24.6.05
C. Wright Mills, by Alan J. Banks
C. Wright Mills obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin in 1941. He spent a great amount of time dealing with the writings of Karl Marx and Max Weber. Mills blended the ideas of these two classical sociologists in a powerful way. Mills' best works are deeply influenced by 1) Marx's critique of capitalist production and 2) Weber's analysis of instrumental rationality. It is the blending of these two writers' vision of social stratification and change in the modern era that lies at the foundation of Mills' theory of social reality.
More generally, Mills' aim was to develop what he called sociological imagination. The sociological imagination, he argued, is an outlook on society that focuses on the intimate connections between larger structural issues (what Mills called Public Issues) and the daily problems that confront individuals (Personal Troubles). Mills sought to demonstrate how issues of power, ideology and class are tied up with the daily troubles of ordinary individuals. Mills also sought to expose what he saw as the tragedy of sociology--the inability, unwillingness or refusal to cultivate the sociological imagination.
To better understand Mills' sociology, let's begin with a list of important assumptions underlying his work:
1) Social Reality is both macroscopic and microscopic. Sociologists should try to understand social reality in terms of the meanings that social structures have for individuals. Failure to comprehend these macro-micro inner-connections results in sterile, pseudo-sophisticated rambling which contributes little to the development of the social sciences or to the usefulness of sociology for progressive social change. This reluctance to cultivate the sociological imagination is, for Mills, the tragedy of modern sociology.
2) Sociologists should be activists. Attempts to be value-free are both impossible and undesirable. Too often, those who claim an impartial, objective, and detached status are only fooling themselves. They are making important political decisions through inaction. They are biased because they have (unwittingly) refused to deal with points of view, values, interests and their own position. More often than not, such sociology merely transforms moral and political ideas into bureaucratic formulas and slogans. Mills goes further to state that sociologists, wittingly or not, have supported the ideology of the Power Elite and the corporate state under the banner of objectivity and value-freeness. Again, Mills' point is simple: the act of supposing to be value-free involves the unwitting acceptance of a value position--usually one that supports existing institutional arrangements.
3) One central feature of 20th century social history is the decline of an independent entrepreneurial class and the simultaneous rise of white collar work. This important historical development has contributed to the "decline of the independent individual and the rise of the little man: (White Collar, p. xii). Modern individuals, because of the kind of society they are entangled in, become increasingly alienated, lacking control over their lives, trapped in boring, routinized jobs. They are very rational and calculating, yet naive and uninformed. One term Mills uses to describe these sort of workers is cheerful robots. He refers to the wives of these cheerful robots as darling little slaves. It is here that Mills best develops his critique of instrumental rationality. But, the key focus is the absence of power among this new class of social actors (passive participants).
4) Another key feature of 20th century social life has been the concentration and centralization of power among a few elite members in society. The emergence and consolidation of this elite in the 20th century is the subject matter of Mills' book The Power Elite. Mills views this elite as consisting of a group of executives who occupy the top positions in the military sector, the corporate suite, and the government office. Members of this elite possess similar social characteristics, similar social backgrounds, and similar social origins. They attend the same schools, and clubs, resorts. They interchange positions on a regular basis: occupying a position in the political directorate one year, the military sector the next and the corporate suite the next. They know each other personally; they know each other's jobs; and they realize the benefits of involvement in the corporate/government world. These men, in other words, have a consciousness of kind. They operate behind closed doors and they make all the important domestic and foreign policy decisions. For Mills, this is a dangerous development. It introduces the possibility that this small minority might wield disproportionate power over the majority, due to their consciousness of kind and their control over institutional resources. For Mills, this represents a significant threat to American Democracy.
5) As a result of 3 & 4 above, there has been a decline in freedom. This problem is enhanced by the development of new forms of control to manipulate the masses into a state of apathy and political impotence. It is one of the greatest problems confronting contemporary societies.
6) Mills' methodological approach stresses what he called "intellectual craftsmanship." This involves cultivating a high level of historical awareness, flexibility, clarity of conception and sociological imagination. While his method is informal, it stresses self-disciplined work and intellectual honesty. Intellectual work, in other words, should be sensible, flexible, creative and passionate; it should help us understand that people are active, yet historically situated.
One final point. Mills thought that social structure has a reality independent of the activities of ordinary individuals. Nonetheless individuals make and remake the social relations of everyday life. The aim of good sociology is to sensitize us to the many ways that social structure influences the daily lives of ordinary people. His greatest political and intellectual concern was that people in advanced societies would be manipulated into a state of acquiescence and political impotence, a state where the role of human reason would no longer play be an important force for progressive social change.
More generally, Mills' aim was to develop what he called sociological imagination. The sociological imagination, he argued, is an outlook on society that focuses on the intimate connections between larger structural issues (what Mills called Public Issues) and the daily problems that confront individuals (Personal Troubles). Mills sought to demonstrate how issues of power, ideology and class are tied up with the daily troubles of ordinary individuals. Mills also sought to expose what he saw as the tragedy of sociology--the inability, unwillingness or refusal to cultivate the sociological imagination.
To better understand Mills' sociology, let's begin with a list of important assumptions underlying his work:
1) Social Reality is both macroscopic and microscopic. Sociologists should try to understand social reality in terms of the meanings that social structures have for individuals. Failure to comprehend these macro-micro inner-connections results in sterile, pseudo-sophisticated rambling which contributes little to the development of the social sciences or to the usefulness of sociology for progressive social change. This reluctance to cultivate the sociological imagination is, for Mills, the tragedy of modern sociology.
2) Sociologists should be activists. Attempts to be value-free are both impossible and undesirable. Too often, those who claim an impartial, objective, and detached status are only fooling themselves. They are making important political decisions through inaction. They are biased because they have (unwittingly) refused to deal with points of view, values, interests and their own position. More often than not, such sociology merely transforms moral and political ideas into bureaucratic formulas and slogans. Mills goes further to state that sociologists, wittingly or not, have supported the ideology of the Power Elite and the corporate state under the banner of objectivity and value-freeness. Again, Mills' point is simple: the act of supposing to be value-free involves the unwitting acceptance of a value position--usually one that supports existing institutional arrangements.
3) One central feature of 20th century social history is the decline of an independent entrepreneurial class and the simultaneous rise of white collar work. This important historical development has contributed to the "decline of the independent individual and the rise of the little man: (White Collar, p. xii). Modern individuals, because of the kind of society they are entangled in, become increasingly alienated, lacking control over their lives, trapped in boring, routinized jobs. They are very rational and calculating, yet naive and uninformed. One term Mills uses to describe these sort of workers is cheerful robots. He refers to the wives of these cheerful robots as darling little slaves. It is here that Mills best develops his critique of instrumental rationality. But, the key focus is the absence of power among this new class of social actors (passive participants).
4) Another key feature of 20th century social life has been the concentration and centralization of power among a few elite members in society. The emergence and consolidation of this elite in the 20th century is the subject matter of Mills' book The Power Elite. Mills views this elite as consisting of a group of executives who occupy the top positions in the military sector, the corporate suite, and the government office. Members of this elite possess similar social characteristics, similar social backgrounds, and similar social origins. They attend the same schools, and clubs, resorts. They interchange positions on a regular basis: occupying a position in the political directorate one year, the military sector the next and the corporate suite the next. They know each other personally; they know each other's jobs; and they realize the benefits of involvement in the corporate/government world. These men, in other words, have a consciousness of kind. They operate behind closed doors and they make all the important domestic and foreign policy decisions. For Mills, this is a dangerous development. It introduces the possibility that this small minority might wield disproportionate power over the majority, due to their consciousness of kind and their control over institutional resources. For Mills, this represents a significant threat to American Democracy.
5) As a result of 3 & 4 above, there has been a decline in freedom. This problem is enhanced by the development of new forms of control to manipulate the masses into a state of apathy and political impotence. It is one of the greatest problems confronting contemporary societies.
6) Mills' methodological approach stresses what he called "intellectual craftsmanship." This involves cultivating a high level of historical awareness, flexibility, clarity of conception and sociological imagination. While his method is informal, it stresses self-disciplined work and intellectual honesty. Intellectual work, in other words, should be sensible, flexible, creative and passionate; it should help us understand that people are active, yet historically situated.
One final point. Mills thought that social structure has a reality independent of the activities of ordinary individuals. Nonetheless individuals make and remake the social relations of everyday life. The aim of good sociology is to sensitize us to the many ways that social structure influences the daily lives of ordinary people. His greatest political and intellectual concern was that people in advanced societies would be manipulated into a state of acquiescence and political impotence, a state where the role of human reason would no longer play be an important force for progressive social change.
