"Hey, brain stuff. Lauren Bogle bomb here. Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent, who, again is running for the democratic nomination for president proclaimed an two thousand nineteen speech to sixteen thousand supporters in San Francisco, we say no to oligarchy. Sanders, who warns billionaires are buying elections, and exerting too much power over the government refers to oligarchy is frequently, but he's not the only one around the web, you'll see places ranging from Russia, China and Saudi Arabia to Brazil, and even Hong Kong described as oligarchies 2017, salon article even warned of the growing power of a global Uber. Oligarchy comprised of wealthy super powerful figures ranging from financiers to Rockstars, and the concept isn't just owned by the left either President Donald Trump may not have used the same terminology, but the billionaire businessman rose to power in part by railing against the elites that he accused of disenfranchising ordinary Americans. If you're not a political science, major, you may be wondering, what exactly is an oligarchy anyway. And do we really have one in the United States, we spoke with Bron forms? Sannoh the William T, Brian chair of American history and professor emeritus of history at the university of Kentucky. He's written a couple books on the subject American oligarchy the permanent political class. And plutocracy in America. How increasing inequality destroys the middle class and exploits the poor form, Asano explained an oligarchy is a combination of wealth, and power, and often tends to close off access to its ranks pulling up the ladder oligarchy from the ancient Greek word, meaning few is a concept that goes back to the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, who used it to describe society governed by select few wealthy, or aristocratic people as opposed to rule by a single monarch, or democracy in which the great mass of people of humble means holds control. Aristotle actually didn't favor either all ARCHE or democracy. He preferred sort of hefty CAF Cup of Joe in which a middle group of moderately wealthy citizens controlled the rains and the early nineteen hundreds philosopher Rubert Michelle's came up the iron law of oligarchy it holds the, any organization or society. Even when the two spouses democratic ideals of popular rule, inevitably will devolve into oligarchy rule in which a few people take most of the power in part because rank and file members tend to want. Someone to tell them, what to do in America Sanders, isn't the first politician to be concerned about oligarchy fear that an entrenched elite would seize power dates back to the era when the nation was founded John Adams, who became the second US president, in particular saw, as a potential menace. We spoke with Luke maye Ville, author of the book, John Adams, and the fear of American oligarchy. He said are popular history. Paints, a revolutionary society that overthrew monarchy, but revolution era, America was also full of animosity towards anything resembling, formal nobility or Hristo credit privilege. This animosity made its way into the US constitution in the form of the nobility clause of article one which prohibits the federal government from granting titles of nobility, what made Adams unique was a systematic manner in which he theorized about oligarchy undocumented the threat that oligarchy had posed throughout history. Mayvale continued relatively early in his life Adams was struck by the disproportionate influence enjoyed by men of wealth, and lustrous lineage, but the record shows that he became much more fearful of oligarchy during his long sojourn as diplomat in Europe, in the late seventeen seventy s and early seventeen eighty s in the old world, he became a careful observer of the power that went hand in hand with family lineage, physical, beauty, and especially wealth, when he compared these observations at the old world to conditions in the new world, he saw more similarities than differences. But Adams, didn't exactly see the world the same way as does Sanders for example, or Senator, Elizabeth, Warren and other presidential candidate who is concerned about the concentration of wealth and power, because Adams, worried about rule by ordinary citizens as well almost as much as he worried about oligarchy, he thought that giving everyone the right to vote would inevitably lead to all currently held private property being divvied up and redistributed. He believed in a balance between the power of the wealthy few and the organized power of the lower classes, something. Perhaps it can to Aristotle's concept of a mixed ruling class. Oligarchy is can develop in societies for several reasons in a country with a monarchy or dictatorship. If a leader becomes too weak or incompetent rule the strata of powerful people under the leader may start to siphon away his authority, and ultimately may replace them with a puppet or else one of their own members. It's also possible for an elite say, for example, superwealthy business moguls to take control of society because they're good at getting things done. Whether or not, those things are in the best interests of everybody else. And there's also oligarchy by default in which democracy, essentially withers because ordinary people allow an elite take over because it's easier than staying informed and grappling with complexities of governing. The question of whether the US is turning into an oligarchy, or perhaps already is one has become a subject of heated debate back in two thousand fourteen and analysis out of Princeton, and Northwestern University said, one thousand seven hundred seventy nine different policy issues and concluded that economic elites and groups representing business interests had a lot of influence upon US, government policy, while ordinary citizens at interest groups, representing them held little sway. They didn't actually use the term oligarchy, though, news. Media headlines summarizing their work did. But several other scholars published rebuttals arguing that either the masses and the elites didn't really disagree that much about policy choices or that when they did, the masses usually prevailed. Public opinion, though, suggests that most people think of the US as allegoric, even if they don't, call it that in two thousand seventeen poll seventy five percent of Americans said the people like them have too little influence in Washington and eighty two percent believed that wealthy people had too much power over the government here in the US form. Misano said, it's not a matter of restrictions. But more closing of opportunity, and diminishing chances for the middle and lower classes, even some billionaires worry that the nation's rising income inequality is unsustainable and may endanger capitalism's future, even if they're not quite ready to give up all their influence."