NOTING THE EXTREME MENTAL INFERIORITY OF CROWDS
A brief look at group psychology in November 2024 as per Gustave Le Bon.
NOTING THE EXTREME MENTAL INFERIORITY OF CROWDS
Now I was contemplating if I should just call my political writing quits,
Of my state of Montana we’re now only represented by Republicans,
Trump with all his insanity has apparently taken over here,
In the political autopsies I have had really little interest overall,
Nothing seems worthwhile in our Humpty Dumpty crash,
Given that the options are apparently tied to survival I continue on.
Trump harnessed the group stupidity that Le Bon so succinctly described,
However we might wish it to be different we realize that damage awaits,
Even though my patience for MAGA individuals is now shorter than short.
Enough self-imposed backbiting, it’s only a waste of time at this juncture,
Xenophobic group weakness exploited - oldest trick in the book,
The loss of the spirit of democracy - seems if it might have occurred,
Rationality is mostly gone, as Le Bon so accurately described,
Each one of these people in the MAGA group are useless to America,
Meshuga, looney, demented, so many words to fit this group psychology,
Every brainsick unfortunate, lost to decent society, it’s too hard to grieve.
Maybe this group’s psychology is more complicated than I think,
Each of the group organism has its complexities perhaps,
Nothing is more prone to regurgitation than trying to figure it out,
Trump and cabinet are Narcissistic Personality Disordered Psychopaths,
As I’ve learned - now how is this group psychology supposed to work,
Likely the results of this through time will not go too well for us.
Inferiority, substandardness in our nation, that’s where we’re headed,
Now I overheard an old man who stands for Trump but who questions,
For he questions Trump’s choices in cabinet after the fact,
Every second guess at this stage is only futile and is maddening,
Republicans who he supported long ago hit the skids and,
In his particular case he has only been asleep for years,
Of such people, of which of millions, can we stomach the conjecturing,
Reality is that he is not going to be singled out for his errant choice,
Is this old man going to learn anything by all this, I am only doubtful,
Trump group-think has bamboozled countless Americans by now,
Yet the wise sit only alone in their wisdom, trying to make the changes.
Of leadership which in a just world would have lost all credibility long ago,
Fortunately we have a few months to build our barricades.
Certainly we are social primates who interact naturally in destined ways,
Rightfully at times our crowds might be even heroic, Le Bon said,
Only more often than not this is not the case he claimed,
While I try to identify the foibles of my group, it’s mighty hard to see,
Due to the ambiguousness of an answer, I surmise it’s quiescent,
So this conundrum of group demeanor permeates our universe.
Charles-Marie Gustave Le Bon (7 May 1841 – 13 December 1931) was a leading French polymath whose areas of interest included anthropology, psychology, sociology, invention, medicine and physics. He is best known for his 1895 work The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind, which is considered one of the seminal works of crowd psychology.
I wished to consider some of Gustave Le Bon’s work further as I have found it rather fascinating. I have taken some of his writing from The Crowd, A Study of the Popular Mind and referenced America today after Trump and other Republican victories from the election this month. I was a little excited when I came across Le Bon’s work in a book from Sigmund Freud, who apparently stole much of it. I hope you get something from this all. I was challenged in my writing of this, I did the best I could to try and make it all applicable to today.
2. …that social organisms being ever whit as complicated as those of all beings, it is in no wise in our power to force them to undergo on a sudden far-reaching transformation.
The person who I think I am, as a rational scientific minded person, finds it hard to imagine any MAGA person as all that complicated. Undoubtedly I’ve hardened opinions of such people from years of observation. But perhaps it was mostly the extreme MAGA who were covered, and those a little less extravagance went under my radar. Personally I understand the collective group who voted for Trump as perhaps more complicated than the stereotypical MAGA in my mind. This primarily from the inexact prism of mostly Facebook posts from people who I thought I might know. At times I realized that I might not know them so well however. Regardless, there was no transformation in this group, despite my active measures by me personally to provide ample reasons for such transformations. I realized that dealing in rationality today is mostly errant with the Trump Republican. But I tried most certainly. Was I unwise in my approach? I am beginning to understand that I may have been and I only hardened resolve in the end. Perhaps I only amused them, if they read my posts at all.
3. … how it is that there is nothing more fatal to a people than the mania for great reforms.
There is a paradox with the Trump Republican. In that they honestly consider themselves conservative and in being such should doublily be unable to achieve great reforms. Change is not what real conservatives are known for. And they were trying to turn back the clock, perhaps taking extreme measures were needed in their minds? In the end they appear to enthusiastically approve of going full fascist. On every step toward extremism they have gladly followed. One can point to disinformation from right wing media as playing a role, yet the unquestioned march to full neo fascist tendencies is mostly bewildering to me. As far as great reforms announced by Democrats, there was little in scope outside of what had been used during past Democratic leadership. There is talk that they need to directly focus on the working class and that they failed to do so. I’ll leave it to others to find the answers. Unfortunately we are in a bind right now and it might be too little too late.
4. Men are ruled by ideas, sentiments and customs — matters which are the essence of ourselves. Institutions and laws are the outward manifestation of our character, the expressions of its needs. Being this outcome, institutions and laws cannot change this character.
Here I admit I am quite confused. I think that the extreme dysfunction of Trump and MAGA has presented very irrational ideas of what institutions and laws America has had. Despite their defense that they are only protecting tradition, it is readily apparent that either they don’t have a firm grasp on America or that they imagine some tradition which is merely their fantasy of actual American tradition based upon history. They insist on using their Phillips screwdriver on our straight notch screwdriver in our actual American traditions. And these people are actively trying to change institutions and laws to mold it into their ideals. The joining of their concept of Christianity into the government is but one glaring example. They insist they are returning to some mythical golden age of the American Christian Government which never existed. I’m still confused, perhaps Le Bon is off here, I’m unsure. As far as the more democratic socialist view for which I hold. There have been times in our history where great strides have been made. From the get-go the wealth class have been vehemently opposed to it, hence it can never be sustained in America. Their needs have trumped the needs of the majority. Consequently the institutions and laws of the wealthy overwhelmingly oppose those of the majority. We see this everyday, the latest being the inability to charge and convict Trump on crimes he clearly committed. And I have to say that I lost faith in America’s women in this last election. Certainly the rights to bodily autonomy, and the clear misogynist views of MAGA seemed not to bother way too many for whatever reason. In my opinion we cannot count on women any longer in our attempted efforts to advance. Many women seem fine with second class citizenship. I’m uncertain if this might change in the near future. I end by saying that I do not necessarily have a firm handle on this. Perhaps the reader might see it more clearly than in my muddled view? If so, let me know.
5. From the philosophical point of view these phenomena may have an absolute value; in practice they only have a relative value.
From Google AI: In philosophy, an "absolute value" refers to a value that is considered true or good regardless of context, circumstance, or individual perspective, while a "relative value" is a value that depends on the situation, comparison to other things, or individual viewpoint, meaning its worth can change depending on the context.
I guess in the case of cult followers all values are relative to that of the cult leader. Trump waivers so much that his views on a host of things are very fluid. Hence his followers will almost instantly adapt to his wishes without a thought. In many cases the followers have some delusional understanding of everything involved with Trump, convincing themselves that he makes sense when he doesn’t. Convincing themselves that he is highly intelligent and Harris is not, mostly because he said so. They only wish to blindly follow him. If the values that the Democratic Party follow are absolute or not I cannot readily answer. I am certain some views are relative as well with us. And in the wide tent which the Democratic Party always tries to erect, viewpoints are going to differ in a relative manner naturally across the broad swaths of the ideological spectrum present. I personally think it has been nearly impossible to continue with this effort and expect to win over a majority of voters.
6. It will be seen that the teachings of pure reason are very often contradictory to those of practical reason.
From Google AI: In philosophy, particularly within the framework of Immanuel Kant, "pure reason" refers to the ability to understand abstract concepts and truths without relying on sensory experiences, essentially focused on theoretical knowledge, while "practical reason" is the faculty of reasoning about what actions one ought to take, based on moral principles and determining what is "good" to do, essentially focused on practical application and decision-making; with "pure practical reason" signifying the ability to reason about morality without relying on empirical factors or personal desires. Reason aims at empirical truth; religion aims at divine truths. Thus no rivalry exists between them.
Well I included this because I thought in the end I could quickly understand it. I must admit that in my capacity as a lay person this is beyond me. I would have to guess that the practical reason of a MAGA Republican and myself might differ significantly. American moral principles are surely under attack among the MAGA contingent, and as to the pure reason in consideration of both opposing political sides, it would seem to me that it might not exist except in the mind of God. One would wish that all his thoughts were pure reason, but that can only be wishful thinking. This discussion is above my pay grade.
7. In certain cases there is more truth in the unreal than in the real.
From Google AI: In philosophy, "real" refers to something that actually exists and is considered to be part of objective reality, while "unreal" refers to something that does not exist in the physical world or is considered to be an illusion or a mental construct, often depending on the philosophical perspective being discussed.
From Google AI: In philosophy, truth is the property of a belief, thought, or statement that corresponds to facts or states what is the case. Truth is the goal of belief, and falsehood is a fault. Truth can be subjective to some degree, and beliefs that are considered true today may be considered false in the future. Truth can help people decide how to act by providing a standard to make sense of the world.
My engineering trained mind is having difficulty fully grasping this statement from Le Bon, to even extract an example from my mind. Upon further exploration into the philosophical definition of truth I understand that truth can be subjective to some degree, and beliefs that are considered true today may be considered false in the future. I cannot but state that many of the subjective truths of the MAGA movement will eventually drop to the wayside, and will be generally considered only falsehoods in time. One has no idea as to the potential damage done to America before that time. My hope is that it will be minimal and we can recover from it. With much of MAGA and the preposterous conspiracy theories they prescribe to, one cannot be but anxious on its effects until it is finely largely forgotten. Of climate change, for scientist and those who depend upon scientists man made climate change is an Objective truth: Truth that is absolute and independent of opinion, perception, or understanding. While a good many through their manipulation through time, man made climate change is a Subjective truth: Truth that is relative and dependent on the observer's perception. A lot of resources have gone into convincing so many of their perception that man made climate change is merely a falsehood. I suppose their belief that this phenomenon is only a hoax or made up could be termed as a subjective truth. It is not truly subjective (worthy of interpretation) to any degree in actuality but with money to sow skepticism here we are. What the future holds for this subject may only cause further disbelief in their belief to the knowledgeable.
8. The philosopher who studies social phenomena should bear in mind that side by side with their theoretical value they possess a practical value, and this latter, so far as evolution of civilization is concerned, is alone of importance.
Trying to pick an example to explore this statement, I have chosen the right to vote as any citizen with the qualifications to do so legally. The true idea of American democracy might strongly adhere to the value of the individual vote. The theoretical value may be the reference in our constitution. There is apparently not a constitutional right to vote per se. Yet if one was to ask almost anyone they would have to concede it as a theoretical value. Now voting in reality is only a practical value. The Republican Party has been playing games for umptween years to mess with this practical value. And every year they do more and more to impede our votes. This has been ongoing at all times. There are serious questions of if we may be able to legitimately vote again. And this indeed is alone of importance. I think this is a good example, but there may be better ones I could have used.
I found a good blog article on Le Bond from an American (I think) psychotherapist living and working in Paris. I included the article in its entirety as I found it quite fascinating. It all makes sense to me, perhaps to you as well? Note the Yellow Vest protests in France, in which Chapman wrote about in the article. I drew a comparison with our own Red Hats. Macron survived the yellow vests. At this time we’ve conceded to the red hats. And Harris was unable to overcome the red hats.
Cherry Chapman
@Cheriekiss
Psychotherapist and blogeur at cherrychapman.com, A Psychotherapist in Paris. Please check out my blog that I hope inspires, informs, enlightens and entertains.
A Psychotherapist in Paris
I can just see Gustave Le Bon peering out his apartment window at the angry violent crowds below. It was 1871 and the terrifying loud crowds of the Paris Commune were storming the streets of Paris like stark raving savages, ravaging hell-bent destruction.
If alive today, he would definitely experience a Deja Vue witnessing the Gilet Jaunes* sabotaging the Champs Elysees. Surely he would shake his head in despair, knowing that mankind hasn’t changed one iota. Hatred, prejudice and crowd violence are alive and well and on the rise.
[* On Saturday 17 November 2018, over a quarter of a million men and women wearing yellow jackets, or gilets jaunes, brought France to a standstill. They blocked access to roads and motorways across the country in protest at a fuel price rise that had left the trendy bike-riding city-dwellers who voted for Emmanuel Macron 18 months earlier largely unbothered. Who were the Yellow Vests? It is hard to establish a clear profile of the protestors. The movement was never a card-carrying organisation but, in the early days, a picture emerged of citizens in low-paid jobs or running small businesses who struggled to pay bills and felt they received little in return for their taxes.]
Today, through modern technology, there are other angry mobs of people being formed and indoctrinated into racial or religious hatred and coaxed into violence in a more powerful and anonymous fashion. The internet.
I thought it was well worth to revisit his theories of crowd psychology, as they are surprising as relevant today as before, perhaps even more so. I have embellished this post with some of my own insight and observations.
Gustave Le Bon is known as the father of crowd psychology in psychological circles, but unfortunately not to the public, thanks to Freud who harvested his theories and stole his thunder.
So who was this visionary? Gustave Le Bon was born in May 1841 in a small village southwest of Paris near Chartres. He was considered a polymath, who went on to become professionally proficient in several disciplines.
He first went to Medical school in Paris, but never practised medicine except in the military. He then became interested in the emerging field of psychology and later immersed in anthropology, sociology and even physics, for which he was nominated a Nobel Prize.
In 1895, he published the Psychologie des Foules(crowds). Although he noted that crowds could be good, even heroic, he felt they were more often given to barbarous acts of violence.
His theories on the stages of crowd indoctrination actually seem even more applicable to the rise of internet indoctrination and influencing the masses.
They are first, anonymity, then contagion, and lastly suggestibility. The internet has allowed total anonymity to a vast degree, where one can easily hide invisible behind a screen with a pseudo or even multiple pseudos.
Le Bon saw the crowd as taking on immense proportions of significance and power that far outweighed the individuals making up the crowds.
He so expertly said: “An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand amid other grains of sand, which the wind stirs up at will”.
He saw the crowd as being like a magnet. I feel it pulls in not only like-minded ones but those on the fringe or borderline of society in need of identification.
Belonging to a group is a fundamental need for human beings, who are social animals dependent on the validation of others.
Le Bon felt those who were not able to bear personal responsibility for individualistic thought, and actions could do so in a crowd.
Of course, the first group that we belong to is our family, which influenced our thoughts, perceptions of ourselves, and others from the time we are infants past adolescence for the better or the worst.
Our herd mentality develops easily within our families, especially if our parents are strongly opinionated and dominating. If we are unlucky enough to have parents such as these, we will be moulded to conform or pay the consequences of disobedience resulting in being disciplined, rejected and even abandoned.
I still hear some French refer to their families as my “tribu” or tribe. As a therapist, I am always confronted with dealing with the aftermath of family dynamics that patients experienced growing up.
Racial or religious prejudice propagated by our families can set up the psychological fragile individual to be drawn in very quickly to internet hate groups for several reasons.
The groups validate their family of origin prejudices and unlike our families allows anonymity and unbridled hatred to propagate, further offering contagion to others.
Anonymity leads to a loss in personal responsibility. It increases the individual’s sense of being invincible and practically invisible because he is so blended in within the group.
He knows that he will rarely be singled out for the wrongs committed by the group. This increases his sense of acting out his hatred with immunity.
Contagion can be much more easily carried out by the vast numbers reached by the internet than physical crowds ever could achieve due to geographical limitations.
These can take wildfire proportion within minutes. You have already witnessed the power of Twitter or Facebook to immediately amass thousands to a cause or to spread news, videos, etc, in lightning speed.
Recruiting others is accomplished by two things that meet basic human needs. Validation and belonging in an exclusive group. This enables them to feel needed and special, even privileged, like a sort of country club mentality if you will.
Suggestibility is easily accomplished by group leaders to incite and promulgate whatever action or direction the group leader wants to shape the crowd.
The leader takes on almost God-like proportions. He is idealized and his thoughts and ideologies are internalized, therefore replacing those of the individual who can often be willing to fight to protect their leader.
The group members are groomed to outdo each other, rewarded and sanctified by the leader with praise and upheld as examples to follow. Dissidents are shamed and can be expulsed.
The crowd takes on a “collective mind” that acts independently of the members making up the group, who can easily be hypnotized into being pawns and puppets.
Outsiders are seen as threatening and must be quickly dealt with by threats, bullying, denouncing and violence if needed.
“The masses have never thirsted after truth. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim”, wrote Le Bon.
All you have to do in look at some political rallies to see what Le Bon was talking about. Firing up a crowd with blaming opponents, anger-driven taunts, lies, half-truths, stirs up the basest of human emotions.
Le Bon wrote that: “…our savage, destructive instincts are the inheritance left dormant in all of us from the primitive ages. In the life of the isolated individual, it would be dangerous for him to gratify these instincts, while his absorption in an irresponsible crowd, in which in consequence he is assured of impunity, gives him entire liberty to follow them.”
The herd mentality then takes over. Personal reflection or reason ceases to exist, personal responsibility goes out the window and self-restraint that might ordinarily be in place if alone is extinguished by the fury of emotion.
Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Lenin all were said to have been influenced by Gustave Le Bon’s book, as several political leaders too.
“In crowds the foolish, ignorant, and envious persons are freed from the sense of their insignificance and powerlessness, and are possessed instead by the notion of brutal and temporary but immense strength.” Gustave Le Bon.
Racism, prejudice and violence starts in our hearts and it is up to us to do something about it. Those of us committed to a more peaceful and harmonious world, cannot allow our hearts to be filled with such poison.
It is up to us to individually and collectively to promote the ideology that each human being, regardless of race, religion, or nationality is deserving of our respect and to be treated with dignity and kindness.
So that ends my look at Le Bon for today. It might seem that he might appear to be a little more known today considering the scope of his work and its applicability with 2024 America. It seems that the bad guys, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Lenin were well aware of it. The took advantage of the reduced intellect in groups for their own purposes. I would venture to say that Putin probably studied it well. As for Trump, who knows. Yet, after about a year at this I finally discover his name by accident. Even after specifically researching the January 6, insurrectionists and their psychology I did not find a mention of Le Bon. I feel that the importance of this might be overlooked.
I will try to end this with some final thoughts in what I might have learned through this process with my pseudo-sonnet.
Consulting our Gods
There was this French polymath by the name Gustave Le Bon,
He recognized the craziness and impulsivity of mobs,
Like a cornfield assault from many raccoons after ripe corncobs,
But we’re dealing with different animals now - mostly greedy cons,
Narcissistic psychopaths a many - what trouble they hope to spawn,
To use our nickel to make themselves filthy rich they consider their jobs,
Can almost give up on climate change measures - will only rain cats and dogs,
But I suppose to cheer you up I’ll mention it’s always darker before the dawn.
I am not exactly feeling that hopeful for our next few years,
Though the ancient chaos maker might just eventually run out of steam,
His backup, who now stays well hidden, will he be the one activating our screams,
I guess we might as well keep our cool and don’t waste our tears,
We now have three rabid house cats by the tail,
Consulting our gods to plead for the country to please not fail.
So that is the best I could do. I find myself mostly in a sulking mood since the election. My level for intolerance for MAGA is very high. I’ve migrated over to Blue Sky hoping some weird billionaire won’t buy it. I guess I am still in the fight.
211th posting, November 19, 2025.