I. * Power had to do with whatever decisions men make about  the arrangements under which they live, and about the events which make up their history.
   * The problem of who is involved in making them is the basic problem of power. There is also the power to manage and manipulate the consent of men.
   * There has, in fact, come about a situation in which many who have lost faith in prevailing loyalties have not acquired new ones, and so pay no attention to politics of any kind. They are inactionary.
   * This is the key to many modern troubles of political intellectuals, as well as key to much political 
     bewilderment in modern society.
   * "Men are free to make history, but some men are much freer than others." For such freedom requires access to means of decision and of power by which history can now be made.
   * Mills states all that is of the past is of little relevance to our understanding of the United States today. 
   * Within this society, three broad levels of power may be distinguished.

II.* The power to make decisions of national and international consequence is now so clearly seated in politcal, military, and economic institutions.
   * The big three levels of power also shape institutions of religion, education, and family.
   * There is a political economy numerously linked with military order and decision.
   * This triangle of power is now a structural fact, and it is the key to any understanding of the higher circles of America today.
   * The high military, the corporation executives, and the political directorate have tended to come together to form the power elite of America.
   *Within the elite as a whole, this coincidence of military domain and corporate realm strengthens both of them and further subordinates the merely political man.

III.*Another interpretation of the American system of power is 
     that it is a moving balance of many competing interests.
   * Mills believes that the balance and the compromise in 
     American society must now be seen as having mainly to do 
     with the middle power. 
   * Politics is not an arena in which free and independent 
     organizations truly connect the lower and middle levels of 
     society with the top levels of decision.
   * As much more people are drawn into the political arenas, 
     their associations become mass in scale, and the power of 
     the individual becomes less dependent upon them.

IV * The last belief is that there will be a rise of the public or masses.
   * The public consists of the unidentified and the non- partisan in a world of defined partisan interests. 

HOMO CIVICUS
Homo civicus is the child grown up; quest for gratification and release from pain
-       through love, food, play, work, he learns to channel his energies and attention
-       restraints are placed on his ability to gratify himself
-       due to these restraints, choices become more complex
        Resources can be used to gain ends from others
-       affection, friendliness, anger, etc.
        Develop strategies for using resources
-       most notably, school and jobs
        During youth, homo civicus is constrained by rules, laws, etc.
-       in accepting/rejecting these restraints, he learns his range of strategies
        Generally  inactive in politics, unless it directly threatens his primary goals

        HOMO POLITICUS
        Same general makeup and drive as apolitical civicus
        Political action is a powerful source of gratification 
-       allocates much of his time to controlling government policies
        HP also develops strategies to achieve wants , but is constrained by both different and additional barriers
-       public humiliation, defeat in election, loss of credibility

        RESOURCES USED BY HOMO POLITICUS AND HOMO CIVICUS
        Resource:  Anything that can be used to sway the choices or strategies of another rindividual
-       one's time, money, credit, information, social standing, popularity, contacts
Resources to Homo politicus are limited and at any given time fixed, but they are not permanently fixed

** Give 6 characteristics listed at the end of the selection (read from book)
 

2 types of approaches are looked at: elitist and pluralist
The concept of power remains elusive.
Sociologically oriented researchers have found that power highly centralized throughout and therefore they support the elitist model.

Political Science has found that power throughout communities is diffused which is related to the pluralist model.

Central thesis that the essay is framed around: there are two faces of power, neither of which the sociologist see and only one of which the political scientists sees.

Criticism of elitist approach:
1. This has to do with the basic premise that in every human institution there is an ordered system of power. This is also known as a power structure, which is the integral part and the mirror image of the organizations stratification
2. The pluralist also criticized the sociologists’ hypothesis that the power structure tends be stable over time
3. The third criticism of the elitist model is that it wrongly equates reputed with actual power.

The Pluralist tends to concentrate their attention not upon the sources of power but one the exercise of power. Power for them is power in decision making analyzed by careful examination of series of concrete decisions. 

Problems with this model include: fact that power may be and often is exercised by confining the scope of decision making to relatively safe issues. The other problem is that the model provides no objective criteria for distinguishing between important and unimportant issues arising in the political arena.