Pre-facing power. The study of power in American political science, 1920–1950

Abstract

Contemporary debates on power usually analyze power through different faces (or dimensions) of power. The first three faces are closely tied to the development of American political science and sociology (Robert A. Dahl; Peter Bachrach and Morton S. Baratz; Steven Lukes). However, the perspective neglects the earlier study of power in the 1920s and 1930s. This article focuses on the concept of power in the works of two influential scholars of that period, Charles E. Merriam and Mary Parker Follett. It concludes that if political scientists in the 1950s and 1960s had paid more attention to Merriam’s and Follett’s work, research on power might have advanced in a more balanced and interesting way than has been the case.

Keywords:

• history of political science
• pluralism
• democracy
• power-over and power-with
• circular power

Notes

1. Introduction to Merriam’s career is based mainly on Karl (1974), Rubinoff (1967) and on the unpublished manuscript by Yoshikazu Nakatani (n.d.).

2. However, as Herbert A. Simon has written, ‘The influence of Merriam upon Lasswell and Gosnell and subsequent graduate students cannot be doubted, but that influence did not start them all off in one direction or fit them to one mold. Hence, followers, but certainly not disciples’ (Simon 1987, p. 9).

3. Introduction to Follett’s career is based mainly on Metcalf and Urwick (1941), Phillips (2010) and Shapiro (2011).

4. It is interesting that Dahl’s definition of power (Dahl 1957) follows the definition by a psychologist, John R.P. French, Jr., ‘the power of A over B (with respect to a given opinion) is equal to the maximum force which A can induce on B minus the maximum resisting force which B can mobilize in the opposite direction’ (French, Jr. 1956, p. 183).