Also it can be argued that voters don't really have any power as those truly in power manipulate their views, shaping their decision. .
It is clear that not all interests are represented equally. This may be due to unequal resources. For example, a campaign for an upper class pressure group will have greater funding than one for homeless people and thus have more representation. In addition, some interest groups are not represented at all as they are hidden from society such as domestic violence, which has only recently become an issue. Extremist views are also often ignored, as they are considered subversive, such as the militant pressure group UK Life.
Pluralism also emphasises the functions of political parties as offering a choice of policies and competing campaigns. In reality however political parties often have to compromise more extreme policies to gain greater support, therefore political parties become increasingly similar. For example in Britain the boarders between left and right-wing politics are less clear and the Liberal Democrats have now been described as "the new left" because the traditionally left-wing Labour Party are now considered to have moved to the right politically.
Elitism contradicts pluralism and argues that it is inevitable for power to be monopolized by a minority group known as the elite. This minority can be described as one group; a power elite or a number of elites in competition for power; a fragmented elite, as stated by Budge. Classical elite theorists, such as Pareto, view the elite as having superior personal qualities and dismiss the possibility of rule by the masses. Whereas Pareto considered only two groups as elite; "lions"; those using force to gain power and "foxes"; those using cunning, Mosca recognised that the qualities found in the elite differ from society to society. The power elite theory describes three main groups that form the elite; federal government leaders, corporation leaders and military leaders, which work closely together.
