The Power Elite, by C. Wright Mills

[p036] The Power Elite (Continued from Vol. 2, No. 1) THE POWER ELITE by C. Wright Mills. (Oxford Univ. Press, 1956). This can be easily seen in the case of such a popular Culture Hero and sycophant of the rich as Arthur Godfrey. But it is equally demonstrable in the career of such a capi- talist politician as Henry Wallace. The prospective Presi- dential candidate of 1944 was pitched out of the Democratic Cabinet and humb!'ed because he hesitated at that time to go along with the cold war policies projected by the post-war needs of imperialism. Even so powerful a general as Mac- Arthur was brought to heel in 1951 when he tried to resist and divert the main line of monopoly capitalist foreign pol- icy. Both the potiticians and brass-hats function as execu- tors of policies whose contents are essentially dictated by the national and international objectives of the ruling rich. In the same spirit, Mills substitutes the term “power elite” for ruling class, because, he says, ruling class is a “badly loaded phrase.” This substitution is somewhat more polite. But is it more accurate and scientific? “Ruling class” is a com- bined conception: class is an economic category, rule a poli- tical category. Mills says he prefers “power elite” because it is an exclusively political concept. This sounds eminently plain and simple, but the situation is not so simple as he makes out. It is true that “ruling class” contains in a single concept references to both economic relations and political functions. Is this justified by the facts? Mills himself admits that in many cases, and even in this one, the economically predomi- nant class is likewise politically predominant. In fact, this is the rule in the history of class society. But, he objects, there are exceptions to this rule. It has occasionally happened that the economically superior class is not politically sovereign, and vice versa. This is so. But in all such exceptional cases there remain two further questions to be answered: (1) which class is decisive in determining basic state policies? and (2) which class serves which? The American monopolists are not only economically but, as he abundantly proves, also politically sovereign. They are not like the Japanese and German capitalists who were politically subordinated to feudal landowners and _ mili- tarists. The American military and political leaders have only a relative autonomy and are strictly dependent upon the plutocracy. What, therefore, prevents Mills from designat- ing the monopoly capitalists.as. the “ruling class”? There appear to be two reasons. One is his reluctance to be too closely identified with Marxism. The other is inherent in his own theoretical method and outlook. He views the dis- tribution of power as systematically disorganised, and the power elite as fundamentally “irresponsible.” This is a one- sided interpretation. The superficial disorganisation of American politics is consciously contrived and used to assure the supremacy of the monopolists. It is true that the power elite has no responsibility toward the people, but this is only the other side of their loyalty and subservience to the real masters of America. The war-lords and the political leaders are fully responsible when it comes to safeguarding the welfare of the wealthy. _ Thus by prying the political superstructure loose from its economic foundation, Mills leaves the door open for the possibility of a liberal-labour-capitalist regime to enforce policies contrary to the economic interests of the monopoly capitalists. He laments the absence of an enlightened and independent Civil Service as though such a_ bureaucracy would not be as subordinate to the ruling rich as the other imstitutions of government. He explicitly says that the leaders of capitalist society need not be historically and socially determined in their actions. Mills demonstrates that the sovereignty of the people is a mockery in the United States. How, then, is the promise of democracy to be made a reali y? Reformists aim to make the power elite “responsible” to ihe people; the revolutionary forces seek to dislodge the plutocratic triumvirate and re- place it by governmental power representing and responsible to the masses. This requires not only fundamental changes in the political set-up but also the socialisation of the means of production. me In this book Mills does not offer any political prescrip- tions although they are implicit in much of what he says. It will obviously take a very formidable counter power to dis- cipline, let alone dislodge, the coalition of plutocrats, war- lords and professional politicians. In this country such a power can be found in only one place; in the ranks of the organised labour movement. Organised labour is already objectively counterposed to Big Business on the industrial field. Mills points out: “The concentration of corporation power and the informal co- ordination of the business world—with and without inter- locking directorships—has become such that the Department of Labour estimates that only some 147 employers really bargain out their wage terms with their labour forces. These bargains set the pattern of wage contracts; thousands of other employers may go through the motions of bargaining, but the odds are high that they will end up according to the pattern set by the few giant deals.” (P. 384) Thus a small band of monopolist employers confront the tens of millions of wage workers in negotiations over wages and working conditions. This economic opposition is bound to break through and assert itself on the political arena. Mills is aware of this. We know from other sources, such as the speech he delivered to a United Automobile Workers’ Educational Conference in 1951, that Mills urges the formation of a Labour Party as the indicated next step in American politics. The political outlook of this professor is more advanced than that of the labour leaders. His advice is well worth listening to. In any event, he has indicated the way to begin the mass political processes which, through the establishment of a Workers and Farmers Government, can bring about the downfall of the plutocratic power elite, which, in his own words, are neither “representative, virtuous, meritorious nor able.”