Politcal Power
Political power can simply be defined as the power to influence. The power to influence is essentially the power to control. When pertaining to political matters, the most influential people in any form of government have the most power. The underlying argument is between who has the most influence. Is it the elite or the majority? There are four theories of who truly governs.
The first theory is clearly elitist. Karl Marx has said that all government in any way shape or form is controlled by whichever class dominates the economy. In all societies there is an economic struggle between two major classes. Although the working class is the majority they have the least political power. This is solely because they have less money than the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie on the other hand dominate the working class economically simply because they own the factories where the working class work. The theory also represents the government as a machine designed to favor to the dominant classes interest. This is why a Marxist would believe that it is pointless to study a government because it has none of its own power. It runs on whoever feeds it, and in this case it is the bourgeoisie.
The second theory is most similar to the first. It states that the nongovernmental elite has the most political power. This time when I mention elite it goes beyond the bourgeoisie. This elite is composed of corporate leaders, high ranking military officers, and a small group of political leaders. Other groups can be added, such as the leaders of the media, labor leaders and the heads of special interest groups. Many more groups can be added but the basic underlying idea of this theory is that a very small group of high status officials not involved in government contain the majority of political power.
The third theory tends to sway from the first two theories. It states that political power is concentrated within some of the people who actually run the government, the bureaucrats. Because the bureaucrats are appointed officials it separates itself even farther apart from the other theories. The bureaucrats are only influenced by the people that appoint them. This is why the political power is contained within the government. The fourth and final theory can be described as a combination of the first three theories. It delves into the dominance of power between the elite themselves.
Power. It is defined as the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others or the course of events. Throughout time, certain individuals have acquired power in their society as a way to govern and keep order among their community. Power is not a new concept; it was used in the past by many emperors, kings, and queens, and is still being used by presidents, prime ministers, and dictators. Although, it has been used to further progress societies into what the world is like today, not all power has been used for the best of mankind. But what goes awry to make power turn corrupt? In William Shakespeare's Hamlet, it is illustrated how power can turn corrupt, when authoritative figures, who possess power, abuse it for their personal gain, rather than for the common good of the society.
In conspiracy theories, the elite represent the individuals and groups who have power. This small population has access to a large amount of money and resources, giving them an advantage over anyone who lacks this access. The elite can represent the conflict between high class versus the low and working class. Also, the government and any governing leadership can be considered the elite over the rest of the nation. This distinction will be important when discussing why people invest in conspiracy theories.
...tadt has created a viable theory for the modern presidents to think about and use to their advantage. Presidents can also look at the case studies found in Kerbel’s article and see how disastrous inflexibility will be to the president‘s policy agenda. The reason this theory is so viable is because it is so hard to argue against a concept so simple as a power to persuade. In addition, people seem to adhere to the simplest principle that explains presidential power best.
Power is authority and strength, which is any form of motive force or energy, ability to act, or control. When too much power is given, a dictatorship government can form, in which all decisions are made by one authority. In the book Animal Farm, by George Orwell the author portrays how “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Lord Acton).
In 1956, C. Wright Mills developed a theory that “the United States no longer has separate economic, political, and military leaders but instead the most prominent people in each region combine to form a united elite.” Most people saw the two main levels of power in the special interest groups and the public, but Mills displayed three levels: the power elite then the special interest groups then the public. It is the higher levels that make the decisions regarding war, national policy, and domestic policy. Members of the power elite tend to be interested in similar things and also come from similar backgrounds. An example of this would be that most members are either educated at special schools, military academics, or Ivy League schools and also share common faiths in the Episcopalian or Presbyterian churches. Members of the power elite have known other members of the group for a long time, share the same groups of friends, and also intermarry (Sociology 407). They do all of this in order to make it easier for each other to agree on the same decisions and so their close friends and relatives can belong to the power elite in the future as well.
In history, governments have endeavored to rule their subjects. Major forms of authority consist primarily of monarchy, absolute monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny, theocracy, and republic. By examining the main faults of each government, the republic is clearly the superior form.
Oligarchy is valued above a democracy although they are both ruled by the appetite of the soul. Those within an oligarchy pursue necessary appetites whereas democratic individuals pursue unnecessary appetites. Rulers are present...
In society, it can be agreed that there are two main types of power, proximal relations of power and distal relations of power. Proximal relations of power deals within the personal relationships in society, whereas distal relations of power are related to society in a more abstract way that affects it as a
Political power results from the fear of force. The individual acts out of a fear of consequences of disobedience and in accordance with the desdire for self-preservation. Political Authority results from a belief in the moral correctness of the organization in question. The individual acts of a sense of obligation and acknowledges the right of the ruler, morally, to rule and the moral correctness of the laws are accepted. The laws are obeyed for their own sake.
In the video Eric Liu spoke of the systems of power that society has structured. Eric defines power as the ability to make others do what you would have them do. He sees power as being found with family, at your workplace, and in relationships. He defines the six main sources of civic power as being Control of physical force, wealth to buy results and other power, State action (government) to have control over people and what they do. An example for this would be that in a democracy the citizens give government power through elections, and in contrast dictatorship expresses power through force. The fourth civic power is known as social norm, which means what others believe that is okay, and what is not okay. The fifth civic power is ideas meaning
Pluralism is essentially a theory in favour of distributing power equally amongst individuals rather than having power remain within the hands of one individual (Heywood, 2003; Schwarzmantel, 1994; Dunleavy and O’Leary, 1987; Crowder, 1994). This theory is predominantly associated with Robert Dahl, who had researched how the state behaves and amongst whom power is exercised in New Haven (Heywood, 2007; Dahl, 1961). However, it has been argued that this theory is too idealistic, and that it is impossible for there to be an equal distribution of power because realistically power is likely to only be exercised by a minority, as in accordance with the elitist view (Heywood, 2007; Schwarzmantel, 1994).
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.
At the top of the economy are chief executives, at the top of the military are the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and at the top of the political domain are the political board of directors. There are higher levels of control in the major domains and the people among these higher levels tend to come together and make decisions, thus forming the power elite.
Politics is the means for attaining valued things. Although, valued things are different in every society, the means of securing those things has never changed. The competition for power, authority and influence will always be the backbone of politics. Applying power, authority and influence to the valued things that support the public good, will produce the quality of life a society desires. In the present day, citizens in the United States demand certain valued things such as welfare, education, safe streets and healthcare. Through politics, citizens can apply their power in many different ways to get the things they want. Power is the ability to get someone to do something they may or may not want to do. Through the use of or the application of coercion, persuasion, manipulation and negotiation, power is used to influence the system.
Power is defined in the course study notes as the “ability of individuals or groups to get what they want despite the opposition”. Power is derived from a variety of sources including knowledge, experience and environmental uncertainties (Denhardt et al, 2001). It is also important to recognize that power is specific to each situation. Individuals or groups that may be entirely powerful in one situation may find themselves with little or no power in another. The county Registrar of Voters, who is my boss, is a perfect example. In running the local elections office, she can exercise the ultimate power. However, in a situation where she attempted to get the county selected for a desirable, statewide pilot project, she was powerless, completely at the mercy of the Secretary of State. Power is difficult to measure and even to recognize, yet it plays a major role in explaining authority. In organizations, power is most likely exercised in situations where “the stakes are high, resources are limited, and goals and processes are unclear” (Denhardt et al, 2001). The absence of power in organizations forces us to rely on soley hierarchical authority.