I'm talking about social, economic, and political power... so in that sense (in my experience) not really, no.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I'm talking about social, economic, and political power... so in that sense (in my experience) not really, no.
Let's imagine there's a person in solitary confinement. This person sees one other each day, who delivers a meal insufficient to be proper nourishment. Any attempt to communicate is met with rebuke. This person is a straight, white, cisgendered, able bodied male. You would consider this person powerful?
The reason I ask this question is because I want to find out what your underlying concept of power is. I want to understand the nature of how members of a particular demographic inherit 'power' through membership alone, or if it is necessary to be involved in a decision making process, executing a decision or benefiting from the execution of a decision to inherit 'power', or through some other process. Traditionally power is considered to be the ability to make and execute decisions which have an impact on other people not involved in it. But this trait is neither universal to all individuals within any demographic, nor exclusive to any demographic, nor does it apply to a demographic as a whole which has no collective ability to act in a unit this way.
A person in solitary confinement doesn't have much social, economic, or political power. Regardless of the fact that they're a straight, white, cisgendered, able bodied male, I wouldn't consider that person powerful.
However, some people do inherit power through that membership alone. Like they say, "it's not what you know, it's who you know."