WEBER'S POLITICAL ECONOMY

Weber's Political Economy



Weber's Political Economy

The differences and similarities between socialism and liberalism, and how it is possible to write one from the starting point of the other, and secondly, whether socialism, if followed properly, would in fact cause conflict to cease.

The exploitation, however, when seen from a liberal perspective, is a natural and essential quality that helps society to function, and is not seen as exploitation at all, rather as a free exchange of equivalents: labour for wages. However, this "equitable" trade has a side effect of ensuring that bureaucracies remain in power because they control the resources (Danaher, and Webb, 2000). These capitalist burghers, or richer merchants of the time, who now possessed the financial means, developed a political system wherein they could attain still more wealth, and, as a side effect, power.

Thus the "bourgeoisie" or ruling capitalists were founded. Liberalism, as defined by the capitalist burghers, was concerned with the individual; their rights, freedoms, advantages, opportunities and desires (Cohen, and Kennedy, 2000). In contrast feudal government was seen as oppressive, hindering the individual's chance of making capital and advancing socially. Spiegal and Wehling equate freedom of trade from governmental interference, and the pursuit of capital, as Liberalism, claiming that States should allow the market to function autonomously, with tariffs and barriers removed, so that all free capitalists may benefit (Danaher, and Webb, 2000). Cohen and Kennedy claim that the liberal ideals of capitalism were unstoppable, and that this caused the demise of feudalism, becoming the foremost political agenda.

Capitalism is a free enterprise economic system, which is dominant in the Western world. It is a system by which most of the means of production is privately owned and regulated by market forces. As such the process of creating capital (capitalism) is an economic system rather than a political one, and therefore should flourish in any society (Bauman, 2001). However, governmental commitment to democracy appears secondary to the pursuit of capital, presumably because the politicians arose from the burghers and merchants, and went into office with the intention of fulfilling the capitalist ideals.

Liberal capitalists believe in the individual being free from the constraints of the State, even for good reasons, however, Sinopoli claims that this freedom is only allowed to a certain extent due to the necessities of governance. Therefore, despite holding liberal ideals of freedom from government interference and equality of potential for individuals, governments still maintain and increase legislation and control (Danaher, and Webb, 2000).

Power flows from the ownership of economic resources and class interests, making political power into a class struggle, one class oppressing another. This oppression, from a liberal perspective, takes on the form of welfare and that the use of subsidy and support drains working morale. In other words, the socialist system of all people having access to basic items of subsistence steals from capitalism its edge, the striving of the individual to attain the necessities of life, making it less than it should ...