Elite theory
[2] Elite theory opposes pluralism, a tradition that emphasizes how multiple major social groups and interests contribute to representative political outcomes that reflect the collective needs of society.
[5] Polybius effectively said this is due to a failure to properly apply checks and balances between the three mentioned forms as well as subsequent political institutions.
He divides the world into two groups: Mosca asserted that elites have intellectual, moral, and material superiority that is highly esteemed and influential.
[12] This macro-scale analysis sought to point out the degradation of democracy in "advanced" societies and the fact that power generally lies outside the boundaries of elected representatives.
He posited a structural-functional approach that mapped hierarchies and webs of interconnection within the city—mapping relationships of power between businessmen, politicians, clergy etc.
[13] This type of analysis was also used in later, larger scale, studies such as that carried out by M. Schwartz examining the power structures within the sphere of the corporate elite in the United States.
(1967), G. William Domhoff researched local and national decision-making process networks, seeking to illustrate the power structure in the United States.
He asserted, much like Hunter, that an elite class which owns and manages large income-producing properties (like banks and corporations) dominate the American power structure both politically and economically.
[15] Burnham's early work The Managerial Revolution sought to express the movement of all functional power into the hands of managers rather than politicians or businessmen—separating ownership and control.
[17] "If the dominant figures of the past hundred years have been the entrepreneur, the businessman, and the industrial executive, the ‘new men’ are the scientists, the mathematicians, the economists, and the engineers of the new intellectual technology.
"[18] Dye in his book Top Down Policymaking argues that U.S. public policy does not result from the "demands of the people", but rather from elite consensus found in Washington, D.C.–based non-profit foundations, think tanks, special-interest groups, and prominent lobbying and law firms.
In their statistical analysis of 1,779 policy issues, professors Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page found that "economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
Some critics disagree with Gilens and Pages' headline conclusion, but do believe that the dataset confirms that "the rich and middle (class) are effective at blocking policies that the poor want".
