Vilfredo Pareto's Sociology : a Framework for Political Psychology

Vilfredo Pareto’s Sociology
40
upon observable human behaviour, also tried to evade questions concerning the 
ontology of underlying ‘biophysical’ components of personality which were at that 
time the preserve of early depth psychologists (e.g. Allport 1937, 39–43, 287–290).
Nonetheless, Pareto remained focused, as were the early biosocial theorists, 
upon trying to understand ‘personality traits’. His thinking might be summarised as 
follows. As Pareto tried to stress by his social system metaphor, individuals are acted 
upon by immensely complex constellations of forces, a logically complete account 
of which must involve recourse to the full range of sociological and psychological 
levels of explanation. These forces are constantly changing and are brought to bear 
in shifting combinations throughout the individual lifespan. However, Pareto felt 
this interplay could be reduced to manageable proportions for the purposes of very 
general, yet meaningful description, at least where aggregations of large social groups 
are concerned. His decision to classify behaviours as different kinds of residue may 
thus be understood as a concern with the outward manifestations of those enduring 
psychic structures by which groups of individuals who have undergone similar 
experiences have commonly learned to settle complex forces in order to bring some 
degree of consistency to their thoughts and behaviours. 
Like Fromm, Pareto envisioned a two way interaction between these personality 
traits and the environmental circumstances which influence them. Operationally, 
however, Pareto overemphasised the agency of his residues in shaping the 
environment (to reiterate, these were to provide the ‘synchronising forces’ which 
regulate the historical cycle) to the extent that he deemed it necessary to warn that it 
would be a misrepresentation to treat residues as ‘causes’ and corresponding social 
phenomena as ‘effects’ (e.g. Pareto 1935, §2414). Once we recognise this two way 
interaction, residues become descriptive, not just of personality traits which reflect 
the inner predispositions of those who hold control positions within the political and 
economic elites, but also of elite environments themselves. They specify, that is, 
how individuals need to behave if they are to succeed within the elites. 
It seems, therefore, that Pareto’s decision to downplay his use of the terms 
‘fox’ and ‘lion’ in favour of the ‘class I’ and ‘class II’ residues might in part be 
regarded as an effort to move beyond his earlier, overly simplistic biophysical 
assumptions about personality (which his earlier use of animal labels to describe 
human types implies) towards one which acknowledges its plasticity. Pareto’s 
changing terminology may reflect, that is, his dawning realisation that individuals 
can adapt to new situations to which they are not initially suited, and, much more 
significantly, that institutions may adapt to new situations without relying upon a 
substantial personnel circulation.
Lastly, a final point may confirm that Pareto’s theory of ‘residues’ is best thought 
of as an early, unsuccessful effort to grasp the idea of a personality trait. Pareto 
believed that a small number of residues will typically manifest themselves within 
a greater number of ideological ‘derivations’ (e.g. Pareto 1935, §2081–2088). So, 
for example, he thought that ideologies of pacifism, humanitarianism, socialism 
and democracy all reflect the same underlying ‘class I residues’ (the characteristics 
which he attributed to his foxes are once more clear). Ideologies which involve a 
thirst for political violence, religious theology, or assertions of the importance of 
specific customs and traditions or folk wisdoms, were all deemed to manifest the 

---

Pareto’s ‘Psychologistic’ Sociology
41
same underlying ‘class II residues’ (where the characteristics of the lions are once 
more apparent). The residues were, in fact, so called because they try to express 
the ‘common elements’ which are left when the changeable features of such varied 
ideologies are removed (e.g. Winch 1958, 104). More fully, they aim to be descriptive 
of different kinds of psychic terrain, where certain kinds of ideology will either 
flourish or find it hard to take root.
Pareto’s relationship between residue and derivation may thus be understood 
very simply as an early and unsatisfactory attempt to grasp a concept which is 
now common currency in psychological research. On replacing ‘residues’ with 
‘dimensions of personality’ and ‘derivations’ with ‘items from a psychometric scale’, 
it becomes clear that the discipline of psychometrics, which emerged in the early 
twentieth century, in particular within the London school, came to rely heavily upon 
an inferential procedure which Pareto sensed but did not pursue towards practical 
ends.
2.9  Conclusion: Pareto’s Political Sociology
Throughout much of chapter twelve of his ‘Treatise’, Pareto moved his focus from 
‘general sociology’ to a particular concern with the distribution of psychological 
characteristics throughout the ‘governing elites’ of western democracies. His 
thinking is neatly concentrated within the following passage which makes it clear 
that he viewed the distribution of psychological characteristics throughout political 
hierarchies as mirroring exactly the distribution of psychological characteristics 
between elites and non-elites:
In our political systems in the west political parties fall into two general classes, 1. Parties 
that alternate in governing a country, so that while one is in power the others stand in 
opposition. 2. Intransigent parties, parties of lost causes, that never get into power. The 
parties which never attain power are frequently more honest, but also more fanatical, 
more sectarian, than parties which do. In the parties that get into power, a first selection is 
made at election time. Barring exceptions – and they are few – a person cannot be elected 
Deputy unless he pays and is willing to grant, governmental favours. That makes a mesh 
which lets very few (honest politicians) get by. A second and more thorough-going sifting 
of the raw material takes place in the choice of Ministers. Ministerial candidates have to 
make promises to the Deputies and be able to assure them that they will look after them 
and their political followings. Rare gifts of acuteness and aptitude for combinations of 
every kind are absolutely necessary. Ministers have to look over the field of business 
with a discerning eye to discover subtle combinations of economic favouritism, neat 
ways of doing favours to banks and trusts, of engineering monopolies, manipulating 
tax assessments, and so on; and in other domains, influencing courts, distributing 
decorations, and the like, to the advantage of those on whom their continuance in power 
depends (Pareto 1935, §2268).
Two points are worth noting here. Firstly, this description, although aimed at ‘political 
systems in the west’, appears written with the Italian polity very firmly in mind. 
This must raise doubts over its more general applicability. Secondly, the personality 
theory which this chapter has begun to sketch out is very much in evidence. To 

---