The Nature Of Power

[Verv]

I have always wondered... What is the nature of power? What makes a person powerful? Obviously, people fall under the control of those who are capable of persuading them with tools of destruction. If your life is at stake you naturally do what a person wants you to do... And that comes off to most humans as being power.

Power is sort of the tool for achieving what you want.

Power is money and violence in its' most base forms. It has zero credit to the person who implements it and says little to nothing about them. One cannot characterize a person with money other than they have money, and one cannot characterize a person with violent force as having anything but their violent force (they could be a weak man with a gun or a strong man with a knife, it does not matter).

But power has a deeper nature when we are talking about humans. In the animal kingdom your power comes from the ability to coerce others through physical violence, but humanity has another means of attaining power.

Due to the fact that we think abstractly as humans, we are able to ascribe power to people who we feel are right, who we feel are innocent or who we generally respect. Some even achieve power through something as superficial as beauty. Power is a much more complicated idea amongst humans.

It is intriguing to think that a man can achieve power through being empahized with (which could even come from his own short comings, even to this extent concepts like ugliness have a certain pull to them). It's fascinating that a beautiful woman can have a stranglehold over a man by mere appearance.

Few have the power of children -- there is a complete and total innocence in a child that makes it immune to our malice and hatred.

Perhaps this is what Jesus Christ meant when the meek would inherit the Earth: they've achieved power through their innocence, they've achieved power through their kindness, they've achieved power through their submission to others.

Their ultimate power is not violence but the exact opposie. Their power is an unconditional love for others.

It is possible that the greatest power that one has, the only power that can defeat violence of arms and money, is the power of love.

You can pay an Army to kill men and to tear down buildings, but can you find enough people who would be willing to murder children and tear down hospitals and people's homes? Can you pay people to commit atrocities?

You may be able to pay a few, but there is a greater power of Love that exists in the soul of mankind. By committing actions of such hatred and destruction man is so motivated by His desire to right a wrong that he will flock against you.

By achieving complete surrender of violence, by achieving complete innocence and by harboring the purest intentions one appeals so broadly to the world that one becomes nearly immune to murder.

True power is Love for others, it is innocence and meakness -- people rush to the aid of the innocent, the loving, the meak.

 

[Norseman]

I have always wondered... What is the nature of power? What makes a person powerful? Obviously, people fall under the control of those who are capable of persuading them with tools of destruction. If your life is at stake you naturally do what a person wants you to do... And that comes off to most humans as being power.

Power is sort of the tool for achieving what you want.

Power is money and violence in its' most base forms. It has zero credit to the person who implements it and says little to nothing about them. One cannot characterize a person with money other than they have money, and one cannot characterize a person with violent force as having anything but their violent force (they could be a weak man with a gun or a strong man with a knife, it does not matter).

But power has a deeper nature when we are talking about humans. In the animal kingdom your power comes from the ability to coerce others through physical violence, but humanity has another means of attaining power.

Ok-ish until here. If power is the ability to get what you want, then power can only be exercised through other people voluntarily if they want the same things, and as our recent discussion on anarchism and communism might demonstrate, it's not at all easy, if even possible, to get someone to change what they want. You can't call it power if someone is doing something only because they want the same goal (and if you are unable to change what goals they desire). In that case, they're not doing what you want personally, they're just doing it alongside you. If you suddenly decided to do something else, they wouldn't continue with you. However, if you were a mafia boss or a president and you changed what you wanted, all the people you controlled would have to change with you, either out of fear of some sort of punishment, or the hope for some reward from you. That is power.

Perhaps this is what Jesus Christ meant when the meek would inherit the Earth: they've achieved power through their innocence, they've achieved power through their kindness, they've achieved power through their submission to others.

Here again, this isn't really power. Women and children only have power in as much as people let them have power. If a kid asks you to get his ball off the roof, you might do it, but you don't have to do it. You don't get anything if you do, and there's no punishment if you tell him to ask someone else. If the kid asked you to shoot his dad, you'd probably refuse. If you're in a gang, and the gang leader tells you to shoot his dad, you do it, or the gang will kill you and do it themselves. You aren't left with otherwise desireable options in a gang, as you are if a kid asks you for something.

If you don't mind, I'm going to snip the rest of your quote.

To be precise, power is not only the ability to get what you want. Influence can do that too. Power is distinct from influence in that you can tell people what to do, and not ask them. Power can be exercised by bosses, politicians, police officers, even spouses can exercise power over each other under certain circumstances. Power dominates people. It takes away their freedom to make any other choice, because they will have to face consequences. When a police officer asks a guy to prove that he isn't drunk, he has to cooperate, or he will get punished. If an abusive husband tells his wife she has to clean the dishes and make him some food, she has to cooperate, or she gets punished. If the wife tells her children they have to do their laundry, they must cooperate, or they get punished. These are all cases where power forces people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do. It imposes itself upon otherwise free and equal relationships between people.

What normally happens is that power goes beyond this, and forms into a hierarchical power structure. Soldiers have to obey their corporals, corporals have to follow sergeants, sergeants have to obey lieutenants, who have to obey captains, who have to obey lieutenant colonels, who have to obey colonels, who have to obey brigadier generals, who obey major generals, who are commanded by lieutenant generals, who obey the president. And now you have one guy who controls something like a million people with guns. Those people with guns allow him to exercise control over 300 million people. If you don't respect his power out of fear, then you get shot or imprisoned. If he faces greater than normal opposition, he can draft some of those 300 million people into the military, give them guns, and use them to maintain his power over everyone else.

 

[Verv]

Ok-ish until here. If power is the ability to get what you want, then power can only be exercised through other people voluntarily if they want the same things, and as our recent discussion on anarchism and communism might demonstrate, it's not at all easy, if even possible, to get someone to change what they want. You can't call it power if someone is doing something only because they want the same goal (and if you are unable to change what goals they desire). In that case, they're not doing what you want personally, they're just doing it alongside you. If you suddenly decided to do something else, they wouldn't continue with you. However, if you were a mafia boss or a president and you changed what you wanted, all the people you controlled would have to change with you, either out of fear of some sort of punishment, or the hope for some reward from you. That is power.

You are right: if someone is doing it because theyw ant the same goal, that is not power, that is cooperation. But let's say they are doing it out of a sense of respect or admiration of you. I used to want to do a lot of underage drinking, but for a long time I did not do it simply because I did not want to lose the respect of my father.

It is an issue where we are persuaded to do something otherwise out of a sense of respect for others, punishment not involved.

I am not desiring to stop drinking beers and soju with my friends, but if I was asked to stop by someone that I very much so respected I would consider doing so, out of respect.

Here again, this isn't really power. Women and children only have power in as much as people let them have power. If a kid asks you to get his ball off the roof, you might do it, but you don't have to do it. You don't get anything if you do, and there's no punishment if you tell him to ask someone else. If the kid asked you to shoot his dad, you'd probably refuse. If you're in a gang, and the gang leader tells you to shoot his dad, you do it, or the gang will kill you and do it themselves. You aren't left with otherwise desireable options in a gang, as you are if a kid asks you for something.

I see your point here, but then again you would tie a child's shoes but you probably would not tie that of an adults; you would go to the tall cabinet and grab them a plate or a cup but you would probably not do this for anyone else.

And, if a child was being attacked, undoubtedly you'd come to their rescue before you would that of an adult stranger.

If you don't mind, I'm going to snip the rest of your quote.

To be precise, power is not only the ability to get what you want. Influence can do that too. Power is distinct from influence in that you can tell people what to do, and not ask them. Power can be exercised by bosses, politicians, police officers, even spouses can exercise power over each other under certain circumstances.

I'd consider power as a means of getting what you want, an ability to move others; there are 'powerful speakers' who have the power of influence, so to speak.

Power dominates people. It takes away their freedom to make any other choice, because they will have to face consequences. When a police officer asks a guy to prove that he isn't drunk, he has to cooperate, or he will get punished. If an abusive husband tells his wife she has to clean the dishes and make him some food, she has to cooperate, or she gets punished. If the wife tells her children they have to do their laundry, they must cooperate, or they get punished. These are all cases where power forces people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do. It imposes itself upon otherwise free and equal relationships between people.

I see what you are saying, but I do not think that this strict definition of power is appropriate. It is powerful when people are asked to do something and face no consequences, yet still do it out of respect for the individual.

Our primary disagreement is semantics.