Norms stabilizing into a combination do so because it works.

Evidence

It is the view of the Berkeley group that the components of the authoritarian syndrome hang together because they are a working system. If it is true that these components are the norms of an underprivileged subculture then I think the contribution of the Berkeley research is to show that this combination of norms makes a viable pattern for human personalities. Norms are not put together at random or incidentally. When they stabilize into a particular combination it must be because that is a combination that works for human personalities. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 637

Categorization

  • XREF: This is Rokeach’s functionalist point that clusters of traits are not ‘bundles’ but interdependent ‘systems’ — which complements social identity’s integrative account of why groups cohere around identity claims. Resonates with integrationist arguments the reader seeks. — connects to: Cooperative market norms can be stable equilibria even amid free-rider incentives — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 190; Norms work mainly through external sanctions, not internalized motivation — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 168; Norms are performed and inhabited, not merely consolidated or subverted. — Saba Mahmood, Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival…, 169
  • DEFINE: Distinguishes ‘bundle’ (traits incidentally co-occurring through common causes) from ‘system’ (traits interlocking functionally) — a definitional distinction that maps onto cohesion-vs-collapse in strategic identity theory.

Broader Connections