(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Talking about power in relation to oneself is considered uncultivated and dangerous. Power is a word that has gradually become inappropriate when talking about democracy and its problems. But that every society must be governed, almost everyone agrees. That we therefore discuss the government of the state, without discussing the phenomenon of power; that's what is dangerous! By forgetting the real concept of "power", we can forget to recognize the phenomenon of power – until one day we discover our powerlessness, or that we possess power we can neither control nor exercise.
There are very few of us who really try to live out democracy today and who use the power we are granted.
There are three kinds of philosophies of power that still surprise status-quodemocracy, because it rarely or never addresses the problem of power, but relies on its institutions and some kind of naturally inherent development. These three philosophies of power are:
To do to people what they cannot do to themselves. This is the fascist view.
To let the individual do what no one else can or must do in him and for him. This is the view of the anarchists.
To let the individual do with others, the other does with him – if they can. This is the opinion of the liberalists.
All three beliefs is deeply pessimistic and rests on different kinds of mistrust of man:
Mistrust 1) That man cannot solve any problems without firm leadership, without drivers, without a sovereign power over him.
Mistrust 2) That every state power is of evil, because no man can withstand power, but interferes with the organic structure of growth and struggle. Therefore, everything should “take care of itself”.
Mistrust 3) That the power of every human being must be controlled by an opposite power.
These forms of mistrust are solved by the power technique:
Violence from above. (For example, technocracy and terror.)
Violence from below. (For example, attacks and ignorance.)
Violence through a petrified distribution of power. (For example, through legal acumen in a tenacious but arbitrary society.)
These three philosophies of power appears constantly in history, but always in new disguises. One will always be able to recognize them in democracy, where they can look like three tendencies trying to keep each other in check. Both social democracy and capital democracy are constantly on their way into one of them, and while this is happening, they are just as suddenly surprised by one of the others; which may seem like a kind of inherent relentless backlash. In societies that tend towards fascism, anarchists always suddenly appear (clear example: the former Spain). In societies that are being dismantled by liberalist roots, there are always fascists who must "fix it". (Clear example: Weimar-Germany.) People who in one moment act like liberals are in the next moment fascists or anarchists, as the case may be. (More difficult example: Here and now! Symptoms: «Farmand» and «NOW» etc.)
It's hard few of us who are really trying to live out democracy today, and who are using the power we are allotted. Therefore, we also do not recognize power when it comes. […] I believe that in order to prepare for democracy and prevent its dangers, we should learn from childhood the following: To rule is to take part in power!
Read the main issue here: «Stein Mehren – cultural radicals and romantic mystic»
Edited for New Time. Originally published in Veien frem (Fossegrimen) issue 1, 1963, reprinted in Kjell Cordtsen (ed.): Blood stains on the road (1967)
