To truly discuss the role of bureaucracy and the market one must surely look at the liberal ideal of free market, the basis of which is that the market can work without legislation or interference from the government. The antithesis to this idea is that of bureaucracy, which formalises and regulates the economy for the sake of efficiency. The idea that the government should have no interference with the marker is commonly known as laissez-faire.
Laissez-faire, a shortened version of the French maxim "laissez faire, laissez aller, laissez passer," meaning "let do, let go, let pass." Is the tome of the free market and was heavily used in nineteenth and early twentieth century British politics to describe the Conservative Party and their opposition to interference through social reform. The idea means that the state should not regulate the economy as it is part of the private sphere which is out of the jurisdiction of the state. Instead of regulation Liberals believe that the market is naturally self-acclimating. Adam Smith described this self regulation as an "Invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. " The idea that a market can be self regulating manifests itself throughout demand and saturation. For example a shortage of a certain good creates demand; the price therefore increases with demand and creates a higher profit margin. This makes it more profitable to make a wanted good. If there is saturation of goods then demand falls forcing the manufacturer to trade at a lower price. This forces the vender to cut profit they will sell it cheaper and thus cut profit forcing those who sell at a loss out of the market. The balance of supply and demand, Smith refers to as "natural price" However, Smith appears to be saying that greed and selfishness drive the economy but he said (that) these are justified as the lower price it achieves is a benefit to society. Smith proposed that this invisible hand' was in fact a natural inclination but can a society's economy really be completely separate and distinct from the state? Does the theory and the actuality come to the same conclusion (I don't understand this?) or is it bureaucracy that is "the natural inclination? " For this argument I will be focusing on Karl Marx's "Notes for a Critique on Hegel's Philosophy of Right " and Max Weber's "The Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism " and "Economy and Society. " Marx wrote that bureaucracy was present in the economy but this was a detriment to the society and that a bureaucracy free society could only be achieved through the removal of the market economy into the hands of the state. Weber on the other hand writes that state and economy are inseparable and that a characteristic of capitalism is its insatiable drive for efficiency, which will only increase the bureaucracy.
Marx sees the economy not as separate and deregulated but rather as linked through the "Corporation of the state." The bureaucracy itself is present within tariffs and taxes as well as legislation which protects the consumer from below standard work. Hegel said in his book "The Philosophy of Right" that rather than an invisible hand to guide the economy there are civil servants who serve the universal good as a vocational particular. Civil servants would be employed by the states to regulate transactions within the market. The idea is similar to the invisible hand as the self interest is eminent in the process. Where they differ however is in the application, Hegel states that the civil servants will serve the needs of the universal and be non self interested as their job and therefore their income is to be impartial to the economy, therefore the interference from the state in balanced. Hegel described the idea of self interested bodies acting in the universal good as follows:
"What the service of the state . . . requires is that men shall forgo the selfish and capricious satisfaction of their subjective ends, (this is required in the case of every post of service) and by this very sacrifice they acquire the right to find their satisfaction in, but only in, the dutiful discharge of their public functions. "
Hegel dubs this new class the Universal class but Marx differs greatly from this stating that the true universal class is the proletariat. Marx says that the proletariat is the universal class as through liberating themselves they intern liberate the rest of society, the worker from their work, the bourgeoisie from their capitalism etc. Where as Hegel sees the Bureaucracy as a good thing which mediates the business of civil society in an abstract way, Marx believes the bureaucracy is a concrete presence in civil society which does not create its own wealth and is merely a detriment to society as a whole. The solution for Marx was the removal of the market economy and the instillation of the State economy. Through the appropriation of the "means of production" to the true universal class i.e. the proletariat one can remove the entangled bureaucracy
Weber however saw the idea of a state economy merely as an appropriation to a greater and more widespread bureaucracy, in juxtaposition to its own aims. The market economy does regulate itself to a certain degree due to competitive interest. All the state economy appears to do is to remove this competitiveness and therefore remove the limit on bureaucracy. As stated in a previous paragraph Marx saw the bureaucracy as a loss to society which does not create its own wealth but rather appropriates it from the economy. What Marx hopes to achieve through the nationalisation of the means of production is the elimination of the bureaucracy that is created in a profit driven economy. Weber does not differentiate between the economy and bureaucracy as they are one and the same. Weber pertains that a characteristic of Capitalism is insatiable drive for efficiency, the replacement of the market with the state does not remove this drive, and rather it frees it from the constraints of competition. All of these ideas are in conflict with the Liberal idea of free trade.
The main ideas of Liberalism are founded on the ideas of freedom and liberty. In theory this means that one can go into the market place and buy goods without feeling the necessity of purchase or the constraint of the state. However this idea is challenged by Marx in the "Notes on the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right." He describes that because the bureaucratic class wishes to increase the efficiency they use the state for "unholy means" as in reference to the Jesuits. Marx refers to the idea that "the bureaucrat has the world as a mere object of his action ". This idea is reinforced by Weber who sees the drive for efficiency as a main characteristic of Capitalism and that materialism is a by product of this. In the concluding chapter of "Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism" Weber describes:
"In Baxter's view the care for external goods should only lie on the shoulders of the "saint like a light cloak, which can be thrown aside at any moment." But fate decreed that the cloak should become an iron cage "
This idea that materialism or capitalism cannot be "thrown aside" but rather is a cage which constrains us is the antithesis of liberal ideas of freedom and liberty. The idea of the never ending quest for efficiency that characterises capitalism in Weber's eyes will leave those people contained within the society ossified and annealed. A society "under the principle sine ira ac studio. " Weber's idea of an increasing bureaucratic system in which efficiency is superior to the humane treatment of workers has some similarities to Marx's ideas of alienation. The difference between the two appears to be the outcome of this mechanisation. Marx believed that this alienation was to do with the "expropriation" of the worker from his production whereas Weber appears to link this rationalisation to the bureaucracy rather than the conditions. This rationalisation then proceeds to dehumanise society and binds them to it so that they are unable to escape. This trait of capitalism is seen as: "The objective' discharge of business primarily means a discharge of business according to calculable rules and without regard for persons. " This however, is a perception of modern society and is different to the ideas and theory of Liberal philosophy however one can find practical applications of the freedoms and liberties that the philosophy pertains in John Locke's "Second Treatise of Civil Government" and the idea of the wilderness.
The Weberian idea of ossification of constraint seems to suggest that the idea of John Locke's wilderness in which anyone can go out and make a living based on the produce of the land they procure free from the constraints of the state is implausible, at least in the modern context. Weber suggests the idea of "Golden Shackles." This seems to differ from the Marxian idea that only the proletariat are truly subjugated by those who hold the means of production, the bourgeoisie. Weber believes that the bureaucracy is that which constrains us not the production and so even the top official in the bureaucracy is still bound by the same rigid "stahlhartes Gehuse" which constrains the lowest official.
In conclusion, the liberal ideal appears to only work within the constraints of the pre industrial state. The introduction of industrial-capitalism meant that the freedom of the goods orientated market needs to be regulated as the primary goal of capitalism is not the welfare of the society but the profits, therefore regulations keep extreme capitalism from emerging. In regards to the nature of bureaucracy the Marxist idea that bureaucracy can be removed from the economy appears deeply flawed as Weber says that the Bureaucracy, Economy and state are merely the different faces of society and cannot be separated. The main body of this essay has been to assert the theoretical but surely if these views are correct they would manifest themselves in reality? The idea of ossification and the "Iron Cage" can be seen. The long working hours and the need for qualifications to prove you have the capabilities to do your job; this does not coincide with the liberal ideas of freedom from the state. The idea of qualified jobs is brought up in both Marx and Weber with Marx describing "Individuals must prove their capability for executive functions, i.e., they must sit for examinations." The ideas of liberalism appear to be masks to make the problems of an interfering state seem better. If bureaucracy was not present in an economy it would manifest itself. The mechanisation of the economy and the ever efficient state are merely symptoms of this manifestation. Possibly the greatest metaphor for the mechanization is in Aldous Huxley's dystopian novel Brave New World in which society has achieved the ultimate efficiency through social conditioning.
""Wheels must turn steadily, but cannot turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as steady as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment."