|
Плюралізму заперечують браком емпіричних доказів. Цитуючи результати опитувань, які показують, що значна більшість людей на провідних посадах у державі репрезентує заможний вищий клас, критики плюралізму стверджують, що держава служить інтересам вищого класу, а не інтересам усіх груп суспільтва<ref>{{cite book|author=Cunningham, Frank|title=Theories of democracy: a critical introduction|publisher=Psychology Press|year=2002|isbn=978-0-415-22879-4|pages=86–87|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cOBubkTG9JMC&pg=PA86|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160512120545/https://books.google.com/books?id=cOBubkTG9JMC&pg=PA86|archivedate=12 May 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Diversity in the power elite: how it happened, why it matters|edition=2nd|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|year=2006|isbn=978-0-7425-3699-9|page=4|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0V0gO8tArK8C&pg=PA4|author1=Zweigenhaft, Richard L.|author2=Domhoff, G. William|lastauthoramp=yes|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160430085807/https://books.google.com/books?id=0V0gO8tArK8C&pg=PA4|archivedate=30 April 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
===Погляди критиків ===
[[Юрген Габермас]] вважав, що структура [[базис і надбудова|базис-надбудова]], яку використовують численні марксистські теоретики, описуючи взаємозв'язок держаси та економіки, надто спрощена. На його думку сучасна держава відіграє значну роль у структуруванні економіки, регулюючи економічну діяльність, будучи масштабним споживачем і виробником, а також через перерозподіл ([[держава загального добробуту]]).
<!---
Because of the way these activities structure the economic framework, Habermas felt that the state cannot be looked at as passively responding to economic class interests.<ref>{{Cite book|author=Duncan, Graeme Campbell|title=Democracy and the capitalist state|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1989|isbn=978-0-521-28062-4|page=137|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tMk8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA137|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160425091052/https://books.google.com/books?id=tMk8AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA137|archivedate=25 April 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Edgar, Andrew|title=The philosophy of Habermas|publisher=McGill-Queen's Press|year=2005|isbn=978-0-7735-2783-6|pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=VxfeGh-RrWwC&pg=PA5 5–6]; [https://books.google.com/books?id=VxfeGh-RrWwC&pg=PA44 44]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Cook, Deborah|title=Adorno, Habermas, and the search for a rational society|publisher=Psychology Press|year=2004|isbn=978-0-415-33479-2|page=20|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lmK-RGZi5McC&pg=PA20|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160425040547/https://books.google.com/books?id=lmK-RGZi5McC&pg=PA20|archivedate=25 April 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
[[Michel Foucault]] believed that modern political theory was too state-centric, saying "Maybe, after all, the state is no more than a composite reality and a mythologized abstraction, whose importance is a lot more limited than many of us think." He thought that political theory was focusing too much on abstract institutions, and not enough on the actual practices of government. In Foucault's opinion, the state had no essence. He believed that instead of trying to understand the activities of governments by analyzing the properties of the state (a reified abstraction), political theorists should be examining changes in the practice of government to understand changes in the nature of the state.<ref>{{cite book|author=Melossi, Dario|chapter=Michel Foucault and the Obsolescent State|editor=Beaulieu, Alain|editor2=Gabbard, David|title=Michel Foucault and power today: international multidisciplinary studies in the history of the present|publisher=Lexington Books|year=2006|isbn=978-0-7391-1324-0|page=6|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nE_UBAh_cyEC&pg=PA6|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160516144400/https://books.google.com/books?id=nE_UBAh_cyEC&pg=PA6|archivedate=16 May 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Gordon, Colin|chapter=Government rationality: an introduction|editor=Foucault, Michel|display-editors=etal|title=The Foucault effect: studies in governmentality|publisher=University of Chicago Press|year=1991|isbn=978-0-226-08045-1|page=4|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TzSt_zYZfUsC&pg=PA4|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160503035737/https://books.google.com/books?id=TzSt_zYZfUsC&pg=PA4|archivedate=3 May 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Mitchell, Timothy|chapter=Society, Economy, and the State Effect|editor=Sharma, Aradhana|editor2=Gupta, Akhil|title=The anthropology of the state: a reader|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|year=2006|isbn=978-1-4051-1467-7|page=179|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ImnEMK_hKCgC&pg=PA179|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160518173206/https://books.google.com/books?id=ImnEMK_hKCgC&pg=PA179|archivedate=18 May 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
Heavily influenced by Gramsci, [[Nicos Poulantzas]], a Greek [[neo-Marxism|neo-Marxist]] theorist argued that capitalist states do not always act on behalf of the ruling class, and when they do, it is not necessarily the case because state officials consciously strive to do so, but because the '[[structuralism|structural]]' position of the state is configured in such a way to ensure that the long-term interests of capital are always dominant. Poulantzas' main contribution to the Marxist literature on the state was the concept of 'relative autonomy' of the state. While Poulantzas' work on 'state autonomy' has served to sharpen and specify a great deal of Marxist literature on the state, his own framework came under criticism for its '[[structural functionalism]]'.{{Citation needed|date=January 2011}}
===State autonomy (institutionalism)===
{{Main|New institutionalism}}
State autonomy theorists believe that the state is an entity that is impervious to external social and economic influence, and has interests of its own.<ref name="sklair-2004-139-140">{{Cite book|author=Sklair, Leslie|chapter=Globalizing class theory|editor=Sinclair, Timothy|title=Global governance: critical concepts in political science|publisher=Taylor & Francis|year=2004|isbn=978-0-415-27665-8|pages=139–140|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1xs_MGAo3zgC&pg=PA139|deadurl=no|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160519041724/https://books.google.com/books?id=1xs_MGAo3zgC&pg=PA139|archivedate=19 May 2016|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
"New institutionalist" writings on the state, such as the works of [[Theda Skocpol]], suggest that state actors are to an important degree autonomous. In other words, state personnel have interests of their own, which they can and do pursue independently of (at times in conflict with) actors in society. Since the state controls the means of coercion, and given the dependence of many groups in civil society on the state for achieving any goals they may espouse, state personnel can to some extent impose their own preferences on civil society.<ref name="AUTOREF10" />
-->
===Погляди критиків ===
|
