Classical Elite Theory: Pareto and Weber

  • Jan Pakulski


A hundred years after Pareto and Weber wrote their major works, the elite concept and framework are not as robust as they should be. “Elite” is impoverished semantically in public usage, and classical elite theory is seldom employed in social science. Both need to be clarified and resurrected. Pareto fathered the elite concept and made it the centerpiece of an ambitious theory of society. Weber advanced a similarly ambitious theory anchored in a philosophy, methodology, and political outlook different from Pareto’s. Yet the theories of Pareto and Weber were strikingly congruent, and highlighting this congruence lends force to the explicative value of the elite concept and of elite theory today.


  1. Femia, J. V. (2006). Pareto and Political Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Finer, S. E. (1968). Pareto and Pluto-Democracy: The Retreat to the Galapagos. American Political Science Review, 62(2), 440–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Higley, J., & Pakulski, J. (2012). Pareto’s Theory of Elite Cycles. In J. V. Femia & A. D. Marshall (Eds.), Vilfredo Pareto: Beyond Disciplinary Boundaries (pp. 111–130). Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  4. Huntington, S. P. (1991). The Third Wave. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  5. Pareto, V. (1916). A Treatise in General Sociology. Translated and edited by Arthur Henderson and published as The Mind and Society. New York: Dover, 1935, 4 vols.Google Scholar
  6. Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  7. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Pakulski
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations