On the Struggle of Power

It has been a common fallacy to assume that government alone plays politics amongst themselves. If however, we put the definition of ‘politics’ in its broadest sense, it is the struggle for power in any socioeconomic climate. We say ‘power’ in terms ranging from first impressions, respect and honour, family rules and family taboos, to others like corporate acquisition and mergers, political and international diplomacy and invasions, and political elections. We also say ‘socioeconomic’ in meaning of any social interaction acted through the use finite or infinite resources. So here, we see that all living things engage in the direct or indirect, conscious or unconscious politics, the very struggle for power.

Let me illustrate my point properly here. When I say that I am in the struggle for power, I do not mean the barbaric acquisition or stealing of moneys through the harming or lost of lives, being politically motivated and thus attaining political authority over the people, or finding ways to make friends afraid of me. Rather, as in not in the purest sense of the examples just mentioned, I am referring to the very mere interaction between two beings or more in order for acquisition of certain satisfaction or mutual satisfaction, and in doing so, creating the acknowledgement in the other this already acquired satisfaction – the acquisition of power itself.

Let me put forth my idea more clearly. A talks to B about Issue C, of which A discusses C(A) and B discusses C(B). While A may in fact be confiding with B about his her problems, A does so because for either or some, if not all, in the following instances:



(1) A feels disturbed about the problem and seeks advice, in doing so A unconsciously gives authority to B because A feels uncomfortable and lacks initially the confidence and esteem to face the situation. By B receiving the sense of importance from A, B gives A the necessary comforting and words A needs to acquire confidence once more. As in this case B respects A because B feels important to A, A feels that he is being acknowledged. And, if B sympathizes with A, A feels that somehow A is in the right. B indirectly reinforces A’s morals and circumstance. A thus feels that he is fighting a moral game in which he is the moral one and the 3rd party is the immoral one. A acquires a psychological backing, which in turn acquires power of confidence over B as B acts as a backing for A.

(2) B requires the cooperation of A to realize B’s own interests but realizes that A will cooperate only if A stands to gain. If A helps because he is the friend of B, A looks like as if he were the best friend of B, and in so doing acquires future support, if necessary, from B and thus attains his power through the backing of B.

(3) A requires the cooperation of B to realize A’s own interests but realizes that B will cooperate only if B stands to gain. If B is not the friend of A, or B is not close to A, or B has difficulties pertaining to A’s interest, A realizes that to reach his own goal he has to show B that by helping him, B stands to gain something substantial. That is, reaching A’s goal means to do so via the realization of certain or some own desire or interest of B. By empowering B with what he wants, A acquires power in the form of being a benefactor over B, receiving respect from B.



Of course, however, the above three situations may happen unconsciously or indirectly or both. For example:



(4) A wants B to help A realize A’s interest, and A does not explicitly show how B can help A via realizing B’s certain or some desire or interest of B, but B is aware that in helping A he can simultaneously certain or some of his own desires or interests, B willingly helps A. So, on superficial observation, it seems that B is helping A altruistically, but in fact wants to realize his own desire(s) or interest(s) through A – using A to realize B’s own desire or interest. Or, another scenario is possible. B understands that he is acquiring power quietly over A, or knows that he, after the incident, is comfortable with quietly using A to attain his means. A, however, thinks he holds some form of arbitrary authority over B in the form of friendship, and thus believes that if A needs help in the future, A has B for backing and aid.

(5) A needs B’s help to attain A’s means. B, aware that according to history and past observations, A always makes sure that A reaches his own goal by helping B in certain ways. Thus, B helps A anyway but, in this case, is unsure what benefits he may acquire through A’s attainment of A’s goal. Here is a possible source of abuse from A, as B is providing his services without question of A’s means of attainment, and A might in fact use B’s gullibility to destroy B as A finally has arbitrary power over B and has the potential and capacity to utterly destroy B if A has always hated B from the beginning but keeps quiet about it, or finds B’s presence utterly useless. A therefore obviously here acquires arbitrary discretionary power over B.



As we has seen for all the five scenarios (although there may be many other situations that are here not yet accounted for), the power for struggle does not simply belong to the government alone. We can, in fact, see how all these instance are so very much prevalent in our personal (civilian) lives, happening directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously. I believe the reader is capable of coming up with his/her own examples as they must be quite obvious anyway.

By understanding the generality of the instances of the struggle for power, one must also acknowledge that this is so natural phenomena that it would be quite irrational to not extend this idea to all living things; that this principle of the struggle for power is one of the leading forces of evolutionary design.

I must therefore here discuss the nature of the struggle for power in relation to the freedom of humankind. For since every interaction happens out of these instances, out of necessity (as in Spinoza’s philosophy of determinism), and so we say all human interaction is directed towards the acquisition of power. And, so, if a human is to be free in so far as to acquire self-determination, he is to be rational and aware about the nature of all interactions, and treat all with a pinch of scepticism as all interactions are not in themselves genuine as all things require in themselves some direct or indirect, conscious or unconscious benefit from the interaction.


Note: If need be, I shall discuss my last paragraph with more detail and reason.