Although the concept of pluralism is often equated with democracy in the language of American political science, and in accounts of contemporary trends toward democratization in other countries, both the critique of pluralist theory that began in the 1960s and the early history of the concept suggest the need to reflect on that equation. Pluralism is a concept that often appears in the language of politics, but its systematic meaning is largely a function of its use in talking about politics in the discursive universe of political science. The genealogy of pluralism as a descriptive and normative concept in American political science reveals a great deal about both the evolution of the discipline and its understanding of its relationship to politics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barnes, H.E. (1924). “Some contributions of sociology to modern political theory.” In A History of Political Theories: Recent Times (C.E. Merriam and H.E. Barnes, eds). New York: Macmillan.
2.
Beard, C.A. (1913). An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States.New York: Macmillan.
3.
Bentley, A.F. (1908). The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Cooke, J. (ed.) (1961). The Federalist Papers.Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
5.
Dahl, R.A. (1950). Congress and Foreign Policy.New York: Harcourt, Brace.
6.
Dahl, R.A. (1956). A Preface to Democratic Theory.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7.
Dahl, R.A. (1958). “A critique of the ruling elite model.”American Political Science Review, 52: 463-469.
8.
Dahl, R.A. (1961). Who Governs?New Haven: Yale University Press.
9.
Dahl, R.A. and C.E. Lindblom (1953). Politics, Economics, and Welfare: Planning and Politico-Economic Systems Resolved into Basic Social Processes.New York: Harper and Bros.
10.
Dickinson, J. (1930). “Democratic realities and democratic dogma.”American Political Science Review, 24: 283-309.
11.
Dillon, M.E. (1942). “Pressure groups.”American Political Science Review, 36: 471-481.
12.
Elliott, W.Y. (1928). The Pragmatic Revolt in Politics: Syndicalism, Fascism, and the Constitutional State.New York: Macmillan.
13.
Follett, M.P. (1918). The New State: Group Organization, the Solution to Popular Government.New York: Longmans, Green.
14.
Galbraith, J.K. (1952). American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
15.
Galbraith, J.K. (1967). The New Industrial State.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
16.
Gunnell, J.G. (1990). “In search of the state: political science as an emerging discipline.” In Discourses on Society: The Shaping of the Social Science Disciplines (P. Wagner, B. Wittrock, and R. Whitley, eds). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
17.
Gunnell, J.G. (1993). The Descent of Political Theory: The Genealogy of an American Vocation, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
Gunnell, J.G. (1994). “The declination of the `state' and the origins of American `pluralism'.” In Political Science and Its History: Research Programs and Political Traditions ((J. Dryzek, J. Farr, and S. Leonard, eds). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Hagan, C.B. (1957). “The group in political science.” In Essays in Honor of Arthur Bentley (R. Taylor, ed.). Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch University Press.
20.
Hale, M.Q. (1960). “The cosmology of Arthur F. Bentley.”American Political Science Review, 54: 955-961.
21.
Herring, E.P. (1933). “Special interests and the interstate commerce commission.”American Political Science Review, 27: 738-751.
22.
Herring, E.P. (1940). The Politics of Democracy.New York: Norton.
23.
Herring, E.P. [1929] (1967). Group Representation before Congress.New York: Russell and Russell.
24.
Hunter, F. (1953). Community Power Structure: A Study of Decision-Makers.Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
25.
Kariel, H. (1961). The Decline of American Pluralism.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
26.
Kelso, W.A. (1978). American Democratic Theory: Pluralism and Its Critics.Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
27.
Kress, P.F. (1970). Social Science and the Idea of Process: The Ambiguous Legacy of Arthur F. Bentley.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
28.
Laski, H. (1919). Authority in the Modern State.New Haven: Yale University Press.
29.
Laski, H. (1921). The Foundations of Sovereignty.New Haven: Yale University Press.
30.
Latham, E. (1952). The Group Basis of Politics.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
31.
Lindblom, C.E. (1965). The Intelligence of Democracy.New York: Free Press.
32.
Lippmann, W. (1925). The Phantom Public.New York: Harcourt, Brace.
33.
Lowi, T. (1969). The End of Liberalism: Ideology, Policy, and the Crisis of Public Authority.New York: Norton.
34.
McConnell, G. (1966). Private Power and American Democracy.New York: Knopf.
35.
Merriam, C.E. (1924). “Recent tendencies in political thought.” In A History of Political Theories: Recent Times (C.E. Merriam and H.E. Barnes, eds). New York: Macmillan.
36.
Mills, C.W. (1956). The Power Elite.New York: Oxford University Press.
