In Chart 17.14, the issue of the distribution of scarce resources in society is a central axis of voter distribution. At the right end of the spectrum, there are economic conservatives who advocate minimum taxation and a purely spontaneous and competitive market mechanism for the distribution of wealth and basic services (including health care and education), while at the left end of the spectrum, there are socialists who advocate progressive taxes and a redistribution of wealth and services by the state to create social equality or “equality.” A second axis of the division of electoral preference is linked to social policy and “collective decision-making. At the right end of the spectrum is authoritarianism (law and order, limits of personal autonomy, exclusive citizenship, hierarchical decision-making, etc.), while at the left end of the spectrum is individual autonomy or the expanded democratization of political processes (maximum individual autonomy in politics and culture, equal rights, including citizenship, non-parliamentary democratic participation, etc.). Along the axes and range of political opinion, one could imagine an elliptical distribution of individuals, with the greatest proportion in the middle of each spectrum and much fewer people at extreme ends. The dynamics of political supply in political competition are the result of the way political parties try to position themselves along the spectrum in order to maximize the number of voters who challenge them, while they differ from their political competitors. The modern state is based on the principle of sovereignty and the sovereign system. Sovereignty is the political form in which a single “sovereign” or supreme central authority prevails within a clearly demarcated territory. The sovereign system is the structure that divides the world into distinct and indivisible sovereign territories. Currently, 193 member states are represented at the United Nations (United Nations in 2013). The entire globe is divided into distinct states, with the exception of the oceans and Antarctica.
As mentioned above, power relations generally refer to a kind of strategic relationship between leaders and governed: a series of practices by which states try to determine the lives of their citizens, managers try to control the work of their workers, parents try to direct and educate their children, dog owners try to train their dogs , doctors try to manage the health of their patients. , chess players try to control the movements of their opponents, individuals try to keep their own lives in order, etc. Many of these places of exercise of power are outside our normal conception of power, because they do not seem “political” – they do not raise fundamental questions or differences about an entire way of life – and because the relationship between power and resistance can be very fluid in them. There is a gift and a hold between the leaders` attempts to direct the behaviour of the governed and the attempts of the governed to oppose these directions. In many cases, it is difficult to view relationships as power relations unless they become fixed or authoritarian. This is because our traditional view of power is that one person or group of people has power over another. In other words, when we think of someone, a group or an institution that has power over us, we think of a relationship of domination.