Difference between revisions of "Power"

From Nordan Symposia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 16: Line 16:
 
synonyms power force energy strength might mean the ability to exert effort. power may imply latent or exerted physical, mental, or spiritual ability to act or be acted upon <the awesome power of flowing water>. force implies the actual effective exercise of power <used enough force to push the door open>. energy applies to power expended or capable of being transformed into work <a worker with boundless energy>. strength applies to the quality or property of a person or thing that makes possible the exertion of force or the withstanding of strain, pressure, or attack <use weight training to build your strength>. might implies great or overwhelming power or strength <the belief that might makes right>.
 
synonyms power force energy strength might mean the ability to exert effort. power may imply latent or exerted physical, mental, or spiritual ability to act or be acted upon <the awesome power of flowing water>. force implies the actual effective exercise of power <used enough force to push the door open>. energy applies to power expended or capable of being transformed into work <a worker with boundless energy>. strength applies to the quality or property of a person or thing that makes possible the exertion of force or the withstanding of strain, pressure, or attack <use weight training to build your strength>. might implies great or overwhelming power or strength <the belief that might makes right>.
 
==Wikipedia==
 
==Wikipedia==
 +
===Political Power===
 
'''Political power''' (''[[imperium]]'' in Latin) is a type of [[power (sociology)|power]] held by a person or group in a [[society]]. There are many ways to hold such power. Officially, political power is held by the holders of [[sovereignty]]. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however, and the extent to which a person or group holds such power is related to the amount of [[Power (sociology)|societal influence]] they can wield, formally or informally. In many cases this influence is not contained within a single state and it refers to [[Power (international)|international power]].  
 
'''Political power''' (''[[imperium]]'' in Latin) is a type of [[power (sociology)|power]] held by a person or group in a [[society]]. There are many ways to hold such power. Officially, political power is held by the holders of [[sovereignty]]. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however, and the extent to which a person or group holds such power is related to the amount of [[Power (sociology)|societal influence]] they can wield, formally or informally. In many cases this influence is not contained within a single state and it refers to [[Power (international)|international power]].  
  
Line 22: Line 23:
 
For analytical reasons, I.C. MacMillan<ref>I.C. MacMillan (1978) Strategy Formulation: political concepts, St Paul, MN, West Publishing;</ref> separates the concepts ''power'' {{Quote|''Power is the capacity to restructure actual situations.''|I.C. Macmillan}} and influence {{Quote|''Influence is the capacity to control and modify the perceptions of others.''|I.C. Macmillan}}
 
For analytical reasons, I.C. MacMillan<ref>I.C. MacMillan (1978) Strategy Formulation: political concepts, St Paul, MN, West Publishing;</ref> separates the concepts ''power'' {{Quote|''Power is the capacity to restructure actual situations.''|I.C. Macmillan}} and influence {{Quote|''Influence is the capacity to control and modify the perceptions of others.''|I.C. Macmillan}}
  
== Separation of powers ==
+
=== Separation of powers ===
  
 
[[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu]] claimed that without following a principle of containing and balancing [[Legislature|legislative]], [[Executive (government)|executive]] and [[judiciary]] powers, there is no freedom and no protection against abuse of power. Separation of power must be in such grade, that any of the branches can operate without excessive limitations from the others; but interdependecy between them must also be in such grade, that one single branch cannot rule out the other's decisions. This is the [[separation of powers]] principle.
 
[[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu]] claimed that without following a principle of containing and balancing [[Legislature|legislative]], [[Executive (government)|executive]] and [[judiciary]] powers, there is no freedom and no protection against abuse of power. Separation of power must be in such grade, that any of the branches can operate without excessive limitations from the others; but interdependecy between them must also be in such grade, that one single branch cannot rule out the other's decisions. This is the [[separation of powers]] principle.
Line 30: Line 31:
 
A similar concept, termed Division of Power, also consists of differentiated legislative, executive, and judicial powers.  However, while Separation of Power prohibits one branch from interfering with another, Division of Power permits such interference.  For example, in [[Indonesia]], the President (who wields executive power) can introduce a new bill, but the [[People's Consultative Assembly]] (holding legislative power) chooses to either legalize or reject the bill.
 
A similar concept, termed Division of Power, also consists of differentiated legislative, executive, and judicial powers.  However, while Separation of Power prohibits one branch from interfering with another, Division of Power permits such interference.  For example, in [[Indonesia]], the President (who wields executive power) can introduce a new bill, but the [[People's Consultative Assembly]] (holding legislative power) chooses to either legalize or reject the bill.
  
==Power projection==
+
===Power projection===
  
 
'''Power projection''' (or '''force projection''') is a term used in [[military science|military]] and [[political science]] to refer to the capacity of a [[state]] to implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory. The [[United States]] [[United States Department of Defense|Department of Defense]], in its publication ''J1-02: Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms'', further defines power projection as
 
'''Power projection''' (or '''force projection''') is a term used in [[military science|military]] and [[political science]] to refer to the capacity of a [[state]] to implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory. The [[United States]] [[United States Department of Defense|Department of Defense]], in its publication ''J1-02: Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms'', further defines power projection as
Line 38: Line 39:
 
While traditional measures of power projection typically focus on [[hard power]] assets (tanks, soldiers, aircraft, naval vessels, etc.), the developing theory of [[soft power]] notes that power projection does not necessarily have to involve the active use of military forces in [[combat]]. Assets for power projection can often serve dual uses, as the deployment of various countries' militaries during the [[Humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake|humanitarian response]] to the 2004 [[Indian Ocean]] [[2004 Indian Ocean earthquake|earthquake]] illustrates. The ability of a state to project its forces into an area may serve as an effective diplomatic lever, influencing the decision-making process and acting as a potential [[deterrent]] on other states' behavior.
 
While traditional measures of power projection typically focus on [[hard power]] assets (tanks, soldiers, aircraft, naval vessels, etc.), the developing theory of [[soft power]] notes that power projection does not necessarily have to involve the active use of military forces in [[combat]]. Assets for power projection can often serve dual uses, as the deployment of various countries' militaries during the [[Humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake|humanitarian response]] to the 2004 [[Indian Ocean]] [[2004 Indian Ocean earthquake|earthquake]] illustrates. The ability of a state to project its forces into an area may serve as an effective diplomatic lever, influencing the decision-making process and acting as a potential [[deterrent]] on other states' behavior.
  
==Political Science Perspectives==
+
===Political Science Perspectives===
  
 
Within normative political analysis, there are also various levels of power as described by academics that add depth into the understanding of the notion of power and its political implications.  [[Robert Dahl]], a prominent American political scientist, first ascribed to political power the trait of decision-making as the source and main indicator of power.  Later, two other political scientists, Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz, decided that simply ascribing decision-making as the basis of power was too simplistic and they added what they termed a 2nd dimension of power, agenda-setting by elites who worked in the backrooms and away from public scrutiny in order to exert their power upon society.  Lastly, British academic [[Steven Lukes]] added a 3rd dimension of power, preference-shaping, which he claimed was another important aspect of normative power in politics which entails theoretical views similar to notions of [[cultural hegemony]].  These 3 dimensions of power are today often considered defining aspects of political power by political researchers.
 
Within normative political analysis, there are also various levels of power as described by academics that add depth into the understanding of the notion of power and its political implications.  [[Robert Dahl]], a prominent American political scientist, first ascribed to political power the trait of decision-making as the source and main indicator of power.  Later, two other political scientists, Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz, decided that simply ascribing decision-making as the basis of power was too simplistic and they added what they termed a 2nd dimension of power, agenda-setting by elites who worked in the backrooms and away from public scrutiny in order to exert their power upon society.  Lastly, British academic [[Steven Lukes]] added a 3rd dimension of power, preference-shaping, which he claimed was another important aspect of normative power in politics which entails theoretical views similar to notions of [[cultural hegemony]].  These 3 dimensions of power are today often considered defining aspects of political power by political researchers.
Line 52: Line 53:
 
[[Category: General Reference]]
 
[[Category: General Reference]]
 
[[Category: Political Science]]
 
[[Category: Political Science]]
 +
[[Category: Philosophy]]
 
[[Category: Sociology]]
 
[[Category: Sociology]]

Revision as of 18:18, 31 December 2007

Lighterstill.jpg

Yinyangemlite 1.jpg

Merriam Webster

pow·er

Pronunciation:

\ˈpau̇(-ə)r\

Function

noun

Etymology

Middle English, from Anglo-French poer, pouer, from poer to be able, from Vulgar Latin *potēre, alteration of Latin posse — more at potent

Date

13th century

Definition

1 a (1): ability to act or produce an effect (2): ability to get extra-base hits (3): capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect b: legal or official authority, capacity, or right2 a: possession of control, authority, or influence over others b: one having such power; specifically : a sovereign state c: a controlling group : establishment —often used in the phrase the powers that be darchaic : a force of armed men echiefly dialect : a large number or quantity3 a: physical might b: mental or moral efficacy c: political control or influence4plural : an order of angels — see celestial hierarchy5 a: the number of times as indicated by an exponent that a number occurs as a factor in a product <5 to the third power is 125>; also : the product itself <8 is a power of 2> b: cardinal number 26 a: a source or means of supplying energy; especially : electricity b: motive power c: the time rate at which work is done or energy emitted or transferred7: magnification 2b8: scope 39: the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis in a statistical test when a particular alternative hypothesis happens to be true synonyms power authority jurisdiction control command sway dominion mean the right to govern or rule or determine. power implies possession of ability to wield force, permissive authority, or substantial influence <the power to mold public opinion>. authority implies the granting of power for a specific purpose within specified limits <gave her attorney the authority to manage her estate>. jurisdiction applies to official power exercised within prescribed limits <the bureau having jurisdiction over alcohol and firearms>. control stresses the power to direct and restrain <you are responsible for the students under your control>. command implies the power to make arbitrary decisions and compel obedience <the army officer in command>. sway suggests the extent or scope of exercised power or influence <an empire that extended its sway over the known world>. dominion stresses sovereign power or supreme authority <given dominion over all the animals>. synonyms power force energy strength might mean the ability to exert effort. power may imply latent or exerted physical, mental, or spiritual ability to act or be acted upon <the awesome power of flowing water>. force implies the actual effective exercise of power <used enough force to push the door open>. energy applies to power expended or capable of being transformed into work <a worker with boundless energy>. strength applies to the quality or property of a person or thing that makes possible the exertion of force or the withstanding of strain, pressure, or attack <use weight training to build your strength>. might implies great or overwhelming power or strength <the belief that might makes right>.

Wikipedia

Political Power

Political power (imperium in Latin) is a type of power held by a person or group in a society. There are many ways to hold such power. Officially, political power is held by the holders of sovereignty. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however, and the extent to which a person or group holds such power is related to the amount of societal influence they can wield, formally or informally. In many cases this influence is not contained within a single state and it refers to international power.

Political scientists have frequently defined power as "the ability to influence the behaviour of others" with or without resistance.

For analytical reasons, I.C. MacMillan[1] separates the concepts power Template:Quote and influence Template:Quote

Separation of powers

Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu claimed that without following a principle of containing and balancing legislative, executive and judiciary powers, there is no freedom and no protection against abuse of power. Separation of power must be in such grade, that any of the branches can operate without excessive limitations from the others; but interdependecy between them must also be in such grade, that one single branch cannot rule out the other's decisions. This is the separation of powers principle.

Division of Power

A similar concept, termed Division of Power, also consists of differentiated legislative, executive, and judicial powers. However, while Separation of Power prohibits one branch from interfering with another, Division of Power permits such interference. For example, in Indonesia, the President (who wields executive power) can introduce a new bill, but the People's Consultative Assembly (holding legislative power) chooses to either legalize or reject the bill.

Power projection

Power projection (or force projection) is a term used in military and political science to refer to the capacity of a state to implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory. The United States Department of Defense, in its publication J1-02: Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, further defines power projection as

The ability of a nation to apply all or some of its elements of national power - political, economic, informational, or military - to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations to respond to crises, to contribute to deterrence, and to enhance regional stability. [1]

This ability is a crucial element of a state's power in international relations. Any state able to direct its military forces outside the limited bounds of its territory might be said to have some level of power projection capability, but the term itself is used most frequently in reference to militaries with a worldwide reach (or at least significantly broader than a state's immediate area). Even states with sizable hard power assets (such as a large standing army) may only be able to exert limited regional influence so long as they lack the means of effectively projecting their power on a global scale. Generally, only a select few states are able to overcome the logistical difficulties inherent in the deployment and direction of a modern, mechanized military force.

While traditional measures of power projection typically focus on hard power assets (tanks, soldiers, aircraft, naval vessels, etc.), the developing theory of soft power notes that power projection does not necessarily have to involve the active use of military forces in combat. Assets for power projection can often serve dual uses, as the deployment of various countries' militaries during the humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake illustrates. The ability of a state to project its forces into an area may serve as an effective diplomatic lever, influencing the decision-making process and acting as a potential deterrent on other states' behavior.

Political Science Perspectives

Within normative political analysis, there are also various levels of power as described by academics that add depth into the understanding of the notion of power and its political implications. Robert Dahl, a prominent American political scientist, first ascribed to political power the trait of decision-making as the source and main indicator of power. Later, two other political scientists, Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz, decided that simply ascribing decision-making as the basis of power was too simplistic and they added what they termed a 2nd dimension of power, agenda-setting by elites who worked in the backrooms and away from public scrutiny in order to exert their power upon society. Lastly, British academic Steven Lukes added a 3rd dimension of power, preference-shaping, which he claimed was another important aspect of normative power in politics which entails theoretical views similar to notions of cultural hegemony. These 3 dimensions of power are today often considered defining aspects of political power by political researchers.

A radical alternative view of the source of political power follows the formula: information plus authority permits the exercise of power. Political power is intimately related to information. Sir Francis Bacon's statement: "Nam et ipsa scientia potentia est" for knowledge itself is power, assumed authority as given. Many will know that unless someone with authority heeds, there is no political power. The kingmaker is not the king.

It is said democracy is the best method of informing those entrusted with authority.Template:Fact They are best able to use authority without ignorance to maximize political power. Those who exercise authority in ignorance are not powerful, because they do not realize their intentions and have little control over the effects of using their authority.

Post-modernism has debated over how to define political power. Perhaps, the best known definition comes from the late Michel Foucault, whose work in Discipline and Punish (and other writings) conveys a view of power that is organic within society. This view holds that political power is more subtle and is part of a series of societal controls and 'normalizing' influences through historical institutions and definitions of normal vs. abnormal. Foucault once characterized power as "an action over actions" (une action sur des actions), arguing that power was essentially a relation between several dots, in continuous transformation as in Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy. His view of power lent credence to the view that power in human society was part of a training process in which everyone, from a prime minister to a homeless person, played their role within the power structure of society. Jürgen Habermas opposed himself to Foucault's conception of discourse as a battlefield for power relations, arguing that it should be possible to achieve consensus on the fundamentals rules of discourse, in order to establish a transparent and democratic dialogue. Thenceforth, he argued against Foucault and Louis Althusser that power was not immanent to discourse, and that philosophy could be completely distinguished from ideology.

More recently, there has been a move among academics to differentiate power from a new concept of luck. Under some conditions (particularly the when examining the third dimension of power) it becomes necessary to determine who obtains a favourable result through the wielding of genuine power and who is simply "lucky". An example might be an ethnic minority who receive favourable treatment while not intentionally seeking it. A person promoted through positive discrimination would be considered "lucky" rather than "powerful". The eventual aim of such discrimination would be to eventually convert some (or all) of that luck into power. Some groups remain serially lucky without ever obtaining power.

  1. I.C. MacMillan (1978) Strategy Formulation: political concepts, St Paul, MN, West Publishing;