Plurastic And Dominance Contrast

1302 Words6 Pages
Pluralism and Dominance/Marxism While pluralism and dominance or otherwise known as Marxism, are said to have developed from liberalism and socialism respectively. A great part of their theories are notably different, if not completely in contrast with each. In order to understand these views of state, it is important to first understand the fundamental views of pluralism and dominance/ Marxism. The Dominance theory is better explained as the Marxist theory developed by Karl Marx and is outlined most clearly in The Communist Manifesto (Steiner 2009). The theory states that social divisions along class lines lead to a ‘ruling class’ controlling the ‘means of production’. The Marx theory argues that the abuse of the proletariat promotes the interests of the bourgeoisie. The elitist theory could be said to follow on from the Marxist in that it postulates a privileged minority with disproportionate control. However, the control in this case is over the mechanisms of the state. Therefore, one might argue that these elite only possess influence rather than control over the means of production. This is perhaps the reason proponents of this theory are more content for the continuation of its existence when compared with their Marxist counterparts. Pluralism is essentially a theory in favor of distributing power equally amongst individuals rather than having power remains within the hands of one individual (Heywood 2003; Schwarzmantel 1994; Dunleavy and O’Leary 1987).This is one having multiple groups and institutions through which power is diffused. Within such a society no entity or interest has overriding power and each may check and balance others. (Steiner 2009) However, it has been argued that this theory is too idealistic, and that it is impossible for there to be an equal distribution of power because realistically power is likely to only be
Open Document