Power, and it's effects on humans.

[Revan]

I've recently got my Mordants Need: A Man Rides Through; back... and I was reading a certain part that caught my interest.... and thought I'd make a topic on it...

Now, as this quote is from a Mordants Need novel, you're probably wandering why the hell is it in this forum instead of the Mordants Need forum. The answer is simple, I'm not discussing Mordants Need, I'm discussing humans and the effect power has on them; I simply got the idea from Mordants Need.

Anyways, this is the quote;

"I see." Terisa had learned a lot from Castellan Lebbick: She had learned how to speak harshly to angry men. "You think an Imager can't be honest. You think that talent -- an accident of birth -- precludes loyalty. Or compassion. or even ethics."
Still the Termigan didn't shift in his seat; he didn't raise his head or his voice. "In the end," he articulated flatly, "no Imager is loyal to anyone but himself. That the bature of power. It seduces -- it requires. An Imager can appear loyal only as long as his power and his loyalty don't come into conflict."

Later on in the same conversation:

"if you're telling me the truth-Which is always possible, I suppose-you haven't known about your talent very long. You;ve only had a few days to discover what it does to you. My lady, I'll tell you what it does.
"It teaches you -- no, it forces you to believe you're more important than other people. Because you can do more. If you're smart enough, and strong enough, and nobody gets in your way, you can change the outcome of the world. You can remake Mordant in your own image. So how can you let anybody stand in your way? How can you let anybody tell you what to do? How can you submit to any kind of control?"

I thought this was very interesting, and started to think about it. And I think this is completely right in a lot of ways. Let's say hypothetically you had a power that no-one had before... like being able to move things with just a thought. What type of effect would it have on you. Or on anyone?

Are people with power made to feel they can do more? And as a result, unable to sumbit to any kind of control? How does it effect us?

I mean it's a well known fact that most if not all humans desire power of some kind. And what if they get that power? What then?

erm... anyways... I'm off.

[Avatar]

Look forward to thinking about this for tomorrow. I will just quickly say that even people without any kind of power are usually, if not always, unwilling to submit to control.

If you have power though, its much harder for anyone to make you submit.

--Avatar

[ChoChiyo]

I have no desire for the power to bend others to my will--I require only enough power to do the things I need to and want to do each day.

I am of the opinion that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I think, as your quote says, people with power often get the idea that because they can do something, it is their right to do so.

I think that is what has gotten the Bush administration in such a vat of crap.

Might does NOT make right, in my book.

Even though I myself have no desire for power (beyond the simple, every day power to rise, work, eat, sleep, and play), I would fight like hell against anyone who tried to control and manipulate me through their power.

[duchess of malfi]

But some people come to have great power and do not seem to become corrupted by it. I am thinking of people like Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, and Mahtama Ghandi here. People who used the power of voice/example to make positive changes in the world.

I think of power as being a tool like any other -- it is how it is used, and what it is used for that can cause problems.

[ChoChiyo]

But some people come to have great power and do not seem to become corrupted by it. I am thinking of people like Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, and Mahtama Ghandi here. People who used the power of voice/example to make positive changes in the world.

I think of power as being a tool like any other -- it is how it is used, and what it is used for that can cause problems.

I think the difference here is in the type of power these people have. They had the power of love and reason. Formidable power, indeed.

The power to legally or physically force people to do what you want as opposed to what they want is the corrupting kind.

Now we will have to get into a discussion about the types and hierarchy of power.

[lhaughlhann]

I think the difference here is in the type of power these people have. They had the power of love and reason. Formidable power, indeed.

Well put, I read in TIME'S Top 100 people of the last century that the respect Mother Theresa had earned was so overwhelming, that at a Charity dinner (for her orphan cause) with top dignitaries etc, she managed to insult all the people attending, within the first 3 minutes of her speech, accusing everyone on the way they conduct their lives, with comments directed at individuals without mentioning names and still kept the crowed seated and in support of her Cause, due to that respect.

(That didn't come out how i wanted it to, but that was the gist of it).


Still i am not too sure how easily we can say certain people are not corrupted by power, no matter how much they have done for this world. One never truly knows another mans nature.

[lurch]

...two things to consider,,,what goes on between the ears. In school you notice you have the ability to get people to follow you, in college you become the leader, former of ideas, and administrator of the execution of the idea..in the work place, you meet the real world and compete,co-exist, and even learn to loose,,but you know you have the talent, the skill. What do you do?..wait around for " your" time or jump on the next great bandwagon inorder to exercise your stretch of the ego. Politicians make this fatal mistake . Geo. Wallace jumped on the States Rights issue during school de-segregation and became a southern cracker politician as a result. He could of bided his time and temperment and just been a Southern Democrat. Thats just one example out of many.
..And, like the politicans case,,Power is something that is given back to the Talented,,theOne who can do more. i can make a glass jump into my hand..so what?,,what can people gain from that besides being a side show freak? But if i can make glasses of water march across the Sahara desert and turn sand dunes into olive groves,,well then,,there is Power that comes back to one so talented.
...The truth is, people in America anyway,,aren't taught about Power,,its responsibilities,,its problems etc. We do have morals and ethics constently reviewed in church services and sermons, and now in Corporate boardrooms and seminars. This goes full circle back to between the ears. Power by itself,,is comparable to a paranoid schitzoiphrenic. he Knows the world is out to get him and ain'ty nobody going to change that reality for him. There is power there. ..But , power with compassion isn't even a guarantee you won't be a fool ( see current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.)..Power hasto be accomplied by wisdom and compassion. Perhaps that is why tribal leaders of ancient times where usually the eldest ofthe tribe..a popular myth anyway.
...Point is ..try this analogy...some folks say money is power,,Well,,give a million dollars to a 18 year old and chances are good it will all be gone by the time he/she reach 25. Give a million dollars to a 50 year old and by the time he/ she are 55, they'll be able to retire and live quite comfortably for the rest of their life just on the interest,,leaving a hansom inheritance for the next generation to do the same....Power is the same way. by itself, it will be wasted soon enough,,but with wisdom and compassion,,an individual can make the right choices that reach into the generations of the future. Hopefully it reaches into the good,,but in all realities, there is no guarantee...
...Just remember one basic thing...The Power any one person has,,is usually what is given by others, rather than what emminates from within.
...MEL

[Avatar]

Good posts guys. Especially like Cho's mention of the types of power, or, by extension, the basis of the power that they wield.

Personally, I wouldn't mind power. Not much. Just enough to bend the nations of earth to my will would suit me fine.

But I'm an egostistical megalomaniac myself.

I also think lurch makes a good point about power being conferred on others by the people who would be obediant to it. After all, as I've said before, if all the soldiers just sat down and said "bugger this", do you think the generals would go and have at it amongst themselves? Not bloody likely. We complain, but we enable those with power to excercise it over us.

--Avatar

[dennisrwood]

Avatar: we would take a representative of the troops and execute them. the rest will fall into it.

i know about power, on a micro scale i wield it everday. it is nice, a rush. but it can turn quickly, and it can eat at you. i have seen too many tinpots, and on such a small scale. but power is a bitch to harness.

[Avatar]

Yeah, I sometimes wonder if it's not even more "corrupting" on a small scale. Or at least, those who wield it on that scale seem to be just as affected by it as those who wield it nationally/globally.

Regarding executing one guy, that's the whole point. If after the executed him, everybody else still refused to play, what are they gonna do? Execute everybody?

By allowing that excercise of power to affect us, by submitting to it, we tacitly imply that we find it acceptable to be controlled in that manner.

--Avatar

[Nathan]

And how are you going to execute someone if every soldier refuses orders? Do it yourself? I doubt they'll stand for that.

[ChoChiyo]

And how are you going to execute someone if every soldier refuses orders? Do it yourself? I doubt they'll stand for that.

Sadly, there will always be a red-eyed group of fanatics salivating for the opportunity to do it for "God and country"--never stopping to think about whether it is the right thing to do, because, God help them, they trust their government and their superiors to be altruist.



Sorry. The idea of trusting the government always reduces me to hysterics.

Or worse--they'd collect some families of soldiers and start executing them.

Yup. I can see it.

[duchess of malfi]

I also think lurch makes a good point about power being conferred on others by the people who would be obediant to it. After all, as I've said before, if all the soldiers just sat down and said "bugger this", do you think the generals would go and have at it amongst themselves? Not bloody likely. We complain, but we enable those with power to excercise it over us.

--Avatar

Actaully, something like that did happen for a brief time during WW1. I read a book about it a few months ago. I'll go digging through the stacks of books near my bed and see if I can find it and its author.

[duchess of malfi]

Here you go: Silent Night; The Story of the World War I Christmas Truce by Stanley Weintraub

Quick summary from the back of the book:

In the early months of World War I, on Christmas Eve, men on both sides laid down their arms and joined in a spontaneous celebration. Despite orders to continue shooting, the unofficial truce spread across the front lines. Even the participants found what they were doing was incredible: Germans placed Christmas trees on trench parapets, warring soldiers sang carols, and men on opposing sides shared food parcels from home. They climbed from the trenches to meet in "No Man's Land" where they buried their dead, exchanged gifts, ate and drank together, and even played soccer.

Throughout his narrative, Stanley Weintraub uses the recollections of the men who were there, as well as their letters and diaries, to illuminate the fragile truce and bring to life this extraordinary moment in time.

It is an interesting and well written book, which reads more like a novel than a history.

[ChoChiyo]

Here you go: Silent Night; The Story of the World War I Christmas Truce by Stanley Weintraub

Quick summary from the back of the book:

In the early months of World War I, on Christmas Eve, men on both sides laid down their arms and joined in a spontaneous celebration. Despite orders to continue shooting, the unofficial truce spread across the front lines. Even the participants found what they were doing was incredible: Germans placed Christmas trees on trench parapets, warring soldiers sang carols, and men on opposing sides shared food parcels from home. They climbed from the trenches to meet in "No Man's Land" where they buried their dead, exchanged gifts, ate and drank together, and even played soccer.

Throughout his narrative, Stanley Weintraub uses the recollections of the men who were there, as well as their letters and diaries, to illuminate the fragile truce and bring to life this extraordinary moment in time.

It is an interesting and well written book, which reads more like a novel than a history.

That gives me goosebumps.

And goes to show that us people are all good. It's the leaders who've been besotted with power who are bad.

Alas.

If only we could all see it.

Is a Muslim child less valuable than a Christian child? A U.S. child less than a Iraqi child?

Which children are NOT worthy of life?

Alas, alas.

[Avatar]

Aah yes, I'm very familiar with the story, although not with the book, (which I'm now going to have to look for).

As Cho says, it's the leaders from whcih the problems spring, not the poor buggers doing it. Apart from the fact that they continue doing it.

Why don't we just stop? It's very rarely that I meet somebody that I can't get along with on one level or another, and I'd guess that most people are the same. (OK, I'm pretty tolerant, but most people could be, if they just tried.)

The story of that christmas is beautiful. We should be trying to make it more than an isolated incident though. Hell, we should make it the norm. It stands out so much simply because it's not. But it could be.

--Avatar