Bureaucracy In The 19th Century

C) According to the Western model of social structure (Marx), the lower strata of different bureaucratic professions or domains might assimilate with proletarian workers, while the high bureaucracies – with the upper stratum of bourgeoisie. And in the last decades of the Western
19th century, the classical petty bourgeoisie even saw an outstripping of representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism”.
ESPRIT DE

(But this behavior of Eastern bureaucracy showed only its constitutive relationship with the landowners and not with the weak bourgeoisie).
F) The real shape the power of Western bureaucracy has deployed was, obviously, not that of the Weberian ideal-type. There was not only about rationality and correctness9, but also about indifference and irresponsibility towards the public aims and tasks of a supposed competent and law-observing bureaucracy. The members of bureaucracy were also significantly motivated by the personal well-being and, inherently, by the preservation of their own bureaucratic status. This was realized – in the West – through the use of formalism supported by the ideology of rational and correct bureaucracy reflecting the thesis of
Western modern work ethic (Herzfeld 1993, 19). The bureaucratic indifference generated by the routinization of activities was and is highly related to the legitimating of the bureaucratic positions: something which links more closely the Eastern and Western history of