Assignment - Critically discuss basic assumptions of Elite Theory and apply the theory to any public policy of your choice

INTRODUCTION

In political science, public policy and sociology, elite theory is a theory of the state which seeks to describe and explain the power relationships in contemporary society. The theory posits that a small minority, consisting of members of the economic elite and policy-planning networks, holds the most power and that this power is independent of a state's democratic elections process (Odumakin, 2009).   Through positions in corporations or on corporate boards, and influence over the policy-planning networks through financial support of foundations or positions with think tanks or policy-discussion groups, members of the "elite" are able to exert significant power over the policy decisions of corporations and governments. An example of this can be found in the Forbes magazine article (published in December 2009) entitled The World's Most Powerful People, in which Forbes purported to list the 67 most powerful people in the world (assigning one "slot" for each 100,000,000 of human population).

Even when entire groups are ostensibly completely excluded from the state's traditional networks of power (historically, on the basis of arbitrary criteria such as nobility, race, gender, or religion), elite theory recognizes that "counter-elites" frequently develop within such excluded groups (Higley, 2012). Negotiations between such disenfranchised groups and the state can be analyzed as negotiations between elites and counter-elites. A major problem, in turn, is the ability of elites to co-opt counter-elites.

Assumptions of Elite Theory

Elite theory opposes pluralism, a tradition that assumes that all individuals, or at least the multitude of social groups, have equal power and balance each other out in contributing to democratic political outcomes representing the emergent, aggregate will of society. Elite theory argues either that democracy is a utopian folly, as it is traditionally viewed in the conservative Italian tradition, or that democracy is not realizable within capitalism, as is the view of the more Marxist-compatible contemporary elite theory permutation (Bariledum, 2013).

The theoretical view was also held by many social scientists which holds that politics is best understood through the generalization that nearly all political power is held by a relatively small and wealthy group of people sharing similar values and interests and mostly coming from relatively similar privileged backgrounds (Ojukwu and Shopeju, 2010).

Most of the top leaders in all or nearly all key sectors of society are seen as recruited from this same social group, and elite theorists emphasize the degree to which interlocking corporate and foundation directorates, old school ties and frequent social interaction tend to link together and facilitate coordination between the top leaders in business, government, civic organizations, educational and cultural establishments and the mass media. 

This "power elite" can effectively dictate the main goals (if not always the practical means and details) for all really important government policy making (as well as dominate the activities of the major mass media and educational/cultural organizations in society) by virtue of their control over the economic resources of the major business and financial organizations in the country (Tola and Bamidele, 2014).

Application of Elite Theory in Accountability Policy in Nigeria

The governing elite in Nigeria deriving from their social characteristics and privileges of office operate as a formidable team against the mass (people) who are encumbered by daily pressure for sustenance and necessities of life. The manipulative tendencies and tool by the elite inhibit any genuine effort to advance common cause in form of qualitative education, shelter, basic infrastructure and other social amenities as deliverables of democratic governance.

Michael (2014), validated this in his assertion that “the dominant fraction of the Nigerian ruling classes does not use the wealth they loot…for the benefit of their people although these poor people whose names are invoked in vain are often mobilized to fight their imaginary enemies. The reference to looting of the nation’s wealth above reinforces the serial argument by scholars and public analysts/social commentators that the governing elites in Nigeria (past and present) are complicit in resource plunder, and as an extension of the colonial state, the post-colonial state represented by the governing elite is also predatory and exploitative (Albert, 2005). Albert corroborated that the emergent statesmen were apprenticed under the colonial administrators and required such anti-democratic traits as arrogance; exclusivity; elitism; executive authoritarianism, censorship of popular debate on public issues. Successive governing elites in Nigeria are not accountable to the citizenry.

This is attributable to the fallen status of Nigerian laws and weak institutions of governance which ensures that the internal and external mechanisms for upholding public accountability are grossly circumscribed (Ibietan, 2013). Support for these averments hinges on various allegations of public treasury looting by public officials, Governors and local government chieftains to mention but a few. The institutions (CCB; EFCC; ICPC; Judiciary) saddled with the tasks of maintaining probity in office, moral rectitude in the conduct of government business and integrity in public affairs have not been able to do much.

Visit www.researchshelf.com for complete project materials, project topics, past examination questions and answers, assignments, research proposals,  meet fellow students online, meet with lecturers and ask for help, read and post news (Campus News). Registration is Free Of Charge (FOC).

Note also that our mobile app will soon be launched where you can download it and view all the above features on your mobile devices.