Pluralism vs. Elitism in Democracy

Introduction 

• Democracy may be defined as a system where the people determine laws, policies, and leadership directly or indirectly.

  • Pluralism: Power in liberal democracies is dispersed among various groups, preventing dominance by a single elite.

  • Elitism: Power is held by a select few rather than broadly distributed.

• Robert Dahl introduced the concept of polyarchy to characterise American politics and other political systems that are open, inclusive, and competitive. 

  • Polyarchies are based on the principle of representative rather than direct democracy. 

• C Wright Mills argued that elected officials may appear to represent the public, but absolute power is concentrated among a network of political, corporate, and military elites.

• Examining pluralist and elitist perspectives can provide insight into whether democracy functions as a system of shared power or elite control.

Key Ideas

---

Robert Dahl’s Pluralist Polyarchy 

• Dahl's polyarchy describes real-world democracies that are open, competitive, and inclusive but fall short of the ideal democracy.

  • At a minimum, an ideal democracy would involve: effective participation, equality in voting, an informed electorate, citizen control of the agenda, inclusion, and fundamental rights.

• Polyarchy reflects the practical limits of an ideal democracy in complex societies and emphasises the role of pluralism in preventing power from being concentrated in a single ruling elite.

• As a form of representative democracy, it allows for participation through institutions rather than direct governance.

  • Core features of polyarchy include: free and fair elections, competing political parties and interest groups, civil liberties, and widespread but indirect citizen participation.

C Wright Mills’ Power Elite 

• Mills argued that democracy is dominated by a small, powerful elite from government, business, and the military, rather than reflecting true public rule.

  • Elections and political parties create the illusion of democracy but primarily serve to sustain elite dominance. 

    • Political leaders and party competition often occur within the elite class, meaning real power remains concentrated.

• Political participation is mainly symbolic, legitimising the system without granting real influence to the public.

  • While citizens can vote, elite groups decide major policies behind closed doors.

• Media, education, and political discourse are controlled by elites, preventing challenges to their power and keeping the public focused on surface-level politics.

---

Applying Dahl and Mills to Social Media’s Influence on Democracy

Social media appears to open new avenues for participation, but it also introduces new forms of control. Whether it empowers or undermines democracy depends on which theoretical lens we apply.

Empowering Pluralism – Dahl’s perspective 

• Dahl’s polyarchy model suggests that democracy thrives when multiple interest groups compete for influence—social media enhances this competition by weakening traditional gatekeepers like mainstream media and political parties.

  • This supports Dahl’s vision by increasing competition among voices in the public sphere.

• Social media being widely accessible can increase political awareness and participation, especially during times like elections.

  • Enables mass movements (#MeToo, Black Lives Matter, etc), allowing previously marginalised voices to organise.

  • The 2020-2024 election cycles saw unprecedented levels of youth political engagement via TikTok and Instagram.

• Social media provides Dahl's "effective participation" criterion by connecting citizens directly with policymakers.

Reinforcing Elitism – Mills’ perspective

• Mills’ power elite theory argues that democracy is dominated by a small ruling class—social media, rather than decentralising power, reinforces elite control as corporate tech giants shape political discourse and influence public perception.

• Mills argued that elites control the flow of information, much like social media algorithms that prioritise certain narratives while suppressing others.

  • Platforms like Meta, X, and Google decide which content gets visibility, shaping public opinion.

  • Echo chambers reinforce elite narratives by narrowing the range of visible perspectives, making it easier for political and corporate elites to reinforce targeted messages.

• The use of user data for political manipulation aligns with Mills' concerns about elite power. 

  • The Cambridge Analytica scandal revealed how user data could be weaponised for political manipulation and strategic influence of public opinion, precisely as Mills would predict.

    • Cambridge Analytica harvested Facebook data to build psychological profiles of American voters, which it used to support political campaigns like Trump’s 2016 run through targeted messaging aimed at shaping opinions and voting behaviour.

• Social media gives people a sense of political engagement (likes, shares, comments) without necessarily changing the power structure. 

---

Further reading 

• Giovanni Sartori  – The Theory of Democracy Revisited (1987)

  • Analytical framework for pluralist democracy.

• James Madison – Federalist No. 51

  • Emphasises how institutional structures prevent any one group from gaining too much control. It reinforces the idea that governance should be shaped by a balance of contending forces.

    
    

---