Member-only story
Power vs. Strength
Power and strength are often confused for one another, but in truth are diametric opposites, insofar as what they represent, and how they impact people. One builds up the world, while the other invariably tears it down.
To understand the difference between power and strength, we need to look at the psychological motivation that drives the development of each. When we do that, we discover that they are sought for very distinct reasons, and wielded to achieve very divergent aims.
Power
Power is sought in order to win titles, rewards and/or control. Power is also a limited commodity; and it increases, like anything finite, proportional to its scarcity. Not everyone can enjoy the same power, because it is meaningless if everyone has the same amount of it — meaning, no people over whom to exert it. For power to exist, there must be a limited supply, won in contest, whose reward creates a differential — an imbalance — between those who have it and those who do not. That means, power necessitates losers. The absence of power weakens the agency of those without it. The search for power is what is called a finite game — one played to win what others have. Finite games are zero-sum, because there is no net gain or loss — only a trade, or a consolidation. Finally, the goal of a power game is to end it, and be declared the winner at its conclusion. Because of this, all future play constitutes a threat to the power a player has accumulated in the process of past games. Thus the winner of a past power game plays future games only as an act of preservation of the status quo — aka their power base.
The global economy, which aims most of human activity, including titles, income, hierarchies, productivity, influence, competition and control, as well as possessions, resources, physical beauty, sports, inequality, incarceration, laws, political systems, and everything that feeds off of — or into — all of these things, are finite games played to gain power, of some kind — an advantage.
To win.
