Sometimes its good to take a look at who’s mastering the leash of the words and concepts that lead change and progress. I happened to be Googling about recently when I opted to click through to the Wikipedia page on Empowerment. it wasn’t exactly the bite of excitement I had been hoping for. In fact, it is a rather weak and empower-less resource.
Even before one gets to the core definition statement, the collectivist Keepers of the Concepts notes rather prophetically that “This page has some issues.”
Okay … I’ll grant them that. Including some language issues. But the very next sentence that tries for a generic representation does a good job of offering us e-power lovers a tasty treat of wisdom: “Empowerment refers to increasing the economic, political, social, educational, gender or spiritual strength of an entity or entities.” Which arguably is a feel-good statement though broad enough to mean just about anything.
Except that the unmerciful guardians then tag on yet another snarkitude of sorts: “[according to whom?]”
It seems that we, as progressives, we ought to at least be able to come up with some language and direction that is fun and inspiring. Though too money oriented for me, I’m not entirely turned off by this extrapolation that the originating author(s?) provides by quoting others: “Empowerment is not giving people power, people already have plenty of power, in the wealth of their knowledge and motivation, to do their jobs magnificently. We define empowerment as letting this power out.”
I think it is incumbent upon us to self-define our own clarity if the revolution for change is going to take hold. Wiki-less empowerment isn’t a good way to start.
Anyone else care to contribute to sharing their takes on what empowerment is all about?