power corrupt?

[danyboy27]

is there any book about it? power indeed corrupt but is there any scientifics studies that have been made about it?

and what is your opinion about power? are we naturally hungry for it?
take notice that this topic dosnt have any link with capitalism or communism, power isnt simply a matter of money after all.

[scarletghoul]

What do you mean, like political or psychological studies or what?

Understanding Power by Chomsky is cool

[Ovi]

is there any book about it? power indeed corrupt but is there any scientifics studies that have been made about it?

and what is your opinion about power? are we naturally hungry for it?
take notice that this topic dosnt have any link with capitalism or communism, power isnt simply a matter of money after all.
There are people hungry for power and it's those people that will end up ruling.

[Il Medico]

In a capitalist society, power does not corrupt. The process of gaining power does.

[SubcomandanteJames]

There are two types of people who hunger for power-- those who look to exalt themselves to gain power over others, and those work with others to gain power over themselves. Therein lies the clash.

[mikelepore]

There are people who are hungry for power, but that has nothing to do with whether social institutions are going to allow them to act on their impulses. For example, if the all the industries were socially owned and not for sale, there could still be some people who want to be the exclusive bosses, but who have no means to acquire the power. Society gets to deterrmine whether the opportunities shall be given to such people. For that reason, greed doesn't make socialism impossible; on the contrary, greed makes socialism all the more necessary.

[IcarusAngel]

This book is an explanation of power and breaks down politics as such:

http://home.comcast.net/~kidicarus23/RussellPower.png

[Bud Struggle]

There are people who are hungry for power, but that has nothing to do with whether social institutions are going to allow them to act on their impulses. For example, if the all the industries were socially owned and not for sale, there could still be some people who want to be the exclusive bosses, but who have no means to acquire the power. Society gets to deterrmine whether the opportunities shall be given to such people. For that reason, greed doesn't make socialism impossible; on the contrary, greed makes socialism all the more necessary.

I don't know if that's true. The USSR had set out to be a Communist Marxist society without autocratic rulers and leaders but it was no time before it created one of the great bureauocracies and greatest dictatorships the world has ever known. All with grand hopes for universal equality.

I seem to think that the people hungry for power always manage to find ways to achieve their goals. This is the main reason I don't think Anarchism (even though I really like the idea in principle) would work. People would find a way to "take it over."

[RGacky3]

The USSR had set out to be a Communist Marxist society without autocratic rulers and leaders but it was no time before it created one of the great bureauocracies and greatest dictatorships the world has ever known. All with grand hopes for universal equality.


The USSR is'nt a thing, its a name for a country, what made the rulers and bureaucracies were people, in power.


People would find a way to "take it over."

That argument applies to democracy as well.

[AnthArmo]

You might like to see the Stanford Prison Experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

And also check out the Milgram experiment to see how people can be forced into evil because of authority

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[Bud Struggle]

You might like to see the Stanford Prison Experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

And also check out the Milgram experiment to see how people can be forced into evil because of authority

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

I think both these experiments while technically imperfect show that there is a tendancy among humans to gain and use and abuse authority. It's just who we are as people and that needs to be taken into account when we romanticize some utopian society of the future in our dreams.

Even the EZLN has a "Subcomandante" to run the show.

[RGacky3]

Even the EZLN has a "Subcomandante" to run the show.

He's just really a spokes person.

[danyboy27]

He's just really a spokes person.

i am not quite sure about it.

. In January 1994, Marcos led an army of Indian farmers out of the mountains and took over the eastern part of the state of Chiapas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiapas), protesting the government's neglect of indigenous peoples

[RGacky3]

i am not quite sure about it.

. In January 1994, Marcos led an army of Indian farmers out of the mountains and took over the eastern part of the state of Chiapas (http://www.anonym.to/?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiapas), protesting the government's neglect of indigenous peoples

If you read or understand about how the desicion making gets done in the Zapatista territories, you'd understand what I'm talking about, Marcos is not the leader.

[danyboy27]

If you read or understand about how the desicion making gets done in the Zapatista territories, you'd understand what I'm talking about, Marcos is not the leader.

explain me then.

[Bud Struggle]

explain me then.

I'll report back and explain what's REALLY going on.

Bud Struggle--RevLeft's man on the scene on the front lines of the Revolution! :thumbup1: