When you were growing up, your parents probably banned something from your household. What did that make you think? Of course, it made the banned object seem like the holy grail of gold! My parents banned the video game "Mortal Kombat" and thus ensured I'd be in love with it for six months.
When I recently visited Japan, I was amazed that shops would leave merchandise sitting outside the store overnight. A golf shop below my youth hostel must have left a million yen worth of golf clubs outside every night. Shoes were left outside doorways, free for the taking. Rooftops of tall skyscrapers were left unlocked and easily accessible. Bags were barely glanced at in customs, the inspectors satisfied with my signature on a paper saying I wasn't bringing anything evil. Many restaurants combined the "pay after you eat" system of a waited establishment with the unguarded atmosphere of a fast food joint. In short, I was intimately, totally trusted. A truly bizarre feeling, coming from the United States.
And the amazing thing is, the crime rate is extremely low in Japan. Ridiculously low. In essence, trust and respect and honor and morality convince the population to behave. And behave they do. Suggest something remotely shady, like sneaking into a movie at the theatre, and they'll be astonished like they didn't even realize such things were physically possible!
Let's compare this to the United States. Public space is a matrix of surveillance cameras, security guards, and fear. The general assumption is that there are three types of people: paying customers, people up to no good, and paying customers up to no good. And crime flourishes in this environment.
At a youth hostel in Ikebukuro, a Spanish traveller, a French traveller and I were discussing this state of affairs. The Spanish traveller invented the words, "Soft Power" and "Hard Power". Japan rules with Soft Power, the United States rules with Hard Power. Soft Power is a subtle power based in traditions, respect, trust, and a strong sense of right and wrong. Hard Power is a power based on force and fear. The thing is, Soft Power is more successful by far. Hard Power totally fails.
Let's look at a few of the laws in the United States. Alcohol consumption is banned until age 21. Virtually every U.S. citizen drinks by age 18, and a large number by 16. Anyone who actually holds out all the way to 21 will probably hold out indefinitely, for other reasons than the written law. Marijuana is banned completely. And it's used very widely.
If almost everyone is actively breaking a law, doesn't that suggest the law is broken? Even when the law is technically followed, loopholes are still exploited. The minimum drinking age is very strongly enforced on stateside military bases, for example. Consequently, every weekend, there's a mass exodus of soldiers and airmen across the borders for Mexican drinks. Neither is it even hidden that the laws are ignored. Everyone knows that everyone's breaking the law. And yet, the law remains! The government embarrasses itself with its own ineffective laws!
(Update concerning the Japan example: In the comments, phaunas suggests another explanation of the specific Japan example. Be sure to check out the comments after finishing the article)
Hard Power and Soft Power aren't restricted to a national level, by any means. Any position of leadership has some mix of Hard and Soft Power. Soft Power is, of course, the more effective of the two, and the mark of a true leader. When a rule is enforced with Hard Power, under threat of penalty and suspicion of guilt, people will follow the rule as little as they can get away with.
One interesting thing is that unofficial leadership must rely mostly on Soft Power. For example, the leader in a casual social group isn't going to get very far barking out orders and making threats.
The problem with Soft Power is that it's much harder to control. Anyone can issue orders and threats, but it takes skill and compassion to bring Soft Power to bear on a situation. Soft Power is implemented by setting the positive example. It's implemented by establishing a relationship of respect and trust with one's followers.
The Soft Power / Hard Power split exists in our rulership over our own selves, too. Hard Power over oneself is self-criticizing, self-punishing, and self-loathing. And it is utterly ineffective. Soft Power over oneself is self-esteem, self-rewarding, and self-loving. It manifests a solidly anchored personality, steeped in principles and unshakable. Those who lead themselves with Soft Power are the spice of the world, they're the people we look up to and admire.
The Mirror Model of Social Interaction states that in a social interaction, the people we interact with tend to mirror our own feelings. As a leader, if you lead from a place of distrust, the Mirror Model says your followers will respond with distrust. And an untrusted leader is an ineffective one.
Let us resolve to shift, wherever we can, toward a Soft Power approach of trust and respect. It's something I am working on in myself, so we can work on it together.
Here are some other articles I've written. I trust you'll read them all.
The Relationship Between Happiness And Material Success
Eight Rules of Leadership
The Mirror Model of Social Interaction
When I recently visited Japan, I was amazed that shops would leave merchandise sitting outside the store overnight. A golf shop below my youth hostel must have left a million yen worth of golf clubs outside every night. Shoes were left outside doorways, free for the taking. Rooftops of tall skyscrapers were left unlocked and easily accessible. Bags were barely glanced at in customs, the inspectors satisfied with my signature on a paper saying I wasn't bringing anything evil. Many restaurants combined the "pay after you eat" system of a waited establishment with the unguarded atmosphere of a fast food joint. In short, I was intimately, totally trusted. A truly bizarre feeling, coming from the United States.
And the amazing thing is, the crime rate is extremely low in Japan. Ridiculously low. In essence, trust and respect and honor and morality convince the population to behave. And behave they do. Suggest something remotely shady, like sneaking into a movie at the theatre, and they'll be astonished like they didn't even realize such things were physically possible!
Let's compare this to the United States. Public space is a matrix of surveillance cameras, security guards, and fear. The general assumption is that there are three types of people: paying customers, people up to no good, and paying customers up to no good. And crime flourishes in this environment.
At a youth hostel in Ikebukuro, a Spanish traveller, a French traveller and I were discussing this state of affairs. The Spanish traveller invented the words, "Soft Power" and "Hard Power". Japan rules with Soft Power, the United States rules with Hard Power. Soft Power is a subtle power based in traditions, respect, trust, and a strong sense of right and wrong. Hard Power is a power based on force and fear. The thing is, Soft Power is more successful by far. Hard Power totally fails.
Let's look at a few of the laws in the United States. Alcohol consumption is banned until age 21. Virtually every U.S. citizen drinks by age 18, and a large number by 16. Anyone who actually holds out all the way to 21 will probably hold out indefinitely, for other reasons than the written law. Marijuana is banned completely. And it's used very widely.
If almost everyone is actively breaking a law, doesn't that suggest the law is broken? Even when the law is technically followed, loopholes are still exploited. The minimum drinking age is very strongly enforced on stateside military bases, for example. Consequently, every weekend, there's a mass exodus of soldiers and airmen across the borders for Mexican drinks. Neither is it even hidden that the laws are ignored. Everyone knows that everyone's breaking the law. And yet, the law remains! The government embarrasses itself with its own ineffective laws!
(Update concerning the Japan example: In the comments, phaunas suggests another explanation of the specific Japan example. Be sure to check out the comments after finishing the article)
Hard Power and Soft Power aren't restricted to a national level, by any means. Any position of leadership has some mix of Hard and Soft Power. Soft Power is, of course, the more effective of the two, and the mark of a true leader. When a rule is enforced with Hard Power, under threat of penalty and suspicion of guilt, people will follow the rule as little as they can get away with.
One interesting thing is that unofficial leadership must rely mostly on Soft Power. For example, the leader in a casual social group isn't going to get very far barking out orders and making threats.
The problem with Soft Power is that it's much harder to control. Anyone can issue orders and threats, but it takes skill and compassion to bring Soft Power to bear on a situation. Soft Power is implemented by setting the positive example. It's implemented by establishing a relationship of respect and trust with one's followers.
The Soft Power / Hard Power split exists in our rulership over our own selves, too. Hard Power over oneself is self-criticizing, self-punishing, and self-loathing. And it is utterly ineffective. Soft Power over oneself is self-esteem, self-rewarding, and self-loving. It manifests a solidly anchored personality, steeped in principles and unshakable. Those who lead themselves with Soft Power are the spice of the world, they're the people we look up to and admire.
The Mirror Model of Social Interaction states that in a social interaction, the people we interact with tend to mirror our own feelings. As a leader, if you lead from a place of distrust, the Mirror Model says your followers will respond with distrust. And an untrusted leader is an ineffective one.
Let us resolve to shift, wherever we can, toward a Soft Power approach of trust and respect. It's something I am working on in myself, so we can work on it together.
Here are some other articles I've written. I trust you'll read them all.
The Relationship Between Happiness And Material Success
Eight Rules of Leadership
The Mirror Model of Social Interaction
Posts
4 comments:
I agree - there is positional power and there is real power. Real power is wielded by those who understand human nature and can act 'with the flow.' Hard forms of leadership are basically unsustainable because they rely on force, and people will only obey so long as they are afraid to do otherwise and in the most minimal sense possible.
I agree with a lot of that. Hard power is easy and soft power requires self-discipline from everyone. It's a society effort as well as an individual effort.
Japan has stricter penalties for those crimes, that's hardly the idea. It's just that in their society, the whole is emphasised more than the individual. So, all their lives, Japanese people are trained to think of others, to keep group harmony, to do what everyone wants them to do. This is nothing to do with soft and hard power, I think.
Would you say that a life long educational effort to train citizens to be good is somehow soft? That's quite hard in my opinion, it's kind of brainwashing, although any type of education which isn't fact based could also be thought of in the same light. They are encourage *not* to think for themselves, but to think of the group.
They even push kids into various groups in school, there are many clubs, some schools you must join a club, also their classes are always together, pretty much throughout school, students stay in the same class. So for several years you are stuck with this group, so you better get along.
There are also expressions you may know in Japanese, like 'the tallest nail gets hammered down', kind of like 'the squeaky wheel gets the grease' except in a negative fashion. If you stand out, you *will* get hammered back into place, through peer pressure, higher authority etc.
Hmm, good questions and counterpoints, phauna. I was mostly using my experience of Japan as an illustration for the more general stuff, but what you bring up is interesting, I'll update the blog to refer people to your comment.
Whether the penalties are stricter, I still felt that the *threat* was less present. Eg., I wasn't sternly admonished not to take the stuff lying unguarded outside the shop. I don't think it's the penalties, so much as the *threat* of the penalties, that matters: by the time the penalties are actually being enforced, it means the rule was broken, so the "power" was ineffective anyway.
I'll have to think about this for awhile and decide whether or not to change anything else in the post. Thanks for the feedback.
Post a Comment