Theory of Power Elite:

Relevance: Sociology paper I: thinkers

• Wright Mills explains elite rule (Theory of Power Elite) in institutional terms.                                             
• Mills explains elite rule in institutional rather than psychological terms. He rejected the view that members of the elite have superior qualities of the population. Instead he argues that the structure of institutions is such that those at the top of the institutional hierarchy largely monopolize power.
• Certain institutions occupy key ‘pivotal positions’ in society and the elite comprise those who hold ‘command posts’ in those institutions. Mills identifies three key institutions: Central Government, Business Class and Army. Those who occupy the command posts in these institutions from three elites.
• In practice, however, the interests and activities of the elites are sufficiently similar and interconnected to form a single ruling minority which Mills claims that ‘American capitalism is now in considerable part military capitalism’. Thus as tanks, guns and missiles pour from the factories, the interests of both the economic and military elites are served. In the same way Mills argues that business and government ‘cannot now be been as two distinct worlds’. He refers to political power is a powers elite which dominates American society and takes all decisions of major national and international importance.
• However, things were not always thus. The power elite owes its dominance to a change in the ‘institutional landscape’. In the nineteenth century economic power was fragmented among a multitude of small businesses. By the 1950s, it was concentrated in the hands of a few hundred giant corporations ‘which together hold the keys to economic decision’.
• Political power was similarly fragmented and localized and, in particular, state legislatures had considerable independence in the face of a weak central government. The federal government eroded the autonomy of the states and political power became increasingly decentralized. The growing threat of international conflicts has led to a vast increase in the size and power of the military. The local, state controlled military have been replaced by a centrally directed military organization. There developments have led to a centralization of decision making power. As a result, power is increasingly concentrated in the hands of those in the command posts of the key institutions.
• The cohesiveness and unity of the power elite is strengthened by the similarity of the social background of its members and the interchange and overlapping of personnel between and three elites. Members are drawn largely from the upper strata of society: they are mainly protestant, native-born Americans, from urban areas in the eastern USA. They share similar educational backgrounds and mix socially in the same high-prestige clubs. As a result they tend to share similar values and sympathies which provide a basis for mutual trust and cooperation.
• Within the power elite there is frequent interchange of personnel between the three elites. For example, a corporation director may become a politician and vice versa. At any one time, individuals may have footholds in more than one elite. Mills notes that ‘on the boards of directions we find a heavy overlapping among the members of these several elites’. Thus a general may sit on the board of a large corporation. Similarity of social origin and the interchange and overlapping of personnel strengthens the unity of the power elite.
• Mills argues that American society is dominated by power elite of ‘unprecedented power and unaccountability’. He claims that momentous decisions such as American entry into World War II and the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima were made by the power elite with little or no reference to the people. Despite the fact that such decisions affect all members of society, the power elite is not accountable for its actions either directly to the public or to any body-which represents the public interest.
• The rise of the power elite has led to ‘the decline of politics as a genuine and public debate of alternative decisions’. Mills sees no real differences between the two major political parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, and therefore the public are not provided with a choice of alternative policies. The bulk of the population is pictured as a passive and quiescent mass controlled by the power elite which subjects it to ‘instruments of psychic management and manipulation’. Excluded from the command posts of power the ‘man in the mass’ is told what to think, what to feel, what to do and what to hope for by mass media directed by the elite. Unconcerned with the major issues of the day, he is preoccupied with his personal world of work. Leisure, family and neighborhood.
• Free from popular control, the power elite pursue its own concerns power and self-aggrandizement. Mill says that owing to importance of political reasons that Hiroshima, Nagasaki (Japan) was attacked with nuclear bomb and was completely devastated. However, Cambodia, Iraq and now Afghanistan are suffering from the autocratic tendency and activities of American power-elite.
• Viewing their nature of this kind Mills predicted that whenever there happens a third world war, they would be responsible for it. Mills further opines that in internal matters the power elite is not committed to the mass.  It means if their policies favour the mass, it is merely incidental.  That is why American mass is always unhappy with governmental procedures.
• Mills’ conclusions about the nature and distribution of power on the national level are largely echoed in an investigation of power on the local level by Floyd Hunter, Community Power Structure is a study of a large southern city in the USA given the pseudonym of ‘Regional City’ but generally believed to be Atlanta, Georgia.
• Hunter claims that power rests in a small decision making group which is dominated by ‘the businessmen’s small decision making group which is dominated by ‘the businessmen’s class’. This primarily economic elite rules by ‘persuasion, intimidation, coercion and if necessary force’. Through its finance of local political parties, it directly influence who is elected and largely controls local politicians from the state governor.
• With its power to regulate finance, the economic elite can control the granting of mortgages and level to influence decisions in its favour. Hunter examine a number of important local policy decisions including urban renewal and a sales tax. He claims that the economic elite formulated policy on these issues which was then translated into legislation by the politicians.

Critical Analysis of Elite Theory:

• Robert Dahl criticized Mills that his statements are only suggestive and not conclusive. According to Dahl, Mills has emphasized only on one aspect of power-elite whereas their second aspect is equally important that they work for the welfare of the mass with full commitment.  It is not appropriate here to assume that power elite possesses the complete control.  In this reference only Dahl has talked about plural interest groups who get the policies turned in favour of the mass.
• Mills theory is also criticised for having a narrow view as it was based on his observations of the American society only. Social facts in Latin American, Asian and African Societies are different.
• After rise and spread of industrial revolution, high rate of division of labour, specialists has further diffused power in the society.
• Classical elite theory is simplistic in conception and ignores the differences between various types of ruling system like modern democracies and feudal societies. Pareto and Mosca also fail to provide a method of measuring and distinguishing between the supposedly superior qualities of elites.
• According to T B Bottomore – ‘Elite circulation may not be always there’. In Indian society, Brahmins , Kshatriyas and survived for long as elite due to closed nature of caste system.
• Altruistic motives in Social action of individuals also matters and power alone is not the guiding force in society. With altruistic motivation, Public opinion also matters these days and even elites have to listen to it.
• According to Westergaard and Resler, power does not lie with those who make the decisions, but, is visible through its consequences. Whoever reaps the largest rewards in the end, holds the maximum