User talk:TimRJordan/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/2020-21/Seminar group 4/Power

Do you think it would be helpful to have a definition of power at the top of the page? --Zvxz (discuss • contribs) 11:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this is a great idea. It would help the page flow a lot better. Should we do that for every issue? purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 12:35, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think adding a definition to all of them is a great idea- I have added in a working definition for power but I think it needs some clarification so please feel free to edit/delete it! --Zvxz (discuss • contribs) 13:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea, thank you for adding it! Just make sure to reference the definition Vkwzw (discuss • contribs) 10:18, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't we mean "intersectionality" as a combination of strategies used in power relations rather than the theoretical framework which the Wikipedia page describes? -- Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 14:31, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I think the 'Hitler’s Indoctrinated Society: The Coercive Power of Linguistics' section is really well written and super super interesting! Perhaps adding in some specific quotations from Hitler which demonstrate your points could solidify the discussion?--Zvxz (discuss • contribs) 12:16, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have added two different quotations, one from his speech and one from his autobiography for a range of linguistic deliveries. I hope this makes it more succinct and interesting! Thank you for the suggestion.

The references for "Hitler’s Indoctrinated Society: The Coercive Power of Linguistics" got mixed up with the references for "Power Inequalities in Surveillance Capitalism" Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 14:21, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

In the part about Surveillance Capitalism, it seemed that a lot of Wikipedia links were supposed to be added but we couldn't access them. I added them, change/remove them if I made a mistake :) Majb324 (discuss • contribs) 15:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I did the same with the remaining links which still couldn't be accessed! Hope it's alright Mouxy73 (discuss • contribs) 16:42, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you! I haven't noticed it when I was uploading Hot Steams 417 (discuss • contribs) 20:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I just read the section on 'The White-power music' and it was really insightful. I wonder if music can have such a profound effect on our thoughts, is there a governing body for music? Who decides whether music can be released? I would also be interested to know if there are any research papers which quantify the effect music has on its audience. Jigamaree (discuss • contribs) 22:14, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with this comment. super interesting. Is there a possible link between science and music in terms ofthe tonal differences used or for example, major and minor chords used? What makes one piece of music or lyrical artistry more popular than another? purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 15:24 10th of November 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you found it interesting! To answer your questions, each country has it own legislation so one song might be considered as inciting to hatred where another country won't. For example in France, anyone can report what he believes is a hate speech and a judicial tribunal will then assess it. The American legislation on another hand, emphasises the importance of freedom of expression so it may be more difficult in the United States to control the release of music. As for research papers which quantify the effect music has on its audience, I referenced one which I found interesting so feel free to check it out! Mouxy73 (discuss • contribs) 12:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

In ‘Power in Contemporary International Relations,’ the aspect of power in terms of its ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ forms is an insightful concept. Another aspect of power within IR could be the competing power play between international relations theories. You could potentially touch on the continual reformulation of IR through the rise and fall in the explanatory powers and monopoly of different theories at different times. For example, you could mention the way in which the relevance, therefore power, of positivist theories of IR, such a realism and liberalism, are determined by their context in time and space. In terms of liberalism, for example, the commencing of World War II triggered disillusionment with the previously dominant theory. Another example would be the continual failure of liberal interventionism (such as the 2003 US invasion of Iraq) further undermining liberalism’s ideas, allowing for the over-taking of realism as the dominant theory in IR once again.

Similarly, it could be argued that realism’s dominance within the discipline of IR is eroded when it is deprived of its material legitimacy. Examples of this are the end of the Cold War, or the rising ‘global’ perspective accompanying an increasingly globalised world posing a threat to the realist heavy focus on the nation state and sovereignty.

Constructivist theory, however, minimises such fluctuation in relevance, and therefore power in IR, by adopting a post-positivist approach: one that recognises perpetual change in the international system and is governed by less objective or fixed concepts, prioritising ideational over material structure. Constructivists would, for example, treat sovereignty as a social construct. Thus, the decline of sovereignty does not undermine the explanatory power of constructivist theory, as it is able to explain sovereign decline in terms of transformations in national identity, norms and behaviour. In this way, constructivism allows for explanation of changes in material reality, lending great power to the theory as its relevance is independent of contextual, material factors. Below I have linked some relevant pages if you wish to incorporate some of these ideas into your work. --Banksy2020 (discuss • contribs) 00:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

https://www.e-ir.info/pdf/72860 https://www.e-ir.info/pdf/72781 https://www.e-ir.info/pdf/72842 https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1601483.pdf?casa_token=Q11Gee8s364AAAAA:rUyn4XS_FZCWA2bun9gQCEEpZhwWGo5CFmV_aqJFT2bfiLgGeggfejC_Y0HIX7NV2aqOlYl2JFpEcCI5VPx-z4KdxCqadPrwOQ_riEu8RFWfndflSA

That is a really interesting take on it. I will definitely have a look into that and try to add it in if I get the time. When I was writing my section, I did find there was a crossover with each of the theories so this is a good way to link them. Also, feel free to add in your thoughts! Jigamaree (discuss • contribs) 12:07, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd be interested to discuss the links that people see between what is touched on in the 'Power in Athenian Democracy' section and modern democracy. I see a lot of connections between present-day politics and the implementation of persuasive rhetorical linguistic techniques over substance in public speaking, although it is probably less dramatic now. I was just wondering if anyone had any ideas around this, especially in the recent American election.--Zvxz (discuss • contribs) 11:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

In regards to the Power in Cartography essay, which is beautifully written and constructed, I believe as a non-geographer myself, I think it would be super helpful to have an example of regular mapping. What is the name of a classic regular map? If every single map that is produced has a specific sense of power, what is the name of the classic map that would be seen as the historical 'norm'?purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 15:15 10th of November (UTC)
 * The classic regular map is called the Mercator Projection! I thought your suggestion was really good so I've added a section about it - hope that's ok!

It would be very interesting to link the Power in Athenian Democracy and Power distortions in History sections, because the Athenian Democracy is often taught in an over-simplistic way, which ignores possible criticisms and contributes to a simplistic ideological view of democracy, and a prejudice that it is necessarily "the best system" in people's minds.