Sociology Essay 1

This essay did not receive an A. I got an 80 on it, but I forgot to add two concluding sections onto it. So I suppose 80% is pretty good considering. I have also decided to add my own commentary to this one. anything in parentheses (like this) is an added commentary. Actually, I may have added commentary in a select few spots to previous posts, but I am now making it official.

Politics and Sociology

An Essay By Josiah Teal

All information gained through Brym and Lie’s textbook, Sociology; Your Compass for a New World.

Power and Authority

When one is to discuss the aspects of politics one must first address the issues of power and authority. A loose definition of power is when an individual or group of individuals are able to control other individuals, even against their will. It is my opinion that power needs to be controlled when it is used to govern a people; too much power often results in an oppressed population. Authority is defined as legitimate power. Power becomes legitimate when the governed people perceive it as legitimate (or so they say).

Types of Authority

The German sociologist Max Weber separated authority into three categories, the first of which is traditional authority. An example of traditional authority can be found in the English monarchy. The Queen is an example of this kind of authority. The second type of authority is called legal-rational authority and this is found when an individual achieves an authoritative position by following the rules. Although some people would tend to disagree (vote counts and such), George W. Bush is an example of legal- rational authority because he followed the rules to attain the office of the President of the United States. The final example of authority is called charismatic authority. When one is able to lead by rallying a people to a cause he/she is an example of charismatic authority. Martin Luther King Jr. is a perfect example of this type of leadership.

Types of Political System

Like the types of authority, types of political systems are also largely in three categories autocracy, authoritarian, and democracy. In an autocracy, total power is in the hands of a single person or party. In an authoritarian state, the average citizen has limited say in the government and the power is more widespread. In a democracy, the power resides with the people, who have the ability to elect leaders from among themselves (in a roundabout way).

Theories of Democracy

Pluralist Theory

According to Brym and Lie’s textbook on sociology, pluralist theory “holds that power is widely dispersed. As a result, no group enjoys disproportionate influence, and decisions are usually reached through negotiations and compromise.” This theory has drawn some harsh criticism and most sociologists tend to disagree with it, saying that in America, wealthy corporations can often influence politics and legislation.

Elite Theory

Elite theory is the idea that smaller, influential institutions have more say over politics than most of us would be comfortable with. These groups may also ignore public opinion in order to get what they want.

Power Resource Theory

Power resource theory holds that variations in the “distribution of power between major classes partly accounts for the successes and failures of different political parties” according to Brym and Lie. Differences in the views favored by each party account for the differences between the classes who favor them (wait for it...).

State-Centered Theory

This theory states that the state can to some extent control it’s own affairs independent of the way power is distributed among particular classes at any given time.

The Future of Democracy

In 1989, the country of Russia made a dramatic switch from communism to a democracy. This event had much of the western world applauding the change and hoping for a bright future for Russia. Unfortunately, the people of Russia were not accustomed to a democratic lifestyle and the bright future slowly began to fade. The economy soon collapsed and hopes for a new Russia soon fell through. The failure of Russian democracy causes one to wonder, “what social conditions must there be in order for a government to become completely democratic and for democracy to take firm root?”

The Three Waves of Democracy

In the year 1828, half the white men in the United States became eligible to vote, by the year 1926, 33 counties in the world were at least partially democratic. This was the first wave of democracy. After WWII, the second wave of democracy began to take place. The reason was largely on behalf on liberated nations, and even some new nations that were born after fascist and socialist leaders were overthrown. In 1974, the overthrow of dictatorships in Portugal and Greece initiated the third and biggest wave of democracy. Although the third wave of democracy is officially the biggest, the actual impact is rather small in comparison. The reason being is that many of these democracies are what we call formal democracies, meaning that even though citizens may be able to participate in national elections, doing so has little or no effect. They also lack constitutional protections (or the illusion thereof), like those provided in the United States, which is a liberal democracy.

Social Preconditions of Democracy (in a nutshell)

In the words of Brym and Lie, “Liberal democracies emerge and endure when counties enjoy considerable economic growth, industrialization, urbanization, the spread of literacy, and a gradual decrease in economic inequality.” This is a big influence in the spawning and flourishing of the middle and working class. In many cases there was a middle class but limited political freedom, this class of citizens would likely attempt to overthrow the restrictive government and possibly replace it with a democratic one (unless they were too scared). In a nation where the working class is too weak, democracies will be much less likely to emerge.

Electronic Democracy

In 1935, the results of the first nationwide poll was featured in a full page story in the Washington post. George Gallup, the man responsible for the poll, said this, “After one hundred and fifty years we return to the town meeting. This time the whole nation is within the doors.” George Gallup’s idea was that the government now knew what the nation as a whole wanted (I have yet to participate in a poll like this). Although the idea that the government would be forced to do whatever the populace wanted was a bit naive, the Gallup poll did let the people be heard in a way that was never before possible. Some of the naivety expressed at the birth of the Gallup Poll was also expressed at the inception of new wonders such as the internet as people began to assume that voting on certain issues could now be done electronically; however, the possibilities of this are rather slim under current conditions. How could one regulate something such as internet voting? How would voting electronically over the internet be secure? What about people with no internet connection or computer? The questions go on.

Postmaterialism

Postmaterialism is defined as the shift from class based to value based politics resulting from growing equality and prosperity in industrialized countries. Postmaterialists claim that even so recently as fifty years ago, most citizens were more concerned with their next paycheck and making a living. Today, many people are more concerned with traditional values and morality (interesting...).

Politics by Other Means

War

Instead of peacefully participating in social movements, many countries turn to war as a means to get what they want. All too common, wars have ravaged the planet for nearly all of recorded history, resulting in many billions of dead through the ages (gross oversimplification).

Terrorism

Terrorists have found a way to get governments to notice them and that is through terrorism. Terrorism is politically motivated violence against non-combatant targets. The official explanation for why a people resort to terrorism is because they have no other way of getting the attention or putting pressure on a particular government or group. I say it’s because they are too cowardly to declare war and rather enjoy making innocent people suffer. Terrorism is low. That’s all I have to say about it.

Conclusion

The political realm of the world can often be a confusing and tumultuous topic. Looking at it now it seems to be becoming clearer than ever as I begin to understand causes and effects of social forces (according to contemporary explanations). Although it doesn’t seem that there is any perfect political system (benevolent dictatorship), I believe that one must always strive to influence the world around them for the better (just how to go about it is a bit harder to figure out).