34 Power elite, bureaucracy, pressure groups, and political parties

Facts like these, which have been duplicated in countless other studies, suggest to many observers that power in the United States is concentrated in the hands of a single power elite. Scores of versions of this idea exist, probably one for each person who holds it, but they all interpret government and politics very differently than pluralists. Instead of seeing hundreds of competing groups hammering out policy, the elite model perceives a pyramid of power.

A bureaucracy is a group of specifically non-elected officials within a government or other institution that implements the rules, laws, ideas, and functions of their institution;^[1][2] in other words, a government administrative unit that carries out the decisions of the legislature or democratically-elected representation of a state.^[3]

The term "bureaucracy" was created from the French word bureau, meaning desk or office, and the Greek κράτος kratos, meaning rule or political power.

Political parties and pressure groups are depend ent upon one another. Interest groups find the parties an im portant method of gaining access to those in public authority, and the parties need the support of groups to elect and maintain themselves in power. The loose party structure and the na ture of the federal system foster a chain of continuous re lationships between the two. Interest groups participate in both nonpartisan and partisan primaries and general elections through candidate endorsement, providing campaign funds, and general campaign activity. Interest groups are particularly in terested in programs and seek to influence party platforms and may provide speech materials for candidates. There is some attempt on the part of both to infiltrate each other though rarely has an interest group been able to capture complete control of a party organization. The overlapping memberships help to educate the parties about the interests of the private groups and vice versa, and provide some cross-fertilization of ideas as well as manpower assistance. Political parties have a prime function of accommodating the demands of the private interests into the larger public interests.

35 Protest, agitation, social movements, collective action, revolution

A protest is an expression of objection, by words or by actions, to particular events, policies or situations. Protests can take many different forms, from individual statements to mass demonstrations. Protesters may organize a protest as a way of publicly making their opinions heard in an attempt to influence public opinion or government policy, or they may undertake direct action in an attempt to directly enact desired changes themselves.^[1] Where protests are part of a systematic and peaceful campaign to achieve a particular objective, and involve the use of pressure as well as persuasion, they go beyond mere protest and may be better described as cases of civil resistance or nonviolent resistance. A protest can itself sometimes be the subject of a counter-protest. In such a case, counter-protesters demonstrate their support for the person, policy, action, etc. that is the subject of the original protest.

Agitation is an unpleasant state of extreme arousal. An agitated person may feel stirred up, excited, tense, confused, or irritable.

Agitation can come on suddenly or over time. It can last for just a few minutes, or for weeks or even months. Pain, stress, and fever can all increase agitation.

Agitation by itself may not be a sign of a health problem. However, if other symptoms occur, it can be a sign of disease.

Agitation  with a change in alertness (altered consciousness) can be a sign of delirium. Delirium has a medical cause and should be checked by a health care provider right away.

The variety of methods that are applied to the study of social movements, and the tremendous variation in the type of questions being asked, demonstrates one of the most important lessons for students of social movements: There is no single definition of a social movement. More than that however, there is no single method for studying social movements nor is there any sense of agreement as to the particular types of questions that should be asked about the movements themselves. In fact, the very idea that there exists a single “sub-field” within sociology that contains within it all possible permutations of the study of social movements is problematic. Charles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others. For Tilly, social movements are a major vehicle for ordinary people's participation in public politics. He argues that there are three major elements to a social movement:

1. Campaigns: a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of target authorities;

2. Repertoire (repertoire of contention): employment of combinations from among the following forms of political action: creation of special-purpose associations and coalitions, public meetings, solemn processions, vigils, rallies, demonstrations, petition drives, statements to and in public media, and pamphleteering; and

3. WUNC displays: participants' concerted public representation of worthiness, unity, numbers, and commitments on the part of themselves and/or their constituencies.

Collective action is traditionally defined as any action aiming to improve the group’s conditions (such as status or power), which is enacted by a representative of the group.^[1] It is a term that has formulations and theories in many areas of the social sciences including psychology, sociology, political science and economics.

A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turn around") is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time. Aristotledescribed two types of political revolution:

1. Complete change from one constitution to another

2. Modification of an existing constitution.^[1]

Revolutions have occurred through human history and vary widely in terms of methods, duration, and motivating ideology. Their results include major changes in culture, economy, and socio-political institutions.

There are many different typologies of revolutions in social science and literature. For example, classical scholar Alexis de Tocqueville differentiated^[2] between 1) political revolutions 2) sudden and violent revolutions that seek not only to establish a new political system but to transform an entire society and 3) slow but sweeping transformations of the entire society that take several generations to bring about (ex. religion). One of several different Marxist typologies divides revolutions into pre-capitalist, early bourgeois, bourgeois, bourgeois-democratic, early proletarian, and socialist revolutions.

The term revolution has also been used to denote great changes outside the political sphere. Such revolutions are usually recognized as having transformed in society, culture, philosophy and technology much more than political systems; they are often known as social revolutions.^[6] Some can be global, while others are limited to single countries. One of the classic examples of the usage of the word revolution in such context is the industrial revolution.