Elite-Mass Relations in Communist Systems (review)

276 SAIS REVIEW provided later in the Appendix with essentially numerical information as it relates to cases reported (date of first and current number), method of transmission , seropositive rates, actions taken, and entry restrictions. To conclude, although one is led to expect area-specific information about AIDS in the Third World, Sabatier's dossier instead provides a comprehensive global overview of the international history of AIDS. Nevertheless, much of this information is new and valuable for the layman, who typically is knowledgeable about only methods of AIDS transmission and community resources. Although this is the third edition put out by the Panos Institute, it is their first trade edition. Unfortunately, this is also the last edition to be published, as the Panos Institute will instead focus its energy on the production of a regular newsletter, WorldAIDS. This publication is also a much needed resource and will provide the same emphases as Sabatier's dossier. Elite-Mass Relations in Communist Systems. By Daniel N. Nelson. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988. 217 pp. $37.50/cloth. Reviewed by Sharon Werning, M.A. candidate, SAIS. Most scholarly inquiry into communist systems suffers from an elitist and hierarchical bias, asserts Daniel Nelson in Elite-Mass Relations in Communist Systems . This "top-down" approach results in part from the difficulty in obtaining data on mass behavior and political opinion in these societies. More important, however, have been the twin assumptions of party control and citizen quiescence. That communist parties seek to preserve central control has led many researchers to adopt "centralism" as their frame of scholarly reference. The field has been changing over the last two decades (and so, by the way, has the situation—notably in Poland and Hungary), but, in Nelson's opinion, a greater research emphasis on local politics and mass political behavior would still be fruitful. Nelson argues that a close examination of "political culture" in communist systems reveals a volatile and tenuous relationship between the citizenry and the Party. His goal is to establish guidelines for evaluating political culture by making better use of local data sources (which he contends are accessible and useful). Specifically, his objective is "to better know when, how, and to what extent those who are ruled by communist party regimes will challenge the legitimacy of party government, individual leaders, or socialism writ large— and when, how, and with what effect its leaders will respond." The goal is ambitious, and the reports are rather disappointing. Nelson makes some interesting observations, but does not present a systematic analysis of elite-mass relations. Rather, the book contains a section on elite-elite relations that does not quite fit with the author's objective. (Perhaps this is a result of the format of the book: a compilation of previously published articles— supposedly "modified," yet supported mainly with pre-1980 data.) The book's greatest shortcoming, however, lies in its confusing terminologies and vague generalizations across countries and time. Isolated data, particularly on Poland BOOK REVIEWS 277 and Romania, is used to support general statements about "all communist systems." By the book's conclusion, the guidelines Nelson promised for predicting "challenges to legitimacy" in communist systems remain amorphous and elusive. In the first section of the book, Nelson's discussion of local political institutions is based on the assumption that "the successes or failures of communist governments at local levels, where contact with the citizenry is most frequent and salient, will be a key determinant of the long-term prognosis for such systems ." He argues that communist systems face a unique dilemma: the MarxistLeninist principle of "democratic centralism" requires a façade of democracy, which is achieved through largely symbolic processes of election and consultation with the masses at local levels. Actual political power must be preserved for the party, which is served by "absolute subservience of lower levels to the commands of hierarchically superior units." In reality, Nelson argues, local organizations frequently challenge the center, especially in the presence of three variables: the local control of valued economic resources, ethnic identity, and/or historical cleavages. Nelson illustrates local "power accretion" by citing the economic resources in Silesia as the reason for Edward Gierek's ascendancy to a...