essay introduction on power

• The Student Experience
• Financial Aid
• Degree Finder
• Undergraduate Arts & Sciences
• Departments and Programs
• Research, Scholarship & Creativity
• Centers & Institutes
• Geisel School of Medicine
• Guarini School of Graduate & Advanced Studies
• Thayer School of Engineering
• Tuck School of Business

Campus Life

• Diversity & Inclusion
• Athletics & Recreation
• Student Groups & Activities
• Residential Life
• [email protected] Contact & Department Info Mail
• Locations & Hours
• Apply for Funding
• Reserve a Space
• Student Organizations
• Alumni Organizations
• Campus Resources
• Stay Connected
• Meet the OPAL Deans
• About Advising
• Black & Pan African Student Advising
• International Student Advising
• Latine & Caribbean Student Advising
• LGBTQIA+ Student Advising
• Pan Asian Student Advising
• Women and Gender Student Advising
• Community & Leadership
• International Student Mentoring Program
• Black Legacy Month
• Caribbean Carnival
• Latine & Caribbean Heritage Celebration
• Queer History Celebration & Trans Week of Visibility
• International Student Pre-Orientation Program
• Community Socials & Welcomes
• 2023 Awards
• 2022 Awards
• 2021 Awards
• LLC/Affinity Houses
• Virtual Programming
• About OPAL Education
• Black Hair Care
• Committees & Working Groups
• News & Events

Search form

Introduction to power, privilege, and social justice, definitions to lay the groundwork.

Before we start, here are a few terms that are referenced often in the information below.

Social identity is an individual's sense of who they are based on which social group(s) they belong to. Social identities allow individuals to have a sense of belonging. These groups can consist of but are not limited to:

• Social class
• Memberships in different organizations/clubs
• and many more...

Power is the ability to influence and make decisions that impact others

Privilege is advantages and benefits that individuals receive because of social groups they are perceived to be a part of. Privilege is often a result of systematic targeting and/or marginalization of another social group.

Social justice is the practice of allyship and coalition work in order to promote equality, equity, respect, and the assurance of rights within and between communities and social groups.

How Identity Shapes Experience

Identity is complex and consists of multiple intersecting factors. For example, race, gender and/or socioeconomic status leads to differences not only in biological markers (skin color or physical features) and cultural markers (types of clothing), but also in shared traditions, beliefs, and/or biases. These identities not only impact the way society treats or views an individual, but also the way an individual interacts with others and their surroundings.

Identity shapes a person's experience to make it unique, even when they are in the same setting as someone else. For instance, a student who is low-income or trans might have a very different experience with Dartmouth than a more affluent, straight student due to the ways that power and privilege affect how they move through the world, how others view them, and what is expected of them.

The Importance of Social Justice

Social identities often shape our experiences, how we view the world, and the way society views and/or treats us. The social identities we carry are a basis for determining who may have power and privilege and who may be marginalized and oppressed.

Social justice is important because it gives us the opportunity to celebrate and learn from each other's diverse experiences and perspectives, builds a stronger campus community and impacts our daily lives. Social justice has the power to reform and improve access to and quality of education, healthcare, criminal justice and more. To make positive changes in the communities we are a part of, OPAL Education has a strong focus on social justice and peer to peer education and is dedicated to creating spaces "where all students can thrive, value difference, and contribute to the creation of a socially just world."

Next: Starting the Tough Conversations about Identity and Social Justice

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Contentious Politics and Political Violence
• Governance/Political Change
• Groups and Identities
• History and Politics
• International Political Economy
• Policy, Administration, and Bureaucracy
• Political Anthropology
• Political Behavior
• Political Communication
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Philosophy
• Political Psychology
• Political Sociology
• Political Values, Beliefs, and Ideologies
• Politics, Law, Judiciary
• Post Modern/Critical Politics
• Public Opinion
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• World Politics
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Power in world politics.

• Stefano Guzzini Stefano Guzzini Uppsala University, PUC-Rio de Janeiro, Danish Institute for International Studies
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.118
• Published online: 20 April 2022

The concept of power derives its meanings and theoretical roles from the theories in which it is embedded. Hence, there is no one concept of power, no single understanding of power, even if these understandings stand in relation to each other. Besides the usual theoretical traditions common to the discipline of international relations and the social sciences, from rationalist to constructivist and post-structuralist approaches, there is, however, also a specificity of power being a concept used in both political theory and political practice. A critical survey of these approaches needs to cast a net wide to see both the differences and the links across these theoretical divides. Realist understandings of power are heavily impressed by political theory, especially when defining the ontology of “the political.” They are also characterized by their attempt, so far not successful, to translate practical maxims of power into a scientific theory. Liberal and structural power approaches use power as a central factor for understanding outcomes and hierarchies while generally neglecting any reference to political theory and often overloading the mere concept of power as if it were already a full-fledged theory. Finally, power has also been understood in the constitutive but often tacit processes of social recognition and identity formation, of technologies of government, and of the performativity of power categories when the latter interact with the social world, that is, the power politics that characterize the processes in which agents “make” the social world. Relating back to political practice and theory, these approaches risk repeating a realist fallacy. Whereas it is arguably correct to see power always connected to politics, not all politics is always connected or reducible to power. Seeing power not only as coercive but also productive should neither invite one to reduce all politics to it nor to turn power into the meta-physical prime mover of all things political.

• relational power
• structural power
• political realism
• constructivism
• post-structuralism
• Pierre Bourdieu
• Michel Foucault
• Steven Lukes

Introduction: Which Power?

For the battle-proof reader of analyses in the discipline of international relations (IR), “power in world politics” may immediately evoke proclamations of what power really is and where it lies, who has it and who endures it. It may also connect to a specific self-understanding of the field, which thinks of itself as being deserted by possible utopias and reform, forever caught in a world inevitably characterized by power politics, a tragedy not manageable by the faint-hearted and which the world can only ignore at its peril.

For its crucial place in the observation and practice of world politics, it comes as no surprise that there is no “usual” definition of power . But there is more to power’s multiple meanings than the different theories that may reframe it or the different practical understandings of power negotiated in international diplomacy. Its multiple meanings result from the specific role power has in discourses where it connects many different phenomena in various domains. It stands in for resources or capabilities, status, and rank, cause and its effect (influence), for rule, authority, and legitimacy, if not government, then again for individual dispositions and potentials, autonomy and freedom, agency and subjectivity, as well as for impersonal biases (e.g., the power of markets or symbols) or, as bizarre as it might sound at first, for symbolic media of communication. And this is not an exhaustive list.

As this short list shows, power informs not only the language of practitioners and explanatory theories but also of political theory; indeed, it is systematically intertwined with our understanding of politics. For power has become closely connected to the definition of the public domain ( res publica ) in which government is to be exercised.

Moreover, this interrelation of power and politics has become self-conscious in present-day world politics. The last decades of the 20th century have witnessed a double movement in the practitioners’ understanding of power. On the one hand, the contemporary agenda of international politics has exploded. For major diplomatic corps, it now includes virtually everything from monetary to environmental relations, from human rights to cyberspace. With this multiplication of international political domains, there is more “governance,” which means more international “power,” because actors have been able to consciously order and influence events that were not previously part of their portfolio. On the other hand, however, practitioners have been anxious for quite some time because power and actual control seems to be slipping away from them. Power is ever more “abstract, intangible, elusive” ( Kissinger, 1969 , p. 61, 1979 , p. 67). It has “evaporated” ( Strange, 1996 , p. 189). Indeed, the ease with which public debates have seized on topics like the structural forces of globalization, the dilemmas of an incalculable “risk society,” or the awe, if not sense of powerlessness, when confronted with the planetary range of governance problems induced by climate change, testify to the increasing concern that exactly when the world’s expanding agenda would need it most, actual power eludes leaders. Paradoxically, or perhaps not, the expansion of governance is accompanied by a sense of lost control. 1

Hence, “power in world politics” cannot be confined to an unequivocal encyclopedia article. Instead, the conceptualizations of power in their respective domains become central (for a more detailed justification, see Guzzini, 2013b ). Consequently, this article will make no further definitional effort to find a generally acceptable view of power (as did, e.g., Dahl, 1968 ). Although the following is informed by such undertakings when avoiding definitional fallacies, such attempts are, as a general strategy, less appropriate for an encyclopedia and probably not possible for such a contested term like power , as previous concept analyses have shown (as, e.g., Baldwin, 2002 ; Barnett & Duvall, 2005 ; Berenskoetter, 2007 ; Guzzini, 1993 , 2016 ). The interest here is not reducing the analysis of power to a single definitional core; rather, it is exploring the variety of usages and how they relate to each other.

The first section, “ Realist Power Analysis ,” looks at realist understandings of power that are heavily stamped by political theory, in particular when defining the particular ontology of “the political.” The second section, “ Power as Influence ,” then follows liberal and structural power approaches that use power as a central factor for understanding outcomes and hierarchies while generally neglecting any reference to political theory. Finally, the third section, “ The Power Politics of Constitutive Processes ,” looks at attempts to understand how power is understood in the constitutive but often tacit processes of social recognition and identity formation, of technologies of government, and of the performativity of power categories when the latter interact with the social world, that is, the power politics that characterize the processes in which agents “make” the social world.

Realist Power Analysis: The Distinctive Nature of World Politics and Its Explanation

Knowledge of world affairs was initially tied to the group practicing it. Actors observed themselves and distilled maxims of action from historical experience. While historians, sociologists, and macroeconomists look at their fields with an external expertise, the knowledge of international politics stems from the way diplomats and generals came to share practical lessons of the past (and this may also apply to the early days of law and management studies). Hence, the first way to think about power in world affairs is by following the meaning and purpose of power in the language of international practitioners.

And since it is fair to say that realism is the translation of that language into a codified system of practical maxims ( Guzzini, 1998 , 2013a ), analyzing classical realism provides such a bridge. For (many) classical realists, power is constitutive of politics—world politics in particular. It is part of a theory of domination. It is, moreover, related to the idea of government, not understood in its steering capacity, but in what constitutes political order. Finally, through the idea of the reason of state, power is related to the normative ideal of an ethics of responsibility as included in the “art of government.”

It is only in the disciplinary move where realism was to become a school of thought in the establishment of IR as a social science that the analysis of political order was translated into a rational theory of the maximization of power, or, put differently, where a theory of domination was subsumed under an explanatory theory of action. In this move, the purpose and understanding of power is narrowed and as this section will show, fraught with internal tensions.

The Nature of Power and the Definition of World Politics

A central tenet of classical realism is to look at the constitution of political order. That order is not defined in the Aristotelian sense of a polity organized around a common purpose, the common good, but in terms of the necessity of domination. This necessity of domination, in turn, explains why government has to be understood in a Machiavellian manner, that is, interested in the management of power. Indeed, 18th-century Europe experienced an increasing reduction of the meaning of politics to Machtkunst (approximately, the art/craft of power/governing) so typical of realism ( Sellin, 1978 ).

If order is understood mainly through the art of domination, then it becomes easier to understand why for Max Weber, in many regards the prototypical political (not IR) realist, physical violence and its control are, in turn, connected to the idea of politics and power. The threat or actual use of violence is the characteristic that sets politics aside from economics, law, or other spheres of social relations ( Weber, 1921–1922/1980 , pp. 531, 539). For realists, politics has specific tasks that can ultimately be resolved only through physical violence ( Weber, 1919/1988a , p. 557). Therefore, behind power, understood as the specific means of politics, stands the possibility of physical violence ( Weber, 1919/1988b , p. 550). A polity is based on domination, which is possible through the control of physical violence, which, in turn, constitutes, not the only means, but the politically characteristic and ultimate, means of power (for a detailed discussion, see Guzzini, 2017a ).

Classical realists stood squarely in this tradition but, as Hans Morgenthau and Raymond Aron respectively show, took different cues from it. Morgenthau added a Nietzschean twist. Just as for Weber, politics is struggle ( Weber, 1918/1988a , p. 329), but it is derived from human nature: The lust for power ( Morgenthau, 1946 , p. 9) or the drive to dominate ( Morgenthau, 1948 , p. 17), which is common to all humans. This adds an ontological status to power as being one of the fundamental drives of humans. This also explains why, for Morgenthau, whatever the final goal, power is always the immediate one ( Morgenthau, 1948 , p. 13), that is, the inevitable means. From there, Morgenthau builds an ultimately utilitarian theory of international relations that understands action in terms of the maximization of power and a foreign policy strategy of gauging power in an ethics of responsibility. Just as for Weber (for this argument, see Wolin, 1981 ), Morgenthau’s theory is ultimately guided by his political theory and ontology. In this, power constitutes the links among this political ontology, his explanatory theory, and a foreign policy doctrine (for a detailed account and critique, see Guzzini, 2020 ).

Also, Aron derives from Weber, but he does not follow Nietzsche in the way Morgenthau does, nor in the way Weber occasionally did himself when he fused national value systems with a view of an existential struggle, his eternal combat of gods ( Weber, 1919/1988b , p. 604f.). Aron is highly critical of such a position ( Aron, 1967 , p. 650). He starts from the idea that the international system has no world government comparable to the Weberian modern state, and, without a legitimate monopoly of the means of violence, it is in a “state of nature.” He is clear that this state of nature is not to be confused with a state of “war of all against all.” It refers to a sometimes highly conventionalized realm that is not part of a biological but a human order ( Aron, 1966 , pp. 482–483). Indeed, the parallel existence of a civil society (with a government) and an external sphere of multiplicity is something that has always existed and defines the backdrop against which politics is to be understood. Although without a Nietzschean touch, here, too, the management of violence and power becomes the constitutive principle of world politics as power politics, in which collective violence is not antithetical but fundamental to it. The best one can aspire to is a politics of the “art of the possible,” connected to this very particular responsibility that falls on political leaders to use the reason of state correctly.

Power in Realist Explanations

When moving from political to explanatory theory, power turns from being an ontology of order and politics to being an explanatory variable. Given its central place in realism’s political theory, it is perhaps normal that it would also acquire a central place in its explanatory theory. The drive for domination is translated into a utilitarian theory of power, security, or rank maximization. Power as part of a “vertical” theory of domination, as in realist, elite theories (e.g., Robert Michels or Vilfredo Pareto), becomes subsumed under a “horizontal” theory of action and its effects.

Such a move affects the underlying understanding of power. Power is understood either as capabilities/resources or, indeed, as their effects (influence). Resourceful actors (regular winners) are poles of power, and the configuration of those poles gives the main characteristic of the international order, namely its polarity. The government of world order is hence but the result of these two steps of the argument. This leads to two typical theoretical applications. Starting from the micro level of analysis, actors are seen as maximizing relative power or rank with the effect that this competitive behavior ends up in an always precarious balance of power. Starting from the macro level, the given polarity of the balance of power provides systemic constraints for internal balancing (arms race) and external balancing (alliances) that actors may ignore only at their peril.

This translation into a utilitarian theory of action, however, produces a series of conceptual problems. For being able to empirically identify a “maximization” of power or any “balance” of power, there must be a measure of power that indicates what is more or less, what is maximized. In other words, it requires a concept of power akin to the concept of money in economic theory, as also argued by John Mearsheimer (2001 , p. 12). In this analogy, the striving for utility maximization expressed and measured in terms of money parallels the national interest (i.e., security) expressed in terms of (relative) power. And yet, this central assumption has been challenged both by early realist critiques and institutionalist approaches.

Raymond Aron opposed this aggregated concept of power and the underlying power–money analogy ( Aron, 1962/1984 , pp. 99–102). Utilitarian economics trades on the possibility of integrating different preferences within one utility function. This is made possible by the historical evolution toward monetarized economies where money would fulfill the function of a shared standard of value. But in world politics, power does not play the same role. There is no equivalent in actual politics (and not just in theory) to money; power does not “buy” in the same way; it is not the currency of world politics. Even supposedly ultimate power resources like weapons of mass destruction might not necessarily be of great help in buying another state’s change in its monetary policies. More power resources do not necessarily translate into more purchasing power ( Baldwin, 1971 ). Without a precise measure, however, it is not clear when power has been maximized or when it is balanced, and whether this was intended in the first place ( Wolfers, 1962 , p. 106). Realist theories based on power are indeterminate, as Aron insisted.

In response, realists could insist that diplomats have repeatedly been able to find a measure of power, and hence the difference is just one of degree, not of kind (see the answer to Aron by Waltz, 1990 ). Yet, even if actors could agree on some approximations for carrying out exchanges or establishing power rankings, this is a social convention that by definition can be challenged and exists only to the extent that it is agreed upon, as acknowledged by Morgenthau (1948 , pp. 151–152) himself. Power resources do not come with a standardized price tag, and no type of resource is generally convertible (“fungible”). And if power is not providing a standard of value, then neither analysts nor actors know when and how some action is maximizing power nor how these maximizations “add up” to polarity. If one cannot reduce world politics to solely one of its domains (war and physical violence), and if one cannot add up resources into one pole, then the assessment of polarity is no longer clear—and with this the assessment of the type of international order and its causal effects. The measure of power is internal to a diplomatic convention whose stability is not granted; a point that later power analysis has developed (see “ Power as Convention: Performative and Reflexive Power Analysis ”).

It is here where the mix of the normative and explanatory stance of realism pulls the concept of power in opposite directions. The insistence on the almost impossible measurement of power, so important to realists from Morgenthau to Wohlforth (2003) , is crucial for realist practice. It instils the realist maxim of a posture of prudence in the diplomats, reminding them that they “cannot and should not be sure.” Yet, this indeterminacy makes the explanatory theory unfalsifiable; there is always one way to twist power indicators and understandings to make the story fit. In this way, using the central role of power to translate an ontology of order into a utilitarian explanatory theory led to problems for classical realism at both the micro and macro levels of analysis in terms of rank maximization and polarity analysis. At the same time, it provided the backdrop against which new conceptualizations developed.

Power as Influence: Relational and Structural Power in World Politics

International relations (IR) proceeded in its conceptualizations of power mainly with the purpose of fine-tuning the role of power in explanatory theories; political theory fell by the wayside. So institutionalists were aware of the indeterminacy, as well as at times the tautology, of a concept of power that IR scholars used as both a capacity and its effects. One of the possible remedies consisted in qualifying the very idea of a capacity were it to retain a distinctive causal effect. Another was to open up the black box of the translation process from power as control over resources to power as control over outcomes.

This focus on dyadic interaction reduces the initial purpose of understanding domination to understanding influence in different outcomes, and then to its aggregation. A theory of domination was not just subsumed under a theory of action; it seemed to get lost altogether. A series of scholars tried to counter this tendency. They identified a problem in the explanatory attempts to relate power only to the level of interaction. Instead, they conceived of power in “structural” terms to reintegrate more vertical components of domination into the analysis of power. Whereas the more institutionalist answer uses a relational understanding of power to qualify capacities as actual influence over outcomes, the structuralist answer was to include more non-agential or non-intentional factors into the analysis of outcomes to recuperate a sense of in-built hierarchical relations. More problematically, however, both approaches do more than just widen the analysis of power relations; they also tend to import this widening into the concept of power itself, as if a reconceptualization alone were sufficient for a comprehensive analysis of power.

Relational Power and Liberal Institutionalism

Power is not in a resource; it is in a relation. This stance was forcefully exposed by Robert Dahl (1957 , pp. 202–203) in political theory and by David Baldwin (1989 , 2016) within IR. Such an innocuous-looking statement is very consequential. In its behavioralist twist, such a relational approach tends to focus on actual influence understood as the causal effect of one actor’s behavior on another’s behavior. And it tends to look for the conditions that make this influence possible in the first place.

Both Dahl and Baldwin treat power and influence, capacities and their effects, interchangeably. That may sound odd, because most Western languages use two different words that capture different, if related, ideas. And yet, it is quite logical if one thinks about power as a central concept in (linear) causal explanations, as much of IR does. IR is interested in outcomes. If power were just in resources—latent, potential, and hence potentially “powerless” in affecting outcomes—then, so the story goes, why should one care about power in the first place? Scholars and practitioners wish to understand the actualized capacity to affect outcomes, that is, being able to impose one’s will or interests as the Weberian tradition has it. Indeed, for Dahl that understanding is the main way to understand “who governs” in an empirically controllable manner ( Dahl, 1961/2005 ). Government is constituted by the actual steering effects of elites where certain interests prevail. Dahl could relate power as influence on behavior to the wider understanding of the domestic political order. Influence in a behavioralist theory of action was aggregated to an analysis of government that discloses whether its elite is unified or multiple. Translated into IR, however, the absence of a world government means that IR scholars were left with the theory of action. When thinking world political order, influence is all there is.

Therefore, much of the analysis came to focus on the conditions that make such influence possible and the specific situational context which constitutes that certain resources come to constitute capabilities to affect outcomes. Understanding the relation crucially comes before the analysis of power therein. Bachrach and Baratz (1970 , pp. 20–21) provide a telling example to show the difference a relational approach makes. Let us assume a soldier returns to his camp. The guard asks him to stop or she will shoot. The soldier stops. Hence, the guard exercised power as influence. And yet it is not clear how. It could have been simply through the threat of using her arms. But it could also be because the soldier followed the rule of obeying an order, independently of the arms and the threat. Without a close analysis of the relation, indeed the individual motives, one would not know the kind of power relation this represents. But let us further assume that the soldier does not stop. The guard shoots. Now, it is ambivalent whether this shows an exercise of power. On the one hand, one could say that she succeeded in stopping the soldier from coming too close to the camp. On the other hand, the threat was clearly not successful. As Waltz (1967/1969 , p. 309) once noted, the most powerful police force is one that does not need to shoot to get its way in the first place. The exercise of power may paradoxically show the powerlessness of its alleged holder. And one can twist the example even further. Suppose the soldier had decided to take his life, and, by advancing, forced the guard to do it on his behalf. In this case, it was the returning soldier who got the guard to do something. Power was on his side in this asymmetrical relation. As the example shows, knowing resources is insufficient to explain the direction in which power is exercised; one needs to know the motives and values of the actors, as well as the general normative system involved. Indeed, once one knows them, the power relation could turn out to be reversed.

In IR, there have been three prominent ways to deal with this relational aspect. David Baldwin almost single-handedly introduced Dahl’s approach into IR. In the wake of the U.S. defeat in Vietnam, he became increasingly tired of analyses in terms of “conversion failures” or what he also called the “paradox of unrealized power” ( Baldwin, 1979 , p. 163), where the allegedly more powerful actor lost. If power means influence, it cannot fail. If it does, it means that power was either wrongly assessed or, more fundamentally, wrongly understood ( Baldwin, 1985 , p. 23).

Baldwin was most interested in qualifying the specific context in a relational approach. He shared Aron’s critique of what he called the lacking fungibility of power, in which power simply does not have the same standard of value function as money does in real economies ( Baldwin, 1979 , pp. 193–194, 1993 , pp. 21–22). As a result, he insisted that a relational approach to power requires the prior establishment of the specific “policy-contingency framework” within which power relations are to be understood: the scope (the objectives of an attempt to gain influence; influence over which issue), the domain (the target of the influence attempt), its weight (the quantity of resources), and the cost (opportunity costs of forgoing a relation) must be made explicit. Resources consequential in one policy contingency framework are not necessarily so in another. Scholars who do not see this multidimensionality and persist in the “notion of a single overall international power structure unrelated to any particular issue-area” are using an analysis that “is based on a concept of power that is virtually meaningless” ( Baldwin, 1979 , p. 193).

A second approach worked by checking the translation between the two classical power concepts in this interactionist tradition, namely control over resources and control over outcomes. Whereas Baldwin packaged much into situational analysis to uphold causal effects of behavior/policy instruments, Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye (1977) downgraded a direct link between resources and outcomes that is hampered by bargaining processes and other effects during the interaction. They did, however, also qualify this process for a better assessment of what counts as a power resource in the first place. They expressed the relational component of power in terms of asymmetric interdependence. In this way, power as influence over outcomes is connected, but not reducible, to the resources possessed by one actor, yet valued by the other, and/or by resources of A that can affect the interests of B. Moreover, not just any effect is significant. In their distinction between sensitivity interdependence and vulnerability interdependence, they gave a more long-term twist to it because the mere capacity to affect B (sensitivity) is only ephemeral if B can find alternatives. Only if such alternatives cannot be found (vulnerability, understood in terms of the elasticity of substitution) is the relation asymmetric in a more significant sense. This way of defining power keeps the link to resources but denies a direct relation from resources to outcomes and qualifies what makes them constitutive by specifying the particular dyadic interaction.

Finally, Joseph Nye’s concept of soft power ( Nye, 1990 , 2007 , 2011 ) adds yet another aspect to the liberal analysis of these power relations. His emphasis on softer resources that can be influential depending on the context is not the original part; indeed, Baldwin’s power analysis was very much driven by his attempt to show that economic sanctions, and in particular positive sanctions (carrots, not sticks), can be influential. Rather, what specifically characterizes soft power is the focus on the mechanisms via which actors can have effects. In a way akin to structural power approaches (see “ Structural Power and Dependency ”), as well as classical realist definitions, the analysis of power starts from the receiving side: soft power lies in the capacity of “attraction” of an actor, which means that its analysis starts from those attracted.

In all three approaches, the epistemic interest consists in revalorizing foreign policy instruments in which military resources or coercive mechanisms are not necessarily the most influential; indeed, no resource has such general capacity. Baldwin opens up for positive sanctions and issue-area-specific resources. Keohane and Nye invite policies that avoid long-term vulnerabilities in interdependent relations or, even better, tie all countries into mutual vulnerabilities to moderate their behavior. And Nye’s soft power focuses on foreign policies that would make countries more attractive and, hence often get their way without much further ado. These approaches respond to a vision of an international order fragmented into different issue areas or international regimes.

The innumerable policy-contingency frameworks become confusing however: They make analysts lose sight of the forest for all the trees. With power as influence having subsumed domination under a theory of action, international order and hierarchy got lost. To see the whole forest, Keohane and Nye (1987) envisaged developing a generalized theory of linkages. And yet, precisely because of the lacking fungibility that makes power logics not reducible to each other across regimes, such a theory of linkages is not possible within this theoretical framework. If it were, the fragmentation could be subsumed under a meta-regime that effectively substitutes for a linkage theory.

This leaves the institutionalist approaches open to two further developments intrinsic to a relational approach. First, taking fungibility seriously excludes a single international power structure, as Baldwin pointed out, and, hence severs the link between power and international order. Just as in Dahl, the international order appears pluralistic. But the agent and interaction centeredness of such an approach does not persuade those for whom the absence of intended agential or interaction effects does not yet imply an absence of power or domination. For them, the relational approach needs to be complemented, if not superseded, by a more structural approach. Second, as Bachrach and Baratz’s (1970) illustration shows and as soft power further develops, the concept of power looks different if its understanding starts from the position of the alleged power holder or the recipient/subaltern. Add to this that interests or values, present in a relation, cannot be understood individually because norms or conventions, indeed meanings, are not private but intersubjective, and one ends up with a relational approach that connects power to shared understandings and norms. No longer agent centered, power analysis experiences a turn to material and ideational structures of power.

Structural Power and Dependency

In social and political theory, Steven Lukes’s seminal approach distinguishes three dimensions of power: a direct behavioralist one (Dahl), an indirect one about the many issues excluded from the actual bargaining (Bachrach & Baratz), and a third dimension where it is the “supreme exercise of power to get another or others to have the desires you want them to have” ( Lukes, 1974 , p. 27). Here, the absence of conflict does not necessarily indicate the absence of a power relation, but possibly its most insidious form. Lukes derives this approach from Gramsci’s understanding of hegemony. Domination is not simply imposed from above but must be won through the subordinated groups’ consent to the cultural domination they believe will serve their own interests. It works through a naturalized “common sense.” At the same time, Lukes is not merely interested in the origins of domination in the common sense shared by the subordinate. Rather, as a philosopher of liberal democracy, he sees the purpose of power analysis as being connected to what this tells us about individual autonomy or actual freedom ( Lukes, 1977 ) or, in a more structural fashion, how structures “shape fields of possibility” for agents, as Hayward (2000 , p. 9) puts it. The more material component of this structural analysis has inspired the approaches in international political economy (IPE) taken up in this subsection; the intersubjective mobilization bias and endogenization of identity and interest formation will be the subject in the final major section “ The Power Politics of Constitutive Processes: Social Recognition, Technologies of Government, and Performativity ”.

In IR, there have been several attempts to understand power beyond dyadic relations and bargaining by reaching out to a structural level of power (for the following, see Guzzini, 1993 ). Some of them are still very much in line with Bachrach and Baratz’s approach of seeing power not only in direct confrontation but also in indirect agenda setting, yet applied here more fundamentally to the rules of the game. Thus Stephen Krasner’s use of “meta-power” in his Structural Conflict refers to developing countries’ use of institutions and regimes not just as a lever against powerful states but also as a way to affect the rules of global liberalism. “Relational power refers to the ability to change outcomes or affect the behavior of others within a given regime. Meta-power refers to the ability to change the rules of the game” ( Krasner, 1985 , p. 14).

Susan Strange’s take on power overlaps to some extent but goes further. She uses structural power to refer to the increasing diffusion of international power, in both its effects and its origins, due to the increasing transnationalization of non-territorially linked networks. Structural power is, on the one hand, a concept similar to Krasner’s intentional meta-power: The ability to shape the structures of security, finance, production and knowledge ( Strange, 1985 , p. 15). Here, power is structural because it has an indirect diffusion via structures, that is, because of its diffused effects. On the other hand, it is structural because it refers to the increasingly diffused sources and agents that contribute to the functioning of the global political economy ( Strange, 1988 ). Taken together, the provision of global functions appears as the result of an interplay of deliberate and unintended effects of decisions and nondecisions made by governments and other actors. The international system appears as if run by a “transnational empire” whose exact center is difficult to locate because it is not tied to a specific territory, but whose main base is with actors in the United States ( Strange, 1989 ). A more vertical theory of domination reappears in this specific asymmetry: Even though actors in the United States might not always intend or be able to control the effects of their actions, the international structures are set up in a way that decisions in some countries are systematically tied to, as well as can fundamentally affect, actors in the same and other countries. This becomes visible when looking at power relations not from the standpoint of the power holder and intended action or intended effects, rather from the receiving side, where neither matters primarily. Whereas Krasner focused on the hidden power of the weak, Strange emphasizes the tacit power of the strong.

Lukes’s focus on autonomy is echoed in the emphasis on questions of in/dependence by dependency and Gramscian scholars. For Stephen Gill and David Law, structural power refers to “material and normative aspects, such that patterns of incentives and constraints are systematically created” ( Gill & Law, 1988 , p. 73). This clearly defines a form of impersonal power, where the impersonal material setting is nearly synonymous with the functioning of markets, and the normative setting corresponds to a form of Gramsci’s historic bloc ( Cox, 1981 , 1983 ). As a result, contemporary world politics is seen as a Pax Americana in which the analysis of transnational elites plays a major role for understanding domination ( Van der Pijl, 1998 ). The view from the periphery is central for dependency scholars. Autonomy in international relations is often translated in terms of sovereignty, yet another power-related concept. Dependency theories stem from the awareness that formal sovereignty did not bring much control for many countries in the Global South of their political processes ( O’Donnell, 1973 ) and their class formation and “associated-dependent” ( Cardoso & Faletto, 1979 ) or “crippled” economic structures ( Senghaas, 1982 ), where the structural effects of global capitalism rules through the workings of states and firms ( Dos Santos, 1970 ).

It is not by coincidence that most of these approaches are from what came to be called IPE in the late 1970s. They attribute power to nonstate actors and, indeed, to structures like global capitalism. By doing so, they politicize economic relations whose effects are not God-given or natural but the outcome of political struggles—struggles whose domination effects are left unseen in bargaining power approaches ( Caporaso, 1978 ). In this way, IPE is not just about international economic relations; its focus on structural features of domination redefines the realm of world politics itself.

Yet, while these approaches undoubtedly enrich power analysis by including indirect institutional, non-intentional, and impersonal practices and processes, they also risk overloading the single concept of power in the analysis when trying to keep power as the main explanatory variable ( Guzzini, 1993 ). William Riker distinguished between power concepts informed either by necessary and sufficient or by recipe-like (manipulative) kinds of causality ( Riker, 1964 , pp. 346–348), or, put differently, power concepts driven by analyzing either outcomes or agency. Baldwin, following a manipulative idea of power, needed to heavily qualify the situational context to keep the causal link between certain policy instruments and their effect, that is, power as influence, with the problem that such approaches tend to ignore non-manipulative factors in the analysis of power and domination. Structural power concepts include them, but then they tend toward a necessary and sufficient explanation in which all that affects the asymmetrical outcome is not just related to power but is included in the concept of power itself, as if the whole analysis of power were to be done by the factor/variable of power.

This raises a series of broader concerns for understanding power. First, it is clear that power needs to be disentangled from the potential tautology of being both resources and their effects. Indeed, it is better thought neither as a resource nor as an event (influence) but as a disposition, that is, a capacity to effect ( Morriss, 1987/2002 ) that does not need to be realized to exist. Second, it seems that reducing political theory to explanatory theory played a bad trick: The phenomenon of power in its many ramifications gets shoehorned into power as a central explanatory variable that is becoming the wider and more encompassing the more the analysis wishes to take the seemingly endless list of factors into account to understand political order. That invites a strategy of decoupling the analysis of power relations and the concept of power: More factors than power may enter the analysis of power relations ( Guzzini, 1993 ). But it could also imply something more fundamental, namely, that power is not to be used as a causal explanatory variable at all. In this context, Peter Morriss writes that power statements “ summarise observations; they do not explain them” ( Morriss, 1987/2002 , p. 44, emphasis in the original). Put differently, if it were to be used in explanations, the underlying vision of causality would have to be altered; a more dispositional understanding of causation in the social world would allow power a place in explanatory theories that would turn multifinal or indeterminate ( Guzzini, 2017b ) and which would be applicable to both agential and structural effects. Also here, the concept/factor of power would not exhaust all there is to say about power relations.

The Power Politics of Constitutive Processes: Social Recognition, Technologies of Government, and Performativity

So far, power has been understood either as an agency concept that focuses on agent dispositions, or as asymmetrical effects of action in social relations, or as dispositions of structures, which systematically mobilize biases, dis/empower agents materially, authorize their acts, and make certain actions un/thinkable in the first place. The rise of constructivism and post-structuralism and the establishment of international political sociology (IPS) pushes power analysis to take these relational and constitutive processes a step further. What distinguishes these approaches to power in IR is the different underlying process ontology and a social relationism that “presumes a non-essentialist view of social reality” ( Bially Mattern, 2008 , p. 696). A relational ontology takes its starting point not from units as fixed items that then interact, but from the relations through which their actual properties are continuously constituted (for IR, see Guillaume, 2007 ; Jackson & Nexon, 1999 ; Qin, 2018 ). The analysis focuses on the profoundly political processes that constitute subjects, their identities, as well as material and intersubjective contexts, that is, “how the world is made up,” in which power appears as an emergent property of such relations and processes ( Berenskoetter, 2007 , p. 15). This ontological shift characterizes three different research agendas in contemporary power analysis.

A first research line reframes the understanding of power in a more sociological analysis through a theory of action that is no longer utilitarian but based on the fundamental role of social recognition. The analysis of power is based on a certain vision of human nature, in that humans are viewed as profoundly social, their very identity constituted through the multiple spheres of recognition in which they live. This means, however, that power does not come out of a given drive that finds its expression in asymmetrical social interaction but resides in the constitutive processes that make up the identity of international actors and “govern” the practices that define membership and status in international society.

Second, the Foucauldian lineage of power analysis connects power analysis back to political theory. There, rather than seeing in the evaporation of agency control a sign of diminishing power, it looks at the mechanisms that keep the order together, or the “technologies of government,” where government is to be understood as all that which provides political order.

Finally, a third research line, often informed by the previous two, deals with the understanding of power when connected to the idea of the construction of social reality. There, power analysis is tied to the study of performativity, that is, the way discursive practices help create the subject they presuppose, as is prominent, for instance, in feminist theories and in the study of reflexivity, that is, the interaction between our knowledge and the social world. Perhaps unexpectedly, it is this line that connects power analysis back to the world of diplomatic and other international practice because it looks at the social conventions that establish proxies for power and the power of those conventions in world politics.

Having connected explanatory theories with both political theory and practice, this can be seen as a return to the initial realist concern with the nature of politics and order. It surely improves on the links between the three domains. But it risks repeating a realist fallacy. Whereas it is arguably correct to see power always connected to politics, not all politics is always connected or reducible to power. Seeing power not only as coercive but also productive should neither invite one to reduce all politics to it nor to turn power into the metaphysical prime mover of all things political.

The Power Politics of Recognition and Identity

As mentioned, IPS is a second answer to the attempt to theorize domination not reducible to a theory of action. In this tradition, power in world politics is not about steering capacity and agent influence. It is about the informal and often tacit ways in which order and hierarchy (stratification) is produced. Rather than seeing in soft and normative power simply mechanisms of institutionalization and socialization, it sees in them identity-constituting processes that end up constituting the borders of international society and its authorized members.

In a first research agenda in IPS, power is framed not within a utilitarian theory of action but in a social theory of recognition ( Pizzorno, 2007 , 2008 ). Using recognition for theorizing action and society can be derived from a series of sociological traditions, such as from Mead (1934) and Schutz (1964) to Berger and Luckmann (1966) , from Ricoeur (2004) , or from different post-Hegelian traditions ( Honneth, 1992 , 2010 ; Taylor, 1989 , 1992 ) and has informed IR scholars ever since the sociological turn (e.g., Ringmar, 1996 , 2002 ). There are two social theories of recognition that have been prominent in the rethinking of power relations in IR: Bourdieu’s field theory and Goffman’s symbolic interactionism, in particular his approach to stigma.

Bourdieu’s is still primarily a theory of domination organized around three fundamental concepts: habitus, practice, and field, which constitute each other (for a succinct presentation, see Guzzini, 2000 , pp. 164–169; Leander, 2008 ). Bourdieu’s concept of capital is the closest to the concept of power, sometimes used interchangeably. But it is only one element in the more general theory and analysis of domination (for a more detailed analysis, see Bigo, 2011 ; Guzzini, 2013c ). For the present purpose, it is important to stress Bourdieu’s relational understanding of power that is closely tied to phenomena of recognition. Hierarchies in fields are constituted by the distribution of capitals that are specifically relevant to the field. As previous relational approaches to power, Bourdieu’s theory of capital is relational in that it is never only in the material or ideational resource itself, but in the cognition and recognition it encounters in agents sharing the field and constantly negotiating their status within the field. Yet Bourdieu adds a further intersubjective component because his relational analysis of power insists on the complicity, or as he sometimes prefers to call it, the connivance, that exists between the dominating and the dominated. For this, he mobilizes a theory of symbolic action and symbolic power. Symbolic capital is the form that any capital will take if it is recognized in a strong sense, that is, perceived through those very conceptual categories that are, however, themselves informed by the distribution of capitals in the field ( Bourdieu, 1994 , pp. 117, 161). “Doxic subordination” is hence the effect of this symbolic violence, a subordination that is neither the result of coercion or asymmetrical interdependence nor of conscious consent, let alone a social contract, but of a mis(re)cognition ( méconnaissance ). It is a symbolic, and hence most effective, form of power. It is based on the unconscious adjustment of subjective structures (categories of perception) to objective structures. And so, according to Bourdieu, the analysis of “doxic acceptance” is the “true fundament of a realist theory of domination and politics” ( Bourdieu with Wacquant, 1992 , p. 143, my translation).

The initial usage of Bourdieu in IR had applied such misrecognition to the field of world politics itself, indeed to its very constitutive practices as applied by its realist elite. From early on, Richard Ashley tied the understanding of power to a social theory based on how relations and recognition constitute agency ( Ashley, 1984 , p. 259). Ashley tried to understand the specificity of international governance by using Bourdieu’s phrase of the “conductorless orchestration of collective action and improvisations” ( Ashley, 1989 , p. 255). He argued that, despite realist claims to the contrary, there is an international community under anarchy—and that it exists in the very realists who deny its existence ( Ashley, 1987 ). This community is all the more powerful in the international system as its theoretical self-description conceals its very existence by informing the common sense, shared in particular among practitioners: the power of the common sense.

In IR, a Bourdieusian analysis of how such recognition and misrecognition empowers certain agents has been applied to the study of international elites and the constitution of certain (expert) fields (e.g., Bigo, 1996 ). Anna Leander has shown how, in the military field, commercial actors are not just empowered in a trivial sense by having become more prominent, but how misrecognition has endowed them with epistemic power ( Leander, 2005 , pp. 811–812)—Bourdieu calls it épistémocratique ( Bourdieu, 2000 , p. 100)—that locks the field (temporarily) into a new doxa ( Leander, 2011 ). This doxa authorizing arguments and turning symbolic the capital of commercial agents provides, in turn, a vision and division of the worlds that “categorically” preempts ways to press for the accountability of commercial security forces ( Leander, 2010 ). Similar Bourdieu-inspired power analyses have focused on the “doxic battles” ( Berling, 2012 ; Senn & Elhardt, 2013 ) or the “never-ending struggle for recognition as competent in a given practice” ( Adler-Nissen & Pouliot, 2014 , p. 894). Such struggles are always embedded in the logic of practice that constitutes the field: Actors try to win a game whose rules they accept by playing it. Sending (2015) combines these approaches by showing how authority is not given to an actor but is the outcome of a continuous competition for recognition. The constituted authority defines, in turn, what is to be governed, how, and why. Consequently, power phenomena enter this type of analysis twice: Hierarchies within fields are a power phenomenon in themselves while being constituted by the power politics in the practices of recognition.

Bourdieu’s (1989) analysis of symbolic power is closely connected to his concern with the power of classifications (the visions and divisions of the world). Classifications literally make up the social world by organizing the social space, and hence its hierarchy, and by interacting with agent identity and their body ( Bourdieu, 1980 , pp. 117–134). In the analysis of world politics, this has been picked up mainly through Goffman’s (1963) analysis of stigmatization. Ayşe Zarakol (2011 , 2014 ) shows how Turkey’s, Japan’s, and Russia’s integration into the norms of (initially European) international society interacts with their state identity. Stigmatization is a process constitutive of international society, its hierarchy, and its inclusions or exclusions. At the same time, any state recognized as not yet normal or inferior in international society will experience ontological insecurity in the state’s self-understandings. Consequently, all action is necessarily informed by stigma-coping mechanisms, defiantly accepting, negotiating, or rejecting the stigma, but never being able to avoid it (see also Adler-Nissen, 2014 ).

Power practices understood through their interaction with identity processes are also fundamental for Janice Bially Mattern’s concept of “representational force” ( Bially Mattern, 2001 , 2005a , 2005b ). If identity is crucial for interest formation, then it is only a small step to analyzing how diplomatic practices, intended or not, can end up blackmailing actors by taking profit from contradictions in another actor’s self-understandings or between its action and self-representation.

The social ontology of this approach where the other is part of the self, and where action is driven by the need for recognition, thus gives rise to different practices and processes of domination.

Technologies of Government

Foucault reached the analysis of power in IR in the late 1980s and early 1990s (e.g., Ashley & Walker, 1990 ; DuBois, 1991 ; Keeley, 1990 ; Manzo, 1992 ). Foucault’s political theory revises Weber, and his empirical analysis translates Goffmanian sensibilities into a study of discourses and performativity, where discursive practices help create the subject they presuppose. The Weberian lineage is most visible in Foucault’s political theory, which can be seen as a new take on Weber’s stählernes Gehäuse ( Weber, 1904–1920/2016 , p. 171), initially translated as “Iron Cage,” where the development of (Western) capitalism and rationalism created a new modern subject, both emancipated and curtailed. It is the answer to a conservative paradox in modernity: How can the emancipation and empowerment of the citizen lead to more order and control in modern societies?

Here, Foucault develops a dual analysis of modern government. On the one hand, it analyzes the interaction between “regimes of truth” and order, that is, the way government is increasingly a set of practices based on knowledge to administer public and private life, using general “stat(e)”istics and offering services on their base. On the other hand, in a more Goffmanian vein, it looks at the way these regimes of truth, be it in medicine, psychology, education, penal law, and so forth, establish the “normal” and “deviant,” classifications that interact with the subjects who implicitly control themselves by “identifying” with the expectations implied in such classifications. Government consists in constituting the subject through which, in turn, it achieves order (e.g., Foucault, 1975 , p. 223ff.). A branch of postcolonial studies took its inspiration from Foucault to understand how imperial knowledge, for instance in the form of “Orientalism,” constituted the colonial “other” as a “lamentably alien” subject in the first place, making it governable, legitimating its governance, within which the subaltern participates in its own subjugation ( Said, 1979/2003 , respectively at pp. 94, 97, 207 (quote), 325).

It is not fortuitous that Foucault’s analysis of power comes in terms of “government,” which is also a semantic component of the French pouvoir (and not puissance ). Its focus is on the changing mechanisms and technologies in the provision of political order. It shares this focus on order with classical realists but takes a completely different approach. It does not base its analysis in the human lust for power or the inevitable clash of wills, all given before the analysis. The ubiquity of power is not to be found in the struggle for resources that define human relations, but in the impersonal processes that constitute the subjects and their relations in the first place ( Brown & Scott, 2014 ).

Such an approach to government makes the study of world governance its most obvious field in IR. And yet, such study has been mainly conducted in a Weberian way within neoliberal institutionalism (for a comprehensive reconstruction, see Zürn, 2018 ). This school tends to think governance mainly in terms of agency (who governs?), scope (what?), and normative content (for what?), raising issues of the various networks of actions, their steering capacity, and their legitimacy and contestation. Foucauldian approaches see governance constituted by its mechanisms (how?) (for a discussion of these four problematiques of governance, see Guzzini, 2012 ), be they the political economy of populations, the constitution of insurance and risk management ( Lobo-Guerrero, 2011 , 2012 , 2016 ), or, indeed, the governmentality constituted by the increasing globalization of the fields of practice within which subjects subject themselves to varied “techniques of the self” ( Bayart, 2004 ). It is through the analysis of those rationalities of government that one can understand agency and scope in the first place.

Such a focus on modes and mechanisms problematizes governance differently. First, it does not assume a public realm (the states), markets, and civil society as something given prior to analysis, but studies how liberal rationalities of order have diffused and enmeshed all of them, producing hybrid authority (for a more IPE-inspired analysis, see Graz, 2019 ). Firms have to comply with corporate social responsibility and the state apparatus to become efficient in terms of new public management. By inventing new indices of productivity, such neoliberal practices constitute the public realm as a firm-like actor in the first place. And order is achieved through ever-new standards and accounting devices that work through their very acceptance by, for example, governments that need to be rendered “accountable” in such a way ( Fougner, 2008 ; Löwenheim, 2008 ).

For the same reason, Foucauldian analysis of nongovernmental organizations insists that, rather than seeing in this global civil society an anti-power or new power, “it is it is an expression of a changing logic or rationality of government (defined as a type of power) by which civil society is redefined from a passive object of government to be acted upon into an entity that is both an object and a subject of government” ( Neumann & Sending, 2010 , pp. 5, 17, 115; emphasis in the original). Rather than comparing the relative power for the assessment of rank and hierarchy, an analysis of governmentality concentrates on the new mechanisms through which (self-)regulated behavior, and hence order, is achieved. And here, nongovernmental organizations are not necessarily a barrier to government located out there with some hegemonic actors; they are themselves, perhaps unwittingly, part of it ( Hynek, 2008 ; Lipschutz, 2005 ; in a less Foucauldian vein, see Bartelson, 2006 ).

Power as Convention: Performative and Reflexive Power Analysis

IPS reconnects not only with the political theory of the nature of order and government but also with the practical concern of its use in world politics. Classical realists plead for prudence in the always indeterminate assessment of power to deal with “the most fundamental problem of politics, which is not the control of wickedness but the limitation of righteousness” ( Kissinger, 1957 , p. 206). Akin to previous traditions in peace research, IPS scholars invite practitioners to reflect and potentially counter the discourses and often self-fulfilling processes that constitute and perpetuate social facts. It does not recoil, as classical realists did, from drawing out the implications of the conventional nature of international politics. Confronted with the missing fungibility of resources and the unavailable objective measure of power, Hedley Bull merely declared that an “overall” concept of power used for comparisons is “one we cannot do without” ( Bull, 1977 , p. 114) and pursued the analysis. IPS was to follow up on who “we” is.

For while there is no objective measure of power, there are social conventions to measure power. The understanding of power is not established by the observer, but by the actor. It becomes a social convention. Diplomats must first agree on what counts before they can start counting ( Guzzini, 1998 , p. 231). And those conventions are, hence the effect of negotiations within the diplomatic field and its processes of recognition and, in turn, constitute technologies of government themselves. Understandings of power inform practices and vice versa. Discourses of power are both performative in that they intervene in the social world and reflexive in that such practices re-affect those discourses.

This practical component of power has evolved with political discourse, at least in Western traditions. There are two prominent reasons why practitioners cannot do without an overall concept of power, namely the link of power to responsibility and the conventions of hierarchy that tie rank or status to power.

In our political discourse, the notion of power is attached to the idea of the “art of the possible,” identifying agency and attributing responsibility ( Connolly, 1974 , chap. 3). If there were no power, nothing could be done, and no one could be blamed for it. Therefore, re-conceptualizations of power, both among observers and practitioners, often have the purpose of widening what falls into the realm of power in order to attribute agency and responsibility. Things were not inevitable; not doing anything about it requires public justification. Here the ontological stance of the entire section meets a purpose of power analysis. An ontology that focuses on the constitution of things historicizes and denaturalizes issues ( Hacking, 1999 , pp. 6–7). And in showing how the present was not inevitable, it drags into the open the domination that goes into, as well as the modes of legitimation that follow, social facts. For instance, attributing power to the social fact of gender and the dispositions sedimented in gender scripts denaturalizes their role in the existing sexual stratification and in its reproduction. In short, in at least Western political discourse, attributing power politicizes issues ( Guzzini, 2000 , 2005 ; for an early statement, see Frei, 1969 ).

A second reason why diplomats cannot do without the overall concept of power is the established convention of organizing international society according to different strata, where “great powers” have special responsibilities but also privileges, the most important being “exemptionalism” and impunity. Here, rules, which apply to all others, may apply to them only at their discretion. To establish this special status, proxies of power are agreed to. As in Bourdieu’s field of power, where the conversion rates between different forms of capital are (socially) established ( Bourdieu, 1994 , p. 56), the overall hierarchy is the result of an ongoing fight to establish the rates of convertibility and hence hierarchy of capitals and social groups. It is the struggle for the “dominating principle of domination” ( Bourdieu, 1994 , p. 34).

This interaction between our conventions of what counts as power and political practice, be it rank or behavior, works both ways. Joseph Nye’s concept of soft power was meant not only to describe international relations but also to influence them. If all actors agreed on this understanding of power for attributing rank, then political competition would be about movies and universities, not military bases and economic exploitation. The understanding of power, if shared, changes social reality, here the very nature of world politics. In reverse, countries who wish to influence the conventions can also do this through their acts and their recognition. This is only logical for an actor trying to foster a convention for proxies of power that fit its profile. When Russia privileges hard power and its exercise, downplaying economic welfare or human rights and inciting behavior that strengthens this understanding, it influences the conventions to its benefit. The more others react in kind, the better. One of the reasons Russia is so keen on its “sphere of influence” is that such a sphere allows it to do things that otherwise would be forbidden. And it makes Russia equal to others that claim such a sphere (for instance, the Western Hemisphere for the United States). And precisely because international society knows that impunity is a proxy for rank, it applies economic sanctions and other measures. They are symbolic means in that they are not meant to return matters to the status quo. Yet they are very important ones, expressing a refusal to accept someone as a member of that limited club that has discretion in applying social rules. Obviously, such discretion and acceptance of impunity as a proxy for rank can only thrive when it is shared as a “gentlemen’s agreement” within the club, as during colonial times.

Even if careful scholarly discussion can discard some conceptualizations of power, there is no one root concept that one can unravel simply by digging deeper. Concepts derive their meanings from the theories in which they are embedded, like words in a language, and meet there the meta-theoretical or normative divides that plague and enrich our theorizing. Power is particularly complicated because it is a concept deemed important not only across different explanatory theories, with their underlying and conflicting ontologies, but also across different domains from philosophy to the lifeworld of the practitioner. It is perhaps not surprising that the realist tradition, in IR and elsewhere, has focused on power as a privileged way to link these three domains. This may indeed be one of its defining characteristics.

Initially, realist writings combined the domains of political theory, centered on the understanding of order in the polity, with the domain of explanatory theory by assuming that, in the absence of a genuine world polity, the analysis of capabilities and influence was all there could be and a political practice based on power and prudence. Yet having reduced much of power analysis to the disciplinary expectations of a U.S. social science, in particular political theory fell by the wayside. Liberal and structural scholars exposed the weaknesses in realist power analysis, from the fungibility assumption to the double link between agent resources to influence, and from there to a balance of power, which subsumed domination under action. They redefined the causal (or not) role for power, be it at the agent or the structural level. Finally, with the post-structuralist and constructivist turn, the analysis of power returns to the links between the three domains of ontology, understanding/explanation, and practice through the analysis of the power in the processes that constitute social facts and hierarchical subject positions.

Yet, what all these approaches risk is falling into the trap of a realist fallacy. It may well be that power is intrinsically connected to politics and the political, but not all politics can be reduced to power. Like geopolitical thinkers before (for a critique, see Aron, 1976 ), Foucault has reversed Clausewitz’s famous dictum that war is but the prolongation of politics by other means, with the effect of making war the default position of the political. 2 But this can hardly account for all conceptions (and some would add for the reality) of politics. Hannah Arendt, for instance, a thinker close to the realist tradition for not propping her theory up by a banister or for having any post-totalitarian illusion about human nature ( Isaac, 1992 ; Kalyvas, 2008 ; Strong, 2012 ), strongly criticized the tendency “to reduce public affairs to the business of dominion.” And while “power is indeed of the essence of all government,” she redefined power to make it the “opposite” of violence, namely the “human ability to act in concert” ( Arendt, 1969 , respectively at pp. 44, 51, 56, 44). Her take on politics offers a way to include solidarity into our understanding of politics ( Allen, 1998 , pp. 35–37, 2002 , p. 143). She unties the link between power and violence in the realist tradition, whether classical or Foucauldian, and hence the reduction of politics to the means or technologies of control. And, as any reflexive analysis immediately realizes, this geopolitical or Foucauldian reversal of Clausewitz is a self-fulfilling prophecy by producing what its discourses presuppose (see the analysis of “ontogenetic war” in Bartelson, 2018 ) and hence hardly prudent advice for political practice.

This fallacy is but an expression of the temptation that emanates from power for the understanding of world politics. It is the temptation of a shortcut, where the concept of power is conflated with the analysis of all power phenomena, from symbolic violence to dependency, and where the ontology of power encompasses all there is to the nature of politics. In doing so, power is either taken not seriously enough or too much so. Realist explanations in IR have not taken power seriously enough by having one of its most reductionist understandings, as witnessed by the many critiques and developments discussed in this article. At the same time, the political realist tradition has played a bad trick in that it tacitly smuggles into international theory the thinking of politics only in terms of struggle and domination. Power analysis in world politics needs to both apprehend power in its comprehensive nature for its analysis and qualify the role of power in its understanding of politics.

• Adler-Nissen, R. (2014). Stigma management in international relations: Transgressive identities, norms, and order in international society. International Organization , 68 (1), 143–176.
• Adler-Nissen, R. , & Pouliot, V. (2014). Power in practice: Negotiating the international intervention in Libya. European Journal of International Relations , 20 (4), 889–911.
• Allen, A. (1998). Rethinking power. Hypatia , 13 (1), 21–40.
• Allen, A. (2002). Power, subjectivity, and agency: Between Arendt and Foucault. International Journal of Philosophical Studies , 10 (2), 131–149.
• Arendt, H. (1969). On violence . Harcourt, Brace & World.
• Aron, R. (1984). Paix et guerre entre les nations (8th ed.). Calmann-Lévy. (Original work published 1962)
• Aron, R. (1966). The anarchical order of power. Daedalus , 95 (2), 479–502.
• Aron, R. (1967). Max Weber et la politique de puissance. In Les étapes de la pensée sociologique (pp. 642–656). Gallimard.
• Aron, R. (1976). Penser la guerre, Clausewitz . II : L’âge planétaire . Gallimard.
• Ashley, R. K. (1984). The poverty of neorealism. International Organization , 38 (2), 225–286.
• Ashley, R. K. (1987). The geopolitics of geopolitical space: Toward a critical social theory of international politics. Alternatives , XII (4), 403–434.
• Ashley, R. K. (1989). Imposing international purpose: Notes on a problematique of governance. In E.-O. Czempiel & J. Rosenau (Eds.), Global changes and theoretical challenges: Approaches to world politics for the 1990s (pp. 251–290). Lexington Books.
• Ashley, R. K. , & Walker, R. B. J. (1990). Special issue: Speaking the language of exile: Dissidence in international studies. International Studies Quarterly , 34 (3), 259–416.
• Bachrach, P. , & Baratz, M. S. (1970). Power and poverty: Theory and practice . Oxford University Press.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1971). Money and power. Journal of Politics , 33 (3), 578–614.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1979). Power analysis and world politics: New trends versus old tendencies. World Politics , 31 (1), 161–194.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1985). Economic statecraft . Princeton University Press.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1989). Paradoxes of power . Blackwell.
• Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Neoliberalism, neorealism, and world politics. In D. A. Baldwin (Ed.), Neorealism and neoliberalism: The contemporary debate (pp. 3–25). Columbia University Press.
• Baldwin, D. A. (2002). Power and international relations. In W. Carlsnaes , T. Risse , & B. A. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of International Relations (pp. 177–191). SAGE.
• Baldwin, D. A. (2016). Power and international relations: A conceptual approach . Princeton University Press.
• Barnett, M. , & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in international politics. International Organization , 59 (1), 39–75.
• Bartelson, J. (2006). Making sense of global civil society. European Journal of International Relations , 12 (3), 371–395.
• Bartelson, J. (2018). War in international thought . Cambridge University Press.
• Bayart, J.-F. (2004). Le gouvernement du monde. Une critique politique de la globalisation . Fayard.
• Berenskoetter, F. (2007). Thinking about power. In F. Berenskoetter & M. Williams (Eds.), Power in world politics (pp. 1–22). Routledge.
• Berger, P. L. , & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge . Anchor Books.
• Berling, T. V. (2012). Bourdieu, international relations, and European security. Theory and Society , 41 (5), 451–478.
• Bially Mattern, J. (2001). The power politics of identity. European Journal of International Relations , 7 (3), 349–397.
• Bially Mattern, J . (2005a). Ordering international politics: Identity, crisis, and representational force . Routledge.
• Bially Mattern, J. (2005b). Why soft power isn’t so soft: Representational force and the sociolinguistic construction of attraction in world politics. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 33 (3), 583–612.
• Bially Mattern, J. (2008). The concept of power and the (un)discipline of international relations. In C. Reus-Smit & D. Snidal (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of International Relations (pp. 691–698). Oxford University Press.
• Bigo, D. (1996). Polices en réseaux. L’expérience européenne . Presses de Sciences-Po.
• Bigo, D. (2011). Pierre Bourdieu and international relations: Power of practices, practices of power. International Political Sociology , 5 (3), 225–258.
• Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le sens pratique . Les Éditions de Minuit.
• Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory , 6 (1), 14–25.
• Bourdieu, P. (1994). Raisons pratiques. Sur la théorie de l’action . Éditions du Seuil.
• Bourdieu, P. (2000). Propos sur le champ politique . Presses Universitaires de Lyon.
• Bourdieu, P. , with Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). Réponses: Pour une anthropologie réflexive . Éditions du Seuil.
• Brown, W. , & Scott, J. W. (2014). Power. In C. R. Stimpson & G. Herdt (Eds.), Critical terms in the study of gender (pp. 335–357). University of Chicago Press.
• Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics . Macmillan.
• Caporaso, J. A. (1978). Dependence, dependency and power in the global system: A structural and behavioural analysis. International Organization , 32 (1), 13–43.
• Cardoso, F. H. , & Faletto, E. (1979). Dependency and development in Latin America . University of California Press.
• Connolly, W. E. (1974). The terms of political discourse (2nd ed.). Martin Robertson.
• Cox, R. W. (1981). Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond international relations theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 10 (2), 126–155.
• Cox, R. W. (1983). Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: An essay in method. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 12 (2), 162–175.
• Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioural Science , 2 (3), 201–215.
• Dahl, R. A. (1968). Power. In D. L. Sills (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (Vol. 12, pp. 405–415). Free Press.
• Dahl, R. A. (2005). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city (2nd ed.). Yale University Press. (Original work published 1961)
• Dos Santos, T. (1970). The structure of dependence. American Economic Review, LX (2), 231–236.
• DuBois, M. (1991). The governance of the third world: A Foucauldian perspective on power relations in development. Alternatives , 16 (1), 1–30.
• Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison . Gallimard.
• Foucault, M. (1976). Histoire de la sexualité, 1. La volonté de savoir . Gallimard.
• Fougner, T. (2008). Neoliberal governance of states: The role of competitiveness indexing and country benchmarking. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 37 (2), 303–326.
• Frei, D. (1969). Vom Mass der Macht. Überlegungen zum Grundproblem der internationalen Beziehungen. Schweizer Monatshefte , 49 (7), 642–654.
• Gill, S. , & Law, D. (1988). The global political economy . Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity . Prentice-Hall.
• Graz, J.-C. (2019). The power of standards: Hybrid authority and the globalisation of services . Cambridge University Press.
• Guillaume, X. (2007). Unveiling the international: Process, identity and alterity. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 35 (3), 741–759.
• Guzzini, S. (1993). Structural power: The limits of neorealist power analysis. International Organization , 47 (3), 443–478.
• Guzzini, S. (1998). Realism in International Relations and International Political Economy: The continuing story of a death foretold . Routledge.
• Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in International Relations. European Journal of International Relations , 6 (2), 147–182.
• Guzzini, S. (2005). The concept of power: A constructivist analysis. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 33 (3), 495–522.
• Guzzini, S. (2012). The ambivalent “diffusion of power” in global governance. In S. Guzzini & I. B. Neumann (Eds.), The diffusion of power in global governance: International Political Economy meets Foucault (pp. 1–37). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Guzzini, S. (2013a). The ends of International Relations theory: Stages of reflexivity and modes of theorizing. European Journal of International Relations , 19 (3), 521–541.
• Guzzini, S. (2013b). Power, realism and constructivism . Routledge.
• Guzzini, S. (2013c). Power: Bourdieu’s field analysis of relational capital, misrecognition and domination. In R. Adler-Nissen (Ed.), Bourdieu in international relations: Rethinking key concepts in IR (pp. 79–92). Routledge.
• Guzzini, S. (2016). Power. In F. Berenskoetter (Ed.), Concepts in world politics (pp. 23–40). SAGE.
• Guzzini, S. (2017a). Max Weber’s power. In R. N. Lebow (Ed.), Max Weber and international relations (pp. 97–118). Cambridge University Press.
• Guzzini, S. (2017b). Power and cause. Journal of International Relations and Development , 20 (4), 737–759.
• Guzzini, S. (2020). Embrace IR anxieties (or, Morgenthau’s approach to power, and the challenge of combining the three domains of IR theorizing). International Studies Review , 22 (2), 268–288.
• Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Harvard University Press.
• Hayward, C. R. (2000). De-facing power . Cambridge University Press.
• Honneth, A. (1992). Kampf um Anerkennung. Zur moralischen Grammatik sozialer Konflikte (2nd ed.; with a new postface). Suhrkamp.
• Honneth, A. (2010). Das Ich im Wir. Studien zur Anerkennungstheorie . Suhrkamp.
• Hynek, N. (2008). Conditions of emergence and their biopolitical effects: Political rationalities, governmental programmes and technologies of power in the landmine case. Journal of International Relations and Development , 11 (2), 93–120.
• Isaac, J. C. (1992). Arendt, Camus, and modern rebellion . Yale University Press.
• Jackson, P. T. , & Nexon, D. H. (1999). Relations before states: Substance, process and the study of world politics. European Journal of International Relations , 5 (3), 291–332.
• Kalyvas, A. (2008). Democracy and the politics of the extraordinary: Max Weber, Carl Schmitt, and Hannah Arendt . Cambridge University Press.
• Keeley, J. F. (1990). Toward a Foucauldian analysis of international regimes. International Organization , 44 (1), 83–105.
• Keohane, R. O. , & Nye, J. S., Jr. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition . Little Brown.
• Keohane, R. O. , & Nye, J. S., Jr. (1987). Power and interdependence revisited. International Organization , 41 (4), 725–753.
• Kissinger, H. A. (1957). A world restored: The politics of conservatism in a revolutionary era . Victor Gollancz.
• Kissinger, H. A. (1969). American foreign policy: Three essays (3rd ed.). W.W. Norton.
• Kissinger, H. A. (1979). The White House years . Little Brown.
• Krasner, S. D. (1985). Structural conflict: The Third World against global liberalism . University of California Press.
• Leander, A. (2005). The power to construct international security: On the significance of private military companies. Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 33 (3), 803–826.
• Leander, A. (2008). Thinking tools: Analyzing symbolic power and violence. In A. Klotz & D. Prakash (Eds.), Qualitative methods in international relations: A pluralist guide (pp. 11–27). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Leander, A. (2010). The paradoxical impunity of private military companies: Authority and the limits to legal accountability. Security Dialogue , 41 (5), 467–490.
• Leander, A. (2011). Risk and the fabrication of apolitical, unaccountable military markets: The case of the CIA “Killing Program.” Review of International Studies , 37 (5), 2253–2268.
• Lipschutz, R. D. (2005). Global civil society and governmentality: Or, the search for politics and the state amidst the capillaries of social power. In M. Barnett & R. Duvall (Eds.), Power in global governance (pp. 229–248). Cambridge University Press.
• Lobo-Guerrero, L. (2011). Insuring security: Biopolitics, security and risk . Routledge.
• Lobo-Guerrero, L. (2012). Insuring war: Sovereignty, security and risk . Routledge.
• Lobo-Guerrero, L. (2016). Insuring life: Value, security and risk . Routledge.
• Löwenheim, O. (2008). Examining the state: A Foucauldian perspective on international “governance indicators.” Third World Quarterly , 29 (2), 255–274.
• Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view . Macmillan.
• Lukes, S. (1977). Power and structure. In Essays in social theory (pp. 3–29). Columbia University Press.
• Manzo, K. (1992). Global power and South African politics: A Foucauldian analysis. Alternatives , 17 , 23–66.
• Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist . University of Chicago Press.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics . W.W. Norton.
• Morgenthau, H. J. (1946). Scientific man vs. power politics . University of Chicago Press.
• Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace . Knopf.
• Morriss, P. (2002). Power: A philosophical analysis (2nd ed.). Manchester University Press. (Original work published 1987)
• Neumann, I. B. , & Sending, O. J. (2010). Governing the global polity: Practice, mentality, rationality . University of Michigan Press.
• Nye, J. S., Jr. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy , 80 , 153–171.
• Nye, J. S., Jr. (2007). Notes for a soft power research agenda. In F. Berenskoetter & M. J. Williams (Eds.), Power in world politics (pp. 162–172). Routledge.
• Nye, J. S., Jr. (2011). The future of power . PublicAffairs.
• O’Donnell, G. (1973). Modernization and bureaucratic-authoritarianism: Studies in South American politics . Institute of International Studies—University of California.
• Pizzorno, A. (2007). Il velo della diversità: Studi su razionalità e riconoscimento . Feltrinelli.
• Pizzorno, A. (2008). Rationality and recognition. In D. della Porta & M. Keating (Eds.), Approaches and methodologies in the social sciences: A pluralist perspective (pp. 162–173). Cambridge University Press.
• Qin, Y. (2018). A relational theory of world politics . Cambridge University Press.
• Ricœur, P. (2004). Parcours de la reconnaissance. Trois études . Éditions Stock.
• Riker, W. H. (1964). Some ambiguities in the notion of power. American Political Science Review , 58 (2), 341–349.
• Ringmar, E. (1996). Identity, interest and action: A cultural explanation of Sweden’s intervention in the thirty years war . Cambridge University Press.
• Ringmar, E. (2002). The recognition game: Soviet Russia against the West. Cooperation and Conflict , 37 (2), 115–136.
• Said, E. W. (2003). Orientalism (3rd ed.). Penguin Books. (Original work published 1979)
• Schutz, A. (1964). Collected papers II: Studies in social theory . Martinus Nijhoff.
• Sellin, V. (1978). Politik. In O. Brunner , W. Conze , & R. Koselleck (Eds.), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland. Band 4 (pp. 789–874). Klett-Cotta.
• Sending, O. J. (2015). The politics of expertise: Competing for authority in global governance . University of Michigan Press.
• Senghaas, D. (1982). Autozentrierte Entwicklung. In D. Nohlen & F. Nuscheler (Eds.), Handbuch der Dritten Welt 1. Unterentwicklung und Entwicklung: Theorien—Strategien—Indikatoren (2nd rev. ed., pp. 359–379). Hoffmann und Campe.
• Senn, M. , & Elhardt, C. (2013). Bourdieu and the bomb: Power, language and the doxic battle over the value of nuclear weapons. European Journal of International Relations , 20 (2), 316–340.
• Strange, S. (1985). International Political Economy: The story so far and the way ahead. In W. L. Hollist & F. L. Tullis (Eds.), The international political economy (pp. 13–25). Westview Press.
• Strange, S. (1988). States and markets: An introduction to International Political Economy . Basil Blackwell.
• Strange, S. (1989). Toward a theory of transnational empire. In E.-O. Czempiel & J. Rosenau (Eds.), Global changes and theoretical challenges: Approaches to world politics for the 1990s (pp. 161–176). D. C. Heath.
• Strange, S. (1996). The retreat of the state: The diffusion of power in the world economy . Cambridge University Press.
• Strong, T. B. (2012). Politics without vision: Thinking without a banister in the twentieth century . The University of Chicago Press.
• Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity . Cambridge University Press.
• Taylor, C. (1992). Multiculturalism and the politics of recognition . Princeton University Press.
• van der Pijl, K. (1998). Transnational classes and international relations . Routledge.
• Waltz, K. N. (1969). International structure, national force and the balance of world power. In J. A. Rosenau (Ed.), International politics and foreign policy: A reader in research and theory (pp. 304–314). Free Press. (Original work published 1967)
• Waltz, K. N. (1990). Realist thought and neorealist theory. Journal of International Affairs , 44 (1), 21–38.
• Weber, M. (1980). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie (5th rev. ed.). J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). (Original work published 1921–1922)
• Weber, M. (1988a). Parlament und Regierung im neugeordneten Deutschland. In Gesammelte Politische Schriften (pp. 306–443). J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). (Original work published 1918)
• Weber, M. (1988b). Politik als Beruf. In Gesammelte Politische Schriften (pp. 505–560). J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). (Original work published 1919)
• Weber, M. (1988c). Wissenschaft als Beruf. In Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre (pp. 582–613). J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). (Original work published 1919)
• Weber, M. (2016). Die protestantische Ethik und der “Geist” des Kapitalismus (Neuausgabe der ersten Fassung von 1904–05 mit einem Verzeichnis der wichtigsten Zusätze und Veränderungen aus der zweiten Fassung von 1920) ( K. Lichtblau & J. Weiß , Eds.). Springer VS. (Original work published 1904–1920)
• Wohlforth, W. C. (2003). Measuring power—and the power of theories. In J. A. Vasquez & C. Elman (Eds.), Realism and the balance of power: A new debate (pp. 250–265). Prentice Hall.
• Wolfers, A. (1962). Discord and collaboration: Essays on international politics . Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Wolin, S. S. (1981). Max Weber: Legitimation, method, and the politics of theory. Political Theory , 9 (3), 401–424.
• Zarakol, A. (2011). After defeat: How the East learned to live with the West . Cambridge University Press.
• Zarakol, A. (2014). What made the modern world hang together: Socialisation or stigmatisation? International Theory , 6 (2), 311–332.
• Zürn, M. (2018). A theory of global governance: Authority, legitimacy, and contestation . Oxford University Press.

1. Others would turn the argument around and claim that this diffusion is a new mechanism that constitutes the present form of governance, a rule without steering. See the section “ The Power Politics of Constitutive Processes .”

2. Given Foucault’s own critique of the reduction to command and obedience (as in the Weberian realist tradition) and his nominalist understanding of power ( Foucault, 1976 , pp. 113, 123), the reversal of Clausewitz is not uncritical and surely less so than in some later followers.

Related Articles

• The Balance of Power in World Politics
• Social and Political Power
• Power Shifts and War
• Power and National Capability

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Politics. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 22 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|81.177.182.136]
• 81.177.182.136

Character limit 500 /500

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Hero — Power

Power Essays

Hook examples for power essays, anecdotal hook.

"Standing at the helm of a vast empire, wielding authority and influence, I've often pondered the intoxicating nature of power and its consequences on those who possess it."

Rhetorical Question Hook

"What does it mean to hold power, and how does it shape individuals and societies? The concept of power raises complex questions about human nature and governance."

Startling Statistic Hook

"In a recent study, it was revealed that 1% of the world's population owns more wealth than the entire bottom 99%. This staggering wealth gap forces us to confront the dynamics of power and inequality."

"'Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.' Lord Acton's words resonate through history, reminding us of the potential dangers of unchecked authority."

Historical Hook

"From ancient rulers to modern leaders, the pursuit and exercise of power have shaped the course of civilizations. Exploring the historical context of power unveils its enduring significance."

Narrative Hook

"Enter the world of a character driven by ambition and the thirst for power, where moral boundaries blur, and choices have far-reaching consequences. This narrative unravels the complexities of power."

Contrast Hook

"In a society that values democracy and equality, how do we reconcile the existence of power disparities? Contrasting the ideals of power with its realities prompts reflection on our societal values."

Emotional Appeal Hook

"The allure of power, the fear of its abuse, and the desire for justice are deeply emotional experiences. Exploring the emotional aspects of power highlights its impact on individuals and societies."

Political Power Hook

"What role does political power play in shaping policies and governance? Delving into the dynamics of political power reveals its influence on decision-making and public life."

Social Power Hook

"From the power of social media to influence public opinion to the power of grassroots movements to effect change, the concept of social power is ever-evolving. Understanding social power dynamics is key to navigating today's world."

Theme of Power in Literature

Similes in animal farm, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Power Dynamics in Lord of The Flies

The dangerous side of power, faces of power and its impact on society, the lust for power in "game of thrones", let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

A Reconceptualization of Power and Its Normative Value

World women leaders: sexism on the path to power, discovering the illusion of power in the handmaid's tale, power struggle in modern world by kosinski, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Women in Power

Overview of the three dimensions of power, hegemony (leadership or dominance), the patriarchal power and female norms in hamlet, the royal prerogative, three dimensions of power by steven lukes, power through the panopticon in the african context, negative effects of philip ii reign in spain, review of nigerian power reform, the theme of dominance in a family and fight for 'power' in the homecoming, the association of southeast asian nations – a global political powerhouse, power, possession, and disease in volpone, the digression of vivian’s power within wit, understanding the president's relationship with congress, maximum power point tracking techniques for photovoltaic systems, exploring power and authority, julius caesar brutus manipulation quotes, wind power: harnessing the energy of the wind, does power corrupt, animal farm chapter 5 summary, relevant topics.

• Helping Others
• Someone Who Inspires Me
• Role Models
• Influential Person
• Winter Break

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Module 15: Government and Politics

Introduction to power and authority, what you’ll learn to do: define and differentiate between power and authority.

In this section, we will discuss the government and the political system in terms of their impact on individuals and larger social systems. In order to help us understand and discuss our political system, we must first define government.  Government is a political institution with formal methods of acquiring and exercising power and authority. This political institution encompasses all the means and processes by which a society maintains order. The two underlying elements of a government are power and authority—as sociologists, let’s examine them both separately, and then consider how they may be interrelated.

Power is an entity’s or individual’s ability to control or direct others, while authority is influence that is predicated on perceived legitimacy. Consequently, power is necessary for authority, but it is possible to have power without authority. In other words, power is necessary but not sufficient for authority. As you’ll learn in this section, Max Weber studied power and authority, differentiating between the two concepts and formulating a system for classifying types of authority.

• Introduction to Power and Authority. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Power and Authority. Authored by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : https://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:GveClPvr@2/Power-and-Authority . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]
• Icon. Authored by : TukTuk Design. Provided by : Pixabay. Located at : https://pixabay.com/illustrations/icon-leader-leadership-lead-boss-1623888/ . License : CC0: No Rights Reserved

Talk to our experts

1800-120-456-456

• Knowledge is Power Essay

Essay on Knowledge is Power

Knowledge means understanding of something such as facts, information, description and skills. It is the source of power to man and this distinguishes him from other creatures of the universe. Though man is physically weaker than many animals, for he cannot see as far as an eagle, nor carry heavy loads as some animals. Nevertheless he is the most powerful creature on earth. This power basically comes to him from knowledge not from physical strength. ‘Knowledge is power’ means that a man has education and a complete control on his life by using the strength of knowledge. 

The ability to acquire knowledge, preserve and pass it on to the future generation makes man powerful. It enables him to control the forces of nature and use them for his benefit. This power of knowledge, if used wisely can bring happiness to mankind. Knowledge leads to wisdom, respect and consequently power. 

Why is Knowledge Powerful?

Knowledge does not always come with power. Knowledge is the state of awareness or understanding and learning of specific information about something and it is gained from experience or study. This means a person has the resources to express his views dynamically and make intelligent decisions based on his every day situations, awareness and understanding. 

This doesn’t make a man powerful. A man is said to be powerful when he uses his knowledge to mobilize in the right direction. When a man has the ability or capacity to act or perform effectively with his knowledge then he gains Power.

Benefits of Knowledge

Knowledge is important to shape our personality and perfect our behavior and dealings with people. 

Knowledge hones thinking skills. Knowledge is necessary in order to be able to formulate an opinion or develop a line of thought.

A person gets the power to analyze and assert situations by his knowledge. 

With knowledge, a man can master the techniques of adjusting and accommodating with changes in the surroundings and life situations. 

Knowledge helps a man to face adversities and stay balanced.

It is a key to removing the darkness of ignorance.

Knowledge helps in enhancing more options in the professional career of the individuals.

Knowledge helps in boosting confidence in individuals.

Education and knowledge together can provide better governance to the country.

A nation can have true democracy when the citizens of the country are knowledgeable about both social and economic conditions.

Prospective of Knowledge

Education is a key to success and this statement holds true as being knowledgeable can lead to a successful life. Knowledge will never diminish like any physical entities. In fact, the evolution of civilization in our society has happened due to the increase in the knowledge base of humans. Progress in the medical field has been made possible by developing rational thinking through the use of knowledge. Knowledge is the foremost tool of empowerment. It is the key to success in life. Knowledge, along with the power to think and analyze, differentiate men from animals. Knowledge teaches us to be humble and compassionate. People with very humble backgrounds have risen to power and wealth, on the strength of knowledge and skill. Only this can maintain harmony in the society.

Writing the Knowledge is Power Essay

Writing the Knowledge is Power Essay can be quite easy. Before you start the essay, collect all the details about the proverb to understand its meaning. This way, you can curate a meaningful essay with all the right facts and relevant points. Moreover, you should know the correct format for writing an essay. You can refer to the Knowledge is Power Essay available on Vedantu’s website to understand the format and learn more about the topic. Here are some tips to follow while writing your own essay on Knowledge is Power: 

Gather all the information you can from textbooks to the Internet about knowledge before you begin the essay. 

Once you have collected all the details, start your essay with an insightful introduction to the topic to give the readers an idea of what they will be learning from the essay. 

While writing the main body, do not go off-topic and write irrelevant points. Everything you write should be entirely focused on the topic i.e. Knowledge is Power. 

Add a good conclusion at the end to summarize the entire essay and give your final statement about the topic i.e. Knowledge is Power. 

Once you have completed the essay, proofread it to find mistakes and rectify them immediately. 

If you have time, revise the essay and check whether you can add more powerful points to make your writing more effective.

Points to be included in the Knowledge is Power Essay

Before you start writing your Knowledge is Power Essay, you should have a clear understanding of what points to include. This will save a lot of your time and help you finish the essay in much less time. You can gather all the information regarding the topic i.e. Knowledge is Power, and then start writing. Here are the points that you can add in the essay: 

In the introduction, write mainly about that specific proverb, i.e. Knowledge is Power, to give your reader an idea of what you are reading. 

When you come to the main body, add relevant points and explain your opinions on the topic. For example, you can write about why knowledge is considered powerful or the benefits of knowledge. 

Try adding quotes related to the topic in your essay to make it more impactful. You can use these quotes before your opening statement or support the information in the main body. 

While writing your conclusion, add a broad statement that summarizes the essay. Do not add any new ideas or information in the conclusion. You only have to sum up the entire Knowledge is Power Essay at this stage.    

FAQs on Knowledge is Power Essay

1. How Do You Define Knowledge?

Knowledge means understanding of facts, information, description and skills. It refers to awareness of something gained by education or experience. Here are the three different types of knowledge: 

Explicit Knowledge: It refers to the type of knowledge that can be easily documented, stored, curated, and accessed. For example, information available in textbooks, the internet, etc. 

Implicit Knowledge: The practical application of explicit knowledge is known as implicit knowledge. For example, how to drive a car or how to swim. 

Tacit Knowledge: Any knowledge gained from personal experiences and context is known as tacit knowledge. For example, body language, leadership, humour, etc.  

2. Why is Knowledge Considered Powerful?

Knowledge is powerful because a man can mobilize his life into the right direction. Knowledge can be both creator and destructive of our society. Through knowledge only, one can differentiate between right and wrong and make an informed decision. It also helps you plan your future and takes you on the path to success. With more knowledge, you will be able to overcome your weaknesses and gain more self-confidence. It encourages a positive attitude towards life and keeps you motivated to survive and thrive in the real world.

3. Mention Two Benefits Of Knowledge.

Knowledge is something that you gain throughout your life. It comes with an infinite number of benefits and keeps you on the right track. Knowledge encourages you to act morally and help others in any way possible. Moreover, it boosts your confidence to face any difficulty without being dependent on others. The two benefits of knowledge are:

Knowledge shapes our personality and behavior with others.

Knowledge with proper education can provide better governance to a nation.

4. Why is Less Knowledge Dangerous?

Less knowledge or half knowledge is very dangerous as it leads a man to a benighted condition for the rest of his life. He will never be able to excel in any field to the fullest. Less knowledge can mislead a person into making wrong decisions that have a negative impact on his/her life. Usually, people with less knowledge are only aware of the major aspects of a subject. They do not focus on the minor aspects, which gives them an unbalanced view of that particular subject.

5. From where can I get the Knowledge is Power Essay?

You can get the Knowledge is Power Essay from Vedantu’s official website and mobile app. Vedantu provides you with the Knowledge is Power Essay without charging you anything. You can just visit our website and search for the essay to get access to it. Moreover, we offer a huge variety of study material for the English language to help students get better at the subject. You will find various topics of grammar, letter writing, speech writing, and much more only on Vedantu.com. Use all this study material to improve your writing skills and gain more knowledge about the English language.

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, how to write an introduction paragraph in 3 steps.

General Education

It’s the roadmap to your essay, it’s the forecast for your argument, it’s...your introduction paragraph, and writing one can feel pretty intimidating. The introduction paragraph is a part of just about every kind of academic writing , from persuasive essays to research papers. But that doesn’t mean writing one is easy!

If trying to write an intro paragraph makes you feel like a Muggle trying to do magic, trust us: you aren’t alone. But there are some tips and tricks that can make the process easier—and that’s where we come in.

In this article, we’re going to explain how to write a captivating intro paragraph by covering the following info:  

• A discussion of what an introduction paragraph is and its purpose in an essay
• An overview of the most effective introduction paragraph format, with explanations of the three main parts of an intro paragraph
• An analysis of real intro paragraph examples, with a discussion of what works and what doesn’t
• A list of four top tips on how to write an introduction paragraph

Are you ready? Let’s begin!

What Is an Introduction Paragraph? 

An introduction paragraph is the first paragraph of an essay , paper, or other type of academic writing. Argumentative essays , book reports, research papers, and even personal  essays are common types of writing that require an introduction paragraph. Whether you’re writing a research paper for a science course or an argumentative essay for English class , you’re going to have to write an intro paragraph. 

So what’s the purpose of an intro paragraph? As a reader’s first impression of your essay, the intro paragraph should introduce the topic of your paper. 

Your introduction will also state any claims, questions, or issues that your paper will focus on. This is commonly known as your paper’s thesis . This condenses the overall point of your paper into one or two short sentences that your reader can come back and reference later.

But intro paragraphs need to do a bit more than just introduce your topic. An intro paragraph is also supposed to grab your reader’s attention. The intro paragraph is your chance to provide just enough info and intrigue to make your reader say, “Hey, this topic sounds interesting. I think I’ll keep reading this essay!” That can help your essay stand out from the crowd.

In most cases, an intro paragraph will be relatively short. A good intro will be clear, brief, purposeful, and focused. While there are some exceptions to this rule, it’s common for intro paragraphs to consist of three to five sentences . 

Effectively introducing your essay’s topic, purpose, and getting your reader invested in your essay sounds like a lot to ask from one little paragraph, huh? In the next section, we’ll demystify the intro paragraph format by breaking it down into its core parts . When you learn how to approach each part of an intro, writing one won’t seem so scary!

Once you figure out the three parts of an intro paragraph, writing one will be a piece of cake!

The 3 Main Parts of an Intro Paragraph

In general, an intro paragraph is going to have three main parts: a hook, context, and a thesis statement . Each of these pieces of the intro plays a key role in acquainting the reader with the topic and purpose of your essay. 

Below, we’ll explain how to start an introduction paragraph by writing an effective hook, providing context, and crafting a thesis statement. When you put these elements together, you’ll have an intro paragraph that does a great job of making a great first impression on your audience!

Intro Paragraph Part 1: The Hook

When it comes to how to start an introduction paragraph, o ne of the most common approaches is to start with something called a hook. 

What does hook mean here, though? Think of it this way: it’s like when you start a new Netflix series: you look up a few hours (and a few episodes) later and you say, “Whoa. I guess I must be hooked on this show!” 

That’s how the hook is supposed to work in an intro paragrap h: it should get your reader interested enough that they don’t want to press the proverbial “pause” button while they’re reading it . In other words, a hook is designed to grab your reader’s attention and keep them reading your essay! 

This means that the hook comes first in the intro paragraph format—it’ll be the opening sentence of your intro. 

It’s important to realize  that there are many different ways to write a good hook. But generally speaking, hooks must include these two things: what your topic is, and the angle you’re taking on that topic in your essay. 

One approach to writing a hook that works is starting with a general, but interesting, statement on your topic. In this type of hook, you’re trying to provide a broad introduction to your topic and your angle on the topic in an engaging way . 

For example, if you’re writing an essay about the role of the government in the American healthcare system, your hook might look something like this: 

There's a growing movement to require that the federal government provide affordable, effective healthcare for all Americans. 

This hook introduces the essay topic in a broad way (government and healthcare) by presenting a general statement on the topic. But the assumption presented in the hook can also be seen as controversial, which gets readers interested in learning more about what the writer—and the essay—has to say.

In other words, the statement above fulfills the goals of a good hook: it’s intriguing and provides a general introduction to the essay topic.

Intro Paragraph Part 2: Context

Once you’ve provided an attention-grabbing hook, you’ll want to give more context about your essay topic. Context refers to additional details that reveal the specific focus of your paper. So, whereas the hook provides a general introduction to your topic, context starts helping readers understand what exactly you’re going to be writing about

You can include anywhere from one to several sentences of context in your intro, depending on your teacher’s expectations, the length of your paper, and complexity of your topic. In these context-providing sentences, you want to begin narrowing the focus of your intro. You can do this by describing a specific issue or question about your topic that you’ll address in your essay. It also helps readers start to understand why the topic you’re writing about matters and why they should read about it. 

So, what counts as context for an intro paragraph? Context can be any important details or descriptions that provide background on existing perspectives, common cultural attitudes, or a specific situation or controversy relating to your essay topic. The context you include should acquaint your reader with the issues, questions, or events that motivated you to write an essay on your topic...and that your reader should know in order to understand your thesis. 

For instance, if you’re writing an essay analyzing the consequences of sexism in Hollywood, the context you include after your hook might make reference to the #metoo and #timesup movements that have generated public support for victims of sexual harassment. 

The key takeaway here is that context establishes why you’re addressing your topic and what makes it important. It also sets you up for success on the final piece of an intro paragraph: the thesis statement.

Elle Woods' statement offers a specific point of view on the topic of murder...which means it could serve as a pretty decent thesis statement!

Intro Paragraph Part 3: The Thesis

The final key part of how to write an intro paragraph is the thesis statement. The thesis statement is the backbone of your introduction: it conveys your argument or point of view on your topic in a clear, concise, and compelling way . The thesis is usually the last sentence of your intro paragraph. 

Whether it’s making a claim, outlining key points, or stating a hypothesis, your thesis statement will tell your reader exactly what idea(s) are going to be addressed in your essay. A good thesis statement will be clear, straightforward, and highlight the overall point you’re trying to make.

Some instructors also ask students to include an essay map as part of their thesis. An essay map is a section that outlines the major topics a paper will address. So for instance, say you’re writing a paper that argues for the importance of public transport in rural communities. Your thesis and essay map might look like this: 

Having public transport in rural communities helps people improve their economic situation by giving them reliable transportation to their job, reducing the amount of money they spend on gas, and providing new and unionized work .

The underlined section is the essay map because it touches on the three big things the writer will talk about later. It literally maps out the rest of the essay!

So let’s review: Your thesis takes the idea you’ve introduced in your hook and context and wraps it up. Think of it like a television episode: the hook sets the scene by presenting a general statement and/or interesting idea that sucks you in. The context advances the plot by describing the topic in more detail and helping readers understand why the topic is important. And finally, the thesis statement provides the climax by telling the reader what you have to say about the topic. 

The thesis statement is the most important part of the intro. Without it, your reader won’t know what the purpose of your essay is! And for a piece of writing to be effective, it needs to have a clear purpose. Your thesis statement conveys that purpose , so it’s important to put careful thought into writing a clear and compelling thesis statement. 

How To Write an Introduction Paragraph: Example and Analysis

Now that we’ve provided an intro paragraph outline and have explained the three key parts of an intro paragraph, let’s take a look at an intro paragraph in action.

To show you how an intro paragraph works, we’ve included a sample introduction paragraph below, followed by an analysis of its strengths and weaknesses.

Example of Introduction Paragraph

While college students in the U.S. are struggling with how to pay for college, there is another surprising demographic that’s affected by the pressure to pay for college: families and parents. In the face of tuition price tags that total more than $100,000 (as a low estimate), families must make difficult decisions about how to save for their children’s college education. Charting a feasible path to saving for college is further complicated by the FAFSA’s estimates for an “Expected Family Contribution”—an amount of money that is rarely feasible for most American families. Due to these challenging financial circumstances and cultural pressure to give one’s children the best possible chance of success in adulthood, many families are going into serious debt to pay for their children’s college education. The U.S. government should move toward bearing more of the financial burden of college education. 

Example of Introduction Paragraph: Analysis

Before we dive into analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of this example intro paragraph, let’s establish the essay topic. The sample intro indicates that t he essay topic will focus on one specific issue: who should cover the cost of college education in the U.S., and why. Both the hook and the context help us identify the topic, while the thesis in the last sentence tells us why this topic matters to the writer—they think the U.S. Government needs to help finance college education. This is also the writer’s argument, which they’ll cover in the body of their essay. 

Now that we’ve identified the essay topic presented in the sample intro, let’s dig into some analysis. To pin down its strengths and weaknesses, we’re going to use the following three questions to guide our example of introduction paragraph analysis: 

• Does this intro provide an attention-grabbing opening sentence that conveys the essay topic? 
• Does this intro provide relevant, engaging context about the essay topic? 
• Does this intro provide a thesis statement that establishes the writer’s point of view on the topic and what specific aspects of the issue the essay will address? 

Now, let’s use the questions above to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of this sample intro paragraph. 

Does the Intro Have a Good Hook? 

First, the intro starts out with an attention-grabbing hook . The writer starts by presenting  an assumption (that the U.S. federal government bears most of the financial burden of college education), which makes the topic relatable to a wide audience of readers. Also note that the hook relates to the general topic of the essay, which is the high cost of college education. 

The hook then takes a surprising turn by presenting a counterclaim : that American families, rather than students, feel the true burden of paying for college. Some readers will have a strong emotional reaction to this provocative counterclaim, which will make them want to keep reading! As such, this intro provides an effective opening sentence that conveys the essay topic. 

Does the Intro Give Context?

T he second, third, and fourth sentences of the intro provide contextual details that reveal the specific focus of the writer’s paper . Remember: the context helps readers start to zoom in on what the paper will focus on, and what aspect of the general topic (college costs) will be discussed later on. 

The context in this intro reveals the intent and direction of the paper by explaining why the issue of families financing college is important. In other words, the context helps readers understand why this issue matters , and what aspects of this issue will be addressed in the paper.  

To provide effective context, the writer refers to issues (the exorbitant cost of college and high levels of family debt) that have received a lot of recent scholarly and media attention. These sentences of context also elaborate on the interesting perspective included in the hook: that American families are most affected by college costs.

Does the Intro Have a Thesis? 

Finally, this intro provides a thesis statement that conveys the writer’s point of view on the issue of financing college education. This writer believes that the U.S. government should do more to pay for students’ college educations. 

However, the thesis statement doesn’t give us any details about why the writer has made this claim or why this will help American families . There isn’t an essay map that helps readers understand what points the writer will make in the essay.

To revise this thesis statement so that it establishes the specific aspects of the topic that the essay will address, the writer could add the following to the beginning of the thesis statement:

The U.S. government should take on more of the financial burden of college education because other countries have shown this can improve education rates while reducing levels of familial poverty.

Check out the new section in bold. Not only does it clarify that the writer is talking about the pressure put on families, it touches on the big topics the writer will address in the paper: improving education rates and reduction of poverty. So not only do we have a clearer argumentative statement in this thesis, we also have an essay map!  

So, let’s recap our analysis. This sample intro paragraph does an effective job of providing an engaging hook and relatable, interesting context, but the thesis statement needs some work ! As you write your own intro paragraphs, you might consider using the questions above to evaluate and revise your work. Doing this will help ensure you’ve covered all of your bases and written an intro that your readers will find interesting!

4 Tips for How To Write an Introduction Paragraph

Now that we’ve gone over an example of introduction paragraph analysis, let’s talk about how to write an introduction paragraph of your own. Keep reading for four tips for writing a successful intro paragraph for any essay. 

Tip 1: Analyze Your Essay Prompt

If you’re having trouble with how to start an introduction paragraph, analyze your essay prompt! Most teachers give you some kind of assignment sheet, formal instructions, or prompt to set the expectations for an essay they’ve assigned, right? Those instructions can help guide you as you write your intro paragraph!

Because they’ll be reading and responding to your essay, you want to make sure you meet your teacher’s expectations for an intro paragraph . For instance, if they’ve provided specific instructions about how long the intro should be or where the thesis statement should be located, be sure to follow them!

The type of paper you’re writing can give you clues as to how to approach your intro as well. If you’re writing a research paper, your professor might expect you to provide a research question or state a hypothesis in your intro. If you’re writing an argumentative essay, you’ll need to make sure your intro overviews the context surrounding your argument and your thesis statement includes a clear, defensible claim. 

Using the parameters set out by your instructor and assignment sheet can put some easy-to-follow boundaries in place for things like your intro’s length, structure, and content. Following these guidelines can free you up to focus on other aspects of your intro... like coming up with an exciting hook and conveying your point of view on your topic!

Tip 2: Narrow Your Topic

You can’t write an intro paragraph without first identifying your topic. To make your intro as effective as possible, you need to define the parameters of your topic clearly—and you need to be specific. 

For example, let’s say you want to write about college football. “NCAA football” is too broad of a topic for a paper. There is a lot to talk about in terms of college football! It would be tough to write an intro paragraph that’s focused, purposeful, and engaging on this topic. In fact, if you did try to address this whole topic, you’d probably end up writing a book!

Instead, you should narrow broad topics to  identify a specific question, claim, or issue pertaining to some aspect of NCAA football for your intro to be effective. So, for instance, you could frame your topic as, “How can college professors better support NCAA football players in academics?” This focused topic pertaining to NCAA football would give you a more manageable angle to discuss in your paper.

So before you think about writing your intro, ask yourself: Is my essay topic specific, focused, and logical? Does it convey an issue or question that I can explore over the course of several pages? Once you’ve established a good topic, you’ll have the foundation you need to write an effective intro paragraph . 

Once you've figured out your topic, it's time to hit the books!

Tip 3: Do Your Research

This tip is tightly intertwined with the one above, and it’s crucial to writing a good intro: do your research! And, guess what? This tip applies to all papers—even ones that aren’t technically research papers. 

Here’s why you need to do some research: getting the lay of the land on what others have said about your topic—whether that’s scholars and researchers or the mass media— will help you narrow your topic, write an engaging hook, and provide relatable context. 

You don't want to sit down to write your intro without a solid understanding of the different perspectives on your topic. Whether those are the perspectives of experts or the general public, these points of view will help you write your intro in a way that is intriguing and compelling for your audience of readers. 

Tip 4: Write Multiple Drafts

Some say to write your intro first; others say write it last. The truth is, there isn’t a right or wrong time to write your intro—but you do need to have enough time to write multiple drafts . 

Oftentimes, your professor will ask you to write multiple drafts of your paper, which gives you a built-in way to make sure you revise your intro. Another approach you could take is to write out a rough draft of your intro before you begin writing your essay, then revise it multiple times as you draft out your paper. 

Here’s why this approach can work: as you write your paper, you’ll probably come up with new insights on your topic that you didn’t have right from the start. You can use these “light bulb” moments to reevaluate your intro and make revisions that keep it in line with your developing essay draft. 

Once you’ve written your entire essay, consider going back and revising your intro again . You can ask yourself these questions as you evaluate your intro: 

• Is my hook still relevant to the way I’ve approached the topic in my essay?
• Do I provide enough appropriate context to introduce my essay? 
• Now that my essay is written, does my thesis statement still accurately reflect the point of view that I present in my essay?

Using these questions as a guide and putting your intro through multiple revisions will help ensure that you’ve written the best intro for the final draft of your essay. Also, revising your writing is always a good thing to do—and this applies to your intro, too!

What's Next?

Your college essays also need great intro paragraphs. Here’s a guide that focuses on how to write the perfect intro for your admissions essays. 

Of course, the intro is just one part of your college essay . This article will teach you how to write a college essay that makes admissions counselors sit up and take notice.

Are you trying to write an analytical essay? Our step-by-step guide can help you knock it out of the park.

Ashley Sufflé Robinson has a Ph.D. in 19th Century English Literature. As a content writer for PrepScholar, Ashley is passionate about giving college-bound students the in-depth information they need to get into the school of their dreams.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

Want a daily email of lesson plans that span all subjects and age groups?

The power of a great introduction - carolyn mohr.

653,675 Views

40,282 Questions Answered

Let’s Begin…

Never underestimate the power of an intriguing start. When analyzing the literary greats like Charles Dickens and Kurt Vonnegut, be inspired by their craft and learn how to write a tantalizing introduction and strong thesis.

About TED-Ed Animations

TED-Ed Animations feature the words and ideas of educators brought to life by professional animators. Are you an educator or animator interested in creating a TED-Ed Animation? Nominate yourself here »

Meet The Creators

• Educator Carolyn Mohr
• Animator Seesaw Studios
• Narrator Carolyn Mohr

More from The Writer's Workshop

How to make a sad story funny

Lesson duration 04:39

395,109 Views

First person vs. Second person vs. Third person

Lesson duration 05:20

1,064,702 Views

The 5 types of text structure

Lesson duration 03:50

3,135,236 Views

The importance of setting in a story

Lesson duration 03:14

1,164,384 Views

The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility

This essay about the influence of ethos in literary works highlights how authors use credibility and ethical appeal to shape persuasion and trust. Through examples like Nick Carraway in “The Great Gatsby” and Atticus Finch in “To Kill a Mockingbird,” it explains how reliable narrators and characters establish trust. It also discusses the role of the author’s reputation and ethical themes in enhancing a narrative’s persuasiveness and impact.

How it works

The influence of ethos in literary works is a potent force, deeply affecting persuasion and credibility. Ethos, one of Aristotle’s three modes of persuasion, centers around the character and credibility of the author or speaker. In literature, ethos is reflected through the authority, trustworthiness, and ethical appeal of the narrative voice or characters, significantly shaping the audience’s perception and interpretation of the text.

Ethos in literature plays an essential role by establishing a bond between the author and the reader, fostering trust and a sense of reliability.

This trust is vital in persuading the audience to accept the themes, messages, and arguments presented within a literary work. Ethos operates on various levels in literature, from the narrative voice and character development to the broader context of the author’s reputation and societal standing.

The narrative voice is a primary conduit for ethos in literary works. A narrator’s reliability, honesty, and moral character profoundly impact how the story is received. For instance, in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby,” the narrator, Nick Carraway, is portrayed as a trustworthy and objective observer. Nick’s credibility enables readers to navigate the morally ambiguous world of Jay Gatsby and the Jazz Age with confidence in his account. Fitzgerald carefully constructs Nick’s character as an ethical and reliable narrator, whose observations and judgments are considered credible by the audience. This use of ethos amplifies the persuasiveness of the novel’s critique of the American Dream and societal moral decay.

In a similar vein, in Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird,” the character of Atticus Finch embodies ethos. As a lawyer and father, Atticus is depicted as a paragon of virtue, integrity, and wisdom. His ethical stance and moral courage in defending Tom Robinson, an African American falsely accused of raping a white woman, establish his credibility and authority. Atticus’s ethos not only persuades other characters within the narrative but also profoundly influences readers’ understanding of justice, racism, and morality. His character serves as a moral compass, guiding the audience through the complex social issues presented in the novel.

Authors also establish ethos through their own reputation and societal standing. The author’s background, expertise, and previous works contribute to the credibility of their current literary endeavors. For example, George Orwell’s experiences as a journalist and his critical perspectives on totalitarianism lend significant ethos to his dystopian novel “1984.” Orwell’s authoritative voice and firsthand knowledge of political oppression enhance the novel’s persuasive power and credibility. Readers are more inclined to accept the grim realities depicted in “1984” due to Orwell’s established ethos as a commentator on social and political issues.

Ethos in literature is not limited to individual characters or narrators but extends to the broader themes and ethical considerations within a work. Literary texts often engage with ethical dilemmas and moral questions, inviting readers to reflect on their own values and beliefs. By presenting characters and situations that resonate with universal ethical principles, authors persuade readers to engage with the text on a deeper level.

William Shakespeare’s plays frequently explore the complexities of human morality and ethical decision-making. In “Hamlet,” the eponymous character grapples with questions of justice, revenge, and moral integrity. Hamlet’s introspective soliloquies and ethical dilemmas invite the audience to consider the nature of right and wrong. Shakespeare’s nuanced portrayal of Hamlet’s internal struggle establishes a strong ethos, compelling the audience to empathize with the character’s moral quandaries and consider broader ethical implications.

Ethos also plays a crucial role in non-fiction literary works, where the author’s credibility is paramount. In memoirs, autobiographies, and essays, the author’s personal experiences and ethical stance directly influence the audience’s perception of the text. For instance, in “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” Maya Angelou’s powerful narrative voice and honest recounting of her life experiences establish a profound ethos. Angelou’s credibility as a writer and her candid exploration of themes such as racism, trauma, and identity engage readers on an intimate and persuasive level.

In persuasive essays and rhetorical works, ethos is a foundational element that enhances the author’s argument. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” exemplifies the power of ethos in persuasive writing. King’s authority as a civil rights leader, coupled with his articulate and morally grounded arguments, establishes a compelling ethos. His credibility and ethical appeal persuade readers to consider the justice of his cause and the urgency of civil rights issues. The letter’s persuasive power is rooted in King’s ethos, as he effectively combines personal integrity with logical and emotional appeals.

Moreover, ethos in literature extends beyond the text itself to encompass the broader cultural and historical context. The societal values and norms of a particular time period influence the reception and interpretation of literary works. Authors who align their narratives with prevailing ethical standards or challenge societal norms can significantly impact their audience’s perception.

In summary, the influence of ethos in literary works is multifaceted and crucial in shaping persuasion and credibility. Through the narrative voice, character development, authorial reputation, and engagement with ethical themes, literature employs ethos to establish trust and authority. This trust, in turn, enhances the persuasiveness of the narrative, allowing readers to connect with the text on a deeper level. Whether through the reliability of a narrator, the moral integrity of a character, or the credibility of an author, ethos remains a central element in the art of literary persuasion. As readers, we are continually influenced by the ethical appeals woven into the fabric of literary works, guiding our understanding of the world and our place within it.

Cite this page

The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility. (2024, May 21). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/

"The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility." PapersOwl.com , 21 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/ [Accessed: 22 May. 2024]

"The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility." PapersOwl.com, May 21, 2024. Accessed May 22, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/

"The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility," PapersOwl.com , 21-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/. [Accessed: 22-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Power of Ethos in Literary Works: Persuasion and Credibility . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-power-of-ethos-in-literary-works-persuasion-and-credibility/ [Accessed: 22-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

From Blank Page to Engaging Opener: Expert Tips for Essay Introductions

Table of contents

Starting an essay is simple but not easy. Though the purpose of your introduction may be to give readers a clear idea of what your paper will be about, it can go beyond that.

First impressions matter. Your essay introduction is the very first paragraph of your paper, making it the first thing your reader will see in your essay.

For some professors, your introductory paragraph may be what they base their grading decision on. So, if you plan to write an essay that stands out, you need to start your essay on a strong note.

A good introduction sets up your argument and tells readers what they can expect, but a solid essay introduction should also show readers why they should be expecting it. This is important to capture your reader’s attention and get them to read further.

When writing an introduction, the general rule is to use a broad to a specific structure. Here’s a quick guide to starting an essay and the steps to writing a solid introduction.

5 Key Elements Every Essay Introduction Needs

Slap a few lines together, and voila, you might think, but that’s not how you should approach writing introductory paragraphs. Here are some key elements of a good introduction.

1. Engaging hook

The very first sentence of your essay matters. It decides if the readers will continue reading, so you want to keep it intriguing to make for an interesting essay .

Ideally, you want to start your essay by having the first sentence relate directly to the issue , question or problem highlighted by the essay topic.

Use a punchline that talks about your topic directly. As a rule of thumb, you want to write something clear and concise that tells your reader why it’s interesting.

Avoid starting your essay with broad claims or general statements of fact. Make sure your first statement is able to evoke emotions while getting right to the point.

Further in the article, we’ve shared a few creative ways to start your essay.

2. Deliver context and background information

Your introduction must include some background information on the particular topic. This is because, for readers, context shapes the meaning of where the work is situated.

Having the definition and explanation of specific vocabulary will let readers better understand what your topic and subject matter are about.

Here, you should explain it to let readers understand the fundamental problems being addressed, and why it is an important issue we should discuss.

Provide only relevant information that is interesting or related to the scope of your issue.

3. Limit the scope of your discussion

It’s impossible to cover everything in a topic. That’s why your introduction also needs to tell your readers - what is the main focus of your essay.

Highlight the parameters of your topic by noting the extent that you will be exploring in your paper, and define what your essay is not going to cover.

This is important to make sure your essay has a central focus. Because if your scope is too broad, your work might be too messy or not feasible. Likewise, if it is too narrow, your paper may not be able to address your main argument adequately.

To get a better idea about the scope of your topic, look at your outline. See if there is an excess of material or lack thereof.

4. Provide a clear thesis statement

One of the key elements in any introduction is the thesis statement. This is the main argument to your essay prompt and should inform the rest of your essay.

Stating your idea or argument can be a single sentence to the essay question but you should also include 2 to 3 sentences explaining the answer in more detail.

In any case, your thesis should be easy to spot and is commonly placed as the last sentence of your introduction.

5. Outline the structure of your essay

If your essay will be covering different segments and parts of a topic, it would be helpful to be providing an overview of how you are approaching the essay.

Mapping your essay is especially helpful in longer pieces as it can give a clear sense of the direction your argument will take.

Now that you understand the important elements of an essay let’s look into some creative ways you can adopt when starting an essay.

7 Inventive Ways to Begin Your Essay with Impact

There is no one formula for writing a good introduction, but here are some of the best ways you can write an engaging hook.

1. Open your essay with a question

One of the most common ways of starting an essay is by asking a question. When you ask the reader something, they will tend to visualize and start thinking about it.

However, make sure it’s a question where the audience needs to read more of the essay to get an answer. For example, “Do you want to know the secrets of writing a Grade A essay?” Students who are interested will definitely continue reading to find out more.

On the other hand, you can also begin your essay with a rhetorical question like “What is the world without connection?” Using a rhetorical question can prompt your readers to reflect and show where you are headed with your essay.

2. Starting an essay with a quote

Beginning your essay with a memorable quote is also another good idea, especially if it is from a profound or influential person. However, make sure the quote fits your purpose and the framework of your essay.

Avoid overused quotes and cliches that everyone is familiar with because it does not contain an element of surprise and may let them think this is just another one of those essays. Similarly, don’t choose a quote that is so overly complicated your audience can’t understand or relate to it.

Instead, find quotes from reputable resources and make sure to explain or connect them in a way that supports your thesis statement.

3. Use numbers or statistics

Quoting numbers or statistics derived from related studies and research can also make for a strong opening.

For example: “ Do you know that one-third of adults are still sleeping with a comfort object? ”.

These are just some of the more surprising examples, but using statistics and numbers is an easy way to show readers the bigger picture of the situation or scenario.

That is, in other words, how important or severe the case is.

4. Start with storytelling

A fantastic story or personal narrative is one of the most effective hooks. Set the scene of your story by providing a compelling description talking about the who, when, where, and what.

If you are writing a creative or descriptive essay, you can also include sensory details like what you smell or feel from your touch to further captivate your audience.

However, if it is not a necessary part of your essay, keep your story short.

Though readers may love a good story, long narratives can take up a considerable chunk of your essay word count, so make sure to use it moderately.

5. Reveal a common misconception

“The Chinese did not invent fortune cookies!”.

Revealing a common misconception can pique people’s interest in learning more. We can hardly resist our curiosity, especially when a statement describes a contrast between beliefs and reality.

That’s why if your topic presents a standard view that is wrong, you can use this as a chance to write an engaging hook.

6. Use a literary device

Good for avoiding bland, boring essays — literary devices can add a lot of colour to your article, especially if you are working on a piece of creative writing.

It is one of the more engaging hooks because it makes your readers view the topic from a different perspective. For example, linking the community to the human body to describe the interdependent components in a society.

The best way to use this technique is by introducing a metaphor or simile in the introduction and then weaving connections between the symbol and the subject throughout the entire essay.

You can eventually bring the idea back together in the conclusion paragraph to add a circular structure to the writing, making for an exceptional essay.

7. Use a joke or riddle

How many students does it take to write an interesting essay? Just one, and that’s you.

Last but not least, one of the hardest but arguably most effective ways of starting an essay is by using a joke or riddle.

By introducing a clever joke or riddle into your introductory paragraph, your readers or lecturer will likely laugh and feel good about your essay.

You can easily find a joke by doing a web search of your topic with the word ‘joke.’ An important note to take when doing this is to make sure your readers can relate to it or find it humorous, or else it will just likely become awkward.

Ultimately, how you go about starting an essay will set the tone for the whole essay, so make sure you spend more time on writing an effective introduction.

At last, both introductions and conclusions are important components of an essay.

Now that we are done with the ways you can consider starting an essay, the next chapter will teach you all about closing an essay.

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

Perfecting Your Paper’s Grammar, Style, and Format (APA, MLA, etc.).

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

Essay on Power of Education

Students are often asked to write an essay on Power of Education in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Power of Education

Introduction.

Education is a powerful tool that shapes our lives. It is like a key that opens the door to knowledge, shaping our thoughts, actions, and future.

The Role of Education

Education helps us understand the world around us. It teaches us to read, write, and communicate effectively, skills that are essential for a successful life.

Education and Society

Education plays a critical role in society. It helps to eradicate social evils, promote equality and justice, making society a better place.

In conclusion, the power of education is immense. It can transform individuals and societies, paving the way for a brighter future.

250 Words Essay on Power of Education

The intrinsic value of education.

Education is a powerful tool that has the potential to transform lives and societies. It is a catalyst for personal growth, providing the knowledge and skills necessary to navigate the world and engage with others in a meaningful way. It fosters critical thinking, creativity, and intellectual curiosity, enabling individuals to understand and challenge the status quo.

Education and Social Empowerment

The power of education extends beyond personal development; it is a key driver of social change. Education promotes equality and social justice by providing opportunities for all, regardless of their social or economic background. It equips individuals with the tools to challenge societal norms, combat prejudice, and advocate for change.

Education as an Economic Engine

On an economic level, education fuels innovation and productivity. It equips individuals with the skills and knowledge necessary to contribute to the economy, fostering economic growth and prosperity. It also plays a crucial role in reducing poverty and inequality, as it provides individuals with the skills needed to secure decent employment and improve their living conditions.

The Future of Education

As our world continues to evolve, the power of education will only grow. With the advent of technology and the rise of the knowledge economy, education will play an increasingly important role in equipping individuals with the skills and knowledge necessary to thrive in a rapidly changing world.

In conclusion, education is a powerful tool for personal, social, and economic development. It is a catalyst for change, driving social progress and economic growth, and equipping individuals with the skills and knowledge necessary to navigate an increasingly complex world.

500 Words Essay on Power of Education

Education is a cornerstone of society, shaping the minds and hearts of individuals across the globe. It is a powerful tool that equips people with knowledge, skills, and values, empowering them to navigate the world and contribute to societal progress. The power of education is not only about the acquisition of information but also about the transformation of individuals and societies.

Education as a Catalyst for Personal Growth

Education is a catalyst for personal growth and development. It is the key to unlocking one’s potential, fostering critical thinking, and nurturing creativity. The knowledge and skills acquired through education enable individuals to understand the world better, make informed decisions, and solve complex problems. Education also promotes self-awareness and self-confidence, empowering individuals to pursue their passions and dreams.

Education and Social Transformation

Education is a potent tool for social transformation. It fosters understanding and tolerance, breaking down barriers of prejudice and discrimination. Education promotes social cohesion and inclusivity, creating societies where diversity is celebrated and respected. It also plays a crucial role in reducing poverty and inequality by providing individuals with the skills and knowledge needed for gainful employment and economic independence.

Education and Sustainable Development

Education is instrumental in achieving sustainable development. It equips individuals with the knowledge and skills necessary to address complex global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and inequality. Education fosters innovation and creativity, driving scientific and technological advancements that contribute to sustainable development. Furthermore, education promotes responsible citizenship, empowering individuals to make decisions that benefit both people and the planet.

The Power of Lifelong Learning

In the rapidly changing world, the power of education extends beyond formal schooling. Lifelong learning, which encompasses all learning activities undertaken throughout life, is becoming increasingly important. It enables individuals to adapt to changes, acquire new skills, and remain competitive in the job market. Lifelong learning also promotes personal fulfillment and well-being, contributing to a more engaged and active society.

In conclusion, the power of education is immense. It is a tool for personal growth, social transformation, and sustainable development. It empowers individuals, transforms societies, and shapes the future. As Nelson Mandela once said, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Therefore, it is vital to ensure access to quality education for all, fostering a world where everyone has the opportunity to learn, grow, and thrive.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Online Education
• Essay on National Education Day
• Essay on Liberal Education

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Solar Energy Essay

500 words essay on solar energy.

Solar energy is the energy which the earth receives from the sun which converts into thermal or electrical energy. Moreover, solar energy influences the climate of the earth and weather to sustain life. It has great potential which we must use to our advantage fully. Through the solar energy essay, we will look at this in detail and know more about it carefully.

Importance of Solar Energy

Solar energy is very important as it is a clean and renewable source of energy. Thus, this means it will not damage the earth in any way. In addition, it is available on a daily basis. Similarly, it does not cause any kind of pollution.

As it is environment-friendly, it is very important in today’s world. It is so much better than other pollution sources of energies like fossil fuels and more. Further, it has low maintenance costs.

Solar panel systems do not require a lot of solar power energy. Moreover, they come with 5-10 years of warranty which is very beneficial. Most importantly, it reduces the cost of electricity bills.

In other words, we use it mostly for cooking and heating up our homes. Thus, it drops the utility bills cost and helps us save some extra money. Further, solar energy also has many possible applications.

A lot of communities and villages make use of solar energy to power their homes, offices and more. Further, we can use it in areas where there is no access to a power grid. For instance, distilling the water is Africa and powering the satellites in space.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Uses of Solar Energy

In today’s world, we use solar energy for a lot of things. Firstly, we use solar power for many things as small as calculators to as big as power plants which power the entire city. We use the most common solar power for small things.

For instance, many calculators use solar cells to operate, thus they never run out of batteries. Moreover, we also have some watches which run on solar cells. Similarly, there are also radios which run on solar cells.

Thus, you see so many things run on solar power. All satellites run on solar power otherwise they won’t be able to function. Moreover, large desalinization plants make use of solar power if there is little or no freshwater.

In addition, many countries have solar furnaces. We also use solar power commercially and residentially. You will find its uses in transportation service too. In fact, soon, solar powers will also be out on the streets.

Conclusion of Solar Energy Essay

To sum it up, solar energy is a cost-effective means of energy which is quite useful for people that have huge families. When we install solar panels, we can get solar energy which will reduce electricity costs and allow us to lead a sustainable lifestyle. Thus, we must all try to use it well to our advantage.

FAQ of Solar Energy Essay

Question 1: What is solar energy in simple words?

Answer 1: Solar energy is basically the transformation of heat, the energy which is derived from the sun. We have been using it for thousands of years in numerous different ways all over the world. The oldest uses of solar energy are for heating, cooking, and drying.

Question 2: What are the advantages of solar energy?

Answer 2: There are many advantages of solar energy. Firstly, it is a renewable source of energy which makes it healthy. Moreover, it also reduces the electricity bills of ours. After that, we can also use it for diverse applications. Further, it also has low maintenance costs.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Volume 70 Masthead
• Volume 69 Masthead
• Volume 68 Masthead
• Volume 67 Masthead
• Volume 66 Masthead
• Volume 65 Masthead
• Volume 64 Masthead
• Volume 63 Masthead
• Volume 62 Masthead
• Volume 61 Masthead
• Volume 60 Masthead
• Volume 59 Masthead
• Volume 58 Masthead
• Volume 57 Masthead
• Volume 56 Masthead
• Volume 55 Masthead
• Volume 54 Masthead
• Volume 53 Masthead
• Volume 52 Masthead
• Volume 51 Masthead
• Volume 50 Masthead
• Sponsorship
• Subscriptions
• Print Archive
• Forthcoming: 2021-2022
• Special Issue: Law Meets World Vol. 68
• Symposia Topics

Introduction: Generating Governance - An Essay Series on Strategies and Challenges in AI Regulation

In this essay series, the authors explore different aspects of emerging AI governance regimes.   Though about quite different topics, the essays have many common threads. Several of the essays demonstrate that many of the difficulties with AI governance are less challenges of AI than challenges of governance generally—navigating power struggles and competing interests, getting buy-in, and avoiding capture. A second theme is the importance of regulatory diffusion and how governance regimes implicitly rely on it. Several of the authors see a vision of diffusion as central to the form of regulation chosen by each government—particularly in the EU’s case, where the government relies on the so-called “Brussels Effect” to assert greater control over global technology and market regulation. Finally, several of the authors examine the EU’s draft AI Act, probably the most globally important pending AI regulation. Specifically, they discuss the impacts of its core focus on risk, an approach that relies heavily on precaution, internal assessments, and enterprise risk management and mitigation, rather than accountability and liability from an oversight body. The choice to use risk management—a choice that the EU is certainly not alone in—has specific consequences that are worth teasing out, and several of the essays here do just that.

Share this:

About the author.

Andrew Selbst is an Assistant Professor at the UCLA School of Law.

Algorithms in Judges’ Hands: Incarceration and Inequity in Broward County, Florida

Abstract Judicial and carceral systems increasingly use criminal risk assessment algorithms to make decisions that affect individual freedoms. While the accuracy, fairness, and legality of these algorithms have come under scrutiny, their tangible...

Can AI Standards Have Politics?

Abstract How to govern a technology like artificial intelligence (AI)? When it comes to designing and deploying fair, ethical, and safe AI systems, standards are a tempting answer. By establishing the best way of doing something, standards might...

Sovereignity and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence

Abstract This Essay explores the concept of sovereignty in relation to artificial intelligence. Although sovereignty has long been used to describe the status of nation states, the concept of sovereignty is used in multiple ways in the digital...

Challenging Minority Rule: Developing AI Standards that Serve the Majority World

Abstract This essay considers the emerging transnational governance frameworks for AI that are being developed under the auspices of a handful of powerful regulatory blocs, namely the United States, the European Union, and China, which are best...

• International
• Schools directory
• Resources Jobs Schools directory News Search

Institutional Power in Checking Out Me History Grade 9

Subject: English

Age range: 14-16

Resource type: Assessment and revision

Last updated

17 May 2024

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

The PDF file consists of a 30/30 marked comparative essay assessment in timed conditions with an introduction of the relevant context of Checking Out Me History and London to achieve top marks in AO3. Has an in-depth sophisticated analysis for key, judicious quotes, an examination of the form and structure in a high level of detail to achieve the top grades. I had wrote the essay during my GCSEs as a main revision tool to practice my timings and was recommended to share my notes because of its high level quality and originality. In the end, I achieved a Grade 9 in both Literautre and Language. The first page is a typed up version and the second page is my actual wrote up response.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

• Top Stories
• Photo Reprints
• Express Login
• Email Updates
• Turn off Notifications
• Capitol Report
• Announcements
• Today in History
• Red Zone Hall of Fame
• Hit the Paws Button
• Columns and Op-eds
• Matter Of Laugh Or Death
• Reflections
• What’s for Dinner
• Open Houses
• Dining Guide
• Newspaper Ads

Special Sections

• Social Marketplace
• Merchandise
• Pets & Animals
• Real Estate for Rent
• Real Estate for Sale
• Transportation – Autos
• Rec Vehicles
• E-Edition Log In
• Subscriber Verification
• Citizens News
• Beatles vs Stones
• Advertising
• Newspaper Delivery
• Your Internet History
• Terms of Use
• Commenting Rules
• Vacation Stop
• Letters to the Editor
• Editorial and Opinion
• News Article
• Sports Department
• Website Issues
• Home Delivery Subscription
• Activate Access
• Purchase a Digital Subscription
• Single-Day Access
• Digital Sub Account Info

• Life & Arts

Lilly Dancyger’s penetrating essays explore the power of female friendships

Who means more to you – your friends or your lovers? In a vivid, thoughtful and nuanced collection of essays, Lilly Dancyger explores the powerful role that female friendships played in her chaotic upbringing marked by her parents’ heroin use and her father’s untimely death when she was only 12.

“First Love: Essays on Friendship” begins with a beautiful paean to her cousin Sabina, who was raped and murdered at age 20 on her way home from a club. As little kids, their older relatives used to call them Snow White and Rose Red after the Grimm’s fairy tale, “two sisters who are not rivals or foils, but simply love each other.”

That simple, uncomplicated love would become the template for a series of subsequent relationships with girls and women that helped her survive her self-destructive adolescence and provided unconditional support as she scrambled to create a new identity as a “hypercompetent” writer, teacher and editor. “It’s true that I’ve never been satisfied with friendships that stay on the surface. That my friends are my family, my truest beloveds, each relationship a world of its own,” she writes in the title essay “First Love.”

The collection stands out not just for its elegant, unadorned writing but also for the way she effortlessly pivots between personal history and spot-on cultural criticism that both comments on and critiques the way that girls and women have been portrayed – and have portrayed themselves – in the media, including on online platforms like Tumblr and Instagram.

For instance, she examines the 1994 Peter Jackson film, “Heavenly Creatures,” based on the true story of two teenage girls who bludgeoned to death one of their mothers. And in the essay “Sad Girls,” about the suicide of a close friend, she analyzes the allure of self-destructive figures like Sylvia Plath and Janis Joplin to a certain type of teen, including herself, who wallows in sadness and wants to make sure “the world knew we were in pain.”

In the last essay, “On Murder Memoirs,” Dancyger considers the runaway popularity of true crime stories as she tries to explain her decision not to attend the trial of the man charged with killing her cousin – even though she was trained as a journalist and wrote a well-regarded book about her late father that relied on investigative reporting. “When I finally sat down to write about Sabina, the story that came out was not about murder at all,” she says. “It was a love story.”

Readers can be thankful that it did.

Best of Summer Grilling

Loca vore: oysters, animals and food trucks, the invisible power of ‘nudging’ is leading diners to cut back..., let’s grill homemade chili dogs, burgers and mushrooms this memorial day, southwestern chicken burgers with tortilla salad, what's for dinner, readers choice 2023, health matters spring 2023, homestyle fall 2023, better living 2023, autumn almanac 2023, latest news, average u.s. vehicle age hits record 12.6 years as high prices force people to..., daily marijuana use outpaces daily drinking in the us, a new study says, norway, ireland and spain say they will recognize a palestinian state, deepening israel’s isolation, watertown voters approve 2024-25 town, school budgets at referendum, homestyle spring 2024, celebrating downtown 2023.

• Community News
• Barkhamsted CT
• Beacon Falls CT
• Bethlehem CT
• Bridgewater CT
• Burlington CT
• Cheshire CT
• Colebrook CT
• Cornwall CT
• Falls Village CT
• Harwinton CT
• Litchfield CT
• Middlebury CT
• Naugatuck CT
• New Britain CT
• New Hartford CT
• New Milford CT
• Plymouth CT
• Prospect CT
• Salisbury CT
• Simsbury CT
• Southbury CT
• Southington CT
• Terryville CT
• Thomaston CT
• Torrington CT
• Washington CT
• Waterbury CT
• Watertown CT
• Woodbury CT

AI Detector

Try the ai content detector..

Our AI Checker is trained on blog posts, wikipedia entries, essays, and more articles found online and across multiple large language models (LLM’s).

Content from AI systems like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini leave traces with certain wordage, structure, and syntax. Our ChatGPT Detector, makes you aware of these probabilities for your content.

The AI Detector will let you know in seconds if what you have reads like it is written by a human or if it sounds like it came from ChatGPT, GPT-4, Bard, Claude, and Gemini. Then, use the AI Humanizer to produce the most humanlike writing possible, giving you undetectable AI content.

AI Detector Score

Want undetectable ai content then ai humanizer has you covered.

The AI Humanizer uses a proprietary mix of 3 AI engines, NLP and semantic analysis algorithms to rewrite sentences and paraphrase paragraphs in a way that is so humanlike it bypasses even the toughest and most accurate AI detection tools - like this one!

ChatGPT Detector.

The ai detector., checks for chatgpt, gpt4, bard, claude & gemini..

The AI Detector, boasting a 98% accuracy rate, discerns whether your text is likely human or AI-generated, including from sources like ChatGPT, GPT4, Claude, and Bard. Our AI Checker is one of the most trusted in the industry. Be aware: AI-detected writing can influence search engine rankings, academic grading, and reader perceptions. The AI Detector, now with a pro version, can transform AI text into undetectable AI content!

AI Detector Introduction

With chatgpt and ai text tools here: use the ai checker to see how your content reads.

We use natural language processing and a trained model using artificial intelligence to detect patterns, forecast probable word choices, as well as understand sentence structure and other characteristics that lead to a higher AI probability within a typical AI Checker.

Want to check if images were created by a machine? Check out our AI image detector.

Human Quality Output

Ai checker + generative ai.

Get unlimited access to the AI Detector pro version along with our Generative AI suite that gives you human level output for just $49!

Unlimited AI detection scans

Unleash the power of the premium AI Checker with unlimited AI detection scans. With up to 50k characters allowed per scan, you can check most types of written content with ease.

Rewrite robotic-sounding content with a click

Use the human-quality rewriter of the premium AI Detector to instantly humanize AI-generated text.

Personalized to your Unique Voice

Generate blogs, books, essays, and more in your own voice with the combination of our fine-tuned models. Then, edit your output easily in the built-in professional editor.

Plan includes

Monthly Stats for the ChatGPT Detector.

This Month's Scans

Human Results

You have 1 more free scan today!

Unlock 50k character scans

Unlock Undetectable Rewrites

Unlock unlimited complete AI scans.

Get the unlimited AI Detector plan and receive:

• Unlimited AI Detection + Paraphrase Analysis
• 25k undetectable rewrite credits
• Bulk Undetectable Rewrites
• Unlimited Image AI Detection
• Scan by URL
• Premium Editor
• Export to Word/Doc/HTML

This is a premium feature. Go premium and unlock:

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The Real Danger if Trump Is Re-elected

By Jacob Heilbrunn

Mr. Heilbrunn is the editor of The National Interest, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and the author, most recently, of “America Last.”

Donald Trump may be regularly depicted as an impetuous toddler in chief, but he appears to possess genuine convictions about international relations. Ever since he gave an interview to Playboy magazine in 1990 decrying Mikhail Gorbachev for failing to hold the Soviet empire together (“not a firm enough hand”) and praising the Chinese Communist leadership for crushing the student uprising at Tiananmen Square (“they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength”), Mr. Trump has extolled authoritarian leaders as possessing the right stuff, while he has dismissed democratic ones as weak and feckless.

This impulse is not a new phenomenon for the United States; it dates back to World War I and World War II, when leading American conservatives praised foreign autocrats such as Kaiser Wilhelm II, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Francisco Franco as their ideological comrades in arms. Until now, however, no modern president has lauded autocracy as a model for America.

During his four years in office, Mr. Trump blustered about alliances and praised foreign dictators but never actually upended America’s foreign policy. That could change in a second Trump administration. The former president is poised to adopt a radical program centered on constructive engagement with foreign strongmen and hostility toward democratic allies; it would include abandoning NATO. It would convert America from a dominant economic and military power into what Mr. Trump purports to abhor — a global loser.

To understand why Mr. Trump’s approach might well differ from the one he took in his initial term, it’s helpful to look at the foreign policy advisers who are being talked about as potential members of a new Trump administration. They can be divided into two camps, which might be called Restorationists and Revisionists.

Restorationists are establishment Republicans such as former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the former national security adviser Robert C. O’Brien who want to go back in time — specifically, to Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy hawkishness and staunch internationalism, which they believe led straight to the fall of the Berlin Wall and victory in the Cold War. During the Trump presidency, they worked overtime to maneuver Mr. Trump in this direction, pushing him to adopt tough stances toward Iran, Russia and China, while maintaining ties to traditional allies in Asia and Europe.

Now, in a variety of interviews, speeches and books, they have been sketching out their vision for a second Trump term — one that would shore up America’s alliances, pursue peace through strength and confront Iran, Russia and China — while camouflaging their crusading Reaganite views in a thin veneer of Trumpian nationalism.

Revisionists, by contrast, are “America First” advocates who espouse a much harder-edged approach and, more often than not, want to go it alone.

Organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and the America First Policy Institute, the two main think tanks vying to staff the next Trump administration, have been vetting potential appointees to establish a government in waiting. As Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general and former Trump national security official, observed in his 2021 memoir, “War by Other Means,” “Our problem was that we did not always know who our enemies were; in some cases, they were our own political appointees.” Mr. Trump himself has loudly complained about many of the advisers he appointed, such as John Bolton.

The conservative activists around him wish to install purists who will preach America First precepts, not least the dogma that America’s security isn’t tied to Europe’s because, as Mr. Trump recently put it, “an ocean” separates the territories.

The Revisionists don’t place as much value on our membership in NATO and are generally ardent proponents of a longstanding dream on the right of a Fortress America that can strike unilaterally whenever and wherever it pleases, unencumbered by nettlesome international alliances and organizations.

Take Mr. Trump’s former ambassador to Germany and acting national intelligence director, Richard Grenell. He has opposed Sweden and Finland’s joining NATO while supporting far-right populists in Serbia, Guatemala and elsewhere. Then there is Russ Vought. A former Trump budget director who might serve as the White House chief of staff, Mr. Vought has decried American aid to Ukraine and stated that he would reassess “the old idea of NATO’s collective defense.”

Mr. Kellogg, who might serve as defense secretary under Mr. Trump, is not a staunch opponent of sending aid to Ukraine, but even he has suggested that we should be prepared to use the threat of cutting it off to push the country into peace talks with Moscow — a recipe for pre-emptive surrender.

Former Trump Defense Department official Elbridge Colby, who is widely seen as a top contender to become national security adviser if Mr. Trump wins re-election, typifies the radicalism of the Revisionist camp. Mr. Colby has insisted that confronting China requires slashing support to Ukraine, and he recently lambasted Britain’s foreign secretary, David Cameron, for “lecturing” Republican politicians about the imperative to assist Kyiv, deeming it “foreign interference.”

Mr. Trump’s own hostility to sending aid to Ukraine suggests that he would most likely be receptive to a deal with President Vladimir Putin of Russia, allowing him to operate freely in Central and Eastern Europe — in the name of stability and peace. By the same token, for all his bluff and bombast about the China threat, Mr. Trump, unlike President Biden, has never indicated that he would stand by Taiwan were China to invade.

He appears to view American alliances with South Korea and Japan with skepticism, if not outright hostility. Less than a year after the Japanese prime minister, Fumio Kishida, met with Mr. Biden in April to announce new security agreements, Mr. Trump could simply decide that he has no intention of honoring America’s commitments abroad.

Rupturing America’s alliances would lead to arms races and nuclear proliferation in Asia and Europe. Nationalists like Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, and Serbia’s president, Aleksandar Vucic, who is known as a “little Putin,” would be emboldened to strengthen their ties with the Kremlin and undermine European security.

And the domestic consequences could be severe. Many of Mr. Trump’s economic advisers, including the former trade chief Robert Lighthizer (a leading candidate to be the Treasury secretary under Mr. Trump), are apparently intent on pursuing the Great Depression redux — waging trade wars with Europe and Asia. They’re floating a host of other risky measures, including curbing the independence of the Federal Reserve, weakening the dollar to try to increase exports, and imposing high tariffs on goods from China and Europe.

While Mr. Biden’s new tariffs on China aggressively target the solar industry and electric cars, Mr. Trump wants to decouple the world’s two largest economies from each other. These measures would weaken the confidence of foreign investors and fuel higher inflation.

With Ukraine and Russia at war, China threatening its neighbors and the Middle East aflame, warnings of a new world war already abound. Add in Mr. Trump’s strongman predilections — purging the State Department, the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. as redoubts of the deep state, cozying up to Mr. Putin, threatening China and reportedly sending assassination squads into Mexico to target drug kingpins — and the odds of a calamity rise.

Would the damage be irreversible? Chancellor Otto von Bismarck of Germany supposedly remarked that “God has a special providence for fools, drunkards and the United States of America.” But Mr. Trump’s return might test even the Almighty’s patience.

Mr. Trump’s economic and foreign policy nationalism would subvert the preponderance of power that America has enjoyed since 1945 and that he has promised to bolster. It has been threatened from without but never from within. As he vows to upend America’s relations with the rest of the globe, the danger is not that Mr. Trump would fail to live up to his principles. It’s that he would.

Jacob Heilbrunn ( @JacobHeilbrunn ) is the editor of The National Interest, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and the author, most recently, of “America Last.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .