Content area
Full Text
Introduction:
Violence in societies, often grounded in oppressive circumstances, is caused by imbalances in power relations and wrong conceptions and applications of power. In this regard, ideologies of the past have been one important factor in the socialization of individuals and social groups into present power relations, and breaking away from the old habits is a difficult task. Many problems, which present themselves in breaking away from current power relations, include historical values, traditions, customs, precedents, habits, lack of general will to fight injustices and non - caring attitudes. Guidance to correct the situation is available from several visionaries and reformers of the past. The aims of this article are to use and explicate part of this guidance, and to formulate a strategy for the restructuring of power relations, one which will cause the alleviation of the oppressive circumstances.
The authors explore both the classical and contemporary renditions of power and power relations, as well as impart knowledge on the applicative aspects of power and its dynamics. Their effort involves 1) the identification of how power and power relations are conceived and applied, and how they give rise to oppressive circumstances when imbalances in power relations occur; and 2) the finding of solutions in order to eliminate the oppressive circumstances in non - violent ways, by properly balancing the power relations. The operative contexts of oppression are profiled to illustrate the problems and how planners, social workers, and counsellors may use the information to help aggrieved people and extricate them from unwanted situations. It must be understood that part of the problem lies in how power is conceived and applied, including the abuses of power in accordance with the conceptions held.
Power:
Power is a "fuzzy concept," and disputes regarding its adequacy and clarity remain current to this day. Steven Lukes maintains that power has not been properly defined or used by the users.(f.2) Peter Morris stresses that power is a "dispositional concept," with disposition being a relatively unchanging underlying condition and dispositional differentiated from episodic, which relates to specific facts and events. His further differentiation consists of separating the "dispositional power" from its "exercise aspects," on the one hand, and its "vehicles of use," on the other. He links the exercise fallacy to...