- Political power
Political power ("
imperium" in Latin) is a type of power held by a group in a societywhich allows administration of some or all of public resources, including labour, and wealth. There are many ways to obtain possession of such power. At the nation-state level political legitimacyfor political power is held by the representatives of national sovereignty. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however the extent to which a person (such as Joseph Kony, Subcomandante Marcos, or Russell Means) or group such as an insurgency, terrorist group, or multinational corporationpossesses 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 stateand 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 [I.C. MacMillan (1978) Strategy Formulation: political concepts, St Paul, MN, West Publishing;] 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
Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieuclaimed that without following a principle of containing and balancing legislative, executive and judiciarypowers, 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 powersprinciple.
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 (or force projection) is a term used in military and
political scienceto refer to the capacity of a stateto implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory. The United StatesDepartment 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. [http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/data/p/04138.html]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 powerassets (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 powerassets (tanks, soldiers, aircraft, naval vessels, etc.), the developing theory of soft powernotes 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 Oceanearthquake 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 deterrenton 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 Lukesadded 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 kingmakeris not the king.
It is said democracy is the best method of informing those entrusted with authority.Fact|date=August 2007 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-modernismhas 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 ministerto a homeless person, played their role within the power structure of society. Jürgen Habermasopposed himself to Foucault's conception of discourseas a battlefield for power relations, arguing that it should be possible to achieve consensuson the fundamentals rules of discourse, in order to establish a transparent and democratic dialogue. Thenceforth, he argued against Foucault and Louis Althusserthat power was not immanent to discourse, and that philosophy could be completely distinguished from ideology.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.