Participation Regardless of Power

In the article by John Gaventa, he introduces the dimensions of power. First being, the power of the pluralists, mentioned by Robert Dahl and Nelson Polsby, where "A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would otherwise not do". In participation the key concept is the interest of the individual to engage themselves in the things they care about the most. Dahl categorizes the activists as homo politicus and the non-activists as homo civicus. These distinctions become important in the way citizens interact in politics. Those who are homo civicus prefer to use their time and money in more efficient ways. Gaventa becomes frustrated that people don't participate if there are no power constraints, then what is holding them back? Therefore, Gevanta believes that A has no power over B because B has different interests which makes the relationship between A and B irrelevant.

The second approach of power is that non-participation is attributed to "ignorance, indifference, and shiftlessness of the people". Here the main concept is that "whoever decides what the game is about also decides who gets in the game". This creates an exclusion of certain individuals meaning that they cannot participate unless they are recognized and invited to express their opinions. This brings forth the importance of power where power is relevant in order to participate and have a voice in politics. This cannot be the case because if these people are feeling excluded and neglected then they would voice their opinions and challenge these powers. Their interests would be heard and action would take place.

The third power is when "A exercises power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B's interests". This third power allows for the consideration of "social forces and historical patterns". The interest of people change and shift all the time so how do we get people to participate in a non-chaotic manner?

Power seems as though once established by the elites it is difficult to change it in favor of the powerless people. It seems as though the people who hold the most power will affect the political system regardless of the needs of citizens, according to Gaventa. The third power seems reasonable because if citizens feel that their interests are threatened then they will challenge the the opposing power to change policies that will benefit their interests. I do not feel that people are excluded or neglected but some people do not feel the urge to engage in politics because they have better things to do with their money and time. People who want to participate can participate regardless of how much power they possess.