Exceptional Proff only 1
520
Introduction
Topics to be covered include:
· Overview of Pluralism
· Interest Groups and Policymaking
· Overview of Populism
· Components of Populism
· Populism, Democracy, and Public Administration
Scholars such as Parenti (2010) argue that the United States is a pluralist democracy. But at times, such as with the 2016 election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, populism becomes a powerful influence in the U.S. political system. This lesson will examine both pluralism and populism, providing an overview of each concept and explaining how they impact the practice of public administration as well as how they impact the political system and democracy.
Overview of Pluralism
Pluralism
Pluralism refers to the characteristic of society whereby people with diverse backgrounds—which includes differences in race, ethnicity, religion, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, and so forth—develop and sustain a culture pertaining to their special interests while living within the confines of a broader civilization that has a broad common culture.
Culture and cultural diversity
To fully understand pluralism, it is beneficial to understand the culture. Culture , as it pertains to groups in society, can be defined as the set of beliefs, customs, values, and way of life shared by individuals in a particular group. Cultural diversity refers to the differences in culture among individuals and comprises more than obvious differences such as race or speaking different languages. For example, two individuals who live in the same town and attend the same schools may be culturally diverse if they have different racial and/or religious backgrounds or come from households that differ in education and class.
Culture Clash
Cultural diversity can sometimes lead to a culture clash , which occurs when individuals disagree about basic values that they hold as a function of their culture. For example, cultures are framed by a dimension called individualism-collectivism which is “the tendency of a culture’s members to emphasize individual self-interests or group relationships” (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn 2005, p.58). This can create culture clashes that impact political issues as people from cultures that place more value on individualism may disagree with people from cultures that place more value on collectivism. In another example, some culture clashes are the result of ethnocentrism , which occurs when individuals consider their own race, ethnic group, religion, gender, or another culturally-based identity group to be superior to other groups with a different culture.
Interest groups
As it pertains to government and politics, pluralism is the foundation for interest group politics. An interest group can be defined as people who organize to protect and promote a common interest by using their power to influence the government to take specific actions that benefit their interest. Interest groups are also called special interests, organized interests, pressure groups, and factions.
Pluralist theory
According to Cigler and Loomis (2012, p.4), “Pluralist theory assumes that within the public arena there will be countervailing centers of power within governmental institutions and among outsiders. Competition is implicit in the notion that groups, as surrogates for individuals, will produce products representing the diversity of opinions that might have been possible in the individual decision days of democratic Athens.” Under the pluralist theory , power is regarded as broadly distributed across the various interest groups that participate in politics. The pluralist theory of democracy argues that when various interest groups compete for power, this creates multiple centers of power. If one interest group becomes too powerful, its power will be checked by other interest groups. In theory, this prevents any one group, or collection of groups, from becoming too powerful and dominating other groups, possibly curtailing their rights and freedoms.
How we view interest groups
According to Cigler and Loomis (2012), interest groups are a logical occurrence in democracies because people recognize that it is beneficial to organize and unite forces to protect and promote their interests. Generally, as long as they do not become too powerful, interest groups are regarded favorably as an important part of U.S. politics. Bianco and Canon (2013) note that some scholars argue pluralism strengthens a political system by ensuring that power is dispersed with no group having total control. This perspective has its roots in James Madison’s writings in the Federalist.
However, as Cigler and Loomis (2012) point out, interest group politics also may be viewed with distrust. For example, in recent years, concerns have been expressed over the amount of money that some groups, such as Citizens for Better Medicare, have spent supporting politicians who agreed to promote their interests through government legislation and programs (Cigler & Loomis 2012, p.5).
Pluralism and Public Administration
In the United States, interest groups are a factor in policymaking at all levels of government—federal, state, and local. According to Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom (2008, p.69), pluralist interest group systems, such as that used in the United States, have the following features:
· A single interest may be represented by multiple groups. For example, issues regarding labor are represented by various labor unions and business associations. In some cases, these interest groups compete, while in others, they align and work together to achieve common goals.
· Membership in these interest groups is voluntary. It also is limited.
· These interest groups generally have a decentralized organizational structure.
· These interest groups are clearly separated from the government.
In the United States, interest groups are one way that the process of interest articulation is accomplished. Interest articulation refers to the methods that individuals and groups use to inform the government about their needs and demands. As noted in Lesson 1, the steps in the public policy process generally include problem identification, agenda setting, policy formulation, policy adoption, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. Interest groups can be involved in any of these steps, but they are particularly important in the problem identification and agenda-setting stages. They can assist politicians and government officials as they identify and understand specific problems and, through public education and promotion efforts, interest groups can use their power to get a problem on a government’s agenda.
According to Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom (2008), some interest groups are poorly organized and short-lived while others are professional organizations with permanent staffs who are experts regarding their interests. Members of these interest groups sometimes participate on government advisory committees and/or testify at hearings and other government meetings to provide information about the causes supported by their interest groups. According to Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom (2008, pp.64-68), interest groups can be categorized into one of the following types:
ANOMIC Anomic interest groups are spontaneous interest groups created suddenly in response to an event that causes strong emotions, such as frustration or disappointment, among a large number of individuals. Groups generally are short-lived and typically poorly organized. While they exist, their members may protest or take other actions intended to voice their feelings, such as anger.
NONASSOCIATIONAL Nonassociational groups are groups that have common interests because they share a religion, ethnicity, occupation, or another common identity. When a problem arises that affects their common interests, such groups may become politically active to address the problem. Generally, non-associational interest groups are poorly organized, and their political activity is sporadic only to address a specific issue.
INSTITUTIONAL Institutional interest groups are formal groups that function in a political and/or social capacity as well as for the purpose of interest articulation. Such groups include churches, corporations, and political parties, which are large organizations that often incorporate interest groups into their structure for the purpose of representing the organization in the interest articulation process.
ASSOCIATIONAL Associational interest groups are formal groups that have the sole purpose of interest articulation. Such groups include chambers of commerce, trade unions, women’s rights groups, environmental activists, and ethnic associations.
Interest Groups and Policymaking
To be effective and impact the political process, including policymaking, interest groups must have access to policymakers. They accomplish this through a variety of channels of access, both legitimate as well as coercive. According to Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom (2008, pp.70-74), these channels include the following:
PERSONAL CONNECTIONSMembers of interest groups may know influential people, including politicians and other government officials, who provide them with access to the policymaking process.
MASS MEDIAInterest groups can use mass media, including television and newspapers, to advertise and provide information regarding their interests and issues, making it more likely their interests will receive attention.
POLITICAL PARTIESInterest groups can support political parties, as well as specific candidates for public office, and through this support, gain access to the policymaking process.
LOBBYINGBy supporting lobbyists and participating in the lobbying process, interest groups gain access to legislatures and other lawmaking bodies involved in policymaking. This includes access to public administrators who work in bureaucratic agencies for the government.
Lobbying is demonstrated by the Iron Triangle , which is comprised of interest groups, members of Congress, and public administrators. The theory of the Iron Triangle argues that public administrators maintain contact with representatives and lobbyists from interest groups who seek to influence the work and programs managed by government bureaucracies. Interest groups use this contact to provide information to public administrators and promote their interests. Members of Congress maintain contact with both public administrators and interest groups, using the information they provide as the basis for legislation. According to the Iron Triangle theory, policymaking is a function of public administrators working with both members of Congress and representatives of interest groups, including lobbyists (Meier & O’Toole, 2006).
Regardless of which channel interest groups use to connect and work with government officials to influence the policymaking process, their efforts affect the work of public administrators. The policies that public administrators implement are often the result of work by interest groups. Since interest groups are a function of pluralism, the work of public administrators is greatly affected by pluralism and its impact on the United States’ political system.
Overview of Populism
Populism is a complex concept that has been described and defined in many ways. It regained prominence in the United States with the candidacy and election of Donald Trump as the nation’s 45thpresident, who some scholars regard as a populist (Friedman, 2017). According to Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017), some of the perspectives regarding populism include the following:
· Few politicians and government leaders describe themselves as populists. Rather, it is a term used to describe others, usually with a negative implication.
· The popular agency view of populism argues that the term refers to a democratic approach to life developed by popular involvement in politics.
· The Laclauan approach to populism, which is based on the work of political theorist Ernesto Laclau, asserts that populism is the core of politics, acting as a liberating force in political activities by encouraging conflict and mobilizing overlooked groups in society in an effort to change the status quo.
· The socioeconomic approach, or populist economics, refers to a view of government as irresponsible because it spends too much money and includes too much redistribution of wealth.
· A more contemporary and academic approach to populism argues that it is a political strategy used by leaders who wish to concentrate power and govern using a direct connection with their supporters and followers.
· Political communication scholars and the mass media regard populism as a folkloric approach to politics in which politicians and other leaders seek to mobilize common people by standing with them as they oppose elitism , which refers to the argument that elites—people with power and status—dominate and control society, including government institutions.
Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017) offer an ideational approach to define populism. Under this approach, they make the following assertions regarding populism.
· Populism, as a concept, is a primary factor in many debates regarding politics.
· Populism can be regarded as an ideology or worldview.
· Ideology refers to a system of beliefs and values held by a group of people that provides the foundation for the economic and political theories that help determine a society’s policies.
· When politicians and other government leaders invoke populism, they are appealing to the common people and rejecting elitism.
· As part of the process of rejecting elitism, populism criticizes the establishment and advocates for removing elites from positions of authority and possibly even abolishing institutions.
· When populism critiques the establishment and advocates for its abolishment, it may or may not recommend anything to replace the establishment.
· As an ideology, populism is thin-centered, which means that it has a limited structure and foundation of conceptual ideas. As such, populism is usually attached to another, more robust, ideology, such as nationalism, that is based on more concrete and definitive ideas and ideals.
· Since it is a thin-centered ideology, populism is incapable of providing answers and solutions to the complex political issues encountered by society.
· Attaching to another, more robust, ideology is necessary for populism to promote political ideas and projects that will appeal to the broader public.
· In essence, populism helps people understand political realities (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2017).
Components of Populism
With these ideas as the basis for understanding populism, Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017) suggest that populism can be viewed as an ideology that separates people into two different homogeneous and antagonistic camps -- the “pure people” versus the “corrupt elite.” They argue that politics should, therefore, be an expression of the general will of the people.
Generally, populists think that the general will of the people has been suppressed. According to Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017), since it rejects rule by elites, as well as the notion that power is distributed throughout society to various interest groups, populism can be understood as the polar opposite of both elitism and pluralism.
According to Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017), populism has three core concepts, as follows:
THE PEOPLEThe common people are sovereign and are the source of political power in a democracy. They are prohibited from exercising this power because they do not have the sociocultural and socioeconomic status necessary to promote their interests. Populism generally aims to address the interests and concerns of the common people. The people who subscribe to populism tend to think of themselves as the national community, with everyone in the community sharing common goals and values.
THE ELITEArgues the elites are powerful and corrupt, and the elite includes the political establishment as well as the economic elite, cultural elite, and media elite. Under the populist viewpoint, these groups do not just ignore the common people’s interests, but actually, use their power to usurp the common people’s general will. According to populism, one of the primary distinctions between the common people and the elite is that the common people are good, while the elites are immoral.
THE GENERAL WILLThe common people have the ability to form a community and work together to legislate and implement common interests. They have the ability to use government to execute that general will when led by politicians who understand and support them. Under this premise, direct democracy is preferred, with all government programs and actions approved by referendum (the process of submitting a proposal to the electorate and allowing them to vote to decide how that proposal should be handled).
Populism, Democracy, and Public Administration
According to Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017), when it becomes the prevailing ideology in a political system, populism has both positive and negative effects on democracy. These can be summarized as follows:
· POSITIVE EFFECTS OF POPULISMGroups that do not feel they are represented by the political elite may have better access to the system.
· The policymaking process may become more responsive to the needs of those who feel they have been overlooked.
· More issues and policies may become part of the political realm, making the system more transparent and accountable.
· Public institutions, which specialize in protecting minority rights, may be eroded and even abolished.
· Since populism focuses on morality, it may lead to a moralization of politics that makes it extremely difficult, and perhaps even impossible, to reach political agreements.
According to Bianco and Canon (2013), the framers of the U.S. Constitution recognized that populism and its promotion of majority rule could result in the suppression of minority rights. They regarded this as majority tyranny , which refers to a situation whereby the government makes policies and takes actions that benefit the majority without consideration for the interests and rights of the minority. This is one reason the framers, particularly James Madison, advocated for pluralism and competition among interest groups. The framers felt this would prevent any one group from gaining too much power in the political system.
Populism can be problematic for public administrators as they strive to do their jobs according to traditional rules and regulations established in government bureaucracies. As Friedman (2017) noted, when populists control a government, they tend to undermine government institutions, such as the courts. Friedman (2017) uses Hungary as an example of a government under populist control that has undergone significant changes in its bureaucracy.
Almond, Powell, Dalton, and Strom (2008) suggest that populism provides an example of why local politics are important. They note that when people are frustrated with national policies, they may elect populist officials at the local and state levels who then create conflict with national politicians and governments to address local constituents’ dissatisfaction with government policies and activities. While such conflict may have the benefit of ensuring that all citizens’ voices are heard, it also may lead to greater inefficiencies in government operations.
Conclusion
To accomplish the goals and objectives of their particular government organization or agency, public administrators in the United States must work within the confines of the American political system. While this system is generally regarded as pluralistic in nature, it is sometimes significantly influenced by ideologies that oppose pluralism, such as populism. When this occurs, public administrators may face opposition to their work and the way they approach it. The goals and objectives of their work may change, requiring them to alter their processes. While this can be frustrating for public administrators, their purpose is to serve the American people and provide a government that is responsive to their needs and wants. Thus, if the majority of the people support a populist leader who demands change in the bureaucracy, public administrators are expected to adjust their work accordingly to meet these demands.
References
Almond, G.A., Bingham Powell Jr., G., Dalton, R.J., & Strom, K. (2008). Comparative Politics Today, A World View. New York: Pearson Longman.
Bianco, W. T., & Canon, D.T. (2013). American Politics Today, Third Edition. New York: W.W. Norton and Co., Inc.
Ciglar, A. J., & Loomis, B.A. (2012). Interest Group Politics, Eighth Edition. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Friedman, U. (2017). “What is a Populist? And is Donald Trump One?” The Atlantic. Available online at https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/02/what-is-populist-trump/516525/ .
Meier, K.J., & O’Toole Jr, L.J. (2006). Bureaucracy in a Democratic State: A Governance Perspective. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C.R. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Parenti, M. (2011). Democracy for the Few, Ninth Edition. Boston, Massachusetts: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Schermerhorn, J.R. Jr., Hunt, J.G., & Osborn, R.N. (2005). Organizational Behavior, Ninth Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.