The Power Elite Analysis

Introduction
Cities in the United States are at the mercy of state governments. Specefically, the tenth amendment of the United States Constitution states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” (U.S. Constitution). States grant power to cities using the outline of charter cities and general law cities. The concept known as Dilllon’s rule can be traced back to Iowa state judge John Dillion and it states that “ when legal questions arise about the extent of power granted to a city, the court usually sides with the state, city powers are interpreted narrowly” ( Lecture). The power dynamic created by this stature draws

This model is built on a hierarchal filtration systems that gives elites seemingly unlimited power while leaving others with little to none. According to Whitt in the U.S. elite members are from these areas : (1) the highest political leaders including the president and a handful of key cabinet members and close advisers; (2) major corporate owners and directors; and (3) high-ranking military officers. Particularly, C.W. Wright Mills believes that elites, which in this case are business, military and political figures, are able to exercise an unlimited amount of power due to systematic hierarchal controls. Moreover, the growth in these institutions have created a systemized power structure that os based off of the interest of the elites in these arenas; Mills refers to this concept as being “ The command post for modern society” ( Mills, 1965). The centralization of power in this model highlights the streamlined goals and interest of actors within the sectors who coincidentally have shared attitudes and beliefs. According to Whitt “elites are unified in the purpose and outlook because of their similar social background and because of a convergence of interest arising form their positions within dominant social institutions” ( Whitt 11). Elites have experienced similar educations, social status and

This implies that basic institutions play a key role in determine the status of a society and the interactions between classes. This theory holds that class position is the basis of power and that power is held primarily by the dominant class. Whitt highlights the following as major differences that desperate the dialectical class model from both the elite and pluralist models: (a) the institutional context of political activity and (b) the class based politics (c) dialectics/ contradictions. According to the dialectical model one must understand the logic and biases associated with social institutional while still being observant of the political behaviors of social classes and individuals (Whitt). The theory is that dominant groups want to preserve institutions that give them power. Additinally, this model gives the state has a degree of autonomy in order to maintain class hegemony; however, its primary role is to serve the interest of the dominant group. Finally, if the dialectic model is deemed as applicable if the following conditions are in place: (a) process of social institutions, that expel what is beneficial to dominant classes, (b) evidence of latent class conflict, divergent interest, or observable class