘GM’ refers to H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (trans. and ed. ), From Max Weber (New York, 1946) (H/33/. W36). ‘SEO’ refers to Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, tr. Henderson and Parsons (New York, 1947) ((HB/175/. W364). ‘ES’ refers to Max Weber, Economy and Society, ed. G. Roth and C. Wittich (New York, 1968) (HM/57/. W342). Beetham’ refers to David Beetham, Max Weber and the Theory of Modern Politics (London, 1974) (JA/76/. B37). In this lecture I want to look at what Weber says about bureaucracy, in G and M, p. 196 ff, and in SEO, p. 329 ff. First, something about the word. ‘Bureau’ (French, borrowed into German) is a desk, or by extension an office (as in ‘I will be at the office tomorrow’; ‘I work at the Bureau of Statistics’). ‘Bureaucracy’ is rule conducted from a desk or office, i. e. by the preparation and dispatch of written documents – or, these days, their electronic equivalent. In the office are kept records of communications sent and received, the files or archives, consulted in preparing new ones. This kind of rule is of course not found in the ancient classifications of kinds of government: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy – and bureaucracy? In fact it does not belong in such a classification. It is a servant of government, a means by which a monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, or other form of government, rules. Those who invented the word wanted to suggest that the servant was trying to become the master. Weber is of course aware of this tendency; in fact he attacked the pretensions of the Prussian bureaucracy to be an objective and neutral servant of society, above politics, and emphasized that every bureaucracy has interests of its own, and connections with other social strata (especially among the upper classes); see Beetham, chapter 3. But formally and in theory the bureaucracy is merely a means, and this is largely true also in practice: someone must provide policy direction and back the bureaucrat up (if necessary) with force. At the top of a bureaucratic organization, there is necessarily an element which is at least not purely bureaucratic’, SEO, p. 335, to give policy direction. In the middle ages the most effective kings ruled from horseback: they travelled round the country, armed, accompanied by armed men, and enforced their will. They were prepared if necessary to enforce their will on their armed companions by personal combat, though their prestige was such that t his was seldom necessary. The king was accompanied also by ‘clerks’, i. e. lergy, who could read and write, who took along a chest containing records and writing materials; the modern bureaucracy developed from this. In modern countries the ruler does not have to fight in person, or travel round much; he or she rules by sending messages, through a bureau. The messages are usually acted on mainly because of the government’s moral authority or prestige (a ‘status’ phenomenon), but also because they can be backed by force, by a ‘staff’ of police or soldiers. As Weber points out (e. g. SEO, pp. 330-1), armies have been bureaucratized. Napoleon had to watch his battle from horseback, but the modern general receives and sends messages. Napoleon had a ‘staff’, officers who galloped off with written messages, the modern army has a ‘general staff’; the Prussian general staff was in Weber’s time regarded with pride one of the key institutions of the German empire – it was in Weber’s terms a bureaucracy. As he also points out, not only government services but also political parties, churches, educational institutions, and private businesses, and many other institutions have ureaucracies. That is, they all have a professional staff for keeping records and sending communications which will be regarded, at least by other staff of the same institution, as authoritative directions. Bureaucracies are found in ancient Egypt, ancient Rome, in the middle ages (notably the bureaucracy that served the pope). Bureaucracy is a pervasive feature of modern societies, ever growing in import ance, Weber believed. Weber sets out an ‘ideal type’ (see last lecture) for bureaucracy, characterised by an elaborate hierarchical division of labour directed by explicit rules impersonally applied, staffed by full-time, life-time, professionals, who do not in any sense own the ‘means of administration’, or their jobs, or the sources of their funds, and live off a salary, not from income derived directly from the performance of their job. These are all features found in the public service, in the offices of private firms, in universities, and so on. Let me comment on these points, starting with the ‘economic’ features. There have in history been governments whose members made no distinction in resources, income, expenditure, etc. between public and private. Weber calls these ‘patrimonial’ (from the Roman law term for property that can be bought or sold). In Europe in the middle ages, for example, ‘jurisdiction’ was often as much a piece of property as a building or a horse. A kingdom might change hands as part of a marriage settlement. This was not true of jurisdiction and property in the Church, which did distinguish the prelate’s private property from that of his church, and did not allow jurisdiction to be inherited or transferred as property; it forbade ‘simony’ (buying and selling office in the church), and enforced celibacy to keep church office and property from falling into the patrimony of families. Weber also speaks of ‘prebends’ or ‘benefices’ (terms used in the medieval Church), meaning an office to which is attached some income-yielding property, e. g. farm, or tithes, or tax-gathering rights, from which the office holder lives–but this property does not belong to the beneficiary/prebendary and cannot be sold or bequeathed. The modern bureaucrat is even further removed from property: he or she does not have a prebend, but is paid a salary. Bureaucrats are not allowed to charge fees for themselves (if fees are charged they belong to the government, fi rm, etc. ), or to accept gifts. The ideal lying behind this is that if the official has any source of income apart from a salary he will not reliably follow the rules. You read "Max Weber" in category "Papers" Reliable following of the official rules is one of the highest values in a bureaucracy. The modern bureaucrat does not own his job (SEO, p. 332). Some governments have sold offices, to raise money. This was true, for example, of judicial positions in 18th century France, of commissions in the army and navy in most European countries into the 19th century. The vested rights of office holders were an obstacle to reorganization, an impediment to efficiency; so they were bought out, or expropriated with compensation. Bureaucrats do not own the ‘means of administration’ – the computers, the furniture, the files, etc. Weber suggests a parallel with capitalist productive enterprise (GM, pp. 81-2). Similarly, in modern armies the soldier does not own his weapons, whereas in ancient armies he did (GM, pp. 221-2). For example, in ancient Rome when the army was called together the ‘classes’ were expected to come equipped to a certain standard at their own expense – ‘classification’ was a form of taxation. Soldiers were expected to bring money to buy food from the locals (when they did not take what they wanted by force); they got no pay or provisions. In modern educational institutions teachers do not own what they use (in medieval universities originally they did, and in fact each ‘master’ owned a school which was a private business enterprise). ‘The bureaucratization of†¦ the universities is a function of the increasing demand for material means of management†¦ Through the concentration of such means in the hands of the privileged head of the institute, the mass of researchers and docents (lecturers) are separated from their â€Å"means of production† in the same way as capitalist enterprise has separated the workers from theirs’, GM, pp. 23-4. In the modern army, public service, private firm, the equipment is provided by the organization partly because this is more efficient now that it is so elaborate and expensive. The modern bureaucrat is a full-time, life-time professional; this requires a sufficient salary and job security, because otherwise people will not stay in the job full ti me for life. Unless they do, the organization will not be efficient. It takes time and experience to learn the job, not so much because it is difficult to perform the particular task, but because it all has to be coordinated. An elaborate division of labour requires stability of staff. Because of the nature of bureaucratic work, and also perhaps because of the importance of training and coordination in the job, the bureaucracy wants educated recruits. Their education will be attested by some certificate (partly just to prove they have been educated, but also perhaps because a bureaucracy likes to work with clear impersonal criteria). Weber speaks of ‘credentialism’, the preoccupation evident in modern societies with formal educational qualifications. All these things – credentials, fixed salary, tenure, stability of staffing, Weber incorporates into his ideal type. They are all required, he believes, for the efficient functioning of an administrative machine. Another feature is the impersonal application of general rules, both to the outsiders the organization deals with, and to its own staff. The Taxation Commissioner’s staff impersonally, objectively, apply the rules to the taxpayer, and their own duties and rights within the organization are defined by rules applied to them impersonally by their superiors. In Weber’s mind this is the most important feature of bureaucracy. It underlies the features we have been commenting on up to this point: bureaucrats do not own their equipment or their job, and receive a fixed salary etc. , because these things ensure reliable rule-following. In ESO he treats of bureaucracy under the heading of Types of Legitimate Authority. There are three types: rational, traditional and charismatic. Charismatic authority is regarded as legitimate, and works, because followers are personally devoted to the ‘gifted’ leader. Traditional authority is regarded as legitimate because everyone has always obeyed whoever was in the leader’s position, and no one thinks of disputing his authority. Rational authority is the ‘rule of law’: it exists in a community in which there is a moral attitude of respect for the law as such, or because the law has been arrived at in a way that is regarded as legitimate. Rulers are recognised and obeyed if they can show a warrant in the law. Bureaucracy obviously exists within such a framework: even in the bureaucracy of a private firm, subordinates want to be assured that orders are properly authorised. Bureaucracy is the most efficient way of implementing the rule of law: the legal rules are recorded, studied, and applied in a carefully considered and reliable way to individual cases. Why does Weber regard the rule of law as ‘rational’? One possible answer is suggested by his statement that ‘any given legal norm may be established†¦ on grounds of expediency or rational values or both, with a claim to obedience’, SEO, p. 329. ‘Expediency’ is, in Weber’s thinking, one of the two main forms of rationality, and ‘rational values’ is the other. So he is saying that law may be rational in either or both of those ways, and (therefore? ) claim obedience. Insofar as the law is rational, obedience is rational, and the rule of law is rational. In other places he emphasises the rationality of bureaucracy in precisely the first of those two senses. So let me explain the two senses more carefully. He distinguishes the ‘zweckrationell’ from the ‘wertrationell’, the ‘goal-rational’ and the ‘value-rational’ (SEO, p. 115). ‘Zweck’ means end, purpose, goal. Goal-rational behaviour is whatever course of conduct is well-adapted as a means to one’s ends, whatever they may be; i. e. it is economic efficiency from the actor’s point of view – given that these are my goals, and these are the resources available to me, what is the effective way of achieving these goals? The Nazi ‘final solution’ might be said to be rational if it really was an efficient solution to what its proponents saw as a problem, whether they were right to see it as a problem or not, and whether it was moral or immoral. And very often Weber writes as if the intelligent choice of means is all that rationality can be. But from time to time he says that the rationality of actions is not always determined by their effectiveness in furthering goals, but sometimes by some other sort of relation to values that are not goals, and that goals and other values also can be rational or irrational. For example, to tell a lie may be an effective means of furthering one’s goals, but it may violate a moral value, a value that truth-telling serves in some sense other than as a means to achieve a goal; and truthfulness is not a goal, but a ‘value’ of some other sort (we also ‘value’ ultimate goals). So occasionally he distinguishes between ‘goal-rationality’ – effectiveness in serving one’s goals whatever they are, rational or irrational – and ‘value-rationality’, the rationality of goals (and not merely as means to some ulterior goal) and other values, and of actions in their relation (otherwise than as means) to some value. But only occasionally: often he treats rationality as synonymous with efficiency. And it is in this sense, I think, that he means that bureaucracy is rational in the following: ‘Experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative organization†¦ is†¦ capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency, and is in this sense formally the most rational known means of carrying out imperative control over human beings. It is superior to any other form in precision, in stability, in the stringency of its discipline, and in its reliability. It thus makes possible a particularly high degree of calculability of results for the heads of organization and for those acting in relation to it. It is finally superior both in intensive efficiency and in the scope of its operations, and is formally capable of application to all kinds of administrative tasks’, ESO, p. 337. Weber is thus not one of those who regard bureaucracy as synonymous with inefficiency: quite the reverse, it is the supremely efficient way of conducting administration. This is why is has been adopted by capitalistic firms, and in every institution. An institution served by a bureaucracy will out-perform its competitors, and prevail in the struggle for survival: bureaucracy has spread and continues to spread because of its survival value for social institutions. ‘When those subject to bureaucratic control seek to escape the influence of the existing bureaucratic apparatus, this is normally possible only by creating an organization of their own which is equally subject to the process of bureaucratization’, GM, p. 38 – because they can’t beat a bureaucracy except with the aid of another one. (This is the theme of the book on Political Parties by Weber’s protege Roberto Michels; his book shows how the Marxist Social Democratic Party, despite its belief in internal democracy, had become thoroughly bureaucratized and undemocratic. Later Trotsky explained Stalinism as a ‘bureaucratic deformation’ of Marxism. ) Just as Adam Smith’s pin makers who divide their labour will make more pins and sell them more cheaply than their ld-fashioned competitors, and will drive them out of the market, so an army with a general staff, a government with a bureaucracy, a pope with a chancery, a firm with an efficient office, will prevail over their competitors. Bureaucracy is in fact the division of labour applied to administration, and bureaucracy occupies the same place in Weber’s account of the development of modern civilization as division of labour in general occupies in Adam Smith’s account. For Weber this species of division of labour is more fundamental than the others because it initiates and orders other divisions of labour. Instructions come to the factory floor from the office. Just as Adam Smith saw division of labour in general as the cause of progress toward modern, generically commercial, society, so Weber sees bureaucracy as one of the most important causes of the development of capitalism specifically. He points to many cooperating causes (see Collins), and in The Spirit of Capitalism puts some emphasis on the moral causes – on the factors that made people strive for ever increasing profit, and to use their profits not for consumption but for further investment. But among the causal factors he often mentions the adoption of rational accounting methods: no amount of will to make a profit, or willingness to invest, would have had the desired result if investment and management had not been guided by systematic accounting, carried on of course increasingly by a bureaucracy. Once some began to be systematic others had to follow suit or go under. Labourers were ‘separated’ from the old-fashioned means of production by the superior effectiveness of production guided by systematic accounting – they could get a better living as employees. Capitalists adopted machinery and other innovations when their bureaucracy analyzing the possibilities of investment found that such innovation would be profitable. In fact a bureaucracy finds its own capitalists. As modern Weberians have pointed out, modern firms are run, not by owners, but by their managers, who often initiate the issuing of shares to raise capital, or seek loans or investments. But although Weber regards bureaucracy as supremely efficient, he regards its inevitable triumph with distaste. Paralleling the distinction between ‘goal-rational’ and ‘value-rational’ (and perhaps the same distinction in other words) is a distinction between ‘formal’ and ‘substantive’ rationality. Society is ‘formally’ rational when things are organized to maximise the attainment of people’s goals, whatever they are. But it may be formally rational without being ‘substantively’ rational, because this organization is inimical to values rationally paramount over the goals actually served. One of these values is personal freedom, to which bureaucracy is inimical. The quality which best guarantees promotion [in a bureaucracy] is a measure of pliancy toward the apparatus,†¦ of â€Å"convenience† for his superior’, ES, p. 1449. Socialism would mean one unified bureaucratic system: at least now there are alternative and competing bureaucracies; see ES, pp. 1402-3, 1453-4, and Beetham, pp. 82-9. So for Weber bureaucracy occupies the place capitalism has for Marx, of the admired enemy, spreading inexorably throughout the world and into every department of life. But Weber foresees no ‘death-knell’. Bureaucracy is inescapable. But Weber does not believe that there is no point in resisting the inevitable. He was himself politically active, in a despairing kind of way – he did not expect to have success, but he went on ‘resolutely’, like a Stoic. Weber as politician takes his stand on certain values although (as a scientist) he cannot rationally justify them, and takes ‘responsibility’ for organising action aimed at realising those values although he knows that action may fail. Weber contrasts the status honour of the bureaucrat with the responsibility of politician; see ES, pp. 1403-4, 1417, 1438. If a bureaucrat’s superior gives him a directive he considers wrong he should object, but if the superior insists ‘it is his duty and even his honour to carry it out as if it corresponded to his innermost conviction’, On the other hand ‘the politician must publicly reject the responsibility for political actions that run counter to his convictions and must sacrifice his office to them’. A genuine political leader will be ready to accept responsibility for morally dubious action, since the different parts of our value system are irreconcilably in conflict; GM pp. 118-28, 147ff. ‘The essence of politics is struggle’ (ES, pp. 1415, 1450) to attain power; political leaders must be selected through competitive struggle. They will enter parliament only if that is the way to real power; see ES, pp. 1409, 1414, 1420-1, 1450. The real leader’s task is not merely to compromise interests as if politics were like a market place, but to take a stand on issues that transcend material interests; see Beetham, pp. 222-6, 144-7. A person is more likely to care about such issues, and be willing to sacrifice office to conviction, if he is financially independent – he must live ‘for’, not ‘off’ politics; see ES, pp. 1427, 1448, and GM pp. 84-5. See Max Weber on Capitalism Return to Politics, Philosophy and Medieval Studies How to cite Max Weber, Papers Max Weber Free Essays This paper intends to highlight the facts concerning Max Weber. This includes general history, his education, major contributions, theories, as well as, the critical contributions he made. General History Max Weber was born in Erfurt, South Germany in 21 April 1864 (Morrison, 1995). We will write a custom essay sample on Max Weber or any similar topic only for you Order Now He passed away in June 1920 (Morrison, 1995). He brilliantly finished school at an early age and then went on to teach at several universities in Germany while delivering thought-provoking lectures and writing what are to be considered his major contributions to politics, sociology, economics etc (Morrison, 1995). Education Max Weber was an outstanding student (Morrison, 1995). Furthermore, he holds a bachelor’s degree in law and a doctorate in political economy which he both earned in Berlin (Morrison, 1995). Moreover, he also attended University of Heidelberg, as well as, University of Gottingen (Morrison, 1995). Major Contributions Max Weber’s contribution to the world of economy, law public administration, philosophy, political economy, politics, as well as, sociology include the following: 1) Major research projects on capitalism, methodology, and religion like the â€Å"The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism† specifically â€Å"The Religions of the East† wherein he looked into the relationship between religious and philosophical ideas in the east and the development, (as well as, inadequacy of it) of capitalism in that geographical area; 2) â€Å"Economy and Society† which is taken to be Max Weber’s most ambitious theoretical and historical work; 3) theory of bureaucracy; 4) types of legitimate domination; 5) concept of rationality; 6) etc (Morrison, 1995). Theories Max Weber’s theories are categorized under â€Å"bureaucracy† (Morrison, 1995). For him, this concerns the continuous, rational, professionalized, as well as, rule-governed form of administration (Morrison, 1995). In addition to that, Weber believes that bureaucracy is a   form of an administration that do not entail any kind of personal, irrational, or emotional feelings (Morrison, 1995). Furthermore, he associated the phenomenon of bureaucratic development or bureaucratization with rationalization, as well as, modernization (Morrison, 1995). Moreover, he also claimed that bureaucratic development is related to the division of labor or specialization, in terms of administration and not economic production (Morrison, 1995). Also, he said that bureaucracy is excellent since it is characterized by efficiency, impartiality, as well as, efficiency but from it also arise dangers including its incompatibility with democracy, as well as, alienation of the public from the processes of bureaucracy (Morrison, 1995). Critical Contributions One of the most critical contributions of Max Weber is known as the legitimate types of authority (Morrison, 1995). First of all, he claims that legitimate authority and legitimate domination is one and the same (Morrison, 1995). Second, he states that domination is not similar with power (Morrison, 1995). Explaining further, â€Å"power according to Max Weber is the capacity of an individual to do something even if resistance comes into play while domination is a right of the ruler to command and to be obeyed (Morrison, 1995). Third, according to him the three types of legitimate domination or authority are the following: 1) rational-legal, which is based on legal precepts and rules and that obedience is something that is impersonally owed and obligatory wherein an order is the source of authority; 2) traditional, which is established on what norms are acceptable and practiced, including rites and rituals which are carried out wherein the family is the source of authority; and 3) charismatic, which is instituted in the qualities of the leader considered to be extraordinary especially when it comes to the capability of the leader to inspire his followers eventually making his followers obey him (Morrison, 1995). References Morrison, K. (1995). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: Formations of Modern Social Thought. London: Sage Productions.       How to cite Max Weber, Essay examples

Case Study of Gambotto v WCP Ltd-Free-Samples-Myassignementhelp.com

Question: Recognise the laws relating to companies in Australia and Examine the duties, rights and responsibilities of Company officers. Answer: Introduction: Gambotto v WCP Ltd was considered as the important case of corporate law in the Australian history. In this case, High Court rejected the amendment made in the constitution of the company because amendment allowed the majority shareholders of the company to compulsorily acquired or expropriate the shares hold by minority shareholders of the company. High Court of Australia took historical decision on 8th March 1995, and in this decision High Court empowered the minority shareholders under the Corporation Act of Australia. In this, Mr. Giancarlo Gambotto representing himself and achieved great success against the Industrial Equity Ltd (IEL) for expropriate the share hold by Mr. Gambotto in WCP as minority shareholder by altering the Articles of Association of WCP. This victory was considered as remarkable victory because it shows the interventionist approach, which was usually avoided by the Courts in corporate context. Decision of High Court in this case was also important because High Court introduced the new stringent rule for the purpose of testing the validity of such alterations made under companies AOA and MOA. Facts of the case: Litigation in this case was related to the attempt made by majority for obtaining the 100 percent stake in the WCP limited. In these majority shareholders of the wholly-owned subsidiaries of IEL holds almost 99.7% shares of the share capital of the WCP and the appellant that were Giancarlo Gambotto and Eliandri Sandri holds almost 0.094% shares of the issued share capital of the WCP. IEL wants to get the 100% control of the WCP for the purpose of obtaining taxation and administrative benefits which includes saving in income tax of almost $4 million and accounting fee savings of almost $3,000 per year. It becomes possible for IEL to purchase the appellants shares under the process of alternative compulsory acquisition, and because of this IEL insert provision in the constitution of the company which allowed any member of the company who hold 90% or more of the issued shares to acquire the shares on compulsory basis before thirtieth June 1992, all the issued shares in WCP at a price of $1.80 per share. WCP also send notice to the shareholders of the meeting which was held on 11 May 1992 for the purpose of considering the amendment to its effect. Experts valued the share at $1.365 per share, and this price was considered fair valuation by the appellant. Appellants do not desire to sell their shares and file suit against the respondent before the meeting for the purpose of preventing the resolution being passed. This meeting took place subsequently, but Court directed to the WCP that it was not possible to acquire any shares by WCP on the basis of this mechanism till the Courts decisi on in this regard. In the meeting, company approve the amendment but IEL did not vote its shares in the meeting (Mitchell, 1994). First decision: As per the judge McLelland J in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, stated that section 176 (1) of the Corporation Law give power to the company to made amendments in the constitution of the company, but the exercise of power was constrained by the equitable principles. He further stated that main aim of amendment made by WCP was to allow the majority shareholders to expropriate the shares of the minority shareholders. As per the opinion of the judge, this amendment results in unjust oppression to those minority shareholders who object this decision. Judge noted if this amendment was permissible and if it was allowed to expropriate the minority shareholders by the majority shareholders, the procedure related to compulsory acquisition stated in the corporation law under section ss 414 and 701 would be unnecessary (Austlii, 1996). Decision by NSW Court of Appeal: NSW court of appeal unanimously overturned the decision taken by McLelland Js decision, and in this appeal leading decision was taken by Meagher JA. His Honour stated that company had power to alter its constitution but this power was constrained by some equitable principles.Judge further stated that view of McLelland Js was only consider the fact that expropriation of shares was a malum in se. Corporation law stated provisions which expressly allowed the expropriation, which means expropriation was not contrary to the law. Meagher also stated that various benefits would be get by the company from the expropriation, and fact related to amount paid for shares was inadequate was not considered by the Judge. Therefore, no reason shows because of which Court should intervene.In this Priestly JA agreed with the decision take by Meagher JA, and stated that person after becoming the member of the company and he also agreed to bind by the duly passed resolutions of the company. However, reso lution related to expropriation of shares passed by amending the constitution of the company and it was considered as real sense and not the divestment against the will of the shareholders.Court of Appeal decided with the majority that as long as sufficient compensation was provided by the company, then it was possible for majority shareholders to expropriate the minoritys shares. High Court Decision: High Court overturned the decision of Court of Appeal by stating that amendment made by the company was invalid because amendment was not made for proper purpose. This decision was taken by the majority of judges that were Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane and Dawson JJ, who initiated their analysis by framing the question of fundamental importance as whether, and if yes in what situations the taking of a power by majority shareholders by amendment to the articles to acquire compulsorily the shares of the minority shareholders will be held invalid on the basis that it is oppressive. For answering this question, judges considered the judgment taken by Lindley MR in Allen v Gold Reefs of West Africa Ltd [1900] 1 Ch 656 at 671. In this case, Lindley MR stated that power of the shareholders to amend the constitution of the company by passing special resolution must be exercised not only as per the procedure of the law but also in the benefit of the company as a whole. By following the judgment taken by Peter in American Delicacy Co Ltd v Heath, majority of the judges of High Court in this case rejected the notion that test laid down by Lindley MR in Allen as bona fide for the benefit of the company as a whole was inappropriate while considering the rights and interest of the shareholders. Court made the difference between the two type of alterations made in the constitution. Court stated that those alterations which does not involve expropriation of shares or of valuable proprietary rights which were attached to the shares, can be made by passing regular special res olution and such resolution was not ultra vires, not beyond any purpose contemplated by the constitution nor oppressive (Ramsay Saunders, n.d.). On the other side, if alteration involves the expropriation of shares or any valuable property rights which were attached to the shares then it was not sufficient to regularly pass the SR, and on these different considerations was applied. Majority of judges in High Court stated two tests which must be conducted while making amendment to the constitution of the company which permits expropriation of shares, and these two tests were stated below: Company exercises this power for proper purpose. If company exercises its power then it will not operate oppressively in relation to the minority shareholders of the company. The first factor of the test which stated that Company must exercises this power for proper purpose means that expropriation of shares will only justified in that case in which it was reasonably proved that continued shareholding of the minority cause damage to the company and affairs of the company and expropriation of shares was necessary for the purpose of eliminating and mitigating that detriment. Majority further stated that it would not be considered as sufficient justification if expropriation of shares would advance the interest of the company or ensures any commercial advantage for the company. An expropriation of shares will only be valid if it saves the company from detriment of any harm. Majority of judges provide two examples which clarify the meaning of proper purpose such as when shareholders of the company is competing in the company, in case when it was necessary to ensure that company is complied with the regulatory provisions such as residency requirement of shareholder. The second factor of the test states that expropriation of shares must be fair and not oppressive in nature, which means it must include both procedural and substantive aspects. The process through which expropriation was conducted must be fair, and it requires the majority to disclose all the necessary information. It also includes valuation of shares by independent expert. On the other side, substantive fairness includes price to be paid for the shares. Majority stated that market value cannot be considered as sufficient indicator for the purpose of determining the fair value of the shares. It must be noted that other factors must be considered such as assets of the company, dividend, nature of the company, and expected future. In this case, fairness was not challenged by the appellant but it could not be established that expropriation of shares was conducted for proper purpose. Majority also stated burden to prove is lie on the party who intended to expropriate for the purpose of proving that power was validly exercised. Key Aspects of the Decision: This decision of High Court was considered as historic decision in context of corporation law in Australia, and following are some key aspects of this decision: Firstly, High Court defines the proper purpose narrowly and also stated the test which is known as stringent test for satisfying the proper purpose of expropriation of shares. Court also stated objective test which ensures that inquiry does not limit in relation to the subjective good faith of the majority. It can be said that Court framed the test in such way which makes it unattractive for the majority shareholders for the purpose of avoiding the protections which is stated in the statutory expropriation mechanisms. The test for proper propose stated by the High Court has no equivalent in the statutory mechanism for expropriation of shares. Secondly, majority of judges placed focus on the concept related to shares as property, with the holder which has proprietary rights in the property. Judges stated that they does not consider, in the case of amendment of the AOA by authorizing expropriation of shares. They further stated that it is sufficient justification related to expropriation of shares that expropriation must be fair and also ensure the interest of the company as legal as well as social entity. However, this approach does not justify the property nature of the shares. Thirdly, principles stated in this case were considered valid only if they were inserted by amending the constitution of the company and do not apply to the constitution from the incorporation of the company. If constitution of the company stated about the expropriation of shares from the time of incorporation of the company then such provision in the constitution is valid. Conclusion: Experts stated that this case was the most important case in the history of corporate law of Australia because this case empowers the minority shareholders of the company. In this case, High Court not only empowered the minority shareholders but also impose responsibility on the majority shareholders and management of the company to conduct expropriation of shares for proper purpose only, and not the for the benefit of majority shareholders. In this High Court protect the interest of minority shareholders. The decision taken by High Court was considered as significant victory for the minority shareholders of the company. In this High Court provide the power to the minority shareholders of the company. This decision is considered as new provision in the protection of minority shareholders of the company. References: Allen v Gold Reefs of West Africa Ltd [1900] 1 Ch 656 at 671. American Delicacy Co Ltd v Heath (1939) 61 CLR 457 at 481. Austlii, (1996). Oppression of Majority Shareholders by a Minority? Gambotto v WCP Ltd. Retrieved on 17th November 2017 from: https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/SydLRev/1996/6.pdf. Corporation Act 2001- Section 414. Corporation Act 2001- Section 701. Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995) 182 CLR 432; 127 ALR 417; 16 ACSR 1; 13 ACLC 342. Mitchell, V (1994). Gambotto and the Rights of Minority Shareholders. Retrieved on 17th November 2017 from: https://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1091context=blr. Ramsay, I. Saunders, B. What do you do with a high court decision you dont like? .legislative, judicial and academic responses to Gambotto V WCP Ltd. Retrieved on 17th November 2017 from: https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1709610/42-WhatDoYouDoWithAHighCourtDecisionYouDontLike1.pdf.