M1

30 October 2023 10:47 PM

MODULE 1
Power, Authority and Legitimacy
1.1. Power as a concept in Political Science
1.1.1 Meaning and definitions of Power
1.1.2 Exercise of political power and role of the Government in decision making
1.1.3 External influences on Exercise of Political Power
(Role of Interests groups, Lobbying as a technique, Examples from India and the USA)
1.1.4. Theories of Power- Elite theory and Marxist theory of Power (Specified)

1.2 Authority as a Concept in Political Science

1.2.1 Meaning and Features of Authority - De jure and De facto Authority
1.2.2 Max Webber’s Classification of Authority
1.2.3 Sources – How is Power legalised?
1.3. Comparative Study – Power and Authority (Specified)
1.4. Legitimacy - Concept and Relevance of Legitimacy in the Exercise of Political Power

Power-
O.P Gauba - Pg 310

Exercise of political power

The exercise of political power refers to the actions and processes through which individuals, groups, or institutions exert influence, control, or authority over
political decisions and the behavior of others within a society. Political power is a complex and multifaceted concept, and its exercise can take various forms.
Here are key aspects of the exercise of political power:

1. Decision-Making:
- Political power involves the ability to make decisions that affect the allocation of resources, the formulation of policies, and the direction of a society.
Decision-making can occur at various levels, from local governments to national and international institutions.

2. Legitimacy:
- The legitimacy of political power is crucial. Legitimate power is typically derived from the consent of the governed, often through democratic processes such
as elections. Governments and leaders need the trust and acceptance of the people to effectively exercise political power.

3. Authority and Coercion:

- Political power often comes with the authority to enforce laws and regulations. This authority can be backed by the legitimate use of force or coercion. The
state's monopoly on the use of force is a defining characteristic of political power.

4. Influence and Persuasion:

- The exercise of political power includes the ability to shape public opinion, influence attitudes, and persuade individuals or groups to support specific policies
or political agendas. This can be achieved through various means, including media, propaganda, and public relations.

5. Institutions and Bureaucracy:

- Political power is exercised through institutions and bureaucratic structures. Governments, legislatures, and administrative bodies play a significant role in
implementing decisions and policies, contributing to the exercise of political power.

6. Political Parties and Interest Groups:

- Political power is often distributed among various political parties and interest groups. These entities work to influence decision-making processes, advocate
for specific policies, and represent the interests of their constituents.

7. International Relations:
- Nation-states exercise political power on the international stage through diplomacy, treaties, and participation in international organizations. The ability to
influence global events and collaborate with other nations is a manifestation of political power.

8. Economic Power:
- Economic resources can translate into political power. Governments that control significant economic resources, such as natural wealth or a robust economy,
may wield considerable influence domestically and internationally.

9. Social and Cultural Influence:

- Social and cultural factors, including traditions, values, and norms, play a role in the exercise of political power. Leaders and institutions may draw on cultural
narratives to gain support and legitimacy.

Understanding the exercise of political power is essential for analyzing political systems, governance structures, and the dynamics of societal organization. It also
plays a crucial role in discussions about democracy, authoritarianism, and the balance of power within a given political context.

Role of the Government in decision making

The role of government in decision-making is a fundamental aspect of governance and public administration. Governments are responsible for making a wide
range of decisions that affect the well-being of their citizens and the overall functioning of society. Here are key aspects of the government's role in decision-
making:

1.Policy Formulation:
- Governments are primarily responsible for formulating policies that address societal issues, challenges, and opportunities. These policies can cover areas such
as healthcare, education, economic development, environmental protection, and more.

Pol Sci 2 Page 1

 as healthcare, education, economic development, environmental protection, and more.

2. Public Goods and Services:

- Governments provide essential public goods and services that might not be efficiently provided by the private sector alone. This includes infrastructure, public
safety, healthcare, education, and environmental protection.

3. Resource Allocation:
- Governments make decisions about the allocation of resources, including budgetary allocations for different programs and services. This involves balancing
competing priorities and needs within the constraints of available resources.

4. Legislation and Regulation:

- Governments enact laws and regulations to establish a legal framework for society. This involves making decisions about the rules that govern individual and
collective behavior, business practices, and various aspects of daily life.

5. Implementation and Enforcement:

- Once policies and laws are formulated, the government is responsible for implementing and enforcing them. This involves creating administrative structures,
coordinating agencies, and ensuring that the intended outcomes are achieved.

6. Representation:
- In democratic systems, governments represent the will of the people. Elected officials are expected to make decisions that reflect the preferences and needs
of their constituents. Public input and feedback play a role in shaping these decisions.

7. Conflict Resolution:
- Governments play a role in mediating and resolving conflicts within society. This can include disputes between individuals, groups, or even between different
levels of government. The legal system often serves as a means for resolving conflicts.

8. Diplomacy and Foreign Policy:

- Governments engage in decision-making at the international level through diplomacy and foreign policy. This includes decisions about international relations,
treaties, alliances, and participation in international organizations.

9. Social Justice and Equity:

- Governments are often tasked with addressing issues of social justice and promoting equity. This involves making decisions aimed at reducing inequalities,
combating discrimination, and ensuring that all citizens have access to opportunities and resources.

10. Emergency Response and Crisis Management:

- Governments play a critical role in making decisions during emergencies and crises. This includes natural disasters, public health emergencies, and other
unforeseen events. Decisions may involve resource mobilization, coordination of response efforts, and communication with the public.

11. Planning for the Future:

- Governments engage in long-term planning to anticipate and address future challenges. This can include decisions related to infrastructure development,
technological advancements, and changes in demographics and societal needs.

Understanding the government's role in decision-making is essential for citizens to participate in the democratic process, hold leaders accountable, and
contribute to shaping the policies that impact their lives. It also highlights the importance of transparency, accountability, and effective governance in ensuring
that decisions align with the public interest.

Interest Groups
Interest groups are a specific type of pressure groups. To recap, pressure groups are groups of people who usually have something in common and join together
to organise activities that promote their interests or values, influence public opinion, and put pressure on policymakers. Pressure groups include:
• Interest groups. Interest groups' membership is usually restricted and they promote the interest of their membership or of a specific section of society which can
be a profession. An example of an interest group is the Teachers' Union, only teachers and teacher students can join and the union represents the interests of
teachers only.
• Cause groups. Anyone can become a member of cause groups and they usually raise big issues affecting society as a whole. Sometimes the issues raised do not
affect the members of the cause group, but they represent the interest of a group in society who isn't as able to speak for themselves. An example of a cause
group is the Refugee Council: anyone can support the refugee council and they'd be fighting for refugees' rights and wellbeing.
• Social movements. Social movements have similar objectives to cause groups but they are more loosely structured and usually more politically radical. A good
example of a social movement is #MeToo.
Interest groups are groups with restricted membership that work to promote the interests of their membership
The first recorded interest group gathered for the purpose of freeing John Wilkes in mid-18th century England. Wilkes had spoken out against the establishment
and proposed a new Bill of Rights.
As societies have become bigger and more complex over the last couple of hundreds of years, individuals who do not feel represented by the governments, have
united and organised to be better heard.
Functions of interest group
The main function of interest groups is to ensure their points of view are heard by policymakers and translated into the laws of the country. However, there are
other, more subtle functions that interest groups play.
Representation of members
Interest groups have to represent a specific subsection of society. Often membership to interest groups is restricted and members must meet specific criteria to
join. For instance, to join the National Farmer's Union, members must be "connected to the agricultural sector"1.
Interest groups must use their political influence to represent the views of their members.
The British Medical Association considers representing and negotiating the pay and rights of doctors and medical students as its primary function.

Education
Interest groups can be great at gathering and presenting issues that the government might not have been aware of, and, by the same token, the members of
each group are likely to know more about the subject they represent than an average politician. This knowledge can be, and sometimes is, used by governments
to draft policies that are more informed and therefore more inclusive.
In the UK the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) launched a consultation in March 2021 involving the National Farmer's Union to
comment on its draft policy statement on environmental principles
Benefiting members

Pol Sci 2 Page 2

 Benefiting members
An interest group can benefit their members directly.
• Membership to the National Rifle Association (NRA) includes travel discounts and specific life insurance policies.
• Membership to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) includes a regular magazine on campaigns as well as plenty of information about nuclear
disarmament.
Funding political parties
In some democracies, interest groups can provide financial support to the candidate in an election that most closely represents their views.
Trade unions are one of the Labour Party's major funders.
Improving democracy
The functions mentioned above are all part of the more overarching ideal, which is that interest groups can make democracy better.
"How?", you may ask.
• Interest groups facilitate political participation by providing a structure for citizens to channel their voices and grievances through to their government.
• They also hold governments to account by tracking its activities in relation to the issues the interest groups care about.
• Ensuring pluralism. As different interest groups represent the interest of many different groups in society, they ensure different voices get heard
Pluralism is a philosophy that recognises the importance of the peaceful coexistence of people and groups in society from different ethnic, social, political,
religious and economic backgrounds
In the real world, of course, not all different groups are as able as each other to carry out their functions. Let's think back to some of the groups we have
discussed. As I am sure you can guess, the differences in resources, organisational levels, alignment to government's views, and, crucially, type of government
( democratic or authoritarian) mean that not all interest groups' views are taken into account as equals.

India
Interest Groups, also called special interest group, advocacy group, or pressure group, any association of individuals or organizations, usually formally organized,
that, on the basis of one or more shared concerns, attempts to influence public policy in its favor. All interest groups share a desire to affect government policy to
benefit themselves or their causes. Their goal could be a policy that exclusively benefits group members or one segment of society (e.g., government subsidies for
farmers) or a policy that advances a broader public purpose (e.g., improving air quality). They attempt to achieve their goals by lobbying that is, by attempting to
bring pressure to bear on policy makers to gain policy outcomes in their favor.

Furthermore, interest groups exist at all levels of government—national, state, provincial, and local—and increasingly they have occupied an important role in
international affairs. The common goals and sources of interest groups obscure, however, the fact that they vary widely in their form and lobbying strategies both
within and across political systems. This article provides a broad overview that explains these differences and the role that interest groups play in society.

There Contribution in different fields in India

• Business Groups – Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), Associated Chamber of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) etc
• Trade Unions – Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS), Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS)
• Educational Field :- PRATHAM
• Professional Groups – Indian Medical Association (IMA), Bar Council of India (BCI), All India Federation of University and College Teachers (AIFUCT)
• Agrarian Groups- All India Kisan Sabha, Bharatiya Kisan Union, etc
• Tribal Groups – National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), Tribal National Volunteers (TNU) in Tripura, League of Assam, etc.
• Ideology based Groups – Narmada Bachao Andolan, Chipko Movement, Women’s Rights Organisation, India Against Corruption etc.
Interest Groups may achieve their targets through various means- legal or illegal, peaceful or violent, honest or corrupt etc. That’s why there are some issues with
these groups which create problems in the society like narrow views regarding government programme and policies, lead the public against the government,
riots, act as barriers in development work etc.

USA

• ABA Commission on Homelessness and Poverty.

• Affordable Housing Industry Information.
• American Association of People with Disabilities.
• American Association of Retired Persons.
• American Consulting Engineers Council.
• American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
• American Foundation for AIDS Research.

Lobbying
Lobbying is the lawful activity that influences political decisions and public officials in the policies and decisions they make to benefit the larger groups.
Many people can do lobbying, including:
1. Private individuals
2. Corporations
3. Interest groups
4. Government officials
However, some professional lobbyists do their business by trying to influence legislation and government actions on behalf of their clients and can work with
individuals and non-profit organizations to achieve their goals.
A lobbyist is a person employed or has a contract, to influence another person or a governmental entity on behalf of their employers

Example
You probably heard of Facebook (now it's called Meta). In 2020, they spent more than $5.4 million hiring lobbyist firms to advocate for legislation that will benefit
them in the topics of blockchain, content moderation, and data analysis.1

Types of Lobbying
Lobbying can happen by directly reaching a legislator to influence their decision or by indirect pressure on legislators. There's also a type of lobbying that occurs
only during the election period.

Direct Lobbying
Direct lobbying is the Act of influencing, or trying to influence, decisions by appealing directly to the officials who enact those decisions. For example, when a
lobbying firm directly communicates with a congress member to make a decision that will benefit the company that hired them.
Direct lobbying can include meetings, phone calls, or direct communication with policymakers about a specific issue to achieve their goals. They accomplish this

Pol Sci 2 Page 3

 Direct lobbying can include meetings, phone calls, or direct communication with policymakers about a specific issue to achieve their goals. They accomplish this
by building a professional relationship with the policymaker and explaining the problem at hand, giving them quality information to build credibility on the issue
and provide assistance to make it possible.
During the first months of 2022, the oil industry spent $12.4 million on lobbying directly to legislators to mitigate the consequences of the Russian invasion of
Ukraine. As a result, more than 20 senators signed a letter recommending to President Biden different changes that affect energy policies.

Electoral Lobbying

Electoral lobbying happens when a group or an individual funds or directs resources to a candidate's electoral campaign that favours their interest. This doesn't
mean that if they win and hold public office, they will make decisions in favour of them. However, they fund their campaign efforts hoping they make decisions to
honour the donor's interests.

In 2020, the NRA spent millions supporting Donald Trump's electoral campaign in hopes he would favour political decisions that protected their interests.

But electoral lobbying doesn't happen only with presidential campaigns. It can also help congresspeople in their campaign finance, governors, and mayors at a
state level. Electoral lobbying is a way for them to raise financial support through fundraisers, donations, and PACs.

Electoral lobbying is a solution many electoral candidates seek to fund complex and expensive political campaigns. In return, they have the elected official's
support once and if they reach public office.
Due to this, electoral lobbying is one of the most influential types of lobbying in the United States, with a significant impact on the legislation and decisions of
public officers during their tenure. Due to ethics, no elected official can publicly say the decisions they make are affected by this. Still, the compromise with their
donors is expected to hold after they are elected.

Grassroots, or indirect lobbying, relies on mass actions by a community impacted by the issue to influence policy. Instead of going to policymakers directly, they
engage with the community, so they can contact government officials to influence their decision.
Non-profit organizations usually do this or interest groups that can approach government officials directly, either for lack of means or because the issue will be
better heard from the large community.
They use tools such as the internet, social media, online petitions, and public gatherings to bring awareness about a particular issue and educate the community
on what needs to be changed.
Black Lives Matter is a significant global social movement, with a large US presence, challenging and fighting racism. It's also one of the most notable examples of
grassroots lobbying. They have successfully lobbied for police reform in several states using protests and social media.
Government Lobbying
Lobbying benefits the government in many ways. They facilitate the communication and interests of the public and public officiants and help them shed light on
what the general public needs in ways they wouldn't know without the noise lobbying can make.
Elected officials must make decisions on behalf of others and work toward their constituents' interests. A conflict of interest exists if elected officials find
themselves in a situation where they benefit from a specific law or decision. That's why there's a very thin line between lobbying and bribery, which can
negatively impact the government.
To avoid this, governments often regulate what lobbying is and how it can be done to prevent political corruption and promote transparency.

India
• In the US and Europe, lobbying has been made legal and is legitimised. In India, there is no such law that makes lobbying lawful. India’s lobbying industry is
massive and has an effect on public policies. A legal mechanism and framework for lobbying can be beneficial for India as it will ensure transparency in how
lobbying groups run.

• Thus, if there are no laws for lobbying in India, the question arises of whether that makes it illegal. The answer is no. The law is silent on this issue. If a particular
group tries to influence public policy through a social campaign for the greater good, it cannot be termed illegal if the group is not breaking a law.

• There are no laws in India that legitimise lobbying in India. But that does not imply that lobbying does not happen in India. Many organisations and business
groups try to influence public policy and legislation through lobbying.

Business Lobbying in India: How Does Lobbying Influence Government Policies in India?

• The country does not have any legislation sanctioning lobbying’s validity as a lawful profession as it does in other democracies like the US, the UK, Europe, and
others. However, this does not indicate that the industry does not exist in the world’s largest democracy. Lobbying has long been seen as a way for businesses,
corporations, and other interest groups to communicate with the government.

• Institutions like ASSOCHAM (Associated Chamber of Commerce in India) and FICCI (Federation of India Chambers of Commerce and Industry) have worked for
decades to help members by influencing key decisions and policy concerns. These groups have a significant impact on India’s policies. Professionals in
government agencies argue for the adoption of a policy that they have proposed and how it benefits a broader group of people at these meetings which are not
held in secret. The government benefits from this since lobbyists provide insight into public opinion.

• Many foreign and domestic corporations are currently operating as corporate lobbyists because of a lack of regulation in India about what constitutes lobbying.
This is a detrimental side effect of the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes lobbying. As a result, lobbying is considered unethical in the country because
of the lack of a transparent legal framework.

The Question of Legality of Lobbying in India

There is a perception in India that lobbying is the same as bribing or that it is unethical. However, the lack of legal regulations in the country cannot be taken as
evidence that lobbying, in general, is immoral or unethical.

Separate laws for lobbying in India are necessary to remove any doubts about its legality. The reasons for that are as follows:

• The industry will become more open and accountable to the public. The legalisation of lobbying could lead to the disclosure of all investments and expenditures
made by these agencies in lobbying activities, similar to Western regulations.

• As a result of these disclosures, research and analysis might be done on how legislation evolves from its inception to becoming a law.

Pol Sci 2 Page 4

• As a result of these disclosures, research and analysis might be done on how legislation evolves from its inception to becoming a law.

• Lobbying is an essential part of the legislative process since it is impossible for a legislator to have all of the necessary expertise and information about all aspects
of governance and the well-being of citizens.

USA

Lobbying is often misinterpreted or criticized as bribery, which it is not. Lobbying is a practice performed by either individuals or organizations whereby public
campaigns (which are legally registered with the government) are undertaken to pressure governments into specific public policy actions. The legality of lobbying
comes from the Constitution and from our participatory democracy.
First Amendment Protection
Often overlooked in the many rights protected by the 1st Amendment is the right to lobby. While never expressly using the term “lobby,” the right “to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances” is specifically noted. This translates into modern times as a right to lobby, a right addressed in the U.S. Constitution.

Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995

By rule of law, the Lobbying Disclosure Act also provides for the legality of political lobbying. Concerning both the legislative and executive branches of the
government, this act defines what constitutes a lobbyist and her required government registration, what lobbyist actions consist of, and how lobbyists must
comply in order to avoid penalties. The Lobbying Disclosure Act was enacted to ensure that lobbying is publicly registered. While acknowledging the importance
of lobbying, the act allows the public to evaluate any undue influences that may be affecting decision making in the government.

Participatory Democracy
In addition to the legal framework that protects lobbying, lobbying is further supported as an inherent part of participatory democracy. For our government to
succeed and protect the rights of its citizens the citizens must participate; lobbying is a way for our citizens to do that. Lobbyists represent the interests of citizens
who do not have the opportunity or access to represent them personally to the government. Through lobbying, their interests are still heard. Economist Thomas
Sowell provides that governments do not work without lobbying: “Reform through democratic legislation requires either ‘public consensus or a powerful minority
lobby.’”

Power in Numbers
As alluded to above, lobbyists serve an important purpose in aggregating the interests of many individual constituents. Any individual can have a cause, but with
over 17,000 bills introduced to the U.S. Congress over every two-year session for an example, it is close to impossible for one voice to be heard, let alone
actioned upon.4 Lobbyists can represent many voices, and in addition, their size and singular focus allow for research and fact-checking needed to bolster
arguments.
For perspective on the tremendous size of lobby groups, the total dollars spent in 2022 on lobbying interests totaled over $4.09 billion dollars and the total
number of lobbyists employed reached almost exceeded 12,600.5 The money spent on lobbying in 2017 is not an anomaly. Total lobbying spending has exceeded
$3 billion since 2008.

The Bottom Line

Lobbying is an integral part of a modern participatory government and is legally protected. In the U.S., the right to lobby is protected by both the 1st Amendment
and the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, and additionally by the inherent need for participation in our democratic environment.

Class theory
Title: Class as the Source of Power: Marx, Engels, and Gramsci's Perspectives

Introduction:
The concept of power in political theory has been extensively explored through various lenses, with class perspective playing a pivotal role in shaping ideologies.
Developed primarily by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 19th century, this theory posits that political power is a direct outcome of economic power. This
essay delves into the Marxist perspective on power, emphasizing the intrinsic link between economic and political dominance. Additionally, Antonio Gramsci's
contribution to Marxist thought is examined, introducing the concept of hegemony and emphasizing the importance of cultural and ideological dimensions in
maintaining capitalist rule.

Marxist Class Perspective on Power:

Marx and Engels, in their analysis of society, identified class as the organizing category for the exercise of power. Economic power, vested in the ownership of
means of social production, determined the division of society into antagonistic classes: the haves (dominant class) and the have-nots (dependent class). This
division was evident in ancient, medieval, and modern societies, represented respectively by masters and slaves, lords and serfs, and capitalists and workers.

The means of social production, encompassing land, capital, machinery, and labor, were owned by the dominant class in each epoch. The dependent class faced
exploitation, leading to class struggle and conflict. However, it was under capitalism that the conditions for a decisive class struggle emerged, as industrial
production concentrated workers in cities, fostering communication and consciousness of their collective strength.

Marx and Engels believed that the working class, or proletariat, would ultimately overthrow the capitalist class through a socialist revolution. The Communist
Manifesto called for the unity of workers across borders, emphasizing the inevitability of the forcible overthrow of existing social conditions. The goal was to
establish a classless communist society, where social ownership and control replaced capitalist domination.

Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, Mao Zedong, and other Marxists endorsed the idea of class struggle leading to socialist revolution, aiming to abolish capitalism and
achieve social ownership. This vision involved compulsory work during the socialist phase, leading to the eventual emergence of a classless communist society.

Gramsci's Hegemony and Cultural Dominance:

Antonio Gramsci expanded Marxist thought by introducing the concept of 'hegemony.' While admiring the Bolshevik Revolution as a triumph of willpower over
economic conditions, Gramsci cautioned against applying the same strategy in the Western context. He argued that the real strength of ruling classes in the West
lay in their cultural and spiritual supremacy, rather than just economic dominance.

Departing from classical Marxism, Gramsci emphasized the autonomy of the superstructure, especially the analysis of the contemporary Western society's
cultural dimensions. He identified two levels within the superstructure: Political Society or State, employing coercion, and Civil Society, obtaining consent through
legitimation. The latter, closer to the base, comprised autonomous structures of domination and legitimation.

Gramsci focused on the institutions of civil society – family, school, and church – as crucial in shaping the values and beliefs of citizens. These structures served to
legitimize the rule of the bourgeois class, creating a perception of just rule even when injustices were present. When power is exercised seemingly with the
consent of the people, it is termed 'hegemony.'

Pol Sci 2 Page 5

consent of the people, it is termed 'hegemony.'

According to Gramsci, the efficiency of structures of legitimation within bourgeois society usually prevents challenges to its authority. Civil society plays a pivotal
role in maintaining stability, and only when it fails to prevent dissent does political society resort to coercion through police, courts, and prisons.

Transforming Culture and Ideological Warfare

Gramsci's analysis led to the conclusion that a successful communist movement should not solely focus on overthrowing the capitalist class but also address the
value system sustaining capitalist rule. Even under socialist production, the institutions of civil society could perpetuate the capitalist ideology. Therefore, efforts
should be directed at transforming the culture by instilling socialist values.

Gramsci advocated for a departure from the exclusive focus on economics by Marxists. Instead, he urged an ideological warfare in the cultural sphere, including
literature, art, and philosophical debates. Revolutionaries should infiltrate autonomous institutions of civil society, fostering a new mass consciousness rooted in
socialist values.

Gramsci's humanistic approach rejected tyranny and coercion. He envisioned a society where decisions were made through consensus, seeking to replace the
state with a regulated society. His emphasis on democratizing institutions highlighted the need for a cultural revolution to accompany any socio-economic
transformation.

In conclusion, the class perspective on power, as developed by Marx, Engels, and expanded by Gramsci, provides a comprehensive understanding of the
dynamics between economic and political dominance. Marxists envisioned a revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist class, leading to a classless communist
society. Gramsci's introduction of hegemony highlighted the cultural dimensions of power, emphasizing the role of civil society in maintaining capitalist rule. The
essay underscores the importance of addressing cultural hegemony and transforming societal values to achieve lasting socio-economic change.

Elite theory
Title: Elite Theory of Power: Pareto, Mosca, Michels, and Beyond

Introduction:
The early 20th century witnessed the emergence of elite theory as a sociological perspective on power. Pioneered by Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, and Robert
Michels, elite theory offered a distinct approach to understanding societal divisions and the nature of authority. This essay explores the foundations of elite
theory, its key proponents, and its application to the analysis of power structures. Additionally, it delves into the critiques and developments of elite theory by
scholars like Max Weber, Joseph Schumpeter, and C. Wright Mills, who introduced the concept of the "power elite" in the context of modern American society.

Foundations of Elite Theory:

Elite theory, as advanced by Pareto, Mosca, and Michels, presents a societal division into dominant and dependent groups akin to class theory. However, unlike
class theory, elite theory views this division as somewhat natural, attributing it to the competence and aptitude of individuals rather than the emergence of
private property.

Vilfredo Pareto introduced the term 'elite' to signify a superior social group characterized by exceptional ability in various fields. The elite, a minority, makes
major decisions in society, while the masses, lacking leadership qualities, tend to follow the elite. Pareto distinguished between 'governing elite' and 'non-
governing elite,' noting a constant competition between them, leading to the 'circulation of elites.' He recognized intelligence, talent, courage, and cunning as
qualities of the elite.

Gaetano Mosca, in "The Ruling Class," posited the inevitable division of people into rulers and the ruled. The ruling class, controlling wealth, power, and prestige,
represents influential groups. Mosca emphasized the ruling class's capacity for organization and asserted that the dominance of this minority was essential for
proper organization, invoking moral and legal principles to gain the consent of the ruled.

Robert Michels, in "Political Parties," introduced the 'Iron Law of Oligarchy,' arguing that every organization, regardless of its original democratic aims, ultimately
becomes an oligarchy ruled by a chosen few. Michels asserted that the majority's apathy and dependence on leaders lead to the consolidation of power in the
hands of a few, thwarting the possibility of the 'circulation of elites.'

Critiques and Developments:

While elite theory argued for the functional nature of the elite-mass division, scholars like Max Weber challenged traditional definitions of democracy. Weber
rejected the notion of 'government by the people,' proposing that democracy be redefined as 'competition for political leadership.' He warned that socialism
might lead to the dictatorship of officials rather than the dictatorship of the proletariat, emphasizing the persistence of power concentration even in classless
societies.

Joseph Schumpeter built on Weber's ideas, advocating a model of democracy as a competitive process for political leadership. He viewed democracy not as a
collective decision-making mechanism but as a system where individuals and groups competed for leadership positions. Schumpeter's perspective aligned with
the idea that power concentration was inherent in social structures.

C. Wright Mills, in "The Power Elite," introduced a nuanced version of elite theory in the context of modern American society. He coined the term 'power elite' to
describe a combination of captains of industry, military leaders, and prominent politicians who collectively exercised power due to their high status. Mills
observed that these groups shared not only cultural and psychological orientations but also familial and social backgrounds, forming a self-conscious class.

According to Mills, the power elite did not derive its power from fulfilling social demands; instead, they were capable of shaping and creating such demands. This
inner circle of powerholders worked cooperatively to strengthen each other's positions, projecting an image of high moral character to command societal
respect. Mills highlighted the disconnect between the power elite's projected moral character and their actual social and moral responsibilities.

The 'Iron Law of Oligarchy' proposed by Michels, however, faced criticism. Some argued that its applicability varied among organizations, depending on the
vigilance and assertiveness of their members. Despite this, Michels' observations served as a cautionary tale for those striving for institutional democratization.

Implications and Contemporary Relevance:

Elite theory, despite its critiques, offers valuable insights into the dynamics of power and authority within societies. The concept of the power elite, as articulated
by Mills, remains relevant in understanding the concentration of influence among interconnected groups in modern society. In an era marked by globalization
and interconnectedness, the power elite theory sheds light on how elites across economic, political, and military spheres collaborate to maintain dominance.

The application of elite theory to contemporary situations allows for an examination of power structures, decision-making processes, and the role of societal
consent. It prompts questions about the sources of power, the perpetuation of elite rule, and the potential challenges to established hierarchies.

Pol Sci 2 Page 6

consent. It prompts questions about the sources of power, the perpetuation of elite rule, and the potential challenges to established hierarchies.

In conclusion, elite theory, pioneered by Pareto, Mosca, and Michels, has provided a distinctive lens for analyzing power structures and societal divisions. The
concept of the power elite, as refined by later scholars like Mills, offers insights into the interplay of economic, political, and military forces shaping modern
societies. While critiques and challenges have been raised, elite theory remains a relevant and thought-provoking framework for understanding how elites
consolidate and perpetuate their influence. The ongoing application of elite theory to contemporary situations enhances our comprehension of the intricate
dynamics of power in today's complex social landscape.

Sl. No. De Facto De Jure

1 The ‘de facto’ recognition is referred to as the recognition that is based on ‘a a The ‘De Jure’ recognition is referred to as the recognition that is
fact’ only based on ‘law’
2 The acknowledgements that are put forward by de facto are genuine but not The acknowledgements that are put forward by de jure are done
mentioned in the law after following a proper procedure by the law
3 State succession rules cannot be applied de facto State succession rules are applied under De Jure
4 De facto are temporary or provisional rules or identification or laws which are De jure are legal recognition and permanent recognition that are
temporary and can be withdrawn easily fixed or permanent that cannot be withdrawn
5 There will be two opposing governments present when the state accepts de There is only one government present when the state takes De
facto recognition Jure recognition
6 By de facto government, public debt or state assets cannot be recovered By de jure government, public debt or state assets can be
recovered
7 In de facto recognition the exchange of diplomatic representatives is not In de jure recognition the exchange of diplomatic representatives
possible is possible
8 The de facto government cannot get membership in the United Nations even if The de jure government can get membership in the United
most of the people or the majority of the states have recognized that de facto Nations when most of the people or the majority of the states
government have recognized that de jure government
9 For example – When one is taking a house for rent is the de facto recognition, For example – When one is owning a house and staying there is a de
because anytime the landlord of the house can come to withdraw the person who is jure recognition, because it is permanent and no one can ask him to
giving rent and staying in that house leave the land or the house

Traditional Authority
As the name implies, traditional authority is power that is rooted in traditional, or long-standing, beliefs and practices of a
society. It exists and is assigned to particular individuals because of that society’s customs and traditions. Individuals enjoy
traditional authority for at least one of two reasons. The first is inheritance, as certain individuals are granted traditional authority
because they are the children or other relatives of people who already exercise traditional authority. The second reason
individuals enjoy traditional authority is more religious: their societies believe they are anointed by God or the gods, depending
on the society’s religious beliefs, to lead their society. Traditional authority is common in many preindustrial societies, where
tradition and custom are so important, but also in more modern monarchies (discussed shortly), where a king, queen, or prince
enjoys power because she or he comes from a royal family.
Traditional authority is granted to individuals regardless of their qualifications. They do not have to possess any special skills to
receive and wield their authority, as their claim to it is based solely on their bloodline or supposed divine designation. An
individual granted traditional authority can be intelligent or stupid, fair or arbitrary, and exciting or boring but receives the
authority just the same because of custom and tradition. As not all individuals granted traditional authority are particularly well
qualified to use it, societies governed by traditional authority sometimes find that individuals bestowed it are not always up to
the job.
Rational-Legal Authority
If traditional authority derives from custom and tradition, rational-legal authority derives from law and is based on a belief in
the legitimacy of a society’s laws and rules and in the right of leaders to act under these rules to make decisions and set policy.
This form of authority is a hallmark of modern democracies, where power is given to people elected by voters, and the rules for
wielding that power are usually set forth in a constitution, a charter, or another written document. Whereas traditional authority
resides in an individual because of inheritance or divine designation, rational-legal authority resides in the office that an
individual fills, not in the individual per se. The authority of the president of the United States thus resides in the office of the
presidency, not in the individual who happens to be president. When that individual leaves office, authority transfers to the next
president. This transfer is usually smooth and stable, and one of the marvels of democracy is that officeholders are replaced in
elections without revolutions having to be necessary. We might not have voted for the person who wins the presidency, but we
accept that person’s authority as our president when he (so far it has always been a “he”) assumes office.
Rational-legal authority helps ensure an orderly transfer of power in a time of crisis. When John F. Kennedy was assassinated in
1963, Vice President Lyndon Johnson was immediately sworn in as the next president. When Richard Nixon resigned his office
in disgrace in 1974 because of his involvement in the Watergate scandal, Vice President Gerald Ford (who himself had become
vice president after Spiro Agnew resigned because of financial corruption) became president. Because the U.S. Constitution
provided for the transfer of power when the presidency was vacant, and because U.S. leaders and members of the public accept
the authority of the Constitution on these and so many other matters, the transfer of power in 1963 and 1974 was smooth and
orderly.
Charismatic Authority
Charismatic authority stems from an individual’s extraordinary personal qualities and from that individual’s hold over
followers because of these qualities. Such charismatic individuals may exercise authority over a whole society or only a specific
group within a larger society. They can exercise authority for good and for bad, as this brief list of charismatic leaders indicates:
Joan of Arc, Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and Buddha. Each of these
individuals had extraordinary personal qualities that led their followers to admire them and to follow their orders or requests for
action.

Pol Sci 2 Page 7

action.

Charismatic authority can reside in a person who came to a position of leadership because of traditional or rational-legal
authority. Over the centuries, several kings and queens of England and other European nations were charismatic individuals as
well (while some were far from charismatic). A few U.S. presidents—Washington, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Kennedy, Reagan,
and, for all his faults, even Clinton—also were charismatic, and much of their popularity stemmed from various personal
qualities that attracted the public and sometimes even the press. Ronald Reagan, for example, was often called “the Teflon
president,” because he was so loved by much of the public that accusations of ineptitude or malfeasance did not stick to him
(Lanoue, 1988).
Weber emphasized that charismatic authority in its pure form (i.e., when authority resides in someone solely because of the
person’s charisma and not because the person also has traditional or rational-legal authority) is less stable than traditional
authority or rational-legal authority. The reason for this is simple: once charismatic leaders die, their authority dies as well.
Although a charismatic leader’s example may continue to inspire people long after the leader dies, it is difficult for another
leader to come along and command people’s devotion as intensely. After the deaths of all the charismatic leaders named in the
preceding paragraph, no one came close to replacing them in the hearts and minds of their followers.
Because charismatic leaders recognize that their eventual death may well undermine the nation or cause they represent, they
often designate a replacement leader, who they hope will also have charismatic qualities. This new leader may be a grown child
of the charismatic leader or someone else the leader knows and trusts. The danger, of course, is that any new leaders will lack
sufficient charisma to have their authority accepted by the followers of the original charismatic leader. For this reason, Weber
recognized that charismatic authority ultimately becomes more stable when it is evolves into traditional or rational-legal
authority. Transformation into traditional authority can happen when charismatic leaders’ authority becomes accepted as
residing in their bloodlines, so that their authority passes to their children and then to their grandchildren. Transformation into
rational-legal authority occurs when a society ruled by a charismatic leader develops the rules and bureaucratic structures that
we associate with a government. Weber used the term routinization of charisma to refer to the transformation of charismatic
authority in either of these ways.
Sources of Power

1. Knowledge

Knowledge is the major source of power. Knowledge provides the capacity for leadership since it assists us in studying, learning, thinking, and mind
development. People with extensive knowledge are held in high regard in society. They hold important positions in various walks of life because they
are the elite of society and have a firm grip over economic, social, and political fields. Even the powerful look to them for guidance and advice.

2. Economic resources

The source of power is economic resources. Those who are financially secure can gain the cooperation and affections of political parties by making
large donations. The wealthy maintain strong lobbying at all levels of society’s power hierarchy in order to influence decision-makers’ behaviour and
build pressure groups. Every year, they spend millions of rupees to control their different societies’ decision-making and decision-implementation
apparatuses. Wealth is thus that one-of-a-kind asset that allows a person or people to seize any amount of power. According to Dahl, a person with
more riches will get more influence than others.

3. Organization and Form

Power is derived from organisation. It is a great power in itself. When people collaborate, their power grows. Political parties are formed in order to
seize and exercise power. Workers have tremendous power when they organise into trade unions, and management is obligated to listen to the
views of trade union leaders. It is common knowledge that well-organized bodies and their members seize authority and leave others far behind in
the race for power. The structure of an organisation can sometimes become a source of power. It is claimed that the larger the organisation, the
more powerful it will be. However, this may not be the case in all circumstances.

A large organisation may become weak at times, whereas a tiny organisation may become more strong. As a result, both organisation and form are
hasis of power. Cordial relationships between organisations and their sizes may make them more powerful, but they may also be detrimental to their
weaknesses.

4. Belief, thought, and action

Belief, thought, and action are all sources of power. Every society has its own set of beliefs and ideas. Those individuals and institutions who
represent and work for their implementation gain power. Mahatma Gandhi and the Congress Party rose to prominence by representing the ideals
and ideas of Indian society and working tirelessly to realise them.

5. Authority

An key source of power is authority. It denotes lawful authority. When a person properly holds a political or legal position, his power grows
automatically. Being a minister grows more powerful when one becomes a member of the government. It is authority that separates one individual
from another. Any field can have authority.

6. Personality traits and skill

Power is heavily linked with a person’s personality. Some leadership qualities include intelligence, persuasiveness, honesty, and so forth. These
assist a person in efficiently capturing his followers. Along with him, and without the use of coercion (physical or spiritual), one can force his will on
them and others. A charismatic personality is defined by intelligence, courage, oratory, organisational abilities, and the ability to make quick and
correct decisions. Leaders in India such as Mahatma Gandhi, P. Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Indira Gandhi, and many more had magnetic
personalities and were more influential than others. Skill can also be used to gain power. A skillful individual can have greater powers than others.

Pol Sci 2 Page 8

7.Control over media

Control over mass media like newspapers, radio. television ete. is also a source of power. In today’s world, mass media may both elevate and
degrade an individual or an institution. It is the media that aids in the shaping of public opinion, and its function becomes even more potent during
election seasons.

8. Love and Humanity

A person who teaches the lesson of love and humanity has the potential to be more powerful than others. M.K. Gandhi, for example, organised the
people of India and became Mahatma. 12. Position/Status-Another source of power is one’s position or status in society’s power system. When one
arrives to occupy a given position, he or she acquires certain powers. One can affect the behaviour of others with their assistance. The extent and
intensity of powers are determined by the nature of the office held; the higher

9. Religion

A person’s religious position is also a source of power because the adherents of that religion support him. The Pope in Christianity, the Unlamas in
Islam, and the Dharma Guru in Hinduism have all been pillars of power in their respective communities, and their supporters make every sacrifice
when the authority and power of their religious leaders is challenged by any external entity.

10. People’s cooperation

A person might become extremely powerful when others work with him. In some cases, one can use force to gain power, but this is only temporary
because true power comes from the consensual participation of the people. A government can only continue in power for as long as the people are
willing to collaborate with it.

Characteristic Power Authority

Derived from force, Power can be gained through control over resources, Authority stems from a recognized position or role, such as a
manipulation, or manipulation, or force. It is situation-specific and not managerial or political role. It is institutionalized and tied to specific
control necessarily tied to formal roles or positions. roles.
Can lead to Power, due to coercion or manipulation, can result in Authority, being seen as legitimate, is often accepted willingly by the
resistance or resentment or resistance from those being influenced, governed, leading to compliance with decisions or commands.
resentment especially if perceived as unjust or exploitative.
Might not be Power does not always have a basis in legitimacy. It can arise Authority, by definition, is legitimate. It is granted by recognized
legitimate from personal charisma, manipulative tactics, or control over entities such as legal systems, religious institutions, or societal
resources, among other factors. consensus.
More flexible and Power can vary in source, scope, and application. It is not Authority is usually associated with specific positions or roles and is
personal always tied to formal roles and can be a more personal and tied to the responsibilities and duties they entail.
individualistic form of influence.
Can be coercive Power can involve the use of coercion, such as threats or Authority relies on voluntary compliance rather than coercion, as its
negative consequences, to influence others. acceptance comes from perceived legitimacy and belief in a larger
purpose.
May be temporary or Power dynamics can change with personal relationships, Authority is generally stable as long as the individual maintains the
fluctuating control over resources, or societal conditions, leading to role or position that grants it, but it can change if the position is
temporary or fluctuating power. vacated or its legitimacy is questioned.
Can exist without Power does not require formal recognition or approval. It can Authority involves the right to influence or command, inherently
authority be based on personal charisma, knowledge, or social requiring some power to affect change or enforce decisions.
connections.
Does not always Power can be exercised without consent through Authority requires recognition and consent from those being
require consent manipulation, coercion, or control. governed, based on belief in its legitimacy and the validity of
decisions.
Influences through Power can influence others by changing attitudes, beliefs, or Authority influences others through legitimacy and the perceived
persuasion or force actions through persuasion or the use of force. right to make decisions or give commands.
Example A bully in a schoolyard may have power over peers through A judge has the authority to interpret the law and make legal
intimidation or force, significantly influencing their behavior. decisions, which is recognized and accepted by society, leading to
non-coercive compliance.

Pol Sci 2 Page 9