Religious ecstasy is a type of altered state of consciousness
characterized by greatly reduced external awareness and reportedly
expanded interior mental and spiritual awareness, frequently accompanied
by visions and emotional (and sometimes physical) euphoria.
Although the experience is usually brief in time,
there are records of such experiences lasting several days or even
more, and of recurring experiences of ecstasy during a person's
lifetime.
In Sufism, the term is referred to as wajad and the experience is referred to as either jazbah (jadbah o jedbah for Maghreb) or majzoobiyat.
The adjective "religious" means that the experience occurs in
connection with religious activities or is interpreted in context of a
religion. Journalist Marghanita Laski writes in her study "Ecstasy in Religious and Secular Experiences", first published in 1961:
Epithets are very often applied to mystical experiences
including ecstasies without, apparently, any clear idea about the
distinctions that are being made. Thus we find experiences given such
names as nature, religious, aesthetic, neo-platonic, etc.. experiences,
where in some cases the name seems to derive from a trigger, sometimes
from the over belief.
History
Ancient
Yoga provides techniques to attain a state of ecstasy called samādhi. According to practitioners, there are various stages of ecstasy, the highest being Nirvikalpa Samadhi. Bhakti Yoga in particular places emphasis on ecstasy as being one of the fruits of its practice.
In Buddhism, especially in the Pali Canon, there are eight states of trance
also called absorption. The first four states are Rupa or,
materially-oriented. The next four are Arupa or non-material. These
eight states are preliminary trances which lead up to final saturation.
In the Visuddhimagga, great effort and years of sustained meditation are practiced to reach the first absorption, and not all individuals are able to accomplish it at all.
Modern meditator experiences in the Thai Forest Tradition,
as well as other Theravadan traditions, demonstrate that this effort
and rarity is necessary only to become completely immersed in the
absorptions and experience no other sensations. It is possible to
experience the absorptions in a less intense state with much less
practice.
In the monotheistic tradition, ecstasy is usually associated with communion and oneness with God.
However, such experiences can also be personal mystical experiences
with no significance to anyone but the person experiencing them. Some charismatic Christians practice ecstatic states (such as "being slain in the Spirit") and interpret these as given by the Holy Spirit. The firewalkers of Greece dance themselves into a state of ecstasy at the annual Anastenaria, when they believe themselves under the influence of Saint Constantine.
Historically, large groups of individuals have experienced religious ecstasies during periods of Christian revivals, to the point of causing controversy as to the origin and nature of these experiences.
In response to claims that all emotional expressions of religious
ecstasy were attacks on order and theological soundness from the Devil, Jonathan Edwards published his influential Treatise on Religious Affections.
Here, he argues, religious ecstasy could come from oneself, the Devil,
or God, and it was only by observing the fruit, or changes in inner
thought and behaviour, that one could determine if the religious ecstasy
had come from God.
St. Rose of Lima who was canonised in 1671, 54 years after her death.
In modern Pentecostal, charismatic and spirit-filled
Christianity, numerous examples of religious ecstasy have transpired,
similar to historic revivals. These occurrences however, have changed
significantly since the time of the Toronto Blessing
phenomena and several other North American so-called revivals and
outpourings from the mid-1990s. From that time, religious ecstasy in
these movements has been characterized by increasingly unusual behaviors
that are understood by adherents to be the anointing of the holy spirit
and evidence of God's "doing a new work". One of the most controversial
and strange examples is that of spiritual birthing –
a practice during which women, and at times even men, claim to be
having actual contractions of the womb while they moan and retch as
though experiencing childbirth.
It is said to be a prophetic action bringing spiritual blessings from
God into the world. Many believe spiritual birthing to be highly demonic
in nature and more occult-like than Christian. Religious ecstasy in
these Christian movements has also been witnessed in the form of
squealing, shrieking, an inability to stand or sit, uttering apocalyptic
prophecies, holy laughter,
crying and barking. Some people have made dramatic claims of sighting
"gold dust", "angel feathers", "holy clouds", or the spontaneous
appearance of precious gem stones during ecstatic worship events.
Others have claimed to have received spontaneous gold tooth fillings.
The Range Christian Fellowship in the conservative Australian city of
Toowoomba demonstrates such displays of religious ecstasy on an almost
weekly basis.
In addition to all the above, worshippers there also use textile
banners and during moments of religious ecstasy believe these banners
carry special powers of "anointing" as a result of divinely inspired
artwork.
In hagiography (writings about Christian saints) many instances are recorded in which saints are granted ecstasies. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia
religious ecstasy (called "supernatural ecstasy") includes two
elements: one, interior and invisible, in which the mind rivets its
attention on a religious subject, and another, corporeal and visible, in
which the activity of the senses is suspended, reducing the effect of
external sensations upon the subject and rendering him or her resistant
to awakening. The witnesses of a Marian apparition often describe experiencing these elements of ecstasy.
Modern Witchcraft traditions may define themselves as "ecstatic traditions", and focus on reaching ecstatic states in their rituals. The Reclaiming Tradition and the Feri Tradition are two modern ecstatic Witchcraft examples.
According to the Indian spiritual teacher Meher Baba, God-intoxicated souls known in Sufism as masts
experience a unique type of spiritual ecstasy: "[M]asts are desperately
in love with God – or consumed by their love for God. Masts do not
suffer from what may be called a disease. They are in a state of mental
disorder because their minds are overcome by such intense spiritual
energies that are far too much for them, forcing them to lose contact
with the world, shed normal human habits and customs, and civilized
society and live in a state of spiritual splendor but physical squalor.
They are overcome by an agonizing love for God and are drowned in their
ecstasy. Only the divine love embodied in a Perfect Master can reach
them."
Basil Fool for Christ
praying. He did not wear clothing either in summer or winter. Fools for
Christ often challenge accepted norms to serve a religious purpose.
Foolishness for Christ (Greek: διά Χριστόν σαλότητα, Church Slavonic: оуродъ, юродъ) refers to behavior such as giving up all one's worldly possessions upon joining an ascetic
order or religious life, or deliberately flouting society's conventions
to serve a religious purpose—particularly of Christianity. Such
individuals have historically been known as both "holy fools" and
"blessed fools". The term "fool" connotes what is perceived as feeblemindedness, and "blessed" or "holy" refers to innocence in the eyes of God.
The term fools for Christ derives from the writings of Saint Paul. Desert Fathers and other saints acted the part of Holy Fools, as have the yurodivy (or iurodstvo) of Eastern Orthodoxasceticism.
Fools for Christ often employ shocking and unconventional behavior to
challenge accepted norms, deliver prophecies, or to mask their piety.
Old Testament
Certain prophets of the Old Testament who exhibited signs of strange behaviour are considered by some scholars to be predecessors of "Fools for Christ". The prophet Isaiah walked naked and barefoot for about three years, predicting a forthcoming captivity in Egypt (Isaiah 20:2, 3); the prophet Ezekiel lay before a stone, which symbolized beleaguered Jerusalem, and though God instructed him to eat bread baked on human waste, ultimately he asked to use cow dung instead (Ezekiel 4:9–15); Hosea married a harlot to symbolize the infidelity of Israel before God (Hosea 3).
By the opinion of certain scholars,
these prophets were not counted as fools by their contemporaries, as
they just carried out separate actions to attract people's attention and
to awake their repentance.
New Testament
A God´s Fool Sitting on the Snow, by Vasily Surikov, 1885
According to Christian ideas, "foolishness" included consistent rejection of worldly cares and imitating Christ, who endured mockery and humiliation from the crowd. The spiritual meaning of "foolishness" from the early ages of Christianity was closely related to that of rejection of common social rules of hypocrisy, brutality and quest for power and gains.
By the words of Anthony the Great:
"Here comes the time, when people will behave like madmen, and if they
see anybody who does not behave like that, they will rebel against him
and say: 'You are mad', — because he is not like them."
"We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised." (KJV).
And also:
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: 'He catches the wise in their craftiness.'" (1 Corinthians 3:19)
"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are
perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18)
"For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did
not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was
preached to save those who believe." (1 Corinthians 1:21)
In Western Christianity there have been several saints who lived
lives which were rather eccentric and seemingly foolish. Among the
earliest of them is St. Nicholas of Trani
a young homeless man who died in 1094 AD. He apparently never stopped
repeating the phrase 'Kyrie Eleison' and behaved foolishly. Similarly Blessed Peter of Foligno lived in voluntary poverty and was deemed crazy.
Some ascetics are known as mendicants and are organised into mendicant orders. The most famous example in the Western church is Francis of Assisi,
whose order was known for following the teachings of Christ and walking
in his footsteps. Thus, upon joining the order, Franciscans gave away
all possessions and focused on preaching in the streets to the common
man.
Servant of God, Brother Juniper, an early follower of the Franciscan
order, was known for taking the doctrine of the Franciscans to the
extreme. Whenever anyone asked for any of his possessions, he freely
gave them away, including his clothes. He once even cut off the bells
from his altar-cloth and gave them to a poor woman.
His fellow Franciscans had to watch him closely, and strictly forbade
him from giving away his clothes. While such behaviors were embarrassing
to his brothers, he was also recognized as a pure example of the
Franciscan order and thus esteemed.
"The Little Flowers of Saint Francis of Assisi",
which documents the oral traditions of the Franciscans, told several
stories of "Brother Juniper". The most famous of these is the story of
how Brother Juniper, when he heard a sick brother request a pig's foot
as a meal, Brother Juniper took a kitchen knife and ran into the forest,
where he saw a herd of swine feeding. There, he quickly cut the foot
off of one of the swine and carried it back to the brother, leaving the
swine to die. This angered the herdsman, who complained to Saint
Francis. Saint Francis confronted Brother Juniper, who joyfully
exclaimed, "It is true, sweet father, that I did cut off the swine's
foot. I will tell thee the reason. I went out of charity to visit the
brother who is sick." Brother Juniper likewise explained to the angry
herdsman who, seeing the "charity, simplicity, and humility" (Hudleston,
1953) in Brother Juniper's heart, forgave him and delivered the rest of
the pig to the brothers.
The Holy Fool or yuródivyy (юродивый) is the Russian version of foolishness for Christ, a peculiar form of Eastern Orthodoxasceticism.
The yurodivy is a Holy Fool, one who acts intentionally foolish in the
eyes of men. The term implies behaviour "which is caused neither by
mistake nor by feeble-mindedness, but is deliberate, irritating, even
provocative."
In his book Holy Fools in Byzantium and Beyond, Ivanov
described "holy fool" as a term for a person who "feigns insanity,
pretends to be foolish, or who provokes shock or outrage by his
deliberate unruliness."
He explained that such conduct qualifies as holy foolery only if the
audience believes that the individual is sane, moral, and pious. The
Eastern Orthodox Church holds that holy fools voluntarily take up the
guise of insanity in order to conceal their perfection from the world,
and thus avoid praise.
Some characteristics that were commonly seen in holy fools were going around half-naked, being homeless, speaking in riddles, being believed to be clairvoyant and a prophet, and occasionally being disruptive and challenging to the point of seeming immoral (though always to make a point).
Ivanov argued that, unlike in the past, modern yurodivy are
generally aware that they look pathetic in others’ eyes. They strive to
pre-empt this contempt through exaggerated self-humiliation, and
following such displays they let it be known both that their behaviors
were staged and that their purpose was to disguise their superiority
over their audience.
Fools for Christ are often given the title of Blessed (блаженный),
which does not necessarily mean that the individual is less than a
saint, but rather points to the blessings from God that they are
believed to have acquired.
The Soul of the People. Notice the old man in the background, with his arms stretched to heaven, painting by Mikhail Nesterov
The Eastern Orthodox Church records Isidora Barankis of Egypt (d. 369) among the first Holy Fools. However, the term was not popularized until the coming of Symeon of Emesa, who is considered to be a patron saint of holy fools. In Greek, the term for Holy Fool is salos.
The practice was recognised in the hagiography of fifth-century Byzantium, and it was extensively adopted in Muscovite Russia, probably in the 14th century. The madness
of the Holy Fool was ambiguous, and could be real or simulated. He
(or she) was believed to have been divinely inspired, and was therefore
able to say truths which others could not, normally in the form of
indirect allusions or parables. He had a particular status in regard to the Tsars, as a figure not subject to earthly control or judgement.
The first reported fool-for-Christ in Russia was St. Procopius (Prokopiy), who came from the lands of the Holy Roman Empire to Novgorod, then moved to Ustyug,
pretending to be a fool and leading an ascetic way of life (slept naked
on church-porches, prayed throughout the whole night, received food
only from poor people). He was abused and beaten, but finally won
respect and became venerated after his death.
"Crazy
for God" is an expression sometimes used in the United States and other
English speaking countries to convey a similar idea to "Foolishness for
Christ." It has been especially connected to the Unification Church of the United States. In The Way of God's Will, a collection of sayings popular among church members, Unification Church founder Sun Myung Moon is quoted as saying: "We leaders should leave the tradition that we have become crazy for God."
In 1979 Unification Church critic Christopher Edwards titled a memoir about his experiences in the six months he spent as a church member: Crazy for God: The nightmare of cult life.
In 2007, author Frank Schaeffer titled his autobiography Crazy
for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious
Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back. It tells of his upbringing as the son of a well-known evangelical minister and his later conversion to the Greek Orthodox Church.
In the same year Stephen Prothero, author and chairman of Boston University's Department of Religion, wrote in the Harvard Divinity Bulletin:
"I am crazy for people who are crazy for God: people nearly as
inscrutable to me as divinity, who leave wives and children to become
forest-dwelling monks in Thailand, who wander naked across the belly of India in search of self-realization, who speak in tongues and take up serpents in Appalachia because the Bible says they can."
Modern theology
One of the more recent works in theology is Fools for Christ by Jaroslav Pelikan.
Through six essays dealing with various "fools," Pelikan explores the
motif of fool-for-Christ in relationship to the problem of understanding
the numinous:
The Holy is too great and too terrible when encountered directly for
men of normal sanity to be able to contemplate it comfortably. Only
those who cannot care for the consequences run the risk of the direct
confrontation of the Holy.
The Yurodivy in art and literature
There are a number of references to the yurodivy in 19th century Russian literature. The holy fool Nikolka is a character in Pushkin's play Boris Godunov and Mussorgsky's opera based on the play. In Pushkin's narrative poem The Bronze Horseman, the character of Evgenii is based in the tradition of the holy fools in his confrontation with the animated statue of Peter the Great.
The yurodivy appears several times in the novels of Dostoevsky. The Idiot explores the ramifications of placing a holy fool (the compassionate and insightful epileptic Prince Myshkin) in a secular world dominated by vanity and desire. According to Joseph Frank
"though the gentlemanly and well-educated prince bears no external
resemblance to these eccentric figures, he does possess their
traditional gift of spiritual insight, which operates instinctively,
below any level of conscious awareness or doctrinal commitment." In Demons, the madwoman Marya Lebyadkina displays many of the attributes of the holy fool, as do the characters of Sofya Marmeladova in Crime and Punishment and Lizaveta in The Brothers Karamazov.
Another fool-for-Christ is Grisha in Tolstoy'sChildhood. Boyhood. Youth. Callis and Dewey described Grisha as follows:
He was an awesome figure: emaciated, barefoot and in rags, with
eyes that "looked right through you" and long, shaggy hair. He always
wore chains around his neck...Neighborhood children would sometimes run
after him, laughing and calling out his name. Older persons, as a rule,
viewed Grisha with respect and a little fear, especially when he
suffered one of his periodic seizures and began to shout and rant. At
such times adult bystanders would crowd around and listen, for they
believed that the Holy Spirit was working through him.
Grisha's abnormal social conduct, seizures, and rants were common
behaviors amongst holy fools. The esteem expressed by adults was also
common. In his autobiography, Tolstoy expressed such esteem in reaction
to overhearing Grisha praying:
“Oh Great Christian Grisha! Your faith was so strong that you
felt the nearness of God; your love was so great that words flowed of
their own will from your lips, and you did not verify them by reason.
And what high praise you gave to the majesty of God, when, not finding
any words, you prostrated yourself on the ground.”
A further example is Kasyan in the ninth sketch from Turgenev'sSketches from a Hunter's Album.
The protagonist's coachman describes him as "one of those holy men,"
who lives by himself in the forest, strictly differentiates between
eating bread which he calls "God's gift to man" and "tame creatures" on
the one hand, and birds "of the free air" and creatures "of the forest
and of the field" on the other hand, the latter of which he sees as
being sinful.
Film references
The Island (also known as Ostrov), a 2006 movie telling the life story of (fictional) Father Anatoly in 1970s Russia.
Businesses benefit by having diversity in their work force.
The business case for diversity stems from the progression of the
models of diversity within the workplace since the 1960s. In the United
States, the original model for diversity was situated around affirmative
action drawing from equal opportunity employment objectives implemented in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Equal employment opportunity was centered around the idea that any
individual academically or physically qualified for a specific job could
strive for (and possibly succeed) at obtaining the said job without
being discriminated against based on identity. These initiatives were
met with accusations that tokenism
was the reason an individual was hired into a company when they
differed from the dominant group. Dissatisfaction from minority groups
eventually altered and/or raised the desire to achieve perfect
employment opportunities in every job.
The social justice
model evolved next and extended the idea that individuals outside the
dominant group should be given opportunities within the workplace, not
only because it was instituted as a law, but because it was the right
thing to do. Kevin Sullivan an ex-vice president of Apple Inc. said that
"diversity initiatives must be sold as business, not social work."
In the deficit model, it is believed that organizations that do
not have a strong diversity inclusion culture will invite lower
productivity, higher absenteeism, and higher turnover which will result in higher costs to the company. Establishments with more diversity are less likely to have successful unionization attempts.
Classification of workplaces
In
a journal article entitled "The multicultural organization" by Taylor
Cox Jr., Cox talks about three organization types that focus on the
development of cultural diversity.
The three types are: the monolithic organization, the plural
organization, and the multicultural organization. In the monolithic
organization, the amount of structural integration (the presence of
persons from different cultural groups in a single organization) is
minimal. This type of organization may have minority members within the
workforce, but not in positions of leadership and power. Even though Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
are three interconnected concepts represented by the abbreviation
DE&I, they are not interchangeable. Diversity without equity and
inclusion is often perceived as "tokenism".
The plural organization has a more heterogeneous membership than
the monolithic organization and takes steps to be more inclusive of
persons from cultural backgrounds that differ from the dominant group.
This type of organization seeks to empower those from a marginalized standpoint to encourage opportunities for promotion and positions of leadership.
The workplace diversity can be categorized into single-gender and mix genders.
It focuses on mostly "identity-based differences among and between two
or more people". The multicultural organization not only contains many
different cultural groups or different genders, but it values this
diversity. It encourages healthy conflict as a source of avoiding
groupthink.
Benefits
Diversity is believed by many to bring substantial benefits such as better decision making and improved problem solving,
greater creativity and innovation, which leads to enhanced product
development, and more successful marketing to different types of
customers.Diversity is also claimed to enhance organizations' abilities to compete in global markets. Simply recognizing diversity in a corporation helps link the variety of talents within the organization.
DePree believes that the act of recognizing diversity also allows for
employees to feel have a sense of belonging, which increases their
commitment to the company and allow each of them to contribute in a
unique way.
Standpoint theory
suggests that marginalized groups bring a different perspective to an
organization that challenges the status quo since their socially
constructed world view will differ from that of the dominant group.
Although the standpoint of the dominant group will often carry more
weight, encouraging conflicting standpoints to coexist within an
organization which will create a forum for sanctioned conflict to ensue.
Standpoint theory gives a voice to those in a position to see patterns
of behavior that those immersed in the culture have difficulty
acknowledging. From this perspective, these unique and varying standpoints help to eradicate groupthink which can develop within a homogenous group.
Scott Page's (2007)
mathematical modeling research of team work reflects this view. His
models demonstrated that heterogeneous teams consistently out-performed
homogeneous teams on a variety of tasks.
Page points out, however, that diversity in teamwork
is not always simple and that there are many challenges to fostering an
inclusive environment in the workplace for diversity of thought and
ideas. For example: "If we look at the evidence on whether identity
diverse collections of people perform better than more homogeneous
collections, we see mixed results at every level. At the country level,
we find that in advanced economies, ethnic diversity proves beneficial.
In poorer countries, it causes problems. In cities, we see similar
effects. Diversity has the same pluses and minuses. Cognitive diversity
increases innovation. Preference diversity leads to squabbles" (p. 14).
Also, "We have no logical reason to think that identity diverse groups
would perform better than more homogenous groups – unless we believe
that mysterious collective cognitive capability emerges from the
interactions of people with diverse identities".
In order to benefit from diversity, keep organizations
competitive, and drive business success, comprehensive strategies are
required that encompass all dimensions of diversity (race, gender,
cognitive styles, beliefs, experience etc.).
Challenges
One of the greatest challenges an organization has when trying to adopt a more inclusive environment is assimilation for any member outside the dominant group. The interplay between power, ideology, and discursive acts which reinforce the hegemonic structure of organizations is the subject of much study.
Everything from organizational symbols, rituals, and stories serve to
maintain the position of power held by the dominant group.
When organizations hire or promote individuals that are not part
of this dominant group into management positions, a tension develops
between the socially constructed organizational norm and acceptance of
cultural diversity. Some have claimed that cultural diversity in the workplace will increase interpersonal conflicts.
Often these individuals are mentored and coached to adopt the necessary
traits for inclusion into the privileged group as opposed to being
embraced for their differences.According to the journal article "Cultural Diversity in the Workplace:
The State of the Field", Marlene G. Fine explains that "those who
assimilate are denied the ability to express their genuine selves in the
workplace; they are forced to repress significant parts of their lives
within a social context that frames a large part of their daily
encounters with other people". Fine goes on to mention that "People who
spend significant amounts of energy coping with an alien environment
have less energy left to do their jobs. Assimilation does not just
create a situation in which people who are different are likely to fail,
it also decreases the productivity of organizations".
That is, with a diverse workforce, management may have to work harder
to reach the same level of productivity as with a less diverse
workforce.
Another challenge faced by organizations striving to foster a
more diverse workforce is the management of a diverse population.
Managing diversity is more than simply acknowledging differences in
people.
A number of organizational theorists have suggested that work-teams
which are highly diverse can be difficult to motivate and manage for a
variety of reasons. A major challenge is miscommunication within an
organization. Fine reported a study of "work groups that were culturally
diverse and found that cross-cultural differences led to
miscommunication".
That is, a diverse workforce led to challenges for management. The
meaning of a message can never be completely shared because no two
individuals experience events in exactly the same way. Even when native
and non-native speakers are exposed to the same messages, they may
interpret the information differently.
There are competencies, however, which help to develop effective
communication in diverse organizational environments. These skills
include self-monitoring, empathy, and strategic decision-making.
Maintaining a culture which supports the idea of employee voice
(especially for marginalized group members) is another challenge for
diverse organisation. When the organizational environment is not
supportive of dissenting viewpoints, employees may choose to remain
silent for fear of repercussions,
or they may seek alternative safe avenues to express their concerns and
frustrations such as on-line forums and affinity group meetings.
By finding opportunities such as these to express dissent, individuals
can begin to gather collective support and generate collective
sense-making which creates a voice for the marginalized members so they
can have a collective voice to trigger change.
Strategies to achieve diversity
Three
approaches towards corporate diversity management can be distinguished:
Liberal Change, Radical Change, and Transformational Change.
Liberal change
The
liberal concept recognizes equality of opportunity in practice when all
individuals are enabled freely and equally to compete for social
rewards. The aim of the liberal change model is to have a fair labor market
from which the best person is chosen for a job based solely on
performance. To support this concept, a framework of formal rules has
been created and policymakers are responsible for ensuring that these
rules are enforced on all so none shall be discriminated against. The liberal-change approach centers on law, compliance, and legal penalties for non-compliance.
One weakness of the liberal view is that the formal rules cannot
cover every aspect of work life, as there is almost always an informal
aspect to work such as affinity groups, hidden transcripts, and alternative informal communication channels.
Radical changes
In
contrast to the liberal approach, radical change seeks to intervene
directly in the workplace practices in order to achieve balanced
workforces, as well as a fair distribution of rewards among employees.
The radical approach is thus more outcome focused than focused on the
forming the rules to ensure equal treatment. One major tool of radical change is quotas
which are set by companies or national institutions with the aim to
regulate diversity of the workforce and equal opportunities.
Arguments for and against quota systems in companies or public institutions include contrasting ideas such as quotas
compensating for actual barriers that prevent marginalized members from attaining their fair share of managerial positions
being against equal opportunity for all and imply that a marginalized member only got the position to fill the quota. Sweden's quota system for parliamentary positions is a positive case for radical change through quota setting.
A quota system was introduced at the Swedish parliament with the aim
of ensuring that women constitute at least a 'critical minority' of 30
or 40 percent of all parliament seats. Since the introduction of the
system, women representation in parliament has risen dramatically even
above the defined quota. Today, 47% of parliamentary representatives are
women, a number which stands out compared to the global average of 19%.
Transformational change
Transformational change covers an equal opportunity agenda for both the immediate need as well as long-term solutions. For the short term it implements new measures to minimize bias in procedures such as recruitment, promotion, and communication.
The long term, however, is seen as a project of transformation for
organizations. This approach acknowledges the existence of power systems
and seeks to challenge the existing hegemony through implementation of
equality values.
One illustrative case for transformational change is ageing management; Younger employees are seen as more innovative and flexible, while older employees are associated with higher costs of salary, benefits, and healthcare needs.
Therefore, companies may prefer young workers to older staff. Through
application of the transformational concept an immediate intervention
provides needed relief while a longer-term culture shift occurs.
For the short-term, an organization can set up legislation preventing discrimination based on age (e.g., Age Discrimination in Employment Act).
However, for the long-term solution, negative stereotypes of older
employees needs to be replaced with the positive realization that older
employees can add value to the workplace through their experience and
knowledge base.
To balance this idea with the benefit of innovation and flexibility
that comes with youth, a mixture of ages in the workforce is ideal.
Through transformational change, the short-term solution affords the
organization the time necessary to enact deep rooted culture changes
leading to a more inclusive environment.
Intentional "diversity programs" can assist organizations facing
rapid demographic changes in their local consumer market and labor pool
by helping people work and understand one another better.
Diversity inclusion initiatives must start with the commitment
from the top. With a commitment from top leaders in an organization to
change the existing culture to one of diversity inclusion, the diversity
change management process can succeed. This process includes analyzing
where the organization is currently at through a diversity audit,
creating an action plan aligned with a diversity inclusion strategy,
gaining support by seeking stakeholder input, and holding individuals
accountable through measurable results.
A great power or world power is a sovereign state that is recognized as having the ability and expertise to exert its influence on a global scale. Great powers characteristically possess military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence, which may cause middle or small powers to consider the great powers' opinions before taking actions of their own. International relations theorists have posited that great power status can be characterized into power capabilities, spatial aspects, and status dimensions.
While some nations are widely considered to be great powers,
there is considerable debate on the exact criteria of great power
status. Historically, the status of great powers has been formally
recognized in organizations such as the Congress of Vienna of 1814–1815 or the United Nations Security Council, of which permanent members are: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The United Nations Security Council, NATO Quint, the G7, the BRICs and the Contact Group have all been described as great power concerts.
The term "great power" was first used to represent the most important powers in Europe during the post-Napoleonic era. The "Great Powers" constituted the "Concert of Europe" and claimed the right to joint enforcement of the postwar treaties. The formalization of the division between small powers and great powers came about with the signing of the Treaty of Chaumont in 1814. Since then, the international balance of power has shifted numerous times, most dramatically during World War I and World War II. In literature, alternative terms for great power are often world power or major power.
Characteristics
There
are no set or defined characteristics of a great power. These
characteristics have often been treated as empirical, self-evident to
the assessor.
However, this approach has the disadvantage of subjectivity. As a
result, there have been attempts to derive some common criteria and to
treat these as essential elements of great power status. Danilovic
(2002) highlights three central characteristics, which she terms as
"power, spatial, and status dimensions," that distinguish major powers
from other states. The following section ("Characteristics") is
extracted from her discussion of these three dimensions, including all
of the citations.
Early writings on the subject tended to judge states by the realist criterion, as expressed by the historian A. J. P. Taylor when he noted that "The test of a great power is the test of strength for war."
Later writers have expanded this test, attempting to define power in
terms of overall military, economic, and political capacity. Kenneth Waltz, the founder of the neorealist
theory of international relations, uses a set of six criteria to
determine great power: population and territory, resource endowment,
military strength, economic capability, political stability and
competence.
John Mearsheimer
defines great powers as those that "have sufficient military assets to
put up a serious fight in an all-out conventional war against the most
powerful state in the world."
Power dimensions
In the mid-19th century, German historian Leopold von Ranke attempted to scientifically document the great powers.
"But the fact is that the task of humanity now is not to form great
powers, but to destroy the great powers, the very ones from which all
the misfortunes of nations come, and to unite all peoples into one
family without division into powers and enmity arising from such a
division."
As noted above, for many, power capabilities were the sole criterion.
However, even under the more expansive tests, power retains a vital
place.
This aspect has received mixed treatment, with some confusion as
to the degree of power required. Writers have approached the concept of
great power with differing conceptualizations of the world situation,
from multi-polarity to overwhelming hegemony. In his essay, 'French Diplomacy in the Postwar Period', the French historian Jean-Baptiste Duroselle
spoke of the concept of multi-polarity: "A Great power is one which is
capable of preserving its own independence against any other single
power."
This differed from earlier writers, notably from Leopold von Ranke,
who clearly had a different idea of the world situation. In his essay
'The Great Powers', written in 1833, von Ranke wrote: "If one could
establish as a definition of a Great power that it must be able to
maintain itself against all others, even when they are united, then Frederick has raised Prussia to that position." These positions have been the subject of criticism.
In 2011, the U.S. had 10 major strengths according to Chinese
scholar Peng Yuan, the director of the Institute of American Studies of
the China Institutes for Contemporary International Studies.
1. Population, geographic position, and natural resources.
2. Military muscle.
3. High technology and education.
4. Cultural/soft power.
5. Cyber power.
6. Allies, the United States having more than any other state.
7. Geopolitical strength, as embodied in global projection forces.
9. Intellectual power, fed by a plethora of U.S. think tanks and the
“revolving door” between research institutions and government.
10. Strategic power, the United States being the world’s only country with a truly global strategy.
However he also noted where the U.S. had recently slipped:
1. Political power, as manifested by the breakdown of bipartisanship.
2. Economic power, as illustrated by the post-2007 slowdown.
3. Financial power, given intractable deficits and rising debt.
4. Social power, as weakened by societal polarization.
5. Institutional power, since the United States can no longer dominate global institutions
Spatial dimension
All
states have a geographic scope of interests, actions, or projected
power. This is a crucial factor in distinguishing a great power from a
regional power; by definition, the scope of a regional power
is restricted to its region. It has been suggested that a great power
should be possessed of actual influence throughout the scope of the
prevailing international system. Arnold J. Toynbee,
for example, observes that "Great power may be defined as a political
force exerting an effect co-extensive with the widest range of the
society in which it operates. The Great powers of 1914 were
'world-powers' because Western society had recently become
'world-wide'."
Other suggestions have been made that a great power should have
the capacity to engage in extra-regional affairs and that a great power
ought to be possessed of extra-regional interests, two propositions
which are often closely connected.
Status dimension
Formal
or informal acknowledgment of a nation's great power status has also
been a criterion for being a great power. As political scientist George Modelski
notes, "The status of Great power is sometimes confused with the
condition of being powerful. The office, as it is known, did in fact
evolve from the role played by the great military states in earlier
periods... But the Great power system institutionalizes the position of
the powerful state in a web of rights and obligations."
This approach restricts analysis to the epoch following the Congress of Vienna at which great powers were first formally recognized.
In the absence of such a formal act of recognition it has been
suggested that great power status can arise by implication by judging
the nature of a state's relations with other great powers.
A further option is to examine a state's willingness to act as a great power.
As a nation will seldom declare that it is acting as such, this usually
entails a retrospective examination of state conduct. As a result, this
is of limited use in establishing the nature of contemporary powers, at
least not without the exercise of subjective observation.
Other important criteria throughout history are that great powers
should have enough influence to be included in discussions of
contemporary political and diplomatic questions, and exercise influence
on the outcome and resolution. Historically, when major political
questions were addressed, several great powers met to discuss them.
Before the era of groups like the United Nations, participants of such
meetings were not officially named but rather were decided based on
their great power status. These were conferences that settled important
questions based on major historical events.
"Full-spectrum" dimension
Historian Phillips P. O'Brien, Head of the School of International Relations and Professor of Strategic Studies at the University of St. Andrews, criticizes the concept of a great power, arguing that it is dated, vaguely defined, and inconsistently applied.
He states that the term is used to "describe everything from true
superpowers such as the United States and China, which wield the full
spectrum of economic, technological, and military might, to
better-than-average military powers such as Russia, which have nuclear
weapons but little else that would be considered indicators of great
power. "
O'Brien advocates for the concept of a "full-spectrum power", which
takes into account "all the fundamentals on which superior military
power is built", including economic resources, domestic politics and
political systems (which can restrain or expand dimensions of power),
technological capabilities, and social and cultural factors (such as a
society's willingness to go to war or invest in military development).
Various sets of great, or significant, powers have existed throughout
history. An early reference to great powers is from the third century,
when the Persian prophet Mani described Rome, China, Aksum, and Persia as the four greatest kingdoms of his time. During the Napoleonic wars in Europe, American diplomat James Monroe
observed that, "The respect which one power has for another is in exact
proportion of the means which they respectively have of injuring each
other." The term "great power" first appears at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. The Congress established the Concert of Europe as an attempt to preserve peace after the years of Napoleonic Wars.
Lord Castlereagh, the British foreign secretary,
first used the term in its diplomatic context, writing on 13 February
1814: "there is every prospect of the Congress terminating with a
general accord and Guarantee between the Great powers of Europe, with a
determination to support the arrangement agreed upon, and to turn the
general influence and if necessary the general arms against the Power
that shall first attempt to disturb the Continental peace."
The Congress of Vienna consisted of five main powers: the Austrian Empire, France, Prussia, Russia, and Great Britain. These five primary participants constituted the original great powers as we know the term today.
Other powers, such as Spain, Portugal, and Sweden, which were great
powers during the 17th century and the earlier 18th century, were
consulted on certain specific issues, but they were not full
participants.
After the Congress of Vienna, Great Britain emerged as the pre-eminent global hegemon, due to it being the first nation to industrialize, possessing the largest navy, and the extent of its overseas empire, which ushered in a century of Pax Britannica. The balance of power between the Great Powers became a major influence in European politics, prompting Otto von Bismarck
to say "All politics reduces itself to this formula: try to be one of
three, as long as the world is governed by the unstable equilibrium of
five great powers."
Over time, the relative power of these five nations fluctuated,
which by the dawn of the 20th century had served to create an entirely
different balance of power. Great Britain and the new German Empire (from 1871), experienced continued economic growth and political power. Others, such as Russia and Austria-Hungary, stagnated. At the same time, other states were emerging and expanding in power, largely through the process of industrialization. These countries seeking to attain great power status were: Italy after the Risorgimento era, Japan during the Meiji era, and the United States after its civil war. By 1900, the balance of world power had changed substantially since the Congress of Vienna. The Eight-Nation Alliance was an alliance of eight nations created in response to the Boxer Rebellion
in China. It formed in 1900 and consisted of the five Congress powers
plus Italy, Japan, and the United States, representing the great powers
at the beginning of the 20th century.
Shifts of international power have most notably occurred through major conflicts. The conclusion of World War I and the resulting treaties of Versailles, St-Germain, Neuilly, Trianon, and Sèvres made Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, and the United States the chief arbiters of the new world order. The German Empire was defeated, Austria-Hungary was divided into new, less powerful states and the Russian Empire fell to revolution. During the Paris Peace Conference, the "Big Four"
– Great Britain, France, Italy, and the United States – controlled the
proceedings and outcome of the treaties more than Japan. The Big Four
were the architects of the Treaty of Versailles which was signed by
Germany; the Treaty of St. Germain, with Austria; the Treaty of Neuilly,
with Bulgaria; the Treaty of Trianon, with Hungary; and the Treaty of
Sèvres, with the Ottoman Empire. During the decision-making of the Treaty of Versailles,
Italy pulled out of the conference because a part of its demands were
not met and temporarily left the other three countries as the sole major
architects of that treaty, referred to as the "Big Three".
The status of the victorious great powers were recognised by permanent seats at the League of Nations
Council, where they acted as a type of executive body directing the
Assembly of the League. However, the council began with only four
permanent members – Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan – because
the United States, meant to be the fifth permanent member, never joined
the League. Germany later joined after the Locarno Treaties, which made it a member of the League of Nations, and later left (and withdrew from the League in 1933); Japan left, and the Soviet Union joined.
When World War II began in 1939, it divided the world into two alliances: the Allies (initially the United Kingdom and France, and Poland, followed in 1941 by the Soviet Union, China, and the United States) and the Axis powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan). During World War II, the U.S., U.K., USSR, and China were referred as a "trusteeship of the powerful" and were recognized as the Allied "Big Four" in Declaration by United Nations in 1942. These four countries were referred as the "Four Policemen" of the Allies and considered as the primary victors of World War II.
The importance of France was acknowledged by their inclusion, along
with the other four, in the group of countries allotted permanent seats
in the United Nations Security Council.
Since the end of the World Wars, the term "great power" has been
joined by a number of other power classifications. Foremost among these
is the concept of the superpower, used to describe those nations with overwhelming power and influence in the rest of the world. It was first coined in 1944 by William T. R. Fox
and according to him, there were three superpowers: Great Britain, the
United States, and the Soviet Union. But after World War II Britain lost
its superpower status. The term middle power
has emerged for those nations which exercise a degree of global
influence but are insufficient to be decisive on international affairs. Regional powers are those whose influence is generally confined to their region of the world.
Cold War
The Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies, the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc, which began following World War II. The term "cold" is used because there was no large-scale fighting directly between the two superpowers, but they each supported major regional conflicts known as proxy wars.
The conflict was based around the ideological and geopolitical struggle
for global influence by these two superpowers, following their
temporary alliance and victory against Nazi Germany in 1945.
During the Cold War, Japan, France, the United Kingdom and West Germany rebuilt their economies. France and the United Kingdom maintained technologically advanced armed forces with power projection
capabilities and maintain large defense budgets to this day. Yet, as
the Cold War continued, authorities began to question if France and the
United Kingdom could retain their long-held statuses as great powers.
China, with the world's largest population, has slowly risen to great
power status, with large growth in economic and military power in the
post-war period. After 1949, the Republic of China began to lose its
recognition as the sole legitimate government of China by the other
great powers, in favour of the People's Republic of China. Subsequently, in 1971, it lost its permanent seat at the UN Security Council to the People's Republic of China.
Aftermath of the Cold War
China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are often referred to as great powers by academics due to "their political and economic dominance of the global arena". These five nations are the only states to have permanent seats with veto power on the UN Security Council. They are also the only state entities to have met the conditions to be considered "Nuclear Weapons States" under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and maintain military expenditures which are among the largest in the world.
However, there is no unanimous agreement among authorities as to the
current status of these powers or what precisely defines a great power.
For example, sources have at times referred to China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom as middle powers. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, its UN Security Council permanent seat was transferred to the Russian Federation in 1991, as its largest successor state.
The newly formed Russian Federation emerged on the level of a great
power, leaving the United States as the only remaining global superpower (although some support a multipolar world view).
Japan and Germany are great powers too, though due to their large advanced economies (having the third and fourth largest economies respectively) rather than their strategic and hard power capabilities (i.e., the lack of permanent seats and veto power on the UN Security Council or strategic military reach). Germany has been a member together with the five permanent Security Council members in the P5+1
grouping of world powers. Like China, France, Russia, and the United
Kingdom; Germany and Japan have also been referred to as middle powers.
In his 2014 publication Great Power Peace and American Primacy,
Joshua Baron considers China, France, Russia, Germany, Japan, the United
Kingdom and the United States as the current great powers.
Italy has been referred to as a great power by a number of academics and commentators throughout the post WWII era. The American international legal scholar Milena Sterio writes:
The
great powers are super-sovereign states: an exclusive club of the most
powerful states economically, militarily, politically and strategically.
These states include veto-wielding members of the United Nations
Security Council (United States, United Kingdom, France, China, and
Russia), as well as economic powerhouses such as Germany, Italy and
Japan.
Sterio also cites Italy's status in the Group of Seven (G7) and the nation's influence in regional and international organizations for its status as a great power.
Italy has been a member together with the five permanent Security
Council members plus Germany in the International Support Group for Lebanon (ISG) grouping of world powers. Some analysts assert that Italy is an "intermittent" or the "least of the great powers", while some others believe Italy is a middle or regional power.
In addition to these contemporary great powers mentioned above, Zbigniew Brzezinski considers India
to be a great power. However, there is no collective agreement among
observers as to the status of India, for example, a number of academics
believe that India is emerging as a great power, while some believe that India remains a middle power.
The United Nations Security Council, NATO Quint, the G7, the BRICs and the Contact Group have all been described as great power concerts.
A 2017 study by the Hague Centre for Strategic Studies qualified
China, Europe, India, Japan, Russia and the United States as the current
great powers.
With continuing European integration, the European Union is increasingly being seen as a great power in its own right, with representation at the WTO and at G7 and G-20
summits. This is most notable in areas where the European Union has
exclusive competence (i.e. economic affairs). It also reflects a
non-traditional conception of Europe's world role as a global "civilian
power", exercising collective influence in the functional spheres of
trade and diplomacy, as an alternative to military dominance. The European Union is a supranational union and not a sovereign state and does not have its own foreign affairs or defence policies; these remain largely with the member states, which include France, Germany and, before Brexit, the United Kingdom (referred to collectively as the "EU three").
Brazil and India are widely regarded as emerging powers with the potential to be great powers. Political scientist Stephen P. Cohen asserts that India is an emerging power, but highlights that some strategists consider India to be already a great power. Some academics such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and David A. Robinson already regard India as a major or great power.
Former British Ambassador to Brazil, Peter Collecott identifies that
Brazil's recognition as a potential great and superpower largely stems
from its own national identity and ambition. Professor Kwang Ho Chun feels that Brazil will emerge as a great power with an important position in some spheres of influence. Others suggest India and Brazil may even have the potential to emerge as a superpower.
Permanent membership of the UN Security Council is widely
regarded as being a central tenet of great power status in the modern
world; Brazil, Germany, India and Japan form the G4 nations
which support one another (and have varying degrees of support from the
existing permanent members) in becoming permanent members. The G4 is opposed by the Italian-led Uniting for Consensus group. There are however few signs that reform of the Security Council will happen in the near future.
_-_1875.jpg)
