Give a Ruler an inch and they'll take a mile....

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Drevil_million_dollars.jpg

In the last post I discussed the network of the P&C.  I explained that it conducts itself as a democratic process where issues and ideas are discussed and voted upon.  However, there can be times of civil unrest and issues where members forgo democracy and decide to wield their power and veto decisions or make their own rules.

As a result of the creeping autocracy within the P&C, some members avoid meetings, or only come when certain members are absent.  The shift of power from associational to instrumental makes the meeting place into a space where members feel uncomfortable or marginalised when they are disagreed with or subjugated by the person wielding the power (Allen, 2003 p.5).

There are many ways to view the decisions of the cohort and the division of power within the network.  As Wood et al. (2006) points out, there are many ways to view a map, it depends on what you are looking for.  The member wielding the power may have a better understanding of the direction the group, from a financial and or legal standpoint, but cannot explain the reason sufficiently.  It boils down to perception.  What some members perceive to be an important and viable decision, can be seen as costly and nonviable. People observe ideas from different views dependent on their experiences, knowledge and purpose (Wood et al., 2006 p.12).  The flaneur's of this network can perceive their advantage of not fully immersing themselves within the network.

There are “flaneur’s” of the P&C network.  Those, who like Benjamin's Flaneur's of Paris, flounce, in and out of meetings to get an idea of what is going on, but interact very little.  Having access to the P&C Facebook site, by approval only, s/he can flit in and out of the virtual and real networks that are linked to the P&C to keep abreast of the P&C activities.  The flaneur can interact with and obtain information from members and associates without impacting on the P&C directly, but can present their own agenda to be taken to the P&C without actually physically doing so themselves. (Prouty. 2009 par2)

A good example of this discussion could be the Medici Family, Kuttainen (2016. slide 4) referred to. There are people of power and far reaching networks which can influence outcomes. 



References

Allen, J. (2003). Lost Geographies of Power. Oxford, UK. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Kuttainen, V. (2016). BA1002: Our Space:  Networks, Narratives and the making of place, Lecture 4: Maps. [PowerPoint slides].  Retrieved from: https://learnjcu.jcu.edu.au/

Prouty, R. (2009). One Way Street. ‘A turtle on a leash.’ Retrieved from http://www.onewaystreet.typepad.com/one_way_street/2009/10/a-turtle-on-a-leash.html

Wood, D., Kaiser, W.L., & Abrams, B. (2006) Seeing Through Maps:  Many ways to see the world. Oxford, UK.  New Internationalist Publications Ltd.