This should be easier than it seems, Power isn’t a zero-sum game, not real Power.
Let’s set up the parameters of a conceptual equation; Power exists in an unstable relationship with Control and Faith. Those who have no Faith in anything beyond themselves – we are talking about actual, not professed Faith – also, unsurprisingly, feel a strong need to maintain Control, or since this is an unsustainable wish, they hold onto a fantasy of Control. To achieve it – to make a short term stab at the fulfillment of their desire, they strive to accumulate Power. The kinds of power they see, and want, and grab hold of are all various forms of manipulation, and coercion; to be deployed against anyone or anything they see as a barrier to fulfilling their desire. We tend to think only of this when we think of Power. It is zero-sum. It exists along graduations between polarities, with adversaries at either end; one side holding more or less, or both holding the same Power as they struggle against each other. What one side gains the other loses, in relative terms at least. “The Balance of Power,” the “Struggle for Power;” these are the ways we characterize such dynamics.
But we can imagine another Power that is not zero-sum, that is in fact the opposite of it? The more anyone has, the more everyone has. How does such a prodigy come about? Let’s look at the variables in our equation. Lack of Faith leads to the other kind of Power. Faith – well placed – allows this kind to flourish. Within one’s self, among one’s peers, in one’s community; it is possible to look at each individual as an autonomous being, an autonomous actor within the relationships, and dynamics we inhabit. If conditions can be created, and maintained, that foster the growth, and development of this kind of Faith; then we find we can act in ways that bring a growing level of Power to all.
There are opposing presuppositions behind the contrasting views of Power. These lead us directly to the one sought after within each set of preconditions. They also directly influence the effectiveness of the chosen form; its effectiveness to accomplish the desired result. Here-in lies the rub! This is not an appeal for abnegation, but an analysis of which form of Power has the greatest possibilities of success.
Zero-sum Power presupposes that for “Me” to get what “I” want, others must lose what they want. It also presupposes that what “I” want is feasible. No attempt is made to challenge either supposition. These are treated as “givens.” That others have failed, following this path, is either ignored or put down to their having used less overwhelming force than “I” will muster, or because they were not as clever, or as ruthless; not as “Powerful” as “I” will be!
Power backed by Faith presupposes that what “I” want, others may also want, and have an equal right to. It presupposes that “I’ will need to test what “I” desire against what is feasible, continually. In contrast to the history of failures of zero-sum Power, it is buoyed by examples of people who have achieved the seemingly impossible by following this path. Instead of feeding Hubris in attempts to bluster through, one learns to rely on humility as an essential precondition to success.
These are two poles on a continuum of Power relations between people. Actual situations lie somewhere within the area bound by these examples. They can be seen as trends within the dynamics that actually take place within, and between people. The greatest value in examining these examples lies in our recognizing which way our own attempts at achieving results may be trending. Are we falling into the traps of Hubristic Power? Are we striving towards a greater reliance on the Power of Humility?
I think it is a thoroughly defensible position to state that within a larger context, and over greater time frames, no attempt to achieve mastery through zero-sum Power has ever succeeded in its objectives. Also that the corollary is equally true. This is not really a Paradox or attributable to any outside agency promoting the good and punishing evil, although I make no claims on the existence or lack of any such entity. It simply fits the conditions.
The crux lies in competing views of self-interest. Striving for the aggregation of force as a desirable form of Power can only be maintained if one has a limited view of one’s self-interest. Usually this is as a result of confusing desire and will for true self-interest. To maintain that misplaced identification one must begin to close off from reality, first denying internal realities, then once firmly along the slope of this trend, ever greater external realities are ignored until a point is reached where the attempt fails of its own weight. We tend to see this “defeat” as a sign that the “other side” has “won.” I would say, and think, that a deeper view will show the defeat was internal, whatever the external agency of the “last straw” might have been. Why else do they call it tragedy? All such cases fail. The small ones quietly, the large ones spectacularly.
Power that grows the more it is shared works because its practitioners are following a path on which they constantly test their realities, and their sense of where their true self-interest lies. When this is done using all ones faculties, and with growing Faith in its demonstrable results, it will lead one along a path of convergence between an ever sharper sense of the effects of externalities, as they are coupled with an ever more nuanced sense of one’s true self-interest. Such a path is open ended. It has trends, not destinations in mind, and it is open to the unexpected in ways that let us reach goals beyond our imaginings. Not as wish fulfillment, but as tangible, actual results.
In an effort to limit the imposition of constraints into how we see the terms of this conceptual equation, let’s just say that what is meant by Faith, is an open ended, and non-limiting definition. The one delineation I feel is essential is that we not confuse, wishes, fantasies, even hopes for Faith. The nature, the end and the embodiment of one’s Faith is open to wherever one’s striving for authenticity will take them. So long as there is a striving to differentiate Faith from its easy simulacra. There is no magic in this, no dogma, these are pragmatic suggestions. Unless one is operating under conditions of a living Faith that is tested, and kept vibrantly in mind; the equation breaks down at some point. The challenges of maintaining a stance vis-a-vis Power and Control will corrode and corrupt without the protection of such a Faith to act as a corrective. It is only through such Faith that one is able to maintain a posture conducive to letting non-zero-sum Power take hold.
To round out our definitions, let’s look briefly at Control. As with Faith, when one allows an easy simulacra of what Control can mean to take hold, the result is a striving for zero-sum Power. When one sees clearly the limits, and place of Control; then one is open to non-zero-sum Power. The key difference is the relationship between one’s conception of Control, and the place of Will. At the risk of adding yet another term to be defined, briefly, if one sees the results of Control as being identified with the desires of unadulterated Will, then one is on the slope to zero-sum. The corollary is in seeing that there cannot be that kind of Control, only a fluid approach to influencing externals while steering and guiding one’s desires to maintain relationships within some wider sphere.
It may be that this attitude can be seen as the underlying commonality between the possibilities of what Faith may mean. This is about a Faith that relies on maintaining a relationship with what is, while guiding one’s expectations/desires along paths that lead to a wider fulfillment of what can be found within a radically considered exploration of true self-interest.
One final condition. These matters cannot be understood, or reduced to any linearity of thought or action. Any attempt to do so will short-circuit the complex dynamics this conceptual equation is meant to symbolize. This thinking cannot be brought down to any one case or set of contingencies, it must be held loosely in mind as the flow of events moves on. It provides no single place to stand for all time, just a form of crucible in which the catalytic actions of the day can be discovered, and acted upon in preparation for the next set of operations. Without developing a comfort, and even a Faith, in a multi-focal reality, and one’s ability to navigate it; there is no escape from the zero-sum.
As we are surrounded by an ever-increasing awareness – whether sought, or just run into, as conditions evolve out from under our preconceptions – our awareness of limitations surrounds us. As we find more and more areas where we individually or collectively have less and less actual power to make changes, there are beginnings, merely whispered affirmations, that within each of us lies a resource of power that has no limits if it is pursued honestly. There is a power to transform reality through the actions of the human mind, starting with individuals and spreading and rippling throughout networks of individuals – call these communities – that can lead us to make such far-reaching alterations of how we see and interact with the world in ways that can make profound changes in our lives, and our world.
Those who are impatient, always looking for short-cuts, ways to “game” reality; they have lost touch with what it means to live. In their rush to some preconceived result, they will scoff and be-little the effort required to actually engage in life. They have their rationalizations, their abbreviations go so far as to abbreviate the importance of life itself as lived; we see this in any ultimatum: “Better Dead than Red!…” or any call for Martyrdom. Whether they put some narrow value into supreme priority over all the others, or whether they are so impatient with this life that they can only see value in some wished for after-life, they continue to jump to the conclusions that their way works, against all evidence, even as that way destroys us, and everything worth caring about, all in the name of saving it.
This is not the old argument for pacifism, though there was much truth in it. There need to be found ways to deal with emergent situations that may require overt, physical action against others. But such an option has to be seen for what it really is, not a reach for the most powerful option, but an admittance that we have already gone far towards losing the fight. There is an entire discipline held within this change in perspective, enough to employ at least one Pentagon worth of people in its realization, but in such an organization there will be a striving towards the positive, instead of the pursuit of a petulant destruction of everything, in the name of the will of the few.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world."
"Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
Let’s set up the parameters of a conceptual equation; Power exists in an unstable relationship with Control and Faith. Those who have no Faith in anything beyond themselves – we are talking about actual, not professed Faith – also, unsurprisingly, feel a strong need to maintain Control, or since this is an unsustainable wish, they hold onto a fantasy of Control. To achieve it – to make a short term stab at the fulfillment of their desire, they strive to accumulate Power. The kinds of power they see, and want, and grab hold of are all various forms of manipulation, and coercion; to be deployed against anyone or anything they see as a barrier to fulfilling their desire. We tend to think only of this when we think of Power. It is zero-sum. It exists along graduations between polarities, with adversaries at either end; one side holding more or less, or both holding the same Power as they struggle against each other. What one side gains the other loses, in relative terms at least. “The Balance of Power,” the “Struggle for Power;” these are the ways we characterize such dynamics.
But we can imagine another Power that is not zero-sum, that is in fact the opposite of it? The more anyone has, the more everyone has. How does such a prodigy come about? Let’s look at the variables in our equation. Lack of Faith leads to the other kind of Power. Faith – well placed – allows this kind to flourish. Within one’s self, among one’s peers, in one’s community; it is possible to look at each individual as an autonomous being, an autonomous actor within the relationships, and dynamics we inhabit. If conditions can be created, and maintained, that foster the growth, and development of this kind of Faith; then we find we can act in ways that bring a growing level of Power to all.
There are opposing presuppositions behind the contrasting views of Power. These lead us directly to the one sought after within each set of preconditions. They also directly influence the effectiveness of the chosen form; its effectiveness to accomplish the desired result. Here-in lies the rub! This is not an appeal for abnegation, but an analysis of which form of Power has the greatest possibilities of success.
Zero-sum Power presupposes that for “Me” to get what “I” want, others must lose what they want. It also presupposes that what “I” want is feasible. No attempt is made to challenge either supposition. These are treated as “givens.” That others have failed, following this path, is either ignored or put down to their having used less overwhelming force than “I” will muster, or because they were not as clever, or as ruthless; not as “Powerful” as “I” will be!
Power backed by Faith presupposes that what “I” want, others may also want, and have an equal right to. It presupposes that “I’ will need to test what “I” desire against what is feasible, continually. In contrast to the history of failures of zero-sum Power, it is buoyed by examples of people who have achieved the seemingly impossible by following this path. Instead of feeding Hubris in attempts to bluster through, one learns to rely on humility as an essential precondition to success.
These are two poles on a continuum of Power relations between people. Actual situations lie somewhere within the area bound by these examples. They can be seen as trends within the dynamics that actually take place within, and between people. The greatest value in examining these examples lies in our recognizing which way our own attempts at achieving results may be trending. Are we falling into the traps of Hubristic Power? Are we striving towards a greater reliance on the Power of Humility?
I think it is a thoroughly defensible position to state that within a larger context, and over greater time frames, no attempt to achieve mastery through zero-sum Power has ever succeeded in its objectives. Also that the corollary is equally true. This is not really a Paradox or attributable to any outside agency promoting the good and punishing evil, although I make no claims on the existence or lack of any such entity. It simply fits the conditions.
The crux lies in competing views of self-interest. Striving for the aggregation of force as a desirable form of Power can only be maintained if one has a limited view of one’s self-interest. Usually this is as a result of confusing desire and will for true self-interest. To maintain that misplaced identification one must begin to close off from reality, first denying internal realities, then once firmly along the slope of this trend, ever greater external realities are ignored until a point is reached where the attempt fails of its own weight. We tend to see this “defeat” as a sign that the “other side” has “won.” I would say, and think, that a deeper view will show the defeat was internal, whatever the external agency of the “last straw” might have been. Why else do they call it tragedy? All such cases fail. The small ones quietly, the large ones spectacularly.
Power that grows the more it is shared works because its practitioners are following a path on which they constantly test their realities, and their sense of where their true self-interest lies. When this is done using all ones faculties, and with growing Faith in its demonstrable results, it will lead one along a path of convergence between an ever sharper sense of the effects of externalities, as they are coupled with an ever more nuanced sense of one’s true self-interest. Such a path is open ended. It has trends, not destinations in mind, and it is open to the unexpected in ways that let us reach goals beyond our imaginings. Not as wish fulfillment, but as tangible, actual results.
In an effort to limit the imposition of constraints into how we see the terms of this conceptual equation, let’s just say that what is meant by Faith, is an open ended, and non-limiting definition. The one delineation I feel is essential is that we not confuse, wishes, fantasies, even hopes for Faith. The nature, the end and the embodiment of one’s Faith is open to wherever one’s striving for authenticity will take them. So long as there is a striving to differentiate Faith from its easy simulacra. There is no magic in this, no dogma, these are pragmatic suggestions. Unless one is operating under conditions of a living Faith that is tested, and kept vibrantly in mind; the equation breaks down at some point. The challenges of maintaining a stance vis-a-vis Power and Control will corrode and corrupt without the protection of such a Faith to act as a corrective. It is only through such Faith that one is able to maintain a posture conducive to letting non-zero-sum Power take hold.
To round out our definitions, let’s look briefly at Control. As with Faith, when one allows an easy simulacra of what Control can mean to take hold, the result is a striving for zero-sum Power. When one sees clearly the limits, and place of Control; then one is open to non-zero-sum Power. The key difference is the relationship between one’s conception of Control, and the place of Will. At the risk of adding yet another term to be defined, briefly, if one sees the results of Control as being identified with the desires of unadulterated Will, then one is on the slope to zero-sum. The corollary is in seeing that there cannot be that kind of Control, only a fluid approach to influencing externals while steering and guiding one’s desires to maintain relationships within some wider sphere.
It may be that this attitude can be seen as the underlying commonality between the possibilities of what Faith may mean. This is about a Faith that relies on maintaining a relationship with what is, while guiding one’s expectations/desires along paths that lead to a wider fulfillment of what can be found within a radically considered exploration of true self-interest.
One final condition. These matters cannot be understood, or reduced to any linearity of thought or action. Any attempt to do so will short-circuit the complex dynamics this conceptual equation is meant to symbolize. This thinking cannot be brought down to any one case or set of contingencies, it must be held loosely in mind as the flow of events moves on. It provides no single place to stand for all time, just a form of crucible in which the catalytic actions of the day can be discovered, and acted upon in preparation for the next set of operations. Without developing a comfort, and even a Faith, in a multi-focal reality, and one’s ability to navigate it; there is no escape from the zero-sum.
As we are surrounded by an ever-increasing awareness – whether sought, or just run into, as conditions evolve out from under our preconceptions – our awareness of limitations surrounds us. As we find more and more areas where we individually or collectively have less and less actual power to make changes, there are beginnings, merely whispered affirmations, that within each of us lies a resource of power that has no limits if it is pursued honestly. There is a power to transform reality through the actions of the human mind, starting with individuals and spreading and rippling throughout networks of individuals – call these communities – that can lead us to make such far-reaching alterations of how we see and interact with the world in ways that can make profound changes in our lives, and our world.
Those who are impatient, always looking for short-cuts, ways to “game” reality; they have lost touch with what it means to live. In their rush to some preconceived result, they will scoff and be-little the effort required to actually engage in life. They have their rationalizations, their abbreviations go so far as to abbreviate the importance of life itself as lived; we see this in any ultimatum: “Better Dead than Red!…” or any call for Martyrdom. Whether they put some narrow value into supreme priority over all the others, or whether they are so impatient with this life that they can only see value in some wished for after-life, they continue to jump to the conclusions that their way works, against all evidence, even as that way destroys us, and everything worth caring about, all in the name of saving it.
This is not the old argument for pacifism, though there was much truth in it. There need to be found ways to deal with emergent situations that may require overt, physical action against others. But such an option has to be seen for what it really is, not a reach for the most powerful option, but an admittance that we have already gone far towards losing the fight. There is an entire discipline held within this change in perspective, enough to employ at least one Pentagon worth of people in its realization, but in such an organization there will be a striving towards the positive, instead of the pursuit of a petulant destruction of everything, in the name of the will of the few.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world."
"Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
Margaret Mead
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment.