"What is the nature of social power? It would help if you consider this by considering your own definition of social power and why you either do or do not want more."
To break this question down, I think one needs first to define power.
"At the most general level, power is the ability to influence the behavior of others to get the outcomes one wants."
The amount of power a person has can be determined in many ways, but in a capitalistic society monetary worth seems to be the most prevalent measure. For Marx, the ability to own land and private property helps determine the distribution of power. Power is passed down from generation to generation, giving people that have never worked a day in their lives authority they cannot even begin to comprehend.
Of course I'm completely ignoring the power of influence, but for the most part money drives our society. For example, without extraordinary amounts of money would American companies have such a profound impact on globalization?
Are McDonald's and Disney innately popular, or is it more reasonable to guess that their advertising ploys and ruthless marketing have made the companies multinational conquerors?
Social power is the ability to manipulate society and the people within it without rebellion. Disney does a great job of making their products "magical" or "good" to the point that no one questions the motives of the company. Disney doesn't care about children or their livelihoods, or accurate representations of race, etc. Disney cares about profit. In spite of this, Disney movies and products are primary socializing agents for thousands of children.
On the other hand, social power can influence and change the structure of society. Influence allows a person to gain power and achieve their goals. In this sense, I would love to have more social power. Leaders like Martin Luther King used their social power to change how society functions for the better. With an actual agenda, social power can be used to help better people’s lives. In the hands of an emotionless psychotic organization hell bent on profit, social power can ruin people, cultures, and general well being. Would you like fries with that?
I'll post more later.
Here's a thought related to social power, which is connected to money, as you stated... Each generation of the middle class must recreate itself. Each representative of the middle class must recreate her/himself...she/he must learn to stand alone economically. Yet, there is a correlation between access and opportunity for knowledge, skill development, and attitudinal and behavioral patterns AND socio-economic status. So, as you state, social and eocnomic power is/can be generationally "passed down", but is not absolute. Class divisions remain definitive in U.S. (of course not "noticable" to the public for a variety of reasons) if we take even a casual look at economic data. That many other variables ultimately have an influence on the amount of social power one has at any point in time during a lifetime is of interest. There is interplay between race, ethnicity, SES, and societal attitudes toward each variable. These attitudes are changing. A recent survey published in Newsweek magazine revealed changes in attitude toward racial and ethnic partnering (i.e. dating and marriage) when age of respondent is taken into consideration. The younger the person, the greater acceptance. This is not new to you, me, or any other casual observer of our American cultural landscape! Now, I wonder, will this "cut across" SES so that SES will become secondary or ancillary, or is it already not as critical in one's understanding of the acquisition of social power? And, what effect will this have on couples' access and opportunities in life? Social power in the middle class is unique from social power in the working class, in my opinion. Of course, all the above is simplified and inadequately described. Time is not on my side at the moment! Thanks for your contribution to my blog. I appreciate the time you took to express your thoughts, sir!
ReplyDelete