Cleaning Out the Power Elite

[Seeker]

I guess I subscribe to elite theory in when it comes to political science.

Not in terms of 'organization' but simply in terms of a mass of people in the 'power elite' generally forming and perpetuating ideologies that serve what they percieve as their interests.

In previous times, the Power Elite was periodically 'flushed' and cleansed from the body politic by wars, revolutions, and religious upheavals.

But we live in an era of satelite technology, affordable mass entertainment, and extremely 'leveraged' military technology. It is unlikely that an elite can be militarily threatened as long as they maintain control over their militaries.

The power elite consists of the 'top level' of society, across academia, politics, finance, corporate government, bureaucracy, media, and the military.

90% of these people should be exiled to a small Arctic island in a perfect world.

I think it is pretty clear that, due to a lack of any purgative mechanism, they have become increasingly decadent, corrupt, inefficient, and just plain bad. To a ridiculous, end-of-manchu-dynasty extent.

Representational democracy is proving to be kind of...not good as a purgative. It is too easy for the Power Elite to 'game the system', it moves too slowly, and it was created in an era before the mind-numbing effects of our Entertainment Culture.

So what are we left with? Will environmental, cultural, political and economic problems ever reach a level that will cause a Mass Sociocultural Enema? Or do we just gradually become SMAC style 'Nerve Stapled drones'?

[One_more_turn]

This sounds like what Pol-Pot was trying to do.

[notyoueither]

Re: Cleaning Out the Power Elite

Originally posted by Seeker
I think it is pretty clear that, due to a lack of any purgative mechanism, they have become increasingly decadent, corrupt, inefficient, and just plain bad. To a ridiculous, end-of-manchu-dynasty extent.

And DanS thought I was being hysterical.

Relax, dude.

[Boris Godunov]

Um.... yay purges?

[Darius871]

No previous elite has ever had the benefit of masses' complacency induced by "mind-numbing effects of our Entertainment Culture," so there's really no historical analogy that would be useful. Frankly I think this elite is here to stay so long as there isn't a wholesale economic collapse, so you might as well get used to 'em.

[Lancer]

We are NOT all that bad.

*Dispatches death squad*

[Eli]

It is true that power is in the hands of the "'top level' of society, across academia, politics, finance, corporate government, bureaucracy, media, and the military. "

But why don't you turn the resolution knob a little bit higher? Who are these people? Are their jobs hereditary? Are they accessible only to their friends? Are you forced to bribe someone to enter their ranks?

I think that you'll agree with me that the vast majority of these positions are mostly meritocratic. Yes, there are meritorious people who can't reach these positions due to certain circumstances, and there are un-meritorious people who do reach them. But generally speaking, we're much closer to a meritocracy than to anything else.

So if you don't like something, you can change it (unless you suck or can't get others to agree with you). The people currently manning the positions of power can be replaced and are being replaced.

So unless you're talking about changing the most basic foundations of liberal democracies, where is the problem?

[Arrian]

Read Animal Farm. What happens in the end, after the revolution? A new elite takes power. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Simply "purging" the decadent elite doesn't really do anything. It's not a solution.

-Arrian

[Japher]

You need to disperse the power so that it's so thin no one really cares.

[onodera]

Originally posted by Arrian
Read Animal Farm. What happens in the end, after the revolution? A new elite takes power. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Simply "purging" the decadent elite doesn't really do anything. It's not a solution.

-Arrian

You can solve this by having more revolutions.

[Eli]

Originally posted by Japher
You need to disperse the power so that it's so thin no one really cares.

So you're a Libertarian?

[Blaupanzer]

The "elite" is actually several overlapping groups that interact with one another and lose some of their individual identity over time. Point is that there is not one elite but a group of elites, an oligarchy.

Thomas Jefferson agreed explicity with onodera's point saying we should have an upheaval every 60 years or so. The alternative would be that the same families, institutions, and economic structures would eventually emerge to run everything. In the US, the Civil War fulfilled that function and to a large extent so did the Depression/WW II. We are clearly due another as it has been over 60 years since the last. Hopefully this can be done with as little violence as possible, but those that benefit from this type of generational power scheme will not leave voluntarily.

[Blaupanzer]

Originally posted by Japher
You need to disperse the power so that it's so thin no one really cares.

Possibly an Anarchist?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Darius871
No previous elite has ever had the benefit of masses' complacency induced by "mind-numbing effects of our Entertainment Culture," so there's really no historical analogy that would be useful.

Does the phrase "Bread & Circuses" ring a familiar note?

[snoopy369]

This is, interestingly enough, connected to a book I'm reading (System of the World), where one of the characters (an anti-slavery agitant) debates with himself about (political) Power, and whether it is conserved, like energy, or if it is able to increase and decrease.

I think that the only way for a country to get out from the Shrinking Elite quandry, is to open up a new avenue of growth (so that Power is not conserved, as it is in a stable country with no significant avenue of growth, but it is increasing). Why did the French and Russian revolutions fail so miserably in this (even if they had a very short-term benefit, it lasted only a few decades at most) but the American revolution, and possibly the Chinese, worked much better (for centuries, in our case, and for at least half a century in China's)? It was because of huge growth in industry, the frontier, etc., which meant that there were plenty of areas for those who would expand their power to do so.

This is why I fully support space exploration; it is our only meaningful frontier at this point.