Hierarchy salience and social action: disentangling class, status, and authority in world politics

Abstract

Hierarchy is a persistent feature of international politics. Existing accounts recognize that there are many ways in which actors can stand in relation to one another. Yet they struggle to make sense of this complexity. This study considers Max Weber’s contribution to understanding international hierarchy. It discusses three ideal types of stratification based on the distribution of capabilities (class), estimations of honor and prestige (status), and command relationships (authority). Following the neo-Weberian approach, these dimensions matter because they make social action intelligible. Furthermore, Weber clarifies how class and status are connected and how these two dimensions relate to authority through the process of ‘social closure’. The study concludes that scholars who focus exclusively on authority structures miss the fact that authority typically derives from other forms of stratification: although based on different logics of social stratification, class and status hierarchies often coalesce into (legitimate) authority.

Status cues and normative change: How the Academy Awards facilitated Chile's gender identity law

“…46 Status refers to actors' social position based on estimations of honour and prestige. 47 Political actors care about the status of their state for both extrinsic and intrinsic reasons. 48 For one, status distinctions distribute resources unevenly in society.…”

Regional powers, global aspirations: lessons from India and Iran

“…While some have stressed states' status ranking on the basis of 'valued attributes [such as] wealth, coercive capabilities, culture, demographic position, socio-political organisation, and diplomatic clout' (Larson et al, 2014, p. 7), others emphasise on the importance of audience logics and recognition in conferring a claim to higher status (Duque, 2018). Still others argue that status claims are made against a backdrop of 'social stratification' in international society (Keene 2014;Schulz 2019). Our conceptualisation draws on these approaches and defines it as a sense of social place, where states are recognised to belong, seek to, or feel entitled to belong (Jagtiani, 2021).…”

Political Imagery and the Russia-Germany-America Triangle

“…Images then promote confidence and stability or discontent and resentment. They convey status, prestige, honour (Lebow 2008; Larson and Shevchenko 2010; Wood 2013; Onea 2014; Wolf 2014; Wolf 2019), hierarchy and “standards of civilization” (Gong 1984; Hobson and Sharman 2005; Lake 2009; Schulz 2019), and recognition (Honneth 1992). They impact on the ontological (in)security of state elites and populations (Mitzen 2006; Steele 2008; Steele and Homolar 2019).…”