Political Elites and Strategic Rationality

Abstract

Modern political sociology began, at the turn of the century, with the study of political elites. Mosca, Pareto, and Michels started the inquiry by positing the ubiquity of elites and the division of labor it reflected, identifying in sociological terms ‘who governs’ and explaining the maintenance and transformation of elite composition in terms of social stratification, personality profiles, and organizational needs. Fifty years later elite studies shifted to the debate between believers in the cohesiveness or monolithic structure of national elites and those who attempted to demonstrate the pluralism of elite structures in western democracies, and especially in the USA. At stake, in this debate, was nothing less than the definition of democracy in terms of the relationship among elites, and between elites and ‘masses’.

“New frontiers in elite research cannot expected to be found through more and more empirical work about partical problems, but rather by trying to broaden the theoretical perspectives and by incorporating new concepts and hypotheses into the theoretical frame of comparative politics.”

Dietrich Herzog, ‘The selective system in politics’ Munich, Eighth World Congress, International Political Science Association, 1970.

“Executive leaders must estimate the motivations of members of their inner circle ...and that of rival leaders, ...And in calculating other persons’ needs, executives must calculate their own.”

James MacGregor Bums, Leadership, New York: Harper & Row 1978, p. 373.