Communicative power is meaningful only in the network of?

Communicative power is meaningful only within a network of social relations, since power exists in the ties between people, not in an isolated speaker.

The capacity to influence through messages arises from position, dependence and recognition among connected actors, so it is inherently relational.

Ethical resistance is a moral response to power, not the field in which communicative power itself becomes meaningful.

Restrictive freedom is a contradictory phrasing about limits on liberty and does not name where communicative power lives.

Political oneupmanship is one narrow tactic of rivalry, far too specific to be the general ground of communicative power.

Thinkers like Habermas and Foucault locate communicative power in shared discourse and networks of social relationship.