Zeynep AYHAN/19070311025

THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN THREE IDEOLOGIES

In this research paper, the distribution of power and resources of the state will be
examined in the light and understanding of Marxist, pluralist and elite theories. The
reason for choosing this topic is to obtain comprehensive information about the role
of the state, which has never lost its popularity and is discussed, and to express an
opinion on the subject. Since this subject will be explained clearly, simply and in the
light of research on it, it may attract the attention of those who want to get
information and ideas about the subject and may benefit them.
Although there is no single definitively accepted definition of the state, the state
can be defined as a form of political organization that has a monopoly of using
physical or abstract and consensual power in a certain region, over a certain society,
based on the expressions of the German thinker Max Weber. So, what roles should a
political organization that has the authority to use such force have in society? Despite
the passing of time, the role of the state has been discussed in every period and
theories have been developed on this. The role of the state in power and resource
distrubution in society will be examined and compared according to three theories.
These are the Marxist, in which the state is explained as class-based, and who sees
the state as an organization of a ruling class that subjugates other classes; pluralist
against uniform, monolithic, monolithic approach, practices and administrations; and
elite theories that argue that society should be governed by a certain and ideal
minority.
Marxism is an ideology pioneered by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxism has
been considered and evaluated as an economics doctrine in the long run. Indeed, in
his book 'Capital', Marx underlined and criticized the capitalist economy system and
its management. In this context, Marx's main aim is to establish the foundations of a
new economic order and thus to replace the capitalist economic order with an
alternative and ideal form. Marxism is not only the work of a thinker, but the work
and explanation of his age. It is the world view of the modern age, an era in which
heavy industry developed and was active. The period in which Marx lived was a
period in which great advances were made in the technical field, people were able to
dominate the forces of nature in many areas, and societies were enriched. (Göze,
2000) However, after a short time, it was seen that these positive developments had
negative consequences for some people, and the working masses lost their freedom
by getting poorer day by day. Marx tried to find a solution by examining and criticizing
this situation. Although an economic evaluation method is the starting point; in fact,
the economic doctrine section is only a fraction of Marxism’s works and thoughts.

1
 Marxism, which emerged with the birth of the heavy industry proletariat within the
liberal state order, emerged as a view that expressed the problems and
contradictions of this age and aimed to find a solution to them. It aims at a much
broader range of evaluations. Marxism, which deals with wide and diverse problems
such as human, history, state, society, nature and universe problems, is a view that
aims to solve these problems both in theory and in practice and to reach a synthesis.
As a philosophical doctrine, it encompasses all human-related issues, whether closely
or remotely. Marxism should not be regarded as the thought and work of Marx alone.
It was inspired by various currents of thought before it. Complementing these
currents of thought with each other, he tried to reach a synthesis and bring a new
and original worldview. In fact, almost all of the issues that Marx focused on were
either dealt with in his era or before by others. For example; Working as the basic and
active relationship of man with nature, the problem of work, the social division of
labor were discussed and studied by economists such as Ricardo, Smith and Petty in
England, which was the advanced industrial country of that era, starting from the
18th century. Research on nature and the place of man in nature was developed by
thinkers such as Holbach, Helvetius and later Feuerbach. In the 18th and 19th
centuries, scientists in the fields of mathematics, physics and biology opened new
horizons to people with their discoveries and discovered new laws of nature. The
problem of the role and importance of contradictions in man, in history and in nature
was especially raised and processed by Hegel. And in addition to these, it should not
be forgotten that Marxism is not only the work of Marx. Marx wrote many of his
works together with Engels. (Göze, 2000)
Briefly explaining Hegel's dialectic, which can be considered as one of the
cornerstones of Marxism, will clarify the subject. The German thinker Hegel places
thought and consciousness at the center of everything. Thought; proceeds in the
form of thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Karl Marx reverses Hegel's dialectic. According to
him; Not thought but social conditions determine and affect a human and life. In
other words, it is not thought that determines material conditions, but conditions
that determine thought. Marx and Engels have a materialist, progressive and
deterministic understanding of society. In this understanding, the infrastructure
determines the superstructure, material relations and other forms of relations. In the
Marxist approach, material elements that include economic relations and modes of
production in a society are infrastructure elements. More intellectual elements such
as religious, political, legal and artistic fields form the superstructure of a society.
(Bülbül, Siyaset Bilimi Sözlüğü, 2020)
In Marxism, there are certain limitations on the state and its role that will run the
society. In Marxism, the state is studied and explained as class-based. The state is a
political organization in which a dominant and dominant class influences and
subordinates other classes. As in dialectics, Marx describes the exact opposite of
2
Hegel's understanding of the state. According to Hegel, the state is almost a sacred
formation that ensures order in societies on earth. In other words, the state is a tool
for the protection of social order, peace, tranquility and beauty. (Bülbül, Siyaset Bilimi
Sözlüğü, 2020) According to Marxist thought, the state expresses the existence and
struggle of classes in society. In Marxism, the state is monopolized by the capitalist
class. In this approach, the role of the state is to represent the interests of the
capitalist class and to prevent reactions to it. With the coming to power of the
working class, the means of production will be centralized and class conflict will
disappear. When the classes disappear, the reason for the existence of the state will
also disappear and the state will wither away.
Pluralism is the state of diversity in the international arena in the political, social,
cultural, economic, religious, ideological and moral fields, where different ideas,
actors, beliefs, interests, approaches and lives coexist. Aristotle's 'Who sets the rules?
The one? The few? or the many?' to the question; It is a political ideology that
responds to the many. Pluralism is a political philosophyholding that people of
different fate, backgrounds and lifestyles can coexist in the same society and
participate, communicate equally in the political process. Pluralism argues that
diversification is valuable and beneficial to society and assumes that autonomy
should be experienced by disparate functional, interest or cultural groups within a
society, including different religous groups, trade unions, organizations and ethnic
minorities. (Longley, 2019) Pluralism is fundamentally opposed to uniform,
monolithic approaches and practices. As a political ideology, pluralism advocates
diversity, not monism, in all areas of life, society and administration, as in cultural
pluralism and philosophical pluralism.
In the West, writers such as Montesquieu, Robert Dahl and John Locke are among
the writers who advocate pluralism. In 1787, James Madison argued that idea of
pluralism while writing America Constitution. (Bülbül, Siyaset Bilimi Sözlüğü, 2020) In
1920’s pluralism had been refered that every functional groups like trade unions,
political/pressure groups based on the common interest of group members can be
include in governing. Early 20th century in England, cohesive medieval constructs
such as trade guilds, villages, monasteries, and universities, they argued that
pluralism, through its economic and administrative decentralization, could overcome
the negative aspects of modern industrialized society because, it can set an area
which provide educated people of politics, linked in people together, politicians have
to responsible to everyone. And the system was open to different interests. (Longley,
2019)
In terms of society, the pluralist state is the widespread and equal distribution of
power in free democracies. In terms of the state, it is an order open to the influence
of all social groups on politics. The state does not take anyone's side; It has no

3
interest of its own. Robert Dahl, for instance, claimed that power must be dispersed
among many interest groups that tended to balance their relative bargaining
position. (Yumatle, 2014) Recent representatives of pluralism in political science still
claim that politics is the process by which the state responds and channels the
plurality of material and ideal interests. But they have also incorporated to their
considiration area previous criticisms and have advanced a more nuanced view. They
thus acknowledge the relative power leverage of different groups and the unique,
commanding position of the state in shaping and inducing preferences among
conflicting groups. (Yumatle, 2014) However, it is not possible to observe pluralism in
social life in the West, which is the source of this thought, until historically recent
times. An important reason for the increasing racism, anti-immigration and
xenophobia in the West today is that historically Western societies do not have
enough of a pluralistic past, according to some political scientists.
If the society and state structures in elite theories are examined; In elitism, there is
the belief and acceptance that societies are ruled by a certain minority, not by the
majority. In other words, it argues that the few make the rules. Elite theory is the
theoretical perspective in political science in which a community is handled by a small
group of its best members from their field, and argues that such regulation should in
fact be inevitable in modern societies. These two principles can be seen together
ideologically or separated logically. (Maloy, 2016) Robert Michels is the publisher of
the elite theory with Iron law of oligarchy.
The first known advocate of normatively elitism is Plato. According to Plato, it is the
philosophers who can best understand the ideal state. In this context, either
philosophers should head the states, or the people who rule the states should be
philosophers or be trained as philosophers. Plato designed an aristocratic order based
on a strict class distinction in order for the society to get rid of the democratic
struggle environment. Opposing democratic rule, Plato favored rule by the wise, wise
and educated minority and believed in the innate inequality of people. (Göze, 2000)
The elite theory, which has a class approach and argues that society is governed by
a certain class, conflicts with the management approach of Marxism. The dominant
class, in other words hegemony, is the class understanding of Marxism and it talks
about the negativities of class distinction. According to the Marxist view, class
distinction is based on private ownership of the means of production and this private
property is in the dominant class. (Bülbül, Siyaset Bilimi Sözlüğü, 2020) Therefore,
society is not ruled by the majority, but by those who hold the economic power. And
according to this view, the ruling class, the bourgeois class, will constantly exploit the
working class, and since this exploitation will become unbearable at some point,
revolution will be inevitable. However, under the leadership of the working class,
there will be a classless society. After the revolution, all classes will disappear. The

4
classical elitism approach, which is the thesis that societies are ruled by small
minorities, is based on the idea that democracy is practically impossible and in this
approach, it is stated that the Marxist approach is not possible either. With the
circulation of the elite, the ruling class is rejected, with the continuity of the ruling
class, classless society is opposed. (Bülbül, Siyaset Bilimi Sözlüğü, 2020) Italian
thinkers Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca are among the leading figures of this
approach. According to Mosca, in all societies there are rulers and ruled, rulers are
always in the minority and control the ruled. The ruling class benefits from the
blessings of power and does all this because it is organized, and they can also have
superior qualities. This class may resort to persuasion, deception and violence,
depending on the circumstances, in order to protect and secure their positions. The
ruling class may change, but the phenomenon of the ruling class does not, that is,
superior minorities always rule the society. Pareto is the first thinker to use the
concept of Elite. He claims to be a superior stratum of every segment of society.
According to him, society is divided into elite and non-elite. Elites, on the other hand,
are divided into executive and non-administrative elites. And finally, the ruling elites
are divided into two as the in-group, which is political power, and the out-group,
which has influence over this power. And he claims that there is a continuous
movement from bottom to top among the social strata, he mentions that the elites
change hands within the society and in this context, the elite circulation is carried
out.
To conclude, is there any ideal considerations among these three ideologies?
Robert Dahl uses the concept of polyarchy to reject a single superior elite class in
societies. According to him, there are differences, contradictions and conflicts among
many elite groups in all societies around the world. And these different groups must
have equal rights in order to have a say in the administration. All this makes it
possible to implement democracy in any society. Because the fact that groups with
different characteristics have authority in the administration is one of the features
that distinguish democratic and authoritarian regimes from each other. In contrast to
pluralism, there is a common thread between elite and Marxist views that democracy
as a majority rule is not possible. Although they converge at this point, there are also
differences between these two approaches of thought. For example, the dominant
class in Marxism, in Gramsci's words, hegemony is based only on an economic and
material basis and is explained in this way. However, in elite theory, the ruling class
plays a role in political and sociological factors along with economic factors. In
Marxism, there is no transition between classes, but according to elite theory, there
is a possibility of transition between classes. This situation ensures the circulation of
elite class and forever existence of ruler elite class. In Marxism, on the other hand, it
is predicted and stated that a classless society will be passed in the future.
Considering these three different ideologies, pluralism, which is an inclusive idea that

5
advocates the management of societies in the world that includes various cultural,
religious and political structures, by representatives of every group it includes, ideally
deals with the role of today's states in society.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1)
Bülbül, K. (2020). Siyaset Bilimi Sözlüğü. ANKARA: Adres Yayınları.
2)Göze, A. (2000). Siyasal Düşünceler ve Yönetimler. İSTANBUL: Beta .
3)Longley, R. (2019, July 31). What is pluralism? Defination and Examples.
Thougth.Co: https://www.thoughtco.com/pluralism-definition-4692539
adresinden alındı
4)Maloy, J. S. (2016, May 26). Elite Theory. Britannica:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/elite-theory adresinden alındı
5)Yumatle, C. (2014). Pluralism. Carla Yumatle.