Violence and conquest have been used as tools for power for a long time, but they are, at least in their old roles, increasingly obsolete. New methods of obtaining power over people have been developed and they are far more effective.
Oppression is very much a “taking” form of power; it is when someone from over there comes over here, roughs you up, and takes what you have. It tends to excite resentment and resistance, and it can’t take what you don’t have. It is limited.
“Giving” forms of power, however, are limited only by our capacity to want. Givers aren’t alien to us; they are an intimate aspect of our daily lives. Rather than take what we possess, they provide what we lack; engendering gratitude, approval and hunger for more. Companies, governments and entire societies maintain and expand power over people by engineering their perception of needs, of rights and of “the good life.” People’s behaviors are determined by their perceived needs, and those perceptions are easily engineered. To engineer perceptions is to direct behavior.
It is difficult to express the extent to which our perceptions are engineered because it is pervasive and we have no baseline against which it may be measured, but examples are easy to find; commercial advertising is the easiest example to identify. Advertisements don’t just present products, they create problems which their products solve. How many people would notice the poor state of their hair if companies weren’t so eager to correct it? If nobody noticed, would average hair actually be a problem?
Everyone wants to be rich, or at least appear like it. Since money correlates to social status, wealthy people (or those who form the image of wealth) gravitate toward products and services that represent that status, which the less-than-rich attempt to imitate.
Poor people (people who don’t have the stuff they know they need) raise their voices, and non-profit stuff-giving organizations and politicians bend over backwards to altruistically make sure that they get their minimum amount of stuff.
Companies and public health agencies create an image of healthy, “normal” aging, then charge for the chemical, surgical and cosmetic processes necessary to maintain it. We have a right to a highly mobile, disease-free life that extends past a hundred birthdays. If that’s not the way our bodies naturally work, then we must acquire the “health” care necessary. If we can’t afford it ourselves then the general public can and there is no shortage of public servants eager to give us what we need and deserve.
Politicians tell us that the normal life is one with an unruffled economy and perfect freedom from fear, and all it costs is an occasional vote and some of your peripheral rights.
We are told that the unfulfillment in our lives will be healed by getting a large number of certain objects, which requires going to school for 12 plus four years so that we can produce such objects for other, similarly unfulfilled people.
What do humans actually need?
The world system is economic, political and social. Most of the system functions by informing people that they are unfulfilled and then presenting fulfillment for the low price of money, votes and conformity. It is a self-supporting system that equates success with the ability to create and meet needs. Because it provides the highest rewards to those who create the most need, it has a strong structural tendency to reward hunger and suppress contentment — it needs to be needed.
The life blood of this system is power, the ability to compel people to do things, to need things. To the extent that you need something you are incapable of honestly evaluating, changing or rejecting it. When we accept the belief that “the good life” is achieved by applying products and services to our informed deficiencies we make ourselves beholden to those who create and satisfy those beliefs. When we accept the belief that our rights entitle us to services and guarantees, we evaluate our politicians on their projected delivery. When we accept the idea of need, we frantically pursue the satisfaction of that need only to discover that there are always more and larger needs around every bend. Rights are mandatory. Needs need to be fulfilled. To suggest otherwise is laughable.
If the individual ought to be a questioning being, if people ought to exercise real choice in self-government, then we should reject the addictions that deprive us of our ability to question and choose. If respect means consent then we should shun unwholesome power over one another. How much of the power in the world only exists to control other power? How much control is necessary if we’re not trying to control each other?
This system is not some sinister plot by a shadowy secret society to control everyone’s lives; this is the natural result of human tendencies. We humans covet shiny things, fear death and enjoy telling other humans what to do. That’s the way we’re wired. It is a part of ourselves that we must consciously fight.
There’s nothing wrong with a vibrant economy so long as it addresses actual human needs and supports human rights. We do need some things, and we enjoy many more. But our use should be conscious, not compulsive, or we risk our ability to make unpoisoned decisions. Use becomes habit, habit becomes expectation and expectation becomes dependency. Those who need nothing cannot be controlled.
What do humans actually need?