The original paper is pretty interesting, and much more nuanced than Stross’s summary.
“Our claim is most controversial,and tenuous, regarding the idea of elite panic.We believe that elites panic just as non-elites do. Because the positions they occupy command the power to move resources, elite panic is more consequential than public panic.”
The paper overall references the fact that that historically, people in authority assume the public will panic, and most data suggests that they don’t. And ‘elites’ in this context means those in authority, not “rich and/or privileged people”.
They actually discus three possibilities: that
1) elites fear panic
2) elites cause panic
3) elites themselves panic
However, the paper certainly doesn’t suggest that ‘elites’ are somehow more prone to panic than the rest of society.
“Elites and Panic : more to fear than fear itself”
Clarke and Chess
“Our claim is most controversial,and tenuous, regarding the idea of elite panic.We believe that elites panic just as non-elites do. Because the positions they occupy command the power to move resources, elite panic is more consequential than public panic.”
The paper overall references the fact that that historically, people in authority assume the public will panic, and most data suggests that they don’t. And ‘elites’ in this context means those in authority, not “rich and/or privileged people”.
They actually discus three possibilities: that 1) elites fear panic 2) elites cause panic 3) elites themselves panic
However, the paper certainly doesn’t suggest that ‘elites’ are somehow more prone to panic than the rest of society.
“Elites and Panic : more to fear than fear itself” Clarke and Chess
Pdf at https://moscow.sci-hub.tw/2964/7c0b4f9dec1b897ad09a6565ffbfc...