Mills wrote multiple books, but we'll just focus on The Power Elite (2000).

Originally published in 1956,

this is the author's only book that has focused exclusively on élites and democracy in American society.
According to Mills, the élite have developed a unitary power élite that has de facto administered the
United States despite representative democratic institutions such as Congress.

Mills believes that the power of élite's cohesion comes from their membership in overlapping circles and
shared ideals and codes of behavior, as well as their common socioeconomic beginnings and education
at élite schools, colleges, and universities. He contends that they are willing to adopt one another's
perspectives, always sympathetically and frequently with the knowledge.

As Mills describes it, America has descended into a mass society with the destruction of the larger
society. People have become passive recipients of communication; they avoid conversations and
disputes, instead of allowing supposed experts, public relations, and mass media ideas to prevail. An
independent public, in which individuals debate and think on public problems before making decisions,
is compatible with the liberal heritage but incompatible with the establishment of a power élite.

In response to criticism of his book on the American power élite, Mills published a commentary on those
critiques in 2008. This remark is worth considering for two reasons: first, it explains Mills' theoretical
stance on élite theory; and second, it offers insight on Mills' idea of sociology's legitimate job.

Mills criticizes Pareto's theory of the élite's circulation and supports Michels' iron law of oligarchy as a
"fairly good description of what has, in reality, occurred in most mass organizations." He also praises
Mosca's concept between two layers of the ruling class, which he believes is important for studying the
US power élite. Mills, on the other hand, criticizes traditional élite theory in general for failing to study
the relationship between institutional structure and élite creation.

During the 1950s and 1960s, C. Wright Mills established a reputation in the American educated society
as an independent radical and unconventional thinker. This most renowned and controversial book' has
sparked intense polemics and critiques, as well as more fair assessments. Trevino appears to agree with
Mills' notion that people in each component of the American power élite is interchangeable, but notes
that it has gotten more diverse since the 1980s.

Mills' study of the power élite in America is "worthy of serious attention," yet it is "subject to the
following objections." Contrary to Mills' conclusions, the concentration of huge firms in the American
economic system "has remained essentially stable." Mills' definition of power concentration in the
hands of these three élites is empirically flawed; on the issue of power, Parsons claims that 'power is an
essential and desirable component of a highly organized society.'

Some critics have criticized Wright Mills for the way he dealt with the issue of the power élite in the
United States, as well as the strategy he took to it. Wright Mills responded to some of these objections
by stating that prediction and description are closely linked. Mills thought i
The Power Elite (2000) is Mills's only book that deals primarily with élites and democracy in American
society. Mills believes that, in spite of representative democratic institutions such as Congress, a unitary
power élite has de facto dominated the United States. People have become passive consumers of
communication; they avoid conversations and disputes in favor of allowing 'expertise, public relations,
and mass media ideas to prevail.' Following the publication of his controversial book on the American
power élite, Mills wrote a response to the book's critics. This statement is worth considering for several
reasons. First, it explains Mills' theoretical position on the élite theory. Second, it gives insight into Mills'
idea of sociology's essential task.

During the 1950s and 1960s, C. Wright Mills established a reputation in the American educated society
as an independent revolutionary and unconventional thinker. This most renowned and controversial
book' has sparked intense controversy and critiques, as well as more fair assessments. Horowitz
emphasized that this study would be remembered not for its theoretical advances, but for the wave of
the future research that it stimulated. Mills' analysis of the power élite in the United States was the
issue he handled, yet he did it without skipping rigorous initial research and instead relied on illustrative
instances. Mills thought it important in this situation to protect value freedom while also clearly stating
political opinions. Mills fails to differentiate between their influence in the economy and in society as a
whole, despite the fact that property and control have been separated.
t essential in this situation to protect value freedom while also making it clear political beliefs.
*his book indicates the characteristics of elites by their possession of centralized power in the economic,
political, and military orders. gi tuyo pud nya ug pili ni nga mga leader so that they are able to make
decisions of major significance and consequence to the population.

*Mills assumed that the power of élite's connection comes from their common socioeconomic status
and education at élite schools.

*ang mka dominate sa isa ka society is katong naa sa high position or naay capabilities to handle any
circumstances. many of them are wealthy and privately powerful people. some of them are also not
elected as a politician or officers.

The corporation

CEO

COMPANY PRESIDENT

MAJOR SHAREHOLDER

The military

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICERS

JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF

The Federal Government

POLITICIANS

ELECTED OFFICERS

*Since sila man ang naay kakayahan to lead, sila rasad ang nakabalo how to solve issues with the
society. By that, we can understood sa first bullet why gi specify niya ang elites by their centralized
power in the economic, political, and military abilities.

*meaning, the ordinary citizen is a relatively powerless subject of manipulation by those entities. As
Mills describes it, America has descended into a mass society with the destruction of the larger society.
People have become passive recipients of communication; they avoid conversations and disagreements,
instead of allowing supposed experts, public relations, and mass media ideas to prevail. In which
individuals debate and think on public problems before making decisions.