Political Socialization
George Ritzer
Sociological theory is the same as the rest of the social world in that it is affected by politics. What portions of sociological theory become important can come about because of political processes in what is called political socialization (Ritzer, 5).
Ritzer includes a list (of four points) of these political processes in his book. They are:
1. The work of people in power (historically, men) who maintained higher social status by working with well known sociological theorists can or may be seen or viewed by the general public as more important than the works of people who may have lacked this relationship with their mentors (Ritzer, 5).
2. Works that reflect politics are more likely to be seen as important and therefore become part of the well known sociological concepts we learn today. So more conservative theories in the past (Ritzer gives the example of structural functionalism) would be seen as more acceptable than the more radical theories (as an example, Marxist perspectives) (Ritzer, 6).
3. Theories that can be tested are, most likely, going to be accepted by mainstream sociologists than those that are too widespread (or those that are considered grand theories that try to generalize things that might not be compatable with each other) (Ritzer, 6).
4. Ideas that are formed by majority members (i.e., white males) will become accepted than those created by minorities. Works that were created by blacks (with the exception of W.E.B. DuBois), will not, most likely, become part of the canon. The same held true for women, until relatively recently. Other cultural minorites, such as Chicanos, homosexuals, or any other group that might be oppressed by the majority, are also less likely to have their ideas considered by the general population (Ritzer, 6).
Max Weber
Max Weber discusses his views on politics in the Lemert book.
"'Every state is founded by 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 (Lemert, 111)." That is a mouthfull, and it would have been translated wrong if I tried to decipher it.
Weber goes on to talk about what the state truely is, in an easier to understand tone. He states that a state is a monopoly that has a legitimate use of force in a certain area. So, for example, our United States government has the right to maintain the rules and enforce them in our society above everyone else (Lemert, 111).
Men dominate other men because of these political organizations that society enforces upon us. Weber asks the question, why do people (men) obey these rules? He follows up with three legitimate reasons why we follow the rules (Lemert, 111).
First, because of tradition. It is a habit of people to conform to society whether it is considered good or bad. This is "domination exercised by the patriarch (Lemert, 112)."
Charisma is the second reason: because people tend to follow after certain individuals just because of a general devotion to a specific person. For example, movie stars may not have the best intentions for everyone, but some people listen to them just because of their status in society (Lemert, 112).
Last, the "domination by virtue of 'legality,' by virtue of the belief in the validity of legal statute and functional 'competence' based on rationally created rules (Lemert, 112)." This seems similar to the first reason, to me personally.
Weber sums it all up by listing the three types again and giving them the names traditional, charismatic, and legal. People respond to fear of what may happen in the afterlife, magical, unforseen powers, or/and powers of the power holder.
Thomas Janoski, Robert Alford, Alexander Hicks, and Mildred A. Schwartz
Early Symbolic Interactionism
Collective Behavior consists of circular reaction, milling, collective excitement, and crowd action. New norms arise from these forms of interaction (Janoski, 336). Norms are the general ideas that people in a society tend to agree upon.
This would explain how change could come around if enough people decided that there is a need for change in their society. A problem is a personal issue, but when enough people have the same type of problem, it may become an issue. This may be general knowledge, but I know that it was a specific theorist who came up with this. Someone edit this for me if they know the answer.
Political Socialization may be overturned if enough people come together as a unit and agree on an issue that they want to change.
Leon Trotsky
The theory of permanent revolution: Trotsky believed that the revolution that Marx talked about was going to occur in Russia and not from Western capatalism. The Russian revolution would be the start of many revolutions to occur in Europe, or so he believed. It was a good prediction of the Russian revolution (Benewick, 243-244).
Other Social Political Revoutionary Countries
Just to show that other countries have the same sorts of problems as our society, here is an example of revolutionary problems in Latin America. This also shows more evidence to Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution.
"The field of Latin American politics has undergone major changes since 1960, but it has often failed to keep up with the massive transformations that have occurred in Latin American economic, social, and political life (Dent, 16)."
Links to Other Websites:
[More Information About Max Weber]
Refrences:
1. Benewick, Robert and Green, Philip. (1998). The Routledge Dictionary of Twentieth-Century Political Thinkers. New York: Routledge.
2. Dent, David. (1990). Handbook of Political Science Research on Latin America. Westport: Greenwood Press.
3. Janoski, Thomas, et al. (2005). The Handbook of Political Sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
4. Lemert, Charles. (2004). Social Theory, 3rd Edition. Boulder: Westview Press.
5. Ritzer, George. (2003). Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots. New York: McGraw-Hill.