Political power
The question then is not “Who runs this community?” but “Does anyone run this community?” Elitists also assume that their power structure stays stable over time. Such categorical assumptions about community power cannot be made at all and it is doubtful whether, fundamentally, anyone dominates in a community. Pluralists in general also reject the elitists´ basic premise that there is a power structure in every human institution reflecting the organisation´s stratification. While some have economic power, others have military, religious, political or association-based powers. According to Rose, there are several elites who are not united. Rose argues that the economic elite is indeed important and very influential, but there are many other factors involved in the distribution of power in communities. It is unlikely that everyone understands or knows the ways in which Hunter believes the economic elite to hold power over the community. They see different people as powerful in different ways. People understand power in different ways. Firstly, it is unclear whether Hunter´s reputational method can be completely accurate. There are many criticisms of the elitist approach. These tasks they delegate to those lower down in the power hierarchy or pyramid. While these people may be commonly held by he community as having the most influence and power, they rarely initiate or execute policies. Who these influential people are was determined by Hunter´s “reputational method”, asking a panel of judges who they felt to be the most powerful in the community. The topmost political leaders, he says, are the men with the most important economic connections. The economic elites Hunter views as the power behind politicians. Admission into the “power elite” here is determined almost solely on their position within the local business community. Hunter´s studies, as he saw them, showed that Regional City in Atlanta was run by a small group of powerful men who were able to shape policies both informally and behind the scenes.
They are the “power elite” and can exercise influence over a large number of community decisions, thus “ruling” the local community. The upper class, or the group with the highest social – economic standing, hold the most power. Stratification studies assert that communities are divided into classes. His might be called a “stratification theory” of power, where power is a “subsidiary aspect of the community´s social structure” (Polsby) and the main determinant of the distribution of power within a community is its social stratification. Hunter, on the other hand, felt that there was dominant elite in the community, that power is concentrated in the hands of a few. They focus their attention on the exercise of power, rather than its sources. This is typical of pluralist theories of power. Someone who involved in making the key choices shaping a community have power in the sense that what they decide on changes people´s lives and in this way, these decision – makers have power or control over other people. Power is embedded in decision – making so that it is held by those who make decisions that can affect the community in general. “Who rules?” is analogous to “Who participates?” or “Who prevails in decision – making?”. Here then, power is to do with decisions. Polsby related the notion of community power to “decisions affecting large parts of the population of local communities” and sees “power”, influence” or “control” as the “capacity of one actor to do something affecting another actor, which changes the probable pattern of specified future events”. Many concentrated on studying power relationships within communities: community power.
There are many theories of power, and one crucial factor in determining who has political power is in defining what political power actually is.
What Determines Who Has Political Power, And How Much Of It They Have? Essay, Research Paper Реферат: What Determines Who Has Political Power And