These creative individualities, in the domain of the State and Market, resist the Empire Matrix with equal innovativeness and passion as activists in Civil Society.
Finding these individualities in the State and Market, means, above all, letting go of deep-seated biases which dictate to the activist that all people in the State and Market are pawns of the Empire Matrix. Not only does this almost religious belief have no bearing with reality. It predisposes Civil Society to be totally unable to truly create a new society, a new world.
For to advance a world different from the Empire Matrix, means to mobilize all equally concerned individuals, in all domains of society, to do their part in resisting the Empire Matrix and creating a different world where they are. When the strategic tri-sectoral partnerships of advanced threefolding are set in motion, then Civil Society is able to expand the zones of liberation in the domains of culture, polity and the economy that were once under the control of the Empire Matrix.
Then threefolding substance, examples of which we discussed above, can enter more fully and help in the process of reconstructing society and a new global civilization. Advanced threefolding is also the means to an important social innovation of our times, that is, societal revolution, the most dangerous nemesis of the Empire Matrix.
Systemic Societal Revolution versus the Empire Matrix. Empire increases the death process of Nation States. It turns nation states from being their own self-organizing societal entities into vassals and tributaries of the Empire Matrix. A nation state that is compromised can no longer protect its citizens from the Empire Matrix. State-centered counter approaches are historically bankrupt and will not work. Only peaceful societal revolution will do the job. Societal revolution mobilizes all realms of society, not just the state, towards a new mode of existence that can resist Empire.
Social threefolding, just by its very nature—awareness of and advocate of the involvement of all realms—is the most potent means to and form of societal revolution. All Empires are violent and destructive systemic societal revolutions. They fuse all realms into one— into the almighty and all powerful Society that dictates what all realms of society will do, what all citizens in those different realms will do. Social threefolding is equally about systemic societal revolution, only of a different kind.
Instead of unsustainable coercion and domination, it advocates comprehensive sustainable development, achievable only with the involvement of all spheres of society. A brief look at the history of the decline of Empires can also point to the power of societal revolution advanced through threefolding. Michael Mann, author of The Sources of Social Power , documents how alternative networks of social power defeated past Empires.
Mann identifies four sources of social power: economic, political, military, and ideological.
In threefolding language, this is economic power, political power including military and cultural power including ideological. The dynamics between State and Society already found earlier expression in the dynamics between Empire and aristocracy. Empire centralizes power. Aristocracy, as compared to Empire, diffuses power and relies on decentralized networks of power. In other words, social power that has been effective against Empire is the networking of cultural, economic, and political power. This shows the potential of strategic threefolding partnerships in advancing and attaining societal revolution.
We have carefully drafted the last paragraph to emphasize a key point to hold in mind in this historical comparison. Social threefolding is a modern-day phenomena deeply associated with the two polar trends of globalization and individuation, trends absent in the social conditions of past Empires. Nonetheless, the historical reference is useful because it demonstrates that the mobilization of networks of cultural, political and economic power can defeat empires. It is now appropriate to bring to consciousness an assumption underlying this discussion of third generation strategies as a potent antidote to the Empire Matrix.
Third generation strategies require a new mode of being and acting for Civil Society. First and most obvious is that civil society groups cannot remain splintered and in isolation from each other. The State is consolidated. The Market is also quite organized. Civil Society often borders at the edge of anarchy. But societal revolution requires that civil society organizations must reach a stage of networking and cooperation so as to be able to mobilize and act in unison at the national and global levels.
With national civil society movements, societal revolution will remain an empty dream while the Empire Matrix makes significant strides in consolidating its control of the nation states of the world. As we shall see below, civil society also has to improve its global networking to address the geopolitical maneuverings of the Empire Matrix. There is a second and more subtle aspect to this demand for a new mode of being and acting in civil society.
This is the aspect of reflexivity in civil society. The struggle against the Empire Matrix is, among others, the struggle for the freedom of the human spirit. To remain unreflective in this struggle, means essentially to have no inwardly secure basis to create freedom and liberation in the world. Reflexivity is already required in less advanced stages of social threefolding. But in the arena of societal revolution, the absence of authentic and honest reflexivity can only mean the distortion or abortion of societal revolution.
One area requiring reflexive capacities and engagement is the way civil society self-constitutes and organizes itself. Civil Society must resist the temptation of coordinating its forces by conventional organizational patterns, that is, by centralism. Instead civil society needs to pursue flexible social forms which allow diverse new forms of organization to emerge among the thousands of individuals and institutions of civil society. This means, among others, maintaining network relations with all independently organized groups that pursue their own unique form of struggle against the Empire Matrix.
This, in turn, necessitates active tolerance and understanding within Civil Society of different tactics and strategies against the Empire Matrix. For example, some situations call for resistance. Civil Society should constitute itself in such a way that it can understand and equally support who should do one or the other approach, especially if objective conditions require such a diversity in approaches.
To achieve this, Civil Society needs to encourage new forms of authentic dialogues within its formation. Civil Society needs real dialogue not just on social forms and approaches adapted to human dignity. In addition, Civil Society needs to cultivate active tolerance, warmth and attention to others by the very way in which it carries on these dialogues. Active appreciation of diversity of social forms and approaches, however, does not mean composing a potpourri of everything desirable.
Rather it means working seriously towards the development of new thinking and approaches that will work given the real concrete needs in social life. Many hope that a new world might emerge from its critique of the old world. But even more are realizing that Civil Society needs to go beyond critique to the creative process of authentic social innovation. Reflexivity, when understood cognitively and epistemologically, is at core a spiritual process. This means that Civil Society will need to find a creative way to hold together, in creative tension, the traditional and mutual prejudices and opposition among those who hold a more spiritual approach to change versus those who rely purely on social means to counter the Empire Matrix.
Civil Society will need to see that social and spiritual engagements are not opposites, but mutually reinforcing perspectives of the same reality. Once the various third generation approaches are underway, threefolding begins to dismantle the structural violence associated with the Empire Matrix. Empire promotes and practices structural violence.
Threefolding, in its advocacy for strategic, authentic cooperation, where appropriate, is the systemic non-violent antidote to Empire Matrix. Gandhi advocated non-violent resistance. But he even placed greater importance on creating the alternative world we all want in our daily activities. He continuously argued that we needed to embody the change that we are fighting for in the world. In addition, conscious threefolding enables proponents to actually advance their alternatives, in a peaceful and non-violent manner, into the other realms of society.
And finally, when cohesive national civil society formations arise, advanced threefolding triggers societal revolution and starts to guide societal evolution without a violent capture of state power. There is another way to understand why threefolding makes the historically effective, non-violent approaches of Gandhi against Empire, even more strategic and comprehensive.
Similarly, the Committee of Correspondence was a form of non-violent societal revolution before the armed conflict of the American Revolution broke out. In a certain sense, Gandhi wanted to incarnate compassion and love in the social system. Social threefolding has the capability of doing just this, especially with its dialogic approach where catharsis in social processes is achieved through intentional listening and profound respect for the views and perspectives of the Other. There is a further aspect to this. Imposition is at the heart of the Empire Matrix.
All spheres are collapsed under its dominant control. The Empire Matrix becomes the Society. In contrast, dialogue and associational processes are at the heart of conscious and advanced social threefolding. Integration that is achieved by Empire through forced and dominated fusion, is achieved in threefolding through dialogue and free association. Threefolding practice in itself thus produces an immunization process against the culture and practices of the Empire Matrix, thereby already loosening the hold of Empire Matrix.
When there is profound dialogue, genuine strategic partnerships can develop, even among parties of very different backgrounds, practices, and inclinations. Partnerships are important in a complex world and are really another form of non-violence in practice. The Empire Matrix achieves this through coercion, through a hierarchical structure of vassal and tributary states.
Threefolding achieves this through strategic partnerships. The Empire Matrix is weakened by the proliferation of strategic partnerships innate in conscious and advanced threefolding. Strategic partnerships isolate those sectors in business and government that inwardly have no inner connection to the Empire Matrix. This is the reason why resistance cannot always be the strategic approach in all circumstances.
Furthermore, threefolding enables civil society to link with important progressive movements in the economic and political domain that also advance a complementary concept of social threefolding and societal transformation. In the business world, the societal learning movement has ideas and approaches convergent with social threefolding. In the domain of government, tri-sectoral policy approaches also converge with certain aspects of conscious threefolding. In the Empire, most businesses are fused with the State. Threefolding emphasizes and encourages the independent logic of the Market, constrained only by the appropriate boundaries of State and Civil Society.
In effect, the framework of threefolding itself already produces a tendency to break apart the unhealthy collusion of the State and the Market as well as the State and institutions of Culture. Perhaps one of the most powerful cases for the importance of threefolding to resist and transform Empire is that the Empire itself, is the distorted image of social threefolding.
One makes a remarkable observation. All the key elements of the Bush Doctrine are distortions of the healthy impulses that animate social threefolding. This can only mean two things. First, on the basis evolutionary movement of social forms discussed earlier, social threefolding is the next healthy stage for human civilization. The distortion of the Bush Doctrine on Empire is that it hopes to divert the emergence of threefolding as the next stage in human social evolution.
Second, this can only mean that threefolding is a powerful antidote to Empire, since the very substance of Empire is a distorted derivative of social threefolding. Let us now examine how the Bush Doctrine on Empire is a distortion of social threefolding. Distinct American Internationalism. As will be seen shortly, this distinct U. In brief, social threefolding would like to see the autonomous cultural realms of the different nation states of the world establish their own relationships on the basis of the inherent requirements of culture.
That this is possible has already been done in the realms of both the Polity the United Nations, for example and in the realm of the Economy the World Trade Organization. The reference here to the WTO is NOT a support of the WTO, but to show that it is possible to establish differentiated economic arrangements at the global basis for example, fair and sustainable trade.
On the other hand, the Empire has a simple approach to rule over the potential of conscious, just and associative global relationships that social threefolding would wish. Rogue States. Empire labels other countries as rogue states. Social threefolding practices strategic appreciation of the value of the differences in culture among countries and, within certain limits, the different approaches to governance and economic management. Threefolding, for example, does not support the repression of citizens of nation states.
Empire ignores legitimate global bodies like the United Nations and mobilizes vassal and tributary nation states to support its imperial ambitions. Social threefolding advances strategic alliances that encompasses all spheres of society in nation states and among nation states, and not just of vassal, tributary and corrupt States pretending to represent their whole society.
Systemic Societal Approach. The Empire has detailed plans to mobilize cultural, economic, and political power to achieve global hegemony. Social threefolding advocates non-violent societal revolution where social cohesion is gained through voluntary, conscious agreement and consent of all spheres of society towards comprehensive sustainable development. Network of Military Bases. These military installations are essential in advancing the dreams of Empire. Suppression of Military Competition. Empire also aims to achieve its decadent mission by ensuring that it will have no military rivals.
Its network of military bases is only one component of its overall plan for securing military superiority around the world. Social threefolding relies on the spiritual superiority of Truth, Compassion, and Morality to mobilize the hearts and minds of millions around the world, not only to resist Empire, but to create a better world. Suppression of Dissent. Empire seeks to achieve its goals through lies, deceit, and force. Social threefolding want to achieve a better world through truth, persuasion, dialogue, and strategic partnerships. The Empire makes a special effort to advance psychological and propaganda warfare through its control of the media and other sources of information dissemination.
Social threefolding champions the spiritual freedom of the cultural sphere of societies to make citizens immune to disinformation and manipulation and to advance its purposes through information and education. Time Horizon. Even in the dimension of time, the Empire mirrors social threefolding.
The time horizon of Empire is strategic and all encompassing, leaving very little to chance. Its systemic societal approach has built in long-term, strategic perspectives in many of its programs. Social threefolding champions the strategic approach even as it appreciates the short-term tactical impact of demonstrations and certain kinds of alternatives. Empire has geopolitical imperatives in the different regions of the world.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, in his book, The Grand Chessboard , has clearly laid out what this geopolitical imperative is. It is therefore important for global civil society to begin thinking strategically in a geo-strategic sense. The Empire has regional plans in motion. These regional plans contextualize what happens at the level of the nation state. Global civil society has to have an appropriate response, instead of just moving from one global demonstration to another, even if the importance of such a mobilization is appreciated.
To achieve this level of mobilization, civil society, alone or in partnership with strategic allies in the state or market, has to articulate a clear vision of the task of the different regions of the world. In a deep sense, it will need to address the identity question of a nation state or regional grouping of nation states. To a great extent, the Empire is the different regions of the world to find their identity.
If Europe, for example had a very strong vision of what it wants for itself and its role in the world, then the covert and overt persuasions and pressures from the U. Empire will have very little effect. Failing this, Europe will then be just another appendage to the US Empire. This united sense of direction and purpose, unfortunately, is presently not the case. On the one hand, France , Germany , Netherlands , and the Scandinavian countries have different aspirations and perspectives on the U. So what is the last remaining force questioning the geopolitical ambitions of Empire?
That force is in Global Civil Society, in the different civil society formations of the different countries around the world. The resistance will be coming from the autonomous spiritual-cultural life of countries, especially the institutions of civil society active in culture. So, in a struggle like this, social threefolding is relevant in two ways. First, through de facto threefolding, as a beginning, civil society frees cultural life to enable it to take up the question of identity. Second, using approaches crucial in conscious and advanced threefolding, civil society, through tri-sectoral processes and societal revolution, if necessary, can have this identity operative at the level of the nation state and the region.
In many social situations, this often results in the conflict between the individual and the community. But this is precisely where the strength of the threefolding approach lies. It is able to balance increasing individuation and social cohesion, at the same time. It encourages individual freedom and spiritual innovation in the cultural sphere while, at the same time, encouraging a greater sense of community to prevail in the two other realms, especially the economic. It is this healthy synthesis that Empire wants precisely to destroy.
Its doctrine of neo-economic liberalism, in fact, is a distortion of this healing and balanced approach of social threefolding. Empire encourages egoism in the economic realm, where increasing solidarity is the actual operative principle. There is also a very powerful social dynamic which results from this increasing process of individuation in humanity. With spiritual individuation comes the dawning of spiritual consciousness and freedom with a search for community at the same time.
Institutions in society that are contrary to this, especially those of Empire Matrix, are experienced as an alien body inside the consciousness of the individual.
The Precarization Effect | SpringerLink
The individual will reject irrelevant social forms and technologies and search for new meaning and new ways for achieving human potential and for humanity to relate together. In practical social terms, this process results in the alienation of the individual from traditional, top-down, violent, dominating, power-hunger and wealth-greedy society.
They rebel, re-frame their social experience, and create new social movements in the process. The net result is the flourishing of activism that we see around the world today. The institutions of modernity, especially of the Empire Matrix, are alien to the emerging spirit of millions of individuals around the world. Social threefolding is intimately connected with individuation and the necessary alienation of individuals from structures in society that are authoritarian and destructive in nature, including totalitarian tendencies in the State and the Market and within Civil Society itself—especially universities that generate materialism in all its forms.
This alienation produces the human substance of Civil Society, thereby beginning the de facto threefolding process with the increasing freedom of the cultural life from its own imperfections and the dictates of the State and the Market, especially those of Empire Matrix. This whole complex of process connected with individuation and social threefolding is therefore the enemy of Empire. Empire seeks to stop this process of individuation, which is the Achilles Heel of Empire.
However, social threefolding is substantively grounded on this process of individuation of humanity and therefore enhances it through the conscious differentiation of the three realms of society, freeing culture to nurture this process of individuation and all its fateful consequences for Empire and the future of Humanity. The first is the growing global interconnection of humans and their societies. Economics primarily drives this process but it affects all aspects of life. The second is the growing emancipation of the individual from racial, tribal, ethnic, linguistic, gender, national and other forms of group conditioning and constraints.
This is the process of individualization or individuation, also broadly understood.
Revolution and the growth of industrial society, 1789–1914
Understood more profoundly as a polarity, these two trends can be harmonized to create a better world. The diversity inherent in the individuation process can be encouraged to come together in ways that vitalize social life, leading it away from chaos. However, just at this important juncture in history, a perversion of these two powerful tendencies and a malign integration of them are rapidly emerging in the world.
This integration promises, not to bless the world, but to curse it with all kinds of sufferings. Economic Globalization In the mids, the world saw the creation of the most powerful global economic institution of all times, the creation of the World Trade Organization WTO. In the wake of the WTO, the economic and social fate of many nations crumbled. Clash of Civilizations In Samuel P. Unilateralism U. And, if they see an egotistic advantage for them in a global treaty, then they plot either of two options. They join a treaty if they think they can use this treaty to their full advantage.
Senate, as really an agreement among the Quad—the U. Mutation of U. Unilateralism to U. Empire Recently, the U. Empire has emerged and is starting to integrate these three broad societal tendencies into a new and dangerous kind of globalization, that of Empire. Empire would harness these economic, political and cultural developments to create a new world order based on domination and control.
The unprovoked war on Iraq and, in this context, the erosion of the role of the UN, is a vivid illustration that we have crossed the threshold into a very different world. Briefly, the U. In the wake of its emergence as a third global power, global civil society is de facto threefolding societies where it is active. Threefolding refers to the active presence and activity of the three powers - State, Market and Civil Society, in determining the future of societies. In de facto threefolding, the interaction among the three societal powers is mostly antagonistic of each other, especially between Civil Society versus the State and Market.
States want to achieve this through propaganda and censorship of ideas. Civil society needs a cognition of globalization beyond the horizon of neo-liberal understanding, which reflects the ruling economic interests. Globalization asks for a holistic approach in thinking. In the peace movement and the movement for a more just form of globalization, we discern a kind of feeling, an arising sense, for the necessity of such a holistic approach.
He denies that there is a question of the need for perestroika also for the western countries. Does the West have to fight the rest? B ut why should the rest of the world be impressed by this given state of the West? It hinders the appreciation that freedom, equality and solidarity, among others, are values shared by modern humanity all over the world. Reframing the Understanding of Universality Within Diversity The question of culture cannot be answered well in terms of nationalism, the forces of which can no longer be the starting point, as they tend to produce incompatibilities.
Healthy globalisation requires the sense for the whole of humanity while, at the same time, valuing the unique individuation process of each human being. The meaning of the human rights is not the demand for the greatest happiness of the largest number of people. Human rights, instead, is based on the concept that nobody can really be happy as long as one single human being is sentenced by prevailing social conditions to be in misery.
Globalization is abolishing the old geographical frontiers between cultural areas. Every culture now has the possibility to be present worldwide. It is against the stream of history and the process of individuation if we try artificially to re-establish old cultural frontiers in situations where human beings no longer live within tribal consciousness.
The state with its top down principle, also in the form of majority rule, cannot be the sovereign or domain of culture. The geopolitical treatment of cultural questions can only lead into catastrophes today. Cultural questions have to be separated clearly from questions of state power. This is an abuse of globalization which has the potential to build new social forms around the unique insights, talents, and social sensibility that is starting to emerge among individuals around the world.
Reframing Elite Economic Globalization Dealing with elite forms, including corporate, globalization, of course, means dramatic action. Reframing U. Unilateralism The cornerstone for addressing the problem of U. Human rights are not relative to the cultural context. Human rights are individual, and at the same time, global and universal. Within the political sphere we also have to respect the principle of subsidiarity and of grassroots democracy. This means, therefore, that we need encourage multilateral arrangements within and among states and not bureaucratic institutions of a world government.
What we do not need is the reestablishment of law-making by the imperial elite and arbitrary decision-making by one superpower at the global level. Instead we need global governance by means of social threefolding processes and not by centralized structures. We have to allow the cultural, economic and political spheres to develop in accordance with their specific needs. This means global networking of cultural initiatives and institutions, a strong sector of political institutions safeguarding human rights and the environment and economic networking within the context of ecological and social responsibility.
The coordination between the three spheres of society should be achieved through bottom up approaches including strategic tri-sectoral partnerships. Reframing Civil Society Itself We have seen that, in the discussion of globalization and the Empire Matrix, it is essential not only to look at peoples, states and markets. First Generation Mobilization Strategy: Resistance The first area of struggle is the self-defence of cultural life against the cannibalism of economic and political powers against culture.
Second Generation Mobilization Strategies: Alternatives Cultural spaces which are defended then become starting points for the actual implementation of a new vision of the world. Tri-sectoral Partnerships One of the embryonic forms of the new social form of cooperation that is finding widespread acceptance is tri-sectoral partnerships. Authentic Social Threefolding Dynamics When tri-sectoral partnerships become more strategic, then authentic or advanced threefolding can start to function.
Reflexive National and Global Civil Society Movements It is now appropriate to bring to consciousness an assumption underlying this discussion of third generation strategies as a potent antidote to the Empire Matrix. The authors have reworked the essay to make it available for the GN3 website www.
He is author of many publications including the book, Shaping Globalization: Civil Society, Cultural Power, and Threefolding , translated in 9 languages and most recently, the Awardee of the Right Livelihood Award. In this respect it is interesting to note that many nomadic or hunter-gather societies developed mechanisms that specifically prevent formal, enduring state organizations from developing. The polity function is organized in a manner that actively fends off the formation of a permanent state institution Clastres A number of very important aspects of power disappear from view by a kind of sleight of hand when sociologists attempt to take this viewpoint.
One dominant functionalist framework for understanding why the state exists is pluralist theory. In pluralist theory, society is made up of numerous competing interest groups—capital, labour, religious fundamentalists, feminists, gays, small business, homeless people, taxpayers, elderly, military, pacifists, etc. In democratic societies, power and resources are widely distributed, albeit unevenly, so no one group can attain the power to permanently dominate the entire society.
Therefore, the state or government has to act as a neutral mediator to negotiate, reconcile, balance, find compromise, or decide among the divergent interests. From the point of view of the system, it maintains equilibrium between competing interests so that the functions of social integration and collective goal attainment can be accomplished. In this model, the state is an autonomous institution that acts on behalf of society as a whole. It is independent of any particular interest group. On one hand, the pluralist model seems to conform to commonsense understandings of democracy.
Sometimes one group wins, sometimes another. Usually there are compromises. However, critics of pluralist theory note that what disappears from an analysis that attempts to take the neutral point of view of the system and its functions is, firstly, the fact that the system itself is not disinterested—it is structured to maintain inequality; secondly, that some competing interests are not reconcilable or balanceable—they are fundamentally antagonistic; and, thirdly, that politics is not the same as administration or government—it is in essence disruptive of systems and equilibrium.
Parsons writes,. He suggests that an alternative normative order is not simply the product of a competing social interest that might be balanced with others, but a revolutionary threat to the entire system. The question of why the state exists has been answered in a variety of different ways by critical sociologists. In the Marxist tradition, the power of the state is principally understood as a means by which the economic power of capital is exercised and maintained.
The state itself is in many respects subservient to the interests of capital. In the analysis of Nicos Poulantzas , the state performs a key role in maintaining the integration of capitalist society, which is otherwise threatened by class conflict and even conflict within the capitalist class itself. Poulantzas emphasizes that the state is not under the direct control of the capitalist class however. He is not describing a conspiracy theory.
A second type of critical sociology is feminism. One of the central organizational forums in the development of second-wave feminism in Canada was the formation of Status of Women committees that pressed the Lester Pearson government in the s to establish the Royal Commission on the Status of Women In this case, the state is regarded as an institution that can be used to transform gender relations through legislation on sexual equality, maternity leave, access to birth control, reproductive rights, child care, etc.
The consciousness raising around the Royal Commission was also a pivotal event in which the private troubles of women were collectively recognized as public issues of social structure. This is not an accidental circumstance. MacKinnon argues, for example, that state power is in crucial respects sexual power, a power that institutionalizes male domination by enforcing the assumptions and social requirements of heterosexuality.
While instances of overt male sexual abuse and coercion like rape, incest, sexual harassment, child pornography, and procurement for prostitution are subject to prosecution, this is only to protect the underlying male sexual dominance and female subordination of heterosexual relationships. A third critical sociological perspective on the state can be found in the work of Michel Foucault who argues that the idea of the state is an abstraction that conceals a far more widespread and pernicious operation of power. The challenge to power must not be addressed towards the state, Foucault argues, but to the local sites, practices, relationships, discourses, and institutions where the effects of power are directly experienced.
Other sociologists study government and power by relying on the framework of symbolic interactionism, which is grounded in the works of Max Weber and George H. Only on the basis of the meanings attributed to politics can coherent political courses of action and behaviour be undertaken individually or collectively.
Symbolic interactionism, as it pertains to government, therefore focuses its attention on figures, emblems, or individuals that represent power and authority. Many diverse entities in larger society can be considered symbolic: trees, doves, wedding rings. The symbolic nature of political discourses and political emblems are of course open to manipulation, which is often referred to as image politics. One side of this, as we have seen, is their attention to the ongoing creation of symbols that give meaning to political life and activity.
But as micro-sociologists, they are also interested in the face-to-face aspects of politics. In reality, much of politics consists of face-to-face backroom meetings and lobbyist efforts. What the public often sees is the front stage of politics that is sanitized by the media through gatekeeping. Symbolic interactionists are most interested in the meaningful interaction between the small groups who make decisions, or in the case of some recent parliamentary committees, who demonstrate the inability to interact meaningfully.
The heart of politics is the result of small-scale exchanges between individuals and small groups over periods of time. The long-standing complaint of increasing incivility in House of Commons debates, question period, and committee work points to the way that give-and-take interactions between parliamentarians have been severely curtailed in recent years Samara These interactions are essential for creating mutual understanding and consensus as well as producing new meanings and perspectives that individuals use to make sure there are future interactions. To the degree that they break down or communication becomes dysfunctional, the elementary components that enable the legislative function of government to perform its activity independent of direct control by the Office of the Prime Minister i.
Politicians, political parties, and other political actors are also motivated to claim symbolic meanings for themselves or their issues. This practice of calculated symbolization through which political actors attempt to control or manipulate the impressions they make on the public is known as image management or image branding. Erving Goffman described the basic processes of image management in the context of small scale, face-to-face settings. It is by no means certain that the group will accept the face the individual puts forward, however.
On the political stage, especially in the age of mass-mediated interactions, image management and party branding are subject to sophisticated controls, calculations, and communications strategies. As Goffman points out with respect to face-to-face interactions, however, it is by no means certain that the public or the news media will accept these claims.
Critics point to the way the focus on image in politics replaces political substance with superficial style. Using image to present a political message is seen as a lower, even fraudulent form of political rhetoric. Symbolic interactionists would note however that the ability to attribute persuasive meaning to political claims is a communicative process that operates at multiple levels.
Determining what is and what is not a substantial issue is a crucial component of political communication. So, do image politics, image management, and image events necessarily make democratic will formation less substantial and less issues oriented? Power and Authority Sociologists examine government and politics in terms of their impact on individuals and larger social systems. Forms of domination occur when the give and take between these two types of power become fixed into permanent hierarchies. Modern states are institutions that organize relationships or power and domination according to the principle of sovereignty.
Authority is influence that is predicated on perceived legitimacy. Max Weber studied power and authority, differentiating between the two concepts and formulating a system for classifying types of authority: traditional, rational-legal, and charismatic. Democratic Will Formation Nations are governed by different political systems, including monarchies, oligarchies, dictatorships, and democracies. Democracies are based on the principle of rule by the people, although how democratic will formation is achieved and implemented has changed from the original direct democracy of the Greeks to modern forms of representative democracy.
Three components are central to the understanding of democratic societies: the institutions of democracy, the internalized sense of citizenship, and the public sphere. Sociologists model the process of democratic will formation and political party competition by examining social factors that affect political demand and political supply.
The challenges to state authority have intensified in recent years, leading to the observation that states of exception have become the norm. Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power Sociologists use frameworks to gain perspective on data and observations related to the study of power and government. Power and Authority 1.
Democratic Will Formation 7. Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power Which concept corresponds best to the functionalist analysis of the state? Power and Authority Want to learn more about sociologists at work in the real world? They argue that democracy is becoming more oriented toward serving the rich than the general population. Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power Functionalism is a complex philosophical theory that pertains to a variety of disciplines beyond sociology.
Anarchists have had one of the most thorough critiques of power and the state but their arguments have largely been misunderstood. Introduction to Government and Politics Huntington, Samuel. Political Order in Changing Societies. Lyall, Sarah. Weber, Max. Power and Authority Acton, Lord. Essays on Freedom and Power. In Jonathan Barnes ed. Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Eisenberg, Andrew. Foucault, Michel. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow ed. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hobbes, Thomas. London: John Bohn. Pollock, John. United Nations. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A. Henderson and T. New York: Oxford University Press. Zuckerman, Ethan. May 6. Democratic Will Formation Bakunin, Mikhail. Bakunin on Anarchy. NY: Vintage Books. CBC Radio.
July Esenwein, George. New Dictionary of the History of Ideas. New York: Charles Scribners. Forrest, William. The Emergence of Greek Democracy. London: World University Press. Cambridge: MIT Press. Inglehart, Ronald. Kitschelt, Herbert. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Milan, Anne. Statistics Canada — Catalogue No. Ogmundson, Richard. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan. Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph. Oakland, CA. Chomsky, Noam and Edward Herman. Boston: South End Press. Chomsky, Noam. Dyer, Gwynne. Canada in the Great Power Game Toronto: Random House Canada.
Galloway, Gloria. Geyer, Michael. The Militarization of the Western World. Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. NY: Penguin Press. Schmitt, Carl. Tepperman, Lorne. Don Mills: Oxford University Press. Walker, RBJ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zizek, Slavoj. Do we have an enemy? Pp New York: Zone Books. Delucca, Kevin. NY: Routledge. NY: Pantheon Books.
NY: Vintage. Gill, Ian. Goffman, Erving. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
MacKinnon, Catherine. Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. Marx, Karl and Friederich Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Newman, Peter. June: 42, Panitch, Leo. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Parsons, Talcott. Classical Sociological Theory. Malden, Ma. Poulantzas, Nicos. Political Power and Social Classes. London: New Left Books. Rebick, Judy. Toronto: Penguin Canada. April Smith, Jennifer. April 4. Thomas, Gregory. Figure Acropolis in Athens by Adam L. Skip to content Increase Font Size. Learning Objectives Power and Authority Define and differentiate between government, power, and authority Identify and describe the three types of authority The De-Centring of the State: Terrorism, War, Empire, and Political Exceptionalism Identify and describe factors of political exception that affect contemporary political life Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power Understand how functionalists, critical sociologists, and symbolic interactionists view government and politics.
Is the staging of image events a legitimate tactic in contemporary politics? Section Quiz Authority involves intimidation. Authority is more subtle than power. Authority is based on the perceived legitimacy of the individual in power. Authority is inherited, but power is seized by military force.
Which of the following types of authority does not reside primarily in a leader? Dictatorial Traditional Charismatic Rational-legal 3. The exercise of power by the state The strategies some use to direct the behaviour and actions of others The institutionalization of legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the state The means by which permanent hierarchies are established and enforced 4.
Traditional Charismatic Rational-legal Illegitimate 5. Barbers Money Charisma Democratic debate Rule by individuals and rule by MPs Rule by the people and rule by the oligarchs Rule through referenda and rule through proportional representation Rule through direct action political protests and rule through petitions and letter-writing campaigns 9. Holding a Canadian passport Formal membership in a political community An internalized sense of individual dignity, rights, and freedom All of the above None of the above The way the democratic system responds to economic market forces Social factors that affect the distribution of political opinion and the ability of political actors to satisfy political opinion The problem of excessive democracy and the inability of political leaders to meet unrealistic democratic demands The natural limits on public expenditures determined by the tax base of a nation Higher-than-average non-voting political behaviours Higher-than-average voting turnouts Lower-than-average consumption of news and current events Higher-than-average concern with postmaterialist issues Which statement best expresses the shift to postmaterialism?
People are more concerned today with Buddhist-inspired lifestyles than with consumerism. People are more concerned today with Green politics than with social conservatism. People are more concerned today with the quality-of-life issues than with economic growth and security. People are more concerned today with lowering taxes than with the decline of the welfare state. The use of tear gas to suppress public looting The use of violence by non-state actors to achieve political ends The use of secretive security agencies to assassinate leaders of foreign governments The indiscriminate destruction of civilian property to attain military objectives Greatest good for the greatest number Goal attainment Power Symbols of authority Political supply and demand Pluralism The needs of capital Proletarian revolution They can only occur in a representative democracy.
Maintaining law and order Meeting social needs Equally distributing resources Planning and directing society The state is a means of managing the affairs of the bourgeoisie. The state is made up of meaningful interactions of small groups of people. The state is made up of meaningful interactions of small groups of men. The state is a means of attaining societal goals.
Short Answer Power and Authority In what ways is government exercised outside of the context of state-citizen relationships? What compels people to follow governmental direction in these situations? Explain why leaders as divergent as Hitler and Jesus Christ are both categorized as charismatic authorities. Charismatic leaders are among the most fascinating figures in history. Select a charismatic leader that you wish to learn more about, and conduct online research to find out more about this individual.
Democratic Will Formation Do you feel that Canada is a true democracy? Why or why not? Would you characterize your main political concerns as materialist or postmaterialist? What sociological factors do you think will influence the political preference formation in the next federal election? To which specific groups or classes do the federal parties address their platforms? What might lead an individual to vote for a political party that does not represent the traditional concerns of their socioeconomic group in society?
What types of conflict characterize the world today? In what ways has the sovereignty of the state been undermined during the period of globalization? In what ways have the activities of supranational agencies, economic agreements, and military alliances been responsible for the decline of sovereignty?
Does it makes sense to describe this process as a new global empire? Why do you think this was popular in ?
What is Kobo Super Points?
Would it be popular today under similar circumstances? What happened to the War Measures Act? Theoretical Perspectives on Government and Power How would functionalists criticize critical sociology and symbolic interactionism, and vice versa? What is the significance of the different analyses of the state by Marxists, feminists, and Foucaultians? Work and the Economy. Share This Book.