Views of power

Why we need to understand views of power

It’s useful for organizers to understand and explicitly share our organization's’ basic assumptions about how power and change work – so that we can better work together.

That’s why we believe identifying the three major theories of change that organizations hold – and learning about the strengths and weaknesses of each – is important.

It’s also useful to be clear what our dominant “views of power” are.

If two organizations have different ideas about who holds true power in society – the public at large vs. a few appointed decision-makers – they will likely have entirely different targets, demands, strategies, and tactics. Let’s dive into defining them.

Two major views of power: social and monolithic

Adapted from Momentum participant guide.

“Do people really have any power?”

This is at the heart of organizing and movement building. Do the "people" have power or do the "authorities" have it? How we answer that question will determine whom we organize, how we organize, and whether we win.

Many of us have been raised in cultures that teach us that power lies in the hands of the appointed few. We understand this to be a monolithic view of power – a view that assigns power to the top of the pyramid.

Alternatively, there is a belief that all leaders rely on the tacit consent of the people they rule over. For instance, the boss relies on the tacit consent of the workers to work; if the workers don’t show up, the boss’ power is empty – he rules over no one.

Collectively, our consent keeps certain institutions or “pillars” of society in place. If people were to collectively withdraw their consent, the pillars would fall and it would be clear that ordinary people actually have the power. We call this a social view of power.

While many of us became organizers and activists because we saw the world through a social view of power, our campaigns and movements have frequently organized themselves around decision-makers at the top. (Structure-based organizing, for instance, traditionally leverages the base in order to push decision-makers to agree to incremental reforms.) Our strategies and structures have sometimes reinforced a monolithic view of power. We also call this the "monolithic myth."

A social view of power requires more than a small base turning out at an action: it requires sustained mass participation.It means building our movements to activate the public and meet their needs at a higher level than the status quo.

To be clear, the Momentum organizing model is based on a social view of power. We believe that the people hold the power, and that it is our job as organizers to bring as many people as possible into the movement.