Knowt
Note
Studied by 23 peopleNoteStudied by 31 peopleNoteStudied by 1 personNoteStudied by 20 peopleNoteStudied by 90 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people
Week 6
Political Capital Lecture notes
Consists of organization, connections, voice, and power as citizens turn shared norms and values into standards that are codified into rules, regulations, and resource distributions that are enforced”
political capital, generally reflect the dominant cultural capital — tendency to support the status quo
analyzing political capital helps understand who has power and who is marginalized/excluded
how/under what circumstances can marginalized communities organize together?
Whose issues are on the agenda and whose are excluded
power is important in political capital (who has it, how is it exercised, etc.)
What is power?
How is/can it be measured?
Power is the ability to create a situation that otherwise would not happen or to prevent something from occurring that others wish to make happen
community power — the ability to affect the distribution of both public and private resources within the community
community power can be increased by external factors
community power structure — can be studied to see who holds power — more participatory or concentrated
power is not always held by elected officials
3 dimensions/ faces of power
decision making power
coercive — the ability to force someone to do something. A causes B to act, and B knows A has the power
non-decision making power — the setting of the agenda
the ability to influence the actions of others. A persuades B to do something though B is not aware of the persuasion
ideological power — influencing wishes/thoughts — opposing even their own self interest
the structure of the sets of institutions, benefitting A over B, while neither is aware of the background relationships
three types of power
sovereign — most recognizable power = forces of control and domination exercised through physical punishment, repressions, laws, and rewards (obedience to laws)
disciplinary — self-regulating power exercised through knowledge/rewards/images (eg. social norms and behaviours… we are trained/conditioned to act a certain way)
governmental power — “the conduct of conduct” — exercised through the production of knowledge and structuring of possible fields of action (eg. discourse provides only specific ways of constructing social reality)
power is the structuring or restructuring of fields of action in political, economic, social or ecological spheres. It aims at changing the practices of individuals and can be exercised through sovereign, disciplinary, or governmental actions.
trusteeship: the authoritarian exercise of power based on expert knowledge att the root of development policy with the aim of improving society on behalf of poor and ignorant people
What are institutions? The tragedy of the commons
brick and mortar
”the rules of the game” that fram conduct of individuals and organizations
both formal and informal
institutional discourse can become embedded in normative practices and policies
As Dryzek states, “the impact of discourse can often be felt in the policies of government or international organizations. beyond affecting institutions, discourses can become embodied in institutions. When this happens, discourses ‘constitute the informal understandings that provide the context for social interaction’”
Challenges of institutions
multiple institutions can governs various spheres which leads to “forum shopping” (best option)
institutional are socially embedded in a particular cultural, political, and spiritual contexts
main actors are not always state-based orgs, but NGOs, private businesses, traditional elites, and religious organizations = multiple, complex power relations/dynamics and unequal social relations
institutions are not only localized, but are increasingly globalized (migration, markets, urban/rural, international)
Institutions are not fixed or designed, but are dynamically reconstituted, reproduced, and reshaped by the continued actions of multiple actors
The tragedy of commons
economic concept; you can’t have free access to communal land
someone will take advantage of the system if there isn’t rules and regulations in place
”when short-term self-interest leads to tragedy for all”
four approaches to power
pluralism
elitism
class-based analysis
”the growth machine”
pluralism— power is held by those who have formal positions within the community — elected officials, etc.
assume there is no dominant source of power and is dispersed among competing interests
individual is basic “building block” of society — “one person, one vote”
based on individuals (in democratic societies) making decisions based on information; rational choice
best way to understand power is to look at over actions — the visible
event analysis technique used to study power — reveals diverse groups influence decisions
Differences in influence among class or ethnicity explained by their choice not to participate in political process
elitism — power is concentrated in the hands of small groups of people based on social and economic positions
power is distributed hierarchically
power is held by those who control the public agenda, but may not be visible players in the political process
important to look at issues that never make the agenda. Why?
class-based analysis — focus on economic roots of power — those who control economic system have power
those with economic power do not have to make decisions, but decisions facilitate profit making
Marxists critiques of power would be considered class-based analysis
The growth machine — a coalition of groups that perceive economic gain in community economic growth
a variation of class-based theory
These groups work to encourage growth and capture its benefits
example of renter class in reading
power and community change
economic change — changing economic conditions in communities create changes in power
environmental change — a changing environment and awareness of environmental damage changes power dynamics
demographic change — changes in population demographics through migration changes power dynamics
How do we provide spaces of inclusion for marginalized communities in power structures and decisions?
chevron vs amazon video notes
How is power being distributed in this case?
Which of the four approaches best explains power?
River was polluted with black oil
the community depended on the river
life and future
oil related disaster
chevron
Billions of gallons of oil dumped into the amazon rainforest
Texaco/ chevron
On their clothes, in the air, in their water
carcinogenic
Didn’t notify the people that they were dumping oil in their drinking water
determinantal to communities health
Poverty
young children with cancer
All the communities depended on the forest for their survival
killing animals
chevron was petrified of going before the jury
case got shifted to Ecuador/avoided jury trial
challenged jurisdiction
bad faith and unethical litigation tactics
tried to bribe judges
Tried to overwhelm the trial with paper work
tried to bankrupt the opposition
The ecosystem was critical to the planet not just local communities
Case ended with a resounded victory for the affected communities
They had done this in dozens of other countries; opened the possibility of trillions of dollars in liability
Whole business model could be destroyed
spending massive sums of money to avoid paying
human rights lawyer was detained
Sued everyone who wants to help the case
lesson: if we let the fossil fuel industry to continue, we will no longer have a planet
Lecture summary:
Course Content Overview
Focus on Political Capital:
Today's lecture emphasizes political capital as a key concept within the broader context of different types of capital.
Understanding political capital is vital for grasping how power dynamics function in society.
People's Archive Project:
Students reminded to incorporate at least two forms of capital in their project presentations.
Emphasis is placed on cultural capital and political capital, analyzing their roles and implications.
Understanding Political Capital
Definition:
Political capital is defined as the resources and leverage an individual or group uses to influence political outcomes.
It is shaped by the dominant cultural capital, influencing which groups are included or excluded from political discussions.
Community Issues:
Students should reflect on their communities in Canada, identifying major issues concerning natural resources and representation in political frames.
Marginalized Communities:
Analysis on how marginalized groups can mobilize and organize within their frameworks to gain representation.
Discussion on the intersectionality of political and social capital, including both local and international networks.
Group Discussion on Power
Definition of Power:
Students engage in defining and measuring power as a foundational concept of political capital.
Aspects of Power:
Areas of power discussed include:
Decision-making abilities: Power in choosing or influencing outcomes.
Access to information: Control or influence over information dissemination.
Wealth: Financial resources as a means to exert influence and control.
Power Dynamics:
Examination of who holds power within various groups and communities, and how this power distribution affects overall community efficacy.
Dimensions of Power
Decision-Making Power:
Defined as coercive, representing the ability to mandate compliance among individuals or groups.
Influential Power:
Describes how individuals affect decisions indirectly, primarily through persuasive means or by setting agendas.
Ideological Power:
Impacts individual desires and thoughts, often persuading individuals in ways that may contradict their own self-interest.
Community Structures:
Analysis of how resource allocation often correlates with power distribution, shaping access to both public and private resources.
Unelected Officials:
Acknowledgment that power extends beyond elected representatives, including various stakeholders and elite groups who possess significant influence.
Concepts of Community Power
Community Power Structures:
Examination of how power is allocated within communities and the effectiveness of community-based decision-making processes.
Types of Power:
Communities may experience either participatory power dynamics or elitist structures, impacting fairness in resource distribution.
Changing Structures:
Discussion on the versatility of institutions, recognizing that their structures are affected by shifts in cultural, economic, and social contexts.
Tragedy of the Commons
Definition:
Concept highlights the problematic results of unrestricted access to shared resources, which may lead to their over-exploitation or depletion.
Resource Management:
Stress on governance as a necessity even for communal resources to prevent negative outcomes such as overuse or environmental degradation, reinforcing the need for established regulations.
Class Readings and Theories
Pluralism Perspective:
Views the individual as central to society, illustrating how diverse groups impact decision-making processes.
Marxist Critique:
Explores how political power often aligns with the interests of the economic elite, emphasizing resource control's influence on political agendas.
Emerging Changes:
Economic transformations can lead to new power dynamics that significantly affect the political influence of marginalized communities.
Final Discussion Points
Inclusivity in Power Structures:
Reflective prompts for considering ways to include marginalized communities within political decision-making processes.
Multifaceted Power Relations:
Recognition of the complex web of institutions, both local and beyond, that contribute to shaping community dynamics and interactions.
Chapter 6 notes (political capital)
Joe and Ellen McDougal grew up in Small Lake, Missouri, a persistently poor area.
They chose to stay and raise their family there.
Joe worked at a small manufacturing plant; Ellen made crafts and waitressed part-time at the Down Home Café.
They noticed the town lacked recreational facilities, especially proper lighting at the baseball diamond.
For years, they petitioned the city council for funding but were told it was a "recreational luxury" and not a priority.
A customer at the café suggested they talk to Hank Jones, a local business owner with political influence.
Ellen casually mentioned the issue to Hank over coffee.
Within a week, the city council approved funding through a small property assessment.
Hank’s informal influence proved more effective than formal political processes.
Raises questions about democratic decision-making and the role of informal power in resource allocation.
Examines political capital in rural communities, including theories, power measurement, vested interests, and external influences.
Political capital involves organization, connections, voice, and power in shaping rules, regulations, and resource distribution.
Example: Cuyahoga River fire (1969) led to citizen mobilization and national environmental reforms (Clean Water Act, EPA creation).
Political capital turned local water-quality concerns into enforceable national standards.
It influences resource distribution and agenda-setting within a community.
Often aligns with dominant cultural capital, reinforcing the status quo.
High bonding social capital in rural areas can discourage alternative ideas.
Water-quality regulations often face resistance, especially from agricultural and private property interests.
Local norms and values must consistently support environmental health for regulations to be effective.
Political capital in rural areas is often controlled by influential individuals rather than elected officials.
Elected officials may anticipate opposition from powerful figures, affecting decision-making (e.g., Small Lake city council rejecting park funding due to assumed resistance from Hank).
Understanding political capital helps identify how excluded groups can gain influence and have their issues addressed.
Rural communities are influenced by external events but can also generate and allocate resources locally.
Power is the ability to make or prevent change, impacting public and private resource distribution.
Community power is strengthened through external connections and can shape a community’s future.
Formal leaders may not always control decision-making; real power holders may be less visible.
Community power structures can be mapped to assess whether power is widely shared or concentrated.
Small Lake’s politics are influenced by a hidden power structure rather than elected officials.
Some communities are controlled by influential networks that lack public accountability.
Power is exercised through physical force, institutional authority, and influence.
Internalization is the most effective way to enforce societal norms (e.g., knowing not to pollute).
Peer pressure serves as a second level of social control, encouraging compliance through community expectations.
Economic control is the third level, used when polluters are not directly affected by local consequences.
Economic sanctions can be positive, helping cover costs for pollution correction.
Economic sanctions can be positive (certification, market access) or negative (fines).
When sanctions fail, force may be used to shut down polluting entities.
Totalitarian regimes rely on physical force, while institutional power is enforced through authority within organizations.
Institutional subordinates must follow orders unless directives exceed institutional rules, though refusal can have consequences.
Whistle-blowers often face retaliation, even in democratic societies.
Influence stems from informal relationships like friendships and social status.
Social scientists debate how power operates in North American communities, as structures vary.
Four major theories of community power: pluralism, elitism, class-based analysis, and the growth machine.
Originally studied in urban settings, these theories were later applied to rural communities.
Participatory-action research analyzes power to drive social and environmental change.
Corporate power in rural areas has been linked to human illness and environmental justice.
Different theories use distinct methods to determine "Who is running this town?"
Whistleblowers treatment:
Whistle-blowers reveal violations of rules and standards within organizations.
Their treatment reflects how power is structured in a community.
Edward Snowden exposed global surveillance by the NSA, sparking debate over security vs. transparency.
Some saw Snowden as a public servant; others labeled him a traitor.
He bypassed official channels, believing the policy lacked democratic oversight.
Other whistle-blowers attempt internal reporting before going public.
A Countrywide Financial employee exposed fraudulent lending practices.
After reporting internally and being ignored, the employee escalated the issue externally.
Following Countrywide’s acquisition by Bank of America, the whistle-blower was fired.
The US Department of Labor later awarded the employee $930,000 in damages.
Predatory lending practices continue to impact communities through home foreclosures.
Whistle-blowers exist in rural areas, exposing environmental and regulatory violations.
Fred Wright, an oil and gas inspector in Texas, aimed to enforce safety regulations.
His supervisors, backed by industry donations, pressured him to approve non-compliant wells.
Wright was reprimanded for enforcing rules and was fired in 2013 despite previous good performance.
He filed a civil lawsuit and a federal whistle-blower complaint.
Morris Kocurek, another inspector, reported improper disposal of toxic waste.
His violation reports were ignored, reassigned, or erased after industry interference.
He alerted US Fish and Wildlife after witnessing ducks die in illegal sludge pits.
The pit operators received a $700 fine under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Kocurek was terminated shortly after Wright for bypassing his supervisors.
Regulations meant to protect health and the environment are overruled by profit-driven political capital.
Hanford, Washington, contains 56 million gallons of radioactive sludge in leaking underground tanks.
The contamination poses a long-term risk to the Columbia River.
Hanford, Washington, houses 56 million gallons of radioactive sludge, threatening the Columbia River.
The DOE aims to process waste into glass for safe disposal but has made no progress.
The project is over 20 years behind schedule and plagued by design flaws and budget overruns.
Bechtel National and URS Energy were contracted for the waste treatment plant.
Walter Tamosaitis, a URS scientist, warned of hydrogen explosion risks and was isolated, then fired in 2013.
Donna Busche, a nuclear engineer, raised safety concerns in 2010 and faced retaliation.
URS and Bechtel pressured her to change testimony and stop documenting safety concerns.
She filed a lawsuit in 2013 over harassment and was fired in February 2013.
A risk-analysis tool was proposed to reduce safety components, despite explosion risks.
Senator Ron Wyden called for a GAO investigation into whistleblower retaliation and DOE’s inaction.
DOE faced resistance from contractors, who withheld documentation and limited interviews.
The DOE ultimately took no action regarding wrongful firings.
Hanford, WA holds 56 million gallons of radioactive sludge, threatening the Columbia River.
DOE plans to process waste into glass but has made no progress.
Project is 20+ years behind schedule, with design flaws and budget overruns.
Bechtel National and URS Energy contracted for the waste treatment plant.
Walter Tamosaitis warned of hydrogen explosion risks, was isolated, then fired in 2013.
Donna Busche raised safety concerns in 2010, faced retaliation, and was fired in 2013.
URS and Bechtel pressured Busche to alter testimony and stop documenting safety issues.
A risk-analysis tool proposed reducing safety components despite explosion risks.
Senator Ron Wyden urged GAO to investigate whistleblower retaliation and DOE’s inaction.
DOE contractors withheld documentation and limited interviews.
DOE ultimately took no action on wrongful firings.
Early studies of community power used a pluralist perspective, focusing on formal positions.
Further research revealed inequalities in power and resource distribution.
Small groups often controlled communities due to economic and social status.
This led to the competing theory of elitism.
The section explores both models and their methods for measuring power.
Pluralism assumes power is widely distributed within the population.
Power is dispersed among competing interests, with no dominant source.
Citizens in democracies are seen as individuals with access to information, making decisions like market participants.
Voting is the main way individuals exercise political influence.
The “one person, one vote” concept is essential for pluralism.
In representative democracy, citizens vote for representatives who are periodically validated through elections.
The system of checks and balances in the US government ensures no arbitrary use of power.
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights protect freedom of expression and equality of opportunity.
Elected officials hold temporary power and challengers have opportunities for election.
All citizens have the civil right to participate in government through elections, including running for office.
Pluralist theorists believe not everyone exercises equal influence in politics, but active participants can have equal influence.
Some groups or classes may participate less due to individual choices, not systemic barriers.
Pluralist theorists focus on overt activities and formal decision-making to assess political power.
They reject the idea of behind-the-scenes influence and conflicting interests between classes.
Lack of controversy suggests broad agreement on public positions among citizens.
The event analysis technique studies controversial public issues to reveal decision-making processes.
Newspaper coverage, observation, and interviews show a diversity of inputs in decisions.
Robert Dahl's 1961 study "Who Governs?" found no single group dominated decisions in New Haven, supporting pluralism.
G. William Domhoff (1983) reexamined urban renewal in New Haven, revealing economic interests behind the scenes, not just public decision-making.
Dahl's study focused on public decision-making, missing the behind-the-scenes influences and the interests benefiting from the decisions.
To assess power, it’s crucial to study the period before public issues are aired and identify key interests shaping the issue.
The elitist perspective was influenced by Floyd Hunter’s (1953) study of Atlanta and C. Wright Mills’s work "The Power Elite" (1956).
Mills argued a "power elite"—government officials, business executives, and military leaders—controlled the nation, sharing mutual political and economic interests.
Domhoff’s "Who Rules America?" (1967) expanded Mills's analysis, focusing on national power structures.
Elitism assumes power is distributed hierarchically, with wealth leading to prestige, control over information, and authoritative positions.
Pluralism views power as fluid among factional coalitions, while elitism sees power concentrated in the hands of a few elite groups.
Community theorists with a power elite perspective see a pyramidal power structure, where a few economic elites have the most influence.
Hunter (1953) developed the reputational technique to determine community power, starting with a list of 175 community leaders and activists.
After consulting local experts, Hunter narrowed the list to 40 influential individuals, interviewing them to identify top leaders.
Hunter's study found a small group of business leaders, not public officials, dominated the community’s economy through interlocking directorships.
These elites were often invisible to the public and rarely held office, but their informal power influenced decisions.
Elected officials were largely subordinate to this elite group, which avoided public controversy by controlling the decision-making process.
Hunter did not argue that elites had total control but suggested they played a key role in setting the public agenda.
Critics of the event analysis technique argue that it focuses too much on controversial issues, ignoring decisions that support elite interests without debate.
Power can be held by those who control the public agenda, even if they are not directly visible in the political process.
It is crucial to examine nondecisions or issues that are never publicly debated, which may be withheld from political attention.
Matthew Crenson’s study on pollution found that dirty air became a political issue only in communities where industry had less power, highlighting the role of nondecisions.
Class-based theories of community power focus on economic elites who control the corporate system and influence political decisions.
In class-based theory, decision makers may not be economic elites themselves but tend to represent their interests.
In Small Lake, local businessman Hank Jones had informal control over the city council, illustrating this dynamic.
Helen and Robert Lynd's 1930s study of Muncie, Indiana, found that the Ball family controlled local financial institutions, showing economic elites' influence on political power.
The Ball family controlled Muncie's growth, shaping real estate, local institutions (college, hospital, YMCA/YWCA) through philanthropy.
Though they rarely held public office, they influenced the Republican Party and had sway in the Democratic Party, enabling or blocking changes.
Elected officials in Muncie were of low caliber, ignored socially/economically by elites, but used politically.
Economic elites, like the Balls, preferred not to directly engage in politics but sought to limit government interference in their interests.
Vidich and Bensman found similar control dynamics in Candor, New York, in the 1960s.
A case study of Candor, Kansas, showed elites influenced local utility pricing and zoning decisions to benefit property owners and business interests.
Special interest groups affected public financing of business projects and controlled community government and non-governmental institutions.
Rural working-class interests focused on working conditions, benefits, and wages, with local government influencing wage levels through employment and recruitment actions.
Working-class citizens are often excluded from decision-making due to inflexible work schedules and lack of representation on public boards.
A working-class mayor in a town faced ridicule for missing city council meetings due to his job, which had irregular hours.
The local elite's tight control discouraged working-class citizens from running for office or addressing issues affecting them.
Fear of personal consequences (e.g., job loss) led some citizens to stop participating in activism.
The more concentrated the economic, political, and civic roles are within a community, the less likely citizen voices are to be heard.
Harvey Molotch's "growth machine" theory (1976) introduced the idea of a coalition of business interests that promote community growth for economic gain.
The growth machine includes developers, construction companies, real estate agents, and others benefiting from increased land rent and population growth.
Growth machines compete to attract capital and residents, boosting returns on land, buildings, and services.
The growth machine in New Orleans, driven by the rentier class, played a role in exacerbating Hurricane Katrina's disaster impact, particularly for the poor.
The rentier class includes property owners such as developers, landlords, and real estate speculators, whose income comes from land and property.
Rentiers promote population growth and city expansion, often for increased job creation, benefiting their financial interests in land use.
Their profits depend on population growth and political influence, securing favorable zoning, tax relief, and infrastructure development.
Rentier class members are significant political contributors, ensuring policies that benefit their interests, including subsidies for building on flood plains.
Despite studies showing limited local benefits, incentives to attract industry continue, increasing land values but often harming community quality of life.
Industry is often placed in low-income areas, benefiting wealthier communities while burdening the poor with pollution, overcrowded schools, and congestion.
In rural and minority communities (e.g., African American, Native American, Hispanic), this practice is termed environmental racism.
Poor and marginalized groups have limited political power to address these issues.
Many communities with few environmental laws are targeted by industrial investors seeking profit.
The central conflict often arises between the growth machine and neighborhoods, framed as a battle between use value and exchange value.
Use value refers to the value something has for personal use, while exchange value is realized when the property is sold.
Neighborhood residents typically prioritize use value, seeking to preserve and enhance their homes without focusing on profit.
Gentrification exposes the tension between preserving use value and increasing exchange value in targeted neighborhoods.
Neighborhood associations work to improve amenities like parks, aiming to enhance use value without focusing on financial capital.
Residents often favor keeping land values low to reduce property taxes, while the growth machine seeks to increase land values for profit.
In rural areas, the growth machine consists of local businesses (banks, utilities, law firms) whose wealth depends on business volume, similar to urban areas.
Local firms and individuals form the core of the growth machine, with economies of scale benefiting their involvement.
Growth is widely seen as beneficial, supported by dominant cultural capital that justifies investment and regulations.
External interests like multinational firms may seek tax benefits or environmental exceptions by mobilizing local political capital.
Smart-growth coalitions emerged in urban areas in the 1970s to combat sprawl and suburbanization, now applied in rural areas.
Smart-growth principles aim to balance quality of life and a vital economy through zoning and planning.
Key smart-growth principles include:
A range of housing options for all income levels (built and financial capital).
Walkable neighborhoods to enhance human and social capital.
Community and stakeholder collaboration in development (social and cultural capital).
Distinctive communities with a strong sense of place, balancing architectural beauty, housing, and transportation (cultural, natural, and built capital).
Development decisions should be predictable, fair, and cost-effective for smart growth to succeed, with private sector involvement (financial capital).
Smart growth encourages mixed land uses to improve living spaces (natural capital).
It supports preserving open space, farmland, and critical environmental areas to bolster economies and guide new growth (natural capital).
Providing a variety of transportation choices is key for smart growth (built capital).
Development should be directed towards existing communities, utilizing infrastructure and conserving open space (social, cultural, and built capital).
Compact building design is encouraged as an alternative to land-consuming development (built and natural capital).
Decorah, Iowa exemplifies rural smart growth by maintaining a growing economy within established boundaries and focusing on sustainability through initiatives like the Northeast Iowa Food and Fitness Initiative.
Rural no-growth coalitions are more dominant in smaller, non–trade center communities, typically involving manufacturers, processors, and commercial farmers focused on export markets.
Some rural elites, such as peanut processors, oppose higher wages and public school spending to keep labor unskilled and wages low, also reducing taxes.
In midwestern farm communities, retired farmers dominate local politics, favoring no-growth policies to maintain low real estate taxes and minimal government expenditure.
Retirees in rural areas prioritize the use value of their homes and often vote in large numbers to oppose infrastructure bonds, including for schools.
In Springdale, New York, a business elite controlled local politics through an “invisible government” that manipulated elections by limiting voting hours and controlling candidate nominations.
Vidich and Bensman identified informal village board requirements: long-term residency, economic vulnerability or kinship ties to power, little knowledge of government, and a low-tax ideology.
Village board members were often incompetent, economically vulnerable, or kinship-connected, resulting in ineffective governance where routine affairs were seen as automatic.
Members of the invisible government and board owners had rental properties, focusing on low-cost management rather than growth or sales of real estate.
Ensuring the election of people with a low-tax, limited-government mindset was crucial to maintaining control of the village.
In larger rural communities, influence is often through semi-governmental organizations like chambers of commerce, which promote tourism and economic development with limited public accountability.
Rural communities vary in their orientation towards no-growth, smart-growth, or pro-growth strategies, with smart-growth having the most impact in creative, entrepreneurial communities.
In some communities, no-growth groups can defeat growth machines and prevent new economic activity from developing.
Some rural communities, especially regional trade centers, may seek to attract capital during crises to increase employment.
Many rural communities, however, choose inaction when facing decline.
In modern capitalism, ownership is separate from management; businesses need large amounts of capital that individuals or families can't always provide.
Corporations can raise capital by selling stocks, either publicly or privately, which impacts decision-making and policy.
Local vs. absentee ownership affects a company's involvement in the community, with locally based businesses more likely to use local political capital and be invested in the area.
Nonlocal ownership may result in less community involvement and more external influence, making local citizens more likely to mobilize against external threats like environmental pollution.
Nonlocal firms may threaten to leave if they don't get favorable conditions, often benefiting the growth machine and favoring managers who are geographically mobile.
Absentee company managers usually do not invest in local community or philanthropic activities, unlike local industrialists who are more engaged in civic life.
Local industrialists are often linked to the rentier group and provide wealth through local community foundations.
Nonlocal firms are part of broader national or international supply chains, which means local entrepreneurs miss out on those commercial networks.
Absentee firms have smaller economic multiplier effects compared to locally owned businesses.
When local businesses are part of the growth machine, they help foster policies that benefit local firms.
The trend of media consolidation is similar to manufacturing; chain newspapers, being absentee-owned, are less likely to support local growth machines and more likely to take independent stances.
Local newspapers often serve as arbiters within the growth machine, but when they are absentee-owned, this integrative role is weakened.
Absentee-owned enterprises foster community pluralism by not prioritizing local politics, creating space for non-elites to organize, but may use threats to leave if issues directly affect them.
The decline of branch manufacturing plants in rural areas results from their move to places with cheaper labor and fewer environmental regulations.
The shift from industrial to service-sector growth has made it harder for the growth machine to control community symbols for its benefit.
Previously, local governments offered tax breaks to industries, though the benefits were minimal for people on fixed incomes and unemployed individuals, as new jobs were taken by more-educated commuters.
The rise of the service sector has brought problems such as the displacement of poorer residents by downtown malls and local stores being replaced by chains like Walmart.
Environmental concerns have increased, particularly around rural landfills, nuclear waste dumps, and missile sites, which can split communities between those seeking jobs and those concerned about environmental degradation.
In rapid-growth communities, professionals with organizational skills and environmental concerns challenge the growth machine using their political capital.
National economic elites are influencing local communities through local branch firm managers who engage in lobbying, political support, and land use issues.
National elites aim to align local elites with national growth machine ideologies, sometimes through local chambers of commerce pushing programs that may not suit local development needs but align with the national agenda.
Communities differ in how power is concentrated and whether it is controlled by local or absentee entities.
Understanding local power structures is essential for enacting grassroots change and choosing effective strategies.
Challenging power elites can be empowering for marginalized groups but also risky due to elites' control over information and symbols.
Excluded groups can gain political capital by analyzing power structures using diverse research methods.
Key questions help reveal community power dynamics, such as who can represent the town, who can approve or block projects, and whose support is needed.
Studies show that power influence varies by issue rather than being dominated by a single group.
Different methodologies (positional, reputational, and event analysis) yield varying results, suggesting that power is distributed across multiple actors.
A combined research approach is necessary to understand who truly holds and exercises political capital.
Different individuals influence different local events, but most influential people appear in positional or reputational analyses.
The local growth machine plays a role in key issues but can be defeated by organized citizen efforts.
Political capital is dispersed, allowing for countervailing influences.
Growth proponents have an advantage due to career incentives and paid political engagement, but sustained citizen involvement can lead to pluralistic outcomes.
Persistence and continuity are essential for disadvantaged groups to build and maintain political capital.
Organizing coalitions and staying active prevents recurring disadvantages in social and natural capital.
Both power elite and class-based theorists use network analysis to identify key community power structures.
Network analysis maps interconnections between firms and individuals to assess power dynamics.
Studies often combine multiple methodologies to reduce bias and provide a balanced view of power structures.
The Movers and Shakers study of San Jose combined reputational analysis, network analysis, and historical research to examine community power.
Movers and Shakers used historical analysis to identify key issues like annexation, land use, urban renewal, and election methods.
Decision-making research included agenda setting and symbolic manipulation, not just formal processes.
A pro-growth power structure existed but changed over time with increased pluralism.
Pluralism grew as newspapers shifted from local to absentee ownership and elections moved from at-large to district-based.
As major firms transitioned from local to multinational ownership, pluralism increased.
Multinational firms focused their influence on decisions directly affecting their operations while limiting broader community involvement.
Identifying power groups requires linking vested interests to specific areas of influence in local communities.
Power is context-dependent—some actors succeed in certain issues but not in others.
More transparency in local government could improve resource distribution, such as youth recreation funding.
Different sociological studies show varying power dynamics; for example, environmentalists have confronted the growth machine in some cities.
The California tax revolt started in working-class communities due to financial strain and frustration with taxes and government inefficiency.
Business interests later joined, shifting the movement’s impact.
The ultimate beneficiaries of the tax revolt were real estate developers.
Early studies focused on a monolithic power elite (Mills 1956), but recent research examines control over specific issues.
Even small rural communities can have complex power structures.
Political capital determines not only how issues are resolved but also which issues gain attention.
Political capital transformation:
Political capital can be converted into built, social, cultural, and financial capital.
This transformation is the exercise of power.
Community power
Defined as the ability to influence the distribution of public and private resources.
Exercised through physical force, economic force, institutionalized force, and influence.
Community power structure
The patterns in how power is exercised shape how communities function.
Social scientists disagree on how to measure and define power.
Pluralism perspective
Assumes power is widely distributed within a community.
Uses event analysis to measure power by examining decision-making in controversial public issues.
Elitist perspective
Assumes power is concentrated among a few individuals.
Uses the reputational technique, where knowledgeable community members identify the most powerful individuals.
Class-based theory:
Suggests those who control the economic system also control the community.
A modern adaptation is the growth machine model, where a coalition seeks economic gain through community growth.
Applied mainly to urban areas but relevant to rural communities with varying orientations (pro-growth, smart-growth, or no-growth).
Pluralism in power structures:
Broad participation in agenda setting is key to making power structures more inclusive.
Public issues should be openly discussed and debated.
Without community empowerment and participation in agenda-setting, decision-making through discussion and compromise lacks significance.
KEY TERMS
Class-based analysis as a theory of power assumes that those who control the economic system control the community.
Community power is the ability to affect the distribution of both public and
private resources within the community.
The community power structure consists of the patterns identified in the exer-
cise of community power.
Elitism as a perspective of power assumes that power generally conforms to the social stratification system; wealth, prestige, and power tend to be associated with one another.
Event analysis is a research methodology that involves identifying and using controversial public issues to reveal the decision-making process.
Event analysis technique is the preferred strategy for measuring power from a pluralist perspective. Researchers identify controversial public issues and then look at the decision-making process used to resolve those issues.
Those who make the decisions are deemed to have power in that area.
Frequently different issues are examined to determine whether the same or different people exercise power across issues.
The exchange value of an object, such as a house, is its value to the owner insofar as it can be exchanged for money.
The growth machine is a coalition of groups that set about to use power to encourage growth and capture its benefits.
Network analysis is a way to measure power by looking at the patterns of linkages between organizations and individuals considered to be important in the community.
A New England town meeting is a form of direct representation in which all residents in a geographic jurisdiction come together to make decisions on local policies, rules, regulations, and budgets.
Pluralism as a theory of power assumes power is an attribute of individuals and that the capacity for acquiring power is widely distributed within the population.
Power is the ability to make something happen that otherwise would not happen or to prevent something from happening that others wish to make happen.
The rentier class is made up of those whose principal income derives from rent or an increase in the value of property. It includes landlords of residential, commercial, and industrial establishments and of agricultural land as well as speculators in land and buildings.
Reputational technique measures power by asking knowledgeable members of a community who they think has power.
The use value of an object, such as a house, is its value to the owner for his or her own uses. Factors taken into consideration include comfort, sentimental value, prestige imparted by the object to the owner, pleasure in possessing or using the object, and so forth.
Chapter 6 PDF summarizer
Introduction to Political Capital
Background and Community Issues
Joe and Ellen McDougal from Small Lake, Missouri, raised their family there.
Joe was employed in a manufacturing plant; Ellen created crafts and worked part-time as a waitress.
The community faced issues such as poor recreational facilities and a significant demand for baseball diamond lights for children's leagues.
Efforts for Community Improvement
Years of petitions to the city council for improvements failed due to funding being categorized as "recreational luxuries."
Key advice came from Hank Jones, a local influential figure (owner of a feed and farm supply store).
Following discussions with Hank, funding was successfully secured for park lighting.
Critical Questions Raised:
Why did informal conversation yield better results than formal petitions?
What are the democratic implications behind these community resource allocations?
Political Capital Defined
Definition: Political capital includes organization, connections, voice, and power that allow communities to enforce norms and values.
Historical Example: The Cuyahoga River incident mobilized citizens against pollution, leading to the Clean Water Act and the establishment of the EPA.
Influence: Political capital affects resource allocation and community power dynamics.
Bonding Social Capital: Can reinforce existing power structures and lead to undervaluation of diverse perspectives.
Case Study: Water quality regulations in rural areas demonstrate the influence of agricultural practices on local governance.
Power Dynamics in Rural Communities
Power is often held by influential, non-elected individuals who impact community decisions.
The McDougals’ experience illustrated Hank's influence over decisions despite not having an official elected position.
Community Power Structure Insight: Understanding governance and how marginalized groups can mobilize for change.
Power Definition: The capacity to create or hinder situations within a community.
Dimensions of Power
Exercise of Power: Can be exerted through:
Physical force
Institutional authority
Economic influence
Informal social networks
Control Examples: Local norms, such as environmental standards, can dictate behavior and influence decision-making processes.
Whistleblowers and Power Structure
Importance of Whistleblowers: They highlight processes and interests that influence decisions within organizations and governance (e.g., Edward Snowden).
Community Impact: Their struggles demonstrate the tension between local governance and powerful economic interests.
Class-Based Power Analysis
Economic Power Roots: Frequently concentrated with economically influential families shaping policy outcomes without formal offices.
Case Example: The Ball family's influence in Muncie, Indiana, exemplifies economic power affecting local governance.
Rentier Class and Growth Machine
Rentier Class: Individuals with political capital from real estate interests significantly impact local economies.
Growth Machine Concept: Economic entities advocating for growth primarily to increase profits often overlook community needs.
Smart Growth Principles
Overview of Smart Growth: Integrates economic vitality with sustainable community development.
Key Principles:
Development of walkable neighborhoods
Preservation of open spaces
Mixed land use accommodating both residential and business needs
Pluralism vs. Elitism in Community Power
Pluralism: Early studies indicated power is distributed among various community groups.
Elitism: Challenges this view, recognizing that a small group may dominate decision-making and governance.
Event Analysis and Methodology
Event Analysis: Studies community power by examining public disputes and decision-making processes to understand power distribution.
Measuring Community Power
Reputational Technique: Determines community power through interviews regarding influential individuals.
Findings: Highlight diverse political capital structures across different communities.
Local vs. Absentee Ownership
Ownership Impact: Local ownership enhances community ties and responsiveness; absentee ownership can neglect local needs and create disconnection.
Change and Community Engagement
Community Dynamics: Power structures can shift; ongoing local engagement is essential for participation in decision-making and empowering grassroots movements.
Migrant dreams
about migrant workers
divisive on what the strategy is?
About 7,000 migrant workers
had to pay 7,000 dollars to come
$200 to the agency they work with
TFW in ontario
30% of their gross pay, and 6500$ to come to Canada
if you don’t pay they get fired and sent back to Indonesia with incredible debt
housing; minimal autonomy
have to tell the supervisor about every move they make
coercion and surveillance
Indonesian workers
“Management fee”
were promised they would have high salaries
were told tell people they paid nothing to come
People leave their families in hopes of being able to send them money
inadequate housing
can’t complain or they will lose their jobs
eg. Several people all living in a garage, with nowhere to store their belongings (their stuff is scattered everywhere)
More TFWs are coming in to the country than other immigrants
TFWs treated like property; lots of abuse
curfews, confiscated passports
Laws aren’t designed to protect them
Contract says air ticket is paid, and then requests money for travel
contract written in English so that recruiters can lie about the details
Living in small house with 16 other people filled with cockroaches and filth
a few girls move out to stop paying rent to the recruiter
Employer continues to deduct rent from paycheck
Workers getting sent home after being injured on the job
If immigration comes and they don’t have a passport they will get deported (the employers take their passports)
Two girls are getting married; maybe not a girl, maybe a trans man?
”spouses”
Recruiter sent pictures to her family telling them she was married
police were called
some are more willing to work with the police than others
Unsafe working conditions
Infected lungs from chemicals
told him he couldn’t wear respirator
After confronting recruiter about health risks he was fired
mother died while the daughter was working in canada
Someone broke into a TFWs house and stole the police report
another had her passport and documents stolen from her home
charged for extortion of money
attorneys deny all allegations and twist the facts
Lots of evidence proving it happened
agent took away the married couples TFW status
LMO
6 girls
tricked/deception
Lack of rights information for migrant workers
vulnerability is constructed
The six girls are suing their employers
Empty promises
recruiter was charged under the criminal code
case is pending
recruiter declined to participate in the film
Dwipas recruiter faced 37 charges
human trafficking
4 charges of fraud
unrelated to the worker in the film
Pierre Polievre declined to participate
More than half a million migrant workers from over 80 countries aer in Canada with temporary status
since 2006 numbers have exceeded the number of immigrants with permanent resident status
Migrant dream summary
Situation of Migrant Workers in Canada
Discussion between Nanik and Evelyn about work and vulnerabilities faced by migrant workers.
Over 7,000 migrant workers in Leamington area, facing exploitation.
Recruitment and Payments
Migrant workers often pay high fees to agents to come to Canada (e.g., $7,000).
Weekly deductions from their wages (hundreds of dollars, approx. 30%) to repay loans taken for their journey.
Threats from agents for not paying, creating a cycle of debt.
Employment Vulnerabilities
Migrant workers are fearful of losing their jobs if they complain about conditions or refuse to pay fees.
Example of two workers fired for stopping payments—high intimidation tactics.
Workers live under surveillance and strict controls regarding their housing and movements.
Living Conditions
Unacceptable living conditions reported; workers fear complaining to avoid job loss.
Housing control leads to feelings of coercion, workers unable to leave without permission.
Systemic Issues
Recruitment fees fraud, with real costs unfairly transferred to workers.
Employers responsible by law for recruitment fees but often shift the burden to workers.
Migrant workers lack access to social welfare programs and protections, rendering them vulnerable.
Health and Safety Concerns
Reports of migrant workers suffering from unsafe work conditions.
Use of unsafe chemicals without proper protective gear leading to health risks.
Legality and Rights of Workers
Migrant workers are often left without proper legal recourse or protection under Canadian law.
System may purposely construct these vulnerabilities for economic gain.
Calls for Awareness and Change
Need for awareness and legal protection for migrant workers.
Discussion about the contrasting views of Canada as a land of hope versus current exploitation.
Examples from various communities of abuse and exploitation.
Emotional and Psychological Impact
Workers express fear and emotional distress due to job insecurity and exploitative conditions.
Individual stories highlight trauma and challenges faced in their immigration journey.
Community Advocacy
Activism efforts to raise awareness and seek legal changes for better treatment of migrant workers.
Individuals supporting each other and pushing for systemic change within the program.
NoteStudied by 23 peopleNoteStudied by 31 peopleNoteStudied by 1 personNoteStudied by 20 peopleNoteStudied by 90 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people