ABSTRACT
Ruling elites in Western countries during the twentieth century’s second half were seldom clearly distinct from their predecessors and successors. Typically, they were enmeshed in extended circles and networks of political influence and personal acquaintance that tied together several thousand of the uppermost figures in politics, government administration, business, trade unions, the media, and assorted interest groups. These interlocked formations were tighter than the ‘pluralist elite’ depicted, but more far-flung than the ‘power elite’ model portrayed.1 Through such circles and networks, individuals and factions rose to executive power, osmosis-like, via lengthy careers in elective, party, administrative, and other politically relevant arenas. Once in power, elites found their actions checked in many ways. Radical policy innovations were stymied by the complexity of established institutions and by programs inherited from the previous holders of executive office. Truculent congressional or parliamentary supporters had to be placated; political debts incurred during the rise to power had to be paid; preparations for the next election tempered actions; the power of elites in other societal sectors had to be respected; the personal behaviors and political decisions of the ruling group were subject to intense media scrutiny and criticism. All in all, a single-minded pursuit of political aims that broke sharply with what had gone before was exceedingly difficult. As S. E. Finer put it, elites in most Western countries routinely took in each other’s washing.2 The complexity and extent of this elite laundry gave rise to the view among political analysts that ‘ruling elite’ was a gross simplification, if not a wild exaggeration.
