Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche eBook Õ di

Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche eBook Õ di



10 thoughts on “Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche

  1. Matthew W Matthew W says:

    Mandatory reading for those interested in understanding power shifts in the West Essentially Pareto who was apolitical shows how most elites bring their own demise Overtime elites become weak and passive thus allowing a new elite to come and destroy them The decadent elites are the ones that promote liberalism humanitarianism and socialism which eventually brings their own demise In the modern West if one wants to be considered sophisticated one has to believe in the leftist we are the world spiel Of course those underclasses aren't really interested in word peace they want power and plan to destroy the upper classes using their own altruistic philosophies against them If the US follows the same route as elites in the past which it is America has certainly degenerated over the past 60 years certain minorities and special interest groups will completely take control of this country which has already pretty much happenedAnyways this book was a huge influence on Mussolini and he certainly took power in Italy for a couple decades


  2. Helen Helen says:

    This is a brief powerful book written at the turn of the 20th C which was said to have been subseuently favored by fascists; however the author condemns eually old elites new elites nationalism anti Semitism Catholicism socialism Marxism He is also disillusioned with the bourgeoisie and so the book is critical of all sides in the never ending battle he sees as unfolding the succession of elites as one elite weakens and is supplanted by a new vigorous elite About the only group he consistently applauds is labor unions which he sees as forming part of the new elite fueled by the secular religion as he sees it of socialism Ultimately though he has little hope for any elite group or for the longevity of any elite group to retain power he says all elites become exclusive and eventually give way to new elites There are some unnervingly accurate observations in this very powerful book which is almost the length of a long essay He is scornful of the promises of each new elite group that comes along which usually enlists the downtrodden and the poor deceives them and then exploits them once it achieves power He says this is always what happens to the poor and that despite the promises of each new elite group to come along the poor remain poor Here's how he puts it with respect to a new elite of the ancient world which of course either arose from or enlisted the help of the poor or proletarians of its age Many centuries have passes since the day when the Carmi Sibillini promised to man that there would be no rich and poor no tyrants and slaves norwould anyone be greater or smaller; no kings or leaders; all things would be held in common The poor wretches still wait for these promises to come true There is every likelihood that the new big promises will have the same outcome and this can be expected within an eually short time After the victory the new aristocracy will perhaps allow some concessions of form and language to the new proletarians; that is to the weak the improvident or the incapable but actually these latter will probably have to bear an even heavier yoke than the one they are bearing now The new masters will not at least for a little while have the senile weaknesses of our bourgeoisieAnd regarding how the elites treat businesses specifically with respect to taxes Experience taught the Roman masters that it was profitable for them to let the slave keep a certain nest egg for himself as this would spur him on to work and produce for the master Similarly experience has taught certain democratic governments that to despoil the contractor and the capitalist entirely was precisely to kill the hen that laid the golden eggs Therefore they let them keep certain earnings and are satisfied to take from them as much as is possible without discouraging them from using their intellectual gifts and their wealth in the interests of economic production Thus they exploit them in the best possible manner just as the master exploited the slave It is not certain whether the new elite will have as much patience in allowing itself to be robbed as has the present one Regarding the Dreyfus affair The Dreyfus affair is simply an episode in the contest between the present and the future elite A not very large segment of the present elite had tried especially in the years 1850 to 1870 to rely upon freedom reason and good sense These people have now seen their mistake realizing that men are governed by sentiment and not by reason; the only possible choice therefore is choice of the kind of sentiment or rather of the kind of religion Hence that bourgeois minority had again drawn closer to the majority which consciously or unconsciously had always held similar ideas What could one oppose to the invading socialist religion? The higher class in France did not have much to choose from It sought to invigorate old religious forms especially the Catholic one It tried to turn certain aversions against socialism to its advantage thus giving rise to Antisemitism; and finally it too had a new religion in the guise of nationalism This latter had the enormous advantage of being useful in seducing the army It should be well noted I do not even hint that such a plan was premeditated and then deliberately carried out Indeed the facts prove that most of those who follow this plan do so under pressure of the circumstances in which they find themselves without being aware of it Perhaps one or another cunning and artful leader may see in which direction the movement is driving but he will take every care not to refer to it so as not to weaken the blind faith of his companions The author wraps up uite presciently There always remains an unknown element of future social modifications and there exist changers with could produce long wars among the civilized nations These would probably have the effect of imposing a military dictatorship on some European nation But what the relationship between such a dictatorship and the new would be escapes us Those who judge by the movements of the subjective phenomenon alone will be convinced that a military dictatorship can benefit only the present elite but he who is principally concerned with the objective phenomenon will not accept such a hypothesis without considerable doubt In short the author believes that the decay and fall of old elites is inevitable the movement giving rise to the new elite usurping the old is usually marked by an upsurge in religious feeling in his era he feels that socialism has become the new secular religion and that in fact certain Protestant forms of Christianity with their emphasis on social service are nearly indistinguishable from socialism The old elites become decadent and no longer defend their interests; he identifies the Roman Catholic establishment as having almost been entirely swept away by the Reformation for example and discusses the circumstances of the French Revolution at length He claims that old elites become weaker as they become focused on humanitarian concerns but he eually criticizes all elites in this way and states that it is inevitable that new elites become old decay and are overthrown Thus I at least do not read the book as being a blueprint for fascism or any particular ideology for that matter since according to Pareto all elites eventually fall If some passages are taken out of context then I suppose a fascist could find justification for brushing aside and supplanting the decadent bourgeois old order but the next new elite to come along would simply do the same thing The take away of the book is that no elite lasts forever each elite is in a way doomed to decay and be overthrown The old elites become totally senile and deluded and cease to defend themselves but help their adversaries instead More vigorous energetic individuals rise up either from the bourgeoisie itself or from the proletariat and overthrow either all of society or the elite leadership Yet they too are eventually doomed to fall victim to the new elites which rise up Pareto is obviously highly learned and erudite and gives excellent supporting examples for his theses The book is prescient in that the 20th C was marked by two bloody wars in Europe and the rise of a murderous military dictatorship in Germany exactly as Pareto predicted 30 years before Hitler assumed power in Germany The book is bleak in that the author is basically saying the same thing with supporting examples over and over again It is a thought provoking book of great power in that it's eye opening Is Pareto oversimplifying the course of history as a succession of revolutions overthrowing sclerotic and senile elites? Is Pareto's view perhaps unconsciously modeled on the succession of generations the younger generation eventually supplanting the older generation with sons and fathers reversing roles as fathers weaken and become senile they end up being cared for by their sons instead of vice versa? Of course that too is an oversimplification of Pareto's theory which is uite a bit elaborated than that Simpler yet is the analogy to vegetation A perennial plant is vigorous in the Spring powerful in the Summer only to weaken and decay in the Fall and finally die out as Winter snow falls The following Spring though the same plant will start sending up shoots again to repeat the same growth efflorescence decay death process again Is human society really only an analog of the life of a perennial plant? Pareto's implication that the matrix from which each new elite is drawn from elements of the proletariat or sometimes from the bourgeoisie means the organism society auto regenerates itself each elite is despite the succession of ideologiesreligions really the same elite since each new elite is drawn from the same matrix elements This book may be annoying to some because clearly if taken out of context some of what Pareto says could be seen as pointing to the excesses of fascism a movement which had yet to occur when Pareto wrote this book He is disdainful of what he sees as the inevitable softening of any old elite as they become focused on humanitarian concerns and so forth However as repeatedly stated above Pareto believes every old elite weakens becomes decadent and is eventually supplanted His view is in the end hopeless perhaps too realistic in its assessment of human history from a teleological perspective Thus any reader of any ideology at least any reader who reads the entire book will realize that Pareto doesn't actually exempt any ideology or belief system held by any elite from the eventual fate of all elites There's no way to avoid the fate of all elites Pareto says In fact he's uite critical as in his above uotes of the devious routes by which would be dictators seize power and seduce segments of society As noted above he is however very impressed with labor unions There is one other uote that is worth readingTo many bourgeois the Christian religious wave on which they ride seems to be a means for combating socialism That is to say that among the many manifestations of the religious sentiment they choose or rather believe they choose the one which is least opposed to their interests This reason for their choice has certainly had some effect but much less than would be imagined Sometimes it has existed a priori but often it was found a posteriori in order to provide a reason for the religious movement Be that as it may if there was a strategic thought behind it it failed to produce the desired effect The governing classes wished to use the old religious beliefs in order to keep the people subdued and it so happened that the people are now becoming detached from these beliefs and turning to the new ones particularly to the socialist belief; the bourgeois were successful only within the ranks of the bourgeoisie itself Take the case of a general who wants to hypnotize the solders of the enemy so as to defeat them easily; yet with all the ado he does not hypnotize a single enemy but instead his own men become hypnotized and therefore an easier prey for the adversary Such was precisely insofar as it was conscious the achievement of the bourgeoisie not only as regards the old forms of religion but with regard to the new ones as well AndThe divergence between the subjective and the objective phenomenon produces many illusions Thus many people imagine that they can effectively combat socialism by combating he theories of Marx just as others believed it possible to combat Christianity effectively by pointing out the scientific errors of the Bible There are few educated people today who would not recognize those errors And yet what damage has it done to Christianity? None It prospers than ever The Marxian theory of value is not valid; after they had tried out various and subtle interpretations we now witness some of the most educated Marxists going so far as to say that Marx never intended to set up a theory of value All this has hurt the socialist faith little or not at all It was not the book by Marx which has created the socialists; it is the socialists who have made Marx's book famous It was not the works of Voltaire which toward the end of the eighteenth century produced skepticism; it was that skepticism which gave the writings of Voltaire their reputation This is meant only to define the principal aspect of the phenomenon for it must be added that form too has value Voltaire and the Encyclopedists expressing the existing sentiments of the French higher class in a select form endowed those sentiments with new vigor A similar observation must be made with regard to Marx This book was written in 1901 and the author considered the French revolution and the succeeding dictatorship as a relatively recent example of old elites becoming decrepit and giving way to new elites The book includes a good albeit somewhat critical introductory essay by Hans Zetterberg Here is what Zetterberg says about Pareto's workwhat he Pareto wanted to find was a rational explanation of irrational behavior But it is eually true that Pareto was not in agreement with the philosophies of the Enlightenment which held that the critical factor in the survival of an elite is the extent to which it allows reason to control sentiments; a government by intellectuals for example Pareto held to be a near certain disaster The inability to solve the problem of the role of reason in the circulation of the elites is most obvious when the issue is phrased as reason versus sentiment It is neither reason nor sentiment that should be maximized to insure the survival of an elite but efficiency And efficiency is produced through a delicately balanced mixture of reason and sentiment working not against one another but in harness In the last analysis is is only the efficient elites whether elected appointed or self chosen that gain substantial support from those who are on the receiving end of their decrees who buy their goods and services who attend their sacred rites who receive their knowledge It is the overall all efficiency in the tasks of generating and distributing order riches knowledge beauty sacredness and virtue that slowly makes the elites perceived as legitimate and thus helps insure their tenure This book refreshingly doesn't have much technical jargon and the introductory essay certainly helps place the book in the context of Pareto's thought Zetterberg notes that Pareto himself was a proud detached and ironic man without much desire to align himself with any political movement His bias which is loud and clear is rather against people of all political persuasions who favor social ossification over social change ascription over achievement and softness over toughness And Pareto obviously thinks of himself as a sophisticated visitor to the theater of historical drama who early discovers the entire plot which the rest of the audience still is misled by dramatic gestures moralistic speeches and the comings and goings of the actors Pareto took pride in his superior sophistication in this respect and he sees no reason to hide it Many readers are apt to be annoyed with him for being so smugly sure This is a worthwhile book to read if only to glimpse a perhaps rather cynical viewpoint into how and why elites rise and fall Whether Pareto's theory is cynical or enlightened I suppose depends on the reader's world view andor level of ingenuousness


  3. Joe Joe says:

    7232006The Eternal Return of the EliteThis monograph first saw the light of day in 1901 and has been understood as a somewhat famous attempt at a non race based understanding of 'elitism' The failure of this attempt to be either genuinely explanatory or entirely successful seems by almost all accounts to have been historically verified by fascisms repeated descent into racism But given the utter failure of the Fascist movements of the post World War II era to gain traction one wonders if perhaps now Pareto can at last be given a fair hearing One even wonders if Pareto is fairly characterized as a fascist Be that as it may Pareto still might have much to teach us about the interactions of elites According to Pareto elites rise to power maintain dominance and then fall; but only if another elite is struggling to take its place One is here reminded of Lenin's remark against Trotsky I believe 'that no state ever fell without being pushed' History is according to this text a circulation of elites; and for Pareto the ideologies that these elites represent are only of secondary importance What one must always keep in mind while reading this book is that for Pareto Liberals and Socialists that is the leaders of these ideological positions are eually elites By the 'elite' I should point out Pareto always means the leadership of a class Pareto distinguishes between subjective and objective factors; the latter being real objects while the former are psychological states Thus belief and unbelief are for Pareto eually psychological states In fact according to our author belief is often the sign of a rising elite Note that by 'belief' he doesn't merely mean religious beliefs; according to Pareto socialism is a belief that is it is a psychological state Indeed for Pareto perhaps somewhat surprisingly given his right wing tendency and reputation nationalism itself is also a belief Now he doesn't propose to ignore these beliefs; on the contrary it is the skepticism of the rulers towards beliefs that weakens them in the face of the rising elite These 'myths' are a part of history and need to be explained The 'religious sentiment' ie belief of the masses is what leads to revolt This sentiment is exploited by the rising elite in its attempt to overthrow the ruling elite In this matter the 'skepticism' of the ruling elite is no small aid to the rising elite And what we also need to keep in mind is that logical argument almost always fails in these matters; people believe for non rational reasons sentiment must be met with sentiment ie socialism must be countered with nationalism In fact in these pages Pareto over a hundred years ago by describing the similarity between Christian and Socialist behavior seems to indicate the possibility of a convergence of Christianity and Socialism vis à vis the ruling bourgeois This possibility is currently being explored thanks to the collapse of 'really existing socialism' in the USSR by the most au courant leftist continental theory Keep in mind that for Pareto it is the 'decadence' ie it is 'less apt to defend its own power' and the unabated rapacity of the old elite that causes it to perish Indeed he says of this decadence and rapacity that the old elite could prosper if one of them were absent Scientifically or so Pareto maintains there really is nothing to choose between Speaking of some historical examples of some crimes of new elites Pareto says The old elite when it was in power did even worse so that one cannot conclude from these facts anything against one or the other regime Pareto simultaneously holds that reform is the most dangerous moment for the ruling elite and that the waning of power is perfectly compatible with a rise in the use of violence In fact one comes away from this book feeling that the things that Pareto held in most contempt were inefficiency and incompetence and indeed some of his most contemptuous gestures in this matter are reserved for the capitalists In any case the problem seems to be that the falling class no longer believing in itself can no longer attract the best young people to its cause The rising class has 'belief' and hope the falling one only has its privileges Persecution seems to be no remedy for this Indeed thanks to persecutions many people of doubtful loyalty and unsteady character were eliminated and professional politicians kept away Very amusing But here in 1901 Pareto sees the best of future generations going to socialism while all persecution does is prune the revolutionary plant In fact if one carries away anything from this book it is that old elites must eventually fall We learn here that socialism is the heir of Christian 'belief' And since Christianity is dying all the old elite can do is delay the inevitable 'homecoming' of the common people and their 'religious sentiment' to socialism Thus 'belief' replaces 'belief' Again there is little rationality in this process; Pareto is at pains to emphasize the 'subjective phenomenon' This is why nationalism is the best answer to socialism; one counters one irrationality with another This book is really only a long essay the hardcover edition before me has 75 pages of text 18 pages of notes and a 22 page introduction The notes are uite good and should not be passed up For example while nicely playing off his understanding of socialism as but another belief Pareto after discussing some socialist 'sectarians' writes One day we will perhaps have the Holy Inuisition of the socialist faith Note 18 The Soviet 'show trials' of the thirties were indeed this Inuisition This really is a superb book a worthy companion piece to all the great political realists of history from Machiavelli to Gramsci


  4. 8314 8314 says:

    The following dialogue is from Ghost in the Shell S02E22 Translation by myself Read this and there’s no need to read this bookゴーダ「私が二流とはどういう意味かね?」Gohda What do you mean when you say “you are second notch”?バトー「俺達は以前スタンド・アローンタイプの天才ハッカーと出会った事があってな。どうしてもそいつの起こした現象とこの事件とを比べちまうのさ。そいつと比べるとどうにもここで自決した連中が大した存在に思えなくなってな。それで個別の十一人の外部記憶を調べ、奴等がウイルスによって現れた只の模倣者だって事実を知った訳だ。」Batou We ran into a genius hacker who caused Stand Alone phenomenon once back in the days Couldn’t help to compare the situation right now with the past In comparison the lot who killed themselves here seems not that impressive And then we looked into their external memory found out that they are merely meme who are infected by a electrocerebrium virusゴーダ「ほう。」Gohda Huhバトー「奴等はどっかの犯罪者が、恐らくは中国大使館を占拠した連中の名前を上手い事引き継ぐ形で作った思想誘導装置だったって事さ。それでもウイルスをばら撒いた野郎はさぞかし自分を優秀なハッカーだと思ってるんだろうな。」Batou These are presumably just the work some criminal who used them as a public opinion inducing mechanism by picking up the name “individual eleven” who occupied the Chinese Embassy back in the days — a cunning usurper The one who composed the virus might perceive himself as a great hackerゴーダ「そのウイルスを作ったのは私だとでも言いたいのかね?」Gohda Are you saying that I wrote the virus?バトー「そうは言ってねえ。」Batou Nothing of the sortゴーダ「では私に何を話せと?」Gohda Then what do you want me to say?バトー「そういうお前は、連中をどう見てるんだ?」Batou I want to know — how you of all men think of these peopleゴーダ「ふん、いいだろう。君が言う様に個別の十一人がウイルスによって現れた者だとして、君の言うスタンド・アローンタイプのハッカーとやらと同様、未だ状況を拡大し続けている彼等の方こそ天才、いや英雄と言えなくは無いかね?」Gohda Hmm okay Suppose what you’ve said is true — these people are infected with a virus Wouldn’t you say by playing the exact same role of that genius hacker you mentioned those who are escalating the situation are the true genius or better heroes?バトー「確かに集団自決と言うパフォーマンスでその意志を広めはした。だが奴等は誰の英雄になった?国民のか?そんな事はねえ。精々奴等は難民問題が拡大する切っ掛けを作った道化でしかねえ。現に奴等の死なんざ既に忘却の彼方だ。」Batou Of course they made an impression and advocation by executing themselves openly But whose heroes did they become? The citizens’? Not at all At best they are the entertainments who worsened the immigrant issue Their death by now has long since forgottenゴーダ「成る程。だが事の本質が彼等の記憶では無く今の状況を作り出す事であったとするなら、個別の十一人をプロデュースした犯人こそは天才的なハッカーだと言えなくは無いかね?」Gohda I see But what if the goal was to create a situation like this instead of making them memorable — wouldn’t you say the one behind all this is a genius hacker?バトー「ああ、残念ながらそれは否定出来ねえ。それでも天才かと言われると俺にはいささか疑問が残るね。奴等の思想やウイルスから見えてくる犯人像は、自身の劣等感から抜け出したいと言う欲望に支配された個別主義者の顔だけだ。 所詮個人的な思い付きを他人に強要しているだけでは他人の心を打つ事は出来ねえ。そこには善意でも悪意でもいい、何かしら確固たる信念の様な物が無い限り天才とか英雄と呼ばれる存在には成れねえ。 」Batou Regrettably I can’t deny that But I still doubt if he is a genius The psychological portrait given by the virus showed nothing than an egoist trying to surpass his sense of inferiority through the means of controlling others Merely imposing one’s thoughts onto others by force wouldn’t touch the others’ hearts Be it benign or malicious if one has nothing solid nothing like a belief one could never be counted as a genius or a heroゴーダ「信念・・・」Gohda Belief バトー「そうだ。少なくとも俺はそう思ってる。そしてもう一つ。絶対に必要になってくる最大の要素。運って奴も不可欠だろうな。」Batou Yes At least this is my stance And another key factor the absolutely necessary factor luck There must be luckゴーダ「ほう。それは何故?」Gohda Oh? Why?バトー「決まってんだろ? 天才とか英雄の存在なんて物は詰まる所第三者の主観による所が大きい。英雄を英雄たらしめる為には傍観者によるレスポンスがまずは必要なんだ。そしてそのレスポンスの内容が英雄を高みにも上げるし地に貶めもする。それこそは運でしかねえ。 」Batou It goes without saying no? Notions like heroes or genius depends heavily upon the spectator’s perspective Spectators and their responses must be present in order to make a hero into a hero Their responses can lift a hero to Olympus or chase him down to inferno This is pure luckPareto is clearly deeply influenced by Machiavelli — see how he emphasized on virtù But then sometimes I hoped that he could take a tour in my university and have a closer look at these undergrads who when they earn a degree from this university would be automatically counted as elites Short answer they are nowhere close And I found in general this mesmerizing atmosphere in Ivy Leagues of you future elites are already fantastic to be extremely nauseating Bad air Bad airAll in all I found this book to be based on sand The notion of elites or heroes or genius depends heavily on the spectator who comes with a built in set of values Discussing the rise and fall of elites could never separate from the discussion of changing values changing perceptions of virtù Without the latter the former would just be a moral rant — be it presented in an erudite or pedestrian manner it won’t save its essenceWell Who says anime are all shallow?


  5. Tim Lundquist Tim Lundquist says:

    Remarkable little book that details the rise and fall of elites Full of wonderful turns of phrases does one give credit to Pareto or to his translator? Pareto has little patience for anyone or any class Still his TCFS attitude makes for a fun read Also an interesting comparison between Christianity and Socialism; at times his criticism of modern religion 1860 present seems like a contemporary screed against a moral therapeutic deism


  6. Eileen Eileen says:

    This is a small book with uite complete investigation on the revolution why and how all these revolutions happen Even it was written years ago this book is still uite relevant For those who are passionate and hope revolution could help them go and read it then cool down pleaseThe book is definitely influenced by Karl Max which is for me growing up in China easy to understand Also it predicts uite accurately why our communist revolution happen


  7. Ma Vera Ma Vera says:

    “Greater part of human actions have their origin not in logical reasoning but in sentiment Pareto 1901


  8. İlşad Özkan İlşad Özkan says:

    Yazar özgün ve cesur yorumlar yapmış okunabilir Fakat kitap kötü hazırlanmış ikincil metinlerin çoğu çevrilmemiş bile Ayrıca Türkçe yazım hataları az da olsa göze çarpacak şekilde


  9. O O says:

    Many people unwittingly know Pareto through the 80–20 law or in statistics the Pareto Distribution I knew him as a pioneering uantitative economist but later learned he eventually turned to political–historical–philosophical research resulting in major contributions to sociology The “Rise and Fall of Elites” in this respect is a short book that is essentially an application of his sociological theory developed at length in the “ Trattato di Sociologia Generale” Thus this essay serves as a good introduction to Pareto’s thinkingBefore starting I need to note that the Greek edition of “The Rise and Fall of the Elites” Ἄνοδος καὶ Πτώση τῶν Ἐλίτ Κουκκίδα 2017 includes translations of two essays “ Un’applicazione di Teorie Sociologiche” 1900 and “ Transformazione della Democrazia” 1921 The second essay’s translation not included in the English editions can be found hereAlthough I haven’t read Pareto’s Trattato his theory is based on two fundamental assumptions a people’s actions are influenced by what he calls residues which are mostly extra rational factors instincts sentiments sexual drives etc; b people rationalize their actions by appropriate selection or creation of derivatives eg ideologies philosophies religions scientific rationalizations etc Starting with these assumptions it is easy for Pareto to seek the causes of the actions of groups of people in the less scrutinized residues while discounting the importance or showing the superficial nature of derivatives The actions of many groups are analyzed in this frame of reference but the main focus is on established elites and their struggle with upcoming elites A second recurring theme that helps organize the book and connect geographically or historically disparate examples is Pareto’s theory of cycles In analogy to business cycles Pareto sees cycles in religious beliefs suitably defined to include socialist beliefs and mainly developed in the Applicazione centralization and decentralization of authority and concentration or diffusion of wealth developed in the Transformazione All cycles are correlated to the struggle of different groups for power but mainly with the decline of the dominant eliteMost of the supportive arguments are based on historical events mainly from the Roman Republic the period of the French revolution and contemporary Italian and European politics For instance the politics of the Roman Republic are explained as successive confrontations of Patricians Plebeians Euites and finally Emperors Or centralization waves by the kingdoms of the Merovingians and Carolingians and the subseuent decentralization waves and establishment of upcoming feudal elites France’s gradual transition to absolute monarchy and eventual revolution and counter revolutionPareto is not manichæan in his view of elites; in contemporary societies he sees much than a unified bourgeois elite vs the rest Among others he differentiates the military especially dominant in Germany before the Great War plutocrats industrialists speculators land owners farmers and peasants intellectuals skilled labour unskilled labour syndicalists and unionized workers etc In all these groups he looks for distinct economic—but crucially—also other motives often opposing economic self interest and notes their ephemeral alliances and asymmetric relationships that cannot be easily explained by economic motives aloneThe scientific utility of his theories is debatable and he himself although diagnosing a definite position in the various cycles eg increasing religious beliefs ca 1900 wisely refrains from making predictions about the future evolution of these cycles His aim is to demarcate what is possible and assess what is probable in the near future What impressed me is Pareto’s insistence to only focus on underlying causes—not phenomena—and only on those that lead to significant and recurring transitions He goes into some pain to differentiate this approach from both a purely empirical approach as far as it is dealing with any and all phenomena superficially and a purely dialectical approach as far as it is stylized and does not consider all effective causes of the observed phenomena and their interactions In this respect Pareto’s methodology is a step forwardOn the other hand identifying the cycles can never be extremely useful since according to Pareto they could be short medium and long range while progressing at different rates But at least one can estimate the direction society has been moving towards up to the present—but not in the future Moreover the mechanism through which overlapping “residual” interests get combined or not to form groups that struggle with dominant elites is barely touched upon In practice Pareto is deeply pragmatist realist apparently amoral mostly unemotional almost cynical and sometimes arrogant and brash; definitely a successor of Machiavelli To the extent that the reader is unfamiliar with this approach to political and historical commentary and adding Pareto’s comprehensive knowledge of and uncanny observations on European political history this book can be a provocative read A necessary caveat if this is the case it's not hard for a disinclined reader to accuse Pareto of trying to associate widely supported and “justified” demands against the abuses and excesses of dominant elites with selfish and narrow group interests in order to neutralize any of those demands’ moral merit In any case his comments on contemporary Italian politics illuminate less known aspects of the fin de siècle Zeitgeist and later developments in the Transformazione and are—to me—very novel and strikingHe also maintains a façade of disinterest and neutrality in the Transformazione he explicitly asserts his work is not a call to action albeit ineffective when dealing with the Italian society It’s clear he is sympathetic to a classical liberal program on economic principles free trade low taxation increase in saving absolute respect for property law free labour markets etc This provides a lot of entertaining passive aggressive passages where he is irritated resentful and scornful of the then dominant Italian bourgeoisie’s concessions cowardice and sentimentality but respectful of and admiring though unsympathetic to Italian syndicalists for their practicality common sense rationality vigour and militancyFinally as an illustration of his approach let’s turn to Pareto himself Pareto the bourgeois economist is “convinced” of the utilitarian necessity of the liberal economic program and thus definitely sympathetic to the part of the elite that support this program However they are crumbling and unwilling to fight the combination of crony capitalists organized labour socialists and demagogues He feels threatened and angry but has no theory to morally justify a combative stance by the bourgeoisie Pareto’s theory—from his theory's viewpoint—could well be the derivative of his self preservation residue as a bourgeois academic In any case the extent to which this self preservation sentiment became ubiuitous in the then struggling Italian elites could help justify the raise of Mussolini shortly thereafter


  10. Sema Sema says:

    Sosyolojik bağlamda günümüz Türkiye siyasi ortamını okumaya çok yardımcı olabilecek bir eser Pareto'nun bu kadar iyi öngörülerde ve çözümlemelerde bulunması diğer sosyal bilimcilerden daha az meşhur olması bakımından şaşırtıcı


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche [Epub] ➟ Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche Author Vilfredo Pareto – Capitalsoftworks.co.uk Machiavelli’den bu yana siyasetin doğası zayıflarla güçlülerin mücadelesi şeklinde tasvir edilmiştir Bu sefer bir başka ünlü İtalyan iktisatçı ve sosyolog Vilfredo Pareto XX yüzyıl Machiavelli’den bu yana di teorie eBook ↠ siyasetin doğası zayıflarla güçlülerin mücadelesi şeklinde tasvir edilmiştir Bu sefer bir başka ünlü İtalyan iktisatçı ve sosyolog Vilfredo Pareto XX yüzyılın başındaki bu mücadeleyi anlatıyor Pareto’ya göre insanlık tarihi seçkinlerin durmadan devam eden yer de¬ğiştirme tarihidir Biri yükselirken Un applicazione Kindle - diğeri alçalır Kısa aralıklar dışında insanlar her zaman bir seçkin azınlık tarafından yönetilmişlerdir Pareto seçkin elite kelimesini İt aristrocrazia en güçlü en enerjik ve kötülük kadar iyiliğe de yeteneği olan anlamında kullanır“Seçkinlerin Yükselişi ve Düşüşü” konulu yüzyılın sonundaki bu uzun dene me applicazione di teorie ePUB ✓ ekonometriden sosyolojiye dev bir adım atar Bu kitap Pareto’nun siyaset sosyolojisinin önsözü olarak da okunabilir Pareto ileride bu düşünceler saye sinde büyük ün sağlamıştırSeçkinlerin iktidara gelinceye kadar kullandıkları yöntemler birbirini anımsatır Tüm seçkinler benzer davranış kalıplarını ser gilerler Ve tarih birçok kez tanıklık etmiştir ki başta zayıf ve yoksulların ya nında yer alan seçkin gruplar zafere ulaştıklarında artık başa dönme şansını ebediyyen kaybetmişlerdir.

10 thoughts on “Un applicazione di teorie sociologiche

  1. Matthew W Matthew W says:

    Mandatory reading for those interested in understanding power shifts in the West Essentially Pareto who was apolitical shows how most elites bring their own demise Overtime elites become weak and passive thus allowing a new elite to come and destroy them The decadent elites are the ones that promote liberalism humanitarianism and socialism which eventually brings their own demise In the modern West if one wants to be considered sophisticated one has to believe in the leftist we are the world spiel Of course those underclasses aren't really interested in word peace they want power and plan to destroy the upper classes using their own altruistic philosophies against them If the US follows the same route as elites in the past which it is America has certainly degenerated over the past 60 years certain minorities and special interest groups will completely take control of this country which has already pretty much happenedAnyways this book was a huge influence on Mussolini and he certainly took power in Italy for a couple decades

  2. Helen Helen says:

    This is a brief powerful book written at the turn of the 20th C which was said to have been subseuently favored by fascists; however the author condemns eually old elites new elites nationalism anti Semitism Catholicism socialism Marxism He is also disillusioned with the bourgeoisie and so the book is critical of all sides in the never ending battle he sees as unfolding the succession of elites as one elite weakens and is supplanted by a new vigorous elite About the only group he consistently applauds is labor unions which he sees as forming part of the new elite fueled by the secular religion as he sees it of socialism Ultimately though he has little hope for any elite group or for the longevity of any elite group to retain power he says all elites become exclusive and eventually give way to new elites There are some unnervingly accurate observations in this very powerful book which is almost the length of a long essay He is scornful of the promises of each new elite group that comes along which usually enlists the downtrodden and the poor deceives them and then exploits them once it achieves power He says this is always what happens to the poor and that despite the promises of each new elite group to come along the poor remain poor Here's how he puts it with respect to a new elite of the ancient world which of course either arose from or enlisted the help of the poor or proletarians of its age Many centuries have passes since the day when the Carmi Sibillini promised to man that there would be no rich and poor no tyrants and slaves norwould anyone be greater or smaller; no kings or leaders; all things would be held in common The poor wretches still wait for these promises to come true There is every likelihood that the new big promises will have the same outcome and this can be expected within an eually short time After the victory the new aristocracy will perhaps allow some concessions of form and language to the new proletarians; that is to the weak the improvident or the incapable but actually these latter will probably have to bear an even heavier yoke than the one they are bearing now The new masters will not at least for a little while have the senile weaknesses of our bourgeoisieAnd regarding how the elites treat businesses specifically with respect to taxes Experience taught the Roman masters that it was profitable for them to let the slave keep a certain nest egg for himself as this would spur him on to work and produce for the master Similarly experience has taught certain democratic governments that to despoil the contractor and the capitalist entirely was precisely to kill the hen that laid the golden eggs Therefore they let them keep certain earnings and are satisfied to take from them as much as is possible without discouraging them from using their intellectual gifts and their wealth in the interests of economic production Thus they exploit them in the best possible manner just as the master exploited the slave It is not certain whether the new elite will have as much patience in allowing itself to be robbed as has the present one Regarding the Dreyfus affair The Dreyfus affair is simply an episode in the contest between the present and the future elite A not very large segment of the present elite had tried especially in the years 1850 to 1870 to rely upon freedom reason and good sense These people have now seen their mistake realizing that men are governed by sentiment and not by reason; the only possible choice therefore is choice of the kind of sentiment or rather of the kind of religion Hence that bourgeois minority had again drawn closer to the majority which consciously or unconsciously had always held similar ideas What could one oppose to the invading socialist religion? The higher class in France did not have much to choose from It sought to invigorate old religious forms especially the Catholic one It tried to turn certain aversions against socialism to its advantage thus giving rise to Antisemitism; and finally it too had a new religion in the guise of nationalism This latter had the enormous advantage of being useful in seducing the army It should be well noted I do not even hint that such a plan was premeditated and then deliberately carried out Indeed the facts prove that most of those who follow this plan do so under pressure of the circumstances in which they find themselves without being aware of it Perhaps one or another cunning and artful leader may see in which direction the movement is driving but he will take every care not to refer to it so as not to weaken the blind faith of his companions The author wraps up uite presciently There always remains an unknown element of future social modifications and there exist changers with could produce long wars among the civilized nations These would probably have the effect of imposing a military dictatorship on some European nation But what the relationship between such a dictatorship and the new would be escapes us Those who judge by the movements of the subjective phenomenon alone will be convinced that a military dictatorship can benefit only the present elite but he who is principally concerned with the objective phenomenon will not accept such a hypothesis without considerable doubt In short the author believes that the decay and fall of old elites is inevitable the movement giving rise to the new elite usurping the old is usually marked by an upsurge in religious feeling in his era he feels that socialism has become the new secular religion and that in fact certain Protestant forms of Christianity with their emphasis on social service are nearly indistinguishable from socialism The old elites become decadent and no longer defend their interests; he identifies the Roman Catholic establishment as having almost been entirely swept away by the Reformation for example and discusses the circumstances of the French Revolution at length He claims that old elites become weaker as they become focused on humanitarian concerns but he eually criticizes all elites in this way and states that it is inevitable that new elites become old decay and are overthrown Thus I at least do not read the book as being a blueprint for fascism or any particular ideology for that matter since according to Pareto all elites eventually fall If some passages are taken out of context then I suppose a fascist could find justification for brushing aside and supplanting the decadent bourgeois old order but the next new elite to come along would simply do the same thing The take away of the book is that no elite lasts forever each elite is in a way doomed to decay and be overthrown The old elites become totally senile and deluded and cease to defend themselves but help their adversaries instead More vigorous energetic individuals rise up either from the bourgeoisie itself or from the proletariat and overthrow either all of society or the elite leadership Yet they too are eventually doomed to fall victim to the new elites which rise up Pareto is obviously highly learned and erudite and gives excellent supporting examples for his theses The book is prescient in that the 20th C was marked by two bloody wars in Europe and the rise of a murderous military dictatorship in Germany exactly as Pareto predicted 30 years before Hitler assumed power in Germany The book is bleak in that the author is basically saying the same thing with supporting examples over and over again It is a thought provoking book of great power in that it's eye opening Is Pareto oversimplifying the course of history as a succession of revolutions overthrowing sclerotic and senile elites? Is Pareto's view perhaps unconsciously modeled on the succession of generations the younger generation eventually supplanting the older generation with sons and fathers reversing roles as fathers weaken and become senile they end up being cared for by their sons instead of vice versa? Of course that too is an oversimplification of Pareto's theory which is uite a bit elaborated than that Simpler yet is the analogy to vegetation A perennial plant is vigorous in the Spring powerful in the Summer only to weaken and decay in the Fall and finally die out as Winter snow falls The following Spring though the same plant will start sending up shoots again to repeat the same growth efflorescence decay death process again Is human society really only an analog of the life of a perennial plant? Pareto's implication that the matrix from which each new elite is drawn from elements of the proletariat or sometimes from the bourgeoisie means the organism society auto regenerates itself each elite is despite the succession of ideologiesreligions really the same elite since each new elite is drawn from the same matrix elements This book may be annoying to some because clearly if taken out of context some of what Pareto says could be seen as pointing to the excesses of fascism a movement which had yet to occur when Pareto wrote this book He is disdainful of what he sees as the inevitable softening of any old elite as they become focused on humanitarian concerns and so forth However as repeatedly stated above Pareto believes every old elite weakens becomes decadent and is eventually supplanted His view is in the end hopeless perhaps too realistic in its assessment of human history from a teleological perspective Thus any reader of any ideology at least any reader who reads the entire book will realize that Pareto doesn't actually exempt any ideology or belief system held by any elite from the eventual fate of all elites There's no way to avoid the fate of all elites Pareto says In fact he's uite critical as in his above uotes of the devious routes by which would be dictators seize power and seduce segments of society As noted above he is however very impressed with labor unions There is one other uote that is worth readingTo many bourgeois the Christian religious wave on which they ride seems to be a means for combating socialism That is to say that among the many manifestations of the religious sentiment they choose or rather believe they choose the one which is least opposed to their interests This reason for their choice has certainly had some effect but much less than would be imagined Sometimes it has existed a priori but often it was found a posteriori in order to provide a reason for the religious movement Be that as it may if there was a strategic thought behind it it failed to produce the desired effect The governing classes wished to use the old religious beliefs in order to keep the people subdued and it so happened that the people are now becoming detached from these beliefs and turning to the new ones particularly to the socialist belief; the bourgeois were successful only within the ranks of the bourgeoisie itself Take the case of a general who wants to hypnotize the solders of the enemy so as to defeat them easily; yet with all the ado he does not hypnotize a single enemy but instead his own men become hypnotized and therefore an easier prey for the adversary Such was precisely insofar as it was conscious the achievement of the bourgeoisie not only as regards the old forms of religion but with regard to the new ones as well AndThe divergence between the subjective and the objective phenomenon produces many illusions Thus many people imagine that they can effectively combat socialism by combating he theories of Marx just as others believed it possible to combat Christianity effectively by pointing out the scientific errors of the Bible There are few educated people today who would not recognize those errors And yet what damage has it done to Christianity? None It prospers than ever The Marxian theory of value is not valid; after they had tried out various and subtle interpretations we now witness some of the most educated Marxists going so far as to say that Marx never intended to set up a theory of value All this has hurt the socialist faith little or not at all It was not the book by Marx which has created the socialists; it is the socialists who have made Marx's book famous It was not the works of Voltaire which toward the end of the eighteenth century produced skepticism; it was that skepticism which gave the writings of Voltaire their reputation This is meant only to define the principal aspect of the phenomenon for it must be added that form too has value Voltaire and the Encyclopedists expressing the existing sentiments of the French higher class in a select form endowed those sentiments with new vigor A similar observation must be made with regard to Marx This book was written in 1901 and the author considered the French revolution and the succeeding dictatorship as a relatively recent example of old elites becoming decrepit and giving way to new elites The book includes a good albeit somewhat critical introductory essay by Hans Zetterberg Here is what Zetterberg says about Pareto's workwhat he Pareto wanted to find was a rational explanation of irrational behavior But it is eually true that Pareto was not in agreement with the philosophies of the Enlightenment which held that the critical factor in the survival of an elite is the extent to which it allows reason to control sentiments; a government by intellectuals for example Pareto held to be a near certain disaster The inability to solve the problem of the role of reason in the circulation of the elites is most obvious when the issue is phrased as reason versus sentiment It is neither reason nor sentiment that should be maximized to insure the survival of an elite but efficiency And efficiency is produced through a delicately balanced mixture of reason and sentiment working not against one another but in harness In the last analysis is is only the efficient elites whether elected appointed or self chosen that gain substantial support from those who are on the receiving end of their decrees who buy their goods and services who attend their sacred rites who receive their knowledge It is the overall all efficiency in the tasks of generating and distributing order riches knowledge beauty sacredness and virtue that slowly makes the elites perceived as legitimate and thus helps insure their tenure This book refreshingly doesn't have much technical jargon and the introductory essay certainly helps place the book in the context of Pareto's thought Zetterberg notes that Pareto himself was a proud detached and ironic man without much desire to align himself with any political movement His bias which is loud and clear is rather against people of all political persuasions who favor social ossification over social change ascription over achievement and softness over toughness And Pareto obviously thinks of himself as a sophisticated visitor to the theater of historical drama who early discovers the entire plot which the rest of the audience still is misled by dramatic gestures moralistic speeches and the comings and goings of the actors Pareto took pride in his superior sophistication in this respect and he sees no reason to hide it Many readers are apt to be annoyed with him for being so smugly sure This is a worthwhile book to read if only to glimpse a perhaps rather cynical viewpoint into how and why elites rise and fall Whether Pareto's theory is cynical or enlightened I suppose depends on the reader's world view andor level of ingenuousness

  3. Joe Joe says:

    7232006The Eternal Return of the EliteThis monograph first saw the light of day in 1901 and has been understood as a somewhat famous attempt at a non race based understanding of 'elitism' The failure of this attempt to be either genuinely explanatory or entirely successful seems by almost all accounts to have been historically verified by fascisms repeated descent into racism But given the utter failure of the Fascist movements of the post World War II era to gain traction one wonders if perhaps now Pareto can at last be given a fair hearing One even wonders if Pareto is fairly characterized as a fascist Be that as it may Pareto still might have much to teach us about the interactions of elites According to Pareto elites rise to power maintain dominance and then fall; but only if another elite is struggling to take its place One is here reminded of Lenin's remark against Trotsky I believe 'that no state ever fell without being pushed' History is according to this text a circulation of elites; and for Pareto the ideologies that these elites represent are only of secondary importance What one must always keep in mind while reading this book is that for Pareto Liberals and Socialists that is the leaders of these ideological positions are eually elites By the 'elite' I should point out Pareto always means the leadership of a class Pareto distinguishes between subjective and objective factors; the latter being real objects while the former are psychological states Thus belief and unbelief are for Pareto eually psychological states In fact according to our author belief is often the sign of a rising elite Note that by 'belief' he doesn't merely mean religious beliefs; according to Pareto socialism is a belief that is it is a psychological state Indeed for Pareto perhaps somewhat surprisingly given his right wing tendency and reputation nationalism itself is also a belief Now he doesn't propose to ignore these beliefs; on the contrary it is the skepticism of the rulers towards beliefs that weakens them in the face of the rising elite These 'myths' are a part of history and need to be explained The 'religious sentiment' ie belief of the masses is what leads to revolt This sentiment is exploited by the rising elite in its attempt to overthrow the ruling elite In this matter the 'skepticism' of the ruling elite is no small aid to the rising elite And what we also need to keep in mind is that logical argument almost always fails in these matters; people believe for non rational reasons sentiment must be met with sentiment ie socialism must be countered with nationalism In fact in these pages Pareto over a hundred years ago by describing the similarity between Christian and Socialist behavior seems to indicate the possibility of a convergence of Christianity and Socialism vis à vis the ruling bourgeois This possibility is currently being explored thanks to the collapse of 'really existing socialism' in the USSR by the most au courant leftist continental theory Keep in mind that for Pareto it is the 'decadence' ie it is 'less apt to defend its own power' and the unabated rapacity of the old elite that causes it to perish Indeed he says of this decadence and rapacity that the old elite could prosper if one of them were absent Scientifically or so Pareto maintains there really is nothing to choose between Speaking of some historical examples of some crimes of new elites Pareto says The old elite when it was in power did even worse so that one cannot conclude from these facts anything against one or the other regime Pareto simultaneously holds that reform is the most dangerous moment for the ruling elite and that the waning of power is perfectly compatible with a rise in the use of violence In fact one comes away from this book feeling that the things that Pareto held in most contempt were inefficiency and incompetence and indeed some of his most contemptuous gestures in this matter are reserved for the capitalists In any case the problem seems to be that the falling class no longer believing in itself can no longer attract the best young people to its cause The rising class has 'belief' and hope the falling one only has its privileges Persecution seems to be no remedy for this Indeed thanks to persecutions many people of doubtful loyalty and unsteady character were eliminated and professional politicians kept away Very amusing But here in 1901 Pareto sees the best of future generations going to socialism while all persecution does is prune the revolutionary plant In fact if one carries away anything from this book it is that old elites must eventually fall We learn here that socialism is the heir of Christian 'belief' And since Christianity is dying all the old elite can do is delay the inevitable 'homecoming' of the common people and their 'religious sentiment' to socialism Thus 'belief' replaces 'belief' Again there is little rationality in this process; Pareto is at pains to emphasize the 'subjective phenomenon' This is why nationalism is the best answer to socialism; one counters one irrationality with another This book is really only a long essay the hardcover edition before me has 75 pages of text 18 pages of notes and a 22 page introduction The notes are uite good and should not be passed up For example while nicely playing off his understanding of socialism as but another belief Pareto after discussing some socialist 'sectarians' writes One day we will perhaps have the Holy Inuisition of the socialist faith Note 18 The Soviet 'show trials' of the thirties were indeed this Inuisition This really is a superb book a worthy companion piece to all the great political realists of history from Machiavelli to Gramsci

  4. 8314 8314 says:

    The following dialogue is from Ghost in the Shell S02E22 Translation by myself Read this and there’s no need to read this bookゴーダ「私が二流とはどういう意味かね?」Gohda What do you mean when you say “you are second notch”?バトー「俺達は以前スタンド・アローンタイプの天才ハッカーと出会った事があってな。どうしてもそいつの起こした現象とこの事件とを比べちまうのさ。そいつと比べるとどうにもここで自決した連中が大した存在に思えなくなってな。それで個別の十一人の外部記憶を調べ、奴等がウイルスによって現れた只の模倣者だって事実を知った訳だ。」Batou We ran into a genius hacker who caused Stand Alone phenomenon once back in the days Couldn’t help to compare the situation right now with the past In comparison the lot who killed themselves here seems not that impressive And then we looked into their external memory found out that they are merely meme who are infected by a electrocerebrium virusゴーダ「ほう。」Gohda Huhバトー「奴等はどっかの犯罪者が、恐らくは中国大使館を占拠した連中の名前を上手い事引き継ぐ形で作った思想誘導装置だったって事さ。それでもウイルスをばら撒いた野郎はさぞかし自分を優秀なハッカーだと思ってるんだろうな。」Batou These are presumably just the work some criminal who used them as a public opinion inducing mechanism by picking up the name “individual eleven” who occupied the Chinese Embassy back in the days — a cunning usurper The one who composed the virus might perceive himself as a great hackerゴーダ「そのウイルスを作ったのは私だとでも言いたいのかね?」Gohda Are you saying that I wrote the virus?バトー「そうは言ってねえ。」Batou Nothing of the sortゴーダ「では私に何を話せと?」Gohda Then what do you want me to say?バトー「そういうお前は、連中をどう見てるんだ?」Batou I want to know — how you of all men think of these peopleゴーダ「ふん、いいだろう。君が言う様に個別の十一人がウイルスによって現れた者だとして、君の言うスタンド・アローンタイプのハッカーとやらと同様、未だ状況を拡大し続けている彼等の方こそ天才、いや英雄と言えなくは無いかね?」Gohda Hmm okay Suppose what you’ve said is true — these people are infected with a virus Wouldn’t you say by playing the exact same role of that genius hacker you mentioned those who are escalating the situation are the true genius or better heroes?バトー「確かに集団自決と言うパフォーマンスでその意志を広めはした。だが奴等は誰の英雄になった?国民のか?そんな事はねえ。精々奴等は難民問題が拡大する切っ掛けを作った道化でしかねえ。現に奴等の死なんざ既に忘却の彼方だ。」Batou Of course they made an impression and advocation by executing themselves openly But whose heroes did they become? The citizens’? Not at all At best they are the entertainments who worsened the immigrant issue Their death by now has long since forgottenゴーダ「成る程。だが事の本質が彼等の記憶では無く今の状況を作り出す事であったとするなら、個別の十一人をプロデュースした犯人こそは天才的なハッカーだと言えなくは無いかね?」Gohda I see But what if the goal was to create a situation like this instead of making them memorable — wouldn’t you say the one behind all this is a genius hacker?バトー「ああ、残念ながらそれは否定出来ねえ。それでも天才かと言われると俺にはいささか疑問が残るね。奴等の思想やウイルスから見えてくる犯人像は、自身の劣等感から抜け出したいと言う欲望に支配された個別主義者の顔だけだ。 所詮個人的な思い付きを他人に強要しているだけでは他人の心を打つ事は出来ねえ。そこには善意でも悪意でもいい、何かしら確固たる信念の様な物が無い限り天才とか英雄と呼ばれる存在には成れねえ。 」Batou Regrettably I can’t deny that But I still doubt if he is a genius The psychological portrait given by the virus showed nothing than an egoist trying to surpass his sense of inferiority through the means of controlling others Merely imposing one’s thoughts onto others by force wouldn’t touch the others’ hearts Be it benign or malicious if one has nothing solid nothing like a belief one could never be counted as a genius or a heroゴーダ「信念・・・」Gohda Belief バトー「そうだ。少なくとも俺はそう思ってる。そしてもう一つ。絶対に必要になってくる最大の要素。運って奴も不可欠だろうな。」Batou Yes At least this is my stance And another key factor the absolutely necessary factor luck There must be luckゴーダ「ほう。それは何故?」Gohda Oh? Why?バトー「決まってんだろ? 天才とか英雄の存在なんて物は詰まる所第三者の主観による所が大きい。英雄を英雄たらしめる為には傍観者によるレスポンスがまずは必要なんだ。そしてそのレスポンスの内容が英雄を高みにも上げるし地に貶めもする。それこそは運でしかねえ。 」Batou It goes without saying no? Notions like heroes or genius depends heavily upon the spectator’s perspective Spectators and their responses must be present in order to make a hero into a hero Their responses can lift a hero to Olympus or chase him down to inferno This is pure luckPareto is clearly deeply influenced by Machiavelli — see how he emphasized on virtù But then sometimes I hoped that he could take a tour in my university and have a closer look at these undergrads who when they earn a degree from this university would be automatically counted as elites Short answer they are nowhere close And I found in general this mesmerizing atmosphere in Ivy Leagues of you future elites are already fantastic to be extremely nauseating Bad air Bad airAll in all I found this book to be based on sand The notion of elites or heroes or genius depends heavily on the spectator who comes with a built in set of values Discussing the rise and fall of elites could never separate from the discussion of changing values changing perceptions of virtù Without the latter the former would just be a moral rant — be it presented in an erudite or pedestrian manner it won’t save its essenceWell Who says anime are all shallow?

  5. Tim Lundquist Tim Lundquist says:

    Remarkable little book that details the rise and fall of elites Full of wonderful turns of phrases does one give credit to Pareto or to his translator? Pareto has little patience for anyone or any class Still his TCFS attitude makes for a fun read Also an interesting comparison between Christianity and Socialism; at times his criticism of modern religion 1860 present seems like a contemporary screed against a moral therapeutic deism

  6. Eileen Eileen says:

    This is a small book with uite complete investigation on the revolution why and how all these revolutions happen Even it was written years ago this book is still uite relevant For those who are passionate and hope revolution could help them go and read it then cool down pleaseThe book is definitely influenced by Karl Max which is for me growing up in China easy to understand Also it predicts uite accurately why our communist revolution happen

  7. Ma Vera Ma Vera says:

    “Greater part of human actions have their origin not in logical reasoning but in sentiment Pareto 1901

  8. İlşad Özkan İlşad Özkan says:

    Yazar özgün ve cesur yorumlar yapmış okunabilir Fakat kitap kötü hazırlanmış ikincil metinlerin çoğu çevrilmemiş bile Ayrıca Türkçe yazım hataları az da olsa göze çarpacak şekilde

  9. O O says:

    Many people unwittingly know Pareto through the 80–20 law or in statistics the Pareto Distribution I knew him as a pioneering uantitative economist but later learned he eventually turned to political–historical–philosophical research resulting in major contributions to sociology The “Rise and Fall of Elites” in this respect is a short book that is essentially an application of his sociological theory developed at length in the “ Trattato di Sociologia Generale” Thus this essay serves as a good introduction to Pareto’s thinkingBefore starting I need to note that the Greek edition of “The Rise and Fall of the Elites” Ἄνοδος καὶ Πτώση τῶν Ἐλίτ Κουκκίδα 2017 includes translations of two essays “ Un’applicazione di Teorie Sociologiche” 1900 and “ Transformazione della Democrazia” 1921 The second essay’s translation not included in the English editions can be found hereAlthough I haven’t read Pareto’s Trattato his theory is based on two fundamental assumptions a people’s actions are influenced by what he calls residues which are mostly extra rational factors instincts sentiments sexual drives etc; b people rationalize their actions by appropriate selection or creation of derivatives eg ideologies philosophies religions scientific rationalizations etc Starting with these assumptions it is easy for Pareto to seek the causes of the actions of groups of people in the less scrutinized residues while discounting the importance or showing the superficial nature of derivatives The actions of many groups are analyzed in this frame of reference but the main focus is on established elites and their struggle with upcoming elites A second recurring theme that helps organize the book and connect geographically or historically disparate examples is Pareto’s theory of cycles In analogy to business cycles Pareto sees cycles in religious beliefs suitably defined to include socialist beliefs and mainly developed in the Applicazione centralization and decentralization of authority and concentration or diffusion of wealth developed in the Transformazione All cycles are correlated to the struggle of different groups for power but mainly with the decline of the dominant eliteMost of the supportive arguments are based on historical events mainly from the Roman Republic the period of the French revolution and contemporary Italian and European politics For instance the politics of the Roman Republic are explained as successive confrontations of Patricians Plebeians Euites and finally Emperors Or centralization waves by the kingdoms of the Merovingians and Carolingians and the subseuent decentralization waves and establishment of upcoming feudal elites France’s gradual transition to absolute monarchy and eventual revolution and counter revolutionPareto is not manichæan in his view of elites; in contemporary societies he sees much than a unified bourgeois elite vs the rest Among others he differentiates the military especially dominant in Germany before the Great War plutocrats industrialists speculators land owners farmers and peasants intellectuals skilled labour unskilled labour syndicalists and unionized workers etc In all these groups he looks for distinct economic—but crucially—also other motives often opposing economic self interest and notes their ephemeral alliances and asymmetric relationships that cannot be easily explained by economic motives aloneThe scientific utility of his theories is debatable and he himself although diagnosing a definite position in the various cycles eg increasing religious beliefs ca 1900 wisely refrains from making predictions about the future evolution of these cycles His aim is to demarcate what is possible and assess what is probable in the near future What impressed me is Pareto’s insistence to only focus on underlying causes—not phenomena—and only on those that lead to significant and recurring transitions He goes into some pain to differentiate this approach from both a purely empirical approach as far as it is dealing with any and all phenomena superficially and a purely dialectical approach as far as it is stylized and does not consider all effective causes of the observed phenomena and their interactions In this respect Pareto’s methodology is a step forwardOn the other hand identifying the cycles can never be extremely useful since according to Pareto they could be short medium and long range while progressing at different rates But at least one can estimate the direction society has been moving towards up to the present—but not in the future Moreover the mechanism through which overlapping “residual” interests get combined or not to form groups that struggle with dominant elites is barely touched upon In practice Pareto is deeply pragmatist realist apparently amoral mostly unemotional almost cynical and sometimes arrogant and brash; definitely a successor of Machiavelli To the extent that the reader is unfamiliar with this approach to political and historical commentary and adding Pareto’s comprehensive knowledge of and uncanny observations on European political history this book can be a provocative read A necessary caveat if this is the case it's not hard for a disinclined reader to accuse Pareto of trying to associate widely supported and “justified” demands against the abuses and excesses of dominant elites with selfish and narrow group interests in order to neutralize any of those demands’ moral merit In any case his comments on contemporary Italian politics illuminate less known aspects of the fin de siècle Zeitgeist and later developments in the Transformazione and are—to me—very novel and strikingHe also maintains a façade of disinterest and neutrality in the Transformazione he explicitly asserts his work is not a call to action albeit ineffective when dealing with the Italian society It’s clear he is sympathetic to a classical liberal program on economic principles free trade low taxation increase in saving absolute respect for property law free labour markets etc This provides a lot of entertaining passive aggressive passages where he is irritated resentful and scornful of the then dominant Italian bourgeoisie’s concessions cowardice and sentimentality but respectful of and admiring though unsympathetic to Italian syndicalists for their practicality common sense rationality vigour and militancyFinally as an illustration of his approach let’s turn to Pareto himself Pareto the bourgeois economist is “convinced” of the utilitarian necessity of the liberal economic program and thus definitely sympathetic to the part of the elite that support this program However they are crumbling and unwilling to fight the combination of crony capitalists organized labour socialists and demagogues He feels threatened and angry but has no theory to morally justify a combative stance by the bourgeoisie Pareto’s theory—from his theory's viewpoint—could well be the derivative of his self preservation residue as a bourgeois academic In any case the extent to which this self preservation sentiment became ubiuitous in the then struggling Italian elites could help justify the raise of Mussolini shortly thereafter

  10. Sema Sema says:

    Sosyolojik bağlamda günümüz Türkiye siyasi ortamını okumaya çok yardımcı olabilecek bir eser Pareto'nun bu kadar iyi öngörülerde ve çözümlemelerde bulunması diğer sosyal bilimcilerden daha az meşhur olması bakımından şaşırtıcı

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *