Has Power in Britain Shifted Significantly Into the Hands of Unelected Individuals in Recent Years?
Has power in Britain shifted significantly into the hands of unelected individuals in recent years?
A modern nation-state such as Britain prides itself upon its strong democratic values, yet it is easy to question whether the individuals we elect, the people to whom we give our support and legitimize, are truly the ones with power. Has power shifted away from the individuals we elect in recent years? Has power ever truly been in their hands? To effectively begin answering such questions it is vital to lay out a theoretical framework in regards to what power entails. Steven Lukes’ three-dimensional approach to power allows for an analysis of power that goes beyond the decisions made in Parliament by those we elect, as well as attempting to understand the less obvious, preference-shaping nature of power. It is important to note that whilst it is perhaps difficult to effectively gather, or identify empirical evidence for the third-dimension of power, problems similarly arise when attempting to do so for the first and second face power; however from a theoretical standing the three-dimensional approach enables a much more thorough examination of where power lies in Britain today.
The one-dimensional view of power is in Dahl’s words described as 'A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do ', which Dahl later qualifies as 'a successful attempt by A to get B... '. This facet of power focuses on observable conflict; for example on decision making in Parliament. We can observe the passing of a bill as a consequence of x votes carried out by y MPs. It is proposed that such 'observable ' conflict can be more easily examined and analysed; in order to examine those whom are powerful, patterns of influence in the 'decision making process ', such as in Parliament, can be recorded. This view does not allow for the consideration of unobservable conflicts; however it is not without use, for example the power of party
A modern nation-state such as Britain prides itself upon its strong democratic values, yet it is easy to question whether the individuals we elect, the people to whom we give our support and legitimize, are truly the ones with power. Has power shifted away from the individuals we elect in recent years? Has power ever truly been in their hands? To effectively begin answering such questions it is vital to lay out a theoretical framework in regards to what power entails. Steven Lukes’ three-dimensional approach to power allows for an analysis of power that goes beyond the decisions made in Parliament by those we elect, as well as attempting to understand the less obvious, preference-shaping nature of power. It is important to note that whilst it is perhaps difficult to effectively gather, or identify empirical evidence for the third-dimension of power, problems similarly arise when attempting to do so for the first and second face power; however from a theoretical standing the three-dimensional approach enables a much more thorough examination of where power lies in Britain today.
The one-dimensional view of power is in Dahl’s words described as 'A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do ', which Dahl later qualifies as 'a successful attempt by A to get B... '. This facet of power focuses on observable conflict; for example on decision making in Parliament. We can observe the passing of a bill as a consequence of x votes carried out by y MPs. It is proposed that such 'observable ' conflict can be more easily examined and analysed; in order to examine those whom are powerful, patterns of influence in the 'decision making process ', such as in Parliament, can be recorded. This view does not allow for the consideration of unobservable conflicts; however it is not without use, for example the power of party
Bibliography: Bachrach, P. & Baratz, M., Power and Poverty: Theory and Practice (1970) Beetham, D., Unelected Oligarchy: Corporate and Financial Dominance in Britain’s Democracy, The Democratic Audit (2011) Dahl, R., The Concept of Power (1957) Dunleavy, P., ‘Analysing Political Power’ in Dunleavy, P in British Politics, 7th ed. (2003) Hay, C., Political Analysis: A Critical Introduction (2002) Kuhn, R., Politics and the Media (2007) Lukes, S., Power: A Radical View, 2nd ed Marsh, D., 'Pluralism and the Study of British Politics: It is Always the Happy Hour for Men with Money, Knowledge and power ', British Politics Today (2002) Monbiot, G., Captive State: The Corporate Takeover of Britain (2000) Peston, R., Who Runs Britain? How Britain’s New Elite are Changing our Lives (2008) -------------------------------------------- [ 1 ]. Dahl (1957) p. 80 [ 2 ] [ 3 ]. Hay (2002) p. 173 [ 4 ] [ 5 ]. Lukes (2005) p. 26 [ 6 ] [ 11 ]. Peston (2008) p. 10 [ 12 ] [ 15 ]. Quote from study found in Kuhn (2007) p. 258