 |
These seem to be 5 advantages the power elite has
(although I would reword coercion). |
I agree with C. Wright Mill's stance on the existence of the power elite and the fact that this group, made up of corporate, political, and military leaders, is extremely influential in terms of policy making in America. These groups consist of people who hold positions that allow them to make major, influential decisions - and our country relies on these people to make decisions. Many people refer to history when considering the elite, and reference events such as the dropping of the bombs on Japan during World War II without the people's consent. This event shows how policy is oftentimes held in the hands of a small group of people, and as a result, an elite faction is able to have much power over governmental occurrences. Even today this remains true, with much policy being decided on in a very centralized system. For example, I agree with Emily completely, and think that high-profile citizens like Beyonce or Bill Gates , who have a large fan following, have a heightened ability to get policy that they desire passed, because of the amount of influence the have over mass amounts of citizens who will help collectively push for reform. If they want something done, all they have to do is publicly advocate for the cause and they will very likely gain sweeping momentum, which will then be a source of pressure and influence on policymakers, who will most likely listen to what is being said by these prominent figures. Ultimately, there is a relatively small group of people, who all have a place in the triangle of power created by the three big institutions, who have an ability to push policy through, and this as a result begin to influence life of the citizens. For example, Mills stated that "Religious, educational, and family institutions are not autonomous centers of national power...increasingly shaped by the big three...". What we can garner from this statement is that the elite has such a tremendous influence on policies that what ends up occurring is influence over other basic institutions. This is proven in the following lines in which it is said that religious institutions provide chaplains to armed forces, schools train people for corporate and army jobs, and extended family is influenced by economic and military factors that pertain to them. These examples show that the big three institutions have power not only over policy, but also on other administrations as well. The linkage of the big three creates a huge force that has tremendous influence on so many aspects of life. And because many people do not know or care about policy in the government and who is behind it all, people give the elite the power to make decisions because they themselves do not want to get involved - what happens in the end is that many citizens end up handing over their power to the elite, which ultimately gives it more control and more power to make the influence it desires.
Here is a more recent article on the elite theory:
Forbes Article
I agree with both things you said about celebrities with large groups of followers having a lot of impact and about how a minority exists that has a large influence on policy-making. in my opinion after our class today, however, is that the elites have more power when it comes to policy-making than the large amount of people that may support celebrities and famous figures. This is because as said in our notes these small interest groups are able to focus on their own individual goals rather than how the celebrities just state their general opinions on general topics. Even if these celebrities did only state their opinions on specific things, however, they would still not be as possible because with the size of their followers there is no way they can have any major impact because of the free-rider problem and because they are unable to organize themselves as efficiently. I believe you were agreeing with the elites being more powerful, as I just explained, in your post. If so, perfect do you have any further evidence, but if not why????
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the theory that corporate, military, and political figures and groups have a tremendous influence on policy and are the main forces of reform in our government. Like you said, these groups benefit from being small and consolidated, and thus the level of organization they have is directly correlated to their level of efficiency in getting policy passed through. Also, the amount of money corporations and military leaders, among other elite groups, have and can donate is a clear correlator to their access to politicians, as we learned in class. Because wealthier groups have more resources, they also have an advantage in terms of access to politicians, and thus, it is extremely possible for them to get their policies pushed forward. It is clear that these groups have significantly more influence than America’s common people, because through this idea that elites can more efficiently pass self-interested policy, it is obvious that key political figures and other elites are the ones in control of policy (Congress’ current approval rating of about 14% is a pretty good example of this…). After reading your comment about celebrities, I would have to agree that while certainly influential and prominent in directing the policies that are put in place (by the elite political figures), they have nowhere near as much power as the big three groups do, primarily because of the fact that, while wealthy, their groups are unorganized and large, allowing for a potential free-rider problem that can create inefficiency in pushing reform forward.
ReplyDelete