House of Cards: Power in the Modern State

House of Cards: Power in the Modern State
Capacity, Mills, power, power elite, religion, state

By Ashley Vandehey

https://youtu.be/DjhCemxQmts

            Episode Summary

Frank has a secret meeting in a church late at night, the same day that he makes a presidential decision that cost the lives of American Navy SEALs (an event which draws similarities to Operation Neptune Spear, carried out by SEAL team Six). The man Frank is speaking with, a military priest, tells him he was not chosen to rise to power and greatness. Then, pointing at the crucifix of Jesus says, "He is the only chosen one.” The man leaves and Frank goes to look up to Jesus wherein he says, "Love, that's what you're selling. Well I don't buy it." Frank then spits on Jesus. 
When he goes to wipe it off the figure comes crashing down and shatters all around Frank. As he leaves the church he takes the broken ear of the figure and says, "Well I've got God's ear now."


            Analysis

The Netflix television series House of Cards can do just about whatever it likes since it is not affiliated with a network; this includes addressing faith and religion with a certain vehemence that is not found in traditional network television series. House of Cards is able to confront the intersection of politics and faith like no other. This scene captures power dynamics relative to both the series and state governance. In it we see Frank’s true ethos to power. For a brief moment in this scene, we witness what could be the rediscovery of Frank’s moral compass (since we’re all fairly sure he lost his). But once alone, he commits what a shocking display of sacrilege that would never have been shown on network television. The fact that an episode, and a scene, like this alone cannot be broadcast on network television but through Netflix is additionally telling to who has power over the media. It is also incredibly symbolic towards where power is held in the modern state.

            On a microanalysis level, this scene further shows that the character Frank does not allow any outer power or agenda to surpass or interfere with his own. He worships his own power and capacity to fulfill he wants and needs, and refuses to rely on anyone else. I believe that is because when you rely on someone else, you are inadvertently giving them power over you. Kant referred to true enlightenment as thinking for oneself without needing the guidance of others, so in that respect Frank could be seen as wholly enlightened. Foucault believed that there is a deep and intimate connection between power and knowledge that makes their influence effective. Power in this respect coincides with Marx and Webber’s definition, in that it is the realization of one’s will despite the resistance of others, or in this scene, despite the gospels of Jesus. This scene coincides with another from Season 1 Chapter 13 where Frank says that he prays to himself, for himself. To Frank, his capacity, or ability to possess and carryout power and tasks, is greater than all those around him—save perhaps his wife Claire. The Gospel of Frank Underwood is that power is power, and he can whip anyone to his will whether they’re aware of it or not.

            The cinematography is expressing the power struggle between the modern roles of church and state. For centuries, before the rise of the modern state with the Treaty of Westphalia, the clergy held a majority of power both in government and personal lives. In Wells’s book, “The Power Elite” he dedicates chapters to relevant sources of power in the United States. Not one of these chapters is entitles The Clergy, or The Church, which I believe is truly relevant to the cycle of power dynamics in human history. Had a book on the power elite been written 200 years ago, the church would have without a doubt been a major influencer and propagator of power. The church and religion (at least in a Western context) has lost a lot of the power and influence it once had, while we see the rise of celebrity as a guide to moral behavior.

References

Gates, T., & Eason, L. (2015). Chapter 30 [episode 4]. In House of Cards. Netflix.

Tyrant, Season 1, Episode 4 (14:04-16:17)

Tags: capacity, culture, decision making, positions, power elite 
Author: Jasmine Brown 
Date: April 26th, 2015

Watch Here

          In this excerpt from the show Tyrant, the viewer is presented first and foremost with a quite literal demonstration of what C. Wright Mills identifies as the three central domains of power in society: the military, corporate and political elite. In this scene, the President of Abbudin (a fictional Middle Eastern country), Jamal Al-Fayeed, is consulting his counsel of advisors, among who are his uncle and leader of the military, Tariq, and his brother Bassam, a doctor recently returned from the United States. Thus there is a member of the political elite (the president), the military elite (head of the military), and the corporate elite (a doctor) all participating in the same conversation through which one can observe how their interaction leads to decision-making.
          Due to his position as the president, Jamal possesses the most power in terms of the final say in decision-making and the ability to exercise his decisions; however his decisions are not made in isolation. Jamal most highly values the advice and opinion of his brother Bassam and therefor his decisions are for the most part Bassam’s decisions. So although Jamal may have the greatest capacity for power (as Lukes says), Bassam’s position as the brother wields the most influence. If we recall the definition of power as the capacity or ability to direct or influence the behavior of others, it becomes slightly more difficult to trace the seat of power even from a very observable and one-dimensional perspective. Perhaps Bassam is the most powerful elite member in the room; however this can only be observed through a two- or three-dimensional analysis.
          Furthermore, the theories of Mills and Lukes have been largely influenced by the social structure of the United States as this was their primary area of study. It is interesting then to apply their thought to Tyrant, which is set in a very different cultural context. Here we witness family itself as an elite position within Middle Eastern cultures. Nepotism is an intrinsic aspect of this culture, with members of the same elite family commonly belonging to each of the three power elite domains. This also reflects Mills' idea that, for the elite, it is relatively easy to move between elite circles. In the United States, the military leader with his years of experience would likely have a stronger influence over the president’s decision than would the president’s brother. In the excerpt, however, we observed that this was not the case. Although the military leader is also a family member, the position of brother is more highly valued. In this example we can see that these theories cannot necessarily be applied universally; certain positions in one cultural context may possess more power than they would in another.