Social Power

Social Power

“The ability or right to control people or events…”[1]

When we talk about power, we should point out the level of the society that we are analyzing or studying. Social power is under the political structure of each society, drawing all the interactions not only in the individual levels but also in the groups’ ones. That means that we may refer to “nature of power” in different levels of the society.
Each theorist refers to the term of “power” in a particular manner. Thus, there is a diverse spectrum of the concepts among the different theories such as: functionalism, theory of conflict, structuralism, materialism, etc. However, as is pointed out by Woodman, W.:

“…power is one with which we all deal daily and which goes as far as it does to shape the nature of human life” [2]

Social power crosses all the societal structures, establishing different relations among the members of societies. The political relationships among individual, groups, communities, and societies, are based on the levels of powers which determine the individual levels of participation, decisions, freedom, among other elements. From my perspective, some of the most important elements are: ideology, consciousness, and knowledge. From Marx’s view, those aspects (ideology, consciousness, and knowledge) are annulled by the economic system. The capitalism and the political powers which support that economic system tend to delete labor awareness and knowledge. That process of “discouraging of power” is facilitated by the role not only by the capital or private interests, but also by the public institutions which reinforce the ideological consensus of the highest levels of power (Douglas, M, 1986)[3] (That concept is also described by Luckás, G (1968) in “History and Class Consciousness”). The Marxism concept of power is based on the premise that individuals become “empty boxes” of thought as a consequence of the “alienation”. That concept can be still observed in our surroundings not only in the industrial facilities but also in other kinds of jobs. The alienation of workers is created by the economic system which tends to shadow the “nature of power”. That mechanism is also reinforced by the structures of social organizations endowing individuals with perceptions that reinforce those economic and social structures in competition against alternative ones. That reinforcement is carried out using some cultural aspects such as the language (Bourdieu, P, 1977)[4]. The inequality of power conditions is reflected in different aspects of our lives and as Marx pointed out:

“The surplus labour of the class has ceased to be the condition for the development of general wealth, just as the non- labour of the few, for the development of the general power of human head.” (Marx, K, 1833)

The nature of social power is taken by those who are occupying higher political and economic spheres/levels. According to Marx, K. the means of labour becomes fixed capital, and controls the worker physically as capital. That control of human power is reinforced by materialism structures in the societal level. The importance of the exchange or the “fetishism of commodities” distract the human consciousness and allow the continuation of the economic system. However, like Scott, J. (1985) has described, the “everyday resistance of subalterns”[5] shows that they have not consented to dominance, against the “hegemony” (Gramsci, A, 1921) of both economic and political power.








[1] LONGMAN, Dictionary of contemporary English, New Edition, 2003, London.
[2] In “The Theoretical Yardstick”, Bibliography of the course.
[3] Douglas, M. 1986. How the institutions Think, Syracuse, NY: U. Press.
[4] Bourdieu, P. 1977, Reproduction in education, Society and Culture, Sage Publications, London.
[5] Scott, J. 1985, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance, London Press.