All societies have a form of political organisation which is defined as “the way power, as the capacity to do something, is accumulated, arranged, executed, and structurally embedded in society” (Haviland, Prins, Walrath, & McBride, 2013:291). There are four political systems identified by anthropologists. Certain society systems, like bands and tribes, do not have a centralised political authority as they are too small and there is no one single individual who is allowed to make choices for others (Haviland, et al, 2013:291). However, other society systems, like chiefdoms and states, have a centralised political authority as the society is more complex and needs governance to maintain social order (Haviland, et al, 2013:295). Uncentralised societies have leaders but no set of institutions, however these leaders do not force individuals to follow any set of rules and they only have moral authority because they are seen as the wise elders who are capable of making decisions (Haviland, et al, 2013:292). Decisions in these communities affect the whole community and are made collectively through agreements by adults who are regarded as wise and skilled in many areas of life (for example: hunting or medicine) (Haviland, et al, …show more content…
As societies grow in population size, develop in technological advancements, and increase production through specialisations of labour and trade networks; opportunities for power and control increase. In these societies’ political authorities can come from an individual (in chiefdoms) or from a group of individuals (in a state) (Haviland, et al, 2013:295). There are laws which are made and enforced by the authoritative member/members in these communities and there is social control. This, in some cases, is a disadvantage as it results in less freedom and more conflict, but governments can be an advantage as they can also help maintain social order (Wrong,
Why do we have government? Government may be defined as a set of institutions that regulate behavior within territorial boundaries thru the legitimate use of force. Go...
The article examines the need for various social controls in a society, for the society itself not to fall apart. Peter Berger believed that by using Social control it could bring its recalcitrant members back into line. He believed that all groups no matter how small needed social controls to survive. He explores three areas of control political and legal controls, economics pressures, and ostracism. With the Political and legal controls the ultimate and, no doubt, the oldest means of social control is physical violence. In the politely operated societies of modern democracies the ultimate argument is violence. With economic pressure, few means of coercion are as effective as those that threaten one’s livelihood or profit. Both management and labor effectively use this threat as an instrumentality of control in our society. But economic means of control are just as effective outside the institutions properly called the economy. A good example of an economic sanction would be for a minister. It may not be actually illegal for a minister to seduce his
During the last 5000 years the competition and contest of large, human communities or political systems, of which modern states are the pressing example, often was decided by a simple, `evolutionary' mechanism: war and force. However, the increasing destructive power of artifacts which are developed with the help of scientific knowledge seems to diminish the importance of this device—at least among communities with a somewhat rational leadership. For the mere use of modern techniques increases the risk of self-destruction even for that party which otherwise would be said to have won the `contest'. In this situation it would be desirable to have other, less violent criteria to check whether some political system is better than another one. If we could compare the quality of political systems in a purely conceptual way the practical competition among systems could be reduced to attempts at enlightening the citizens of the respective other system.
According the Manuel Castells, "power is the structural capacity of a social actor to impose over other social actors" and throughout history we see that there will always be a counter power that goes against this power. In Littl...
Over the centuries, many political philosophers, historians, and thinkers have ventured to identify the ideal form of government: a theory which truly takes into account human nature as a whole and applies it accordingly. Human nature, when looked at holistically, is essentially good - men will not annihilate each other if left without a ruler, but motivation, protection, and some degree of rights must be accommodated in order to allow a state to thrive to its greatest capacity. Thus a ruler should be judged by his ability to protect the people and secure their rights, and he should come to power by the collective consent of the people. The perfect government is one in which the ruler has only the power which allows him to aid the people and the state, protect their rights, and ensure their protection. Society and the sovereign are reciprocally obliged towards each other, and they may only be content as long as both factions are appeased.
At an undetermined point in the history of man, a people, while still in the state of nature, allowed one person to become their leader and judge over controversies. This was first the patriarch of a family, then the wisest or fittest militarily of a tribe. These leaders ruled by wisdom and discretion, though neither they nor their followers were subject to any ratified laws. These rulers represented the earliest signs of an emerging hierarchical order, yet did not constitute a government in the formal sense.
A government was required to lead the people and aid in organizing a city. City governments were far more powerful than the council of elders and local chiefs of farming villages. At first, Priest probably had the greatest. In time, warrior kings came to power as chief political leaders. They soon set themselves up as the chief hereditary ruler and passed their power from father to son. Governments soon became more complex as rulers issued laws, collected taxes, and organizes systems of defense. To enforce order, rulers relied on royal officials. Over time, government bureaucracies evolved. Almost always rulers claimed their power came from god or divine right. These rulers then gained religious power as well.
Political institutions have been part of humanity since the beginning of societies. Institutions have developed in different organizational performances and have shaped in what they are nowadays. Institutions have shown us that they are necessary and essential for all societies around the world. We never realize how important and how essential they are for our daily lives, but more than that, we never realize how institutions affect or influence political outcomes. Whether institutions are federalist or centralists, they always vary in the types of outcomes and shortcomings, or if local governments function better than a federal government, or if state governments are better.
Throughout the semester we have studied the role political parties’ play in democracy. Scholars debate that without political parties countries cannot democratize. It is true that political parties play a prominent role in the development of democracy, however; I will argue that depending on how strong or weak the political party is in a given region, the more likely the party will spread democracy. In the following essay I argue that parties can have a role in strengthening but also weakening a democracy based on how well they are able to include all of its citizens.
The ideal political system can, and is, very challenging to create. We believe that the ideal system should accurately reflect the views of the people and create a system of powers that works throughout each branch of government. The branches of government include the executive, the legislative, and the courts. We also go into how these positions are elected, as well as the parties in which they are elected from. They all work together to create a sound government that will work in the best possible way.
Distribution and exercise of power shape attitudes towards authority. How people sustain themselves economically, and how they manage to obtain the necessities of life, determines assigned roles of individuals and the relationships among them.
The second idea is from the perspective of responsibilities of different actors in handling social and economic issues. And the boundaries between different actors in exercising their power an...
Another aspect of social groups is political organization. According to Karl G. Heider the author of Seeing Anthropology through Film, political organization can be defined as the structure of a social unit in terms of the allocation of power among individuals, roles, and groups. (Heide, pg. 450) When defining the political organizations we can look at power as the ability to get other people to do things for them. In addition, actual power can be look at physical force, which implies the use or the threat of physical force and influence. Influence is the ability to talk people into doing things without the use of force. (Hiede, pg. 301) So, political organizations express power and authority; this power can be egalitarian
Every government is power; the ability to influence others. How a government establishes and uses their power is how you determine the quality of the government. Based on the power a government has and how they choose to rule impacts the whole country and the quality of life for people. Governments greatly vary in how they operate but every government requires 3 key elements to be a government: they must have the right to rule; the authority to exercise its power; and the people must recognize the right of the government to exist. So although rulers come in and may take control, ultimately the people of the country must choose to follow someone for them to have any power.
Society is an organization. Society is a network of relationship of human beings that possess this relationship as a result of interdependent goals and objectives. Some people may see society as a place where they are united to due to some common reasons and concerns about their policies, politics, culture, traditions, believes and values. However, one must view society as an essential part life, which they have to be a part of, as they cannot survive without that.