Power Dynamics within Politics and Economics

[fmlpanda]

Power Dynamics within Politics and Economics

Power Dynamics simply refers to Power Relations between groups of people, such as the Power Dynamic between State and Citizen is one of a almost Hegelian Master and Servant one. The Servant must bow and consent to the state but the master must get the servant to willingly bow power to them through the means of Elections. However, in regards to the west the Power Dynamic from the master to the Servant isn't usually an honest one since there is usually a third power dynamic and that is one of big business, whom i'll just refer to as the "child catcher". The Child Catcher lures the Servant into a false sense of security through the means of goods, commodities if you will, whilst these goods and financial security are given the child catcher uses the time that the servant is looking away to use the surplus to bribe the master into keeping further profit, that will in turn allow the child catcher to make the servant redundant and keep the money they otherwise would be making through the servant for 4 years until a new election where the child catcher will bribe the other candidate giving them a reason to take the servant back, and this goes on and on until we are all dead.

The idea that power is given to the state is not a new one and is as old as the idea of a state. Even back in Feudal times, Power was symbolically given to the Lords, Kings and Queens through the means of Intimidation from the Royals to the Serfs, through the means of Execution and Feudal Debt. The Master see's their power dynamic as necessary because anytime they are given symbolic power through any means necessary, they only see love and support from the servant because the servant eventually doesn't see the intimidation as such but instead see's it as the state doing its job. However, we see time and time again that when the state pulls the power away from an area or disaster we see the servants working together without the need for a master dynamic. This is what Anarchist's are talking about when we say that the State-Citizen "relationship" is redundant, because as seen with Anarchist leaning organisations and events such as the Occupy Wall Street movement, Antifascist groups and what happened after the Grenfell tower disaster. When the state refuses to intervene when it is supposed to, the servants group amongst themselves and show that the master is redundant and not needed. But why, why did the state not intervene in the Grenfell Tower Disaster?

The simple answer is that there was no way to show its intimidation and legitimise itself because it had already shown through its incapability to prevent the disaster that the master dynamic had found its loophole and inevitable end. These people just lost their homes, their families, their money, their personal property, There was no way for the state to intimidate them anymore than what they did (or rather did not do) to them. If there is no way for a state to show neither benevolence or malevolence then the state will not do anything at all. In times of war, you seen this dynamic playing out constantly, the president, parliament, or whoever is in charge will go full force using violence at the hands of their power to legitimise themselves. Through this, the servant will do nothing but side with the master through votes to continue the constant re-legitimising of itself as a powerful entity.

This Power Dynamic is the reason why revolutions rarely happen on a nation wide basis, because in order for revolutions to occur the whole population needs to be aware of the power dynamic that is in place and why it isn't a honest dynamic but a really dishonest one where they end up the worst regardless of who wins in the elections. Fascism comes into play after the Master-slave relationship breaks down and begins to rot, giving air to a new form of the Master-slave dialectic where both of the "old" system and governance is rejuvenated in a new form giving a new lease on life to the old master-slave dynamic.

P.S. To my followers, no im not Hegelian, Hegel's just really good for explaining power dynamics

Comments

[chamberpunk]

I wouldn't really call the power of a the king's symbolic. It's definitely material.

[fmlpanda]

For sure, but the point is that the power that is given to them is symbolic, for as long as the king stands there the power is there, power in and of itself is symbolic, to me Violence is the actual material act of restricting someones actions whilst power is the symbolic ability of being able to commit violent acts to keep that power in the hands of those committing the Violent act