Power Structure Architecture (Power Structure Engineering)

[POFP]

Resources:

https://whorulesamerica.ucsc.edu/ ~ G. William Domhoff's website - Combines the research and materials of several historical and modern Power Structure Researchers, and provides excellent analyses of their methodologies and principles, and how right or wrong they were based on the most recent studies.

https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=750070 ~ Simple Sabotage Manual - Mostly outdated and deprecated by bureaucratic regulation, but contains some interesting points to reference for examples of Power Structure mechanics.

https://archive.org/details/imagesoforganiza00morg_0 ~ "Images of Organization" by Gareth Morgan

https://archive.org/details/c_wright_mills_the_power_elite/mode/1up?view=theater ~ "The Power Elite" by C. Wright Mills
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is a placeholder for a thread in which I hope that we, as a community, will systematically design a Framework, and consequently, a reference manual, for understanding and dismantling Dominant and Coercive Power Structures at the Local, State, and National levels. Ideally, the results of this work should be universally applicable, and acknowledging of (But not limiting from) regional, historical, and socioeconomic contexts. In other words, with enough information as input, we should be able to apply the Framework to any past, present, and future event, and identify with certainty, those responsible for how those events occurred through direct or indirect influence by all involved Organizations and Institutions. Setting the precedent of systematically assigning responsibility should improve accountability, or at least make it easier to inform the Public of clear wrong-doing and who they could attempt to hold accountable. I want any Activist to be able to, with reasonable analytical effort, describe in excruciating (To the Powers that Be) detail, through direct observation, how a given Corporate, Political, or Military Power Structure has extracted wealth and freedom from a given group of people through various intentional and unintentional consequences from deliberate action or inaction.

I envision this overall development process, but expect (Read "demand"  ) Discordian intervention to prevent anything from getting boring (Also, feel free to suggest alternative direction/steps - I want this to be a Group Project):

• Consume as much modern literature on Power Structure Research as one can (C. Wright Mills, Floyd Hunter, Marx, G. William Domhoff, Hegel, etc.), jotting down ideas, thoughts, observations, and concepts for analysis by the group.
• Build an intuitive and systems-oriented linguistic structure and vocabulary for studying Power in a Scientific, almost even mechanical way.
• Build on old and new methodologies for studying Power Structures to establish standardized processes for doing so, incorporating, as others like Domhoff have, accessible online/library-based tools and sources that one can use to supplement for remote research.
• Create Reference Materials for Power Structure data points, like Types, inputs, outputs, and how they may relate with external systems, Power Structures/Power Structure Components, and other societal processes.
• Combine core concepts from these Reference Materials into a Manual that enumerates, in detail, the steps for the analysis, deconstruction, and dismantling of any Power Structure by Type.
• Consume as much literature on the consequences of Power Structure collapse in various scenarios (Fallen governments, corporations, militaries, etc.)
• Incorporate into the Reference Manual what steps must be taken by a responsible, Organized People to healthily manage the resolution of the immediate and long-term consequences of the collapse of a given Power Structure by Type.
• Establish a clear and detailed precedent for the Historical recording of both, intentionally dismantled Power Structures, as well as what the consequences of their collapse were, and how they were managed (Or in poor circumstances, NOT managed.). Subsequently, the process of dealing with the consequences should be improved over time as we learn more.
• Begin implementing what we've learned in practice at the Work Place, and in Local and State Elections and make amendments/corrections to the Materials.

My background in Software and Solutions Engineering/Architecture and experience in climbing Corporate Power Structures, combined with more recent study of Power Structures and Social Ecology, have led me to believe that Sociological processes, like the creation of Power Structures, are both almost mechanically/systematically driven by observable, predictable, human-made processes in the real world, and also composed of smaller interdependent parts, while still having net-new emergent properties not inherited from those parts. I want to realize this view in a way that is both informative and useful in both the study and regulation/eradication of Power Structures. At the same time, I want to make sure that this knowledge is not monopolized and abused in a way that harms the public.

I'll begin jotting down my thoughts and information obtained from step 1 over the next month or so, likely starting later today or tomorrow. However, feel free to throw in any and all knowledge you have on the subjects at hand whenever it comes to you, and definitely make recommendations for reading materials to the group if you've already done your homework. Even if it becomes slightly unrelated, we can always create spin-off threads for related topics that we can link to/reference here for further explanation.

I'm also aware that talking about things like this can be considered taboo. If, for personal reasons, you'd like to keep distance from the Project, that's completely fine. I can also take this elsewhere if the Group would prefer that as well.

[POFP]

Notes/thoughts generated so far while reading The Power Elite, by C. Wright Mills:

#1
The beauty (and horror) of Fear as an excuse for Domination and/or Hierarchy is that once used on Hierarchies already in-place, it is especially self-replicating, transcribing itself (With exceptional variation) from Upper echelons down to the Laboring Class. The way the system works, you don't have to Fear the enemy of the Top - Just the enemy of the Managers above your position in the Hierarchical Ecosystem, be it within your own Professional Domain or otherwise. This type of Fear feels more natural - More organic - It relates directly to the Environment you live in instead of some foreign threat. This is especially important when your Country is the biggest and baddest in your hemisphere: Fears of foreigners stop feeling natural because none of the Conflict ever happens anywhere near you or your country. The Internet made this a little easier to account for to an extent, as foreign Powers can always easily be "invading National Systems over the Wire". I say "To an extent", because after your government starts spending more money on Cyber Security than everyone else, the assumption eventually becomes that "Big Brother has it under control."

#2
It's important to note that Local Political Positions are Professional and loosely Corporate-structured ones (By design, thanks to the Spelman Fund's efforts in rewriting local government structure throughout the mid to late 1900s), and so operate under some of the same kinds of pressures that Corporate Organizations do to maximize efficiency (Or the appearance of efficiency, if the position is elected.). This leads to back-channeling and pre-planning of decisions that should theoretically be handled on a Public Stage. When every Public delivery of Political Action appears to be confident, precise, and demonstrate impossibly high attention to detail and overall progress in the short amount of time the topic appears to have been conceived in the Public Eye, it bolsters an inaccurate assumption by the general population that "These politicians may not be perfect, but they are at least more fit to decide than inadequate/inefficient I." But in almost every instance of this, it's more clear after further investigation that everyone fell for the oldest Corporate Presentation trick in the book:

1. Backchannel and prepare for Weeks, or Months in advance.

2. Mention the Problem and your Solution only a day or two (Or maybe a slightly more realistic amount of time depending on the situation) before your Solution and Presentation would be ready.

3. Present your findings early and look like a fucking genius.

EDIT (Didn't like the base wording I was starting out with - Felt like it wasn't coming across right no matter what I did, so I refactored quite a bit.):
Most hierarchical Corporate Structures in America Post-colonialism have been made up of Power Structures based around preventing People of Color and Women from acquiring valuable knowledge, research, and skills through gate-keeping and discriminatory policies. This pretty much guaranteed that the Legislative/Political Process at the Local and State Levels were going to be monopolized by Corporate-oriented White Men, until the professional Corporate world began to open up its lower professional echelons to minorities and the disempowered for the sake of profit, and anyone could begin to learn (On the surface) the Corporate Structure. It also only works on a Superficial level, and further investigation by skilled journalists usually confirms the pre-knowledge extended further back than we were led to believe (Although these discoveries happen far less often in Local politics because local journalists lack the Institutional Power to mount long-term investigations without being stonewalled by the Growth Coalitions, who rule Local jurisdictions effectively with an iron fist.). To deconstruct local Power Structures, you have to expose this behavior and demonstrate and outline Legislative processes that encourage transparency. But it can't be just any example - You either need enough examples to create a reliable statistical analysis, or you need a few powerful and detailed examples that relate to hot-button issues in the region.

If you have access to Capital, this should be easy with targeted campaign ads in the region. But be careful not to state anything in those ads that you can't reliably prove in court, as libel suits are more likely to be won in local legal battles where you lack the protection of the Public Eye (Large-scale public demonstrations receive far more 1st Amendment-support when the Public has clear visibility of it. Law-oriented Activists will usually offer a firm legal defense, pro bono.), and where local government officials are likely to have direct or indirect relationships/ties with the targets. This is where we should take advantage of Advertising through Social Media as much as possible, where regulation is nearly non-existent, and libel suits nearly impossible to be fought. Local established election committees are usually less skilled in the management of Social Media campaigns because most Public attention is usually paid to Federal and State Elections (Emphasis on the Former, by design, again because of the Spelman Fund and similar Institutional Policy Planning Networks.), not local ones. They don't have the same level of pressure keeping them operating at advanced levels like the Federal Election Campaign Managers do. This, of course, is a double-edged sword, as it means your primary pool of public support is smaller unless you have mastered the art of viral campaigns and can extend your pool to the Public at large and let the campaign grow into a National movement organically.

[rong]

I ain't about to read all that shit, but it sounds like you might want this linked here so i can at least do that.  good luck

https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=750070

I'm kinda more into this approach, though:

[POFP]

I ain't about to read all that shit, but it sounds like you might want this linked here so i can at least do that.  good luck

https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=750070

I'm kinda more into this approach, though:

I'm well aware of the text, and it is a good source to have laying around, but it lacks necessary structure and depth. Good ideas, but mostly outdated and circumvented by standard internal Corporate regulation (Corporate Power Structures learned many lessons, although apparently none of them to do with  Meeting-abuse, funny enough...).

Also, it's not possible to just "build a new Model" under Power Structures that seek to, through coercion and literal murder, prevent any form of experimentation with other Models. Remember MLK? Or the Labor Movements of the early 1900s and McCarthyism or even McCarthyism 2: Electric Boogalo? You can't build a new Model without experimentation. Period. That's why Step 9 is Practice and Perpetual Continuous Improvement. America's been on this step for 300 years with minimal Social progress, BECAUSE OF LACK OF EXPERIMENTATION OUTSIDE OF CORPORATE POLICY PLANNING.

EDIT: Correction - Experimentation with Organization does happen, but only in the context of Corporate and Governmental Bureaucracy.

[rong]

I don't mean to jack up your thread, and I apologize if you think that's what I'm trying to do.  as a show of good will, anything that I may add later, I will do so by editing this post instead of creating a new one.  that should help preserve the "flow"

we're obviously coming from different places (reality tunnels and what not) here, too.

I don't have much hope for any sort of success by any definition of the word in this arena, but it's fun to think about.

With that said, I was reading where you were writing about Fear being used to dominate.  That certainly should come as no surprise.  The purpose of a power structure presumably is control.  I guess I have 2 take-aways.  My apologies for not having organized my thoughts very well, but I only have a few more minutes here before I have to go do something else.  Maybe I'll come back and edit this later?

Anyhow - I think it's pretty safe to assume that Power structures are not 100% deliberate.  i think they can largely be attributed to basic survival instincts, greed, and, say, lack of moral fiber and/or fortitude.  a lot of this behavior, i believe, is driven by the subconscious mind.

my other thought was there is also the law of unintended consequences.  Getting back to using Fear as a method of control - no matter your thoughts and opinions about Covid, it is evident that it has provided a source of fear and has been exploited in efforts to control.  The unintended consequence, i think is that, those in power did not expect that so many people, when faced with a "the world may end tomorrow and you will die" situation would accept this fate and pursue their own selfish interests instead of falling in lock step with "the program"  - i can back up this claim somewhat in that people have been quitting their jobs in the largest numbers in history.  i think this is reactionary to the fear stimulus - a sort of, i'm going to enjoy what life i have left as best i can instead of endure the jabs, masks and seemingly endless lockdowns.

i think throughout history, when the coercive fear stimulus is the loud side of a barrel of a gun, it's always a surprise how many choose the bullet instead of getting with the program.
-------------------------


i guess without some sort of end goal in mind, i don't see much point in this exercise . . . maybe your goals are loftier than mine, but i feel i am already able to exert enough influence to achieve my goals. 

[POFP]

I don't mean to jack up your thread, and I apologize if you think that's what I'm trying to do.  as a show of good will, anything that I may add later, I will do so by editing this post instead of creating a new one.  that should help preserve the "flow"

we're obviously coming from different places (reality tunnels and what not) here, too.

I don't have much hope for any sort of success by any definition of the word in this arena, but it's fun to think about.

With that said, I was reading where you were writing about Fear being used to dominate.  That certainly should come as no surprise.  The purpose of a power structure presumably is control.  I guess I have 2 take-aways.  My apologies for not having organized my thoughts very well, but I only have a few more minutes here before I have to go do something else.  Maybe I'll come back and edit this later?

Anyhow - I think it's pretty safe to assume that Power structures are not 100% deliberate.  i think they can largely be attributed to basic survival instincts, greed, and, say, lack of moral fiber and/or fortitude.  a lot of this behavior, i believe, is driven by the subconscious mind.

my other thought was there is also the law of unintended consequences.  Getting back to using Fear as a method of control - no matter your thoughts and opinions about Covid, it is evident that it has provided a source of fear and has been exploited in efforts to control.  The unintended consequence, i think is that, those in power did not expect that so many people, when faced with a "the world may end tomorrow and you will die" situation would accept this fate and pursue their own selfish interests instead of falling in lock step with "the program"  - i can back up this claim somewhat in that people have been quitting their jobs in the largest numbers in history.  i think this is reactionary to the fear stimulus - a sort of, i'm going to enjoy what life i have left as best i can instead of endure the jabs, masks and seemingly endless lockdowns.

i think throughout history, when the coercive fear stimulus is the loud side of a barrel of a gun, it's always a surprise how many choose the bullet instead of getting with the program.

1. No worries - This is a discussion thread for now. I can always create a new thread and sticky it for the officialized documentation.

2. You're absolutely right about unintentional imposition of Power, and C. Wright Mills goes into this at great length in almost every chapter because it's easy to forget when considering the more abstract implementations of power. I'll actually be talking about this fact as well in my next brain dump to establish the fundamentals. I have some modifications to make to the accepted Bases of Power to better explain mechanical features of Power, and this was actually part of my reasoning for doing so.

It's also important to understand that because Power is an Emergent Property of a relationship between two OR MORE things, composed of the difference in Potential for one to act on or impose will on another, it is possible for inaction and/or nihilism to be an expression of Power by way of letting external forces act on an entity when they would normally be circumvented by one's explicit action. This is why we can attribute responsibility and hold those accountable who do nothing. However, the extent of that accountability also depends on the context. One entity may not be aware of those External Forces, and may not have known to act to prevent them. But this may not always be relevant, especially when agreements are made to ensure that that entity is responsible for becoming aware of them.

[POFP]

Snippets of Fundamental definitions and descriptions as they come to me, and as I feel that they have been modified/altered/interrogated enough to be formed on solid grounds:

Terminology:

     - Power: The potential for an entity to alter the State of another.

     - State: The collection of quantitative and qualitative properties that represent an entity.

     - Influence: An abstract representation of State Change of an entity by another.

     - Environment: Everything within an Entity's Influential Proximity
     
     - Influential Proximity: The ease (Read: Energy Expenditure) with which an Entity can alter the State of, or have their State altered by an Entity.

     - Corruption: The tendency for Entities to Stabilize their own States at any cost, including the act of destructively reducing the Stability of others.

To define Power Structure Architecture, we have to establish a fundamental understanding of Power itself - Not just as it relates to People in the Sociological Context, but also as it relates to the physical world (And of course, all abstractions, including the metaphysical, that are derived from it.). Power is an abstract, emergent property induced by the genesis of a relationship between two or more entities that is based on the potential for one or more to alter the State of others. Influence is the imposition, or realization of this Power, in which the State of one or more entities is changed by others, directly or indirectly.

You'll notice that this definition is a bit more broad than most others tend to agree with in the field of Sociology - Not so much as to be in conflict with them, in my view, but just enough to allow us to look at Power Relationships OUTSIDE of the Sociological Context, so that we can better understand how they might evolve WITHIN the Sociological Context. With the introduction of Computer Science and Information Systems in general (Which, while often dealing with the abstract, are still subject to physical Universal constraints.), this version of the Definition will come in handy. It sets us up to look at Power in a mechanical, quantifiable way that is governed by known Universal Laws.

A Power Structure is a Network of entities that are organized in such a way, that their individual potentials for Influence on each other and external entities organize themselves into a more abstract, and effective mechanism for Influence. Power Structure Architecture is the study of how these Power Structures naturally and artificially emerge from both organizations of entities, as well as from other Power Structures, through Aggregation and Inheritance. In the study of Software, which our Power Structure studies will occasionally mirror, Inheritance is the tendency for a component to naturally acquire the properties of its sub-components, and vice versa.

As you'll soon see, Power Structure Architecture, in a more general and philosophical sense, is the study of the relationships that govern how entities in an ever-cooling Universe store and expend energy to stabilize their own States, either directly through self-regulation, or indirectly by altering the States of other Entities in their Environments. This is the principle that, when combined with Influential Proximity Isolation (To the extent that the Influenced Entity is not able to, in-turn, Influence the Influencer.) and reduction of State-Change feedback, guides and drives Corruption. When Entities are able to impose Influence on others to increase their own stability without having subsequent de-stabilizing consequences on themselves, they will naturally, repetitively exert those Influences when favorable conditions manifest themselves. This principle applies both at the miniscule, molecular, mechanical level, as well as at the Sociological. This is why Corporations, after they become too stable and Powerful, begin making Environmentally destructive decisions with reckless abandon to increase profits, and why the (Especially U.S.) Corporate-State Complex is repeatedly responsible for inducing everything from ethno-genocide, to world-wide organizational Leader/Member assassination campaigns at ever-increasing rates, regardless of the effect it has on other Entities near the area of Influence. This practice differs significantly from the natural genesis of Ecosystems that Plants and Animals resided in before the existence of Mankind. The reason for this involves a complex interaction between the Emergence of more Abstract Forms of Power, and subsequently, the Emergence of Free Will.

[POFP]

"Power Emerges from the relationships that govern how entities in an ever-cooling Universe store and expend energy to stabilize their own States, either directly through self-regulation, or indirectly by altering the States of other Entities in their Environments."

I'm going to call this the Stabilization (or Entropy Reversal) Theory of Power.

[POFP]

"Power Emerges from the relationships that govern how entities in an ever-cooling Universe store and expend energy to stabilize their own States, either directly through self-regulation, or indirectly by altering the States of other Entities in their Environments."

I'm going to call this the Stabilization (or Entropy Reversal) Theory of Power.

This would not extend to the point that it implies lack of Free Will, of course, like a Pure Structuralist (Founded on exclusive Reductionism) may suggest. Free Will, while maybe being less frequent under Systems that place emphasis primarily on the Reward Systems of the brain, does exist, and it's the execution of Will Power that sometimes causes the greatest amounts of destabilization. In some cases, this destabilization is for the better, as Discordians who promote Constructive Discord may tell you. In Chemistry and Particle Physics, we learn that sometimes a little destabilization is required to exit one State, and enter a more stable one.

The difference between Corruption and Constructive Discord is that CD accounts for and prevents externalities, because it has a positive greater goal in mind. Corruption involves destabilization in benefit to its own stability.

[POFP]

Just a forewarning: I've been diving pretty deep into ways to quantify (Or at least establish quantification Laws/Constraints for estimation/comparison of) Power, and in so doing am directly relating it to Physics/Thermodynamic concepts (Power as an aggregation of exergy motivated by negentropy. But don't worry, it's NOT like this hilarious bullshit: https://www.icr.org/article/albert-szent-gyorgyis-theory-syntropy-creationism/). At times, it will appear as if my study is:


- Ignoring the Personable/Social aspects of Power due to heavy emphasis on Structuralist descriptions
- Attempting to refute Free Will


So before we go that far I want to clarify these principles:

Attempting to understand Power Structures without the context of Thermodynamics and Information Theory is futile. Sociology does not sufficiently account for the underlying Forces and Constraints that guide the creation of Power Structures or their design - It only describes their Social Motivations and High-level Design at a level of abstraction that is merely statistical and philosophical, which is not enough to attribute accountability and indicate solutions to the problems they create.

Attempting to understand Power Structures without the context of Sociology and Class Struggle is pointless and evil. Any person pushing for a Structural View of Power that makes no reference to methodologies for Social Progress should be regarded as in favor of the current Power Paradigm (Best described by Elite Theory).

Determinacy, like most properties, is relative and sits on a spectrum related to Entropy. Just because the Universe tends toward Determinacy, does not mean all Systems within it tend toward Determinacy.