The Pluralist Theory of Politics in our Political Systems - Essay Example

? ical Pluralism Comes Nowhere Near Capturing The Reality of Local Politics Submitted By Introduction The political systemof any society is a very complex system. It is not confined to the electoral process, the constitution and form of government of any country. It involves a whole spectrum of other social, political, cultural and economic factors. The politics of any country are unique and specific to the conditions of that country. Despite this diversity, all political systems that ever existed in history and those currently existing, the prevailing political systems in different parts of the worlds can luckily be categorized. This paper aims to study the classical pluralist theory and analyze how much it is found in our local politics today. Classical pluralism is the view that politics and decision making are mostly located in the government, but there are also non-governmental groups who use many resources to exert their influence on politics and decision making (Barzilai 2003). Discussion What we observe these days in our local politics is actually neopluralism. It is the reconstruction of political science and advancement in the fundamental and traditional structure of classical pluralism of political sociology. Our societies have come a long way from the traditional classic era of classic pluralism of the post second world war era. Pluralist legacy emphasized on the primacy on the pluralist social agents and factors. Neopluralism still falls in the pluralist legacy of the classic, but it has undergone a series of complicated revisions. There are many theoretical perspectives on one of the most fundamental question of politics. Who should rule? The answer varies from the many, the few, to one? Classical pluralist answer to this question is the rule of many. Although there are not many theories that support the rule of one but classical theories do support the existence of one ruling class or powerful elite. In short we can term it as the rule of the few (Connolly 2010). What is classical pluralism? The central theme of classical pluralism is the concept of unity in diversity proposed by Aristotle. It is also followed by early liberal’s competitive and representative democracy. This theory of liberal democracy in socially diverse countries flourished and evolved into what is called Polyarchy. Polyarchy form of pluralism is about effective rule of elected representatives through a process of free and competitive elections conducted in the supervision of the civil associations of civil liberties. Polyarchy is rooted in the heterogeneous pluralist social structure. The era of 1960’s and 70’s was the era of political and ideological tumultuous and the pluralist theory also responded by evolving into neo pluralist theory. In this theory attention was given to state initiatives. The pluralism of agency was extended to the state-based interest groups (Janosky 2005. The theory of classical pluralism is founded on two building blocks namely interest groups and power politics. It revolves around the idea that interest groups compete with each other to acquire power to further their own interests. The classical pluralist democracy also has equilibrium in place through self correcting balance of political powers. It believes that all the interest groups will have equal opportunities to influence public decision making process. Classical pluralist theory was more an idealistic vision rather than the actual situation although proponents of this theory claimed it to be realistic and based on empirical evidence. This was the first generation of pluralist. Second generation pluralist also called neopluralist were led by Robert Dahl and Charles Linblom. These second generation pluralist were more realistic and realized the inequalities in the theory which were not in favor of the less disadvantaged. Third generation pluralist restricted the identification and categorization of fixed groups with fixed interests (Behrouzi 2006). What are interest groups? There are two views about them. Popular perception about these interest groups is very negative. It is perceived as a cancer which is spreading unchecked and is damaging and weakening the body politic. On the contrary the image proposed by media is that they are the determinants of common good and general welfare. We cannot deny the role of interest groups in politics. The role of political parties a form of organized interest group is indispensible to the political process. According to a French observer Alexis de Tocquivillenored the art and knowledge of combining and association is of utmost importance if we aim to come anywhere near being civilized. Interest groups not only protect the people who are part of them but also organizations cultivate democratic values of the individuals and enrich societies and communities. Interest groups serve the purpose of aggregating and combining different point of views and help pushing policy agendas in the public sphere. Interest groups come under the broader framework of pluralist system. The role of interest groups must be analyzed because some interest groups who are anti- majoritarian, narrow and selfish can lead to government. They may also play a very healthy and active role in counter balancing various issues and representing a broad spectrum of interests. Interest groups can enter our political systems at any time through various loop holes in the federalist system and separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers. Interest groups come in all shapes and sizes and with innumerable political causes. We can define interest group as (Donavan, Mooney & Smith 2008). In a nutshell, it can be stated that that the interest group is any business which is caught up in the electoral procedure and pressure government policy making. There is a difference between interest groups and political parties. Interest groups do not nominate candidates for electoral campaigns and they do not aspire to take the reins of the government like political parties. Many interest groups are actively involved in the electoral process while some only limit themselves to lobbying of officials and policy makers. These minority faction or interest groups are an important factor of the pluralist theory. Proponents of pluralist theory believe conflict as part and parcel of politics. They take conflict as healthy sign which helps in reaching the consensual outcome because of diversity. A healthy debate and discussion by diversified people will lead to a better conclusion. The basic crux of this theory is that pluralist believes that interest groups can safeguard the interests of the general public because of their broad based framework and can compete and counteract on the private sector’s profit seeking behavior. According to Truman, humans being social animal have this natural tendency of creating and forming groups (Ritzer & Ryan 2011). Once these groups are formed they can not only exert power and authority within the group but also on other groups so as to keep the balance and equilibrium of power. Every individual has many or heterogeneous interests. It is quite possible that one individual is a part of several interest groups. Pluralist believes that with time various competing groups will achieve equilibrium and will gradually cancel out various interest groups. The formed groups can represent the potential interest commonly shared by of the group of likeminded people. These potential interest groups would have more influence over the elected officials. Truman was such a strong believer of this theory that he believed that African American in the 1950,s who were working on plantation owned by whites in Mississippi Delta earned their representation only because of these interest groups. In the pluralist theory the role of citizenry is very active along with many passive bodies that ensure political participation. This model works for the well being of the minorities and hence prevents development of powerful factions which may result in unresponsive state. The essential and important features of this model are as follows: it ensures freedom and liberty; it has inbuilt checks and balances to keep executive and legislative body within their domains; it ensures competitive electoral system; the presence of diverse interest groups and their overlapping to gain political influence; respect for law and constitution; state although is deemed impartial, but work to achieve its own sectional interests. (Beall & Restall 2006). Like all theories pluralist theory also is not without its weaknesses. Questions have been raised by the theorist about the concept of formation of interest groups. They believe that it is not that easy and natural to form groups and combine knowledge as proposed by pluralist theory. There are many other questions and objections raised on this theory such as does everyone has equal voice in interest group and do interest groups are actually heard and are they able to exercise any influence whatsoever on the elected officials? Democracy has come a long way from its original version. There are different models of democracy as stated by David Held which shows the evolution of democracy over time. The models are: classical democracy, protective democracy, developmental democracy, direct democracy and the end of politics, competitive elitist democracy, pluralist democracy, legal democracy, participatory democracy, and democratic autonomy (Arora & Awasthy 2007). Classical democracy was the first form present in small states or slave economies. It was very limited but ensured participation in legislation and judicial functions. Protective democracy is better organized and is found in societies of patriarchal system. In models of developmental democracy the concept is of independent civil society. Participation in political system is considered necessary for the protection of the interest of the individuals. Direct democracy aims at abolishment of social classes and there is freedom and free development for all. Competitive elitist democracy is visualized as a system where competitive groups are fighting with each other for their own benefits. It is present in societies where the electoral process is very weak. The elitist always get the chance to rule and make all decisions political and non political. Pluralist democracy acknowledges the presence of various communities in the society forming interest groups to safeguard their interests. Legal democracy minimizes the role of interest groups. Its essential features are that state should run on the basis of constitution and rule of law should prevail and be above everyone. It is a sort of market economy with minimal interference from the government and ensures individual autonomy. Participatory democracy believes in the equal participation of everyone in each institution of society. It ensures development of political efficacy and equal development opportunities for every individual. Leaders are accountable to party members. Democratic autonomy ensures availability of information and informed decisions in all public affairs. The essential features of this system are the autonomy of constitution which ensures competitive party system and direct participation in all administrative bodies. This model is successful in societies where diverse groups exist and enterprises are self managed along with community services which are organized through direct participation internally. Private and voluntary organizations actually help promote diversity. The above detail of different types of democracy actually gives a brief insight of where different societies stand in their political systems. Societies such as ours have come a long way from pluralist theory. There are some serious objections on the pluralist theory. Some believe that the competition between groups as proposed by classical pluralist is as nonexistent as the perfect competition of the classical theory of economics. Both are ideal situations that do not exist in real life. Some of the interest groups are actually effective and influential, well organized, strong and rich and manages to achieve some of their objectives. But such cases are very few. The unequal power of influencing the government policies and actions usually depends on the relationship with the state. Governments usually tend to ignore these interest groups especially in the policy formulation stage. Most governments tend to exploit various divisions of the groups. Governments have the authoritative edge and liberty to choose which group they want to listen to. It is easier for the government to choose some groups and exclude others when the parliament is dominated by homogenous group. The final objection on the pluralist theory is the frequency with which the group between themselves and with government has failed to conform to the civilized pattern proposed by the pluralist theory (Knapp & Wright 2006). The idea of theory of pluralism started when the French traveler Alexis de Tocqueville was amazed by the capability of Americans in forming groups to solve most of their civil rights problems in the early nineteenth century. This led James Madison to realize and foresee the importance of forming groups and multiple organizations in the political system. This was the beginning of the pluralist theory. This initial concept of multiple organizations was further enriched by Robert A. Dahl and hence came the concept of pluralist theory in politics. Early pluralists believe in the competition between interest group resulting in public interest. Now we have all sorts of interest groups in all spheres of life. There are many social, economic, and environmental interest groups. In America there are more than 10,000 interest groups. Most of the interest groups are social in America. The success of any interest group actually varies from country to country. Some of the interest groups have been quite successful in America but failed in other countries such as France (Schmidt, Shelly & Bardes 2010). The pluralist theory of politics believes that political parties perform the function of aggregating or combining different interest groups. It is not their goal to subordinate these interest groups into some party objective, goal or ideology. Therefore parties to compete in elections look for the support of these interest groups. We can predict how the support of one interest group will affect or influence the policy makers. It has its impact on the subsequent distribution of cost benefit analysis. The interest and benefit of the group will be safeguarded by the concerned political party and hence it puts that interest group into subsequent strategic advantageous position. Although in recent history the role and weight age of these interest groups have declined considerably due to the pressures of the taxpayers and other mass movements. Still their influence cannot be ruled out especially in closely fought elections and marginal constituencies. A well placed strategic group can exert more pressure on political parties (Self 2010). Conclusion After deeply studying the pluralist theory, its various aspects, basic fundamentals and pillars and analyzing it strength and weaknesses we can conclude that pluralist theory of politics still do exist in our political systems. But it has come a long way from its classical and traditional form. Classical theory of pluralism has some basic inherent weaknesses which have been catered in its modern and current form. The role of interest group varies from country to country depending on its political system and a lot of other factors. There is no denial that the role of interest groups has declined considerably in our recent history because of the pressures of the tax payers and other massive movements which prevent any undue advantage granted to any specific special group by the political parties and governments. Bibliography Arora, N.D. & Awasthy, S.S. 2007, Political theory and political thought, New Delhi, Har Anand Publications. Barzilai, G. 2003, Communities and law: politics and cultures of legal identities, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Behrouzi, M. 2006, Democracy as the political empowerment of people: the betrayal of an ideal, UK, Lexington Books. Beall, J.C. & Restall, G. 2006, Logical pluralism, New York, Oxford University Press. Connolly, W. 2010, Pluralism in political analysis, New Jersey, Transaction Publications. Donavan, T., Mooney, C. & Smith, D. 2008, State and local politics, institutions and reforms, USA, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Janosky, T. 2005, The Handbook of political sociology, states, civil societies and globalization, USA, Cambridge University Press. Knapp, A. & Wright, V. 2006, The government and politics of France, New York, Routledge. Ritzer, G. & Ryan, J.M. 2011, The concise encyclopedia of sociology, UK, Blackwell Publishing. Schmidt, S.W., Shelly, M.C. & Bardes, B.A. 2010, American government and politics today-Texas edition, Boston, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Self, P. 2010, Political theories of modern governments: its role and reform, New York, Routledge. . Read More