Mass publics hold more logical inconsistencies than political elites do.

Evidence

Whatever problems are posed for description by the diffuseness of the issue base of mass politics, the most important insights are to be gained from the fact that ideological constraints in belief systems decline with decreasing political information, which is to say that they are present among elites at the “top” of political systems, or subsystems and disappear rather rapidly as one moves “downward” into their mass clienteles. We see the importance of this fact in a number of standard phenomena of both routine and crisis politics. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1962 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

But they are grossly out-numbered, as they are in the active electorate. The general point is that the matrix of correlations for the elite sample is of the sort that would be appropriate for factor analysis, the statistical technique designed to reduce a number of correlated variables to a more limited set of organizing dimensions. The matrix representing the mass public, however, despite its realistic complement of ideologues, is exactly the type that textbooks advise against using for factor analysis on the simple grounds that through inspection it is clear that there is virtually nothing in the way of organization to be discovered. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1921 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Furthermore, if a legislator is noted for his insistence upon budget-balancing and taxcutting, we can predict with a fair degree of success that he will also tend to oppose expansion of government welfare activities. If, however, a voter becomes numbered within his sphere of influence by virtue of having cast a vote for him directly out of enthusiasm for his tax-cutting policies, we cannot predict that the voter is opposed as well to expansion of government welfare services. Indeed, if an empirical prediction is possible, it may run in an opposing direction, although the level of constraint is so feeble that any comment is trivial. Yet we know that many historical observations rest directly upon the assumption that constraint among idea-elements visible at an elite level is The nature of belief systems in mass publics 241 mirrored by the same lines of constraint in the belief systems of their less visible “supporters.” — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1861 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Elite ideological battles can pass almost unwitnessed by mass publics — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 1970; Affluent-proxy preferences understate the true gap between elites and ordinary citizens. — Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, Testing Theories of American Politics:…, 105; Mass ideology differs from the elite philosophical cornerstones that must be engaged. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1543 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• Ideological consistency declines sharply from elites to mass publics #corroborates (0.97) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1962
• Political elites hold ideologically organized beliefs while the mass public shows little constraint #corroborates (0.96) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1921
• Elite belief consistency does not extend to their voters #complicates (0.72) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1861