Letter from Wendy - Conclusion

I want to thank you again Wendy for such a cool question...
So where did I leave off? The explanation of the process of power.


People have needs. In our numerous needs lie the potential for power. Power requires need. Where there is no need, there is no power.

Or as I like to say, you can’t bribe a rich man.

Only when the Subject perceives that the Actor has an ability to help or hinder them in the satisfaction of a need will the Subject be willing to make a choice in favor of the Actor.

So… back to semantics… what do we mean by need? And what do we mean by ability?

The concept of needs has been discussed by every psychological school in history. Each has made a contribution. I have found that the most meaningful ideas about needs have come from the Humanists.  I have found that while one pursues an understanding of power there is more to be gained by examining needs than there is by examing the people who seem to have power.

I think there is a more meaningful approach to needs. This is because needs, like power, are experienced.
As such, they are subjective in nature. So we must consider needs from a subjective point of view if we are going to be able to use them for power.

We could say that needs exist on a spectrum of “absolutely-must-have-it” to “it-would-be-nice to have it.”

You might suggest that there is a big difference between need and want. And I agree. But I would like to distinguish this spectrum with two general categories rather than a long list of graduated synonyms. I think we can characterize them well as Requirements and Desires. You can draw the line between them based on your experience.

Requirements are the things we believe we must have. Desires are the things we want but, to some degree, can do without for a while.

But this does not complete the list of power producing needs. For on the list we must include the things we have and do not want to lose. We will call these needs - Attachments. We can be attached to people, things and ideas. Each of these has its own potency.

We experience our wide range of “needs” as Requirements, Desires and Attachments. And every Requirement, Desire or Attachment is a Source of Power for an Actor should they want to control, influence or seduce a choice we will make.

That’s right. I said Source. This is where the power comes from. Power does not come from the ability. I may have the ability to help you or hinder you with any number of power mechanisms. But if you do not have the need that corresponds to my ability, I will be unable to invoke in you an experience of control, influence or seduction.

You can’t bribe a rich man.

I can be big and strong with guns and tanks, and if you are not afraid to die, then I cannot control what you choose to do, say or think.

I can be as rich as Bill Gates, but if you have all the money you want, I cannot buy your choice.

I can be sexy as Megan Fox and Ryan Reynolds put together, but if you do not want sex and romance I have no power to seduce you.

I can control all of the information in the world, but if you don’t need it, or you already have it, I can’t use it to influence your choices.

So Wendy, you did not need your colleague’s approval and she had no ability to affect the way the boss thought of you, so she had no ability to gain your submission to her illusory authority.

The source of the Actor’s power is in the need of the Subject. If the Subject has a requirement, a desire or an attachment that the Actor can positively or negatively affect, then they may be able to create in the Subject a fear, anger or excitement sufficient to control, influence or seduce a choice the Subject is about to make.

But when there is no need, there is no power.

You went to the Professor and asked if your colleague was in charge. He said not. He did not want to even engage in the discussion. Therefore there was no ability to positively or negatively affect your need of approval from the Professor. So you saw through the illusion of her power and it failed. She was unable to control, influence or seduce your choices.

She supposed that her longer term as a TA and her favorable standing provided her with the Professor’s authority. She assumed that every TA desired to be considered highly by the Professor. She thought she had the ability to help or hinder that desire. She anticipated that your future opportunity and success would be contingent on the Professor’s recommendation. She thought she had the ability to influence that recommendation. She thought she could determine your success or failure.

If she had actually possessed that ability, I am sure you would have complied with her demands. You would have had a significant experience of power and would have commenced a long semester of choices dictated by her authority.

From the time she first tried to impose her will, until you had received from the professor a clear message that she had no authority, you experienced power. The anxiety, frustration and anger were the emotional aspects of your experience of power.

She assumed that her past experience with the professor gave her a greater credibility with him. She assumed that her friendship with the professor gave her the greater intimacy to ensure her hierarchical position above you. She assumed you would simply acquiesce to her superior relationship with him knowing that she would have greater influence with him.

However she over estimated her relationship with him. She thought she had an ability that she did not have. For a short while you thought she might have such an ability which is why you temporarily succumbed.

Her presumption came from a past experience with the professor – not from you.

Often we assume things about the people we try to use power on. Typically we see people as being similar to us and wanting many of the same things. We are usually correct in those kinds of assumptions. Her presumption was that you were like her - you wanted career success that would be controlled by the professor. She assumed she had influence with the professor. She wanted to be the first one considered for opportunities. She assumed you wanted to be at the front of that line as well. It was not so much about what you did or said that encouraged her to make the assumption, but how she interpreted the situation and assumed you were like her in your goals. It was how she perceived ( incorrectly) your needs.

It wasn't that you invited the power. The dynamic you were in was filled with needs and ambitions. The dynamic you were in lead her to assume that your ambitions were the same as yours.

So don't see the situation as created by you. Consider and examine anything you may have said or done that could be interpreted by her as showing a desire. That is what she focused on (probably unconsciously) in interpreting your needs and trying to use them for power.

Having broken down the dynamic to discover the process of power, I encourage you to go further. It would be useful in the future to recognize in this scenario a few of the horrible side effects of power dynamics.

First, when power is played successfully against us, our first instinct is to see the other as powerful and see ourselves as flawed. You ask me what you might have done to encourage her bossy-ness. She simply interpreted a situation incorrectly. But I think any of us might have made the same assumptions. You did nothing to encourage this.

Unfortunately in academic circles the competition is fierce and the politics are played hard from the instant you meet. Her experience made her aware of this and she was ready to play the game before you even came on to the scene.

But your resentment is palpable. Even in that short period of time there was enough power to create ill will between you. You discovered what I consider to be one of the most important insights about power.

Power destroys trust.

When people use power they erode the relationship. They reveal their intention – that they are willing to use your needs against you to get what they want. When someone uses our needs against us, for their gain, we never see them the same way again. We resent it. We condemn it. We see it as corruption.

We should have a long chat about corruption.

So many relationships end because of power struggles. The trust is lost. After that, there is not much to the relationship.

And all these relationships end because of the second great insight – power dynamics never end.

Never. Never ever.

Once power enters a relationship, it will come around again. No one ever allows themselves to be a Subject without the intention to be an Actor when the opportunity arises.

Now you took the time to investigate the assertion of her ability to impact your need for success and opportunity. You found out it was unfounded. The other two women did not. They were willing to be powerless. They perceived your colleagues suggestion that she was in change as a valid ability. They complied from the beginning with out resistance and as such were victims of power.

As a college professor who sees young people everyday, I have true concerns about a generation that demonstrates such a willing compliance to even the most subtle forms of power. They see themselves as being powerless in a power-based world. They exist without the ability to change the dynamics. These two other TAs behaved as such. They were defeated characters from the moment power was introduced. It is a shame. Had they operated with you as a unit against the power dynamic of the colleague, you would have seen a very different dynamic. Given their passiveness, you could have recruited them to your side and used them as mechanisms against her.

To your credit, you did not do this.

However is this not what government does? Is this not what terrorist recruiters do? Is this not what happens to our Generation Y all the time? Someone with a goal finds someone who feels that they are powerless to fulfill their own needs without the help of those in authority. Then that authority is exploited for an agenda completely unrelated to the original reason authority was given.

I think there is great value in seeing through power.

When you see that power is an illusory experience in which one's needs are used against them to compel them to make choices that support the Actor's goals - then we act instead of react. We take back choice.

Choice never goes away.
There is no such thing as powerless.
Control is an illusion. The only thing we control is how we respond to the situation before us.



As Edmund Burke said:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.