18. Agency Part One: Empathy and Power

Post Number Eighteen of The Movement We Need.

In this series of posts, I've been writing about five core human needs: safety, belonging, value, agency, and meaning. Movements that succeed in meeting these needs in positive ways will be more welcoming, attractive, broad based, and ultimately effective. In previous posts, I've addressed safety, belonging, and value. Now I'd like to address the question of agency. How do we build movements where people feel empowered, effective, and that they can have a positive impact on the world?

(This series of writings is an experiment—I’m writing a book and releasing it a chapter at a time on Substack, accompanied with podcasts available on Substack, Apple, Spotify, etc. This is the first post in the section on Agency, and the eighteenth post in the series. I have now numbered the posts that are part of the book, to make them easier to find. And as soon as I can figure out how to do it, I’ll put them all together on my page! If you know how, or know how to get Substack to help with this, please DM me!)

Many years ago, when I was a therapy intern at the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic in San Francisco, I had a client who had recently come out of prison. She told me that she often used to get into fights. “I would start to feel like I was disappearing,” she said. “I just had to do something to know I was still there.”

One of our basic human needs is to feel that we have an impact on the world around us, that what we do matters, that our choices are important, and that we make a difference. We call that quality ‘agency’, our ability to take action in service of a goal. It’s an integral part of our sense of well-being, a core need, along with safety, belonging, value, and meaning. Indeed, we cannot feel safe if we cannot affect what happens to us. We cannot feel we belong to a group, a nation or a people if our voices make no difference. We cannot be valued for our choices and actions unless they can move us toward our goals, and the world can have no meaning if we can make no impact on it.

There's a concept that comes from the gaming world, that of an NPC--a nonplayer character. These are characters who have no agency but exist simply to move the story along for those who do. According to New York Times columnist Ezra Klein:

“A few years back, the online right became enamored of a new epithet for liberals: ‘NPC,’ short for ‘nonplayer character.’ The term was lifted from video games, where ‘NPC’ refers to the computer-controlled characters that populate the game while you, the live player, make decisions. NPCs don’t have minds of their own. They’re automatons. They do as they’re told.” (1)

In literature and films, there are protagonists whose choices move the story along. Then there are supporting characters, who don't completely lack agency but whose stories are subordinate to that of the main character. Finally, there are the extras, filler: the unnamed casualties, the faces in the crowd, the hordes of orcs in Lord of the Rings who could just as easily be generated by CGI. But in real life, even the most minor bit player is the center of their own story, the protagonist of their own life. And our system of democracy is supposed to protect our our self-determination, our ultimate right to be that active agent.

What underlies discrimination of all sorts is the idea that there's one group of people who matter, who have and deserve the power to affect the world and whose decisions are important. And then there are others that are back up, supporters, or simply servants. And this is especially evident in the tech bro elitism that is fueling the current rise of autocracy.

Amanda Marcotte writes in Salon: “…the online right refers to anyone who opposes Donald Trump's agenda as an ‘NPC," which is a gaming term for "non-player character," such as the zombies or goblins you fight, or, if you're playing a Mario game, mushrooms you squish. As right-wingers on forums have explained, they believe opposition to Trump inherently means a person ‘can’t do or think on their own,’ and that they only hate Trump because that's what they're told to think. Needless to say, dehumanizing people like this is a standard tactic for justifying abuse, harassment, and even violence. Musk is a big fan of calling anyone he disagrees with an "NPC," such as in 2022, when he mocked opponents of Russia's invasion of Ukraine with the insult.” (2)

When you see everyone else in the world as not quite real, it's easy to be cruel without guilt or remorse. One of the key markers of child development is something called Theory of Mind: the understanding that other people are seeing the world from their own perspective just as you are seeing it from yours, and their perspective, their thoughts, ideas, feelings and basis of knowledge may be different from yours, but just as valued by them as yours is by you. Very young children will often refer to their friends as if you, of course, knew who they are—they aren’t yet aware that you might not have met them. I’ve seen this awareness dawn in a young child: I taught nursery school during my first years in college and I remember one young boy who was notorious for hitting the others with toy trucks. One day, as I grabbed his upraised truck-clenching hand, he suddenly looked intensely at his victim. His eyes widened. He looked up at me and said, “Edward?” I said “Yes, that's Edward, and he has feelings, too!” He looked at Edward again. “Edward!” he said, and I could see that suddenly he got it—that Edward was a person with agency of his own. After that he stopped bashing the other boys.

Unfortunately, some of the people in power these days seemed never to have learned that childhood lesson. Another aspect of Theory of Mind is empathy, the essential ability to project yourself into the mind of another and see the world through their eyes. It's dangerous to place the fate of the world in the hands of those who lack it.

Empathy is not the same as sympathy or compassion. It's not simply caring about another's feelings, although it often leads to that. It's actually a form of intelligence: the ability to shift perspectives, to imagine how someone else might be experiencing the world.

So if agency reflects our striving to impact the world, empathy is our realization that others are also pursuing their own goals. Empathy may constrain our agency: if I recognize that my actions impact others, and I have an inkling of how they may react, I might make some different choices. My ability to control others will always be constrained by their resistance to control, and empathy helps me anticipate that.

Traditional gender roles socialize those assigned as women to develop empathy, to constantly imagine what men need and how they perceive the world. Whereas those socialized as men are not expected to view the world through the eyes of women or gender nonconforming folks. Yet empathy is a human capacity all of us are capable of, and one that is vital for sustaining and nurturing relations and for truly effective leadership.

Lack of empathy not only leads to immoral and cruel behavior, it leads to stupid mistakes. Because without it I have no ability to envision how others will respond to my actions. I can delude myself that putting on a cheese head hat and handing out $1,000,000 checks in Wisconsin will make people like me and vote for my candidate. When, instead, it pisses everyone off and consolidates support for the opposition, I'll be surprised.

Agency is connected deeply to power. So it’s worth delineating some of the many meanings that power can have. I’ve written extensively about various forms of power in other works, (3) but here’s a short summary:

Power-over is perhaps the type of power we're most familiar with. It's the ability of one person or a group of people to control the actions, resources, or choices of others, to impose sanctions and punishments, to limit resources. It's a form of power that underlies all forms of hierarchy, from the absolute right of kings to the more benevolent power of the classroom or the hospital. Power-over isn't always destructive: there are times when a hierarchy is appropriate. For example, you wouldn't want the fire department pulling up in front of your burning house and having a long discussion about who should hold the hose. In emergencies, it's helpful to have one voice in charge. Nor would you want to attend do-it-yourself brain surgery day at your local hospital. Some things require training, experience, and expertise.

But power-over has a way of extending itself beyond those immediate needs, accruing value and demanding deference. That highly trained brain surgeon might be the best one to determine exactly how to take out your tumor, but that shouldn't give them license to tell you how to vote, who to marry, or even, ultimately, to make the decision about whether or not to undergo that surgery. Power-over, in a democracy, must be accountable, constrained, and fairly earned. You don’t want that fire chief to have license to let your home burn because they don’t like your Free Palestine flag, or to hold that position, not because they know how to fight fires, but because the mayor is their cousin.

There is another type of power that I call power-from-within. We might also call it empowerment, spiritual power, integrity or even strength of character. It's the power we feel when we stand up for justice, when we speak out against an unfair practice, or speak a difficult truth in a relationship. It's also the power that's closer to the root meaning of ‘power’, from the Latin potere, meaning ‘ability’. Power-from-within might be our ability to write, to sing, to speak, to dance, to create, to perform a difficult task, even to love. When social justice movements speak of ‘empowerment’, we generally mean amplifying this sense of power-from-within and often using it to counter unjust systems of power-over.

When we bring our power-from-within together with others, it’s strengthened, and we experience power- with, that sense of solidarity that arises when we take action together. As Pete Seeger’s Union song says:

“Step by step the longest march,

Can be won, can be won.

Many stones can form an arch,

Singly none, singly none.

And by union what we will,

Can be accomplished still.

Drops of water turn a mill,

Singly none, singly none.” (4)

It’s the goal of social justice movements to increase that collective power and use it to contest unjust systems of power over.

There's another form of power we experience in our movements that often goes unrecognized or unacknowledged. That is social power, which might also be called ‘rank’ or ‘influence’: your status in a group, separate from any formal role or decision-making power. Your social power determines how much your voice is listened to, how seriously your ideas are taken, and how much respect others show you. Social power comes in two basic flavors: earned and unearned.

Earned social power is gained by taking on responsibilities and fulfilling them, by building up a track record of making good choices, by putting the good of the group or the organization above your personal benefit. It's the type of power that, in traditional societies, might be called ‘eldership’: the power that a mentor or a respected counselor wields.

Even in groups that have no formal hierarchy, where decision making power is distributed equally, some people inevitably have more social power than others. I’m not sure we can or should undo that dynamic. A group in which no one can earn social power becomes unfair and oppressive in its own way, and loses its most committed members over time. After all, if all my work and sacrifices for the group and my years of experience gain me no more of a voice than the person who just walked in off the street, why should I stick around? Conversely, if the founders or the most experienced members hold all the social power and newcomers have no voice, the group becomes moribund. We might think of equity, then, as equal opportunity to fairly earn social power.

But social power can also be unearned. That's one aspect of privilege: unearned advantages or benefits. Groups that accord respect and deference to a member, not because of their choices or actions but because of their gender, skin color, marks of social status, or some other extraneous reason become less smart, less effective and less resilient because they are no longer being guided by those who care most deeply about the group or have the best ability to guide it.

Sometimes these two forms of social power might be intertwined. Someone's educational level may accord them a higher level of social power. Maybe they gained that education through hard work, or earned a scholarships because of their brilliance. They might be the very first person in their family to earn a degree. Or, they might have gained it through the luck of being born to family who for generations have all graduated from elite schools and who have the wealth to pay full tuition.

Social power may or may not translate directly into decision making power. Clearly, if social power is primarily unearned, translating it into decision making power is a bad idea for a group! It opens us to decisions made by someone who may be indulging their own whims or lining their own pockets. When social power is fairly earned, it may make sense for it to confer decision making power. However, even earned social power, if it sucks up all the respect and influence available, can become oppressive.

Those who wield social power effectively often are high in empathy. They understand intuitively that social power carries its own constraints. Exert too much of it, and you engender resentment and lose respect. Accrue too much, leave too little room for others’ voices to be heard, and the group feels disempowered. Unless everyone in a group feels that they have some voice in decisions, and some clear and fair route to earning power, people will feel angry and will probably not stay. Earned social power is most potent when used sparingly, and most appreciated when it is put to the service of amplifying others’ ideas and creativity and furthering their growth and development. A true Elder’s role is not to have all the ideas, but to help others get their ideas heard and realized.

All of these complex ideas about power can help our understanding of how we can further agency. But when we talk about how social movements can build power, there’s a very simple definition for what we mean: power is the ability to get what you want done. That might encompass skills and crafts you can employ yourself, or it may imply the ability to persuade, influence, or command the skills and resources of others. Agency, then, is the freedom to make choices and take actions that further your goals, that help you get what you want done.

In later posts, we’ll look at agency, helplessness and trauma, and explore ways movements can provide opportunities for build both individual empowerment and collective power.

Notes:

1) Ezra Klein “The Republican Party’s NPC Problem—and Ours.” New York Times, 2/16/25

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/16/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-congress-audio-essay.html

2) Amanda Marcotte, “What Elon Musk’s war on federal workers owes to Gamergate.” Salon.Com 2/23/25 https://www.salon.com/2025/02/24/what-elon-musks-on-workers-owes-to-gamergate/

3) Earlier books where I’ve written about power include:

Dreaming the Dark: Magic, Sex, and Politics. Boston, Beacon, 1982, 1988, 1997 editions. French and German editions.

Truth or Dare: Encounters with Power, Authority, and Mystery. San Francisco, HarperSanFrancisco,1988. German edition.

The Empowerment Manual: A Guide for Collaborative Groups. Gabriola Island, BC; New Society Publishers, November 2011.

4) Hear Pete Seeger sing it here.

I keep my posts free for all to read—and if you subscribe, at any level, you’ll get them delivered to your inbox. If you can afford to upgrade to a paid subscription, you will help support my writing and organizing and earn my undying gratitude! Plus you’ll get the following benefits:

Paid Subscribers: $6 a month or $60 a year

· Full access to all posts and archives.

· Community Conversations: A monthly live discussion with Starhawk.

· Starhawk's Tangled Web: A dedicated chat thread for paid subscribers

For WebWeavers: Founding members at $300 a year ($25 a month)

All of the above, plus:

· The Spider's Thread: A dedicated chat thread for WebWeavers

Regardless of what level you choose, know that I am so grateful to have you part of this community!