Suchergebnisse

While several studies have explored the interactional dynamics of charismatic power, most have neglected the role of what Weber termed the charismatic aristocracy. This article revives the classical concept to respond to contemporary calls for performative, follower-centric approaches to charisma. Specifically, the charismatic aristocracy is placed at the center of an analysis of a reiterative moment in charismatization: when influential followers generate content for the emerging charismatic persona. In these germinal moments, the dialogical nature of charisma is most clear, precisely because it is then that charismatic leaders often are not themselves confident in their status and can be found responding to instructional cues—indeed following the lead—of those positioning themselves as obsequious followers. Drawing on 10 years of observations, multistage interviews, and media collections, I provide an interactionist account of the charismatic emergence of John de Ruiter, leader of a successful new religious movement. I conclude by tabling a model that conceives of the charismatic aristocracy as an important fulcrum for expectation, affectation, and recognition in charismatic interactions.

This article seeks to demonstrate that implicit within Weber's writings on charisma are tools that can enable a processual, social constructionist understanding of charismatic formation. A corollary of this point is that Weber's writings represent an historically crucial turning point in the progression from a Carlylian idea of leaders as inherently powerful to a non-essentialist, sociological perspective, and that Weber's inspiration for this progression is best understood not through reference to his nineteenth-century forbearers in the social sciences, but rather in his contrast with the very few theological writers (namely Rudolph Sohm and the writers of the New Testament) who actually had employed charisma as a term prior to Weber's famous appropriation of it. A reinterpretation and retranslation of Weber's writings on charisma that gives priority to the social constructionist elements in his thought can provide tools for navigating through many of the interpretational controversies that have plagued charisma research.

Since 1992, clandestine radical environmentalist cells, calling themselves the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), have carried out arson attacks in an effort to punish corporations for environmentally deleterious practices. I examine the radical environmental movement and find that its recent rise to prominence and notoriety is part and parcel of the larger development of the more general anti-globalization/anti-capitalist movement. Specifically, I examine how, despite its libertarian conservative origins, the ideology of Earth First! changed after an influx of new members with anti-state, anarchist sympathies. Finally, I assess the applicability of three major criticisms of "globalization from below" to the case of the ELF, namely: a) that its preoccupation with the transnational sphere and abandonment of electoral politics is misguided, b) that direct actions such as property destruction are counterproductive to the wider aims of the movement, and, c) that its strategies of contention are too episodic, and do very little to encourage practical, inclusive, local, and sustained action in the service of global justice

AbstractThe term "charisma" is recognized as sociology's most successful export to common speech. While sociologists habitually dismiss popular uses of the word, we address its vernacularity head on as a worthy object of study and as a potential resource for conceptual development. Using machine learning, we locate "charisma" within the wider discursive field out of which it arises (and continues to arise) across four corpora; namely: Weber's major writings; social scientific research (123,531 JSTOR articles); and social media ("X") posts containing of "charisma" (n=77,161) and its 2023 variant, "rizz" (n=85,869). By capturing meaning structures that discursively suspend "charisma" across multiple dimensions, we discern three spectra that help to distinguish charisma's sociological and non‐sociological uses. Spectrum one differentiates perspectives which see charisma as having either a structural or individual‐level range of efficacy. Spectrum two differentiates indifferent/analytical perspectives on charisma from perspectives which see it as desirable but also morally conservative. Spectrum three differentiates between relational and individualized ontologies for charisma. We find that, rather than hewing closely to the Weberian formulation, social scientific uses exist in an intermediate position vis‐à‐vis these three spectra. Thus, scholars participate in what they otherwise criticize as charisma's vulgarization. The article concludes with recommendations for how to constructively interact with 'popular charisma.'

This paper explores the role anger plays in charismatic movements. Although scholars have long recognized the importance of emotions to the etiology of charisma, they tend to focus on mutual affection among leaders and followers, paying less attention to how anger—and particularly its subspecies, ressentiment—patterns charismatic power. Drawing on literature from political science, populism research, and the cultural sociology of charisma, we argue that ressentiment, which is associated with self-disvalue and an invidious need to blame outsiders, is key to theorizing the emotional energy that charisma delivers to revolutionary upheaval. The Weberian source for the intervention is his lesser known concept of 'berserk-charisma'. Reorienting the focus of charisma research to account for its aggressive, 'outward' dimension has the benefit of drawing us closer to the vision Weber had for its social-historical relevance. We demonstrate our insights using the case of charismatic/populist support for Trump.

Abstract
QAnon is beginning to gain attention in scholarly circles, but these sources often disagree about how to categorize the movement. This amounts to the meta-dispute between those who view QAnon primarily as a religious "cult," and those who grant it greater credibility as a political populist movement. Using quantitative and qualitative methods we test the proposition that QAnon could be a mix of both. Results from both analyses suggest that QAnon is best understood primarily as a political populist movement, but one that utilizes religious rhetoric. The findings thus highlight the asymmetric nature of the conflation of religion and politics in the contemporary American civil sphere.