Lippmann–Ortega: On the role of elites in a democracy

Abstract

The aim of this article is to contrast the understanding of elites by José Ortega y Gasset and Walter Lippmann. Although they both agreed in not seeing a conflict between elitism and democracy, they differed in three aspects. First, while for Lippmann the elites are the insiders, those who have privileged access to political information, for Ortega the elites are a phenomenon that has more to do with the moral and the psychological (those ‘egregious men’ who make an effort, who do not get carried away) and are not limited to the political sphere, but include other fields, such as culture or the arts. Second, they also differ in their conception of public opinion: whereas for Lippmann public opinion is the images that outsiders form from the stereotypes created by insiders, for Ortega public opinion is that which is held by everyone and by no one in particular, the well-known, the taken-for-granted. The third difference refers to the relationship between insiders and outsiders: while Lippmann fears the separation between pundits and the passive mass audience, the relationship between Ortega’s ‘egregious men’ and the ‘mass-men’ must be dynamic: the first must lead well, by example, the second must let themselves be guided.