Introduction to Political Science
Spring 2001
Discussion on Shively, Ch. 1 and Bachrach and Baratz, "Two Faces of Power"
February 1

1. What assumptions to proponents of the "elite theory" make about the distribution of power within American democracy? How do they propose that we study power?
2. On what grounds do proponents (i.e., Robert Dahl) of the "pluralist theory" of democracy criticize elite versions of power? What specific criticisms do they make of the assumptions and research methodology used by elite theorists?
3. What do pluralists, in contrast to the elitists, assume about the distribution of power in democratic society? What methodology do they propose we use to study power?
4. What fundamental flaws do Bachrach and Baratz find in the assumptions and research methodology of the pluralist conceptions of power? In what way do the approach and assumptions of the pluralists predetermine their findings?
5. What do Bachrach and Baratz mean by the "two faces of power?" What does Schattschneider, who is quoted in "Two Faces of Power," mean by the "mobilization of bias?" What is entailed in the mobilization of bias? Why is it essential to keep the mobilization of bias in mind when studying power in a community or a nation?
6. Can you think of any issues that are consistently left off the political agenda? What does the absence of these issues reveal the exercise of power? Is it possible to study "nondecisions?" How would you propose to study this form of exercising power?

Elitist view of power/ruling-elite model of power
Pluralist view of power
Mobilization of bias
Nondecisionmaking