The powers that be, no longer are —
Aside from the question mark, this is the title of the much talked-about book by Moisés Naím, from 2013. Once the Trade Mininster of Venezuela, Mr. Naím is now a scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is also a much read international columnist. Here is a profile.
Power, as we know it, is coming to and end. What is emerging is a kind of power in flux that is much easier to attain and much harder to hang on to once you have it. Let us just say from the start that this is a very readable book in terms of how the argument is pursued. In terms of its value, there is a good reason (we will get to that) to quote a former president, Bill Clinton, who says: “The End of Power will change the way you read the news, the way you think about politics, and the way you look at the world”.
From boardrooms to battlefields and churches to states, by being in charge isn´t what it used to be: This is the subtitle. Essentially, it isn´t only power at the top that´s changing but power in general. So whatever reason you´re looking for, they are structural and ephemeral – some factor in societal change is more key than others, one might say. And interestingly enough, when you google the book title and chose “image” — if you use Google, that is — the face that pops up most often aside Mr. Naím is Mark Zuckerberg. That, of course, may be an aspect of the searches that I do on my own computer, of course. But the thought struck me whether the real change factor in Mr Naíms account of the recent world isn´s the media? One may argue that it is, but then again it is perhaps moving too fast to conclusion.
Here are a couple of quotes to set the argument — both from page 10: “Power becomes entrenched as a result of barriers that shield incumbents from rivals. Such barriers not only prevent new competitors from growing into significant challengers but also reinforce the dominance of entrenched players. They are inherent in everything from the rules that govern elections to the arsenals of armies and police forces, to capital, exclusive access to resources, advertising budgets, proprietary technology. alluring brands, and even them oral authority of religious leaders or the personal charisma of some politicians.”
And he goes on:
“Over the course of the last three decades, however, barriers to power have weakened at a very fast pace. They are now more easily undermined, overwhelmed, and circumvented. As our discussion of domestic and international politics, business, war, religion, and other areas will show, the causes underlying this phenomenon are related not only to demographic and economic transformation and the spread of information technologies but also to political changes and profound shifts in expectations, values, and social norms. Such information technologies (including but not limited to the Internet) play a meaningful role in shaping access to power and its use. But the more fundamental explanation as to why barriers to power have become more feeble has to do with the transformation in such diverse factors as rapid economic growth in many poor countries, migratory patterns, medicine and healthcare, education, and even attitudes and cultural mores – in short, with changes in the scope, state, and potential of human lives.”
The above quotes underline both the quality and the problem with the book — if one ought to point to a problem at all. The book covers the wide range of societal change, discussing the concept of power at many different levels. It is a good discussion. The question is still whether it is a good explanation. What does it explain? What causes, what situations, what factors and what solutions come into play — once you look more in detail?
Consider the next few lines, also on page 10: “After all, what most distinguishes our lives today from those of our ancestors is not the tools we use or the rules that govern our societies. It is the fact that we are far more numerous on the planet, we live longer; we are in better health; we are more literate and educated; an unprecedented number of us are less desperate for food and have more time and money for other pursuits and when we are not satisfied with our present location, it is now easier and cheaper than ever to move and try somewhere else.”
All of this is essentially good and well written, but in the end what explains these changes are — in effect — the rise of modern technology. Information technology explains the globalization of the production of meaning. Technologies of manufacture and technologies of physical transportation explain the lowering of nationstate barriers to the global markets and flows of goods. And at the heart of this is the question not only of what power can do today — but also what it has done in the past to set social development on the course to globalized living.
Explaining everything
Before I go on, there is an interesting passage about this book dating back to the launch at Carnegie. Click on the photo to your right, and you will get the transcripts from that discussion. It will underline some of the comments I am making below.
The book consists of 11 chapter, all told. And at the heart is of course the concept of power itself: What is power? From page 15 and onwards, we are treated to a lucid discussion of various approaches to the study of power; from Aristotle via Hobbes, Russell, Dahl, and others, to his point point of view which in this book is quite practical, and therefor literally useful:
“The aim is to understand what it takes to get power, to keep it, and to lose it. This requires a working definition, and here is one: Power is the ability to direct or prevent the current or future actions of other groups and individuals. Or, put differently, power is what we exercise over others that leads them to behave in ways they would not otherwise have behaved“.
Other definition approaches more or less coming to the same conclusion, we are left with an observation of power known from Aristotle, from Weber, from Russell. What may strike some readers is what is absent from it: Luke´s view of power from the point of articulation and belief, and for instance Foucault´s perspective on power as structuring nominalization.
These concerns aside, Naím does a very goods job of outlining the uses and possibilities of power in our contemporary world — in fact, few books from recent years have as convincing an outlining of case analyses and observations. The one author that comes to mind and with whom Naím could be compared to some extent, is Francis Fukuyama – for those who want to have Mr. Naim pegged.
The question of power
Moisés Naím launches a discussion of power as a concept and phenomenon that I find very valuable and which students ought to do also. He says that power in practice is channeled through four different means — or what social scientists call ideal types:
1) The Muscle
The role of armies, police, and other kinds of forces are not by definition bad aspects of power. On the contrary, force is a key aspect of societal order — which is a theme discussed by philosophers and scientists since before Plato. The question is a a simple one to state and a difficult one to answer: What constitutes legitimate force?
2) The Code
We live in a universe of codes, and what Naím calles the Code Channel, others would refer to as the ritual aspect of societal orders. Like the 10 commandments represent a key to power which can only be understood if the meanings and the contexts of the commandments are known, so we find that in all societies human beings have “rainmaker rituals”; we seek order out of chaos, we seek a bond with nature, we seek to communicate an understanding of cosmos in the manner of our societal hierarchies and observances. Some go to church: Now, why do they do that? Ask yourself, in an open way. Why do some kneel in the direction of Mekka?
3) The Pitch
We know that with the emergence of modern media, politics changed. We know that with the changed atmosphere of politics, what also changed was the kind of characters and personality traits that would make for a successful politician. We know the power of advertising, but me may neglect to keep in mind that the power to persuade others is an aspect of rhetorical communication that dates all the way back to Aristotle. What Naím calls the Pitch, is what others would call Political Communication, or Rhetoric, or Spin, or some other term relating to the proliferation of media arenas for articulation and voice.
4) The Reward
A different way to put it is that he or she who commands coveted resources and the capability of allocating them, has power.
These perspectives in place, the book next presents a series of discussions that a blog post cannot do justice to, so we will leave it here.
Moisé Naím (2013) The End of Power, New York: Basic Books