The state is a political institution because it

exercises power and for that reason is a focus

for political sociologists.
Politics
Politics is the process by which groups of people make
decisions.

 The term “Politics” is generally applied to behaviour

within civil governments, but politics has been
observed in all human group interactions, including
corporate, academic, and religious institutions.

 It consists of social relations involving authority or

power, the regulation of political units, and the
methods and tactics used to formulate and apply
social policy.
Traditionally there have been four main areas in political
sociology:

 The socio-political formation of the modern state

 “Who rules”? How social inequality between groups (class,

race, gender, etc.) influences politics

 How public personalities, social movements, and trends

outside of the formal institutions of political power affect
formal politics

 Power relationships within and between social groups (e.g.

families, workplaces, bureaucracy, media, etc.).
 Political sociology was traditionally concerned with
how social trends, dynamics, and structures of
domination affect formal political processes.

 It also explored how various social forces work

together to change political policies.
POWER
 “Politics is the generalized process by which the struggle
over power in society is resolved”. (Richard Braungart, 1981)

 The goal of the political sociologists is to explain the

connections between social interactions, social structures,
and social processes altered by struggle and resolution.

 The works of Karl Marx and Max Weber serve as the classic
foundations for defining power.
Marx
 Marx argued that economic structures like corporations,
owners of capital, and even boss represent societal sources
of power.

 The use of wages to influence worker performance or

attendance is a significant creation of capitalist society.

 The relationships between workers, wage and class

interests was the source of alienating individuals from each
other.

 Power has an economic context rooted in the relationships

between and among social classes.
Weber
 Weber located power in a variety of social spaces including both
economic and noneconomic contexts.

 Power was rooted in formalized social systems such as organizations

or bureaucracies, as well as in the social institutions such as religion
and law.

 Power was not simply just about economic relationships, but rather
a function of social patterns, culture and social organization.

 Weber defined power as: “the chance of a man or a number of men

to realize their own will in a social action even against the resistance
of others who are participating in the action” (Weber, 1947).
 Varieties in the definition of Power
Power Defined as….. Author
The production of intended effects Bertrand Russel (1938: 2)
Power has to do with whatever decisions C. Wright Mills (1959: 181)
men make about the arrangements under
which they live, and about the events which
make up the history of their times…men are
free to make history but some are much
freer than others.

The generalized capacity to secure the Talcott Parsons (1967: 297)

performance of binding obligations are
legitimized with reference of their bearing
on collective goals and where, in the case of
recalcitrance, there is a presumption of
enforcement by negative sanctions.

All kinds of influence between persons of Peter Blau (1964: 115)

groups, including those exercised in
exchange transaction, where one induces
others to accede to his wishes by rewarding
them for doing so.
The capacity of some persons to Dennis Wrong (1979: 2)
produce intended and foreseen effects
on others
The capability to secure outcome Anthony Giddens (1976: 111 – 112)
where the realization of these
outcomes depends on the agency of
others
In the end, we are judged, Michel foucalt (1989: 94)
condemned, classified, determined in
our undertakings, destined to a
certain mode of living or dying, as a
function, of the true discourse which
are bearers of the specific.
The social capacity to make binding Anthony Orum (1989: 131 – 132)
decisions that have far-reaching
consequences for society.
The ability to affect the actions or Olsen an Marger (1993: 1)
ideas of others
Metaphors and Paradoxes: Sociological
Tools in the Study of Power
 Metaphors and paradoxes are useful tools in
sociological thinking.

 Metaphors are analytical devices commonly used to

depict ideas or concepts.

 It becomes more important when sociologists try to

make sense of mysteries.

 Metaphors have been constructed to explain in detail

the nature of power in society.
 Paradox is another analytical tool used in Sociology.

 For Political Sociologists there are various

contradictions or patterns of power in any state.

 Paradox like metaphors explains mysteries.

Metaphors of Power Arrangements

1- Coercive and dominant power

2- Authority and legitimate power

3- Privileged and interdependent power

Coercive and Dominant Power
 Weber launched the sociological analysis by claiming that
power existed in two forms:
i- Coercion and ii- authority

 The concept of power starts with the metaphors of coercion

and dominance.
 Coercive power in the form of physical force is clearly
exercised as one nation-state invades and conquers
another.
 Dominance also reflects the use of resources with
consequences for others in society.
 Terrorism and war are important-societal dynamics related
to the brute use of dominance and coercion.
2- Authority and legitimate power

 Authority is a form of power that emerges from the

acquiescence of individuals and groups based on a
sense of legitimacy and obedience.

 Weber identified three types of authority (i)

Charismatic, (ii) Traditional, and (iii) Rational-legal
authority.
3- Privileged and interdependent power

 The idea of interdependent power depicts power

relationship between individuals and social groups as
reciprocal.

 Power is a two-way street.

 Complex organizations are stages for seeing the power

as a function of social interdependencies.
The conceptualization of Power in Political
Sociology
 Political sociologists study relationships between society,
politics and power into three frame work:

i- the pluralist
ii- the elite- managerial
iii- social-class

These frame works represent very different views of how

power is distributed in society, how politics is socially
organized, and how significant individuals, groups,
organizations, and the state are.
1- Pluralist
This approach to the study of politics and society is
based on the assertion that power is distributed
throughout society among a “plurality” of power centers.

These power centers include:

 Political parties,
 Interest groups
 Voters
 Associations
 Other social actors
 These various centers within society compete for power

 One of the pioneering study of pluralist approach was done by

Alexis Tocqueville (1805 – 1859) in shape of Democracy in
America (1835).

 He concluded in his work that association system of USA is one

of the major reason for the success of American System. He says:

“In no country in the world has the principle of association been

more successfully used or applied to a greater multitude of
objects than in America. Besides the permanent associations
which are established by law under the names of townships,
cities and countries, a vast number of others are formed and
maintained by the agency of private individuals”.
2- Elite / Managerial

 The elite perspective stands in stark contrast to the

pluralist perspective.

 According to this model, power is concentrated in the

hands of few who are distinguished background.
The Elite/Managerial Metaphor of Power: Dominance at Top
Source: Figure created by Tim Buzzell
 Five scholars have influenced this approach

(i) Max Weber- Class, Status and Parties. For Weber, class is
based on economic order, status is based on social order,
and parties are concerned with social power.

(ii) Vilfredo Pareto- Force and fraud- The Mind and Society: A
Treatise on General Sociology.

(iii) Gaetano Mosca- Elite Structure Layers- The Ruling

Class.

(iv) Robert Michels- Iron Law of Oligarchy- Political Parties.

(v) C. Wright Mills- Power Elite Network- The Power Elite.

3- Social Class

 This framework is based on Marxist theories, that

power rests in the classes that control means of
productions.

 The class approach considers that politics and

associated structures are “captured” by the capitalist
class.
 The governing apparatus- the bureaucracy, political
parties, the methods of selecting individuals for
political office are covered in class interests.

 Marx discussed his class view of political structure in

(i) A contribution to the critique of Political Economy
(1859) (ii) The German Ideology (1886),

 Later on Lenin, Gramsci, C. Wright Mills and others

developed this concept and added the idea of
“hegemony”.
Additional Modern Approaches

Rational Choice
 Rational Choice theorists in political sociology suggest
similar assessment of the risk-reward-opportunity in
the political landscape.

 Using an economic model of human behavior, rational

choice situates the study of power in the incentive
based connections between individuals groups, and
institutions.

 Participation in politics is assumed to be linked to

reward structures.
2- Institutionalist

 Institutional approach argues that there are significant

enduring, stable, historical patterns related to
struggles over power in society.

 There exists an overlap between the state, interest

groups and culture, symbols and ideology.
 State, economy,
polity, global market

Groups, Culture,
coalitions, symbols,
bureaucracies, idealogy
organizations
3- Post Modern Political Sociology

 The approach says that power has shifted to those who

control form of watching the behaviours of others,
such as cameras on ATMs or cameras installed on
street corners and traffic signals.

 The nature of being watched shifts power over the

body, movement, and privacy to other authorities.

 Beside nature and social structure discourses about

human sexuality, language and communication
become equally important.
 Michel Foucault wrote extensively on nature of
power in post modernist approach.

 His Book Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison very
crucial in the study of power concept.

 Anthony Giddens considers power to be at the

heart of relations between politics and social institutions .

 He thinks that model state blurs the lines between the

state, public, private and market spheres.

 The Nation State and Violence (1985).

CONCLUSION
 The study of Power and politics takes in a variety of
directions, arenas, or spheres of social and political
interaction.

 In modern times, the private sphere, the day-to-day

social place of interaction amount family members
friends a also becomes subject o the exercise of power
by state, the market, and the actors in public sphere.