power

[Carrol Cox]

When we (i.e., most marxists, plus many anarchists, radical democrats,
probably some other categories) -- when we speak of X being a "social
relation" we are _NOT_ ordinarily speaking of direct personal relations
(e.g., between lovers). Value is a social relation. Property is a social
relation. Actually, I think it goes against the grain of this core use
of "social relation" to call power a social relation. Power is rather a
certain kind of attribute of various social relations, not a social
relation in itself. (Cf. "green" is not an entity in itself but an
attribute of various physical objects.) This isn't quite right, but I
think something like it is needed to clear up a certain fogginess in the
current discussion of power on this list. Marriage is a social
relationship not because two people relate to each other but because of
the social relations which chracterize a whole society, an aspect of
which is establishing a distinction between socially recognized and
unrecognized relations. If you want your lover to inherit your property,
you have to be married. If you want to file a joint tax return, you have
to be married. Etc. Etc. (It is _not_ true that if you want to be
respectable you have to be married: respect is not a general social
relation but an attribute of specific situations.)

In general, "social relation" is a useful concept for social analysis
only if the personal ideas, actions, emotions, etc. of concrete persons
are abstracted from -- ignored.

Carrol