Ideological labels inherit affect from associated symbols like busing, shaped by long-standing predispositions

Evidence

Springsteen is a phenomenon that can be read, with equal conviction, in at least two diametrically opposed ways. His audiences seem to be made up of people from five to fifty, busily reading him in different ways. The symbols are deeply American—populist in their ambiguity; he’s both in the White House and On The Road. In the 1960s you had to be one or the other. Springsteen is somehow both at the same time. That’s what I mean by fragmentation. — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 727 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Ideological labels move people through affect, not cognitive content — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1995; Evaluations of ideological labels rest on symbols more than issue positions; People label themselves ideologically via differing symbolic attachments, not a shared spectrum (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• Fragmented cultural symbols now hold diametrically opposed meanings simultaneously #complicates (0.75) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 727