Resisting illiberalism: Bureaucratic ethics in illiberal times might need Hegel more than Weber

Michael W. Bauer

doi:10.24965/gapp.11590

Authors

Michael W. Bauer Florence School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute (Italia – Italy) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1010-8499

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24965/gapp.11590

Keywords:

administrative ethics, bureaucratic ethos, bureaucratic discretion, democratic backsliding, illiberal transformation, administrative responsibility, bureaucratic guardianship

Abstract

Objectives: This chapter examines the ethical dilemma of bureaucrats in democracies facing illiberal transformation. It argues that the dominant Weberian model of neutrality and hierarchical obedience offers little normative ground for resisting executive orders that undermine constitutional democracy. The objective is to explore whether Hegel’s conception of bureaucracy as part of the ethical life (Sittlichkeit) of the state provides a firmer foundation for legitimizing bureaucratic resistance. Methodology: The chapter employs a conceptual and comparative analysis of Weber’s and Hegel’s theories of bureaucracy, complemented by neo-Hegelian critiques (Frankfurt School, Hannah Arendt). It reconstructs Hegel’s view of bureaucracy as a mediating “universal class” and contrasts it with Weber’s ethically minimalist model to derive implications for public administration ethics and education. Results: The analysis shows that Weberian neutrality risks enabling democratic backsliding by rendering bureaucrats passive executors. Hegel’s framework, by contrast, embeds ethical judgment within institutional roles and provides a normative basis for civil servants to act as guardians of constitutional order under illiberal rule. Conclusions: Public administration education should cultivate a liberal-institutional ethos that prepares bureaucrats not only to administer impartially but also to exercise principled resistance when democracy is threatened.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Michael W. Bauer, Florence School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute (Italia – Italy)

Michael W. Bauer holds the chair of Public Administration at the Florence School of Transnational Governance of the European University Institute, Italy. His research focuses on European and international administration, multilevel governance, and democratic bureaucracy.

References

Aberbach, J. D., Putnam, R. D. & Rockman, B. A. (1981). Bureaucrats and politicians in western democracies. Harvard University Press.

Adams, G. B. & Balfour, D. L. (2014). Unmasking administrative evil. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315716640

Adorno, T. W. & Horkheimer, M. (2002). Dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical fragments [E. Jephcott (trans.)]. Stanford University Press. (Original work published 1944).

Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. Viking Press.

Arendt, H. (1968). Men in dark times. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Arendt, H. (2019). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.

Baena del Alcázar, M., Garrido, L. & Pizarro, N. (1984). La élite española y la presencia en ella de los burócratas. Documentación Administrativa, (200), 73-131. https://doi.org/10.24965/da.vi200.4761

Bauer, M. W. (2024a). Public administration under populist rule: Standing up against democratic backsliding. International Journal of Public Administration, 47(15), 1019-1031. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2023.2243400

Bauer, M. W. (2024b). Administrative responses to democratic backsliding: When is bureaucratic resistance justified? Regulation & Governance, 18(4), 1104-1117. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12567

Bauer, M. W. (2024c). Democratic backsliding and administrative responsibility: Seeking guidance for bureaucratic behavior in dark times. In M. Morais de Sá e Silva & A. de Ávila Gomide (eds.), Public policy in democratic backsliding: How illiberal populists engage with the policy process (pp. 335-366). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65707-8_13

Bauer, M. W. (2025). Authoritarian drift, variegated paths: Mapping administrative transformation strategies under illiberal rule. Public Administration Review, 85(6), 1598-1610. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70028

Bauer, M. W., Brandsen, T., Kovarek, D., Radaelli, C. M., Radtke, I., Steen, T., Stone, D. L., Vallistu, J. & van de Walle, S. (2025). Democratic anchorage through administrative reforms [Concept note, version 1.0, April 2025]. Horizon Europe Project RADAR. https://hdl.handle.net/1814/93132

Bauer, M. W., Lotta, G. & de Holanda Schmidt, F. (2025). Bureaucratic militarization as a mode of democratic backsliding: Lessons from Brazil. Democratization, 32(3), 595-613. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2024.2382355

Bauer, M. W., Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., Yesilkagit, K. & Becker, S. (eds.) (2021). Democratic backsliding and public administration: How populists in government transform state bureaucracies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009023504

Bauer, M. W. & Becker, S. (2020). Democratic backsliding, populism, and public administration. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 3(1), 19-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvz026

Bermeo, N. (2016). On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0012

Bertelli, A. M. (2021). Democracy administered: How public administration shapes representative government. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316755167

Bertelli, A. M. & Falletti, V. (2025). Bureaucracy under pressure: Structural integrity and the ethics of democratic administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, (advance online publication). https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523251406200

Breiner, P. (2019). Max Weber and democratic politics. Cornell University Press.

Casper, G. (2007). Caesarism in democratic politics: Reflections on Max Weber. SSRN eLibrary. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1032647

Cooper, T. L. (2012). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role. John Wiley & Sons.

Crespo González, J. D. (2023). La derecha radical populista y la administración pública. En M. J. Vicente Vicente (ed.), Las nuevas extremas derechas en el mundo (pp. 183-192). Tirant lo Blanch. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/97254

Du Gay, P. (2020). The bureaucratic vocation: State/office/ethics. New Formations, (100), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.3898/newf:100-101.06.2020

Du Gay, P. & Lopdrup-Hjorth, T. (2022). For public service: State, office, and ethics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203093603

Dunleavy, P. (1991). Democracy, bureaucracy and public choice: Economic approaches in political science. Routledge.

Etzioni-Halevy, E. (2013). Bureaucracy and democracy: A political dilemma. Routledge. (Original work published 1985).

Finer, H. (1941). Administrative responsibility in democratic government. Public Administration Review, 1(4), 335-350. https://doi.org/10.2307/972907

Fischer, K. (2002). Die Tugend, das Interesse und der Weltlauf: Hegel jenseits des Etatismus. In K. G. Ballestrem, V. Gerhardt, H. Ottmann & M. P. Thompson (eds.), Politisches Denken Jahrbuch 2002 (pp. 111-127). J. B. Metzler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-02766-5_7

Fischer, K. (2025). Der Sinn der Geschichte: Hegels objektiver Geist der Freiheit und die Perspektiven eines liberalen Narrativs. In F. Höntzsch, M. Oppelt, A. Paukstat & P. Sörensen (eds.), Theoretische Manöver – politische Ideengeschichte im Deutungskampf (pp. 113-132). BoD. https://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/123635

Friedrich, C. J. (1952). Some observations on Weber’s analysis of bureaucracy. In R. K. Merton, A. P. Gray, B. Hockey & H. C. Selvin (eds.), Reader in bureaucracy (pp. 27-33). Free Press.

Friedrich, C. J. (1960). The dilemma of administrative responsibility. In C. J. Friedrich (ed.), Nomos III: Responsibility (pp. 189-202). Liberal Arts Press.

Fry, B. R. & Raadschelders, J. C. N. (2013). Mastering public administration: From Max Weber to Dwight Waldo. CQ Press.

Gale, S. A. & Hummel, R. P. (2003). Forum essay: A debt unpaid—reinterpreting Max Weber on bureaucracy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 25(3), 409-418. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2003.11029411

Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Beacon Press.

Hajnal, G. & Boda, Z. (2021). Illiberal transformation of government bureaucracy in a fragile democracy: The case of Hungary. In M. W. Bauer, B. G. Peters, J. Pierre, K. Yesilkagit & S. Becker (eds.), Democratic backsliding and public administration: How populists in government transform state bureaucracies (pp. 76-99). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009023504.005

Heath, J. (2020). The machinery of government: Public administration and the liberal state. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197509616.001.0001

Hegel, G. W. F. (1991). Elements of the philosophy of right [A. W. Wood (ed.) & H. B. Nisbet (trans.)]. Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1821).

Hejka-Ekins, A. (1988). Teaching ethics in public administration. Public Administration Review, 48(5), 885-891. https://doi.org/10.2307/976904

Henrich, D. (2004). Logical form and real totality: The authentic conceptual form of Hegel’s concept of the state. In R. B. Pippin & O. Höffe (eds.), Hegel on ethics and politics (pp. 241-267). Cambridge University Press.

Hill, T. E. Jr. (1992). Dignity and practical reason in Kant’s moral theory. Cornell University Press.

Horkheimer, M. (1947). Eclipse of reason. Oxford University Press.

Jackson, M. (2009). Responsibility versus accountability in the Friedrich–Finer debate. Journal of Management History, 15(1), 66-77. https://doi.org/10.1108/17511340910921790

Jackson, M. W. (1986). Bureaucracy in Hegel’s political theory. Administration & Society, 18(2), 139-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539978601800201

Kant, I. (1784). Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? Berlinische Monatsschrift, (4), 481-494.

Kant, I. (1991). Perpetual peace: A philosophical sketch. In H. S. Reiss (ed.), Kant: Political writings (pp. 93-130). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1795). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511809620.007

Kant, I. (1996a). On a supposed right to lie from philanthropy. In M. J. Gregor (ed.), Practical philosophy (pp. 611-615). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1797). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511813306.014

Kant, I. (1996b). The metaphysics of morals. In M. J. Gregor (ed.), Practical philosophy (pp. 353-604). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1797). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511813306.013

Kasler, D. (1988). Max Weber: An introduction to his life and work. University of Chicago Press.

Kettl, D. F. (2022). Weberian bureaucracy and contemporary governance. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(2), 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvab026

Koliba, C. (2025). Liberal democratic accountability standards and public administration. Public Administration Review, 85(1), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13831

Koliba, C. (2026). Diagnostic tools for evaluating the transgression of democratic accountability standards: The United States election administration and public health crisis of 2020. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, online first. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvaf025

Korsgaard, C. M. (1996). Creating the kingdom of ends. Cambridge University Press.

Levitsky, S. & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. Crown.

Marcuse, H. (1964). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Beacon Press.

Menzel, D. C. (1997). Teaching ethics and values in public administration: Are we making a difference? Public Administration Review, 57(3), 224-230. https://doi.org/10.2307/976653

Merkel, W. (2014). Is there a crisis of democracy? Democratic Theory, 1(2), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.3167/dt.2014.010202

Moe, T. M. (1995). The politics of structural choice: Toward a theory of public bureaucracy. In O. E. Williamson (ed.), Organization theory: From Chester Barnard to the present and beyond (pp. 116-153). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195098303.003.0007

Mommsen, W. J. (1984). Max Weber and German politics, 1890-1920 [M. S. Steinberg (trans.)]. University of Chicago Press.

Mommsen, W. J. (2004). Max Weber und die deutsche Politik, 1890-1920. Mohr Siebeck.

Mosher, F. C. (1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.

Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. Verso Books.

Moyar, D. (2004). Die Verwirklichung meiner Autorität: Hegels komplementäre Modelle von Individuen und Institutionen. In C. Halbig, M. Quante & L. Siep (eds.), Hegels Erbe (pp. 209-253). Suhrkamp Verlag.

Moyn, S. (2023). Liberalism against itself: Cold War intellectuals and the making of our times. Yale University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.5666742

Moynihan, D. P. (2022). Public management for populists: Trump’s Schedule F executive order and the future of the civil service. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 174-178. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13433

Nabatchi, T., Goerdel, H. T. & Peffer, S. (2011). Public administration in dark times: Some questions for the future of the field. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(supplement 1), i29-i43. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq068

Nah, D. (2022). Hegel, Weber, and bureaucracy. In S. Friedman (ed.), Hegel’s philosophy of right after 200 years (pp. 25-45). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003327318-3

Niskanen, W. A. Jr. (1971). Bureaucracy and representative government (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315081878

O’Leary, R. (2006). The ethics of dissent: Managing guerrilla government. CQ Press.

Olsen, J. P. (2006). Maybe it is time to rediscover bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui027

O’Neill, O. (1990). Constructions of reason: Explorations of Kant’s practical philosophy. Cambridge University Press.

Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (2019). Populism and public administration: Confronting the administrative state. Administration & Society, 51(10), 1521-1545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399719874749

Pfiffner, J. P. (2019). Public administration ethics in the age of Trump. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3435586

Rosanvallon, P. (2011). Democratic legitimacy: Impartiality, reflexivity, proximity. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691149486.001.0001

Rutgers, M. R. & Schreurs, P. (2004). Weber’s Neo-Kantian roots. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 26(1), 103-111. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25610653

Sager, F. & Rosser, C. (2009). Weber, Wilson, and Hegel: Theories of modern bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 69(6), 1136-1147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02071.x

Scaff, L. A. (2011). Max Weber in America. Princeton University Press.

Schäfer, A. & Zürn, M. (2023). The democratic regression: The political causes of authoritarian populism. John Wiley & Sons.

Seibel, W. (2010). Beyond bureaucracy–Public administration as political integrator and non-Weberian thought in Germany. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 719-730. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02200.x

Shaw, C. K. Y. (1992). Hegel’s theory of modern bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 86(2), 381-389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1964227

Spicer, M. W. (2004). Note on origins: Hegel, Weber, and Frederician Prussia. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 26(1), 97-102. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25610652

Stivers, C. & DeHart-Davis, L. (2022). A modern guide to administrative ethics. Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789855515

Terry, L. D. (2003). Leadership of public bureaucracies: The administrator as conservator. Routledge.

Terry, L. D. (2015). Leadership of public bureaucracies: The administrator as conservator [ebook]. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315669236

Tijsterman, S. P. & Overeem, P. (2008). Escaping the iron cage: Weber and Hegel on bureaucracy and freedom. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 30(1), 71-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2008.11029624

Waldo, D. (1952). Development of theory of democratic administration. American Political Science Review, 46(1), 81- 103. https://doi.org/10.2307/1950764

Waldo, D. (1984). The administrative state: A study of the political theory of American public administration. Holmes & Meier.

Weber, M. (1988). Zur Neuordnung Deutschlands: Schriften und Reden 1918-1920 [W. J. Mommsen & W. Schwentker (eds.)]. Mohr Siebeck.

Weber, M. (1995). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Die Wirtschaft und die gesellschaftlichen Ordnungen und Mächte [W. J. Mommsen (ed.), in collaboration with W. Schluchter & B. Morgenbrod]. Mohr Siebeck.

Weber, M. (2011a). Parlament und Regierung im neugeordneten Deutschland: Zur politischen Kritik des Beamtentums und Parteiwesens. Duncker & Humblot. (Original work published 1918). https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-53512-5

Weber, M. (2011b). Staatssoziologie: Soziologie der rationalen Staatsanstalt und der modernen politischen Parteien und Parlamente [J. Winckelmann (ed.)]. Duncker & Humblot. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-53510-1

Yesilkagit, K., Bauer, M. W., Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (2024). The guardian state: Strengthening the public service against democratic backsliding. Public Administration Review, 84(3), 414-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13808