sajjad ahmadian

Legitimate rule is widely regarded as Max Weber’s main contribution to political sociology. The predominant interpretation of Weber’s account of the legitimate rule puts a one-sided emphasis on belief systems. Using a descriptive-explanatory approach, the authors try to establish the limitations of this predominant interpretation. An argument put forward is that for the purpose of understanding the variations in the forms of legitimate rule which had emerged across time and space one needs to understand the values and beliefs of the people in question. The legitimate rule in this interpretation is (or is expected to be) a direct reflection of people’s values. In this study, the authors tried to investigate the limits of the predominant interpretation, and did not intend to find an alternative for the one-sided emphasis of the cultural interpretation, or for an equally one-sided emphasis on organizational and financial factors. Basically, the main objective had been to shed light on the proper place of the belief system explanation of the legitimate rule.
The primary research question is as follows: In Weber's understanding of legitimate rule, what is the relationship between the type of legitimacy claims, that is presented to achieve or maintain dominance, and the external apparatus of the rule? In the hypothesis, it is postulated that the form of the claimed legitimacy is not imposed by the external factors, but the probability of success of the claim of legitimacy is contingent on the external factors. The way of organizing the external mechanisms of domination (especially the administrative apparatus) is contingent on the chance of success of the claim of legitimacy, which is itself determined by the economic factors (especially the method of financing the expenses of the domination apparatus). Of the external constraints, the organizational and financial factors are more important to Weber. The former concerns the organizational structure of the external apparatus of rule, especially the administrative organization, and the latter focuses on the ways by which the financial costs of the administrative staff are met. These two factors determine the likelihood of the success of legitimacy claims by influencing the balance of power between the rulers, the administrative staff and the society. To test the research hypothesis, the method of qualitative textual analysis is used. First, Weber’s account of the legitimate rule in Economy and Society is carefully examined to demonstrate how each of three forms of legitimacy are explained in close association with the organizational-financial factors. Then, the significance of the organizational-financial factors as manifested in Weber’s account of the rise of vocational leaders is described. The analysis of Weber’s Politics as a Vocation demonstrate that the rise of vocational politicians depends on an exceptional bureaucratic order, which is professional enough to dispossess the local contenders of power, but is not too professional to strip the political leaders of the actual power in favor of the top bureaucrats.

Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization involved in internal violence and many assassinations during 1973-1977, some of the most known were the assassination of Majid Sharif Vaghei and Morteza Samadie Labbaf. Although all of this violence cannot be proved ideological by historical evidence, but this conflict between the Marxist members and religious members, is an interesting subject in the history of Iranian armed movements. This article looks for the reason and quality of these happenings in the Hannah Arendt`s Theory of Totalitarianism.

Just like a raging flood, modernity, equipped with an irresistible power, has drastically revolutionized all aspects of human life. Comprehensiveness of modern developments has seized the opportunity to talk about bright and dark aspects of modernity from the hands of a certain stratum of people living in a special period of time, giving it an always-on relevance. Despite the perplexing and staggering broadness of some modernity-associated developments which have been given shape since Classical thinkers, their works thereon have managed to maintain their winning run due to their remarkable richness. In this article, attempts are made to explain viewpoints made by three Classical thinkers namely Alexis de Tocqueville, Emil Durkheim and Max Weber about malaises of modernity on the basis of soft despotism, anti-social individualism and formal rationality.