Comparing Lukes and Webber on power and legitimacy

Steven Lukes and Max Webber are two political thinkers with some very
interesting ideas about power and legitimacy. Lukes believes there are three
faces of power, “The issue method”, “Setting the agenda” and “Manipulating
the view of others”. Whereas Webber believed that there are four major
themes of power, “Religion and class as key dynamic factors effecting society”,
“Class and Inequality”, “Bureaucracy and Rationality” and “The importance of
meaning and action”.
Both Webber and Lukes had a very similar definition of power. They more or
less both believed that power is the ability to make someone do something
that they do not necessarily want to do. Where they differ is how one goes
about obtaining power.
Lukes believed that there are three “faces of power”. The first face “the issue
method” is the most basic. The belief that power can be used to modify the
behaviour of other people when making a decision or in other words the
person who wins an argument or an issue had the power an example of this
would be a parent winning an argument with their child. This approach to
power fits with the pluralist approach but it cannot show ways in which a
pluralist system is biased to one group or another. The second face is the
power is “set the agenda” while this may seem like a very weak form of power
to an outsider it can be very potent is certain circumstances. With this face of
power you can kill an issue before it even becomes a problem because if it’s
not on the agenda to speak about it’s not a problem. But this face is still too
committed to behaviourism and does not recognise that power is more than
just modified behaviour. And finally we come to the third and most complex
face of power “Manipulating the view of others” this is the set way in which
the powerful transform the powerless in a way that makes them behave how
they want in simpler terms this is the power of a person or ideology to shape
one morals and ethics in a way that suits them. This is perhaps the most subtle
and the most dangerous face of power as it make people unaware of the real
motive behind their actions and unaware of the consequences of their actions.
This face also instils a strong confirmation bias making it very hard to change a
person’s pre-conceived notions on a certain issue.
Webber believed that the only way power is obtained is through what he
called “legitimacy” which is the rightfulness of a person to exert power over
another. For example you might believe that a teacher has a legitimate right to
ask his pupils to do something even if they chose to disobey although he did
believe that the claim to legitimacy is sometimes more important than a
willingness to comply. Webber also believed that legitimacy conveyed
authority where someone only had the authority to exert power if they have a
legitimate right to try to and authority backed down when legitimacy is lost
such as when a government goes against the will of its people. According to
Webber there are three types main of authority “traditional authority” the
authority of kings and queens, “Charismatic authority” the type of authority
wielded by politicians and “Legal authority” The authority and power given to
people by laws such as the police. While all these types of authority differ the
one common aspect to all of them is that they require the one who wields the
authority to be legitimate.
In his studies of society Webber came up with four major themes of Modern
society hat effect society. “Religion and Class” Webber (like Marx) believed
that class that is your position in society based on your wealth was a key factor
in how our society developed. But he also believed that there where cultural
factors as well particularly Religion. Webber didn’t think that religion caused
capitalism but that religion (Protestantism especially) fitted together very well.
His second theme of society was “Class, Status and power” Webber that
owning capital or labour split up the two major classes in society he also
believed that inequality was much more complacent in modern society.
Furthermore he argued that differences in “Status” or the amount of social
power one has created a lot of inequality for people and finally we come to
political power i.e. elected politicians but also bureaucrats. Webber saw
Bureaucracy as the major basis of power in society. Which brings us on to the
third theme “Bureaucracy and Rationality.” This is probably the simplest theme
it is quite simply what works beast not what was done before but what is the
beast option for society now such as in education or business. Finally we have
the fourth theme “The importance of meaning.” Webber believed that
sociologists should not just study what we do but why we do emphasising the
meaning behind our actions.
In conclusion both lukes and Webber has some very interesting ideas on power
and legitimacy in society lukes focused more on power with his three faces of
power and Webber focused on legitimacy and authority claiming that authority
is legitimate power with the consent of the ruled but the claim to legitimacy
was some times more important than a willingness to comply