Disciplinary domain of power example

Racism as a system of power is organized via four domains: (1) A structural domain of power that shows how racial practices and organized through social institutions… This is this the structure of racism as a system of power, the way it’s organized without anybody doing anything. This is the structure we’re all born into. And these would be the structures let after us when we die. (2) A disciplinary domain of power where people use the rules and regulations of everyday life to uphold the racial hierarchy or challenge it. The disciplinary domain is often organized through bureaucracies that rely on practices of surveillance, but it need not be. (3) A cultural domain of power that constructs representations, ideas, and stories about race and racism. The practices of this domain manufacture the ideas that either justify the racial hierarchy or challenge it. (4) An interpersonal domain of power that shapes the everyday social interaction among individuals. The interpersonal domain is the on-the-ground workings of racial practices from the structural, disciplinary, and cultural domains: one-on-one encounters and personal choices. This domain involves ordinary social interactions where people accept and/or resist racial inequality in their everyday lives.

Under color-conscious racial formations, the structural and interpersonal domains of power were far more visible in organizing racial inequalities than the disciplinary and cultural domains. The legal structures that upheld racial segregation shaped the contours of the structural domain. In the interpersonal domain, each individual was overtly conscious where he or she fit within the racial order. … The disciplinary and cultural domains were equally important, but far less visible. … In contrast, despite the continued influence of the structural and interpersonal domains, contemporary color-blind racial formations rely far more heavily on disciplinary and cultural domains of power. The disciplinary and cultural domains are growing in significance in the contemporary period, yet may not be adequately recognized.

It is important to stress that all four domains have organised power relations in both periods. While some domains may be more visible than others, all four domains are equally necessary for racism as a system of power to function. Yet, how power is organized shifts across time and space.

Second, intersecting systems of oppression are specifically organized through four interrelated domains of power: structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal. The structural domain consists of social structures such as law, polity, religion, and the economy.

What are the 4 interconnected domains of power identified in Patricia Hill Collins discussion of intersectionality?

Injustices occur because intersectional identities exist in and through four domains of power: structural, hegemonic or cultural, disciplinary, and interpersonal. These four domains of power, known as the matrix of domination, show how “intersecting oppressions are actually organized” (Collins 2000, 18).

What is intersectionality Collins and bilge?

In Intersectionality, Collins and Bilge show that intersections of community portray the interlocking nature of social oppression through digital and social media, which helps communities establish their inclusion in the online global communities./span>

What is a system of power?

Systems of power are the beliefs, practices, and cultural norms on which individual lives and institutions are built. ... Systems of power are oppressive and define relationships between marginalized communities and the dominant culture; they also shape social norms and experiences within marginalized communities.

What are the types of power in sociology?

Key Takeaways

  • Power refers to the ability to have one's will carried out despite the resistance of others.
  • According to Max Weber, the three types of legitimate authority are traditional, rational-legal, and charismatic.

What are the 3 faces of power?

One of Lukes' academic theories is that of the "three faces of power," presented in his book, Power: A Radical View. This theory claims that power is exercised in three ways: decision-making power, non-decision-making power, and ideological power.

What are the five main types of power?

In 1959, social psychologists John French and Bertram Raven identified five bases of power:

  • Legitimate.
  • Reward.
  • Expert.
  • Referent.
  • Coercive.

What are sources of power in leadership?

The five sources of power and influence are: reward power, coercive power, legitimate power, expert power and referent power.

What are the types of power in leadership?

  • Everyone leads differently, but all leadership involves authority. Most leaders exhibit the same types of leadership power. ...
  • Legitimate power. ...
  • Information power. ...
  • Expert power. ...
  • Reward power. ...
  • Coercive power. ...
  • Referent power. ...
  • Charismatic power.

What is power and influence in leadership?

Power and influence both refer to naturally possessed traits that follow as a consequence of authority. The difference lies in how these two approaches to leadership encourage a team to complete their work. ... Power forces people to complete a task, where influence helps them understand why that task is necessary./span>

How do leaders today gain power?

The #1 way to gain power is to give it all away. Effective leaders gain more power by giving it all away. They recognize that by empowering their team members to exercise judgment and make decisions, the team members take care of the customers and the business takes care of itself./span>

Which theory says leaders are born not made?

Great Man theory

How do leaders develop?

Practice discipline. A good leader needs discipline. Developing discipline in your professional (and personal) life is a must in order to be an effective leader, and to inspire others to be disciplined as well. People will judge your capacity to lead by the amount of discipline you display at work./span>

Can leadership be learned or are you born with it?

Yes, Leadership Can Be Learned! Leadership is something that you can work at and develop over time. ... There are a number of aspects of leadership that require practice. It's not all built around inborn personality traits. Even the best leaders you can think of didn't have these skills honed from day one.

Why is it important for leaders to be good listeners?

Listening shows respect and regard for the people you work with. It helps to build rapport and demonstrates that you care about others and what they have to say. Listening is reciprocal, and leaders can model this behavior; when you are a good listener, people will tend to listen more carefully to you, as well./span>

Are good leaders good followers?

Yet few people understand that to be a good leader, you first need to be a great follower. As Aristotle said, "He who cannot be a good follower, cannot be a good leader." ... They judiciously choose who they follow and make followership part of their education./span>

Why is listening so important?

So listening is important because: ... Good listening allows us to demonstrate that we are paying attention to the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of the other person (seeing the world through their eyes). This is crucial to maintaining productive relationships, and sometimes the only way to establish communication.

Why is communication important in leadership?

Communication enables them to share what they have and what they expect from others. ... Good communication skills help to develop better understanding and beliefs among people inspire them to follow the principles and values which their leader wants to inculcate in them.

Why is communication so important?

From a business standpoint, all transactions result from communication. Good communication skills are essential to allow others and yourself to understand information more accurately and quickly. In contrast, poor communication skills lead to frequent misunderstanding and frustration.

Disciplinary domain of power example
I love the domains of power framework as it is developed here by Patricia Hill Collins in ‘Learning From the Outsider Within Revisited’. I find a great deal of insight in Foucault (like Society Must Be Defended) but a few things have always bothered me…such as in Discipline and Punish where in charting the history of the prison in France, he never really deals with the French Revolution or the fall of the Bastille. That bewildered me, where is struggle, then, in his theorising? Look at what Collins writes:

Power may be everywhere, as French philosopher Michel Foucault points out, but what exactly does this mean? If power is manifested and organized everywhere, how might we develop a language of power that is useful? (71-72)

Ah. She asks, how do we? And then she does. If I had read this a bit earlier, domains of power might have been my chosen framework for my thesis rather than Stuart Hall’s theories of articulation, because it seems full of explanatory power:

The framework identifies four interrelated domains where power is organized. (1) a structural domain, where social institutions of a society, such as banks, hospitals, schools, corporations, retail establishment, government agencies, and health care, routinely discriminate in favour of whites and against everyone else; (2) a disciplinary domain, where modern bureaucracies regulate race relations through their rules and practices, primarily surveillance; (3) a cultural domain, where ideologies, such as white supremacy, patriarchy, and heterosexism, are constructed and shared; and (4) an interpersonal domain that shapes social relations between individuals in everyday life. (72)

She gives as a short example the treatment of African American youth — everything that limits chances and stunts lives:

  • Structural power as it works through resegregation of housing and schools, hypersegregation of African Americans within cities
  • Disciplinary power — unspoken roles for different races, racial profiling, ‘neutral’ policies that have unfair impacts (testing, etc), police in schools…
  • Cultural domain — the new ideology of colourblindness, portrayal of a more integrated American through media
  • Interpersonal domain – strategies of everyday racism

Of course, all four of these domains are interrelated — again in seeking to think through this I reach for Stuart Halls ideas of articulation, his theorisations of how the political, the economic and the ideological (I add, of course, the spatial myself) shift and change and act upon each other to come into new formations. Comparing the two, you realise on the one hand just how much needs to be packed into the idea of structural power. This is at both the economic and the spatial, political structures and more. I like separating that out a little more maybe. Yet there is also the way in which the disciplinary domain  works across all of Hall’s areas, and demands to be addressed yet his framework does not require it. How the interpersonal and everyday kinds of violences are also often lost. They don’t quite map onto each other, while each seems to highlight key aspects of a liberatory analysis — I am just starting to think about how they might be brought together, or carried out in succession. Or something. Everything is so interconnected that I rather lose myself if I think about it too much…these are only ever conventions to help lend a little clarity to a very complex world.

A few more of the insights that Collins’ framework can give:

The domains of power framework also sheds light on the ways that ideas about difference can uphold social inequalities within and across all four domains of power. For example, within the structural domain, new commodity relations have found the focus on difference profitable. In the search for ever-expanding consumer markets, understanding differences of race, gender, class, and sexuality helps in identifying segmented consumer markers. “Racial” profiling and market research are two sides of the same coin. (73)

How this impacts within academia itself:

Within this context, people who claim outsider-within identities can become hot commodities in social institutions that want the illusion of difference without the effort needed to change actual power relations. (73)

how we as academics can, and must, use it for social justice. I love that always always Collins brings it back to this:

our scholarship does reveal how ideas about difference and its related constructs matter in both upholding and challenging racism, sexism, class exploitation, and heterosexism as systems of power. But sharpening our focus on power and developing tools that enable us to see how its domains are organized and can be changed, our engaged scholarship creates space for change. (76)

Women around the world are marching today — two of my most treasured possessions came to me yesterday, pictures of my aunt and uncle with placards in front of their Philly home. The times are dark but the struggle seems to be strong. From the marathon hacking to save government data on climate change to the myriad calls to action around Trump’s cabinet of CEOs cutting out the political middleman for pure corporate control. All this as I sit home sick and rather sad at heart…

Save

Save

Save