ne-dimensional system, it merely reflects apathy of ordinary citizens with little interest or knowledge for political matters, and their acceptance of the existing system which they see as rewarding mutual benefits to society. While politics is primarily an elite concern to the pluralist, ordinary people can have a say if they become organized, and everyone has indirect influence through the right to the franchise in the electoral process. Pluralism recognizes a heterogeneous society composed of people belonging to various groups with differing and competing interests. Conflict is therefore also recognized as not only an expected result but as a necessary instrument which enables the determination of a ruling class in terms of who the winner is. Dahl,(as cited in Lukes,1974:18) states: Who prevails in decision-making seems the best way to determine which individual and groups have more power in social life because direct conflict between actors presents a situation most approximating an experimental test of their capacities to affect outcome. Both Lukes and Gaventa put forward the notion that restricting your analyses of a power situation to the one dimensional model can skew your conclusions. If you limit yourself to this approach your study will be impaired by a pluralistic biased view of power. Where the first dimension sees power in its manifest functions of decision making over key issues raising observable conf...
