do you mean recently or at anytime in past, domhoff co-edited collection of essays about 30 years ago, included likes of miliband, bell, dahl, parsons, sweezy, berle, some others (including, if memory serves, aptheker), i'm sure i have it on a shelf at work, pro/con kinda thing, wasn't retrospective in that it consisted of previusly published stuff written while cwm was still alive, even including couple of pieces by him responding to what others had written at the time...
most consistent criticism was that he didn't provide many examples to support his agument, for mainstream pluralists this meant that cwm had not sufficiently identified a power elite, nor shown that its interests differed from those of masses, or proven that its policy preferences routinely carried the day...
from the left came assertion that absent case studies of three 'power domains' - political/economic/military - mills was unable to adequately assess comparative balance of power between them (sense, of course, that evidence would have shown prdominance of corporate execs)...
pluralist/elitist debate - at least in u.s. poli sci arrived at impasse sometime in the 70s, on one side were those - like mills - who thought politics was elitist and unrepresenative, on the other side were those - like dahl before he became an economic democrat of sorts - who thought that politics was pluralist and representative (dahl's student nelson polsby was probably the most vitriolic re. elite theory), power studies kinda faded away at that point, so i wonder if anyone actually reads mills anymore...... michael hoover
-------------------------------------------------------------- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.