1. The concept of power has been defined over and over due to the constant additions to political
philosophy—but it remains to this day, basically, the ability to lord over one person or many.
Power is the primary objective of foreign policy and the capability of states to influence each
other for their vital interests. It assumed importance as the meaning of political theory changed
from being a study of the state, or government to a study of power. Power is force qualified and
expressed in a regular uniform manner through procedures and known rules.
On a similar note, in a state, power is synonymous with the ruling body, or government. It is said
that with great power comes great responsibility; the government has the responsibility to look
after its people—the people of the state—regardless of their status of citizens or subjects, the
welfare and development of the state is the responsibility of the one who is in power. For a
government to consolidate itself, and make complete sense, it has to be cared for, respected and
followed sincerely.
In political theory, various perspectives analyze the nature and distribution of power. Some
notable theories include—
1. ABSOLUTISM- this theory emphasizes centralized and absolute power in a single
authority, often associated with monarchies.
2. LIBERALISM- is the theory that stresses the importance of individual rights, limited
government and the rule of law to prevent the abuse of power.
3. SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY- it posits that individuals voluntarily submit to political
authority in exchange for protection of their natural rights; associated with thinkers like
Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau.
4. REALISM- focuses on power as a central force in international relations, often
characterized by states pursuing their self-interest in a competitive world.
5. CONSTRUCTIVISM- examines how ideas, norms, and identities shape political power
dynamics.
6. ANARCHISM- this theory advocates for a society without hierarchical authority,
challenging traditional notions of political power and governance.
7. FEMINIST POLITICAL THEORY- Examines power imbalances along gender lines and
seeks to address gender-based inequalities in political structures.
These theories provide diverse perspectives on the nature, sources and consequences of political
power.
Power is a dynamic concept that branches out into too many types, thus to be concise, only the
two extremes of the spectrum are discussed—absolutism and anarchy.
Absolutism is a nineteenth century term designed precisely to address the mismatch between
doctrine and power. The intellectual resources of absolutism were far older than the Renaissance
and Reformation. The absolutism of monarchs was a contingent and temporary corollary of the
principal juridical development of the early modern period: the emergence of the concept of
2. sovereignty. Absolute monarchy was a free-rider on a concept that would eventually unseat it.
Theorists of absolute sovereignty drew heavily on Roman law, and often invoked the idea of the
translatio imperii, the inheritance by modern monarchies of Roman imperial authority. The
sovereignty of kings was masqueraded as the divinity of kings to trump the imperium of the
papacy. The “divine right of the kings” was a theological meditation on a juridical concept, not a
species of mysticism and rarely did absolutists endow monarchs with magical or sacerdotal
attributes. Absolutism conspicuously appropriated religious form when expressed as a theory of
obedience. Absolutist theory offered an account of the origins of civil authority.
Anarchy in political theory refers to a state of society without a centralized government or
authority. It is a theoretical concept that challenges the necessity of a hierarchical power
structure. The distinct features of Anarchy, or rather Anarchism is that—it has the absence of a
government and voluntary co-operation, emphasizes individual freedom and authority, and
believes in decentralized decision making, for example, direct democracy. The philosophy of
Anarchism also criticizes coercion. All in all it stresses the importance of empowering the
masses, as opposed to concentration of power in the hands of a few. Benedict Anderson, in his
book on anarchism and anti-colonial imagination, writes that anarchism had a deep resonance in
the periphery because it was not only hostile to imperialism, but also to colonialism. Anarchism
was a trans-national, trans-oceanic movement of migrants and exiles, a revolutionary centre of
vast radical network that connected militant struggles from Russia to Cuba (Anderson 2005).
The foundation of Anarchism lies in the dissolution of Authority.
The concepts of “power” and “authority” are related ones. But a distinction between them is
necessary. Both the terms refer to different properties. But because of their logical grammar
being commonly misconstrued, unnecessary difficulty has arisen. However, they are the names
of not different, but related entities of which one somehow depends on the other.
Jean Bodin in his work, The Six Books of Republic says, “Sovereignty is the absolute and
perpetual power of a state, that is to say, the supreme power to command”. His discussion gives
the impression that sovereignty means power in the ordinary sense of the word. If by absolute
power, Bodin means the ability to issue effective commands, it would be power, properly
speaking. If he means the entitlement or the right to issue commands and have them obeyed, it
would be authority. His account of sovereignty makes it clear that he means authority, whereas
his use of the expression, “absolute power” suggests the first.
Prof. Raphael in his Problems of Political Philosophy distinguishes three meanings of the term
“power”. First, the most general meaning of power is simply ability. We use the same word for
the power of a dynamo, political power or will power. Secondly, we speak of power in a social
context, when we think of power as a specific kind of ability i.e. the ability to make other people
do what one wants them to do. A man may be able to get others to do what he wants, because he
holds a special office, or because he has the strength to make things difficult for them, if they
refuse. Thirdly, there is coercive power which is using the threat of superior force to make others
do what one wants them to do when they are unwilling. Because coercive power is so prominent
3. in political conflict, the word “power” which at first meant ability of any kind, has come to be
associated with enforcement. Power is often used to mean authority when we speak of giving
someone legal powers. A person with power holds a special office (e.g. a minister or a
President); this means that he has authority and is able by virtue of that position to get others to
do what he tells them to do; his power is the exercise of authority. That is why the word power
can be used to mean authority.
Power is thus, one of the key concepts in political theory. It is the ability to control others and
make them do what one wants. It is both normative and empirical; i.e. it is also a fact as well as a
value to be pursued. It is a very comprehensive term, identified with related themes like
authority, influence, control and the like. It is integrally connected with the case of political
legitimacy. Legitimate power is authority.
On the other hand, influence is a wider term where sanctions may not be used. Power is then a
special case of influence.
Power and authority are fundamental concepts in social and political discourse, intricately
intertwined yet distinct in their manifestations and implications. Power refers to the ability of an
individual or group to influence or control others, whether through coercion, persuasion, or
manipulation. Authority, on the other hand, is the legitimate and recognized right to exercise
power, often derived from formal positions or social norms.
Throughout history, power and authority have been central to the organization and functioning of
societies. From ancient monarchies to modern democracies, structures of power and systems of
authority shape the distribution of resources, the enactment of laws, and the resolution of
conflicts. However, the nature and legitimacy of power and authority have been contested and
redefined across different cultures and epochs.
One key dimension of power and authority is their relationship with consent and legitimacy.
While authority typically relies on consent to maintain its legitimacy, power can be exerted
through various means, including coercion and manipulation, often challenging the boundaries of
legitimacy. In democratic societies, the legitimacy of authority is ideally derived from the
consent of the governed, through processes such as elections and the rule of law. However, even
in democratic systems, power dynamics and inequalities can undermine the full realization of
democratic ideals.
Moreover, power and authority are not static but dynamic constructs shaped by social, economic,
and technological forces. Globalization and digitalization, for instance, have transformed the
dynamics of power and authority, enabling new forms of influence and control while also
challenging traditional structures and hierarchies. The rise of social media, for example, has
empowered individuals and grassroots movements to challenge established authorities and
amplify their voices, highlighting the evolving nature of power in the digital age.
In conclusion, power and authority are complex and multifaceted concepts that play a pivotal
role in shaping human societies. While authority relies on legitimacy and consent to govern,
power encompasses a broader range of influences and dynamics. Understanding the interplay
between power and authority is essential for navigating the complexities of governance, social
relations, and collective action in an ever-changing world. As societies continue to evolve, the
4. quest for balance and accountability in the exercise of power and authority remains an enduring
challenge.
