ABSTRACT This paper re‐evaluates the debate between the corporate dominance thesis and the more recent “fractured elite” thesis. The fractured elite thesis, argued by Mizruchi (2013), posits that the American corporate elite has become increasingly fragmented since the late 20th century. This argument draws heavily on evidence from the U.S. board interlock network, which shows a decline in overall cohesion, the diminishing centrality of major banks, and the disappearance of the influential “inner circle” of well‐connected executives. I argue that these conclusions are premature and possibly an artifact of an overreliance on a methodological framework that has been rendered obsolete by the globalization of capital. By contrasting the decaying U.S. board interlock network with evidence from three other networks—the Policy‐Planning Network (PPN), the international board interlock network of the Transnational Capitalist Class (TCC), and political donation networks—I argue that evidence of corporate elite unity persists, albeit through evolved channels. Analysis of the PPN reveals continued elite coordination, while the TCC literature suggests that the locus of elite integration has shifted from the national to the international stage. Furthermore, political donation networks exhibit strong, and in some cases increasing, behavioral unity among elite donors during the same period of alleged fragmentation. Ultimately, I conclude that corporate dominance remains a powerful force in American politics, but understanding its contemporary mechanisms requires researchers to look beyond the domestic interlock network to these other arenas where elite power is organized and exercised.
Andrew Collins (Sun,) studied this question.