By Alexander Perepechko
Published on February 23, 2012
The vision described above remains a journalistic narrative, unless research questions are asked and methodology designed.
Issues of theory and research techniques for this vision are complicated in a country where a foreign accent is often met with displeasure, governments are not happy about the flow of ideas, and public relations experts and broadcast networks are frequently in command of reality. Since the late 1990s, academic social science rapidly becomes an extension of projects designed by political parties, governments, corporations and global networks. Topics pertaining to elites are not discussed in American universities at all. More than 170 years ago Tocqueville (1988: 254-255) offered an image of freedom of discussion: “I know no country in which, speaking generally, there is less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion than in America.” There is little public space to discuss eccentric visions today. America is still America; it speaks and understands only American English. For all the impediments, new technologies and media provide people in America with an opportunity to explore unconventional subjects and to make socially embarrassing discussions public. Surveillance and other socio-political consequences of cyberspace are a different story.
In terms of the vision described above, what is the role of the ruling class in quickly changing the social and political dynamics in America? What are rules of elite games? What (human) technologies do American elites use to effect these changes? Do the changes result from conflicts in the American ruling class? What are these conflicts about? What are the possible consequences of these conflicts for America and the rest of the world? Since there is a profound and original nexus between the fulfillment of a person and the destiny of the world (see Giussani, 1997: 77), what are implications of these conflicts for my own destiny, for destinies of other newcomers?
To place this investigation in context it is useful first to summarize some of the theories and points of view put forward by theorists of elites. Elite-related methodologies are somewhat associated with the sociology of groups (for example, Field et al, 1990) and system theory (Bertalanffy, 1950; Easton, 1965). But Europeans would be more comfortable to relate these studies of elites to the Machiavellian school of thought.
Bertalanffy, L., Von (1950) An Outline of General System Theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, I (2): 134-165.
Easton, D. (1965) A Systems Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley.
Field, G. L., Higley, J., Burton, M. G. (1990) A New Elite Framework for Political Sociology. Revue européen des sciences sociales. T. 28, No. 88: 149-182.
Giussani, L. (1997) The Religious Sense. New York: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Tocqueville, A., de (1988) Democracy in America. New York: Perennial Classics.