User:JREverest/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/2020-21/Seminar group 6/Power

Power in Poetry

Poetry is often seen as an art, a literary form to express one’s feelings or write about the beauty of the world. It is, as Edgar Allan Poe said, “a rhythmical creation of beauty”. However, throughout history, poetry has been used as a mean of power, to denunciate injustice and political oppression. For instance, poetry has been used to denounce colonialism, violence against minorities and religious conflicts.

First, poetry has long been used to denounce colonialism, its violence and its injustice. For example, Aimé Césaire uses rhythm and violent images as a mean of power in the affirmation of the black culture. This is indeed a use of power as images such as “whip” and “sore” as well as “frigates” associated with a rhythm reminding of the African culture creates a statement on his view of colonialism, and uses it as a mean of affirming his identity and fighting back the oppression and the grief engraved in his culture. Hence, power in poetry has been used to denounce and condone colonialism.

In “How we could have lived or died this way”, Martin Espada makes use of a range of imagery such as the imagery of hands or graphic violence to convey the conflict between the minorities represented as a unique character and the rest of the society represented as the oppressor. He narrates the arrest of black and Hispanic minorities to condone police brutality and injustice towards minorities. Strong vocabulary such as “barehanded” represents their vulnerability against the oppressing society, the repetition of the word “suffocate” reinforces this idea of lack of freedom and makes the reader feel that stifling impression. Hence, poetry is also a tool of fighting oppression.

Lastly, poets have used poetry to denounce religious conflict whether in Ireland with Seamus Heaney or back in the 16th century with Agrippa d’Aubigné denouncing the war between the catholics and the protestants in France. Again, violent images and rhetorical devices are used to denounce the absurd violence. Here too, it can be seen that poetry as a discipline is not so much of an art but rather a powerful tool in fighting oppression, war, and misery.

Screen Theory and Power in Filmmaking

Screen theory (also known as psychoanalytic film theory) is a collection of ideas in France and Britain in 1970s and 1980s on how to interpret movies and how movies “work” on people. Its main argument - the idea that the film creates a new reality for the viewer, in which the angle and perspective of the camera have power over the spectator thereby giving the latter a new sense of self and identity over the moving frame.

Screen theory denies the essence of a movie as being the direct mirror of the real physical and mental existence. The general opinion is that movies do not have any literal objective meaning of one’s reality, although, movies still keep a realistic (psychological) effect on its spectators. And thus filmmakers are those who have the power during a movie’s screen-time to create a lasting subjective effect on the spectator (and then it is not the spectator who has the power to give a meaning to the spectacle, as it was understood previously).

In his paper, Noël Carroll (1985) went into further depth and explained what makes popular ("Hollywood-style") movies powerful is not the type of the medium (a moving image), but rather the adaptation of this type to the wider necessities of its audience. An adaptation is as powerful as is its creator. Whilst being exposed to a movie, the spectator is automatically engaged with different manifestations of the filmmakers vision of the world where both human and nonhuman “agents” live - and so the filmmaker has the power to construct feelings of belonging for the spectator, and this all will leave a lasting effect. Noël Carroll (1985) also names 3 elements which allow movies to exercise their dominance over the viewer, them being - a romantically suggestive narration, a successful illustrative representation and a fluid, shifting framing.

The debate on filmmaking and its power actualises a significant question – whether it is important at all to discuss how power dynamics are created and exercised in the cinema. Carroll’s (1985) paper suggests that by analysing what makes a movies adaptation powerful (thereby awarding filmmaker with power dominance) allows to make further conclusions in other disciplines on how these power dynamics can connect different kinds of spectators, no matter what race, culture or educational situation they represent.

Communication Studies: the Power of Social Media

In the modern world of the twenty-first century, social media has arisen as one of the most influential aspects of our society. Although its appearance was made just twenty years ago, it has shaped the way we communicate and interact today, and taken up a monumental role in our lives. This called for the making of a new kind of discipline, meant to adapt to our new norms. In addition to already existing communication degrees, other courses such as social media and communication studies, digital marketing and communication, and media studies have developed in universities across the globe in the past ten years.

It is important to discuss the power role of these technological developments and the impact they've had in the way people see things, receive information, and how their way of interacting with each other has advanced. For example, the 2016 American elections Trump vs. Clinton is a strong example of the power of social media. The effect of Donald Trump’s tweets on the social media base Twitter was considerable: influencing masses and the perpetual spread of lies. Additionally, the Cambridge Analytica case and its collaboration with Facebook to obtain personal data and thus alter voting patterns in the 2016 US presidential election shows the power held by social media, to the extent to which it was able to influence democratic political events. Although news has already been called the “fourth estate” or “fourth power” to democracy, social media has amplified this. As it takes up a bigger and ever growing role in our society, its power in terms of influence and utility increases.

Although means of communication such as television, radio, and newspaper have always influenced and informed people, nothing can be compared to how rapidly the news spread in social media, as well as the fact that anyone and everyone can post what they want. There is a lack of editing and revision, therefore impacting the quality and truthfulness of information.

The Power of Social Media during the COVID-19 pandemic

The most recent example we can find today is how social media affect the behaviour of people during the COVID-19 pandemic? Indeed, social media has an impact on people’s behaviour, and this for many different reasons. First, social media are not regulated, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a critical time for people, data show that fake news has exploded. Furthermore, according to Lon Safko, a tech industry consultant, who wrote The Social Media Bible: "Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter make it easier to propagate fake news and conspiracy theories easier than ever". On the second hand, people tend to watch social media in order to get informed instead of looking at the mainstream media. Ultimately, people who get wrong information on media such as a so-called link between COVID-19 and the 5G, or the government hiding the death tolls, are more likely to not follow the governance guidelines and thus will put people’s lives in danger. And according to a research lead by King’s College, 60 per cent of the people who said that COVID-19 symptoms and 5G are linked, got the information on Youtube.

The Power of Art: Paintings

Art is “the making of objects, images, music, etc. that are beautiful or that express feelings”. There is evidence of art from as early as 40 000 years ago, but the exact moment art emerged as an activity isn’t identifiable. People use art as a tool of expression and creation, it represents a means of catharsis for those who practice it as well as for those who experience it. Hence, when revisiting art products throughout history, one shouldn’t be surprised of the impact such creations have had on their contemporary audience.

To add, some art critics suggest that paintings can function as mediators between the observer and the world of politics. More specifically, paintings are transcending objects that have the power to convey the status-quo of politics of a specific time, meaning they have the ability to define an alternate state of the political situation through the painter’s subjectivity. However, Pettegree (2019) argues, that art, although being a powerful expression in itself, in the past, was inevitably affected by politics, and always was somewhat of political essence. Other critics suggest that paintings have the power of constructing a certain model of self, and especially find and put this “self” in a historical context. Jian (2020) mentions the power of paintings in China – i.e., he states that artworks of Cai Liang had the power to enhance one’s feeling of belonging to a country during the atrocities happening in the wartime.

Leonardo Da Vinci’s (1452-1519) drawing of a fetus inside a dissected womb (“Studies of the Fetus in the Womb”-1511) was highly influential within anatomy studies. He managed to depict the position of the fetus and some of the extra-fetal structures with almost photographic accuracy. This drawing refuted the theory that the womb was divided into multiple chambers and veraciously portrayed its infrastructure. Hence, he forever changed the principles of developmental biology during his time.

“The Black Square” (1915) by Kazimir Malevich also represents an art product which revolutionised people’s perception. The painting is of a simple black square in the centre of a white canvas. It sparked controversy as it seemed almost absurd to exhibit such an oddly simple piece of art amongst works of high complexity and an accurate representation of reality. However, Malevich’s purpose was precisely to escape the ordinary approach and disentangle art from its generally assigned role to mimic reality. He wanted to create an artwork which refers to nothing but itself and exists in a “non-objective world”. After its display in The Last Futurist Exhibition 0.10 in 1915, the perception around what is art generally changed.

Furthermore, art can be used as a strong political tool. Images are often created to make symbols, which allows art to be part of large power plays like propaganda for example, the influence of masses through biased information, used to promote a certain political point of view. During Nazi Germany and the URSS, the promotion of totalitarian ideologies was made through the making of posters, post cards, and cartoons. The use of art at this time was therefore critical as it helped the spread of fear and falsity throughout entire nations and even the world. In a lesser extreme of patriotism, the United States has also used posters to promote war effort. The “I want you for the US Army” and the “We can do it” posters helped spread the need for young Americans to join WWI, as the way the posters were drawn in a manner to make people feel heroic and proud for joining the army.

In addition, caricatures of political leaders have always been a means of criticism. The publishing of certain images through newspapers delivered to the masses helped influence many opinions and got certain people’s perspectives on different political leaders out in the open. These kinds of drawings are still used today, where you can find political leaders drawn in a grotesque manner and exaggerated features, in the goal to ridicule the targeted person or create a satirical image.

Art, as an object or as a message, has the power to change the flow of perception through its accurate depictions, boldness or the ideology behind it. Nevertheless, art has consistently shown us that there are no limits to human expression.

The power of English in scientific research

With 80-90% of all natural science research papers published in English , the language is recognised as the lingua franca of the scientific world. This includes papers published in countries in which English is neither the most commonly spoken language nor the native tongue .

Publications for international consumption used to be predominantly Latin, but with Latin dying out and the growing dominance of universities in the US and the UK, English became the accepted scholarly language by the late 20th century . Prestigious scientific journals and common peer review/publication sites such as Scopus or Web of Science favour and present English papers over non-English papers ; English papers are also shown to have a significantly higher number of citations .

English has a disproportionate power in the world of scientific research because, for many reasons, it is not the most accessible language. In 2015, 22.2% of the world’s scientific researcher population is based in the EU, and the second densest region is China with 19.1% . Although widely spoken, English is not the most common native language in the EU: it is German, followed by French . In China, the most commonly spoken language is Chinese. The countries with the highest density of researchers are Israel, Denmark, and Sweden , where the native languages spoken are Hebrew, Danish, and Swedish respectively. These statistics show that despite institutional pressure to publish in English to receive recognition , it is not the native language of many scientific researchers.

Translation is not always a feasible solution for scientists . A project may not have sufficient funds to have research translated, limiting scientific contributions from poorer institutes, foreign institutes, and institutes based in countries there is minimal government funding for their research. Translation also requires the scholar to be proficient in difficult scientific vocabulary in not one but two languages, or for a translator to understand the difficult content . There may be terms that exist in one vernacular but not the other, making a perfect translation impossible.

Publishing exclusively in English creates an uneven distribution of knowledge globally . Since scientific language is often complicated, it is unlikely the average person can read scientific papers in a language other than their mother tongue. The most common native languages worldwide are Chinese, followed by Spanish . While English speakers are able to benefit from a worldwide pooling of knowledge, this research is not accessible by a greater majority of the world’s population.

Power in Anthropology: How did Belgian colonization change the development of Rwandan society?

Colonization and control seeking from the western countries changed the development of societies and cultures in many colonized countries, such as Rwanda. The colonization of Rwanda by Germany and then Belgium led to a huge internal conflict between two communities, the Tutsi and the Hutu, which led to the death of 800 000 people and is known today as the Rwandan genocide. Prior to the colonization, Rwanda was a peaceful country where Hutu and Tutsi lived together, spoke the same language and had the same religion. The only difference between Tutsi and Hutu was that the Tutsi were usually herdsmen and Hutu usually farmers. Also, they could move from one group to an other. Some historians said that if they had more than 10 cattle, Hutu could become Tutsi. When Belgium gained control of the territory of Rwanda in 1924, they favoured the Tutsi, the minority over the Hutu, in order to control the country, and make it as profitable as possible for them. They notably used the Social Darwinism theory, and the "science race", by "studying" morphological traits (nose, height, skull...) and concluded that Tutsi were scientifically superior because they had more Europeans traits, and thus were more able to survive. . They decided to educate them and put them in more important administrative places, which aggravated the separation between the two communities and lead to the feeling that the Hutu were powered by the minority, the Tutsi. Later, when the first ID cards were brought by the Belgians, these categories appeared in the first Rwandan ID cards as "ethnicity". However, under the United Nations pressure, the Belgians colonists saw that it was inevitable to end the colonization and that the majority (i.e. the Hutu) would start revolting. They also feared the rise of communism and socialism. They, therefore, started to take the side of the Hutu and argued for a more democratic organization. They organized an election, and the Hutu won since they were the majority. By then, some activists started to become either pro-Hutu and pro-Tutsi. At this time, "the political struggle in Rwanda was never really a quest for equality; the issue was only who would dominate the ethnically bipolar state" said Jean-Paul Gourevitch in 1998. To conclude, the Belgian, used the “Divide et impera” strategy by using power as indirect coercion to convince people that they were from different ethnicities and therefore divide them in order to gain power and control , which completely changed the fate of the Rwandan and their country.

The power of the American Dream ideology on societal beliefs

Power can be defined as having the capability to influence and to pursue acts of control over situations and people. Ideologies can play a role in the development and rise of power as well as in the preservation of existing power. It is therefore argued that ideologies are used by powerful figures or members of society to justify and maintain their social status and positions of power.

James Truslow Adams was the first to present the idea of the American dream, presenting a prosperous America in which each upcoming generation would live an improved life and where under any circumstances if you work hard enough, you will reach success. Surveys and tests were conducted to test the credibility of the American dream by US citizens and the majority concluded that they believed that in in order to succeed in the United States, behaviour and hard work are essential and the most important factors to achieve this. What the ideology fails to consider is the idea of success not be solely relied on individual actions as it focuses the attainment success on hard work. This ignores factors such as inequalities both economic and social. Although these inequalities arguably partly arise as consequences of the American dream ideal, they are a paradox to what the idea of the dream is supposed to represent.

This shows how attention from inequalities can be stirred by the power of the American dream ideology by placing focus on individualistic factors such as hard work and ignoring societal disadvantages such as racial, income or wealth inequalities. It could be argued that this is a way to shift focus on the advantages held by society's elites and as stated above, to maintain their social status unchallenged by the disadvantaged in society. By creating an ideology that supports the individualistic idea of hard work being the determining factor of success , it could be argued that those who are disadvantaged are more likely to blame their failure in achieving success on their lack of effort rather than on societal structures.

Despite criticism of the American Dream in widespread media that raises awareness of the harm that the ideology creates, such as in American canonical literature, it persists . One reason is that the documents on which the country of America was founded - the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution - back up the idea that no one has advantages over a fellow citizen. The Declaration of Independence (US 1776) states that “all men have created equal” and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution dictates that American citizens should be equally protected by the law, and cannot be unjustly denied of “life, liberty, or property” . The idea of basic equality as an intrinsic part of being American contributes to the idea that hard work is one of the only ways to rise above others.

Ideologies can have control over people’s views, as explored above within the ideology of The American Dream which holds control over people’s perception of success and social structure. This demonstrates how ideologies may hold power over peoples believes which can consequently lead to a misinterpretation of reality, shown in The American dream ideology by overlooking the factors of societal inequalities and disadvantages in achieving success.  

The psychological power of the American Dream

American Dream is responsible for a distinct branched of an American-individualism, which gave rise to positive psychology. Positive psychology has officially become a new domain of psychology in 1998 thanks to Martin Seligman activity in the American Psychological Association. Bases of positive psychology are: positive individual experience, character traits and positive institutions. Positive psychology reflects what is understood as 'American Dream' - it promotes personal development, promotion and fulfilment through individual effort. It shapes the perception of an individual of both, psychological and social world. Its attachment to individualism undermines the significance of societal and cultural institutions within society. It is often argued to be asocial, ignoring ethnicity, gender, class or power relations.

Power in museology

Museums can be seen as a central legitimate institution for knowledge and power diffusion directed to a wide audience from education to academics or anyone visiting. They hold a knowledge that is interlinked with power. This idea is mainly based on Michel Foucault’s view of knowledge power and their inseparable dynamic (power produces knowledge just like knowledge fuels power). This view strongly influenced the perception and study of museums in previous years. Therefore, power is deeply intertwined with the way we create exhibitions - also known as museology- and this power lies in the museum’s dispersion of governmental, societal and economical contractions.

Indeed, power in museums can be found through the way they can shape a general long-lasting mindset in a society through temporary exhibitions or collections. In other words, museums are able to leave an imprint on any visitor which will eventually linger and influence his political, economic and cultural views. Ideologies are then relayed by museums through their exhibitions. The narratives and displays used in museology to present artefacts is a form of didactic power in the way that they are able to give a universal meaning and explanation to them. More specifically, the displays are usually in accordance with the dominant ideology and social constructions. Museology is a tool to shape and construct people’s identity accordingly to the popular social constructions. Therefore, museums are the ideal setting for a nation to impose a certain point of view or authority in events or culture which highlights their power.

It would be worth noting that museums are also a site of controversial debates in their definition of popular knowledge. These debates underline the museums’ important power as there would be no debate if they did not have any influential power in culture. In short, museums have a political stance and power as the display and presentation of a culture is never neutral and always includes a political view. Museology conveys and fuels a certain power which influences the audience in many ways.

Power in the Modern Media Sphere

Media is defined as the means of transmission of massive information. Media includes tabloids, television, as well as newspaper, magazines, or even cinema. It appeared with the need to communicate and the lack of information felt by the population. Even though it was ubiquitous before, this phenomenon really developed during World War II, with propaganda especially.

Evolving in parallel of new technologies, the media power gain has been exponential. Power can be emphasized as the capacity to influence and impact people and events. And as a result, the effects of power can be beneficial as well as destructive. Indeed, as media was born, its aim was to inform people of the worldwide situation and with the development of and the internet and tabloids, information became even more accessible. We also attend the importance of media during the current global pandemic as it informs us of the latest governmental guidance and all countries around the world.

In addition to that, with media, propaganda and censorship, was born freedom of expression, which is a fundamental human right and includes the freedom of opinion. Unfortunately, it is not applied all around the world, especially in dictatures and other non-democratic policies, which causes geopolitical tensions about the lack of information communicated by governments as we can see with the current genocide happening in China, and the lack of knowledge the international community has about it; or even North Korea with strict control over communication by the government. But freedom of expression in the media also creates important conflicts, especially of cultural and religious nature as we have seen with the terrorist attacks in Paris in January 2015 which happened following the publishment of a caricature of Muhammed.

The development of instant media also helped improve security with for example terrorist attacks, protests movements or even environmental events like fires or hurricanes, it allows populations to avoid risk zones.

Moreover, as said previously, media can also be dangerous, by communicating hateful contents or inciting people, especially with social media, to have dangerous behaviors. For instance, some challenges on social media went viral but turned out to be also very dangerous. Social media also have an important impact on young people especially, my communicating beauty ideals and criteria, which might force people to mistreat themselves in order to be in those criteria. Those superficial ideals communicated by fashion trends and relayed by media, also revealed social misconduct as online harassment and bullying.

As a result, media is an amazing benefit from technological progress, but happens to be as well a very dangerous place if not controlled and regulated, or taken too seriously.

Power in Scientific Research and Policy Making

In contemporary scientific research, any research activities carried out will require funding and resources, but there are often constraints that exist, which lead to competition for economic resources, as well as for human resources and the attention of the public. Therefore, there often needs to be a “rationale” or argument for why particular scientific research should warrant spending. This brings into question the “usefulness of science”, and why some research is deemed important whilst others are deemed not useful. According to the British Chemist and Nobel Prize laureate, Harold Kroto, there are many theories, but only a few that are true. There are “scientific” theories which are considered to be “true” or “facts” if we have used experiments to see that they work and we understand why. There are also theories which are “un-scientific” because they did not yield the same experimental results. However, it takes time and resources to experimentally test theories, and therefore it must be decided which paths should be pursued and which paths should be left. The question then arises, of who should make these decisions, along with the issue of the practical impact of scientific knowledge, and how it can be applied in different settings, such as policy making.

Power in scientific policy

In making scientific policy, policymakers may make use of only the partial and incomplete knowledge which is available to them. Whether this is by accident or by strategic design, Grundmann and Stehr state that policies are “never based on a comprehensive knowledge base.” It is possible, therefore, for politicians to choose the research results which best support their political interests, especially where there is an “excess of objectivity”; when there is a large amount of varying research findings, as these can be used to support a wide range of policies. Furthermore, in some situations there is already a policy consensus before research is even carried out; the research only legitimises the predefined policy. Scientific research then does not provide the information needed to guide policy, but instead can prevent policy from being formulated, if one research finding cancels out another. Krasner presented the view of “ideas as hooks”, suggesting that ideas only serve to emphasise what already exists, and legitimise existing policies. However, in some situations, new knowledge can also be formed in the light of scientific research, which can destabilise policy in a particular field, or change interests and opinions.

In making policies relating to scientific research, technical experts are also consulted in addition to the available scientific evidence. A distinction can be made between scientific research and expertise: whilst scientific research (conclusions published in a paper or data stored on a computer) is unlikely to influence policy itself, experts can be employed to use the information, and apply it to different contexts to influence policy. How this information is applied, and which information is chosen, could vary depending on the expertise, and therefore the power lies with those who can be trusted to use scientific research to provide the expert opinion.

Scientific misconduct and fraud

Scientific misconduct or fraud is a "violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behaviour in scientific research", with fraud being further defined as involving an intentional and deliberate action, whilst misconduct may not.

In scientific research, not all misconduct behaviours are labelled as fraud, suggesting that some types of misrepresentation of bias are acceptable. The narrow definition of fraud can be seen to benefit certain groups more than others; since some situations are characterised as fraud whilst others are not, the social definition being utilised is the one that is convenient to those in power in science. This can relate to the sponsors of scientific research or to the community itself, and Brian Martin presents the idea of a "political scientific elite" - a relatively small number of scientists and bureaucrats who make decisions about research. They have a dominant influence on the priorities within science, working with others in similar positions within government and industry, but are also interested in maintaining the autonomy of science.

Power in Politics

In social sciences, power is understood as the ability of an individual to influence others. This includes both their beliefs and behaviours. Legitimate power that can be held by an individual or a group in politics is called authority. It is a form of identification of political legitimacy, which supports an individual right to hold the power of government. The means of exercising could be through both, compliance or obedience.

Five bases Theory of power

There are multiple theories of power within politics. One of them is French and Raven's bases of power developed by social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven, which produced a schema to identify and judge how the power to a specific relationship. According to this theory, there are five bases of power, which are described as coercive, reward, legitimate, referent, and expert. Later on, Raven has added sixth base: informational power. The main goal of Coercive power is compliance and it is achieved by a means of threat of force by various means. Reward power, on the other hand, is based on one's ability to offer or withdraw a desirable reward of any form. This may include social, emotional, spiritual or material rewards. Legitimate power describes the power of individual justified by their position within the social structure - a position of authority in the hierarchy. It relies on an individual's compliance based on its obligation. Referent power is based on charisma and interpersonal skills of the power holder, that attracts loyalty. A person under power wants to identify with the power holder and strives to gain their acceptance. Expert power is is usually very specific and applies to an area of expertise, as it is based on individual's knowledge, experience and skills, supported by one's reputation and credentials certifying expertise. Finally, the informational power describes the ability of an individual to influence a flow of information. The theory has been extended since by addition of further bases - in particular by Gareth Morgan in the book 'Images of Organization' (1986).

Gender inequality in Political Power

Political participation of an individual is explained by their social position, which is affected by the level of education, gender or age. Inequality in political representation also negatively influences equality in political involvement.

In 2019 only 24.3 per cent of national parliamentarians were women. There are strong variations in those numbers across regions - In Nordic countries it is 42.5 per cent, in America 30.6 per cent and in Europe excluding Nordic countries, 27.2 per cent. The average percentage of women in parliaments is lower in sub-Saharan Africa, with 23.9 per cent, Asia, with 19.8 per cent or Arab states with 19 per cent. In January 2019 20.7 per cent of government ministers positions were held by women, with the most common ministry being Social Affairs.

Representation of women in politics improves the political decision-making process. Women in political representation often focus on battling gender equality issues, such as gender-based discrimination, gender-equality laws or childcare. Inclusion of women in political power has shown to make a difference. A casual relationship has been found between the participation of women in municipal councils and childcare coverage in Norway. Women-led councils in India are found to have 62 per more projects focused on drinking water than those that were led by men.