The relationship between political participation and support for the norms and institutions of democracy is a central question of democratic theory. Classical theorists of democracy such as Rousseau and J. S. Mill stressed the importance of participation as an agent of socialization-a training ground for the general public in the principles of democracy.' Contemporary scholars also have presumed that participation is relevant to the development of support for democratic norms.2 However, taking note of the relatively strong empirical correlation between education (and socioeconomic status more generally) and support for democratic norms, a so-called elitist school of democratic theory concluded that a high rate of participation by persons of low social status might threaten the stability of a democratic political system, since such individuals might be especially susceptible to the appeals of antidemocratic movements.3 The presumption was that among persons of low social status the experience of political participation would not be sufficient to counteract low support for democratic norms resulting from lack of education and the presence of authoritarian personality traits. Where the classical participatory theory implies a direct effect of participation on support for democratic norms that is independent of a person's level of education (or social status), the elitist argument implies an interaction between participation and education, such that low education will inhibit the learning of support for democratic norms as a result of participatory experiences, while high education will facilitate the socialization effect of participation. These theories thus imply two different models-additive and interactive--linking education, participation, and support for democratic norms.