The elitist or the pluralist form of politics essay

I agree with the pluralist form of politics because this form of governance helps to avoid anarchy and pursues shared purposes, promoting an “even minimally adequate life” among all citizens (Roeter 9). Pluralist form of politics is focused on protection of individual freedoms to associate. Avigail I. Eisenber states that “freedom of association is a necessary condition of political pluralism” (2). I believe that pluralism is a pervasive form of politics in modern society. Practically, every modern political theorist is a pluralist who viewes the key point of pluralism in recognition of multiplicity of individuals and groups of individuals. I do not agree with the elitist form of politics because in this case, the elite control the political process. Based on the elitist theory, power is not widely dispersed among groups of individuals as it is spread in pluralism. In other words, political power is concentrated in the hands of the elite.

According to Theodore Rueter, “elite networks are dominated by upper income people who lead powerful institutions, such as business corporations and key federal agencies”(10). As a result, the masses have less power than the elites. I suggest that this form of politics is not democratic because the masses are manipulated by the elites through the media.