If one attempts to discuuss depowerment with zero-people, it can be found that THEY, in one way or another, understand, comprehend, and grok its nature quite well.

Other types of people who consider themselves above the zero-people class probably understand the implications of depowerment. But they are likely to shy away from discussing it because it is unfair, unethical, and indicative of practices characterized by cultivated deception.

Additionally, such practices are at least somewhat unhumanitarian, and if openly admitted and discussed, the context and processes of depowerment promptly introduce difficulties with regard to the philosophy of egalitarianism.

Even more problematical, open and frank discourse on depowerment also sets the stage for thought-provoking discussions regarding empowerment and what THAT consist of.

So, any opening up of depowerment discussions signifies something of a dreaded horror within most societal power management systems.

The best way to keep this horror inactive and asleep in its subconconscious cave is to bleep the very word from the language and dictionaries. The cognitive entrance to the cave is thus sealed over and made invisible via this intellectual contrivance.

And indeed, if there is not a word for something, then it can't be discussed, can it?

In any event, the concept of depowerment becomes very interesting when it is realized that if one really knows something about it, one will probably also know something about EMPOWERMENT and RE-EMPOWERMENT.

-- 8ball (side@pocket.com), April 12, 2001