Compare and Contrast the Assumptions, if Any, which Classical Elitists, Pluralists and Rational Choice Theorists Bring to the Analysis and Explanation of Politics

An illustration of rational choice theory comes in the form of A. W. Tucker's prisoner's dilemma. If you have two choices, identical to someone else, and the outcome depends on the other person's choices, you should act rationally and choose the option that is most likely to benefit you (Luce and Raiffa, 1958). However, this ignores any good feeling you may have for the other person, and uses the rational assumption that people are inherently self interested. It may be the case that you care as much for the other person's well being as your own, but rational choice theory does not entertain this as a possibility. Elitists may, with respect to the prisoner's dilemma, argue that a member of the elite would, and should, choose the most beneficial option. However, a member of the dominated majority may see things differently, and value others in his class as highly as himself. This may affect his decision, and factors other than self-interest may come into his consideration. Pluralists may see the prisoner's dilemma as insignificant, as they would argue that the various groups would attain power in different areas, so would remain equal in power and influence.…