Jonathan La Gasse (FGCU): Power

For some reason, on this unproductive day I had, I began to think about the concept of power in societies (past and present).

At first I thought obviously of the economic power forms present in societies and how this caused the need for certain social institutions. For example, if we were to take Marx’s view that society is defined by their economic aspect, in capitalism power is determined by the control of capital (capital in its largest sense: money, industrial machinery, and labor).

In feudalism, power was more based on land-ownership (although control of labor was also a factor). Arguably, the same holds true for slavery.

I began to noticed that if power was determined by land-ownership then the question of how to acquire more power and how to pass on this power to successors must have arise in these societies. Thus the institution of marriage was formed, it legitimized the successors and it allowed a family to increase their holdings by marrying off to another family with land-holdings, thus merging their holdings (or part of the other family holdings) into one.

Capitalism has different methods of how to pass power and how to acquire power yet some of these old institutions still determined how power is managed. Children of rich people can still inherit money, stocks, properties, etc and they can still marry into another family and merge their assets. However, in a way, things have become somewhat more de-personalized with the advent of corporations. Corporations can merge with other corporations, corporations can even have “rights” like a person (corporate personhood), etc. Indeed, this de-personalization of business may explain a bit why we still hear stories of atrocious corporate behavior all in the name of profit.

But there’s more to power then just economics, even though economics play a large role in it. As Foucault once mentioned, “Power is everywhere.” For example, demagogues depend on their charisma to persuade others, which is how they acquire power. However, even these other forms of power intersect with economic power. A demagogue can only go so far as their voice can take them but with the advent of TV, radio, etc they can spread their message to an even farther audience. But usually these forms of media are controlled by elements in society that have control of wealth, so the message must be to a degree acceptable to these elites. Perhaps this fact explains this old statement: “The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class.” However, new forms of media tend to allow an even playing field such as the internet, which allows anyone with a PC to reach a large audience. The printing press itself was historically a form of media that was not exactly undercontrol of the feudal and monarchic ruling class; in fact, it played a role in facilitating the revolutions that lead to feudalism’s downfall.

I feel that sometimes “power” and the physical aspects pertaining to actual power creates symbols, symbolic institutions (i.e. monarchy in feudalism; its both a symbol and an actual power institution), and “spectacle(s)” (a term from French situationists from the 1960s). The roles of these symbols are probably multi-faceted but for the most part they are created so to protect the actual institutions of power, since one common aspect of all institutions is to self-perpetuate. Our interactions, relations, and reactions to these symbols form a part of the social reality we live in. Most of the time these symbols achieve their aim and elicit our consent towards the continued existence of these power institutions. Perhaps this is what is meant by the concept of “Cultural Hegemony.”  Those who the symbols failed to convince are usually political dissidents and the like, in which case the power institutions may require other means to address the potential threat this specific element poses (since they could try to shatter the symbols or try to “unconvince” others away from the symbols and distractions).

Questions remind: Where do we stand in relation to power? Are we the oppressors or oppressed?

What do, or should, we do about power (as it is manifested in our society), if anything?

This entry was posted on 18. April 2009 at 00:50 and is filed under Introduction to Sociology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.