Power Relations in the Distribution of Knowledge

A common idea held by upper class and educated people is that the issue with the world is that so many people are uneducated. However, I don’t see many sophisticated, rich people paying for or giving away educational resources. Nor do I see post-secondaries allowing people without university emails and passwords giving away access to academic articles that they say are extremely influential and helpful for thinking about life. I also don’t see people who are wishing for equal distribution of everything giving their thoughts and resources to everyone. If the real issue with the world is that so many people are uneducated, why don’t the people who think this use their power and superior stance to stop it? I think there may be a few reasons.

Now, let’s say for a moment that the issue with the world is that resources, power, and knowledge are distributed unevenly among people, species, and countries. Many scholars say this is the problem and advocate for a “new” economic system of communism/socialism to solve this issue. They want to change the economy so things are not sold, they are distributed for “free” by a higher power (government) equally to everyone in the country. However, articles about this very concept aren’t distributed equally. Now, I understand the obvious reasons for this, which include materials costs and the authors right to gain money in exchange for their work; that does not mean that I cannot see the hypocrisy underlying this reality of unequal distribution of knowledge. These scholars want resources and power to be evenly distributed to everyone, which means they should want people to have equal access to their work (especially if they believe their work could make a huge difference in the world). Not to mention, if you cannot afford to spread free knowledge to everyone using the powers of the internet, how could we afford distributing tangible items throughout a country to everyone for free? It doesn’t make any sense… 

Until we think of how the world runs. If we can find any substance in the phrase “knowledge is power,” and I believe we can, then we can understand why knowledge is something you need to pay for in so many cases. You need to pay to buy a book, take a class, earn a degree, learn about philosophy, learn how to grow plants, or how to parent. Once you have this knowledge, no one can take it away from you, and you will always perceive yourself as having a mental advantage over anyone who does not share the same knowledge base because of the value you place on that knowledge. Those with more knowledge that is considered relevant to life will have more power. We as a society value the people with abstract sorts of knowledge more than we value those with other kinds of knowledge, even if the sort of knowledge possessed by those who we value less is more relevant to or useful in the majority of people’s daily life. The issue of unequal power relations does not lie in the amount of knowledge one has, rather in the types of knowledge they have gained throughout their life and how much we value that type of knowledge. 

Then, there is the fact that those who already have power get to decide what knowledge we deem powerful as a society. Celebrities who say that they like a certain brand make us want to gain experience with and knowledge about that company. Scientists and entrepreneurs who say that a certain type of technology is better than the rest give us the impression that this knowledge is better than knowledge about other less important forms of technology. Politicians who say that the economy is no longer beneficial to people with certain skills give us the impression that those people are less valuable members of society. So, if the powerful decide what types of knowledge are most powerful, they can ensure that they stay powerful until there is no longer any power in regular people. 

A huge basis for feminist and anti-racist activism, as well as other forms of important activism, is the reality of the powerful remaining in power by deciding who gets to be powerful. They ensure their own power by making those without power believe them about what knowledge is useful and valued. In the case of communism or socialism, the amount of government intervention and control of the market and the actions of the people through laws and informal social control would make the government the one entity that has this concentration of power that is currently reserved for those with money and valued types of knowledge. 

If we want to actually close the wealth and power gap, we can start by closing the knowledge and access to information gap. Why don’t we start with complete government transparency? Why don’t we start with eliminating the reservation of knowledge and power for the already rich and powerful? If you think this is unreasonable, why? Could it be that you just want yourself and people who share parts of your identity to be more powerful? Could it be that you have prejudices against people who don’t share your identity? Could it be that you think your power and knowledge are more important than someone else’s? Could it be that you, too, know that the government is not going to allow the public to access absolutely everything they do? Not everything is as it seems, and maybe we would be able to conceptualize the truth if we ALL had access to ALL the resources we wanted, from all perspectives. 

Until next time, keep thinking outside the box, and keep reading in between!