Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T23:46:30.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neo-Pluralism: A Class Analysis of Pluralism I and Pluralism II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

John F. Manley
John F. Manley*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article is a critique of contemporary pluralist theory as found largely in the work of Robert A. Dahl and Charles E. Lindblom. Two different forms of pluralism are distinguished and compared critically with Marxist class analysis. Pluralism, it is argued, fails to account for the reality of political and economic inequality in the United States. As a theory, pluralism is also marked by increasing tension between the underlying values and the performance of American polyarchy. The overall result is that pluralism's utility as a description and explanation of the American political economy is called into serious doubt, and a case is made for the explanatory superiority of class analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 2 , June 1983 , pp. 368 - 383
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amdur, R.Rawls and his radical critics. Dissent, 1980, 27, 323–334.Google Scholar
Aron, R.Social structure and the ruling class. British Journal of Sociology, 1950, 1: 1–16.Google Scholar
Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S.Decisions and non-decisions. American Political Science Review, 1963, 57, 632–642.Google Scholar
Bell, D.Meritocracy and equality. The Public Interest, 1972, 29, 29–68.Google Scholar
Bentley, A. F.The process of government. Evanston, Ill.: Principia Press, 1935.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.A critique of the ruling elite model. American Political Science Review, 1958, 52, 463–469.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.Pluralist democracy in the United States. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1967.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.Polyarchy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A., & Lindblom, C. E.Politics, economics, and welfare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.On removing certain impediments to democracy in the U.S. Political Science Quarterly, 1977, 92, 1–20.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.Liberal democracy in the United States. In Livingston, W. S. (Ed.), A prospect for liberal democracy. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979a, 57–72.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.What is political equality? Dissent, 1979b, 26, 363–368.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A.Dilemmas of pluralist democracy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
Domhoff, G. W.Who really rules? Santa Monica, Calif.: Goodyear Publishing, 1978.Google Scholar
Green, P.What is political equality. Dissent, 1979, 26, 351–368.Google Scholar
Higley, J., & Moore, G.Elite integration in the United States and Australia. American Political Science Review, 1981, 75, 581–597.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T.The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. E.Politics and markets. New York: Basic Books, 1977.Google Scholar
Lindblom, C. E.Another state of mind. American Political Science Review, 1982, 76, 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukes, S.Power: a radical view. New York: Macmillan, 1974.Google Scholar
Marx, K.Capital (Vols. 1, 3). New York: International Publishers, 1967.Google Scholar
McClosky, H.Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review, 1964, 58, 361–382.Google Scholar
Meek, R. L.Studies in the labor theory of value. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Mills, C. W.The power elite. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959.Google Scholar
Nicholls, D.Three varieties of pluralism. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbet, R. A.The decline and fall of social class. Pacific Sociological Review, 1959, 2, 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polsby, N. W.Community power and political theory. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Rawls, J.A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Riesman, D.The lonely crowd. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1950.Google Scholar
Scharr, J.Equality of opportunity and beyond. In Pennock, J. R. & Chapman, J. W. (Eds.), Equality. New York: Atherton Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Schattschneider, E. E.The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J.Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.Google Scholar
Truman, D.The governmental process. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951.Google Scholar
Walker, J.A critique of the elitist theory of democracy. American Political Science Review, 1966, 60, 285–295.Google Scholar
Wolfinger, R. E.The politics of progress. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1974.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.