The Opposition Of The Privileged Has Been Around Since The Conception Of Organized Society

The upper-upper class are those who come from old money, which is inherited from previous generations.This class compose less than 1% of the population, but possess a great deal of power, and influence society. The upper-lowers are those who come from “new money.” Most of these people a famous stars and are sometimes referred to as the “working rich” because they work for the money they earn. Although the upper-lowers may possess more money than the upper-uppers, they often find it difficult to be apart of the upper society.

I don’t think we ever saw a political and economic system where the people are in charge. We've only seen different aspects of the same type of "civilization" with the dominant minority. During the American Revolution economic system didn’t fully appreciate peoples hard work to make the separation from Britain, people were paid low wages for their physically hard and were charged with high taxes like the Stamp Act, Declaratory Act, and Townshend Act. Today, things are not much better, many people work 9-5 underpaid jobs just to be able to pay off mortgage, bills, debts and taxes. Bureaucratic powers then and now don’t make use of all our human potential and don’t give many opportunities to “regular people” for individual expression and

In his novel, Making Societies, William G. Roy expresses class as “social relationships that are understood by participants to be hierarchical on the basis of socioeconomic group membership, reinforced by major institutions and recurrent over time” (Roy, 158). With this definition in mind, my family would be considered upper-middle class in today’s societal terms, or upper class based upon Roy’s explanation. Max Weber identifies three concepts that determine the class categories: education, religion, and medicine. We can use these parameters in order to argue that my family has used class advantages in order to get into ISU.

Class, a term that can describe formalness as well as status, portrays the unique identity elitism in cases of hierarchy. Specified etiquette such as mannerism and speech take part in the presentation of potentiality that also expand persuasion of behavioral unity. This monarchical sense of tradition exhibits credential values of status that grant authority and legitimacy by proving an individual’s worth through their personality before even demonstrating their skills. The same can be inferred about the affiliation of “smartness” in the identification of Wall Street investment bankers. Grand named firms filter their preferences to acquire recruitment of Ivy League students from universities like Harvard and Princeton where students already have inclusive smartness. Ho states: “On Wall Street, ‘smartness’ means much more than individual intelligence; it conveys a naturalized and generic sense of ‘impressiveness’ of elite, pinnacle status and expertise, which is used to signify, even prove, investment bankers’ worthiness as advisors to corporate America and leaders of the global financial markets”(167). In the larger picture of global solidarity, the recruitment of intelligent Ivy League students empowers the economic values of the firms and bank, hence bettering the economy of the rest of the

Reading G. William Domhoff’s Who Rules America?: The Triumph of the Corporate Rich was an intriguing and challenging experience for me. My limited knowledge base of the American political class system mostly stems from high school US History classes and listening to my mom’s stories of her experiences in the corporate world. Therefore, I am aware that due to my prior lack of knowledge on the topics presented in Domhoff’s book, I may have misjudged some of his finer points. Part of my struggles may be largely due to the fact that Domhoff’s intended audience for Who Rules America? is other experts in the field of understanding the sociology of the corporate elite and their resources of power. However, I believe that the book has given me a better, if not complete, understanding of the corporate elite and how they stay in power.

The purpose of the textbook, Who Rules America? by G. William Domhoff, is to explain his theory of Class Domination. My essay emphasises the relation of social class to power, the existence of a Corporate community, the relationship of the Corporate community to the upper class, and various methods used by the Corporate community to dominate the U.S Political System. Furthermore, my essay will discuss the potential limits to corporate power in America.

A world of system designed to keep people in unjust and unequal positions is held in place by several interrelated expression of "power over": political power, economic power, physical force, and ideological power (Bishop, 1994: 36). So, we can say power is defined as a possession of control, authority or influence over others. In terms of power of dominant groups over subordinate groups, we define power as domination of one group of people over another in major important spheres of life. Power inequities have been in existence throughout the history of humanity and the ways of manifestation evolved from extreme overt oppression to subtle, covert oppression. Three major forms of power inequalities discussed in this paper are

As Habermas puts it “the relationship of the individual to the state has increasingly become one of client or consumer services, rather than citizen” (Roberts & Crossley, 5). Due to the limited agency (citizens’ roles) within this sphere, we can conclude that the ongoing competition and negotiation for a role in the public sphere ends with strictly dominant views. In such a monarchy, ordinary citizens such as lower classes and women have limited input when debating politics among other things. The ideal of a place where all opinions are counted, so to speak, fails to provide a sense of individual identity. This is due to the fact that it is pre-destined by the state itself and then turned back to the people- telling them what they will think about particular issues; shown especially through the controlling lens of the media.

According to Abercrombie (2000) the upper class is distinguished from the rest by its wealth and power.  The upper class consists of very few people; McGregor argues that it may be as little 1% of society's population.  The people in this group are employers, they own large quantities of land, and some are self-employed or have a career as managers or professionals.  Wealth is distributed among the upper class members mainly through inheritance.  With greater wealth people have the opportunity to manipulate the life that they will lead.  The education system reinforces many inequalities insuring that members of the highest class have better opportunities and elevated chances of achieving greatness.  Members

Wealth in relation to the upper class is defined not as income, but “the value of everything a person or family owns, minus any debts” (Domhoff 2005). Income according to Domhoff, “is what people earn from work, but also from dividends, interest, and any rents or royalties that are paid to them on properties they own” (Domhoff 2011). Those who own a great deal of wealth do not derive it from income, although they may have a high income resulting from the returns on their wealth. (Domhoff 2011) As for the power the upper class wields on politics, the economy and the government, it is indirectly carried out “through the activities of a wide variety of organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions are financed and directed by those members of the upper class who have the interest and ability to involve themselves in protecting and enhancing the privileged social position of their class” (Domhoff 2005). This description of the upper class by Domhoff provides the basis for the argument that it institutionally exist - an organized, cohesive group set apart by its wealth and power.

The government in the United States supposedly revolves around American ideals such as equality and diversity; however, this is simply not the case as perpetuated by class inequalities. The meaning of democracy has been skewed in the United States to represent something entirely different than it did in 1776. Today, American democracy behaves more like an aristocracy, where the upper class exercises power within the government and state, influencing discourse and therefore the laws and resources in our country, which are purportedly “for the people”. Democracy is presumed to provide everyone with equal political power, but the government in today’s America, although seemingly following this ideal model, does not. Instead, the elite upper class has a monopoly over the political influence and are the sole benefactors from public policies due to their influence over the policy making process. The upper class has an overall benefit from class inequality, as it greatly impacts American ‘democracy’ through the significant power gained through money and status, leadership roles that impact government, and the influence in the policymaking process that creates upper class advantages.

The power elite is able to exert power over society. The power elite’s control over politics demonstrates how inequality is functional. This validates the class-domination theory of power, which is distributed based on economic power. By controlling economic resources, the power elites political influence in government shapes law and those involved in government to the power elites benefit. In today’s American society these laws have impacted both the corporate community and the elite. Furthermore, the author’s portrayal of the elite displayed how the elite have control concerning choices in government policies, elections, and laws.

Society is a structured hierarchical system of classes. The higher class you hold, the higher power often associated to you. With this construction of society one-group claims dominance over another doing so with “power over” (Bishop, 2015). Power over others can be visible through physical strength, wealth, resources, and access to opportunities, etc. These dominate groups not only spread ideas, but often are in charge of the creation of ideas, their importance, and the norms and roles for society and classes labeling groups different than their own as inferior.

majority of people has been kept under the authority of the minority. It has been taught

Prevalent flaws within most modern democracies are evident in their social and economic systems. One such problem, in a system that advocates freedom to do whatever you please, is the consequential wealth disparity (Wong, Oct. 24 lecture, tutorial). Aristotle once said that, “democracy is the form of government in which… the free are the many and the rich are the few”. This highlights a paradox of democracy in that it attempts to be equal to all, yet often the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, and an increasing wealth divide will influence governance. Constant writes (pg. 12), “wealth is a power more readily available at any moment… more