Ethics / Philosophy

Habermas is wrong. Max Weber is right.


My title: Singels – One kid families – Singles – Couples … Credit: Post –  China in Transition.

Reblogged via China in Transition #2: Weber believed that a move towards rational-legal authority was inevitable.

I rarely repost, but this photo  cries out for it.  I love her visual (always) but reject the added  Wikipedia thesis. The picture even contradicts the thesis – there is no enlightenment nor positive rationalization.

We entered a new feudal age in the West –  in the world. The sixties are over, 99% hold most of the assets and all of the power. Drones proved effective against asymmetric wars, NSA proved effective against freedom.  The reflective discourse has been Habermas’  fad. The MSM (MainStream Media) manufactures the common consent and controls the allowed dissent. Those in power have grown autistic. For the many it is panem et circenses. We live in our little internet sandbox –  watched. Never ever, so many knew so much, but could or would do so little. Max Weber is right. There are tree types of  legitimacy:

  1. Traditional legitimacy derives from societal custom and habit that emphasize the history of the authority of tradition.
  2. Charismatic legitimacy derives from the ideas and personal charisma of the leader.
  3. Rational-legal legitimacy derives from a system of institutional procedure.

We have neither but raw financial power. Habermas’ thesis of public discourse is laughable. There is serious financial repression for the lucky. For the unlucky the global refugee figure passes 50m for first time since second world war not mentioning the global migration…

Habermas meets Weber (erring) when he pipe-dreamed in his last book of a supranational democracy, without demos – the people  –  which at the end according to Max Weber derives its legitimacy only from institutional procedure… In no way a move towards rational-legal authority  is inevitable, irreversible on necessarily democratic.

Disagree? Drop a line.