Path of Least Resistance: Implicit Power
In his book, Power and Choice, W. Phillips Shively introduces to students of political science the importance of power within the framework of politics. According to him, “Politics consists of the making of a common decision for a group of people through the use of power”(Shively 9). And that “power” is, “the ability of one person or group to cause another person or group to do what the first wishes, by whatever means”(5). Power, therefore, is of extreme importance within the arena of politics for any group who wishes to institute reform or maintain order. And yet, the question of analyzing power, and understanding how it is used, is not as clear as one might imagine. There is a split among political scientists as to who has the power, and how those in positions of power keep it. The debate seems to be centralized over the difference between observable power (manifest) and indirect power (implicit). When deciding the question of who has the power, it seems that the arguments of Hunter and Dahl are mainly concerned with the observable power exercised by those in positions of authority. The other, and more sound, theory of Baratz, Bachrach, and Lukes, maintains that actual power lies within the manipulation of issues from behind the scenes. In answering the question of power, the arguments of Baratz, Bachrach, and Lukes, go beyond the those of Hunter and Dahl, and show that the most effective uses of power are those which are the hardest to see, (implicit power).
Manifest power is, “based on an observable action by A that leads B to do what A wants”(7), and it is this power that both Hunter and Dahl, describe in their studies. These men, although they disagree on specific details, believe that those people with political power take an active and visible part in their community’s important issues. When Hunter did his inquiry into the political currents of Atlanta, he asked his advisors who the most influential men in the city were. He found that there existed a group of powerful individuals who greatly influenced the policies of the downtown area. He concluded that the wealthy elite were in control and had the greatest influence on the politics in the Atlanta area. However, a political scientist named Dahl did not agree. Dahl argued that the flaw with Hunter’s research was that it was based on reputation only.
Power is a great privilege to have and a person can take advantage of the power if they have it. Getting the privilege of power can be abused and misused depending on the person it is given to. Sometimes if the power lands in the wrong person’s hands they can use it to benefit themselves. In the novel called Montana 1948 by Larry Watson, the power of the law is being abused in the situations occurring throughout the book. Having power and privileges can make a great impact on your life and other people’s lives and give you a variety of advantages.
According to Gregory Mantsios many American people believed that the classes in the United States were irrelevant, that we equally reside(ed) in a middle class nation, that we were all getting richer, and that everyone has an opportunity to succeed in life. But what many believed, was far from the truth. In reality the middle class of the United States receives a very small amount of the nation's wealth, and sixty percent of America's population receives less than 6 percent of the nation's wealth, while the top 1 percent of the American population receives 34 percent of the total national wealth. In the article Class in America ( 2009), written by Gregory Mantsios informs us that there are some huge differences that exist between the classes of America, especially the wealthy and the poor. After
Inadvertently Anderson gives us an even bigger lesson about politics in Georgia and the South in general. The Democratic Party was typically seen as the party of the downtrodden for poor farmers and other people who were economically depressed. The poor certainly saw them as their political savior. However, the party support only extended to white Georgians and particularly to white males without having their best interests at heart, only their best interests as perceived and allowed by the political elite. Some of the issues that made Talmadge disenfranchised with the Democratic Party under Roosevelt like setting wage levels, dependence on the federal government, fighting outside interference in "his" state, and especially desegregation subsequently forced many southern Democrats out of the party later. When the Democratic Party found itself without the paternalistic southern white male and the downtrodden white males' allegiance, it was forced to search for support from what they perceived to be the next group of downtrodden voters instead of redefining their issues.
What is power to a human? As time has gone by, there have been many forms of control and influence in the world. Many strive to achieve total rule over a society or group of individuals. Yet the question still presents itself to the average man. Why does man desire power so greatly even though there is visible trouble that follows? Shelley’s Frankenstein, Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron”, and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, whether through the situation or the character themselves, depict the evils and hardships due to an imbalance and poor management of power.
In this paper, Gregory Mantsios compares and contrasts class in America. He uses facts to support his point that things are getting better for the upper class, while things are increasingly getting worse for the middle and lower classes. Throughout the paper, he demonstrates comparing and contrasting by using “myth” versus “reality”.
Growing up in The United States, people are given this idea of an American Dream. Almost every child is raised to believe they can become and do anything they want to do, if one works hard enough. However, a majority of people believe that there is a separation of class in American society. Gregory Mantsios author of “Class in America-2009” believes that Americans do not exchange thoughts about class division, although most of people are placed in their own set cluster of wealth. Also political officials are trying to get followers by trying to try to appeal to the bulk of the population, or the middle class, in order to get more supporters. An interesting myth that Mantsios makes in his essay is how Americans don’t have equal opportunities.
Mantsios believes that Americans do not like to talk about the different classes, whether it is about the upper, middles or lower class. He outlines four myths that are widely held about class in the United States. Myth one the united states is fundamentally a classless society, myth two we are, essentially a middle class nation. Most Americans have achieved relative affluence in what is widely recognized as a consumer society. Myth three we are all getting richer. Each generation propels itself to greater economic well-being. And myth four, everyone has an equal chance to succeed. Requires no more than hard work sacrifice and perseverance (Mantsios).
In Mantsios’ “Class in America” he provides us with four myths about the United States. In one of these myths the idea is brought up that the United States is, at its core, a classless society. It is also states that whether rich or poor, everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. The myth also states that health care and education are provided to everyone regardless of their financial stability. This idea about a classless society is exactly what Mantsios claims it to be, a myth. It is untrue to state that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law, and to believe that whatever differences exist in financial standing are insignificant. There are clear distinctions between different groups of people depending on their economic and social standing.
In the “Class Of America” article, the author Gregory Mantsios displays his point of view on what society says class individuals are in and how that affects their lives further than people in America think. Mantsios believes that citizens in the United States prefer not be put in different social categories like higher, middle, or lower class just because of the income value. Mantsios elaborates on his beliefs about class categories in America and disproves them by using statistics for evidence. In example, he claims that the class you are placed in will affect your lifestyle. Mantsios also debates that whatever class you fall under reflects on how well you will prosper in life, just like schools connecting test scores and the level of schooling the student receives. Whatever class a person is categorized in defining their future in life, even, if they choose to not see it that way that’s how it is.
In January 2013 a prominent national US newspaper quoted former Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice, “It doesn’t matter where you come from, but where you are going.” However, In “The Land of Opportunity,” James Loewen discusses how significant inequality is in America. The social class that you are born into will influence your outlook on social class and will also be the social class you stay in (Loewen, 1995. 322). Your social class will determine the opportunities available for you including health, fitness, nutrition, education, SAT scores, medical resources and more (Loewen, 1995. 321-322). Loewen also proposes that the education system in America does not incorporate a proper analysis of our social class (Loewen, 1995. 323). It is necessary for students to be realistic about social inequality because it is linked with history. As students, we are socialized from an early age to believe in the American Dream through media and our loved ones. We were raised to believe our merit determines our success. In reality race and ethnicity, class, and gender play vital roles in determining where an individual ends up in life. The following articles raise inconvenient facts that go against the American Dream.
In his essay “Land of Opportunity” James W. Loewen details the ignorance that most American students have towards class structure. He bemoans the fact that most textbooks completely ignore the issue of class, and when it does it is usually only mentions middle class in order to make the point that America is a “middle class country. This is particularly grievous to Loewen because he believes, “Social class is probably the single most important variable in society. From womb to tomb, it correlates with almost all other social characteristics of people that we can measure.” Loewen simply believes that social class usually determine the paths that a person will take in life. (Loewen 203)
The structure of power in society is a vital part of understanding sociology. The two main theories that differentiate this structure are Mills’ theory of a power elite and Riesman’s contrasting theory of veto groups, or pluralism. Both theories are often found in varying degrees when considering important public decisions, such as the Hoover Redevelopment Plan or the University Village Plan. Generally, one of these theories is more applicable and relevant to certain public decisions and developments depending on the issue. While both of these theories played a part in the Hoover Redevelopment Plan and the University Village Plan, the power elite theory is ultimately more responsible for the institution of these developments.
C. Wright Mills in his article “ The Structure of Power in American Society” writes that when considering the types of power that exist in modern society there are three main types which are authority, manipulation and coercion. Coercion can be seen as the “last resort” of enforcing power. On the other hand, authority is power that is derived from voluntary action and manipulation is power that is derived unbeknownst to the people who are under that power.
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.
Social class has a large effect on the lifestyles of all Americans. But what does it really mean to be a part of the lower, middle or upper class? These divisions of social class are defined by aspects such as family income and lifestyle; however, education plays a large role in determining ones social class. That does not mean that it will determine success in ones life but to interpret, many people with a further education usually have a higher income as well. Those of the upper class have higher standards for education and career aspirations in contrast to those of the lower and middle class. Besides the differentiation of aspirations of the individuals of each social class, it is also used to determine who will go to college, depending on who can afford it or have no other priorities that can get in the way.