I generally agree with the first answer, but I would take issue with a couple of the ideas in that answer.
First of all, pluralism does not argue that you need groups working with goals that are common to all of them. Pluralism envisions many different groups with different goals, all competing to influence policy.
Second, hyperpluralism (which I connect in my mind with Theodore Lowi's idea of interest group liberalism) does not argue that too many groups suppress the power of government. Instead, they expand the scope of government because government is trying to do more things so as to please more people. It is very much like the system we have now where the government has become huge and tends to work for the interest groups and not the common good.
So hyperpluralism says that too many interest groups mean that government is doing too much for too many groups and so we have an excessively large government.
Hyperpluralism is one theory of American democracy. Pluralism states that several groups with a common goal would influence a policy through planned and effective efforts. Hyperpluralism is basically the same theory with different perspective. While people who believe in pluralism is optimistic, hyperpluralism is a pessimistic and extreme. They believe the groups are too strong and they suppress the power of the government. In other words, hyperpluralists think too many cooks spoil the broth. The theory observes that policymakers try please every groups, and results with a policy that pleases no one and improves nothing.
A state in which many groups or factions are so strong that a government is unable to function
Definition of Hyperpluralism:
– Groups are so strong that government is weakened. Extreme, exaggerated form of pluralism.
– Subgovernments consist of a network of groups that exercise a great deal of control over specific policy areas.
– Interest groups have become too powerful as the government tries to serve every interest.
– The many subgovernments (iron triangles) aggravate the process.
– When the government tries to please all the groups, the policies become confusing and contradictory.
– With more interest groups getting involved, these subgovernments may be dissolving.
– A theory of government and politics contending that groups are so strong that government is weakened.
– Exaggerated / perverted form of pluralism
– Confusing / contradictory policies
– Gridlock- inability to act at all
A state in which many groups or factions are so strong that a government is unable to function.
Interest groups are so numerous and have such varied competing interests that coalitions are difficult to form, and thus no bills can garner enough votes in Congress to pass; policy gridlock results.