Comparing Marx's and Weber's Theories of Bureaucracy

Comparing Marx's and Weber's Theories of Bureaucracy
Name:
Institution:
Date:
Comparing Marx's and Weber's Theories of Bureaucracy
Introduction
The base of sociological knowledge of the 20th and 21st century was laid by classical sociologists of the 19th century, among them Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Max Webber (1864-1920). It is the contributions of these two together with others such as Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) that helped build what is known today as the classical sociological theory. These three sociologists attempted to explain the changes that were taking place in the society of the time. On the one hand, the views of Marx and Weber are very different, but on the other, they are quite similar. For example, while Marx was a strong opponent of capitalism, Weber’s view was that capitalism is an exceptional system (Nicholson, 2017). According to Weber, capitalism is a motivating factor for economic growth. On the other hand, Marx sees capitalism as not only unduly, but also a major cause of division among the populous.
Weber's theory offers a more compelling description of bureaucracy in the sense that, inasmuch as structures in society are rooted in the economy, one is left wondering whether the Marxist theory is limited in scope as it does not acknowledge other influencing factors. This is the main differentiating point between the Marxist and the Weberian theories of bureaucracy (Adhikary, 2016). Although both the theories review and assess historical context, Weber’s theory of bureaucracy covers a wider scope thus presenting a more detailed description. This is evidenced by the fact that Weber’s analysis shows the number of contexts that must exist for a particular outcome to be true. Weber seems to recognize that is futile to be too deterministic. It is Weber’s theory that presents the most compelling description and explanation of bureaucracy because he recognizes all causal forces in his analysis to arrive at his theory.
Comparison of the two theories
With regards to bureaucracy, both Weber and Marx did not create a comprehensive theory. Marx’s main point of concern was based on three basic concepts: the growth of capitalism, the extent to which it exploited the working class, and the liberation of the working class (Mai, 2016). In his analysis of these three basic concepts, Marx in the laconic form discussed all the relevant issues of economics, politics and social life. Among the issues he discussed was bureaucracy.
On the other hand, Weber's approach to bureaucracy is a bit different. His approach presents several features of bureaucracy. According to the Weberian theory, it is these features that suggest the characteristics of bureaucratic organizations (Adhikary, 2016).
The Marxist theory on bureaucracy states that “the general spirit of bureaucracy is secrecy, mystery, preserved inwardly using hierarchy and externally as a close corporation. Marx goes on to add "the hierarchy of the bureaucracy is the hierarchy of knowledge" Marx considers bureaucracy a component of government mechanisms, a governmental formation of the civil population, the government’s consciousness, the will of the government, a demonstration of the power of government. These observations from the Marxian theory show that his view was that bureaucracy only protects state interests. According to Marx, bureaucracy is a negative stage in the social transformation process. To Marx, the abolition of state was to be achieved through institutions after the bureaucratic machinery had been destroyed.
In his definition of bureaucracy, Max Weber argues that it consists "the most efficient and rational way in which one can organize human activity and that systematic process and organized hierarchies are necessary to maintain order. Weber views bureaucracy as superior to traditional structures. According to him, a bureaucratic establishment treats everyone equally, and that division of labor is explicit for every employee.
According to Marx, the definition of history was class conflict. To him, bureaucracy was the major causal force of the parting of the “bourgeoisie and the proletariat” (the rich and the poor). Marx saw this division as erroneous, and according to him, it was capitalism that was propelling it as it is not something that could come naturally. In his view, it was the upsurge of capitalism that had brought about a state where merchants made large profits, but only paid their workers peanuts (Sayer, 2002). Marx’s theory also links the meaning of social classes to the means of material production. The Marxist theory is rather specific in that it brings into light some specific instances in history, which ultimately culminated in a state of Marxism. Both Marx and Engel argue that there have been five progressive modes of production in existence and that they can also be thought of as modes of government control. The progressive modes include slave hood, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and communism.
On the other hand, Weber views capitalism as not only a way of acquiring wealth, but also a method of implementing a system to generate money. Therefore, according to Weber, it is not how a person uses the money that drives entrepreneurship, but the creation of the cash itself which is vital to its spirit. Weber gives an example, stating, "The difference between capitalism and pre-capitalistic spirits is not to be found at this point. The greed of the Chinese Mandarin, the old Roman aristocrat, or the modern peasant, can stand up to any comparison" (MacGregor, 2015)). In this statement, Weber makes it clear that capitalism is not founded on greed or accumulating wealth. Weber’s theory presents three types of power that can be found in administrations: traditional power, charismatic power, and legal power. It is the legal power that Weber refers to as bureaucracy (Weber, 2017).
Weber argues that Marx's views are too narrow. His view was that Marx was only concerned about ec...