Revision summary
Mills: power elite rules via commanding institutions, not psychology. Corporation, military, and political directorates interlock. Weber and Michels support the office view. Gramsci, Lukes, and feminist theory add consent and gender. Bourdieu’s habitus is socialised psyche, not Mills’s rejected mass mind. Comment: right as a method; incomplete as a full map of rule.
Model answer
Introduction
C. Wright Mills argued that the American power elite rules because it commands the commanding institutions of corporation, military, and state. Psychology of “great men” or crowd moods does not explain that command. The sentence is a method rule: look at offices, not at souls.
Body
What Mills meant
- The Power Elite (1956) fused three institutional hierarchies. Interlocking directorates, careers, and social traffic make a coherent minority.
- Pareto’s residues and Le Bon’s crowds are the psychological rivals he rejected as sufficient.
- Rule is the capacity of those institutions to set war, work, and welfare.
Comment: strength
- Max Weber already made office and party central. Mills specified a mid-century United States.
- It travels to India as IAS–corporate–party nexuses better than as a theory of national character.
- Robert Michels’s oligarchy is institutional, which supports Mills.
Comment: limits
- Gramsci’s hegemony and Steven Lukes’s third face add consent and preference-shaping that are not only boardrooms.
- Feminist theory: households and gendered institutions also rule, which Mills underplayed.
- Psychology is not zero. Selection into elites still uses habitus, after Pierre Bourdieu, which is socialised psyche, not Mills’s target.
Verdict
- Right against great-man and mass-mind stories.
- Incomplete if institutions are read without ideology and gender.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD INST[Corporation military state] --> RULE[Elite rule] PSY[Great man crowd mind] --> MISS[Insufficient] MILLS[Mills] --> INST HEM[Hegemony gender] --> ADD[Needed extras]
Conclusion
- Mills’s sentence is sound: elites rule through institutional command, not through a special psychology of leaders or masses. Comment: keep the institutional test; add hegemony, gender, and habitus so the office is not a hollow box. Pareto’s circulation still occurs, but inside those institutions.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Analyse the strengths and weaknesses of social survey method in social research.
Next question in the 2020 paper (Q6). View answer →
-
Did Mills deny that leaders have motives?
No. He denied that motives explain why those offices can bind a society.
-
Is every CEO in the power elite?
No. The elite is the interlocking command of the big three, not every manager.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2020 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
How did the intellectual forces lead to the emergence of sociology ?Discuss. -
2020 · Q4(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
According to Durkheim, "The major function of education is the transmission of society's norms and values." Discuss. -
2020 · Q5(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
In the context of globalisation, has the scope of sociology been changing India ? Comment. -
2020 · Q5(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What are the problems in observing social facts in Durkheim's views? -
2020 · Q5(e) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Does the institution of marriage continue to be sacred in Indian society? Comments. -
2020 · Q7(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 15 marks
Critically assess the Marxian theory of 'Alienation'." -
2019 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Discuss the historical antecedents of the emergence of Sociology as a discipline -
2019 · Q1(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What is the Marxist concept of 'fetishism of commodities'?
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2020 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
How did the intellectual forces lead to the emergence of sociology ?Discuss.
Sociology
Intellectual forces made society worldly, comparable, and criticisable. Montesquieu, Smith, Rousseau, and Comte prepared comparison, market, inequality, and a named science. Marx, Durkheim, and Weber filled the space with class, social facts, and action. Nisbet’s conservative problems also fed the tradition. Ideas licensed the discipline; industry made it urgent.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2020 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Is sociology a value-free science ? Discuss.
Sociology as Science
Weber: value-relevance in questions; value-discipline in proof. Marx, Gouldner, and Harding reject a personless science. Oakley: the interview is already a moral relation. Census categories carry values into counts. Verdict: not value-free; yes to disciplined demonstration.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2020 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Methodology is a system of rules, principles and procedures, which forms. scientific investigation. Comment.
Sociology as Science
Methodology is a system of principles, rules, and procedures. It forms scientific investigation by making claims checkable. Durkheim and Weber wrote method as discipline. Blumer and feminist standpoint show theory inside procedure. Census and NFHS are procedures, not theory-free machines.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.