The Power Elite

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1956

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-4

Chapters 5-7

Chapters 8-10

Chapters 11-12

Chapters 13-15

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Themes

The Emergence of a National Elite

By the 1950s, an upper class with consciousness of itself as such existed in the US. At the top of this class was a national elite. Since money was the only real criterion for admission to this class, it is distinguished from a traditional aristocracy. The formation and historical development of this class dates to the early days of the republic. The nationalization of the class is new, but its existence and awareness of it are not. In the mid-20th century, local elites were displaced by a national one. Power and relevance demanded entrance onto a national stage.

Prior to the Civil War, "old" families with wealth accumulated over generations comprised the upper class. In the aftermath of the Civil War, the era of industrialization saw the creation of newly enriched individuals with enormous amounts of money, such as Cornelius Vanderbilt. Efforts such as creating a list of the "Metropolitan 400" families in New York to exclude the newly rich from high society failed. Those with new money joined high society and became one with this class. In his study of the richest people living in the US since the Civil War, Mills documents the increasing percentage of the top class who originate there. Only 9% of the wealthiest class came from lower-class origins in 1950, versus 39% of it in 1900.

While money gains one entry into this class, it does so by buying the appropriate socialization and credentials to rise into the national elite. Most importantly, the members of the elite are likely to attend precollegiate private boarding schools. These schools are critical to the socialization of the members of this class, as they not only educate them but also prescribe appropriate social behavior and comportment. They also create a sense of family and bonding that extends to the class level. After attending such schools, the elite enroll in Ivy League colleges, where they join select clubs. They attend functions where they mingle with members of the opposite sex who are deemed appropriate for them and, therefore, marry within their class. Once they graduate, they belong to gentlemen’s clubs in their respective cities but can visit such clubs elsewhere when traveling. They form business and social ties with one another and learn to behave with just the right amount of intelligence, deference, and boldness. In short, they are groomed for positions of power.

Mills argues that the outcome of this socialization—proper manners, attitudes, and outlook—aligns the rising generation with those already in power. They resemble those at the top and conform to that type. These individuals were socialized similarly via the same institutions, beginning with schools and continuing in corporations or the military. They advance into the top positions of institutional power because of this conformity, not because of their competence, merit, or values. They are chosen subjectively because they fit, sharing the same outlook and goals. For this reason, Mills argues that members of the elite are not models of conservative excellence. They have no ideology and are driven by material interests while hiding the extent of their power behind meaningless liberal rhetoric.

The Central Role of Institutions in the American Power Structure

National corporations, the military, and the executive branch of the US government are the three institutions that wield consequential power in the mid-20th century. The decisions made in those institutions shape other spheres in society, such as families, educational institutions, and religious organizations. Those who hold the top positions in the trio of powerful institutions make the decisions of consequence for Americans. Among the elite in these top positions, there are interlocking interests and shared personnel.

Following World War II, there exists a permanent state of emergency given tense relations with the Soviet Union and the threat of a nuclear attack. This depiction of reality, which Mills considers a military perspective, empowers the top military leaders and brings them into the inner circle of the power elite for the first time in American history. The military needs munitions in this sophisticated arms race and relies upon American corporations to produce them. This need is a constant one because it is a response to advances on the Soviet side. According to the military, the US must always have enough nuclear weapons to survive a nuclear attack and then launch one at the Soviet Union. Only then, with the guarantee of mutually-assured destruction, will the Soviet Union have no motive to attack. Corporations gain economically from military contracts in pursuit of this goal, and those contracts account for a considerable percentage of all government spending. Increasingly, this spending and the underlying nuclear strategy are taken as givens and unquestioningly accepted by lawmakers as necessities. As a result, executive administration replaces politics.

While top military leaders are less likely to have been born into the upper class, they undergo intense socialization in military academies and then in their military experiences. In the top echelons, leaders are likely to serve in two of the dominant institutions. For example, a former general might become a chief executive officer of a corporation. Corporate and military leaders meet in formal venues, discussing weapons construction, and informally in social circles. Although there is no conspiracy to tout certain policies, their similarity of experiences and interests cultivates a common outlook and perspective.

It is in these top institutional positions that key decisions that determine the shape of the economy, wages, consumer prices, and foreign policy are made. In short, this top group rules via positions in dominant institutions. It defends the interests of corporate America and the military reflexively, as these interests coincide; elite leaders consider corporate and military interests to be the same as American interests. The government, thus, does not conform to democratic and liberal ideals but is marked by extreme political inequality.

The Decline of the Political Sphere and Citizenship

Mills argues that electoral politics operates at a middle level of power. Real power resides with the power elite. Democratic and liberal rhetoric pervades American life, but it does not describe the distribution of power in the US. The power of Congress and the American people is in decline, while that of the corporate elite, the military, and the executive branch is rising. Instead of engaging the public in debates about policy, elites sell their policies via manipulation and propaganda. By entertaining the public, celebrities provide a distraction from politics. By the mid-20th century, these factors began transforming the US from a democratic public to a mass society.

Mills criticizes the theory of pluralism, which was the mainstream interpretation of American politics in the 1950s. According to this theory, Congress decides policies after hearing from competing interest groups that represent all relevant positions at some level. Mills notes, however, that Congress is not the center of power, as over a period of time it delegated much of its lawmaking power to the executive branch, which favors corporate interests and rules administratively. Thus, the critical decisions of consequence, such as those related to foreign policy, are made by the power elite rather than by elected representatives of the people. Mills highlights the lack of ideological debates about the role the US should play in world politics, noting that the two major political parties do not have national platforms but primarily represent local interests in elections. Thus, there is no mechanism for the public to hear alternatives on critical national issues and select the one that best represents their interests.

Corporations and the military are attuned to public relations. They sell their positions to the public via imagery and simple messaging, similarly to how advertisers use commercial propaganda. Lulled by good economic times in the postwar era and distracted by national celebrities and television, the public accepts this propaganda. Meanwhile, the top leaders make decisions in accordance with the interests of their institutions; these decisions are mutually beneficial to the sectors they represent. For corporate leaders, the goals are to retain the private property system and maximize corporate profits. They do not subscribe to any ideology but focus on advancing their economic interests. For this reason, Mills notes that power elites have no moral standing or ideology; their policy decisions are rooted in maximizing profits. The public senses this cynicism but is not in a position to do anything about it.

As a result, Mills worries that the US is shifting from a democratic public to a mass society. In such a society, most people receive opinions of authorities and have no opportunity to respond to them. In a public, people communicate, express opinions, and respond to others’ views. Public opinion, formed interactively, is the basis for policy in a democratic public, whereas authorities make decisions and control actions in a mass society. There is no independence from powerful institutions in a mass society. Individuality is lost. The public cannot form opinions. Mills is careful to say that the US is not a mass society in the 1950s but is trending that way. His work is structured as a wake-up call about the public's loss of political power to executive administrators, military leaders, and corporate chief executives. These three institutions do not operate democratically. On the contrary, they exacerbate inequalities by rewarding those at the top with money, power, and prestige.