Power arises only at the moment positive rewards are threatened with withdrawal

Evidence

But even that is not sufficient. Power is not exercised unless the relationship of the participants to their respective avoidable alternatives is differently structured, in such a way that the power-subject, rather than the power-holder, would have a preference for avoiding his alternative – in our example, violence – and that this relationship between the way the participants relate to their avoidable alternatives can be recognized by the participants. In short, the power-code must bring about a relationability of relations. On this assumption there arises the possibility of conditionally linking the combination of avoidable alternatives to a less negatively evaluated combination of other alternatives. This linking motivates the transmission of action-selections from the power-holder to the power-subject. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 620 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Withholding cooperation becomes power under high interdependence; Power suffers inflation when threats are not backed by enforcement; Effective power requires asymmetrical preferences over avoidable alternatives — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 620 (+1 more)

Related

• Effective power requires asymmetrical preferences over avoidable alternatives (similarity 0.89)
• Power grows as both the power-holder and the subjected gain freedom (similarity 0.81)
• Power grows only as the freedom of the subjected party also grows. (similarity 0.81)
• Power operates as a communication medium of conditional alternative-pairs, not raw force (similarity 0.80)
• Power grows with freedom and alternatives on both sides (similarity 0.80)
• Withholding cooperation becomes power under high interdependence (similarity 0.79)
• Power emerges when rewards are threatened with withdrawal to exact unenvisaged conduct (similarity 0.79)
• Once power-holders lack credibility, others test their resolve and escalate conflict (similarity 0.79)
• Voluntary agreement is impossible between parties of unequal power (similarity 0.78)
• Power differs from coercion in that coercion reduces choices to zero. (similarity 0.78)
• Even the most powerful now are objects without autonomy (similarity 0.78)
• Absolute power stays marginal when no choice-situations exist (similarity 0.78)
• Power functions by controlling the exceptional rather than by sanctioning (similarity 0.78)
• The most effective power operates invisibly, without coercion or open resistance. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Withholding cooperation becomes power under high interdependence #expands (0.70)
• Effective power requires asymmetrical preferences over avoidable alternatives #complicates (0.60) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 620
• Power suffers inflation when threats are not backed by enforcement #qualifies (0.55)