A general synopsis of the interpretation of his lecture comes to the conclusion that he is quite cynical of politicians, painting a dark picture, he calls Parliament members (except a few cabinet ministers ) as well disciplined yes men', and illustrates that really politicians simply have to be wealthy or there have personal income that can contribute to his calling. And how internal vetting of politicians goes on, "selecting leaders and eliminating mere demagogues-. In fact you could argue that Weber's discussion of the political comes from a document that describes essentially how to be politician'. The hard headed social scientist however allows himself to envisage a politician who we may all aspire to be:.
It is immensely moving when a mature man "no matter whether old or young in years - is a ware of a responsibility for the consequences of his conduct and really feels such responsibility with heart and soul .a man who can have the calling for politics'.
Finally in Politics as a Vocation' Weber concludes that the specific instruments of politics is power', backed up by violence, an observation which compounds any understanding of a relationship between ethics and politics. Weber further argues that regardless of the needs for politics the essential means is violence. In considering if potentially harmful means are justified by the ends, he concludes that no system of ethics can make it possible to decide' when such is the case. In fact Weber makes reference to examples which delineate this difficulty justifying the means of violence and even associate politics with evil: the ancient Christians, too, knew very well that this world is ruled by demons, and that he who meddles with politics, who in other words makes use of the instruments of power and violence, concludes a pact with the internal powers'. Clearly Weber illustrates that violence is the primary means of politics, thus creating an idea of the political which is firmly rooted in violence.
