Brokers and Career Mobility Systems in the Structure of Complex Societies

Author(s): Richard N. Adams

Source: Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 26, No. 4 (Winter, 1970), pp. 315-327
Published by: University of New Mexico
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3629363 .
Accessed: 10/10/2013 14:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of New Mexico is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL
OF ANTHROPOLOGY
VOLUME 26

NUMBER 4

WINTER

1970

Brokersand CareerMobilitySystemsin theStructureof

Complex Societies'
RICHARD N. ADAMS
Two meansofgainingaccessto powerin complexsocieties
themobility
are through
Based
individuals
or
and
the
use
brokers.
a studyof
on
ofpower
of
groups
through
the nationalsocialstructure
of Guatemala,thispaperpresentsthe argumentthat
thetwoformstendto appear underdifferent
circumstances.
Powerbrokers
are in
evidencewherepowerdomainsare strongand levelsofarticulation
are rigid;brokers disappearand mobility
comeintoplay wherepowerdomainsbecome
systems
weakand levelsbecomeflexible.

THE

PURPOSE OF THIS PAPER is to relatecareermobilitysystems

and powerbrokerswith two analyticalnotionsthat concernthe structureof

complexsocieties,power domains and levels of articulation.Three generally
familiarconceptsare firstreviewed;some modificationsare then suggested;
are proposed among them.The proposals are speculafinally,interrelations
tive and stem fromanalysesof the national social structureof Guatemala
(Adams 1970).
LEVELS OF INTEGRATION,

BROKERS, AND CAREER MOBILITY SYSTEMS

The conceptof levels in human societyhas been used in many contexts

and formanycenturies.In contemporary
anthropology,however,it is especiallyassociatedwiththeworkof Steward(1955), and Wolf (1967) has added
furtherthoughtson the subject. While Stewardused the concept to refer
specificallyto "national" and "local" levels, Wolf expanded this to seven
"levels and sublevels" for Middle America. But neitherauthor,so far as I
1 This is a revised version of a paper read at the 1968 American Anthropological
Association Annual Meetings.The Guatemalan work on which it was based was supported
by the Ford Foundation and the Institute of Latin American Studies, The Universityof
Texas at Austin.
315

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

316

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

know,has directedhis attentionto a rathercentralproblem:What is a level

of integration?That is, how do we know when we are dealing with one?
How do we know that one may exist,be cominginto existence,or possibly
be changing?How do we then account forthe possible fact that theremay
be different
numbersof such levels in different
societies,or in different
parts
of a singlecomplex society?If thesequestionscannotbe answered,then the
conceptcan neverbe a satisfactory
analyticaltool.
"Brokers"has been used to referto individualswho occupylinkageroles
betweensectorsof a society."Marriagebrokers,"as well as "stock brokers,"
serveto articulatetwo clientsin orderto effectan exchangeof approximate
equivalence. Until a fewyearsago, thisexchangeof equivalenciesseemed to
implythatbrokersworkedbetweensocial equals. Wolf (1956) suggestedthat
this kind of articulatoryrole could be seen operatingin individuals who
related social elementswhich were clearlynot equals, where the thingsbelevels of the societyand, therefore,stood in
ing linked were on different
relativelydifferentpositionsof power. This extensionof the concept has
facilitatedthe conceptualizationof the connectionsand linkages between
local levels of a societyand the largersystem.A problem in the use of the
concept,however,is thatwe have littlenotion whythese"cultural brokers"
seem less congenialin some societiesthan in othersand what conditionslead
to their appearance or disappearance. A furtherquestion is whetherthe
cultural contact between two differentlevels affordedby a broker is of
relevancestructurally
and, ifso, underwhatcircumstances.
"Career mobility systems"refersto a phenomenon that has received
little elaboration beyond the case that was presentedby Leeds (1965) in
Brazil, and the model of spiralismproposed by Watson (1964) for Great
Britain. Obviously, in dealing with levels we are also interestedin the
processof mobility,the deviceswherebyan individual or partysucceedsin
movingfromone level to another.Societies clearlydifferin the degree to
which mobilityduringone's careeris possible; and in those societieswhere
It is
mobilityis feasible,it usually can be describedrathersystematically.
to
of
those
career
as
possible, therefore, speak
mobilitysystems
patterned
processeswithina givensocietywherebyone movesup or down.
What is sometimesoverlookedabout thesesystemsis that theyare more
than merelyways for individuals to move up or down; theyalso establish
levels.Whereasbrokerstranslatethe interests
linkagesbetweenthe different
of one level into responsesat another,in mobilitysystemsthose with interests at one level can attemptto move to the next level and to assess their
own intereststhere.In one respect,therefore,
careermobilitysystemsparallel the activitiesof brokers,and the problem posed concerningbrokersis
equally applicable to them: i.e., under what conditionsdo these systems

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY

SYSTEMS

317

come into operation or fall into disuse? Further,do theyspecificallyhave

somerelationto thepresenceor absenceof brokers?
POWER DOMAINS, LEVELS OF ARTICULATION,

AND CONFRONTATIONS

The conceptualrelationsI wish to explore here are derivedfromtrying

to understanda seriesof eventscoveringa twenty-five
year period in Guatemala and include matterssuch as relationshipsbetween rural community
associationsof national scope, and
dwellers,changingnational governments,
therole of foreignpowers,specifically
Germany,theUnited States,and Cuba.
Of the conceptscentralto thisdiscussion,that of the power domain has
been discussedelsewhere(Adams 1966). It should be kept in mind that the
conceptof power used here is not derivedfromWeber (1964:152-153); i.e.,
it does not include the totalityof influencesthatmake people obey the wills
of others.It refersto control over the environment;the environmentencompassesany set of eventsexternaland relevantto the personsdoing the
controlling.We are concerned,however,with a particularphase of control,
thatwhichone individualmayhave over theenvironmentof another.Thus,
the concept of power being used here divergesfromthe Weberian in that
power is only one of the totalityof influencesthat may exist between two
individuals or players. Moreover, we also use a generalized concept of
player,one thatcan include any kind of social operatingunit that is coping
with the environment.(Adams 1970:39-53contains an extended treatment
of theseconcepts.)Thus, a family,a community,a political party,a military
a governmentmay all be operatingunits,and hence players.
establishment,
A power domain, then, is a relationshipwherein one player has greater
controlover the environmentof a second than the second does over thatof
the first.The domain concept is useful in organizingand examining the
of power.
dynamicsof inequalitiesin systems
To this,I want to add a remodellingof the notion of levels. To avoid
confusionwithearlierusages,I am referring
to thisas "levelsof articulation"
Adams
for
a
detailed
1970:53-70
(see
treatment).A level of articulation
comesinto being when twoplayersmeetin a confrontation.
A confrontation
takesplace when two playersfindthat successfully
with
the environcoping
ment bringstheminto a situationwhere eithermay stand as an obstacle to
the furtherexerciseof power by the other. Confrontationsmay occur randomly,but theyare morecommonlyforeseenand oftenactuallyplanned by
at least one of the parties. In termsof power, success in a confrontation
means that one so uses his power tacticallythat he eliminatesthe other or
superimposeshimselfin a domain over the other. This then places them
at different
levels. Confrontationsmay, however,be continuingand fairly
without
eitherpartywinning.In thiscase, the partiesremain in
stabilized,

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

318

SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

articulation,to some degree intentionallykeeping each other under stress.

It is the conditionof the continuingpresenceof balanced confrontations,
and the repetitionof similar confrontations,
that serves to provide some
to
levels.
permanence
It is probablyworthnoting that the term "confrontation"here is not
being used in quite the same manner as in internationaland local U.S.
meeting
politicsin recentyears.This latterusage suggeststhat a face-to-face
necessarilyimplies a potential conflictand a necessarilyviolent resolution;
has become ale.g., to say that two nationswish to "avoid a confrontation"
mostsynonymous
with sayingthat theywish to avoid a war. In the context
of this essay, "confrontation"refersto the fact that two parties are in
articulationbecause one or both are obstaclesto theother;it does not imply
that theywill choose to fightover the issue nor, indeed, that these issues
will necessarily
everbe resolved.
Levels of articulation become increasinglyexplicit and importantas
confrontations
become moredurable,as moreof themoccur betweenparties
of equivalent power,and, therefore,
as the perceptionof relativepower becomes institutionalizedwithin the society.As such, levels are more than
merelyloci of confrontations;theyalso provide a place for many kinds of
relationshipsbetweenparties,rangingfromconfrontationand competition
to cooperationand assimilation.Individuals may findthemselvesoperating
at different
levels,dependingupon whichof theirvariousroles theyoccupy
at the moment.Consequently,a consistencytends to emergeamong levels
of articulation.Instead of rangingover a broad undifferentiated
continuum,
tend
to
maintainare
bunch
where
of
those
players
roughlyequivalentpower
their
confront
to
those
wish
where
who
and,
ing
positions
consequently,
them must also congregate.To this should be added the recognitionthat
real playersoperate in real space. This means that topographyand other
externalfeatureswill influencethepossibilityof confrontations
takingplace.
Because of this,levels in one locale or regionneed not preciselycorrespond
to those elsewhere.Anythingwhich promotesisolation, be it cultural or
of levels.
physical,maydifferentiate
systems
In spite of this,however,most complex societieshave sets of levels that
approximate the following: (1) sub-communal(possibly identifiedaround
kin, households, etc.); (2) local (possibly neighborhoods,communities,or
sets of small communities);(3) regional (possiblylarge townsor cities and
hinterland,setsof communities,
etc.); (4) national (setsof regionsor a collecof
small
national
tivity
scenes); and (5) clearlysupranational,the maximal
level at whichthemorepowerfulnationsoperate.
The conceptscan be illustratedin the Guatemalan cases as follows.Guatemala itselfis in a power domain of the United States; its economy is

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY

SYSTEMS

319

and
heavilydependentupon actionstakenby theUnited Statesgovernment,
its political systemis explicitlyaligned with the policy decisions of the
United States and against those of socialist countries.The governmentof
Guatemala, in turn, exercises domain over all Guatemalans in various
aspects.And within Guatemala, thereare lesserdomains of businesses,the
church,agrarianenterprises,industries,corporatecommunities,etc. Levels
of articulationcan be identifiedwithin Guatemala by taking note of the
confrontationarticulationsbetween individual familyheads, of town officialsdealing with like officialselsewhere,of ministersof governmentnegotiatingwith leaders in businessand industryor with political figuresof distinction,and so forth.They are also evident in the dealings between the
Guatemalan governmentand other governmentsand in the fact that the
United Statesclearlyexercisesmore power over Guatemalan decisionsthan
the reverse.In thispaper, however,we are concernedwith the lower levels
of articulation,thosethatoperatewithinthenation.
It is importantto recognizethat domains and levels are two different
ways of conceptualizingthe consequences of power operations within a
single society.The presenceof domains can be examined to see how players with roughlyequivalent access to power are aligned horizontally;and
the manifestationof levels indicates that the relationshipbetweendomains
has becomesomewhatinstitutionalized.
However,the two conceptsneed differentiationbecause confrontationsmay produce domains which are not
clearlyalignedwithina set of levels.The notionto be exploredin thispaper
is that societies,or subsegmentsof societies,will fromtime to time place
emspecial emphasison eitherdomains or levels,and that this differential
has
for
our
and
moof
brokers
career
phasis
consequences
understanding
bilitysystems.
APPLICATION

OF THE CONCEPTS

Let us now returnto the conceptsmentionedat the outset. "Levels of

articulation"obviouslyrefersto much that is containedin Steward's(1955)
and Wolf's (1967) "levels of integration."The new notion,however,is more
correlationof varyingforms,
precisein its referent,allows forcross-cultural
indicates the dynamicsof the levels, how theycome into being, and how
theymay change. Since theyare productsof potential conflicts,theirlocus
and systematization
must reflectthe adaptation to the total environment.
Because of theseadvantages,however,thereare some cautions which must
also be observed.Since one cannot,a priori,assume thatlevels found in one
locale will necessarilybe present or operative in another, they must be
soughtout empirically.The studyof different
regional power structuresin
Guatemala made this quite clear (Adams 1970:219-237).Just as kinship,

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

320

SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

locality,and political and economic organizationsmay be assumed to exist

in some form,so may levels.But theirspecificformsmustbe discoveredand
described;theycannotbe assumed.
The conceptof brokers,as a linkage or articulationbetweenlevels,has
principallybeen applied in the literatureon Latin America to relations
betweenlocal and national levels.The materialfromthe Guatemalan study
suggeststhatthe conceptof brokershould be modifiedin two ways.First,it
is a termthat refersto two quite different
kinds of linkages; second,it is a
formwhich seems to be importantprincipallywhen domain structuresare
emphasizedoverlevels.
As linkages between local and national levels, various authors have
cited instancessuch as caciques, school teachers,political agents,military
etc. Emphasisgenrecruitingagents,tax collectors,lawyers,labor recruiters,
erally has been laid on such mattersas whether the individual had his
originsat the local ratherthan the national level or whetherhe represented
the interestsof one over the other. If it is asked whetherbrokersact as
channelsthroughwhich power is exercised,however,then we findwe must
betweentwoquite different
kindsof intermediaries.
differentiate
in
and
in
Guatemala,
Classically
manyother Latin Americancountries,
the school teacheris a culturalrepresentativeof the national systemworkfromthat withinwhich he is used to operating.
ing in a culture different
While the teachermay serve to make national traitsavailable, he usually
has no powerhimself.He cannotexpectfirmsupportfromhis own Ministry
of Education and consequentlyhas little to offeror deny the membersof
the local group beyondwhatevermaybe inherentin his role. The teacher's
weaknessat the national level means that he is of littleinterestto themin
any except his specialized capacity.The same may be said for the public
healthdoctorand theagriculturalextensionagent.
This situationof essentialweaknessis quite different
fromthat of the
an
who
the
of
individual
role
cacique,
classicallyplays
through
intermediary
utilizinghis controlsat each level to the advantage of the other. He can
offersupportby thelocal population to regionalor national political figures
onlyifhe can thenbe sure thattheywill respondto his calls forsupport.His
actual controlover eitherspheredepends upon his successin dealing with
theother;his controlsin one level of articulationprovidea basis forcontrols
in another.In addition to the classic cacique, brokersin this sense include
political party agents,mass organizationleaders, labor union leaders and
agents,industrialforemen,local and regionalmarketeersand creditagents,
labor recruiters,
lawyers,etc.
It is clear that these "power brokers"differfromthose of the firstcategory,for whom we may retain the label "cultural broker."The cultural

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY SYSTEMS

321

brokeris an individual fromone level who lives or operatesamong individuals of anotherlevel. Whateverinfluencehe mayhave on the otherlevel depends basicallynot on the power thathe can wield but on his own skill and
successat one level may have absolutely
personalinfluence.Even flamboyant
no effecton his role at the other.The school teacherwho is a favoritein a
rural school is not necessarilygoing to be the favoritein the Ministry;and
he who "politicks"around the Ministrymay fail to gain a followingin his
own school.
The power broker,on the otherhand, specificallywields power at each
of two levels, and his power in one level depends upon the success of his
operationsat the otherlevel. He controlsone domain only by virtueof having access to derivativepower froma largerdomain. It is interestingthat so
many Latin Americangovernmentshave, fromtime to time,attemptedto
use culturalbrokerroles in a contextwheretheyreallyneeded power brokers. Few governments,
however,allow theirschool teachersor agricultural
agentsaccessto power.
The conditionsunderwhicheach of thesebrokersappears withina complex society necessarilydiffer.Cultural brokers are usually sponsored
throughupper level decisionsand are destinedto act at lower levels. Their
tasks,however,are seldom of firstpriority,since a failure to realize them
is not feltto be a threatto therelativepositionof power of the partiessponsoring them.Classically,a Ministerof Education does not lose his job because he fails to improve national education but because he becomes a
political liability.The increase of teachers,public health agents, and agriculturalagentsvaries with changes in national governmentpolicy about
the importanceof theseparticularareas of lifeforthe governmentor forthe
nation. The increase of travelingagents of breweries,shoe salesmen,and
wholesale agentsdepends upon how and when commercialhouses decide to
improve business operations.In general, I would assume that the importance of culturalbrokersvaries with the stateof the national economyand
theparticularefforts
being made to promotethespreadof a national culture.
The incidence of power brokersanswersto a different
structure.Power
brokerslink unitsor actorsat different
in power
levels,wherethe difference
is such that the inferiorhas no real chance to confrontthe superior.The
19thcenturyGuatemalanIndian dealt throughtheeldersor cacique because
little could be gained by going directlyto officialsat the national level.
Political partyagents operate at the local level to gain voting support for
theircandidatesbecause it is impossibleforthe candidate himselfto do all
the organizing,traveling,and convincingnecessaryfor his election. The
militaryestablishmentkeeps local agents to undertakerecruitingbecause
it cannotaffordto takeup the timeof colonelsand generalsin such a menial

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

322

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

task.In all, the power brokerholds an importantplace in the power structureof thecountryand particularlyin theregionwithinwhichhe works.
Since a major featureof the role of power brokersis to mediate where
do not occur, it followsthat theyshould be especiallyimconfrontations
where
domains
are dominant.If someone low in a domain wishes
portant
to obtain somethingthat is available only to superiorsin the domain, he
or he may tryto do it througha broker.If he
may attempta confrontation,
a
he
the levels more flexible;if he operates
makes
attempts confrontation,
a
he
the
broker,
through
strengthens domain. Power brokersare important,
where levels tend to be
where
domains
are strongand, correlatively,
then,
In
to
Guatemala
rigid. pre-revolutionary
(prior 1944) dictatorUbico allowed
no confrontation;similarly,no coffeefarmerwould allow a show of organized poweron thepart of his laborers.The major meansof handlingproblemswerethroughelders,caciques, townintendentes(government-appointed
town mayors),farmadministrators,
and otherswho stood in power brokerAt
the
there
was no question as to what levels
same time,
age positions.
and
each person knew where he stood. Domains were strongand
existed,
levelswererigid.
During the 1944-1954revolutionary
period,new sourcesof poweropened
up, and multipleaccess to power was made possible by organizingpolitical
parties,mass organizations,labor unions, and the like; concomitantwith
these changes,the incidence of confrontationsbetween organizationsand
domain superiorsincreased.As a result,the systemof levels became much
more flexible,and domains weakened. By the same token,the role of the
power brokerbecame ambiguous.As it became increasinglypossible forthe
lowersectorto get what it wanted throughvariousnew channels,the broker
was by-passedif he was not effective.
The outstandingcase was the manner
in which young,politicallyorientedindividualsbegan to take over control
of local governmentsthroughthe elective processand therebyignored the
traditionalchannelsof local political authority.Indian elders,local ladino
(mestizo)upper strata,and large farmoperatorscould all be confrontedor
by-passedcompletelyby virtueof the new access to power of the political
partyand labor union. (See Adams 1957forcase histories.)
The change bringingabout the new emphasis on levels, and the concomitantde-emphasison domains,did not stop with the end of the revoluwas reduced in imtionaryperiod in 1954. The increase in confrontations
but
and
channels
new
new
the
sources
portantways,
opened by the
power
Labor
revolutionbegan to be used in different
courts
continued in
ways.
under
severe
and,
constraints,
although
operation,
practical
theywere more
in dealing directlywith a farmadministratorin extremeinstances.
effective

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY

SYSTEMS

323

continuedto operate,particularLabor unions,whileweakened,nevertheless

in
the
ly
capital city.
A contrarycase, which tends to demonstratethe propositionhere suggested,is thatof the labor recruiter.Seasonal migrantlabor, whichprobably
access to new power under
numbersas highas 400,000,did not have effective
the revolution.The labor laws and unions could do little to influencetheir
situation.The means of contractinglabor had traditionallybeen through
and
individualswho would act as brokersbetweenthe farmadministrations
the laborersof particulartownsor villages.These habilitadoresand enganchadores,perfectexamples of power brokers,continueto operate up to the
present.They servea purpose forwhich no readilydevisable means of confrontationshave been invented.It may be predicted,however,that if and
when the labor needs of farmsoutstripthe availabilityof the rural population forseasonal labor, thenconfrontations
will begin to take place and the
brokerwill disappear.
Justas rigidityof levels is an aspect of a strongdomain system,so flexibilityof levels is a concomitantof the weakeningof domains.And whereas
brokershave a real role in the formersituation,this role is replaced by
mobilityin the latter.In systemswherebrokersoperate,upward mobilityis
Individuals at the lower levels,in the absence of access to deverydifficult.
rivedpower,depend upon brokersto providewhat little theymay get. The
weakeningof domains and disappearance of brokersis simultaneouswith
an increase in mobility.Aggressivelower sectorindividuals reach directly
forpower themselves;intrasocietalpatternsdevelop wherebyconfrontations
may be made, and the clevererand luckierindividualsand groupswill gain
more power for themselvesand therebymove to higher levels. As was indicatedearlier,we are facedwitha painfulshortageof studiesof themobility
societies.Leeds' (1965) description
processesthat have evolved in different
of the career systemin Brazil was an importantinnovativestudy because
here it was made perfectlyclear that mobilityis considerablymore than a
set of sociological statisticsand that it probably manifeststhe same diversitiesthatare to be foundelsewherein socio-culturalsystems.
The replacementof brokerageby mobilitysuggeststhatthelatteris more
than a means of betteringthe lot of individualswithinthe society,thatit is
also a structurallinkage within the systemas a whole. Both mobilityand
brokersenable a social systemto continue on its course with only gradual
structuralchange. The difference,
quite obviously,is that one keeps people
in theirappointed roles,whereasthe otherallows themto change. In both,
therole systemremainsmuch thesame. The increaseof confrontations,
however, means that individuals and groupingsaccomplish this mediation by

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

324

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

moving out of the lower levels and by obtaining direct access to power
(whetherderivativeor independent).
Anotherway to look at the contrastbetweenthe two situationsis to see
the brokersystemas static and the mobilitysystemas dynamic.A broker
does not change his position within the total structureby virtueof his activitiesas broker.Since his power in each level depends upon maintaining
his controlover resourcesin both areas, he generallycannot move without
losingcontrolover one or both sources.(I say "generally,"because thereare
occasional individuals who are successfulin moving out of the brokerage
The classic case of the
position into higherlevels throughconfrontations.
provincial caudillo who takes over the central government,as Rafael
Carreradid in Guatemala in 1838,does occur. But theyare relativelyfew
when compared with the number of brokersin operation.) Consequently,
the broker accomplisheslinkage within the societyby not moving. In a
careermobilitysystem,on the other hand, the linkage is accomplishedby
the individualoccupyingone positionin one part of the societyat one point
in his careerand anotherpositionlater. He may retain relationsat the differentlevels,but his roles change as he moves up. Time does not change
the broker'sposition,but it extends the roles of the mobile person across
variouslevelsof society,and it is the verymovementover timethatprovides
thelinkage.
THE PROCESS OF WEAKENINGAND STRENGTHENING OF DOMAINS

There remainsa questionas to the reasonsthatdomainsvaryfromweakness to strengthand levelsof articulationfromflexibilityto rigidity.Basicalpower withinits
ly a domain may be said to be strongwhen it has sufficient
control to keep subordinatesin an inferiorposition. The circumstances
whichmay affectthe relativecontrolof domain superiorsare too varied to
permiteven a cursoryreview here. They may be illustrated,however,in
termsof recentGuatemalanhistory.
it followsthat
Since levels are definedby the presenceof confrontations,
in levels depends upon an increasein confrontations.
an increasedflexibility
Some of the more obvious conditionsthat produce this include population
increase,economicdevelopment,and political expansion.Populationgrowth
bringsabout competitionover land and other resources,and it resultsin
whichmay appear at any level, fromthe familyto the interconfrontations
national. Economicdevelopment,entailingas it does an increasedextraction
of resourcesand production,is inherentlya competitiveprocess,both inat any level,
It, too, may breed confrontations
ternallyand internationally.
at
better
known
levels.
are
Political
higher
expansion
althoughthey perhaps
refersmainly to the expansion of nation statesor to political movements

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY SYSTEMS

325

withinnations.These,also,are apparentat higherlevels,but theyoccasionand of peasantor Indian

allyoccurin theformof urbandemonstrations
movements.
Even withinthecommunity,
theexpansionof a familyor kin
groupmaybe seenin thislight.
Becausewe livein an age wherebothnationalgrowth
and economicdewell
as
as
seem
to
be
in
evidencealmost
velopment,
populationgrowth,

it mayseemharderto findcaseswherethereis a shiftfrom

everywhere,

flexibleto rigidlevels.Indeed,thethreeprocesses
just describedconstitute

threephasesof themajorcourseof contemporary

socialevolution.
Their

is not a convergence
of independent
variablesbut a complex
conjunction
each
affects
and
feedback
from
the
one increasesactivities
other,
whereby
withinanother.
Giventhispicture,
and assuming
thatthecourseofevolution
reasonably
is unidirectional,
it wouldbe easyto assumethatflexibility
oflevelsregularincreases.
is
erroneous.
The
of levels
This,however,
ly
changingflexibility
and strength
of domainsis a mechanism
withinthe evolutionary
process,
notan outcomeofit.A majorunidirectional
changeis to increasethenum-

ber of domains,to increasethe amount of power at the top, and, therefore,

to increasethe importanceof largerdomains.This inevitablyleads to more
confrontationsand, consequently,to a more complex structureof levels.
of real situations,however,will inevitablylead to a periodic
The specificity
or fluctuatingrelativeisolation of domains; and this relativeisolationleads
inevitablyto fewerconfrontationsat those points and to a concomitant
of thedomain.
strengthening
To returnto the recenthistoryof Guatemala, under the pre-1944government,the countrywas a somewhat isolated domain, characteristically
a unitarydomain, under the general externalpower of Germanyand the
United States.Germanywas eliminatedby World War II, and the United
States remained the sole external power of any importance.During the
revolutionaryperiod of 1945 to 1954, the internalstructureof the country
began a drasticreorganizationsuch that internalmultiple domains became
common and, with this,a sharp increasein confrontations.
Levels became
flexible,and the internaldomains weakened. As the United States became
frightenedof activityin Guatemala that it consideredto be "communistic,"
it began to provide supportto encouragea confrontationbetweenthe governmentand the elementsworkingagainstthe government,
a processwhich
in 1954. This, in turn,coupled with a
culminatedin a counter-revolution
steadyprocessof economic developmentand population increase,led to a
of the upper sector,with a concomitantstrengthening
severestrengthening
of and reemphasison domains and rigidityof levels. In this the United
Statesprovidedimportantderivativepowercrucial to the process.The grad-

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SOUTHWESTERN

326

JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGY

ual regenerationof a morevirile revolutionarymovementin the 1960s,following the Cuban Revolution,led the conservativeelementsof Guatemala
to align themselves(not by any means always to their taste) with United
States demands, so that confrontationsbecame parallel at various levels.
Not onlywas the United Statesin confrontation
withCuba and the socialist
world, but the governmentof Guatemala was in confrontationwith some
fairlyagile guerrillagroups,and in both rural and urban populations there
were frequentpoliticallyrelated assassinations.In this way, the increasing
activityat various levels initiateda new seriesof specificallypolitical confrontations.Over the past thirtyyears,then,Guatemala has shiftedfroma
period of strongdomains (pre-1944),to a weakening(1945-1954),back again
to strength(1954-ca. 1961), and now again to signs of weakening(ca. 1961
to thepresent).
Nation statesessentiallyattemptto strengthentheirown domain structures. But the fact that they are undergoingeconomic developmentand
that their populations are usually growingmeans that inherentlythe freincreases.Concurrently,
levels reassertthemselves
quency of confrontations
and become more flexiblethroughconfrontations,
promotingthe appearand puttingpowerbrokersout of business.
ance of careermobilitysystems
FINAL COMMENT

The intentof thisessayhas been to relate the processof brokerageand

mobilityto more inclusiveconditionsof the total society.It has done this
throughrelatingthe modes of handlingpowerwithina societyto the shape
and emphasisof the largersocial system;it has furthersuggestedthat the
conditionof the largersystemsets constraintson the kind of linkages that
will emergewithinit. As statedat the outset,it has been speculative,and,
as such,I hope it will serveto stimulatefurtherinquiryinto the relations
of the unit activitywithina complexsocietyto the world societyand to the
social evolutionofwhichit is a part.
ADAMS, RICHARD

N.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

a Symposium.
1957 PoliticalChangesin GuatemalanIndian Communities:
Middle AmericanResearchInstitute,publication
Tulane University,
24,pp. 1-54.

1966 Powerand PowerDomains.AmdricaLatina, ano 9, no. 2, pp. 3-21.

1970 Crucifixionby Power: Essays in the National Social Structureof Guate-

ofTexas Press.
Austin:University
mala,1944-1966.

LEEDS, ANTHONY

a Case Historyand Model,"in

1965 "BrazilianCareersand SocialStructure:

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BROKERS AND CAREER MOBILITY SYSTEMS

327

ContemporaryCultures and Societies of Latin America (ed. by D. B.

Heath and R. N. Adams), pp. 379-404.New York: Random House.
STEWARD,JULIAN

1955 The Theoryof CultureChange: Urbana: Universityof Illinois Press.

WATSON,

WILLIAM

1964 "Social Mobilityand Social Class in IndustrialCommunities,"in Closed

Systemsand Open Minds (ed. by Max Gluckman),pp. 129-157.Chicago:
Aldine.

WEBER,

MAX

1964 The Theoryof Economic and Social Organization(trans.by A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. Ed. with an introductionby Talcott Parsons). Glencoe,Ill.: The Free Press.

WOLF, ERIC

1956 Aspects of Group Relations in a Complex Society: Mexico. American

58:1065-1078.
Anthropologist
1967 "Levels of Communal Relations," in Handbook of Middle AmericanIndians (R. Wauchope, general ed., and M. Nash, vol. ed.), vol. 6, pp.
299-316.Austin:Universityof Texas Press.

THE UNIVERSITYOF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

AUSTIN,TEXAS

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:15:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions