Discuss the concept of circulation of elite. (UPSC CSE Mains 2019 - Sociology, Paper 1)
- Pareto’s thesis was that elites always rule. There is always the domination of the minority over the majority. And history is just the story of one elite replacing another. This is what he called the “circulation of elites”. When the current elite starts to decline, it is challenged and makes way for another. Pareto thought that this came about in two ways: either through assimilation, the new elite merging with elements of the old, or through revolution, the new elite wiping out the old. He used the metaphor of a river to make his point. Most of the time, the river flows continuously, smoothly incorporating its tributaries, but sometimes, after a storm, it floods and breaks its banks.
- Drawing on his Italian predecessor Machiavelli, Pareto identified two types of elite rulers. The first, whom he called the “foxes”, are those who dominate mainly through combination: deceit, cunning, manipulation and co-optation. Their rule is characterised by decentralisation, plurality and scepticism, and they are uneasy with the use of force. “Lions”, on the other hand, are more conservative. They emphasise unity, homogeneity, established ways, the established faith, and rule through small, centralised and hierarchical bureaucracies, and they are far more at ease with the use of force than the devious foxes. History is the slow swing of the pendulum from one type of elite to the other, from foxes to lions and back again.
- Both lions and foxes have their strengths and weaknesses, and political elites are a combination of the two, with one element dominating temporarily.
Analysis of Circulation of Elites
- Pareto’s interpretation of history is straightforward and oversimplified. He ignores the variations on a fundamental theme that characterize political regimes like western democracies, communist single-party governments, fascist dictatorships, and feudal monarchies. The variations between them are negligible compared to the reality that they are all fundamentally manifestations of elite power.
- Pareto falls short in offering a way to quantify and differentiate between the better traits of elites. He believes that the elite has better traits than the general population. His standard for separating lions from foxes is essentially his interpretation of the form of elite leadership.
- Pareto doesn’t even provide a measure to gauge the elite decadence process. He does, however, argue that an elite will quickly lose its energy and vitality and have a limited life if it is closed to recruiting from below.
- Modern democracies, in Pareto’s opinion, are just another kind of elite dominance. He disapprovingly rejected those who saw democratic systems as a more egalitarian and inclusive form of governance.
Criticism of circulation of elite
- Pareto received much criticism, with some arguing that he did not adequately define the characteristics of elites. They lack specificity and objectivity. His theory that elites move around because of psychological issues is likewise insufficient.
- Talcott Parsons criticized Pareto for failing to specify the factors causing residue proportions variations. The biological and genetic variables “bearing upon these alterations,” have not been mentioned by him.
Next
previous
Latest News
EDITORIALS & ARTICLES
General Studies