Political Power Essay Example for Free

Political Power Essay A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do. Does this sum up the essence of political power? Political analysis can be defined quite simply as the analysis of the nature, exercise and distribution of power.1 This argument is criticised of being too broad, excluding almost nothing, nevertheless it is reasonable to argue that power is the central theme which lies throughout the study of politics. Therefore defining the concept of power is one of the crucial things in the study of politics consequently it is often contested and can never be agreed among the scholars. This essay will focus on so-called the faces of power controversy in the post war period. First of all, the idea which consists of the first and basic part in interpreting power will be introduced. Then what its critiques argue and their flaws will also be discussed to draw the conclusion how far the argument A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do reflects the essence of power. The faces of power debate was raised from different theoretical traditions and approaches to political analysis. Basically the argument is about whether the concept of power is simple and quantifiable or it is rather complicated and intuitive concept which cannot be measured. Lukes2 acknowledges that this concept can never be settled. Alternatively he accepts the broad definition of power as As ability to get B to do what he or she would not otherwise have done but tries to highlight 3 different ways in which A can influence Bs behaviour: decision-making, agenda-setting and thought control. The one face of power power as decision-making was suggested by Dahl in the early post war years. The thesis put forward above was originally proposed by him and this one-dimensional view of power was significant and influential in 1950s. Power is somehow about getting things done, and is therefore most clearly reflected in decision and how they are made.3 For Dahl, in order to find out power relationship, three steps are needed. First, a number of decision areas are selected and then the actors involved in that decision and their interests are figured out. Finally by comparing the decisions made and the actors preferences, the power relationship can be revealed. In this sense power is understood as a concept which can be simplified and quantified. A clear example was shown in?Political Analysis?: Anna buys Bens car for à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½500 which is actually worth à ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½800 and both of them are aware of the real value. In this case, Annas power has been exercised over Ben in terms of decision-making since this decision would not have been the case if he had an influence in the process. One of the critical assumptions here is that the actors involved are fully aware of the information. Anna could have made this deal without exerting power if Ben did not know the real value. This argument of power as a decision-making does often make sense in tripartite political system where a number of different parties exercise their influence on controversial issues. In this case it is obvious to see the frequency of a particular partys preference coincides with the final decision. Thus, how far they have influence on decision-making can be understood in terms of their political power. However Dahls argument faces critical attack in a sense that it too focuses on its narrow concept of power in decision-making. First of all, since only the key decisions are studied, it raises the problem of how far we are capable of distinguishing key issues and routine issues which are often ignored. Moreover, it does not take the potential power into account. In this manner, the power which is not exerted cannot be regarded as power. For instance, some business groups would not be concerned with the welfare issues until they realise the increased burden for welfare tax. Then it might be possible for them to begin exercising their power which has not been exercised without any explicit need for it. Also as assumed from its name, it only uncovers one face of power ignoring other circumstances in which decisions are prevented from happening, the area of non-decision-making.4 This gave a rise to the second face of power argument by Bachrach and Baratz. According to their view, power should be understood as agenda-setting which is the two dimensional approach. Power might be manifested not only in doing things but also in ensuring that things do not get done.5 What they basically insist is that power is exercised in choosing what should be involved in formal discussion and what should not be. In other words, who holds the power needs to be understood in agenda-setting process before the actual decision-making process. In this way, they have broadened the boundary in the concept of power. This kind of approach is well shown in the liberal democratic system where parties are seen as the medium of representing a particular preference on issues. However they can actually block a certain kind of issue to be discussed by disregarding it or make an agreement not to raise the issue. It is difficult to quantify the concept of power from this approach nonetheless not impossible. Thus they agree with the one-dimensional approach in a sense that there should be observable and demonstrable evidence of power relationship between the one who exercise power and the other who are subject to the power. However the attempt to limit the concept of non-decision-making to observable behaviour is entirely arbitrary6 since it does not take in the case in which the subordinated do not recognise themselves as being subordinated. Consequently this problem gave a rise to the third-dimensional view introduced by Lukes. According to his argument, the basic assumption of the above two views is not quite right. What people believe as their interests does not necessarily mean their real interests. The ability of A to exercise power over B, not by getting B to do what he would not otherwise do, but, by influencing, shaping or determining his very wants'7 What is meant here is that power lies in shaping peoples consciousness rather than their actions. In other words, without forcing them to do something visibly it is possible to make them do regarding that as natural and beneficial for them. This can be true where peoples preferences are often influenced by social experiences such as culture, education and media and these can be manipulated by those who have the power. In this way it naturally leads to the concept of false consciousness which reflects the idea that people are prevented from recognizing the fact of its own exploitation8 However Lukes argument also faces severe criticism. Back in the example of Anna and Ben, the critical point is not in the fact that Anna forced Ben to do something that he would not otherwise do, but in the fact that Ben behaved in a way which is contrary to his genuine interest. This raises a problematic point that who is to know Bens real interests. In effect, It is impossible to argue that peoples perceptions and preferences are a delusion, that their felt needs are no their real need, without a standard of truth against which to judge them.9 In this sense this debate become meaningless since there is no scientific method which to prove and make an absolute judgement over this. Furthermore it is contested that nobody is capable of distinguishing the autonomous decision based on real interests and the one based on felt interests being manipulated from powerful. To conclude, the debate over the concept of power has been developed from the shallow one dimensional understanding to a more intuitive and complex three dimensional one. It cannot be said that the effort of developing it into more sophisticated form has always been successful. However through this process, it is true to say that the concept of power has been understood from various approaches which enabled better understanding. Nevertheless the important point to note is that the latter has never attempted to replace or deny the former approach since no single argument can define the political concept of power by its own. Rather, it has its root in the former argument and tries to make it more convincing. From this point of view, power is definitely something which enables A gets B to do something that he or she would not otherwise do. Therefore on one hand, it is possible to say that the essence of power lies in this argument to a certain extent but there can be plural ways dependi ng on approaches in doing so. (1,419 words) References Clegg, S.R. (1989:11) Frameworks of Power. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Hay, C. (2002:168) Political Analysis: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Heywood, A. (2004:122, 124, 125, 127 and 128) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Goverde, H. et al. (eds) (2000:26) Power in Contemporary Politics. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Bibliography Clegg, S.R. (1989) Frameworks of Power. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Goodwin, B. (1997) Using political ideas (4th edn). Chichester: John Wiley Sons Ltd. Goverde, H. et al. (eds) (2000) Power in Contemporary Politics. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Hay, C. (2002) Political Analysis: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Heywood, A. (2004) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. McLean, I. McMillan, A. (2003) Oxford concise dictionary of Politics (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1 Hay, C. (2002:168) Political Analysis: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave. 2 Heywood, A. (2004:122) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 3 Heywood, A. (2004:124) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 4 Heywood, A. (2004:125) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 5 Clegg, S.R. (1989:11) Frameworks of Power. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. 6 Goverde, H. et al. (eds) (2000:26) Power in Contemporary Politics. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. 7 Heywood, A. (2004:127) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 8 Heywood, A. (2004:128) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 9 Heywood, A. (2004:128) Political theory: An introduction (3rd edn)). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

The Social Effects of Television Essay -- TV Media

The Social Effects of Television The social effects of television are numerous and definitely vary in positive and negative ways. Since television was first introduced it’s been a very large part of America’s society. Television started as a form of entertainment that would be watched by the family for an hour a night as a relaxing way of getting away from the stresses of real life. Television has now turned into one of the biggest industries in the world, and has more influence than anyone could have imagined. Many people view television as a very positive form of entertainment, as it is without a doubt the most popular kind in the world. There are also those people who say that television is going to be the downfall of our society and we are becoming much to dependent on it. Television allows the viewer to leave their everyday life and enter into a world full of fun, adventure, and even love. Television is now used by many children for educational purposes. Everyone has seen at least a little of Barney, a show that helps kids learn the alphabet and many life lessons as well. There are now tens if not hundreds of shows that are like Barney broadcast all over the world. These shows help a child develop the social skills that one needs at such a young age. Television can be argued to have brought families together. It may not be good that dinner is served in front of the television every so often, but at least the family is together. In this world of fast paced activity, it is hard to find a family that actually sits down to dinner more than once a week. Television is arguably the best form of media and current information that can be found. Everyday of the week, 24 hours a day a person can find current news b... ...their lives are nothing like the ones seen on television. Television is fast-paced, exciting, and very often a little overboard. A large drawback of television is that many people, women and men, perceive themselves as less of a person. Often, one is not as beautiful or as handsome as a person seen on television. Or one is not as smart, or as good at sports as people on television. Television can be seen as a very good thing to have come out of the 20th Century, and it can be seen as something that should never have been invented. There is no arguing though about the dependency and love many people have for television. Much of the world, especially America, depends on television for a great range of things from education, to information, to entertainment. Television has shaped and changed our society and our world in ways that can never be fully understood.

Melville’s “Bartleby the Scrivener”: Humorous or Tragic? Essay

If ever there are two opposite themes offered in the telling of one tale, it is in Herman Melville’s short story, â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener†. As his perspective swings between the objective and subjective, so swings the theme from comedy to tragedy. Regardless of the two perspectives from which Herman Melville relates the story of Bartleby, the telling of a tragic story with humorous subjectivity, the story’s plot and outcome determines the categorization. In fact, had Melville not peppered the story with his narrative, light-hearted, internal musings, and shared with the audience a â€Å"grasping at straw† style of rationalization, the main theme could only have been categorized as tragic. Regardless of the two perspectives from which Herman Melville relates the story of Bartleby, the telling of a tragic story sprinkled with humorous subjectivity, the actual story line, through its progression should determine its categorization. For this reason, Bartl eby the Scrivener, is a tragedy. Throughout the story Melville relates the many troubling incidents experienced with the mysterious copier. Bartleby’s reactions to his superior are so unlike those which most of us have ever experienced, human nature causes the reader to attempt to apply logic to his eccentricities. When asked to proofread a copy, Bartleby’s outrageous answer is, â€Å"I prefer not to†. Having just been introduced to Bartleby and still formulating a first impression, the audience is required to grapple with a logical explanation for his troubling behaviour. At that point, Melville introduces his first bit of comic relief, enlisting the audience’s empathy in stating, â€Å"To befriend Bartleby; to humour him in his strange wilfulness will cost me little or nothing, while I lay up in my soul what will eventually prove a sweet morsel for my conscience†. Since there is no excusing Bartleby’s behaviour, Melville finds solace in rationalizing his reaction and the r eader is quick to empathize, having found no explanation for the behaviour. When his conscience no longer provides for rationalizing the acceptance of Bartleby’s strange behaviour, Melville invites the reader to appreciate the behaviour’s usefulness. To some degree, the â€Å"little guy† in us is somewhat envious of Bartleby’s statement, â€Å"I prefer not to†. How many times would we have used this statement in our lives if we had no fear of the  repercussions? As the story progresses and Bartleby’s behaviour is becoming the norm, the banter between Mr. Nippers, Turkey and the lawyer becomes filled with the word â€Å"prefer†, the expression which has caused everyone such grief up to that point. After suggesting that Bartleby â€Å"would prefer to take a quart of good ale every day†, Turkey states, â€Å"Oh. Prefer? Oh yes – queer word. I never use it myself†. He then replies, â€Å"Oh, certainly, sir, if you prefer that I should†, upon being asked to leave the room. Melville is calling on the reader’s â€Å"little guy† to relate to the subconsciously driven behaviour of the characters. As the employer becomes more agitated, as a result of his circle of friends and acquaintances’ comments, Melville shares his mental gymnastics with the reader. His though process begins with the suggestion that, allowing Bartleby’s occupation of his offices would result in him having to â€Å"mason up his remains in the wall†, when he died. This not being a logical solution, he moves on to the question of whether or not Bartleby could be considered a vagrant. The reader is astonished with his conclusion that, not only will he not force Bartleby to move, he, himself will move without Bartleby. However extreme the employer’s solution has become, the reader can offer no solution and is dragged, empathetically, once again, into the rationalization of the employer, yet still amused by the bizarre situation. Melville lends humour to one conversation between the lawyer and Bartleby, in the form of contradiction. While visiting Bartleby at the office where he had been left, the lawyer again makes suggestions to Bartleby of ways in which he can better his circumstances. Along with the usual â€Å"I prefer not to†, all suggestions were punctuated with, â€Å"I am not particular†. It is at this point in the story, although amusing in its use of contradiction, the reader comes to realize that Bartleby is not making any kind of statement in his refusal to conform. Having become more evident as the story has progressed, is the fact that Bartleby’s amusing, shocking and at times humorous behaviour is not personality driven but driven by his mental instability. As the story winds down, Melville allows no more room for amusement at  Bartleby’s expense. Bartleby has wound up in â€Å"The Tombs, or to speak more properly, the Halls of Justice†. He has rejected the lawyer’s attempts at conversation and although the lawyer is still trying to make Bartleby’s life easier in the few ways he can, Bartleby refuses to acknowledge it. The sad rumour is shared with the reader, about Bartleby’s experience in the Dead Letter Office, which helps to explain Bartleby’s mental state. Once again, the reader is required to examine his own conscience. Bartleby, as it turns out, if not a product of humanity with all its flaws, is at least an example of it. He draws our attention to this in exclaiming, â€Å"Ah Bartleby! Ah humanity!† â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener: A Story of Wall-street†, should be considered a tragedy, if not in the nature of the story-telling, then in the unfolding of the plot. The characters’ eccentricities, when coupled with the narrator’s take on them, have allowed Melville to present the tragedy in an amusing manner but Bartleby has lead such a sad life ending in such a regrettable way, this short story is tragic in theme.

College Tuition Should Be More Affordable - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 716 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2019/08/08 Category Education Essay Level High school Tags: College Tuition Essay Did you like this example? College Tuition Should Be More Affordable College tuition costs in the United States keep increasing every year. In my opinion, college tuition rates should drop in price. When I was seventeen, I had the fortune of meeting several college students that were enrolled in various institutions. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "College Tuition Should Be More Affordable" essay for you Create order I was curious about continuing my education, and I asked them what the worst part of college was? Their response was the high tuition costs and the student loans with ten percent or more interest rates on top of their already ten to fifteen thousand dollar a semester college tuition. I believe college tuition rates should lower in order to decrease the stress on the student, ease the financial burden on the parent, and help a student finish college in hopes of obtaining a career. Stress on college students can be overwhelming and stressful. Many of them are away from home for the first time, unaware of the copious hours of studying, and hard work college classes require compared to high school, and are starting in a new area with unfamiliar surroundings. What many are unaware of however is the financial stress that comes with procuring a college degree. It costs on average of $9,410 a year for in state students in tuition at a public four year college (College Costs FAQs). That is $37,640 over a four year span! Due to the high cost of education, many turn to grants and scholarships to avoid paying outrageous interest fees that come with student loans. Unfortunately, grants and scholarships are both forms of unguaranteed funds. Anyone can apply, but not everyone receives money. Due to this many opt to accept student loans. The average student loan interest rate is 3.76% (Interest Rates and Fees). So when all is said and done, the total cost for a student using nothing but student loans to pay for education. Student loans coupled with college tuition is $39,055.26, almost $40,000 dollars. Knowing these facts, I believe college tuition rates should be more affordable, so that students do not have to incur a massive amount of debt before they have a chance to graduate. Parents of college students sometimes pay their college tuition. Many even put money aside from the students birth till they graduate high school in order to pay some or all of the tuition. The average cost of raising a child from birth to age of eighteen is $233,610 (Gajanan). So on top of the costly amount it takes to raise a child, a parent must also worry about setting their child up with money for tuition, so that they may continue their education and have a chance at a better future. By lowering the cost of tuition nationwide would help ease the financial burden on the parent of sending their child to college. Some students do not finish college and drop out due to the financial strain college tuition puts on them. Only 46% of college students complete school once starting it (Waldren). The cost of tuition in 1985 for tuition and fees at a four year institution per year was $2,784. Fast forward to 2007 and the cost has skyrocketed to $10,913 (U.S. Department of Education), almost five times the original amount! A student dropping out of college because of not being able to afford it is a travesty. It is expected by 2020 that 65% of Americas workforce will need either a bachelors or an associates degree (Carnavale 5). However if education becomes better funded and tuition rates drop due to it, then it is logical to believe that college dropout rates will decrease as well. As a result, more students will have a better chance of finishing their degree plan, have better odds of competing, and making a living wage in the career of their choosing. In conclusion, high tuition fees are negatively affecting students and their families. If fees were to drop, making education more affordable and accessible, not only would students stress levels be lowered, but their families would also reap the positive effects of not being financially burdened, while trying to ensure that students receive education. This would also give the student a better chance at accessing a higher paying career, rather than a lower paying job. For the student and the parent, there is nothing to lose by lowering college tuition, rather both gain peace of mind instead.