When a generally valued discourse is unwelcome: the case of belief in a general expression by a (fictitious) member of the finance elite

Abstract

We aim to show that an idea that is generally valued (“just world”) when expressed by ordinary people becomes paradoxically a sign of immorality when expressed by the finance elite. Participants from Portugal and Spain read the fictitious case (inspired by real events) of “George M.”, a stereotypical member of the finance elite. Participants randomly read that the target had expressed the idea that the world is fair or unfair to people in general. Then, they indicated how immoral the target was and how much they wished him various outcomes. Comparing the target who expressed “the world is not just”, the one who expressed “the world is just” was judged as more immoral. Higher immoral judgements predicted higher wishes of negative outcomes. These results advise the elite against using moralizing discourses, which are likely to backfire