Military, economic and political power

[DougW]

In the world today, power is excercised in many different ways. I think that power can be broken down into three categories, though I'm completely open to adding more types to the list, or removing one of the three or even combining them, as long as there is a logical argument for doing so. The three types, as implied in the title of the thread are:

Military Power

Economic Power

Political Power

I list them in no particular order. The question/subject of the debate is: Are there any differences inherent in these types of power? Is one 'good', another 'bad'. Does one lead to abuse faster or more certainly than another. Does one need to be checked, or regulated against, more than another, and if so, why?

[Jake_Ellison]

We have no absolute power over other people, even slaves have free will, but we can influence other people's actions in two ways:

1. through the threat or use of force

2. by means of reason, appealing to their self interest

Economic power is the means to offer value for trade, as an appeal to someone's self interest.

Political and military power are the means to influence someone's behavior through force. Properly restricted to the defense of individual rights, such power legitimately belongs to the government.

But there are plenty of other ways of influencing someone, other than economic, political and military means. You can beg, and influence someone into giving you a dime, or you can convince someone that what they're doing is wrong, etc. Those don't really fall under any of your three categories, but still, they are a way to influence another person.

The only reason for a government to "regulate" human interactions is to protect individual rights. And the only way to violate those is through force, so force is what the government needs to regulate, not other types of interactions. When the government regulates trade, they are initiating force against individuals to prevent them from interacting with others through reason. That is one power the government should not have, because it supresses man's rational faculty, it destroys values that would otherwise be created through reason.

Edited October 6, 2009 by Jake_Ellison

[2046]

Are there any differences inherent in these types of power?

"Evading the difference between production and looting, they called the businessman a robber. Evading the difference between freedom and compulsion, they called him a slave driver. Evading the difference between reward and terror, they called him an exploiter. Evading the difference between pay checks and guns, they called him an autocrat. Evading the difference between trade and force, they called him a tyrant. The most crucial issue they had to evade was the difference between the earned and the unearned.

"You had said that you saw no difference between economic and political power, between the power of money and the power of guns—no difference between reward and punishment, no difference between purchase and plunder, no difference between pleasure and fear, no difference between life and death. You are learning the difference now." -AS

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/economic...ical_power.html