September 18, 2006
-
Power
James says in comments: "I've written you a reality check. I hope it doesn't bounce. People have as much power as others allow them. It has nothing whatever to do with laws."
This is true as stated. No bounce. But it leaves something out:
Power is an interesting thing. Power is something you claim, and you can claim it in addition to, or despite your humanity. You can claim it in addition to, or despite your civility. You can claim it in addition to, or despite your sense of fair play. And you can claim it in addition to, or despite your humility.
Power has to be claimed. It can't be given. Others can allow power, but that power isn't really power until it is claimed. The act of claiming power defines you. The power you claim defines you in relation to those things listed above and more... Humanity, civility, fair play, humility. And plenty else.
Humanity and humility in particular are examples of things which might limit one's desire to claim power. There are plenty of philosophers (and crackpots) who argue that such things are meaningless in the face of power. That is, that one must abandon humanity and/or humility in order to take one's place of power. They have a point; some leadership decisions require that people die, or that nations crumble, and it can be more difficult to see these things clearly if you actually care. But, as I say: One can claim power not only despite these things, but also *in addition to them.*
And the displayed ability to juggle such things, to retain one's humanity in the face of unimaginably daunting decisions, is the ultimate test of character and spiritual development.
Power is a test of spiritual development.
Right now in Washington, DC, we have an administration who believes that they must take more and more power, and not just any old power but the power to *torture* and *wage war,* in order to fulfill their responsibility. They have lost their humanity, and must be stopped by people of conscience.
The people of conscience are also undergoing a similar and parallel test of their character and spiritual development. Will they succeed?
Comments (6)
Michael Korda wrote an interesting book on this subject years ago with the title POWER!. He referred frequently to The Glass Bead Game.
I started to read 'The Glass Bead Game,' but I don't think I was really ready to 'get it.' I might revisit that sometime.
Do yo mean Micheal Korda or Chris Korda? (Thanksgiving dinners must be so very intersting for that family.)
In those old American history classes I remember that discussion of George Washington, noting how he chose to avoid claiming power that people were willing to give him. American Democracy, we were taught, existed and grew because our leaders were good enough humans that they could self-impose limits.
Now, American leaders all think that are Napoleanic Emperors - winning an election with 50.1% of the vote, or with 47% of the vote, implies to these dangerous people that they have won the right to govern absolutely. It is majoritarianism to the maximum - plebicitarianism.
Jefferson knew all governments would need replacement at our point, and we, perhaps because our civic education has deteriorated so badly, perhaps because of the rise of religious fundamentalist extremists throughout the US south and midwest, need to replace ours. We need a multiparty Parliamentary democracy with proportional representation. That will force us into coalition governments, and begin to halt this dangerous slide to dictatorship.
the one facet of that power that needs to be added is information. Whoever controls the war of information wins the power...
It's true that controlling the flow of information can be a position of power. I think what I said is abstracted enough to cover it, though.
There are all kinds of power one can claim. More than half of Americans don't even claim the power to vote. If people's heads are full of the idea that they're powerless, then they actually *are* powerless.
Just relating to my post and your comments. Well, we are both right on the "renewable" resources. You mine enough plants off, and you do deplete the soil, so really they should be called "semi-renewable" or such. I just get frustrated when people think that vegetation is an endless resource (not saying you do!).
On that map, it is hard to say. I think that that area is also affected by the same forces that raised the Himalayas, so it is probably experiencing a rapid uplift. When you see the lobes like in the center of the picture, I immediately think "landslide/mudslide." The streams look like they're downcutting fast, which can be an artifact of the aforementioned uplift, or simply erosion based in the area being ever more populated.
I'm on dial-up, so backing away is painfully slow. To really know what is going on, I'd probably have to see a geologic map, and even then, find some professor who knows the area. I notice the major rivers flow to the north, and that does not fit with landslides...so, I just don't know...it is odd, I agree!
Comments are closed.