Matrix on Pluralistic and Elitist Perspectives

Elitism and Pluralism- A Perspective Study Elitism and Pluralism governance theories are about the mode of power distribution. Pluralism can be defined as a form of government where the entire population of participants share equal status in rights, power or possession. Elitist theory on the other hand is based on the premise that the successful or the privileged inherit power to govern, given their superiority evidenced by the success they have attained for themselves (Johnson, Dickinson & Morley, n.d). The mainstay in Pluralism is distribution of power.

Elitism on the other hand describes the concentration of power (Porche, 2012). In the matrix I have given, I shall give examples for each of the perspectives and identify groups or individuals representing the roles. Pluralism Pluralism stresses on immaterial or insignificant power, given the conditions and circumstances. The power discussed can take many forms: religious, political, persuasive, or skilled power. The power distribution among the members of the population is equal and everyone has the same level of power.

The theory proceeds to state that control is not concentrated in a single entity or person over the social contract since every person claims equal stake in it. Other theories might present arguments on how systems should be run and who ought to lead them. This is not the case as even the existence of a system is challenged by the theory on pluralism. Another recurring theme is potential power.

Potential power just like the people's abilities will always have more weight than the real present power like a central power's rights or the power of executive leaders. One of the significant weaknesses of Pluralism is hyper-pluralism. It occurs in situations where the people concerned do not feel like they have been given enough power and so there may be uprisings against the ruling government.

This can result in a situation where the entire government is paralyzed as it is expected to meet the wants of the people (Johnson, Dickinson & Morley, n.d). Political power is detached and disjointed. Classes, interest groups, pressure groups, political parties and status groups exist. All these groups want power to be distributed. These groups are not so much about election but demonstration. Public policy is made after accommodating the special interests of many of these groups.

No group is completely independent and they are influenced by the other groups. The bigger groups tend to exert more influence on the smaller groups. The policies developed by these groups are often the product of cooperation and negotiation. Examples of such groups include the Business Marketing Association (BMA) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). These groups really are insider groups which have significant influence and can be said to be a constituent of the establishment.

These groups have the ability to closely work together and elect representatives in the positions of local and central government (Pluralist & Elicit Matrix, 2014; Porche, 2012). Elitism Elitism stresses on material power. People who control the most resources are considered successful and thereby the rightful leaders or a ruler as this (affluence) evidences their unique ability as they would not have been able to accumulate such resources without those abilities.

Those who have most resources are deemed to be more capable mentally and are therefore worthy of being in positions of power. Elitists view the common people as people who lack superiority. The theory of elitism recognizes that people ought to be ruled and notes that the elitists have the right to rule given their material endowment. Since they possess the most resources, they are therefore the people who have the most to lose. Having the people with the most resources in power ensures that there will.