How can charisma (Max Weber) be used as a political instrument?
HOW CAN CHARISMA (MAX WEBER) BE USED AS A POLITICAL INSTRUMENT?
Charisma is a quality of an individual personality that is considered extraordinary, and followers may consider this quality to be endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or exceptional powers or qualities. Whether such powers actually exist or not is irrelevant - the fact that followers believe that such powers exist is what is important. Charismatic leadership has emerged in all places and in all historical ages. For example, we have the Kwaio 'Big Man' of Melanesia (Sahlins, 1963) compared to the black ghetto in Chicago (Kochman, 1960's).
First and foremost, since the task is to define how charisma can be used as a political instrument, it is important to discuss 'functionalism'. Bronislaw Malinowski introduced the concept of Functionalism. It is universal theory and posits that all cultural "traits" are functionally interrelated and form an integrated social whole. In addition, it posited that all parts of society functioned to satisfy the individual's biological needs (in this case, seeking power, or generally gaining an advantage over another). Functionalism was thus a less system-oriented theory than structural functionalism and more oriented towards the individual. It was also more open toward social change.
The political leaders of Melanesian societies are characteristically 'big men', individuals who have acquired power because of their personal qualities and their personal achievement. There is a constant competition, a constant yearning for upward mobility between the men of the village to achieve the statues of 'big man'. They aspire to make decisions on behalf of the village and wish to be respected and powerful - where influence, authority, and leadership in the secular affairs come from success in mobilizing and manipulating wealth. A Big Man's objective to gain popular loyalty and enthusiasm comes from his charisma and ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
The political leaders of Melanesian societies are characteristically 'big men', individuals who have acquired power because of their personal qualities and their personal achievement. There is a constant competition, a constant yearning for upward mobility between the men of the village to achieve the statues of 'big man'. They aspire to make decisions on behalf of the village and wish to be respected and powerful - where influence, authority, and leadership in the secular affairs come from success in mobilizing and manipulating wealth. A Big Man's objective to gain popular loyalty and enthusiasm comes from his charisma and his ability to make people obligated to him by contributing to their feasts, financing marriages, and otherwise investing his resources-in other words, redistributing (Polanyi, 1959) his wealth. The ability to exchange gifts with a large number of people is characteristic of the Big Man-also, this ability enables a Big Man to further create ties of mutual obligation. Therefore, many affines and several wives are a good starting point for networking.
The egalitarian system of Melanesia enables enterprising individuals to obtain much of their power by forging inter-personal ties of reciprocity with other people. Often though, this isn't enough as a Big Man will have to start giving presents to strangers (sometimes outside of his village) to expand his area of influence. Apart from just being able to create personal ties, it is essential for a Big Man to have a charismatic personality to attract more people, and thereby gain more prestige and renown. A Big Man is a successful entrepreneur, carrying visible symbolic capital as strung shell beads and owning pigs - while prestige acts as the invisible symbolic capital. Furthermore, a Big Man acquires renown and respect by holding large mortuary feasts honouring the dead ancestors. But more importantly, looking at from a functionalist (Malinowski, 1920's) point of view, what seems like an act of kinship obligation is in fact a duel for prestige between the 'big men'-the larger the mortuary feast, the more prestigious one would be.
Very similar to the Big Man, we have the "rappers" in the black ghetto of Chicago. Here, there is also upward mobility, using charisma as a means to create a political organization, where prestige and status is mainly governed by the so-called act of "rapping". Rapping is instinctively a fluent and a lively way of talking, always categorized by a high degree of personal style. The function of rapping comes in two ways: expressive and directive. The expressive is a means of projecting a person's personality onto the 'scene' or to evoke a generally favourable response (from others). Directive rapping becomes an instrument to manipulate and control people to get them to give up or to do something. Charisma plays a big role in both ways.
There are many ways of "rapping". Through 'rapping', 'sounding' and 'running it down', the black in the ghetto establishes personality; through 'shucking', 'gripping' and 'copping a plea', he shows he has respect for power; and lastly, through 'jiving' and 'signifying', he stirs up excitement. Ability with words is apparently as highly valued as physical strength. The function of all types of "rapping" (except for 'running it down') serve to project personality, assert oneself, or arouse emotion.
To conclude, while the Big Man use charisma for transformation of status to become a renowned and respected leader, the "rappers" use charisma and verbal ability to manipulate and control situations to give himself a winning edge-that is to say, the function of charisma and language suggests that a person, being in social situations which require a series of transactions, is required to be continually ready to gain advantage of a person or situation defend himself against being victimized.
Gideon Peter Caringal Social A
IB-2 Sample Essay
