TARIANISM. Their work would be used to provide the
intellectual basis for fascism.
Michels was born into a wealthy German family.
During his youth, he became a SOCIALISTand moved to
Italy, where he spent his life as an academic. His train-
ing was in sociology and economics, and he became
noted as a political sociologist. Michels held posts at a
variety of prominent Italian universities, including
Turin, Basel, and Perugia. He wrote a number of
works, the most celebrated being Zur Soziologie des
Parteiwesens in der modernen Demokratie(Political Par-
ties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies
of Modern Democracy) published in 1911. Ultimately,
his major essays were translated into English as First
Lectures in Political Sociology(1949).
One of the main themes of Michels’s work was the
inevitable rise and dominance of oligarchies in politi-
cal systems. Michels asserted that, even in DEMOCRATIC
systems, the need for rapid decision making and the
large-scale BUREAUCRACIESnecessary to implement pol-
icy in the modern nation-state would give rise to polit-
ical oligarchies that he defined as government by the
most capable few: Within the organization of govern-
ment, the most talented and capable would rise
through the ranks and dominate agencies and policy
development. Their rule would be accepted by people
because they were the best suited for the posts.
Michels termed his system the iron law of oligarchyand
held that it applied to all types of political organiza-
tions, including political parties and governmental
bureaucracies.
Just as DEMOCRATIC organizations were bound to
become oligarchic, LIBERAL or RADICAL organizations
were destined to become CONSERVATIVE. As trade unions
or even MARXIST political parties developed large
bureaucracies to carry out their functions, oligarchies
came to dominate the organizations. Inevitably, the oli-
garchies enacted policies and governed in such a way
as to maximize their power and further the interests of
the elite group, became highly centralized and auto-
cratic in nature, and also became more entrenched and
resistant to change, reform, or alternative viewpoints.
Michels’s work was similar to theories developed by
other Italian academics and social philosophers, such
as Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto, who developed
elite theory. These intellectuals maintained that all
societies and governments were hierarchical in nature
and that a small ruling elite held political power over
the majority. Changes in the nature of government
were simply changes in the ruling elite, and the new
oligarchies reflected the values of the new powers.
Other writers expanded on Michels’s concept and
endeavored to apply it to diverse groups such as gov-
ernmental cabinets, religious denominations, and com-
munity groups.
Several of his contemporaries rejected the overt
racism and TOTALITARIANISMof the FASCISTmovement,
but Michels supported the rise of Mussolini in Italy
and believed that his regime was a welcome change
from the weak governments that preceded it. It was
thus with Michels’s consent that his writings were to
provide justification for the fascist government.Further Reading
Mitzman, A. Sociology and Estrangement: Three Sociologists of
Imperial Germany.New York: Knopf, 1973.Middle Ages
The historical period in Western Europe between the
fall of the ancient Roman Empire and the rise of the
Protestant Reformation and MODERNITY; roughly, the
thousand years between A.D. 500 and 1500. Dominated
by MONARCHY, the CATHOLICChurch, and FEUDALISM, the
political thought of the European Middle Ages is char-
acterized by order, HIERARCHY, and religion (see St.
Thomas AQUINAS). Also known as the Medieval period.
See MEDIEVAL POLITICAL THEORY.Mill, James(1773–1836) British political philoso-
pher, economist, and utilitarian
As a philosopher of UTILITARIAN ETHICS and politics,
Mill, like Jeremy BENTHAM, claimed to advance the
“greatest happiness for the greatest number.” By this,
he meant widespread material, economic prosperity
and DEMOCRATIC, EGALITARIAN government. Mill used
this measure to attack the aristocratic British establish-
ment and was therefore considered a RADICAL. Relying
on the political and psychological INDIVIDUALISM of
Thomas HOBBES, the free-market CAPITALISM of Adam
SMITH, and the religious skepticism of the ENLIGHTEN-
MENT, James Mill challenged the traditional organic
realm of William BLACKSTONEand Edmund BURKE. His
book Essay on Governmentasserted that the hierarchies
in British life (MERCANTILISM, the English church, pri-
vate schools, Parliament) obstructed the happiness of
the majority of people. He advocated sweeping demo-
cratic reforms, extending voting rights to commonMill, James 207