Power in Democracy: Elitist Theory

After reading The Power Elite and my other classmates posts, I would have to say that a power in a democracy lies in the hands of an elite, specifically I would tend to agree with with a theory like the Marxist Theory as described in Wilson's Theories of Governance. I think everyone can agree that every person's voice and power is not equal in our democracy, and that there are elites that exist. I would argue that the elite rules through the power of money, or use of the economy, to suit their own interests whether economic, political or some other kind of interest. However, it would be incorrect to say that there are interests that exist that are non-economic because ultimately all interests boil down to some sort of exchange of wealth. Many of my classmates have used Bill Gates and the Common Core as an example of a way a corporate leader can influence the passage of legislation. He pumped a ridiculous amount of money into the system to aid that legislation. It is also important to note that it takes billions of dollars to become the President and millions of dollars to become a Congressmen and then the people who win these elections get nice pay checks and benefits. Clearly, money plays a role in our democracy because politics in our country is based on self interest and generally the most important self interest is acquiring wealth. I mentioned in class before about the donors to the Obama reelection campaign that are now ambassadors to other countries. They spent money to gain important positions in the government and further their interests. Here is the clip:  

Here it is evident that there was an exchange of wealth/power that suited the different elites and subelites needs. Two great examples of this theory in action can be observed in the actions of both the Koch brothers and the NRA. Both of these two interest groups(if you can call the Koch brothers an interest group, which I believe you can) have very large sums of money that they use to influence politicians. I believe around 90% of Americans are in favor of background checks on all gun sales(I'm not sure of the exact statistic, I couldn't find my copy of The Rolling Stone with that factoid in it) but still nothing has been done about it. Why is this the case? The NRA is able to throw money at the problem to help protect their interests which is selling guns. The Koch brothers spend unfathomable amounts of money in campaigns to try and elect the most right wing candidates possible so they can continue to make ridiculous sums of money. That is part of the reason why Eric Cantor lost in the primaries back in the summer and why there has been a rise of Tea Party candidates. These two cases demonstrate clearly that economic interests are the reason behind all political activities. Some people would say that the war in Iraq was over oil, another economic interest. In another post I read the comment about welfare and how it would exist if all elites were self interested. Well, I would argue that a welfare system is in the benefit of the elite because it puts more money in people's hands that will eventually get back to the elite and it also placates the "workers" as Marx would call them. I also would have to say that the Bureaucratic Elite theory makes sense but the only issue is that the bureaucrats that run the government are paid by the elite and must ultimately follow the elites wishes if they wish to make money. Ultimately, despite the presence of a ruling elite all power in all systems of life resides with the people. The way the elite, or "capitalists", gain the power is through the people giving it to them as Mills mentioned in the last paragraph of the reading. Convincing someone to give up their power is incredible easy so elites will always exist. Here is another clip from the Daily Show that kind of discusses the issue of people giving up power:  

Here is the link to the two parts of the extend interview:

Part 1

Part 2