Elite als "betwist" begrip
Abstract
Elite as a 'disputed' concept - An undisputed description of the concept ’elite’ does not exist. This obviously contributes to the fact that the discussion about this term will possibly never end. Everybody ’knows’ what is meant with it, but hardly anyone agrees when attempts are made to define the concept accurately and precisely. Elitists consider the most important power to be concentrated in one oligarchic and well-organised ruling elite while, according to pluralists, power is divided among a large number of differing, and through internal differences divided, elite-groups. However the traditions of elite analysis have been very fruitful in stimulating the empirical and theoretical debate. Machiavellians and their modern descendants, i.e. elitists and pluralists, have continuously been highlighting one of the central issues in sociological analysis : how is power distributed and exercised in society ? Indiscriminate use of the term ’elite’, however, has masked the value of elite analysis. When going through the literature in connection with the subject we could finally conclude that in the majority of cases the national (political) elites are examined. Studies about local (political) elites are rather exceptional. Nevertheless we have pointed out that national and local elites are situated on different levels. Local (political) elites make up the initial phase of the selection process, while national elites are at the end of this process.
How to Cite:
Reynaert, H., (1997) “Elite als "betwist" begrip”, Tijdschrift voor Sociale Wetenschappen 42(3), 325–339. doi: https://doi.org/10.21825/tvsw.95278
Downloads:
Download PDF
View PDF