Analysis of Time of the Right: Reflections on Liberation by Suzanne Pharr
In an article In the Time of the Right: Reflections on Liberation by Suzanne Pharr, a chapter entitled Domination Politics was reviewed. Within this chapter Ms. Pharr stated that she believed there are two kinds of politics: the politics of domination and the politics of liberation. I am going to explain these and then discuss reasons why domination politics specifically, has emerged so strongly in American political circles. We need to keep in mind that both of these politics operate on the individual and public institution level.
Ms. Pharr explains the politics of domination as few seeking to have power over the lives of many, gaining it through systems of oppression and exploitation. The politics of liberation, the goal is for the many to share decision-making, resources and responsibilities for the good of the group as well as the individual (pg. 11).
Domination politics is based on the belief of meritocracy. Meritocracy is the belief that a culture already provides the?dream yet to come true (pg. 11). Everyone in this politic is thought to have equal access to success or failure in their own society and therefore, a belief of superiority emerges among the rich, white, Christian, heterosexual, and able-bodied men. Domination politics survives so strongly because it thrives on economic injustice, oppression and moral insolvency.
Economic injustice and oppression occur because someone benefits from them. It is in the interest of someone to create and perpetuate oppressions (pg. 17). If these groups of people that are oppressed were not pitted against one another, an uprising of phenomenal proportions could occur. This is exactly what the rich, white, male, Christian, heterosexual able-bodied society (a.k.a.: The Norm) does not want to happen! Racism, sexism, and classism are necessities for the survival of The Norm.
As stated in the first paragraph, these politics control both the institutions and the workplaces of modern America, and therefore intersect in the development of policy and laws. For example, The Norm controls financial institutions, government, religion, schools, human services, healthcare, criminal justice, corporations, factories, and large businesses thereby creating a vicious circle of power, privilege, exploitation, and domination.
Ms. Pharr stated as the last lines in the last paragraph of this chapter the following, ?An emphasis on individual effort alone ignores structures of oppression and leaves them intact.
According to Brenda Allen in the chapter “Power Matters,” she mentions that there dominant ideologies of identity that “reflect perspectives and experiences of ruling groups, whose members construct and circulate beliefs that will most benefit them.” We live in a country where there are dominant ideologies of organizational hierarchy, which “arranges job positions in a stratified structure, with power flowing from the top down.” This exemplifies the ideology of domination, which is a belief system in America that the “superior should rule over the inferior” (32). This ideology is so embedded into our system that most people believe it is natural. The American society we live in values patriarchy, white supremacy, heteronormativity, and a specific culture of wealth and poverty; any identity that falls outside of these dominant ideologies is marginalized and placed in the lower strata of social power.
Politics is defined as “the way people decide who gets what, when, where, how, and why—without resorting to violence” (McDonough 20). The author asserts that politics is the alternative pathway for a society to make decisions besides choosing violent means to go about doing so. Instead of using force, politicians use words and the method of persuasion in order to get what they want. When a society has a group of people who feel they are not fairly represented by their elected officials, they will often turn to violence in order to implement changes to the political process that will put in place the rules and regulations they are seeking.
Control is dominating over something or someone. The reason people want control is because control is power. Masculinity is always associated with power and control, while femininity is associated with passivity and weakness. As Allan Johnson states this is related to the fact that “male dominance creates power differences between men and women” (248). So because of the fact that men hold positions of power they seem more superior to women creating these stereotypes about each gender. The reason this is importa...
The purpose of the textbook, Who Rules America? by G. William Domhoff, is to explain his theory of Class Domination. My essay emphasises the relation of social class to power, the existence of a Corporate community, the relationship of the Corporate community to the upper class, and various methods used by the Corporate community to dominate the U.S Political System. Furthermore, my essay will discuss the potential limits to corporate power in America.
After reading two different views on what influences political power in the United States, I have set out to answer 4 questions assigned to me to help define how laws and regulations are laid out, and in most cases, gone around all together. In the text "American Government", the reading was a very fundamental basis of how the federal government was ran according to the constitution and the various philosophies that members of political leadership employ to wield power to influence voters and fellow congressional leaders. On the other hand, "Voices of Dissent" gives a different point of view on how business and the capitalists in fact run this country through campaign contributions and legal loopholes.
Central Argument(s): Those who have the intellect and access to resources are able to rule over those that does not possess the same benefits. An individual’s definitive class in society is based on socioeconomic status or what family they are born in to. This is something that cannot be controlled, but does predetermined how each person or group will live their lives. However a person or group do not have to remain in that class, and revolution occurs when
Kernell, Samuel, Jacobson, Gary C., Kousser, Thad, & Vavreck, Lynn. 2014. The Logic of American Politics 6th ed. Los Angeles: CQ Press
In the United States, the gap between the rich and the poor has been substantially increasing over the years. This growth between the rich and poor illustrates the wealth inequality between the social classes in our nation. Although it is impractical to precisely measure the morality of wealth inequality, we can use philosophical thought to determine what makes a political and economic system just. By analyzing the theories of political philosophers, Robert Nozick and John Rawls, it is clear that wealth inequality is morally justified, as long as equal opportunity and concern for justice among a society is provided under certain conditions.
The “matrix of domination” theory seeks to prove that someone is not limited to one type of oppression and that all oppressions for various reasons are not the same. For example, if one is a black, lesbian woman, she may be oppressed in several different factors throughout the day, but she is can be advantage if she went to an all black company and applied for a job there, but that doesn’t subtract from her other disadvantages. (Glasberg, pg.
Political power results from the fear of force. The individual acts out of a fear of consequences of disobedience and in accordance with the desdire for self-preservation. Political Authority results from a belief in the moral correctness of the organization in question. The individual acts of a sense of obligation and acknowledges the right of the ruler, morally, to rule and the moral correctness of the laws are accepted. The laws are obeyed for their own sake.
Domhoff, G. W. (1990). The power elite and the state: How policy Is made in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
The structure of power in society is a vital part of understanding sociology. The two main theories that differentiate this structure are Mills’ theory of a power elite and Riesman’s contrasting theory of veto groups, or pluralism. Both theories are often found in varying degrees when considering important public decisions, such as the Hoover Redevelopment Plan or the University Village Plan. Generally, one of these theories is more applicable and relevant to certain public decisions and developments depending on the issue. While both of these theories played a part in the Hoover Redevelopment Plan and the University Village Plan, the power elite theory is ultimately more responsible for the institution of these developments.
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.
Money can give people a lot opportunities and privilege. Financially privileged people have no trouble getting materialistic things such as big houses, expensive cars, and jewelry. Being privileged can also provide better scholastic education as well as respect. On the other hand, a lack of money, as a person might guess, limits opportunity and lower a person’s status on the privilege pole. In order for an underprivileged person to have all of those things, they have to work hard to get to get the luxuries of nice houses, cars, and jewelry. As far as education goes, the underprivileged might not go to the best schools but they get an education that will prove to be more valuable in life; they learn to earn respect, appreciate what they have and how to survive with just the necessities and what’s really important in life. So when a person looks at each group and tries to decided with one gets the most out of life, they will see that underprivileged individuals get so much more out of life than a person who came up in affluence and privilege.
As we prosper through time, inequality is slowly less evident. A lot of people don't realize that although things are improving with time, inequality is still prominent in our society. The people that are failing to realize that there still is inequality, are the fortunate ones. They rise well above the poverty line, and usually live relatively economically sound lives. They are the people who are supplied with our society's benefits.