>(Doug, the charismatic leader)
fuck you too, curtiss. ;p
charismatic _authority_ means that you are considered to have character traits that are admirable: good writer, good communicator, virtuous, noble, courageous, intelligent. etc. it doesn't mean that doug or zizek or chomsky mesmerize their followers into droids. rather, it simply means that authority--legitimate power--can be invested in a person or even a set of character traits people think are worthy.
for instance, carrol once noted that it was important the he, yoshie, charles, steve, and (i think) mike yates stood up for one another on the list by demonstrating comradery in the face of attacks on them or the ideas they advance. rational argument was not enough to win people over to leninist marxism; rather, what was also needed was to show people that membership in a group and commitment to the authority of leninist marxism was also about the comradery such membership demonstrated. now, that doesn't mean there is no disagreement among them, that no rational argument takes place, and that people can only be guided by the appeal of solidaristic ties forged "in the struggle". recruitment is based on personal charisma -- but don't take charisma to mean the way we mean it today, in the US. Regan was not a charismatic leader, iow. (in fact, IIRC, charismatic authority is unlikely in contemporary society--science, bureaucracy, and commodification undermine it; nonetheless, i am arguing that carrol's claims about the important of solidaristic ties and personal, one-to-one recruiting are contemporary forms of charismatic authority)
marxism, in general, tends toward charismatic authority. charismatic authority doesn't have to rest on a person, per se. rather, it can rest on commitment to the authority (legitimate power) of the "normative patterns of order" outlined in an intellectual's work: hence, the reversion to marx's texts to claim the import of historical materialist analysis, the 'criticism of all that exists', the claim "i am not a marxist", the call to advance 'the struggles and wishes of the age'. etc.
charismatic authority is counterposed to rational-legal authority (commitment to the idea that rules have been created to achieve pre-given ends and that they should be followed) and to traditional (patrimonial) authority (commitment to pre-given ends handed down by tradition). none of these exist as pure forms, but are ideal types used to analyze the kinds of _authority_ systems in place --in every social formation--that tend to predominate and work to condition social cohesion, solidarity, shared identities and shared meanings. etc.
charismatic authority can become routinized--reified. eventually it can evolve into rational-legal authority structure.
kelley