Elite theory posits that a small, powerful minority, often found in political, economic, and military sectors, holds significant influence over decision-making in society, challenging the ideal of equal representation in democracies.
Introduction – What is Elite Theory?
In the realm of political science and sociology, the Elite Theory has emerged as a critical concept that challenges the conventional notion of liberal democracy in the modern State. The word “Elite” was used in the 17th century for the first time. This theory delves into the intricate dynamics of power distribution within democratic systems and questions whether the principles of equality and representation are truly upheld.
At its core, the Elite Theory posits that, within any democratic political system, an element of oligarchy exists within every organization. This means that, despite the appearance of a fair and democratic process, a small, influential minority wields significant power independent of the outcomes of democratic elections. These elites typically include members of the economic elite and policy-planning networks, who use their positions and financial support within corporations, organizations, think tanks, and government institutions to exert considerable influence over policy and political decision-making.
In essence, the Elite Theory suggests that it is these elite individuals who make the most critical policy decisions within the State, while the general public plays a minimal or non-existent role in shaping the political landscape. One of the fundamental characteristics of this theory is the concentration of power among a unified elite, leaving the non-elites, or the general population, diverse and relatively powerless. The elites’ common interests often stem from shared backgrounds, positions of influence, and a collective pursuit of consolidating their power. Maurice Duverger advises that the formula “government by the people, of the people and for the people must be replaced by another formula i.e. government by an elite sprung from the people”.
This theory stands in stark opposition to Pluralism, which asserts that various social, pressure, and interest groups play a significant role in influencing the State’s political and policy decisions. The Elite Theory, on the other hand, presents a more pessimistic view of democracy. It claims that democracy, in its idealized form, is unattainable and incompatible with a capitalist system.
Within the realm of Elite Theory, the Italian School of Elitism, championed by notable figures like Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, and Robert Michels, holds a prominent place. These scholars introduced critical ideas that have shaped our understanding of power dynamics in modern democracies.
In this article, we will delve deeper into the Italian School of Elitism and explore the significant contributions of its proponents, particularly Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, and Robert Michels and other contemporary thinkers.
Table of Contents
Let’s discuss them one by one and study their own version of Elitism,
Vilfredo Pareto
Vilfredo Pareto was a multi-faceted Italian intellectual who made significant contributions to various fields, including engineering, sociology, economics, political science, and philosophy. His impact on economics was particularly noteworthy, as he delved into the study of income distribution and the analysis of individual choices and he was also a supporter of Mussolini. Moreover, Pareto played a crucial role in popularizing the concept of “elite” in social analysis.
One of his key contributions was the introduction of the concept of Pareto efficiency, which played a pivotal role in advancing the field of microeconomics. This concept, often referred to as Pareto optimality, signifies a situation where it’s impossible to make one individual or preference criterion better off without simultaneously making another individual or criterion worse off.
In his seminal work, ‘Mind and Society’ published in 1916, Pareto conducted a deep analysis of the elitist theory of democracy. He underscored the psychological and intellectual superiority of elites, viewing them as the most accomplished individuals in various fields. Pareto categorized elites into two distinct groups: governing elites and non-governing elites.
Moreover, Pareto introduced the intriguing concept of the “circulation of elites.” This concept posits that no political regime or system can be considered permanent or stable. Instead, the circulation of elites theory asserts that change, including regime change and revolutions, occurs when one elite group replaces another. “History of men is the history of the continued replacement of certain elites as one ascends another decline”. In this perspective, the role of ordinary citizens is not that of initiators or primary actors but rather as followers and supporters of the elite class. Pareto holds that “History is the graveyard of Aristocracies”.
Pareto’s analysis challenged the classical democratic theory, which emphasized the rule of the people. Instead, he contended that society is divided between a minority that rules and a majority that is ruled, highlighting the ever-present dominance of elite groups in shaping the political landscape.
Concept of Residues by Vilfredo Pareto
Concept of residues refers to emotions and inclinations deeply ingrained in people’s fundamental aspirations within society. He categorized these into six distinct classes of residues, each of which exhibited an unequal distribution across the population, leading to a diverse and heterogeneous society.
Among these residues, two stand out as particularly significant. The first is Class 1, characterized by an inclination towards innovation and driven by a natural instinct for combination. The second is Class 2, which embodies a persistence in preserving aggregates, akin to a conservative mindset.
In essence, Class 1 individuals tend to govern by employing calculation and manipulation, while their nature is marked by innovation. On the other hand, Class 2 individuals are guided by tradition and are more bureaucratic and idealistic, aligning with conservative principles.
According to Pareto, for society to function effectively, it is imperative to strike a balance between these two types of individuals, Class 1 and Class 2, as they bring complementary qualities to the table.
Gaetano Mosca
Gaetano Mosca, an Italian political scientist, journalist, and public servant, is often credited with pioneering the elite theory and the doctrine of the political class. Like Vilfredo Pareto, Mosca also rejected classical democratic theory and offered fresh insights into the nature of power and governance.
In his 1939 book, ‘The Ruling Class,’ Mosca provided a comprehensive analysis of the elitist theory. He divided society two classes – A class that rule and a class that is ruled. He focused on the sociological and personal characteristics of elites, emphasizing that elites are an organized minority, while the masses represent an unorganized majority. He categorized the ruling class into two groups: the political class and the non-political class. The political class constitutes a small, politically active group that plays a significant role in shaping national leadership.
Mosca’s perspective underscored the intellectual, moral, and material superiority of elites. He argued that throughout history, societies have predominantly been governed by elites, and these elites have exercised authority over the masses. The elites, as a distinct minority, enjoy privilege, luxury, and comfort, thanks to their monopolistic control of power in society.
Interestingly, Mosca considered modern elites in terms of their superior organizational skills, which were particularly advantageous in gaining political power within the modern bureaucratic system. Unlike Pareto, Mosca believed that elite status was not hereditary, suggesting that theoretically, anyone could rise to elite status.
Robert Michels
Robert Michels, a German-born Italian sociologist, significantly contributed to the elite theory by examining the political behavior of intellectual elites. His most renowned work, ‘Political Parties,’ published in 1911, introduced the concept of the “iron law of oligarchy,” which challenged prevailing notions of democratic organization.
The “iron law of oligarchy” posits several key points. First, it asserts that social and political organizations are inevitably controlled by a small number of individuals due to the necessity of social organization and labor division. This theory holds that rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is an inherent feature of any democratic organization, stemming from the tactical and technical requirements of organizational functioning.
Michels’s theory further maintains that all complex organizations, regardless of their democratic origins, eventually evolve into oligarchies. As organizations grow in size and complexity, power is delegated to individuals within the group, either elected or otherwise.
In the context of representative democracy, Michels argued that “Who says organization, says oligarchy,” emphasizing that historical evolution inevitably mocks any attempts to prevent oligarchy within democratic organizations.
According to Michels, elite or leadership status is not predetermined and can be achieved by individuals, although he acknowledged the challenge of eliminating elite rule within representative democracy. He contended that the democratic process of holding institutions accountable ultimately fails, as those in power can reward loyalty, control decision-making processes, and manipulate access to information to influence democratic decisions effectively. He argues that replacement of elites is rare in history i.e. “Old Aristocracy does not disappear.”
Interestingly, Michels later joined Benito Mussolini’s Fascist Party after migrating to Italy, as he believed it represented the next legitimate step for modern societies.
Ortega Y Gasset
Ortega Y Gasset, a Spanish thinker born on May 9, 1883, is known for his work on the “Elite theory of masses’. He argued that people select their leaders to whom they wholeheartedly dedicate their enthusiasm. These leaders typically possess exceptional abilities and guide the masses. Ortega y Gasset contended that a nation is essentially an organized human collective influenced by a minority of exceptional individuals.
The specific form of governance a nation adopts, whether democratic or communist, depends on the people’s choice. However, the nation’s actual functioning hinges on the dynamic influence of this minority on the larger population. This phenomenon is akin to a natural law, reminiscent of the concept of densities in physics, crucial in the realm of social dynamics.
Contemporary Elite Theorists:
C. Wright Mills
C. Wright Mills, a prominent figure in contemporary elite theory, penned the influential book ‘The Power Elite’ in 1956. Within this work, he delved into the systems of power, class alliances, and relationships existing within the United States. Mills introduced the concept of the “Power Elite,” which he defined as a triumvirate of power groups comprising political, economic, and military entities. These three distinct but not entirely unified power-wielding bodies, according to Mills, exert significant influence over American politics and decision-making processes.
Mills contended that power predominantly resides in the hands of individuals occupying influential positions in the political, economic, and military realms, thus dominating the politics and decision-making landscape in the United States. In essence, he highlighted the erosion of democracy in advanced industrial societies, where power often transcends the purview of elected representatives.
In addition to ‘The Power Elite,’ Mills authored ‘White Collar: The American Middle Classes’ in 1951, where he explored the emergence of a new class consisting of white-collar workers and a salesmanship mentality that was prevalent in advanced country cities. Furthermore, in ‘The Sociological Imagination’ published in 1959, Mills delved into the interconnectedness of an individual’s personal life with social structures and historical developments.
G. William Domhoff
G. William Domhoff, in his book ‘Who Rules America?’ initially published in 1967, conducted extensive research into decision-making networks at both local and national levels. His objective was to elucidate the power structure in the United States. Domhoff’s central assertion is that an elite class, primarily composed of individuals who own and oversee large income-producing properties like banks and corporations, wields considerable influence over the American political and economic landscape.
James Burnham
James Burnham, in his book ‘The Managerial Revolution’ (1941), tackled the notion that genuine functional power rests in the hands of managers rather than political representatives or business leaders, particularly concerning control and ownership.
Robert D. Putnam
A distinguished American political scientist, Robert D. Putnam authored ‘Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community’ in 2000, an expansion of his 1995 essay titled “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital.” Putnam explored the crisis of social capital, representing a dramatic decline in social, civic, political, and associational life in the United States since the 1960s.
Robert Putnam argued that Americans’ reduced interest in one-on-one social interactions, debates, and deliberations, which once enriched American life and its social fabric, has undermined active civic engagement required for a robust democracy. This decline has manifested as reduced voter turnout, decreased public meeting attendance, limited involvement in committees, and diminished participation in political parties. Furthermore, Putnam pointed to the growing distrust of the government within American society.
Putnam employed the example of bowling to illustrate this trend. Although the number of people engaging in bowling has increased over the past two decades, participation in bowling leagues has decreased. When people bowl alone, they miss out on the social interaction and civic discussions that typically occur within a league environment.
Thomas R. Dye
In his book ‘Top Down Policymaking’ (2001), Thomas R. Dye asserted that U.S. public policy doesn’t emerge solely from the “demands of the people” but rather from an elite consensus concentrated in Washington, D.C., involving non-profit foundations, think tanks, special-interest groups, prominent lobbying and law firms, and other influential entities. Dye’s body of work includes titles such as ‘The Irony of Democracy’ (1970), ‘Politics in America’ (1993), ‘Understanding Public Policy’ (1972), ‘Who’s Running America?’ (1976), and ‘Who’s Running America? The Obama Reign’ (2014).
Ramond Aron
Raymond Aron, a prominent French sociologist and political philosopher. Aron argued that societies are shaped by a dominant elite class, which influences political, economic, and cultural affairs. He emphasized the significance of intellectual and moral elites who wield power through their ideas and values. Ramond Aron in his book – “Social Structures and the Ruling Class” divided ruling elites into five sub groups –
- Political Leaders
- Government Administrators
- Economic Directors
- Military Chiefs
- Leader of the Masses or Trade Unions
Aron’s theory highlights the dynamic and ever-changing nature of elites, as they adapt to societal changes. It provides a nuanced perspective on the role of elites in shaping the trajectory of societies, acknowledging the complexities of power and influence beyond traditional political elites.
Conclusion
Elite theory provides a critical lens through which to analyze power and influence within democratic societies. It challenges the ideal of equal representation and suggests that a small minority, often concentrated in political, economic, and military spheres, wields significant control over decision-making.
Prominent elite theorists like Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, Robert Michels, C. Wright Mills, and others have explored these power dynamics. While their perspectives may seem pessimistic about democracy, they offer valuable insights into how elite groups impact society.
Elite theory encourages us to examine the roles played by various elite groups and emphasizes the importance of transparency, accountability, and citizen participation to safeguard democratic principles. It remains relevant in our ever-evolving world, urging us to remain vigilant in protecting the integrity of democratic institutions.
Read More:
