Do you think about the concept of power? I have been, a lot lately. And my unfettered curiosity would not let me rest, so I felt compelled to explore the subject. However, as soon as I started to get my feet wet on the matter, I quickly realized that it is densely intricate and deeply subjective. At a minimum, it would take me a lifetime to try to unravel the concept of power, and I only have half left, if am lucky, which I am not willing to dedicate to the subject in the first place. And, I have other interests too, so I decided to settle for what was possible, considering my hazardously busy life and benign laziness.
In expressing my curiosity in the subject of power, I don’t want to give the impression, even remotely, that I am an expert or have done extensive reading on the subject. In fact, I have a series of questions of my own. Does power and authority mean the same thing? If not, can one exist without the other? Are they interchangeable? If not, where does authority end and power begin? Is the relationship between a parent and a child, power based or authority based? I guess that depends on the “cultural context”, because you would have to have some form of absolute power over your child to be able to force them into marriage. What about influence? Is it a form of power too? I hope someone else will feast on these questions and clarify them for me. But for the purpose of this piece, I intend to focus on the three instruments for wielding or enforcing power:
Power is one of those few words we use frequently with seemingly little need to reflect on its meaning, and so it has been for all of history. In addition to kingship and glory, power is associated with God in all the Holy Books – as having the ultimate power. Power is referenced in most of our daily conversations, and not many get through the day without mentioning it. The United States is said to have power and Britain is said to have lost power. Corporations are said to be dangerously powerful, and the multinational ones even more so. The United States used to have industrial power, but they lost that to Germany and Japan. How about China? Russia is showing some military power at the moment in Ukraine in their attempt to annex Crimea. India recently elected a new Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, and power is expected to shift there. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are seen as powerful people. Jonnie Cochran was deemed a powerful lawyer.
The internet is said to be powerful. We should not forget religious leaders. Oh, and a good number of presidents around the world have too much power which allows them to be dictators. What does all this mean? None of these and the countless other references to power is ever thought to need any explanation. Regardless of the context in which the word is used, we just assume the meaning is understood. The frequent use of power has given it such a commonsense meaning and it needs little or no clarification. Webster defines power as “the ability or right to control people or things”. Max Weber, the German sociologist and political scientist (1864 – 1920), who was deeply mesmerized by the intricacy of the subject, settled for a definition close to everyday understanding: power is “the ability to impose one’s will upon the behavior of other persons”. Someone or some group is always trying to impose their will on someone or a group daily, in every aspect of life and everywhere in the world. But exactly how is this will imposed? It is done through Condign, Compensatory and Conditioned power.
Condign power has a prehistoric and well-established relationship to physical punishment, detention under various harsh conditions, inflicting of pain, mutilation, other forms of torture, or even death. This idea is real; all societies recognize the unkind character of such condign punishment and its cruelty, and all have regulations controlling or trying to control its use. For the most part, it’s considered a form of human rights abuse now, and society in general condemns its promiscuous use by a country or a system of government. Entities like Humans Right Watch and Amnesty International were set up for this specific reason. Tiananmen Square, Abu Ghraib and Mile2 come to mind.
The most distinctive quality of condign power is that it’s objective and visible. Condign power threatens the individual with physical or emotion pain harmful enough for them to forgo the pursuits of their own will or preference to avoid it. In other words, submission is won by making the alternative adequately painful. It is a form of quid pro quo for their submission. Those submitting to the will of others are doing so consciously; they have calculated that this is a better course of action for them. For example, inmates in Guantanamo Bay gave up information (true or false) to avoid waterboarding. For most societies, it is considered imperative that murder, rape and other physical assault be prevented, that condign power be used to bring the would-be murderer or rapist firmly into submission to the will of the community on these matters.
These acts, accordingly, lie under a threat of heavy punishment (mostly condign) to curtail them. However, the proper degree in condign punishment is among the most disputed questions in modern society, and the source of intense debate. Does the punishment handed to a murderer or rapist appropriate to the result sought? How about those guilty of treason? What grade of condign punishment is fitting enough not to violate their liberty and dignity? Physical superiority gave men the ability to impose their will on their physically weaker spouse. Husbands originally won the submission or obedience of wives by applying or the threat of physical assault. A schoolmaster traditionally imposed his will by condign punishment; something I can attest to because my dad was once a schoolmaster (njeff rek!). I wonder if “spare the rod and spoil the child” still holds.
Compensatory power is similar to condign power in its distinctive objectivity and visibility quality, but submission is bought instead of won by the threat of inflicting physical punishment. A laborer who works for pay is at a much better place that the slave whose submission to the will of the master is persuaded by the threat of brutal physical punishment. The former gets no compensation and faces the threat of starvation if he refuses to work and the latter gets lashes but never gets fired. The slave has a better job security by far. The difference between slave labor and paid labor is indeed great, but should the change be attributed to economic development or enlightenment.
Compensatory power is the relationship between employer and employee. Employees are rewarded for their submission in the form of a paycheck by employers, and the threat of getting fired and starvation is sufficient for them to submit to their employer’s will. Part of the submission also includes proper and acceptable behavior based on the employer’s guidelines. But employees will not willingly submit to overtime work without overtime pay, thanks to the labor laws we have in place in most societies now. The appropriate gradation of compensatory reward is also among the disputed questions in modern society, and source of strong contention, especially, between the sexes. Why do women get paid less than men for performing the same job? Are the salaries paid to CEOs too excessive?
In addition to the threat of physical assault against women for their submission, no one can doubt the effectiveness of compensatory power, of reward in the form of clothing, jewelry, trips and entertainment. These have long and sufficiently helped men in securing the feminine will. Yep! Ladies, did you hear that? All the gifts, trips and entertainments are intended to buy your submission. What about soldiers whose submissions are won partially by their pay, partially by the threat of condign punishment if they fail to show bravery in the presence of the enemy. In earlier times soldiers who deserted in the face of the enemy were subject to summary execution. Mercenaries on the other hand, are motivated only by compensatory power. People with money are said to have power because they can pay others to summit to their will. Compensatory is considered a more socially desirable way of obtaining submission compared to Condign.
Although Condign and Compensatory power are visible and objective, Condition power, on the other hand, is subjective; neither those exercising it nor those subject to it need to realize that it is being applied. Submission is gained through persuasion and education. This is explicit conditioning. It can be dictated by the culture itself or religion; the submission is considered to be standard, appropriate, or traditionally proper. This is implicit conditioning. With no clear line separating the two; explicit conditioning blends into implicit. Physical strength gave men access to condign power over women and compensatory power helps in securing feminine obedience with masculine will. However, most of male power and female submission is a result of conditioned power.
Female submission to masculine will has virtually relied on belief since ancient times – that such submission is the natural order of things. It is inked in scripture and reinforced at home, and in the schools as the proper role of women in society. Men should love, honor and cherish, and women are to love, honor and obey. Women are prepared from when they are young to be delivered to men down the aisle, and FGM (female genital mutilation) is part of that preparation in some cultures. Despite the physical, psychological and emotional trauma, this cruel practice is performed on more than 125 million girls and women in the 29 countries in Africa and Middle East where FGM is concentrated. The practice is mostly believed to preserve chastity, ensuring desirability, improving fertility, and enhancing sexual pleasure for men. Go figure!
Nonetheless, all throughout history, you will find an occasionally astonishing or eccentric woman who, by personality or sexual competence, will manage to impose her will on men, community or government. Marilyn Monroe was such a woman (Happy Birthday Mr. President!). Let’s not forget Cleopatra who, as pharaoh, consummated a liaison with Julius Caesar that solidified her grip on the throne. As with the assertion of male dominance, the power of belief is paramount in other aspects of conditioned power. The old chestnut of Gambia’s president possessing the ability to cure AIDS is part of conditioned power meant to mystify him. The power of religion is overwhelmingly driven by belief – belief that it is divine, and supported by the threat of condign punishment both in the present and the hereafter. Conditioned power is the product of a range from objective, persuasion and education.
Condign, compensatory and conditioned power, to an unfortunate extent is abundantly available to presidents in much of the present-day world to help them stay in power. They have the ability to use condign power to confine, torture and kill those who oppose their will. Their access to state funds allows them to use compensatory power to buy the support and will of the people. And conditioned power, to a large degree, helps create belief – belief that leaders know what’s best for the people and should never be questioned. In an effort to emancipate women from male domination, various forms of condign masculine power has been challenged, like the right of husbands to inflict physical and mental punishment on their spouses to subdue them, by the women’s movement. There has been a major push to mitigate the compensatory power imposed by men through education and the development of employment opportunities for women outside the home, and to end the discriminatory practices that keep women in subordinate jobs to get them out of Mitt Romney’s binder. But how much is being done to counter conditioned power, I wonder? The belief of female submission is still being reiterated as traditional values in the home, family, community and religion. And in most cases, women are full participants.
