Is the UK Controlled by a Small Group of Powerful Elites?

A recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page concluded that the US is politically dominated by a rich and powerful elite. However their analysis did not include the UK. The UK despite having a strong multi party system in Parliament (unlike the US which is dominated by only two) has many other democratic failings. In many ways the UK is controlled by a small group of powerful elites, just like in the US.

One of the main ways that the UK is controlled by a small group of powerful elites is the composition of Parliament itself. The UK Parliament is an elitist and unrepresentative institution. It is democratically and descriptively unrepresentative of society as a whole. The majority of MP’s and Lords sitting in Parliament are from a very select background of privilege, which is thoroughly unrepresentative of society. The majority of MP’s and Lords in Parliament are male, white; come from high social class and many are Oxbridge or Private school educated. Worryingly there is a stark lack of female and ethnic minority MP’s in parliament. Only 22% of MP’s are female and only 4% of MP’s are ethnic minorities or black. Furthermore 90% of MPs are university graduates, compared with 20% across the adult population, and over a quarter of MPs went to Oxford or Cambridge.

One of the main reasons why the UK Parliament is democratically and descriptively unrepresentative of society is the role of party candidate selection. Party candidate selection itself appears to be an elitist practice, with often only the most wealthy or ‘important’ candidates chosen (like in the US). This includes a surprising lack of women and ethnic minority candidates being chosen. Some of the key factors to consider when analysing party candidate selection are the impact of Gender bias, education bias, wealth and class considerations. Without doubt it certainly appears that these factors have historically played a big role in why certain candidates are chosen over others. Without reform of the party candidate selection itself, parliament will not be able to move towards becoming less elitist and descriptively unrepresentative of society.

Another major reason for why the UK can be seen as being elitist and unrepresentative of society is because of the voting system. The UK uses a single member, one vote plurality based method for its general election called ‘first past the post’. It’s a very disproportional and unrepresentative voting system. First past the post favours the bigger parties who are more likely to get slightly more votes than other candidates and win the seat outright. It completely discounts the other votes; as such the other votes are wasted because they have no influence in Parliament. This results in huge numbers of wasted votes and creates a very disproportional reflection of the voter’s wishes in Parliament, with often only the major parties and elites getting seats. Third parties or smaller parties have very little representation in Parliament, and can’t voice their opinion on behalf of the people successfully. The only was this can be addressed is with reform of the voting system. For elections to become less elitist and more democratic, a move to proportional representation is required. A good example is New Zealand’s proportional representation voting model, which results in more democratically and descriptively representative Parliaments.

Furthermore it can be argued that the UK is controlled by a small group of powerful elites because of the impact and power of big business and lobbying on UK politics. Like in the US, only the biggest corporations or wealthy few can have big lobbying influence on the government or sway policy in the UK. This is because lobbying is an extremely costly practice to engage in, it’s even more costly if attempted over a period of many years. As a result of this, less wealthy or smaller organisations don’t have as much influence over potential policy reforms set by the government. This gap can be summed up as substantive vs. formal representation of people and organisations in politics. By the Law all people and organisations have the same rights and voice in the UK, but like in many countries around the world, in reality their rights and influence are very different.

These are only some of the main reasons why it can be argued that the UK is controlled by a small group of powerful elites, much like the US. The UK has a lot of work to do towards becoming more egalitarian and less elitist. If the UK can manage that it will be good for democracy, and rightly go towards creating a political system where power is shared between the many instead of the few.

Is the US an Oligarchy or a Democracy?

A recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page concludes that the US is politically dominated by a rich and powerful elite.

The two professors conducted rigorous data-driven research to arrive at the conclusion. According to the BBC, “The two professors came to this conclusion after reviewing answers to 1,779 survey questions asked between 1981 and 2002 on public policy issues. They broke the responses down by income level, and then determined how often certain income levels and organised interest groups saw their policy preferences enacted.”

The professors argue, “analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence”.

The BBC surmises this argument as meaning, “the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power.” In other words the US is an oligarchy, not a democracy. Eric Zuess also boldly supports the argument in Counterpunch, he states “American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it’s pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation’s “news” media).”

Gilens and Page state that the US has many features which make it democratic, but nevertheless their research firmly supports the argument that the US is more of an oligarchy than a democracy. There are also many other factors within the system of US politics which lend support to their conclusions.

The US political system is dominated by the two main parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. In the history of the US, no other political party has had control of congress or any significant majority. Out of a total 532 current members of the Senate and House of Representatives, only 2 members are independents. The rest are Democrats and Republicans. When you compare this to the German and UK Parliaments which are comprised of multiple political parties and interests, it is clear to see how the two parties dominate. The dominance by the two elite parties is certainly not very democratic at all. Legislative power in the US can therefore be argued is in the hands of a very small group of congress people, and it is made even more exclusive with the current two party system.

Lobbying in US politics is another major issue. At the moment only the very rich or big corporations tend to have much access and influence on politicians. This is due to the cost intensive nature of lobbying, which allows very minimal lobbying access to the poor or less influential Americans. As such the big corporations and wealthier individual’s voices tend to get heard much more clearly than other less wealthy groups and individuals. The heavily capitalised nature of lobbying is a big barrier to democracy.

Due to the nature of elections and campaign finance in the US, the more economically supported candidates tend to be able to get their message out to the public far more effectively and efficiently than their less financial well off opponents. Unless a candidate’s election campaign manages to raise enough money through donations or pledges, they are very likely to be unable to stand up politically to an opponent with far greater financial support or clout.

Economic and social influence historically seem to be the keys to power in US politics, as is the case in many other countries. However this is where the problem lies. Only a very select few elite individuals tend to have the economic or social power to enter or influence US politics. And as Gilens and Page’s research suggests, if you aren’t part of the small number of “elites” in the US, you have very little political influence. Unquestionably that is the hallmark of an oligarchy. The US certainly has a lot of work to do to regain its right to be called a true democracy.