The Freud/Weber Connection: The Case of Islamic Iran

In recent years there has been renewed interest in transitions to democracy. This can be traced to the growth in the number of democracies worldwide. Many scholars have sought to create new theories in order to understand or explain this phenomenon. Nonetheless, problems remain. Many of the problems associated with the current literature on transitions relate to the inability of scholars to link micro and macro processes and to uncover consistent patterns of change. This paper will attempt to rectify this situation by returning to earlier approaches that seem to have been lost in the current discussions of transitions. I am referring here to the Freud/Weber connection. Both Freud and Weber deal with transitions, but they do so in fundamentally different ways. Freud employs a micro-psychological approach, whereas Weber employs a macro-sociological one. A number of authors (Brown; Hummel; Lasswell & Lerner; and McIntosh) have suggested that the two approaches have much in common and that Freud's micro-theory may bridge the gap left in many of Weber's macro-concepts. In this paper, the Weber/Freud approach will be applied to the case of Islamic Iran.

Authority for Weber

In Economy and Society, Weber argues that there are three pure types of legitimate domination: traditional, charismatic, and bureaucratic. Traditional forms of rule are those led by a paternal authority with a filial following. This type relies on such values as personal loyalty to the leader and unquestioning obedience. The leader is selected by virtue of his status, and is often regarded as infallible. Traditional paternal authority tends to be elitist and opposed to merit and/or personal achievement. It finds its origins in the patriarchal household upon which it is modeled. Many authoritarian forms of rule that have existed in human history are traditional in character (monarchies, empires, khanates, etc.).

The second type, the charismatic form of rule, opposes tradition and is based upon t