Political Sociology: A Reader

By S. N. Eisenstadt | Go to book overview
Save to active project

in relations with the satellite states, the basic conditions that the regime needs for its self-perpetuation have remained the same—but they can no longer be assured in the same way. That, too, is reflected in the variables of the official ideology.

While this comes close to the position outlined in Mr. Carew Hunt's paper, I cannot follow him in his assumption that the totalitarian party monopoly is a by-product of the attempt to establish collectivist economic planning or to achieve the speedy industrialization of a backward country. This neo-Marxist view, held by such otherwise divergent authors as Professor Hayek and Milovan Djilas, is contradicted by the fact that the Bolshevik Party monopoly, including the ban on inner-Party factions, was fully established by Lenin at the time of the transition to the New Economic Policy (1921), when economic planning was reduced to a minimum and forced industrialization not yet envisaged. Independent of the concrete economic program, totalitarianism was implicit in the centralized, undemocratic structure of a party consciously created as an instrument for the conquest of power, and in the ideological characteristics resulting (to be discussed further in this article). Of course, totalitarian power, once established, favors total economic planning and the undertaking of revolutionary economic tasks by the state; but this is a consequence, not a cause. Marx never developed a concept of total planning, and even Lenin never imagined anything of the kind before 1918. But Marx, in his youth at least, equated the "dictatorship of the proletariat" with the Jacobin model, and Lenin followed this model throughout.


Personal Rulership, Patrimonialism, and
Empire-Building in the New States

Guenther Roth

The concrete lessons of recent history have helped us to appreciate the paramount importance of the political preconditions of social and economic development in the new states. The basic problem of political stability must be solved before all others —or everything else may be in vain. For this reason, some of the scholarly attention that used to be focused on social and economic development has shifted to political organization and has given prominence to terms such as "nation-building," "political culture," and "democratization." At the same time efforts have been made to modify the usual evolutionary and dichotomous conceptions of social and political development. The two-faced nature of tradition and modernity has come under scrutiny again.

Two basic theoretical choices have been made in the face of the complexity of the subject matter: one choice has been to resort to a relatively novel terminology that is intended to transcend Western historical connotations—witness the attempt by Gabriel Almond and his collaborators to adapt the Parsonian scheme; the other has been to re-examine older terms for their contemporary usefulness and to work with historically more specific concepts—an approach prominently pursued by Reinhard Bendix.1

I shall follow the latter path because I should like to reconsider a neglected part of Max Weber's typology of Herrschaft, the notion of patrimonial rule, for it seems to me that many of the features of legal‐ rational modernity may not appear in the new states and that certain basic modes of administration persist, even though traditionalist legitimacy has disintegrated in most cases. From the beginning, it should be clearly understood that Weber's sociology

From Guenther Roth, "Personal Rulership, Patrimonialism, and Empire-Building in the New States," World Politics, XX, No. 2 (January 1968). Reprinted by permission of the publisher and the author.


Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this page

Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Political Sociology: A Reader
Table of contents

Table of contents



Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 632

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?