Comparison Of The Types Of Authorities Exemplified By Donald Trump And Pope Francis

Max Weber, the “father of modern sociology”, distinguishes three types of legitimate domination; Legal, Charismatic and Traditional authority. Each of which is the typologies of qualities of a leader in modern society. According to Weber, one can also fall into one or more of these categories of authority. They may even start out typifying one form of authority and gradually change into another. In this essay, I will compare and contrast the different authorities exemplified by Donald Trump, and Pope Francis. Two very different leaders in terms of values and how their distinct qualities got them legitimate domination over a vast group of people. Specifically, this paper will argue that while Donald Trump and Pope Francis both exemplified qualities of a charismatic leader because of their dynamic personalities and their ability to convey a vision. Donald Trump gradually evolved into a legal authority because of the advantage of his position as the president of the united states of America. Whilst the Pope remains exercising charismatic authority to this day.

To start off, Charismatic authority or as Weber often refers to it the “gift of grace” is identified as “the absolutely personal devotion and personal confidence in revelation, heroism, or other qualities of individual leadership”. In other words, charismatic leadership is legitimized because of the followers’ captivation to the leaders’ personal attributes. Pope Francis is a prime example of this as he presents himself in a genuine, respectful, non-formal way to others. This is seen in his smile, the fact that he chooses to wear simple clothing to relate not only to the high class but to the poor. As well as, his direct eye contact and gaze which gives the other person a respectful and moderate amount of attention but does not overdo it. To add on, his tone of voice is also considered one of the things that people admire about him. He uses a warm and welcoming tone of voice when speaking and greets in ways that are down to earth which creates empathy and understanding in the conversation. Furthermore, the pope shares the vision of goodness, generosity, and peace something that is globally respected as they are pillar values of every religion. Lastly, a major part of being a charismatic leader is recognizing your God-given gift as a leader and using that to give to others and helping them realize their own true worth and value which is seen through Pope Francis. This is something that not everyone is capable of doing. To change someone’s perspective about themselves and make them find their value from the depth of despair requires a powerful, empathetic presence and knowledge. Therefore, Pope Francis is an example of a charismatic leader as he has a dynamic personality and presents himself in a manner that will connect to others, and inspire them to do good. He does so in the simplest most effective ways like his verbal and non-verbal commination and his good valued cause that reached out to people of all ages, religions, and ethnicities.

On the other hand, a charismatic leader can also be someone who is manipulative and does not stand for global values of inclusivity, and peace. They can be as likely to be evil as they are good. Let’s take Donald Trump for example. Trump portrayed America in crisis, he created fear and threat within the population so he can be the one to step in or as he likes to call it “ make America great again”. He managed to make minor issues a national threat and convinced the voters of these threats later to propose his own radical solutions to fix them and come off as the protector. Trump knew what he was doing, he used times of crisis like terrorist attacks, migrations across the border to his advantage and he pushed the buttons right where it hurts. Using his affirmative tone of voice, belittling other candidates to make himself look better, and catchy slogans like “make America great again” he managed to weasel his way into people’s hearts. Moreover, after he became the president his charismatic authority evolved into a legal authority which all modern societies depend on. This type of authority refers to the power made legitimate by law, rules, and regulations. Trump took advantage of his position as the president of America and passed down laws or orders that are very radical like separating children and parents at the USA and Mexico border, putting the Muslim ban on many countries worldwide, and shutting down the government for the longest time in US history to raise money to build a wall on the US-Mexico border. All of which he couldn’t have passed down without the power of his position in the government. Therefore, Donald Trump is a great example of a charismatic leader who was able to manipulate a large number of voters and later evolved into a legal authority after his presidency to get to his desired means.

In conclusion, Both Pope Francis and Donald Trump exemplified traits of a charismatic leader but they each did it to reach different means. Through Donald trump, we also witnessed how a leader can start off exemplifying one authority and later change into another as was stated in Weber’s politics as a vocation essay. From Weber’s classification, we can conclude that each authority, in reality, does not come in its pure form. They can show up in different combinations with other traits and often evolve into different forms in certain situations. Furthermore, they each bring out certain drawbacks that in my opinion should not be disregarded. For example, although I think charismatic leadership is a unique way to woe others it is still not a certain approach to authority as each person is different and that form of authority has no guidelines for it. Secondly, it is a very uncertain form of leadership and is usually for a short period of time. As for legal authority, it encourages the domination of power of the state officials rather than take the input of other civilians in the population. To reiterate, Weber classified three different forms of authority that legitimize domination is not just the state as a whole but in our everyday business settings.