Many major sociological theories are concerned with the distribution of power in society and view those with power as controlling the society. In this essay I will be examining the way pluralism, elitism and Marxism view the distribution of power in society as well as why it is argued that pluralism cannot exist in its purest form.

Pluralists, such as Weber, believe that direct democracy is impractical in modern, complex societies and that representative democracy is the best way to ensure all interest are represented. Pluralism defines two key factors that ensure representation of all interest groups as competing political parties providing a choice of government policies and pressure groups influencing political decisions. Pluralists view the state as necessary to maintain democracy by promoting political liberty. For example, freedom of speech and holding regular free elections provides everyone in society with the opportunity to express their opinion on political issues. Hence Britain, from this perspective can be categorized as a pluralist society as it conforms to all of the above criteria.

Pluralism also emphasises the functions of political parties as offering a choice of policies and competing campaigns. In reality however political parties often have to compromise more extreme policies to gain greater support, therefore political parties become increasingly similar. For example in Britain the boarders between left and right-wing politics are less clear and the Liberal Democrats have now been described as "the new left" because the traditionally left-wing Labour Party are now considered to have moved to the right politically.

There are however several criticisms of pluralism. By simply viewing power as held by those making decisions, as in Lukes' first face of power, pluralism ignores the importance of the other faces of power; setting the agenda and manipulating the views of others. For example, it is argued that only government have power as they set the agenda and thus choose which issues are to be decided on so it is irrelevant who is then involved in the decision making. Also it can be argued that voters don't really have any power as those truly in power manipulate their views, shaping their decision.

In conclusion it appears that pluralism in its purest form is too idealistic to work in practice. It ignores the impracticality of ensuring that all interests are represented equally. Pluralism also does not take into account the laws of nature; survival of the fittest and the human condition to compete for power. Therefore as described by elitism it is inevitable that a power elite will exist. Functionalists view the elite as a qualified superior group, necessary to maintain social control. However the closed social connections and recruitment patterns of the elite lead

Some common words found in the essay are:
Whereas Pareto, Marx Engels, Pluralists Dahl, Pluralists Weber, , Margaret Thatcher, Life Pluralism, Labour Party, Hence Britain, Budge Classical, political parties, purest form, ruling class, power elite, pluralist view, pluralism purest form, distribution power, pluralism purest, pluralism exist, pluralism exist purest, power held, distribution power society, truly power, exist purest form,
Approximate Word count = 1158
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)