Comments on: The Megapower Elite

By: Jeffrey C. Goldfarb

Jeffrey C. Goldfarb — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:32:00 +0000

As a matter of principle, I am the last one to recognize a conspiracy, for theoretical and political reasons. I know there are conspiracies, but try to find alternative explanations first. In the case of Mills and Halton’s notion of an interconnected elites, I see institutions interlocking, justified by ideologies and a political culture that have to some extent lives of their own. During the cold war, fighting communism justified actions that also protected American corporate interests, and it could even be given a human face with Rockefeller support through art shows abroad featuring abstract expressionists. (How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art by Serge Guilbaut and Arthur Goldhammer). But that doesn’t mean that Jackson Pollock was part of the Power Elite. It is the intentionality of Mills notion that I question.

By: Jeffrey C. Goldfarb

Jeffrey C. Goldfarb — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:32:00 +0000

By: Eugene Halton

Eugene Halton — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:17:00 +0000

Goldfarb claims that C. Wright Mills’s concept of power elite or my proposal for a megapower elite is an exaggeration, “Yet this exaggeration does highlight a fundamental problem and can motivate critical action, such as the demonstrations on Wall Street.” Presumably Eisenhower’s 1961 claim for “the military-industrial complex” would also be taken as an exaggeration (an interesting one if so, coming from the head of government and former general and supreme commander of allied forces in World War 2). So what is the exaggeration of the “fundamental problem” then, could you be more specific?

Are the examples I offered of American sponsored coups in the 50s to illustrate Mills’s concept not evidence of strongly interlinked corporate, military, governmental institutions? Do you not see a centralization of power per se as problematic?

Could it be that your concern for grassroots political action may be overshadowing the significance of larger scale systemic interconnections which Mills’s idea of the power elite tried to draw attention to?

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 16:59:00 +0000

I think it is an interesting question whether or not the “power elite” indeed act in tandem as a “united front.” Yet whether the power elite are closely interlocked or not, it seems that a system being rigged in their favor, via the influence of money in politics, has the effect of taking power out of the hands of everyday citizens, and undermining democratic processes. And like Dr. Goldfarb mentioned, this can motivate critical action such as people taking to the streets and creating their own power.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:16:00 +0000

This is very interesting. What I take away from it is the deep question of the extent to which our (or any superpower’s) economic interests determines our foreign policy. And, of course, the fact that these economic interests are shared by powerful leaders and corporations– in short, if United Fruit as our company determined our handling of countries in Central America, and it did or our interest in cheap oil led us to get rid of a democratically elected leader in Iran, and it did, then we really do live in a corporate oligarchy. And I understand the distinction you make between now and then (and least then we had a progressive reaction or the creation, at home, of unions, etc.) whereas now corporate power has no resistance. There is resistance to corporate power and hopefully the resistance will result in the upkeep of unions, etc.

By: Jeffrey C. Goldfarb

Jeffrey C. Goldfarb — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:50:00 +0000

Re-reading The Power Elite certainly provides insight into a major problem in American society today, suggesting a reversal of Marx. First time comedy (capture in recent tv programs, Mad men and its imitators), now tragedy. I am not completely convinced by the idea of a power elite or now of a mega power elite. The closely interlocked nature of the elite that Mills presented and Halton suggests, I think, is an exaggeration. Yet this exaggeration does highlight a fundamental problem and can motivate critical action, such as the demonstrations on Wall Street. Something which I hope will be discussed deliberately at DC.