Although modern western societies purport to be democracies, power is concentrated in small elites.

Transcription

1 Question 2. Although modern western societies purport to be democracies, power is concentrated in small elites. Paper: Political Science Final exam Name: Asbjørn Dencker Mangs Sørensen CPR no.: xxxx-xxxx Name of programme: International Business and Politics Date of submission: 22/ Tutorial call: XD Lecturer: Nina Dadulauri Number of pages: 7,8 Number of characters: Reference system: Chicago 1

2 Democracy has been the core value of western societies in modern history. Democracy is viewed as a crucial value in society and has been attempted spread in multiple countries around the globe (Lynn-Jones 1998). When investigating the complex field of power in western societies, the power seems to some extend to be concentrated in elite groups. The members of the elite are found by an investigation of the people who have enough resources to affect the societies development (Christiansen 2004, 12). Power elites has always existed in all societies, but when is elitism overruling democracy, and has that point already been reached? By looking at Denmark as a case study, and comparing it to United States of America this assignment will argue that the power in western democracies is concentrated in elite groups, and that it can be a problem for democracy. The very first paragraph defines the theoretical term power as used in the following assignment. Secondly this assignment investigates the power elite in Denmark and determines whether their privileges are a problem for democracy, the investigation will focus on four core groups: politicians, business, interest groups and media. Finally, these findings is compared with the conditions in USA, with the purpose of discussing if there exists a western-tendency in which power elite groups affect the democracy negatively. Who is powerful? Is one of the most essential questions in political science since politics is about the power to decide on the authoritative allocation of values in a society (Justesen). This section will shortly identify what power is, assigning how the term will be used in the following sections. One of the most famous definitions of power is made by Robert Dahl, describing power as the ability to make a person do something he wouldn t otherwise do. Bachrad & Baratz takes it a step further and add the term non decisions stressing that power not only lies in determining what enters the decision-making arena, but also what does not enter. Steven Lukes, adds a 3 rd dimension of power, that besides the power to affect peoples behaviour and the power to decide the policy agendas it is also a power to shape, influence and manipulate preferences and interests (Cook 2011). In other words it can be described as the power to create disconnection between real interests and perceived interests. This assignment approaches and discusses power on the foundation of the upstanding theorists. In the next sections we will investigate the power elite in Denmark and examine if these groups power is a problem for democracy. One of the groups in the society that has a great power is the politicians and especially the elite politicians, defined as the politicians with important positions in the government or party committee. The politicians has a double role because they on one side must mirror the people to represent their position and interest, but on the other hand have to be clever, qualified, forward looking, hard-working, and reliable (Christiansen 2004, 34). In other words the population want politicians who understands them, but simultaneous to be 2

3 represented by the best men and women in the country. When looking at Denmark a major power and democracy study from 2004 showed that the composition of politicians in the Danish parliament doesn t mirror the combination in the population, but that they compared to other countries parliaments are very equal to the population. The study also showed a polarization between the elite politician and the common politician, where the elite politicians by turns occupy the posts in the government and party committee (Christiansen 2004, 70-71). All in all the politicians and the politician elite challenges the democratic values since the composition of the politicians are different to the composition of the population, and because of the elite politicians rotation on the positions in the government and party committee. Another group with disproportional amount of power compared to the rest of the population is the business elite. The industry sector has control over the majority of the societies economic capital goods. Thus the business elite has a lot of influence on both the individual s and the societies economic welfare (Christiansen 2004, 131). As an example the business elite has influence on where companies invest- and where they are positioned; decisions that have an impact on both the individual s life and the economy in general. Beyond that some argue that the business elite has too much influence on the decision-making because they occasionally are invited to discuss politics and resolutions on different issues (Karkov 2011). This is better known as neo-corporatism a genuine attempt by governments to incorporate economic interests in the decision-making process (Garner 2016, 32). The democratic problem arise if the recruitment to the business is closed, if the composition of the elite is to far from the population and if the network between the elites are too strong (Christiansen 2004, 15). According to the big power and democracy study of the Danish elite, there are many different paths to the top of the business elite, but on the downside almost all people in the business elite are men over 50 years with a higher education (Christiansen 2004, , 159). To sum up, the business elite has disproportional amount of power through neo-corporatism and within their control of capital goods. The business elite as well as other groups often use interest organisation to protect their interests. Interest organisations have an important role in democracies and are a way to exercise influence on politics in between election. The different interest groups have many differing agendas according to the group they represent. There are for instance both interest organisations for labour and for the industry (McGhie 2014). The interest organisations function is to be the connected link between the societies many interests and the policy-makers. In Denmark there are strong norms about involvement of interest groups in the decisionmaking process. The interest organisations can both be an important partner and on other issues make the process very troublesome (Christiansen 2004, 114). The head of the Prime Ministers department in Denmark 3

4 got in 2010 a new job as CEO in the Confederation of Danish industry, that protect the industries interests (Springborg 2012). One of the prime minister s closest advisers became thereby the leader for the business elites interest organisation. It is situations like this that can be a problem for the democracy because the connections between the different elites become too close and a group in society therefore are too privileged. As defined earlier in as part of the 3 rd dimension of power, power is also to be able to control, twist and manipulate information, and it is here the media play an important role. It is a power in itself to have information and to be able to decide how to frame it. In addition to that it should be mentioned that it is very used that elite politicians hire media specialist to help them frame their political messages, issues and decisions. The media have great power due to the fact that they have the power to decide the content in the media and thereby the way people understand reality (Christiansen 2004, 161). Therefore the media plays a very important role in forming the political agenda, since they can decide what topics to focus on (Roskilde Universitet 2014). Furthermore they can also decide which politicians they choose to give attention (Christiansen 2004, 162). In Denmark many medias are supported financially by the Danish state, to accede to the most comprehensive news and media coverage, but in USA the media is overwhelmingly under private ownership (Berlingske Business 2012) (The Freedom House 2016). Billionaires like Rupert Murdoch and Michael Bloomberg are persons with ownership of some of the most powerful medias in the world (Vinton 2016). When a small group of elite owns so much of the media it becomes a democratic problem because this elite group is able to control, twist and manipulate the way people understand the reality. Further comparative analyse of Denmark and USA show that the democratic challenges related to the power elite are much more serious in the USA. When investigating the political elite in the US there is a big difference between the composition of the politicians and the composition in the population. Taking a look at the members of congress we find that more than half of them are millionaires, and that the median net worth of a member of Congress was $1.03 million in 2013, compared with $56,355 for the average American household (Rappeport 2015). This is a large dividing line, which is a problem for the democracy because the elite politicians have a very different life and challenges compared to the population and consequently also different interests. Some of this big division can be a result of the electoral system, which in USA is a singlemember district plurality system, meaning that its third parties have been very small and ephemeral, so a smaller group of the population is represented (Domhoff 2005). To sum up it has been argued that the political elite in the USA is challenging the democracy much more than the case in Denmark, because the politicians distinguishable from the population. 4

5 Looking at the business elite and interest organisations in USA more democratic problems arise and the conditions of the power elite appear more established. One problem is found when looking at the political action committees and the business elite s funding of election campaigns and the legislative process (The Freedom House 2016). An example is the presidential election where it takes a tremendously big amount of money to win - in 2011 both candidates, Mitt Romney and Obama both topped 1 billion dollars (Vogel 2012). Much of this money comes from super PACs and thereby from companies and private donations. A concrete case is that; only 158 families have provided nearly half of the early money for efforts to capture the White House (Confessore 2015). Provokingly stated it can be argued that this is a democratic problem because these families simply buy into power. In this case most of the families contributed to the republicans who have pledged to pare regulations; cut taxes on income, capital gains and inheritances; and shrink entitlement programs. It is a democratic problem because it shows that the business elite in America has a big influence on the campaign funding and thereby can buy influence. The comparative analyse of the respectively power elite in Denmark and USA has showed that the democratic problems related to the power elite is much more present in the latter. In Denmark there were some democratic problems with the politicians because their composition differed from the composition of the population. But in comparison with the American politician the Danish are much less elitist. Problems was also found in the way the business elite is able to buy power in the US, where the problems with the business elite in Denmark considered neo-corporatism both directly and through interest organisations which give them a privileged and structured access to political decision-making. Summarizing the comparative analyse of the two western democracies shows that there exist power elites in both countries. Furthermore it shows that the democracy problems related to the power elite are more present in the USA than Denmark. All in all concluding that the power in western democracies is concentrated in elite groups, and that it can be a problem for democracy. The next section will deal with the counterarguments to the points of this assignment showing that we are aware of their existence but disproving their legitimacy. It isn t everybody who sees elite groups as a problem for democracy; some might even think that it is an advantage. The founding fathers of elitism, among others Robert Michel and Gaetano Mosca, would stress that a ruling elite is inevitable feature of a complex society (Garner 2016, 32). This means that in every group or organization an elite group will dominate because of the resources they can muster, their psychological characteristics, or their position in society. In other words it is natural that the elite will dominate, because they are most fit to have power, as they are more capable of finding solutions for the 5

6 society. Even if these claims were true, the society they describe is not a democracy. Democracy is defined as rule of the people and the system described above relate more to an oligarchy; defined as the rule of the few (Oxford Dictionaries 2016). Even though we acknowledge that a society needs a division of labour and a management, a democratic society must have some demands to the elites composition, recruitment, and internal relations for it not to undermine the democracy. The first is that there must exist different autonomous elites and not just a homogeneous elite. The second demand is that the recruitment to the elite must be open, so that certain groups can t be excluded from the elite. The third demand is that the elite in so far as it is reasonable must mirror the population s composition (Christiansen 2004, 15). Another approach when looking at power is classical pluralism; they believe that the power in society isn t concentrated in the elite but that it is spread across multiple groups with different interests. Pluralism began in the USA and is developed by Robert Dahl; the key focus was on social groups and interest organisations and how they influence politics (Garner 2016, 30). The pluralist theory does have some points that correspond to the arguments in this assignment; namely that the power isn t centred in one homogeneous power elite, but are located in different groups in society. Nevertheless, the findings in this assignment have showed that some groups in society have a disproportional amount of power in society. Since the power elite in both Denmark and USA exist the pluralist approach is refuted. The groups that this assignment argued has a disproportional great power were; the politician elite, the business elite, the media and some interest groups. To sum up the pluralist approach has been refuted because the assignment has showed that there exist disproportional powerful elite groups in both investigated states. In contrast to the pluralism another approach is elite theory that not only claims that that there exist an elite in all societies, but also claim that this elite is a close knit unity with common interests and homogeneous behaviour (Christiansen 2004, 15). The elite theory challenged the pluralist approach led by the American sociologist C. Wright Mills, who argued that the power in America was concentrated in a small and powerful elite dominating the economic, military, and governmental sphere. Some pluralist thinkers responded by accepting the appearance of an elite but didn t accept that this elite had common interests and homogeneous behaviour (Garner 2016, 32). Instead a new approach was developed stating that some groups of people may have more political power than others, but instead of one homogeneous elite group there are a multiplicity of competing elites. In other words, there are many groups in society competing for influence and power, but some elite groups are disproportional powerful. This approach is known as elite pluralism, and is what this assignment has found in Denmark and USA. 6

7 Based on an investigation of the power elite in Denmark and USA, this assignment argues that the power in western democracies is concentrated in elite groups, and that it can be a problem for democracy. Furthermore, this assignment has argued that there are some democratic problems related to the power elites in Denmark and USA; in Denmark there were found challenges in relation to the elite politicians who constantly rotate within positions in government and the party committee. Moreover, a problem was found in the composition of the politicians that differed from the composition of the population, but when investigating the same figures in USA it can be concluded that the diffraction is much more critical here. Another democratic problem related to the Danish power elite is the disproportional amount of power the business elite access through neo-corporatism. Furthermore, it was found that the confederation of Danish industry has a extra strong connection to the elite politicians through their newly appointed CEO who used to be the prime minister s closest political advisor, manifesting the existence of bonds between the different elite groups within the society. Provokingly it can be stated that the business elite in USA are able to buy themselves into power due to the system that enables private persons to fund politicians election-campaigns, which is a tendency less distinct in Denmark. Both in Denmark and in the USA it was also found that the media has a lot of power, because they indirectly can control information, and are able to twist and manipulate the news. In Denmark many medias are supported financially by the state to accede the most comprehensive news, but in the USA a small power elite owns most of the media, resulting in a democratic problem because this group thereby can control the state of the media. The comparative analyse of Denmark and USA can not give sufficient insight to the weather a general tendency exists across all western democracies, but considering the limited scope of this assignment it can be concluded that a tendency of neglecting democratic values exists within some western democracies due to the power of elite groups. 7

8 Bibliography Berlingske Business. So much of your license fee goes to the state. 29. May meget- af- din- licens- faar- staten (last accesed or shown the 21. December 2016). Christiansen, Peter M, and Møller, Birgit, and Togeby, Lise,. The Danish Elite. Copehagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag, Confessore, Nicholas, and Cohen, Sarah, and Yourish, Karen. Buying power. 10. October presidential- election- super- pac- donors.html Cook, Sam. Lukes 3 faces of power. 11. October lukes- 3- faces- of- power/ (last accesed or shown the 21. December 2016). Domhoff, G. William. Third Parties Don't Work: Why and How Egalitarians Should Transform the Democratic Party. 1. March (last accesed or shown the 21. December 2016). Garner, Robert and Ferdinand, Peter, and Lawson, Stephanie. Introduction to politics. Oxford: Oxford university press, Justesen, Mogens K. "Power" Lecture. Karkov, Rasmus.»Danish politics swim in lobbyism.«videnskab.dk, 5. October 2011: 1. Lynn- Jones, Sean M. Why the United States Should Spread Democracy. 1. March _democracy.html (last accesed or shown the 22. December 2016). McGhie. A small handfull of organisations are pulling the strings in in danish politics. 10. March haandfuld- organisationer- traekker- traadene- dansk- politik Oxford Dictionaries. Defintion of oligarchy in English. 1. January (last accesed or shown the 22.. December 2016). Rappeport, Allan. Making It Rain: Members of Congress Are Mostly Millionaires. 12. January draft/2015/01/12/making- it- rain- members- of- congress- are- mostly- millionaires/ Roskilde Universitet. What is Power, Media and Communication? 1. January research- initiatives/power- media- and- 8

9 communication/what- is- power- media- and- communication/ (last accesed or shown the 21. December 2016). Springborg, Søren. Berlingske Business. 1.. June dybvad- ny- direktoer- i- di (last accesed or shown the 20. December 2016). The Freedom House. The freedom house press/2016/united- states Vinton, Kate. These 15 Billionaires Own America's News Media Companies. 1. June billionaires- own- americas- news- media- companies/# b4b Vogel, Kenneth P. Obama, Romney both topped $1B. 12. July obama- mitt- romney- both- topped- 1- billion- in