Max Weber and Democracy

This text is the beginning of a series of articles about the views of famous sociologists, economists, and political scientists of the 20th and 21st centuries regarding modern democracy theories. Historical events and theoretical concepts briefly mentioned in these articles may serve as a mirror for Persian speakers to gain a better understanding of historical events in Iran. This series starts with the introduction of several theories from Max Weber regarding democracy. Max Weber is primarily known for his analyses of traditional authorities, but the fact that he was an advocate for a type of modern democratic system is often forgotten. Max Weber (April 21, 1864 - June 14, 1920) was a renowned German sociologist and economist who significantly influenced contemporary political science. It cannot be denied that he was a patriot and nationalist and was well aware of the German government's efforts to gain global power. Weber's goal, especially after the end of World War I, from 1918 onwards, was to demonstrate the weaknesses of the German government's policies and the reasons for the fall of the German monarchy. The German monarchy was dissolved on November 9, 1918, with the end of World War I, which resulted in 15 million deaths. After 1920, Max Weber strongly began to defend democratic systems. This German sociologist was one of the critics of the ruling political parties of that time in Germany, but overall he had a positive view of party freedoms and defended the parliamentary system. Weber was critical of the parliament and weak leadership and opposed a system that was only governed by civil servants and politicians who managed and controlled a country based on personal beliefs and ideologies. He believed that politicians should be responsible to citizens, meaning without ideological beliefs and taking citizens' demands seriously. Max Weber defended citizens' rights to participate in democratic elections and believed that a political leader should be trusted by the citizens who elect him. In other words, citizens should have the opportunity to choose their trusted representatives. Of course, Weber believed that alongside the parliamentary system, the president should be elected directly to establish a balance between parliament and political leadership. Manfred Schmidt, a German political science professor, writes that Max Weber formulated the elite democracy theory, as Weber's main interest was in the relationship between rulers and citizens of civil society. Weber's attention was focused on the competition that occurs between politicians and political elites. Max Weber believed in a 'modern mass democracy,' meaning he supported a system that combined party elections, parliamentary elections, direct elections, and referendums. For example, Max Weber criticized the famous German politician Bismarck for being responsible for the political apathy of German citizens. Bismarck was the Prime Minister and subsequently the Chancellor of Germany. Max Weber argued that Bismarck hindered the progress of parliamentarism and a democratic system. The historical fact was that after 1871, Bismarck always tried to make governmental decisions separate from parliament and parties. This meant that the government, with Bismarck's approval, ignored even the majority opinions of parliament and effectively ruled alone, while the parliament at that time was merely a show organ. In fact, high-ranking government officials paid no attention to the decisions of the weak parliament at the time, and thus the German bourgeoisie was constantly failing against monopolistic government decisions. The interesting aspect of the historical trend during this period in Germany until 1933, when the Nazis came to power, was that citizens had the opportunity for somewhat democratic elections, but power was concentrated in the hands of the Chancellor, who also did not pay serious attention to parliament. Members of parliament at that time were completely unaware of what responsibilities the representatives of the people in parliament should undertake and how to behave in relation to traditional power elites in the military and monopolistic government officials. Max Weber attributed the immaturity of the German people at that time to Bismarck, as Bismarck was powerful and simultaneously did not allow German citizens to develop politically, socially, and culturally. Max Weber concluded that Germans had not learned political thinking and blindly and uncritically followed authoritarian leaders. It must be said that unfortunately, the history of Germany after Max Weber's death vindicated him, as the very people whom Max Weber considered apolitical brought Hitler to power in 1933 and made the dictatorship of National Socialism possible. Gotthard Breit writes that the German bourgeoisie in the 1920s was not seeking political independence and individual freedoms. The hierarchy in German society depended on the wealth, assets, and knowledge of each citizen. The German bourgeois citizens at that time were each elite in their respective fields, whether in technical or cultural fields, and had individual freedoms in their professions but had no inkling of the concept of freedom. Max Weber wrote that German citizens actually believed in fate and entrusted their future to an unknown destiny until National Socialism in Germany brought a historical catastrophe for them and for the world. Max Weber wrote: 'What was Bismarck's political legacy? He left a nation without political education... a nation that had no political will and had only gotten used to having a statesman do politics for them.' They had become accustomed to handing over all their powers to the ruling authorities. It should be emphasized that Max Weber has extensive writings on traditional authorities in human history, including the historical and traditional Islamic governance, and considers traditional governments as legitimate from a historical perspective. However, it should not be forgotten that regarding the functioning of a modern democratic system, which he defended, he believed in a combination of parliamentary elections and direct elections by free citizens. Of course, he defended elections that should be conducted without the ideological constraints of the ruling authorities. In other words, elections that are under the ideological control of the rulers cannot be considered democratic elections, according to Weber.