1987 Constructing Institutions rationalized by a sacrificial ethic:the the form and extent of manipulation vary. parts are supposed to sacrifice for the Apathetic cultures are manipulated;fatal- whole. ists live by rules others make and impose Committed to a life of purely voluntary upon them.Manipulation is built into association,those from egalitarian cul- hierarchies;orders come down and obedi- tures reject authority.They can live a life ence presumably flows up.The evocative without coercion or authority only by language of New Guinea anthropology greater equality of condition.Thus egali- (the "big men"versus the "rubbish men") tarians may be expected to prefer reduc- expresses the growth of manipulation in tion of differences-between races,or market cultures as some people cease to income levels,or men and women, possess the resources to regulate their own parents and children,teachers and stu- lives.Egalitarians try to manipulate the dents,authorities and citizens. other cultures by incessant criticism;they An apathetic culture arises when people coerce one another by attributing in- cannot control what happens to them. equalities to corruption and duplicity.s Because their boundaries are porous but To identify with,to become part of a the prescriptions imposed on them are culture,signifies exactly that:the un- severe,they develop fatalistic feelings: viable void of formlessness-where every- what will be,will be.There is no point in thing and therefore nothing is posible-is their having preferences on public policy replaced by social constraint.Even so, because what they prefer would not,in individuals keep testing the constraints, any event,matter. reinforcing them if they prove satisfactory But none of these modes of organizing in practice,modifying or rejecting them, social life is viable on its own.A com- when possible,if unsatisfactory.It is indi- petitive culture needs something-the viduals as social creatures,not only being laws of contract-to be above negotiat- molded by but actively molding their ing;hierarchies need something-anar- social context-shaping the maze as well chic individualists,authority-less egali- as running it-that are the focus of cul- tarians,apathetic fatalists-to sit on top tural theory. of;egalitarians need something-unfair Suppose a new development occurs. competition,inequitable hierarchy,non- Without knowing much about it,those participant fatalists-to criticize;fatalists who identify with each particular way of require an external source of control to life can guess whether its effect is to tell them what to do."What a wonderful increase or decrease social distinctions, place the world would be,"say the adher- impose,avoid,or reject authority- ents of each culture,"if only everyone guesses made more definitive by observ- were like us,"conveniently ignoring that ing what like-minded individuals do.Of it is only the presence in the world of peo- course,people may be,and often are, ple who are not like them that enables mistaken.To seek is not necessarily to them to be the way they are.Hence,cul- find a culturally rational course of action. tural theory may be distinguished by a Gramsci's would-be capitalists may try to necessity theorem:conflict among cul- establish hegemony over others,but they tures is a precondition of cultural identity. are often mistaken about which ideas and It is the differences and distances from actions will in fact support their way of others that define one's own cultural life.They may,for instance,use govern- identity. mental regulation to institute a pattern of Alone,no one has power over anyone. cumulative inequalities that convert Power is a social phenomenon;power, market arrangements into state capital- therefore,is constituted by culture.But ism,leading to their ultimate subordina-
American Political Science Review Vol.81 tion.To be culturally rational by bolster- people's political behavior.If these ing one's way of life is the intention,not criteria are incorrectly or insufficiently necessarily the accomplishment. specified,they will make people's If social life is the midwife of political opinions unrelated where another set of preferences,how do people get from cul- criteria would make them more consis- ture to preferences?Perhaps politics is too tent.When there is a question as to complicated to allow many people to whether it is the people who do not under- figure out what they prefer. stand what they are doing or we social scientists who do not understand the peo- "Preferences Need No ple,I am inclined to think that we have Inferences" fallen down.All of us in social science are looking for bedrock,for the most basic An obstacle to the development of a value and factual premises that we can theory of political preference formation is hypothesize as lying behind specific polit- the view,dominant in psychology until ical and policy preferences.My claim is recently,that cognition must precede that this foundation lies in social relation- affect.For if "preferences are formed and ships,roughly as categorized by political expressed only after and only as a result cultures. of considerable cognitive activity" foundation lies in social relationships, (Zajonc 1980,154),then it would indeed roughly as categorized by political be difficult to explain how most people, cultures. including many who engage only in How does the social filter enable people minimal cognitive activity,at least in who possess only inches of facts to gen- regard to politics,come to have so many erate miles of preferences?What is it preferences.If,however,one goes along about cultures that makes them the kind with Zajonc and the considerable litera- of theories that ordinary folk can use to ture he cites"that to arouse affect,objects figure out their preferences?The ability of need to be cognized very little-in fact people to know what they prefer without minimally"(p.154),more promising knowing much else lies at the crux of theoretical avenues open up.Preferences, understanding preference formation.Cul- Zajonc continues,"must be constituted of ture codes can be unlocked,I maintain, interactions between some gross object because its keys are social.By figuring out features and internal states of the indi- their master preferences,as it were-who vidual"(p.159).But how,we may ask, they are and are not,to what groups they do preferences get from object features to do and do not belong-they can readily internal states? figure out the rest.A basic reason people The cultural hypothesis is that indi- are able to develop so many preferences is viduals exert control over each other by that they actually do not have to work all institutionalizing the moral judgments that hard.A few positive and negative justifying their interpersonal relationships associations go a long way. so they can be acted upon and accounted It is no more necessary for a person to for.The prevailing view is that the inter- verbalize about culture than it is neces- relatedness among attitudes in the mass sary to know the rules of grammar in public is low,that is,people are inconsis- order to speak.The stock phrases "one of tent.Now,criteria of consistency express- us"versus "one of them"goes a long way. ing what ought to be related to what are Preferences might come from insight into not found in nature but,like the cate- general principles,but,because meanings gories of culture I am expounding,are have to be shared,ideologues and theo- imposed in an effort to make sense out of rists often discover that their views are 8