Elite ideological battles can pass almost unwitnessed by mass publics

Evidence

But it is hard to imagine that the ordinary nonsoutherner in 1855 would have had reason to be concerned about the plight of his “black brother” in a land several days’ journey away—certainly not reason sufficient to make any visible contribution to his political responses. Indeed, we are tempted to the heresy that there were very substantial portions of the nonsouthern population in that period who were only dimly aware that slavery or a controversy about it existed. … Quite clearly, there is no necessary connection between the noise, acrimony, or duration of an elite debate and the mass penetration of the controversy, however automatically the equation is made. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1970

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to strategic essentialism’s viability: whether an identity claim can be ‘held strategically’ depends on mass publics absorbing ideological frames at all — connects to the reader’s scrutiny of whether essentialist identity claims are an elite-generated counter-history that never reaches the base. — connects to: Ideological constraint declines sharply and non-elite publics hold disconnected idea clusters. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 1875; Ideological consistency declines sharply from elites to mass publics — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1962; Political elites hold ideologically organized beliefs while the mass public shows little constraint — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1921 (+6 more)
• SEED: Angle: ‘the heresy’ of doubting mass awareness of slavery/abolition, contrasted with the McCarthy-era data, argues that elite struggle over counter-history and essentialism is often invisible below the top strata — a caution for anyone theorizing collective strategic essentialism.

Broader Connections

• Most voters lack meaningful beliefs even on issues elites heatedly contest #corroborates (0.90) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1952
• Ideological consistency declines sharply from elites to mass publics #corroborates (0.85) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1962
• Political elites hold ideologically organized beliefs while the mass public shows little constraint #corroborates (0.85) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1921
• Inter-state nationalist wars are elite-driven and mobilize masses only after the fact #corroborates (0.85) — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 628
• Mass publics hold more logical inconsistencies than political elites do. #corroborates (0.80)
• Decades of spectacle and technocratic excess produced publics turning against their elites. #qualifies (0.72) — Anton Jäger, Hyperpolitics, 185
• Media access structurally favors elites against out-groups whose problems get defined for them #expands (0.70) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 851