The answer of the question of what is the power is not
the only one. Steven Lukes argued three different types of the power. The
primary power is the power which A makes B do. The secondary power is the power
that A is multiplied. The tertiary power is the power that B cannot notice the
existence of A. this is the critical problem whether people can notice the
power or not.
Foucault conceptualized that the power resides in every human
relationship and it was promoted from the bottom but not the top. I would not
argue the details of this because the issue I point out is not the micro power
but the macro power including the government. The most noticeable
characteristics of the macro power are that it monopolizes the legitimate
power. This is the essence of the power of the nation state. The power in this
context means the police and military power. The counter violence against crime
and evil is legitimated by the law. The power is observed in the capitalists
and in mass media, although the center of the power is the nation.
Yet, as Negri and Hardt argued, the new subject of the
power came out. This is “the empire”. The empire showed up because the power of
the nation has decreased since the end of the cold war in 1990’s. “The empire”
is defined as the subject that has the power as the network of the nations.
This is the age when the power transcends the boundaries of the nations.
The issue of this age is not the matter of the international law
or the matter from the humanitarian standpoint, but the matter of the “global
order”. Moreover, they emphasized that war becomes usual conditions for the exceptional
conditions. Furthermore, in the modern war, the power relationship between the
stronger and weaker is obvious. The stronger states the objective that they do
not produce the dead soldiers. The power and war are facing to the new
condition.
What is the relationship between the power and people?
The normal condition of them is found obedience and dependence. People would
not recognize the power as legitimate if they cannot gain the security, the
order, efficiency, proficiency, secure and peace instead. If people do not
recognize the power as legitimate violence, then the power will threat the
individuals who fight resistance, abhorrence, and malignance against the power.
The problem may not be the power itself but be the way of the
power. Anarchism is plausible in theory, although it is not realistic. To seek
for acquiring the power is to obtain the will that makes this predominance
temporally to permanent that is over the generations.
Whether it is fortune or not, there are filled with factors that
can exert it. The capital can not only be accumulated or be taken over, but
also can be augmented. The capital itself is the power in these days. The power
is the tool that allows people to be satisfied with their drive and desire.
People think that it is impossible to live in better conditions without
preserving the power. In addition, people cannot live without being dependent
on the power. Additionally, people even believe that the better society is the
society which people are dependent totally on the power. It might be illusion,
although there is not enough time to realize it as illusion. If people
articulate that, they would be told not to think about it and are told to enjoy
this situation. Seeking for desire and pleasure is recommended by the society
compared with critical thinking.
As noted before this chapter, the most noticeable
characteristics of the power are that it is used as the legitimate violence.
Violence is considered from different aspects. Some philosophers think about it
is the essence of the existence of human beings, and the others think about it
is as holly. Yet, I have questions about the methods of the interpretation of
it. I am not sure that there is universal essence of human beings. Some might
prefer to use or observe violence, the others might not. It can be the matter
of preference or the matter of individual characteristics.
Violence is not only being the means but it also is
objective. If it is means, it can be another means. If it is objective, it
cannot be replaceable. What is the condition that violence is becoming the
objective?
Regardless of the power or violence, power contains
devilishness. The more strengthen the power is the more devilishness is. People
would recognize it as nobleness and holiness. These notions can easily trespass
the judgment of goodness. Human reason must fight against this devilishness.
Moreover, people must notice that the subject is incorporated by the violence
structure and the power.
A large number of
people show their obedience and respect to the power, although they criticize
the putrefaction and unjust of the power. It might be the true attitude toward
it, or it might be a gesture to pursue for another objective. The power knows
the wisdom and a mean spirit of people who obey to it. When people are
controlled by the power and when people are incorporate, the power will strike
people as violence.
No comments:
Post a Comment