In this essay, Bachrach and Baratz are concerned with analyzing political power. The concept of power is a central concept in political science, but its meaning is elusive. They begin from a previous discussion regarding the nature of power between sociologist C. Wright Mills and Robert Dahl, a leading "pluralist theorist" in political science. Bachrach and Baratz side with Dahl, arguing that Mills sees power in a one-dimensional sense, unlike the theory of pluralism which sees power divided up between different groups. Mills most famous work in this area was The Power Elite first published in 1956 at the height of the Cold War. Mills argued that political power in the U.S. was concentrated among what he called the "power elite" or the close-knit group made up of government bureaucracy, the military, and corporate elites. This view was affirmed by of all people Dwight Eisenhower, Allied Commander during World War II and President of the U.S. during the 1950s, who in his farewell address warned of the "military-industrial complex" which seems to parallel what Mills called the power elite.


                   In my opinion, the meaning of this paragraph describes the perspective of power by two different sociologist who both make valid points in todays political system. C. Wright Mills views power as "one-dimensional", meaning he sees power as not thorough or lacking depth. This is a valid point to describe the political system because our system is based off the eyes of our Founding Fathers, who created the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. On the other hand, Robert Dahl uses the "theory of pluralism" to describe power. In our political system, this raises true because we have the Democrats and the Republicans, two sides of the government with different outlooks on how the government should be run, but come together to make decisions on behalf of us as a nation. Thus, both sociologist provide different aspects of power which interestingly enough is recognized in today's modern government.


                   The reason I chose this passage to paraphrase is because it was interesting how both sociologists had their different perspective on power, and both of them were right. We can see the "pluralism theory" with shows like "House of Cards", which presents the way close-knit groups manipulate how to gain power in a bad way. This was the view of Mills, who wrote his book The Power Elite. Then again, we have Dahl's perspective on power, saying it is divided and shared amongst the groups of people in the government. We as a people see this because we vote for the people we want to represent us in our government. These sociologist have both make valid points in contributing to how power can be perceived in our government today.