David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
First, something about the word. 'Bureau' (French, borrowed into German) is a desk, or by extension an office (as in 'I will be at the office tomorrow'; 'I work at the Bureau of Statistics'). 'Bureaucracy' is rule conducted from a desk or office, i.e. by the preparation and dispatch of written documents - or, these days, their electronic equivalent. In the office are kept records of communications sent and received, the files or archives, consulted in preparing new ones. This kind of rule is of course not found in the ancient classifications of kinds of government: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy - and bureaucracy? In fact it does not belong in such a classification. It is a servant of government, a means by which a monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, or other form of government, rules. Those who invented the word wanted to suggest that the servant was trying to become the master. Weber is of course aware of this tendency; in fact he attacked the pretensions of the Prussian bureaucracy to be an objective and neutral servant of society, above politics, and emphasized that every bureaucracy has interests of its own, and connections with other social strata (especially among the upper classes); see Beetham, chapter 3. But formally and in theory the bureaucracy is merely a means, and this is largely true also in practice: someone must provide policy direction and back the bureaucrat up (if necessary) with force. 'At the top of a bureaucratic organization, there is necessarily an element which is at least not purely bureaucratic', SEO, p. 335, to give policy direction
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Thomas Christiano (2005). Review: Democracy and Bureaucracy. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):211 - 217.
John Skorupski (2008). Equality and Bureaucracy. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 82 (1):161-178.
Jeffrey Friedman (2000). After Democracy, Bureaucracy? Rejoinder to Ciepley. Critical Review 14 (1):113-137.
Edward C. Page & Bill Jenkins (2005). Policy Bureaucracy: Government with a Cast of Thousands. OUP Oxford.
Elizabeth Anderson (2008). Expanding the Egalitarian Toolbox: Equality and Bureaucracy. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 82 (1):139-160.
L. J. Hume (1981). Bentham and Bureaucracy. Cambridge University Press.
Sadao Tamura & Minoru Tokita (eds.) (2004). Symbiosis of Government and Market: The Private, the Public, and Bureaucracy. Routledgecurzon.
Clarence N. Stone (1983). Whither the Welfare State? Professionalization, Bureaucracy, and the Market Alternative:Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Michael Lipsky; People-Processing: The Street-Level Bureaucrat in Public Service Bureaucracies. Jeffrey Manditch Prottas; The Welfare Industry: Functionaries and Reprients in Public Aid. David Street, Georte T. Martin, Jr., Laura Kramer; Social Welfare: Why and How? Noel Timms. [REVIEW] Ethics 93 (3):588-.
Thomas Christiano (2005). Democracy and Bureaucracy. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):211–211.
Richard A. Hilbert (1987). Bureaucracy as Belief, Rationalization as Repair: Max Weber in a Post-Functionalist Age. Sociological Theory 5 (1):70-86.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads134 ( #15,123 of 1,725,558 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #53,223 of 1,725,558 )
How can I increase my downloads?