Elites. Historical definitions and approaches

There is common consensus about the fact that in most societies key decisions are taken by a minority, generally referred to as elites. In democratic societies, elites are meant to reflect the values and opinions of citizens they represent. According to the theory of democratic elitism (Bachrach; 1969; Stouffer, 1995), elites endorse democracy and democratic values more than ordinary citizens do (Sniderman et al., 2000; García-Rivero & Kotzè, 2012). Actually, elites have been termed as “the guardians of democracy” (McClosky, 1956; Dahl, 1961). Research conducted in the field corroborates this argument. Elites support democracy and show higher levels of democratic values than ordinary citizens. This has been evidenced both in democratic and nondemocratic countries and in different geographical areas around the earth. However, this consensus contrasts with the different definitions of elites used in the field, giving rise to a debate about who should be considered as part of the elites of a society (Gibson & Duch, 1991: 191; Hoffman-Lange, 1987). A commonly used defition includes those in top positions in private and public sectors with permanent capacity of influence in the policy decision process. This definition however, allows to incorporate and /or exclude a wide range of sectors and positions. The operationalisation of values and opinions of elites also varies widely from questionnaire interview to in-depth interview or discussion groups and the like. Against this background, this paper analyses the different concept of elites through the years. Different conceptions range from cabinet members and/or parlamentarians to member to members of major companies, media, military or even illegal organisations. Conclussions reached evidence that research results vary amply depending on the definition and operationalisation of elites used.