Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-01T02:16:34.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Power, modernity and liberal democracy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

By
Mark Haugaard
Edited by
Siniŝa Maleŝević  and
Mark Haugaard
Mark Haugaard
Affiliation:
Lectures in the Department of Political Science and Sociology National University of Ireland
Siniŝa Maleŝević
Affiliation:
National University of Ireland, Galway
Mark Haugaard
Affiliation:
National University of Ireland, Galway
Get access

Summary

In this chapter I wish to explore the social conditions which made liberal democracy possible, arguing that Gellner's account is incomplete because his view of power was too narrow. Within Gellner's paradigm, modern political forms emerge from a process whereby ‘Production replaced Predation’ (1988: 158). Implicit in the trinitarian ‘plough, sword and book’ image, which informs this account, is the hypothesis that the realm of politics, thus power, is derived from the might of the sword. In Gellner's logic, if the norm of premodern societies is characterised by the dominance of the sword (and occasionally the book), and if it is an observed fact that modern society is not controlled by the might of the sword, the logical implication has to be dominance by one or other of the elements of this trinitarian universe. In short, the rise of one element of the trinitarian universe has to be explained in terms of the fall, or containment, of the other two. As modern societies are industrial societies, it follows that it is the plough economy that has become dominant over the others. While I agree with Gellner that modern democratic societies are historically particular in the fact that, as a routine, positions of dominance do not change hands through contests determined by the sword, it does not follow from this that the only possible explanation is containment of the sword by the plough. Gellner mistakenly assumes that the sword is the only possible basis for power.

Type
Chapter
Information
Ernest Gellner and Contemporary Social Thought , pp. 75 - 102
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, B. 1980. Social Justice in the Liberal State. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Arendt, H. 1970. On Violence. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Bachrach, P. and Baratz, M. S. 1962. The Two Faces of Power. American Political Science Review 56: 641–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, B. 1988. The Nature of Power. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Bauman, Z. 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Bauman, Z. 2001. Community. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Elias, N. 1994. The Civilizing Process: The Development of Manners. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1971. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 2001. The Order of Things. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1959. Words and Things. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1964. Thought and Change. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1988. Plough, Sword and Book. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1992. Reason and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1994. The Conditions of Liberty. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1998. Language and Solitude. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Hann, C. 2003. Civil Society: The Sickness, Not the Cure?Social Evolution and History 2 (2): 55–74.Google Scholar
Haugaard, M. 1997. The Constitution of Power. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Haugaard, M. 2002. Power: A Reader. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Haugaard, M. 2003. Reflections on Seven Forms of Power. European Journal of Social Theory 6 (1): 78–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Lessnoff, M. 2002. Ernest Gellner and Modernity. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Lukes, S. 1974. Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukes, S. 2005. Power: A Radical View. 2nd edn, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macfarlane, A. 2000. The Riddle of the Modern World: Of Liberty, Wealth and Equality. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1981. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Mann, M. 1986. The Sources of Social Power, vol. I: A History of Power from the Beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, M. 1993. The Sources of Social Power, vol. II: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, M. 2005. The Dark Side of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morriss, P. 2002. Power: A Philosophical Analysis. 2nd edn, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Morriss, P. 2006. Steven Lukes on the Concept of Power. Political Studies Review 4: 124–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, T. 1963. On the Concept of Political Power. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 107: 232–62.Google Scholar
Poggi, G. 2000. Forms of Power. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1978. Economy and Society. vol. I: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1967. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Power, modernity and liberal democracy
    • By Mark Haugaard, Lectures in the Department of Political Science and Sociology National University of Ireland
  • Edited by Siniŝa Maleŝević, National University of Ireland, Galway, Mark Haugaard, National University of Ireland, Galway
  • Book: Ernest Gellner and Contemporary Social Thought
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488795.004
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Power, modernity and liberal democracy
    • By Mark Haugaard, Lectures in the Department of Political Science and Sociology National University of Ireland
  • Edited by Siniŝa Maleŝević, National University of Ireland, Galway, Mark Haugaard, National University of Ireland, Galway
  • Book: Ernest Gellner and Contemporary Social Thought
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488795.004
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Power, modernity and liberal democracy
    • By Mark Haugaard, Lectures in the Department of Political Science and Sociology National University of Ireland
  • Edited by Siniŝa Maleŝević, National University of Ireland, Galway, Mark Haugaard, National University of Ireland, Galway
  • Book: Ernest Gellner and Contemporary Social Thought
  • Online publication: 22 September 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488795.004
Available formats
×