'Theories of Power' presentation given to Politics A Level conference, Queens University Belfast, April 2012

1. Theories of power: pluralist,
elitist and Marxist perspectives
Dr. John Barry
School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy
j.barry@qub.ac.uk

2. Key questions
How do Elitist, Pluralist and Marxists theories
define power?
Are such definitions of power adequate for
making sense of contemporary societies?
What understanding of politics or ‘the
political’ does each theory give rise to, and
should those views be challenged or
endorsed?

3. Why power?
Power is an ‘essentially contested concept’ (like ‘democracy’ ‘justice’ ‘equality’ etc.)
Power is an inherently political concept
Definitions of power and definitions of the political’ are interdependent
Theoretical perspectives on power are to a large extent theoretical perspectives on the
stuff of politics itself
That is, definitions of power are constitutive of what we mean by ‘politics’ and ‘the
political’

4. Theories of Power: Pluralist, Elitist
and Marxist
Pluralism – how power is distributed
Elitism – how power is concentrated
Marxism – class conflict and economic power

5. Pluralism
Assumes that power is dispersed within society to the
various interest groups which constitute that society, that
political decisions (including policy decisions) are the
outcome of competition between many different groups
representing many different interests and that the state
acts as a more or less neutral referee.

6. Pluralism Analysed
1. Political power is fragmented and dispersed.
2. The existence of classes, political parties, status groups, pressure
groups, interest groups, etc. testifies to the distribution of power
3. Groups provide a more effective means of representation than
election.
4. Public policy is the outcome of group forces acting against one
another.
5. No one group will dominate for every group there will be an equal and
opposite.
6. The larger the group the more influence it will have.
7. Policies are the product of bargaining and compromise, will tend to be
moderate , fair to all and conducive to social stability.

7. INSIDER GROUPS – MORE
POWERFUL
Practically part of the
establishment
Able to work closely with
elected and appointed officials
in central or local government.
Not always an advantage, since
it is conferred upon those with
largely compatible views to the
government of the day.

8. OUTSIDER GROUPS – LESS
POWERFUL
Outsider Groups:
Do not have easy access to
politicians and civil
servants.
Outside status a sign of
weakness.
OR groups can choose to
‘Tunnelers’,direct action remain on outside so as not
environmentalists – be be compromised .
Manchester Airport, 1997

9. Critique of Pluralism
“The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly
chorus sings with a strong upperclass accent”
(Schattschneider, 1960:p35)
Power is not dispersed
State is not neutral
Society is unequal

10. Limitations of Pluralist theory
An overly ‘optimistic’ view of power that underestimates the
importance of informal power outside official decision-making
processes
e.g., ‘old boys’ networks, often based on class or ethnic, religious etc
bases
Overestimates the ability of interest groups outside traditional elite
spheres to actually influence political processes and outcomes
Social, political and economic capital is often key for access to
decision makers
Overly reliant on the power of competition to mitigate real social
and economic inequalities in society
Resources available to different interest groups are not necessarily
proportionate to their overall levels of support in society

11. Elitist theory of power
In all societies and political organisations there exists a small class of
rulers and decision-makers that performs key political functions and
monopolises power, and a larger class that is ruled over and largely
passive and marginalised in political affairs.
The ruling elite is drawn from the higher echelons of political office,
the corporate sector and the military; an almost‘aristocratic’ nature to
this self-perpetuating elite’s exercise of power.
For Pareto elite power is an inevitable outcome of large-scale
organisations (a division of labour), related to Roberto Michels’
concept the ‘iron law of oligarchy’.

12. Elitism Analysed
There are many sources of elite power (wealth, traditional or religious
authority etc.)
‘Democratic elitism’ – modern democratic elections – opportunities for the
normally passive masses to ‘vote’ in different/same elites to rule over them
Competition between different elites for election, participation by pressure
group elites in between elections, interaction with bureaucratic elites, are
regarded as the ways in which democracy operates in a modern liberal
democratic capitalist state.

13. Elitism and Groups
Distribution of power in society reflect the inequalities of wealth. Some
groups have few resources, other have many.
Some interests are unorganised; some rely on others to protect them;
(minority groups, children, the homeless, mentally ill, poor)
Groups fight their battles in a system which is systematically loaded in
favour of middle and upper class interests, or financial interests.
Organisations themselves are inherently oligarchic. A few leaders wield
power, and are often un-elected and unaccountable to members
(Michel's’ ‘iron law’).

14. Limitations of Elitist theory
Not all historical societies have been hierarchical with an elite
e.g., acephalous tribes and egalitarian societies (though elitism as a
theory is only usually applied to modern societies)_
Distinction between elites and masses is oversimplified?
Universal education and welfare-based meritocracies in post-WWII
Europe
Unable to engage with normative issues of democracy and
justice
Simply presents the existence of ruling elites as ‘inevitable’and
democracy reduced to competition between elites (or sections of the
same elite) to rule

15. Marxism Analysed
“The simple idea is that the policy process, far from
being a rational weighing up of alternatives, is driven
by powerful socio-economic forces that set the
agenda, structure decision-makers choices, constrain
implementation and ensure that the interests of the
most powerful (or of the system as a whole)
determines the outputs and the outcomes of the
political system”
(Peter John, Analysing Public Policy, 1999. p.92)

16. Marxism Analysed
The state’s function is to protect and reproduce capitalism.
Public policies, thus, reflect the role of the state in trying to
regulate the economy and ensure social and political
stability.
In other words, the state formulates and implements policy
to reflect the interests of capitalism and the
capitalist/ruling class.

17. Marxist theory (contd.)
Sources of power:
– Ownership and control of economic property, wealth, productive assets of society,
including control of finance
– Control over ideas, through the media and processes of socialisation more generally,
such as education: ideology/hegemony
– Control over the state
• Role of ideology/hegemony: ‘is not the supreme exercise of power to get another or others
to have the desires you want them to have?’ (Steven Lukes, Power: A Radical View, 1973)
‘False consciousness’
For Marxists, the source and exercise of power is not always readily apparent and therefore
needs to be deciphered; hence the great ability of power to be ‘hidden’ and not immediately
obvious.

18. Upper Class
1% Capitalist Class Model
Corporate
of Class Structure
Class
14% Upper Middle under capitalism
Class
Mean
Income
30% Middle Class
Median
Income
30% Working Class
13% Working Poor
Poverty Line
Underclass
12%

19. Limitations of Marxist Account
State is not autonomous & elites are not unified.
Doesn’t always explain the variation and complexity of public policy and other
political decisions made by the state and its agencies.
Doesn’t allude to the variety of groups involved in formulating policy.
Monocentric view of governments goals doesn’t acknowledge the multiplicity of
social and political objectives expressed in the formulation of policy.

20. Limitations of Marxist theory
• Overemphasises the importance of power originating in
economic relations – pays insufficient attention to non-
economic bases of political power
• Exaggerates the potential for class conflict by neglecting
the possibilities for non-capitalist classes to harness power
and state control/influence in capitalist societies
Exaggerates the ability of a capitalist elite to manufacture
and perpetuate ‘false consciousness’ among the working
class majority
Underestimates the capacity for the reform of capitalism by
liberal democracy- through welfare state provision and
state regulation of the free market for example

21. Summary
Elitist Pluralist Marxist
Source of power elite grouping societal interests capitalist mode of
production
Nature of power concentrated dispersed concentrated
Analysis of neutral positive critical
power
Ultimate verdict accept the system engage with the overthrow the
system system

22. Conclusion
1. pluralist, in which power is diffused widely amongst groups
between which there is competition for political office through
the electoral system, which is open to all.
2. elitist, in which power is concentrated in leaders who may
be elected or appointed, for whose posts there is little or no
competition, entry to which is limited.
3. Marxist, in which power is distributed according to the
accumulation of capital. Owners of capital operate behind the
scene to manipulate the political process, and indoctrinate the
mass of the working classes into accepting the unequal
economic structure of society.