The bureaucracy of Max Weber was advocated in a desperate effort to improve and develop Western society which was once do-minated by the confusion of laissez-faireism after the Industrial Revolution. The arrogance of the capitalists and lawless defiance of the Proletariat to society resulted in the ...
The bureaucracy of Max Weber was advocated in a desperate effort to improve and develop Western society which was once do-minated by the confusion of laissez-faireism after the Industrial Revolution. The arrogance of the capitalists and lawless defiance of the Proletariat to society resulted in the impediment of social, political, economic and cultural development. Therefore, Max Weber intended to have those who received a regular education take a leading position in society so that they could eliminate the primary factors of social confusion and spear-head social development. He maintained that the scale of social organization should be stratified as it becomes expanded and that the stratum of the top management should not only be held by the elite of society but functionally bureaucratized. The characteristics of bureaucracy are as follows: (1) The responsibility, authority and qualification of public servants are strictly controlled by laws and regulations. The relation between the principal and the subordinate becomes valid with legal rights and duties. (2) Stratificational structure graduated according to duty is formed so that the relation between the principal and the sub-ordinate can be maintained. (3) Functional public servants are strictly prohibited to abuse their official authority with the distinction of public and private affairs. (4) As the functions of public servants are hardly possible to be performed without exerting themselves to the utmost, it is necessary for them to regard the officialdom as their calling. An additional office is not allowed in order that they may become professionalized and carry out their duties successfully and faith-fully as career public servants. (5) Administration and documentation by laws and regulations and the promotion of professional knowledge and technical knowhow are emphasized. (6) Public servants are employed by the government on a free contract basis instead of an arbitrary or a compulsory basis. It is an undeniable fact, however, that bureaucracy contributed to social development in a certain social process, but it began to raise many problems and produce malpractices as described below: (1) Legal formalities are too much emphasized that there appeared the phenomena of formalism, red-tape, prudentialism and law-almighty ideas. (2) There also appeared such malpractices as the pursuit of rank and power, confidentialism, factionalism, careerism, pursuit of personal profit, standardization, self-righenousness and evasion of responsibility. (3) Inefficiency was resulted from frustration, weariness and discouragement due to the loss of personality and humanity and human mechanization. (4) Logically, bureaucracy is a conservation-oriented group, because it is inclined to check the occurrence of any social changes. In other words, bureaucracy tends to oppose social changes and reforms. Bureaucracy has of course contributed significantly to the development of democracy by providing equal opportunity for public office, promoting the idea of equality under the law and materializing democratic objectives. However, it attached importance only to the understanding of democratic ideas but involved many factors impeding the materialization of democracy from the practical point of view as enumerated hereunder. (1) The bureaucracy group forming the privileged class be-came a powerful group which often violated the freedom of the common people. (2) It failed to meet the needs of the common people. In other words, administration was not carried out to meet the need of the people but forced them to follow what the administration itself required. (3) Bureaucracy once monopolized legilation and the right of policy decision. All rights was represented by a small number of public servants. (4) The stratificational organization of bureaucracy was resulted in authoritarianism. (5) Bureaucratic structure made a minority of public servants to exercise arbitrarily all rights, thereby showed the iron rule of oligarchy. (6) Bureaucracy was intent on the maintenance of the status quo but failed to introduce new political ideas and changed to the most undemocratic conservative group. These criticisms described above brought about the controver-sy of the modification of bureaucracy, especially bureaucracy developing under the slogan of 'Democracy' was desired to be restored to a substantial democratic system. Therefore many scholars began to analyze and discuss the developmental process of the correlation between bureaucracy and democracy. They also studied on how to eliminate such conflicting factors as may be resulted from their correlationship. Discussed in this paper are the arguments and views of scholars with reference to those described above, including analytical investigations of the author himself.
The bureaucracy of Max Weber was advocated in a desperate effort to improve and develop Western society which was once do-minated by the confusion of laissez-faireism after the Industrial Revolution. The arrogance of the capitalists and lawless defiance of the Proletariat to society resulted in the impediment of social, political, economic and cultural development. Therefore, Max Weber intended to have those who received a regular education take a leading position in society so that they could eliminate the primary factors of social confusion and spear-head social development. He maintained that the scale of social organization should be stratified as it becomes expanded and that the stratum of the top management should not only be held by the elite of society but functionally bureaucratized. The characteristics of bureaucracy are as follows: (1) The responsibility, authority and qualification of public servants are strictly controlled by laws and regulations. The relation between the principal and the subordinate becomes valid with legal rights and duties. (2) Stratificational structure graduated according to duty is formed so that the relation between the principal and the sub-ordinate can be maintained. (3) Functional public servants are strictly prohibited to abuse their official authority with the distinction of public and private affairs. (4) As the functions of public servants are hardly possible to be performed without exerting themselves to the utmost, it is necessary for them to regard the officialdom as their calling. An additional office is not allowed in order that they may become professionalized and carry out their duties successfully and faith-fully as career public servants. (5) Administration and documentation by laws and regulations and the promotion of professional knowledge and technical knowhow are emphasized. (6) Public servants are employed by the government on a free contract basis instead of an arbitrary or a compulsory basis. It is an undeniable fact, however, that bureaucracy contributed to social development in a certain social process, but it began to raise many problems and produce malpractices as described below: (1) Legal formalities are too much emphasized that there appeared the phenomena of formalism, red-tape, prudentialism and law-almighty ideas. (2) There also appeared such malpractices as the pursuit of rank and power, confidentialism, factionalism, careerism, pursuit of personal profit, standardization, self-righenousness and evasion of responsibility. (3) Inefficiency was resulted from frustration, weariness and discouragement due to the loss of personality and humanity and human mechanization. (4) Logically, bureaucracy is a conservation-oriented group, because it is inclined to check the occurrence of any social changes. In other words, bureaucracy tends to oppose social changes and reforms. Bureaucracy has of course contributed significantly to the development of democracy by providing equal opportunity for public office, promoting the idea of equality under the law and materializing democratic objectives. However, it attached importance only to the understanding of democratic ideas but involved many factors impeding the materialization of democracy from the practical point of view as enumerated hereunder. (1) The bureaucracy group forming the privileged class be-came a powerful group which often violated the freedom of the common people. (2) It failed to meet the needs of the common people. In other words, administration was not carried out to meet the need of the people but forced them to follow what the administration itself required. (3) Bureaucracy once monopolized legilation and the right of policy decision. All rights was represented by a small number of public servants. (4) The stratificational organization of bureaucracy was resulted in authoritarianism. (5) Bureaucratic structure made a minority of public servants to exercise arbitrarily all rights, thereby showed the iron rule of oligarchy. (6) Bureaucracy was intent on the maintenance of the status quo but failed to introduce new political ideas and changed to the most undemocratic conservative group. These criticisms described above brought about the controver-sy of the modification of bureaucracy, especially bureaucracy developing under the slogan of 'Democracy' was desired to be restored to a substantial democratic system. Therefore many scholars began to analyze and discuss the developmental process of the correlation between bureaucracy and democracy. They also studied on how to eliminate such conflicting factors as may be resulted from their correlationship. Discussed in this paper are the arguments and views of scholars with reference to those described above, including analytical investigations of the author himself.
Keyword
#관료제 민주주의 상관성
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.