Elite paradox
Duka A.V.,
Sociological Institute of the Russian Academy ofSciences - a branch of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia , alexander-duka@yandex.ru
elibrary_id: 104671 | ORCID: 0000-0003-1748-7145 | RESEARCHER_ID: M-5813-2015
Article received: 2024.05.21 22:18. Accepted: 2024.08.13 22:18
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2025.01.05
EDN: APUUVP
Duka A.V. Elite paradox. – Polis. Political Studies. 2025. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.01.05. EDN: APUUVP (In Russ.)
The paradoxical nature of the existence and functioning of power elites is not a new fact. However, it has been the object of few studies. This is due to the ambiguity of the term and of the phenomenon itself,which is described under the name “elite”. This applies equally to the “paradox”. The author, based on the principles of institutional analysis and starting from the theory of structuration and the theory of paradox in its managerial version, studies both concepts and offers an approach to the analysis of the elite paradox. Firstly, the contradictory position of the power elites in the societal system is revealed: being a subsystem, they regulate and direct the functioning of the entire system. Secondly, the multidirectional nature of the system requirements for the elites is studied. Thirdly, the discrepancy perceived by the observer between the expected characteristics and functions (based on ideas about the role of elites in the social system) and those that are actually recorded are considered. These variants represent the modes of the basic structural paradox of the part and the whole. Elites are derivatives of the social order, and they are also active agents in its formation and consolidation of the principles of its functioning. At the same time, elites are forced to go beyond the framework of the normative system they themselves protect. Otherwise, their main function - the stabilization of the system - will not be realized. The poly-role nature of elite individuals and their control of resources can lead to the privatization of power institutions and the realization of group and personal interests to the detriment of public ones. In modern society, the forced openness of the elite leads to a paradox of public intimacy. Elites are doomed to a transborder existence and ambivalent characteristics, primarily moral ones.
References
Bader, A.K. (2016). Paradox and power. German Journal of Human Resource Management / Zeitschrift furPersonalforschung, 30(2), 108-124. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002216632136
Beerbohm, E. (2015). Is democratic leadership possible? The American Political Science Review, 109(4), 639-652. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055415000398
Buchanan, A. (2002). Political legitimacy and democracy. Ethics, 112(4), 689-719.
Erinosho, L. (2008). Sociology, hypocrisy, and social order. African Sociological Review / Revue Africaine de Sociologie, 12(2), 85-97.
Field, G.L., & Higley, J. (1980). Elitism. London; Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Fonseca A.M. (2009). The Nazi ministerial elite: 1933-45. Portuguese Journal of Social Science, 8(1), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1386/pjss.8.1.43_1
Giragosian, R. (2019). Paradox of power: Russia, Armenia, and Europe after the velvet revolution. London: European Council on Foreign Relations. http://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep21639
Gompert, D.C., & Saunders, P.C. (2011). Paradox of power: Sino-American strategic restraint in an era of vulnerability. Washington: National Defense University Press.
Gonzdlez-Ricoy, I. (2017). Democratic legitimacy and the paradox of persisting opposition. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(1), 130-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12136
Guttsman, W.L. (1963). The British political elite. London: MacGibbon and Kee.
Heaton, J.M. (2014). Paradoxes. In J.M. Heaton Wittgenstein and Psychotherapy. From Paradox to Wonder (pp.15-32). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137367693_2
Janowitz, M. (1956). Social stratification and the comparative analysis of elites. Social Forces, 35(1), 81-85. Jha, N.K. (2001). Paradox of Indian politics: backward elite, forward mass. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 62(2), 221-240.
Kane, J. (2007). The ethical paradox of democratic leadership. Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 3(2), 33-52. Kane, J., & Patapan, H. (2010). The artless art: leadership and the limits of democratic rhetoric. Australian Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 371-389.
Lammers, J., Stapel, D.A., & Galinsky, A.D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy: moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21(5), 737-744. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610368810
Lane, R.E. (1965). Political life: why people get involved in politics. New York: Free Press.
Mangset, M., Engelstad, F., Teigen, M., & Gulbrandsen, T. (2019). The populist elite paradox: using elite theory to elucidate the shapes and stakes of populist elite critiques. In by F. Engelstad, T. Gulbrandsen, M. Mangset, & M. Teigen (Eds.), Elites and People: Challenges to Democracy (pp. 203-222). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0195-631020190000034010
Matanock, A.M., & Garcla-Sdnchez, M. (2017). The Colombian paradox: peace processes, elite divisions & popular plebiscites. Daedalus, 146(4), 152-166. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00466
Merton, R.K., & Barber, E. (1976). Sociological ambivalence. In R.K. Merton. Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays (pp. 3-31). New York: The Free Press; London: Collier Macmillan Publishers.
Mitchell, W.C. (1959). The ambivalent social status of the American politician. The Western Political Quarterly, 12(3), 683-698.
Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.
Nikolov, S.E. (1998). Bulgaria: a quasi-elite. In by J. Higley, J. Pakulski, & W. Wesolowski (Eds.), Postcommunist Elites and Democracy in Eastern Europe (pp. 213-225). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Sainsbury, R.M. (2009). Paradoxes. Cambridge: Cambridge University. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812576
Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited. Oxford: Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90400-9_111
Schad, J., Lewis, M.W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W.K. (2016). Paradox research in management science: looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5-64. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422
Schlesinger, J.A. (1966). Ambition and politics: political careers in the United States. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co.
Schoultz, L. (1978). Political normlessness in comparative perspective. The Journal of Politics, 40(1), 82-111.
Smith, W.K., & Lewis, M.W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958
Smith, W.K., & Tracey, P. (2016). Institutional complexity and paradox theory. Strategic Organization, 14(4), 455-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127016638565
Agamben, G. (2022). A che punto siamo? L'epidenia come politica. (Russ. ed.: Agamben, G. Kuda my prishli? Epidemiya kak politika. Moscow: Nookratia).
Agamben, G. (2021). Stasis: la guerra civile come paradigma politico. (Russ. ed.: Agamben, G. Stasis. Grazhdanskaya voyna kak politicheskaya paradigma. Homo sacer. II, 2. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal').
Ananchenko, A.B. (2009). Be elite and not called. Informatsionnye voyny, 3, 42-45. (In Russ.)
Andreev, D.A. (2020) . The Zemstvo as a challenge: paradoxes of governmental discourse in 1894-1904. Proceedings of Kazan University. Humanities Series, 162(3), 120-131. https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2020.3.120-131
Ashin, G.K. (2005). On the concept of “elite” and not only. Vlast', 11, 40-54). (In Russ.)
Bourdieu, P. (1994). Langage et pouvoir symbolique. (Russ. ed.: Bourdieu, P. Delegirovaniye i politicheskiy fetishizm. In P. Bourdieu. Nachala (pp. 231-256). Moscow: Socio-Logos).
Bourdieu, P. (2016). Sur l’Etat: Cours au Collbge de France (1989-1992). (Russ. ed.: Bourdieu, P. O gosudarstve: kurs lektsiy v Kollezh de Frans (1989-1992). Moscow: Delo).
Burenko, V.I. (2012). Gaetano Mosca as the founder of the theory of political class and one of the founders of elitology. In G. Moska. Istoriya politicheskikh doktrin. Moscow: Mysl’. P. 311-317. (In Russ.)
Chernovolenko, V., Ivashchenko, O., & Simonchuk, E. (1999). Problems of status legitimization of political and economic elites in modern Ukrainian society. Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing, 4, 5-28. (In Russ.)
Chirikova, A. (2008). On the theories of the elite. Society and Economy, 3-4, 144-174. (In Russ.)
Deleuze, G. (1995). Logique du sens. (Russ. ed.: Deleuze, G. Logika smysla. Moscow: Akademia).
Duka, A. (2000). Politicheskaya kul’tura [Political culture]. In V.A. Gutorov (Ed.), Politologia (problemy teorii) [Political science (problems of theory)] (pp. 247-282). St. Petersburg: Lan’. (In Russ.)
Duka, A. (2008). “Elite” and elite: a notion vs. social reality. Society and Economy, 6, 132-146. (In Russ.)
Foucault, M. (2010). Naissance de la biopolitique. (Russ. ed.: Foucault, M. Rozhdeniye biopolitiki. St. Petersburg.: Nauka).
Gaman-Golutvina, O. (2008). Russian elites as a subject of scientific analysis. Society and Economics, 3-4, 175-196. (In Russ.)
Giddens, A. (2003). The constitution of society. Outline of the theory of structuration. (Russ. ed.: Giddens, A. Ustroyeniye obshchestva: Ocherk teorii strukturatsii. Moscow: Akademicheskiy proyekt).
Gitinova, M.M. (2016). Problem of the judicial discretion in criminal law at criminal sentencing. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Pravo, 1, 218-224. (In Russ.)
Hobbes, T. (1989). Elementorum phiiosophiae sectio tertia. De cive. (Russ. ed.: Gobbs, T. Osnov filosofii. Chast’ tret’ya. O grazhdanine. In Sochineniya v 2 t. Vol. 1 (pp. 270-506). Moscow: Mysl’).
Jessop, B. (2019). The state: past, present, future. (Russ. ed.: Jessop, B. Gosudarstvo: proshloye, nastoyashcheye i budushcheye. Moscow: Delo.)
Koichuev, T. (2007). Elite of post-socialist society. Whom should we refer to the elite? Society and Economy, 5-6, 2-12. (In Russ.)
Ledyaev, V. (2008). Who are to be referred to the elite? Society and Economy, 3-4, 121-129. (In Russ.)
Levada, Yu. (1998). The phenomenon of power in public opinion: paradoxes and stereotypes of perception. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 5, 9-15. (In Russ.)
Lyotard, J.-F. (2008). Le postmoderne expliqud aux enfants: Correspondance 1982-1985. (Rus. ed.: Lyotard, J.-F. Postmodern v izlozhenii dlya detey: Pis’ma: 1982-1985. Moscow: RGGU publ.).
Malyushin, M.A. (2020). On the issue of the international community's reaction to the Donbass elections: paradoxes and contradictions. Bulletin of the Voronezh Institute of Economics and Social Management, 2, 18-22. (In Russ.)
Mannheim, K. (1994). Man and society in an age of reconstruction. (Russ. ed.: Mannheim, K. Chelovek i obshchestvo v epokhu preobrazovaniya. In K. Mannheim. Diagnoz nashego vremeni (pp. 277-411). Moscow: Yurist).
Mokhov, V. (2008). On the definition of the elite. Society and Economy, 3-4, 130-143. (In Russ.)
Neumann, F.L. (2015). Behemoth: the structure and practice of national socialism, 1933-1944. (Russ. ed.: Neumann, F.L. Begemot. Struktura i praktika natsional-sotsializma 1933-1944. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal').
North, D. (1997). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. (Russ. ed.: North, D. Instituty, institutsional'nyye izmeneniya i funktsionirovaniye ekonomiki. Moscow: Nachala).
Orlova, A.A. (2016). Arbitrary enforcement as a way of derogation from the implementation of the principle of inevitability legal liability. Vestnik obshchestvennoy nauchno-issledovatel'skoy laboratorii “Vzaimodeystviye ugolovno-ispolnitel'noy sistemy s institutami grazhdanskogo obshchestva: istoriko-pravovyye i teoretiko-metodologicheskiye aspekty”, 6, 158-167. (In Russ.)
Panarin, A. (2006). Narod bez elity [A people without an elite]. Moscow: Algoritm; Eksmo. (In Russ.)
Pareto, V. (2011). Due statisti. (Russ. ed.: Pareto, V. Dva gosudarstvennykh deyatelya. In V. Pareto. Transformatsiya demokratii (pp. 142-151). Moscow: Territoriya budushchego).
Pareto, V. 2018. Manuel d’dconomie politique. (Russ. ed.: Pareto, V. Uchebnik politicheskoy ekonomii. Moscow: RIOR; INFRA-M).
Putnam, R.D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R.Y. (1996). Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. (Russ. ed.: Putnam, R. Chtoby demokratiya srabotala: Grazhdanskiye traditsii v sovremennoy Italii. Moscow: Ad Marginem).
Rakityansky, N.M. (2002). Psikhologicheskiye osobennosti vzaimodeystviya elity i obshchestva v protsesse politicheskogo reformirovaniya [Psychological features of the interaction between the elite and society in the process of political reform]. In E.B. Shestopal (Ed.), Psikhologiya vospriyatiya vlasti [Psychology of perception of power] (pp. 63-74). Moscow: Mysl. (In Russ.)
Rogaeva, I.E. (2021). Pilgrim fathers and puritans: paradoxes in perception of new England first colonists in historical memory of the USA. The New Past, 2, 140-152. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18522/2500-3224-2021-2-140-152
Rudenkin, D.V. (2020). Polarities of Russian youth’s political activity: a comparison of activists of progovernment and opposition movements. Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science, 55, 203-215. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/55/21
Salnikova, L.I., & Barsukov, S.V. (2003). Elitarnyy sindrom [The elite syndrome]. In Tezisy dokladov i vystupleniy na II Vserossiyskom sotsiologicheskom kongresse “Rossiyskoye obshchestvo i sotsiologiya v XXI veke: sotsial'nyye vyzovy i al'ternativy” [Abstracts of reports and speeches at the II All-Russian Sociological Congress “Russian society and sociology in the 21st century: social challenges and alternatives”]. Vol. 3 (pp. 682-683). Moscow: Alpha-M. (In Russ.)
Shestopal, E.B. (Ed.). (2019). Vlast’ i lidery v vospriyatii rossiyskikh grazhdan. Chetvert’ veka (1993-2018). [Power and Leaders in Perception of Russian Citizens. A quarter century of observations (1993-2018)]. Moscow: Ves’ Mir Publ. (In Russ.)
Schmitt, C. (2000). Politische Theologie. Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveranitat. (Russ. ed.: Schmitt, C. Politicheskaya teologiya. In C. Schmitt. Politicheskaya teologiya (pp. 7-98). Moscow: KANON-press-C).
Schmitt, C. (2013). Legalitat und Legitimitat. (Russ. ed.: Schmitt, C. Legal’nost’ i legitimnost’. In C. Schmitt. Gosudarstvo: Pravo i politika (pp. 221-305). Moscow: Territoriya budushchego).
Shestakov, D.A. (2011). Felonious law as a paradox of the criminology of law. Kriminologiya: vchera, segodnya, zavtra, 1, 16-29. (In Russ.)
Sokolov, B.O. (2013). The paradoxes of social choice and democratic theory. Politex, 9(3), 306-315. (In Russ.)
Solovyov, A.I. (2021). Politika i upravleniye gosudarstvom. Ocherki teorii i metodologii [Politics and government. Essays on theory and methodology]. Moscow: Aspect Press. (In Russ.)
Tancher, V.V. (1999). Neo-elitism theories in the light of democratic transformation and Ukrainian Realities. Sociological Studies, 10, 16-26. (In Russ.)
Thatcher, M. 2016. Statecraft. Strategies for a changing world. (Russ. ed.: Thatcher, M. Iskusstvo upravleniya gosudarstvom. Moscow: Alpina Publisher).
Toshchenko, Zh.T. (1999). Elite? Clans? Cliques? How to call those who rule us? Sociological Studies, 11, 123-133. (In Russ.)
Toshchenko, Zh.T. (2001). Paradoksal’nyy chelovek [Human paradoxical]. Moscow: Gardariki. (In Russ.)
Toshchenko, Zh.T. (2007). Paradoxical person: phenomenon of social perception and social practice. RSUH/RGGU BULLETIN. Series Philosophy. Social Studies. Art Studies, 2-3, 156-166. (In Russ.)
Ulunyan, A.A. (2022). Parlamentskaya strata politicheskogo klassa / politicheskiye elity Albanii i yeye otsenka v obshchenatsional'nom diskurse strany (1991-2021 gg.) [The parliamentary stratum of the political class / political elite of the Republic of Albania and its assessments in the ciuntry's national discourse (1991-2021)]. In K.V. Nikiforov (Ed.), Novaya elita v stranakh Tsentral'noy i Yugo-Vostochnoy Yevropy: politicheskiye portrety. Konets XX — nachalo XXI v. [The new elite in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe: political portraits. The late twentieth to twenty-first centuries] (pp. 179-210). Moscow: Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya.
Valades, D. (2006). El control del poder. (Russ. ed.: Valades, D. Kontrol' nad vlastyu. Moscow: Ideya-Press).
Valades, D. (2009). Problemas constitucionales del Estado de derecho. (Russ. ed.: Valades, D. Konstitutsionnyye problemy pravovogo gosudarstva. Moscow: Ideya-Press).
Veblen, T. (1984). The theory of the leisure class. (Russ. ed.: Veblen T. Teoriya prazdnogo klassa. Progress).
Volodin, A.G. (2001). Глобальный парадокс [The global paradox]. In M.V. Ilyin, & V.L. Inozemtsev (Eds.), Megatrendy mirovogo razvitiya [Megatrends of Global Development] (pp. 170-174). Moscow: Economics. (In Russ.)
See also:
Smirnov V.A.,
Theoretical and Methodological Aspects of Political Elites’ Institutionalization in the Baltic States. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No5
Alekseyeva T.A., Loshkariov I.D., Parenkov D.A.,
Dilemmas of the Modern Theory of Political Elites: What’s Next?. – Polis. Political Studies. 2021. No5
Shebanova M.A.,
International bureaucracy as the stratum of transnational political elites. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No1
Kochetkov A.P.,
Authority and elites in a global information society. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No5
Ponedelkov A.V., Starostin A.M.,
Russia’s Regional Administrative-Political Elites: the Past, the Present, the Future. – Polis. Political Studies. 2008. No6