Omar Bennett
In Capital as Power, authors Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler offer a novel perspective on the theory of capital, arguing that capital is not merely an economic entity but a symbolic quantification of power. They propose that capital represents the organised power of dominant capital groups to shape society according to their interests. This power, referred to as 'rules for the capital', is deeply intertwined with the political, social, and philosophical aspects of capitalism. The book explores the evolution of Marxist thinking on accumulation and the state, providing a historical context to understand the current political and social landscape. By examining the intricate legacies of capitalism, Nitzan and Bichler's work contributes to the ongoing discourse on the nature of power in society.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Type | Power |
| Definition | A symbolic quantification of power |
| Scope | Extends far beyond machines and production lines |
| Relation to utility | Little to do with utility |
| Relation to labour | Little to do with abstract labour |
| Relation to dominant capital groups | Represents the organised power of dominant capital groups to reshape their society |
| Relation to Marxism | Examines the evolution of Marxist thinking on accumulation and the state |
| Relation to history | Puts the current political and social state of the world into a long historical context |
| Relation to entertainment | Surprisingly entertaining to read |
| Relation to authority | Authority refers to accepted power—that is, power that people agree to follow |
| Relation to force | "Condign" (based on force) |
| Relation to resources | "Compensatory" (through the use of various resources) |
| Relation to persuasion | "Conditioned" (the result of persuasion) |
| Sources | "Personality" (individuals), "property" (power-wielders' material resources), and/or "organizational" (from sitting higher in an organisational power structure) |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Capital as Power
In their book "Capital as Power", authors Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler address the theoretical conundrums in the discipline of political economy, specifically the theory of capital, and attempt to provide a more satisfactory answer to the question "What is capital?". The book offers a radical alternative to conventional theories of capitalism, which are considered mired in a deep crisis due to their inability to define what capital truly is.
According to Nitzan and Bichler, capital is not merely an economic entity, but a symbolic quantification of power. It is argued that capital represents the organized power of dominant capital groups to reshape or "creorder" their society. This perspective challenges the traditional views of liberals and Marxists, who tend to define capital in terms of economic metrics such as "utils" or "abstract labour". However, the authors argue that these units are fictitious and do not accurately reflect the accumulation of capital.
The book, written in accessible language, takes readers through the history, assumptions, and limitations of mainstream economics and its associated political theories. It examines the evolution of Marxist thinking on accumulation and the state, and articulates a novel theory of "capital as power" within the context of the capitalist mode of power. By situating these ideas in the classical political economy of the 18th and 19th centuries, the authors provide a rigorous analysis of capitalism in its political, social, and philosophical dimensions.
While some critics find the book's structure cumbersome and its definition of power problematic, others praise its ability to put the current political and social state of the world into a long historical context. "Capital as Power" offers a unique perspective on understanding the world and the complex dynamics of power and capital in society.
Samuel Adams' Vision for the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Power as a Prerogative
Power is a complex and multifaceted concept that operates in various forms and shapes human interactions at different levels, from personal relationships to global politics. One lens through which we can view power is as a prerogative, where power becomes a tool for those who possess it to make and break rules, and where the powerful can violate norms and manage interactions with relative impunity compared to those without power. This idea, known as the "prerogative principle," underscores the unequal application of rules and the ability of the powerful to bend or break them without facing the same consequences as the powerless.
The prerogative principle is evident in various social and political contexts. For example, in a workplace setting, a boss may violate norms of appropriate behaviour with their employees without facing the same repercussions an employee would if they acted similarly. This imbalance in power dynamics allows the boss to initiate or end conversations, change topics, or interrupt others with little restraint. The powerful may also exert control over verbal and non-verbal interactions, such as initiating touch or ending discussions, further illustrating their ability to manage social exchanges.
On a larger scale, governments and leaders possess power that is legitimised by laws, written rules, and regulations, often referred to as rational-legal authority. This type of authority is vested in a particular rationale, system, or ideology, and it grants those in power the ability to create and enforce rules that shape the lives of their citizens. While ideally, leaders should act in the best interests of their constituents, power as a prerogative can lead to its misuse or abuse, as seen in instances of corruption or authoritarian rule.
Understanding power as a prerogative is crucial for recognising the unequal distribution of power in society and the potential for its misuse. It also underscores the importance of accountability and checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power. By acknowledging the dynamics of power as a prerogative, we can strive for more equitable systems where power is distributed more justly and is subject to democratic oversight.
Federalism's Constitutional Roots: Exploring the Document's Core Principles
You may want to see also
Marxist-Feminist Perspective
Marxist-Feminist writers like Michele Barrett highlight the role of ideologies in promoting the virtues of family life. Barrett's classic argument is that the use of women as a "reserve army of labour" is a prime example of this. During wartime, women are expected to take on masculine tasks, and after the war, they are expected to revert to their traditional roles. Barrett argues that the destruction of capitalist economic relations is necessary but not sufficient for the liberation of women.
Marxist-Feminist thought also intersects with the concept of "counter-power," which refers to the countervailing force that oppressed groups can harness to counterbalance or erode the power of elites. This concept, explored by anthropologist David Graeber, includes institutions that oppose state power, such as self-governing communities, radical labour unions, and popular militias. Marxist-Feminists might view this as a strategy for women and other marginalized groups to challenge the dominant power structures that perpetuate inequality.
Additionally, Marxist-Feminist perspectives align with Antonio Gramsci's elaboration on the role of ideology in creating a cultural hegemony that bolsters the power of capitalism and the nation-state. Gramsci, drawing on Niccolò Machiavelli's "The Prince," sought to understand why a Communist revolution occurred in Russia but not in Western Europe. He conceptualized hegemony as a centaur, with two halves. The rear end, the beast, represents power through coercion and brute force, while the front end, the human face, projects power through consent. In Russia, the lack of consensual power allowed for a revolution, while in Western Europe, capitalism maintained its dominance by convincing the working classes that their interests were aligned with those of the capitalist system.
Furthermore, Marxist-Feminist thought intersects with the understanding of power as a prerogative. The prerogative principle asserts that individuals with more power can make and break the rules, violating norms and managing interactions with fewer penalties than powerless people. This dynamic reinforces the powerful person's dependence on their position of power. Marxist-Feminists might critique this aspect of power as perpetuating gender and class inequalities, where men and higher classes hold disproportionate power and reinforce their dominance through rule-making and enforcement.
The Necessary and Proper Clause: Expanding Constitutional Power
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Power and Consent
Capitalism, as described by Vineeth Mathoor in a review of "Capital as Power" by Nitzan and Bichler, is the "natural reality" that shapes our rules, morals, and way of life. This indicates that the rules and regulations within a capitalist system are established and maintained through a form of consensual power. In other words, people agree to abide by these rules because they perceive them as legitimate and beneficial. This type of power, termed "rational-legal authority" by Max Weber, is vested in a particular rationale, system, or ideology rather than an individual. For example, a nation that follows a constitution applies this type of authority, where power is derived from the consent of the governed.
Consent can also be examined through the lens of charismatic authority, where leaders gain power through their personal qualities and appeal. Followers of charismatic leaders accept their power because they are drawn to their vision, charisma, or ability to offer innovative solutions during times of crisis. Charismatic leaders, such as Hitler, Napoleon, or Winston Churchill, can inspire their followers to make sacrifices or endure hardships. However, this type of power is typically short-lived, and these leaders may be just as likely to be tyrannical as they are heroic.
In "The Anatomy of Power", John Kenneth Galbraith proposes three types of power: condign (based on force), compensatory (through the use of resources), and conditioned (the result of persuasion). Consent is closely tied to conditioned power, where power is gained through the persuasion of individuals or groups. This can be observed in the concept of "counter-power", where oppressed groups utilise social institutions to counterbalance or erode the power of elites.
Additionally, the Marxist tradition, as elaborated by Antonio Gramsci, recognises the role of ideology in creating a cultural hegemony that bolsters the power of capitalism and the nation-state. Gramsci argues that capitalist hegemony in Western Europe, particularly Italy, succeeded in exercising consensual power by convincing the working classes that their interests were aligned with the system. This contrasts with Russia, where the lack of consent led to a Communist revolution.
Overall, the interplay between power and consent is complex and multifaceted. Power can be derived from consent through rational-legal authority, charismatic leadership, conditioned power, and the creation of hegemonic ideologies. Understanding the dynamics between power and consent is crucial for comprehending the rules and systems that govern society, particularly within a capitalist framework.
Understanding the Take Care Clause of the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Power and Authority
Types of Power
Different types of power have been identified by various scholars and writers. John Kenneth Galbraith, in "The Anatomy of Power" (1983), categorizes power as "condign" (based on force), "compensatory" (through the use of resources), or "conditioned" (resulting from persuasion). Galbraith also identifies the sources of power as "personality" (individuals), "property" (material resources of power-wielders), and "organizational" (derived from a higher position in a hierarchy).
Robert Greene, in his book outlining the "48 Laws of Power," provides a set of principles for gaining and maintaining power, such as using enemies, keeping others dependent, taking credit for others' work, and creating a cult following. These laws are intended to provide strategies for those seeking to become "master players" in the game of power.
Another perspective on power is offered by the concept of "counter-power" or "anti-power," described by anthropologist David Graeber. Counter-power refers to the force that oppressed groups can use to counterbalance or challenge the power of elites. This can include self-governing communities, radical labor unions, or popular militias.
Authority
Authority is the accepted form of power, where people willingly follow the directives of those in positions of power. Max Weber, an economist and sociologist, distinguished between different types of authority. He introduced the concept of "rational-legal authority," where power is derived from laws, written rules, and regulations, rather than the individual implementing them. A nation following a constitution exemplifies this type of authority. On a smaller scale, an employee handbook in a workplace can represent rational-legal authority.
Weber also recognized "charismatic authority," where followers are drawn to a leader's personal qualities, such as charisma or innovative ideas, especially during times of crisis. Charismatic leaders, like Hitler, Napoleon, or Winston Churchill, can inspire extraordinary devotion and motivate followers to make sacrifices. However, they tend to hold power for short periods and may be as likely to be tyrannical as heroic.
The interplay of power and authority is evident in the context of capitalism, as explored by Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler in their book, "Capital as Power." They argue that capital is not merely an economic entity but a symbolic quantification of power. According to them, capital represents the ability of dominant capital groups to reshape society, going beyond machines and production lines. Nitzan and Bichler critique mainstream economics and offer a novel political economy perspective, situating their analysis in the classical political economy of the 18th and 19th centuries.
In a similar vein, Italian writer Antonio Gramsci, building on Niccolò Machiavelli's ideas, examined the role of ideology in creating a cultural hegemony that bolsters the power of capitalism and the nation-state. Gramsci argued that capitalist hegemony in Western Europe, particularly Italy, relied on consensual power, where the working classes were convinced that their interests were aligned with those of the capitalist system.
Congress Powers: Understanding the Legislative Branch's Reach
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The authors of 'Capital as Power', Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler, argue that capital is a symbolic quantification of power, representing the organised power of dominant capital groups to reshape society. They offer a radical alternative to mainstream economics and its associated theories of politics.
The book is written in simple language, making it accessible to lay readers and experts alike. It is also surprisingly entertaining to read.
The book provides a novel approach to political economy, examining the classical political economy of the 18th and 19th centuries and the evolution of Marxist thinking on accumulation and the state. It also articulates an innovative theory of 'capital as power' and a new history of the 'capitalist mode of power'.
