Mass formation meaning? Understanding the Mass Mindset

Mass Formation Psychology Meaning

Feb 15, 2023

Before we get to the topic, let’s examine the meaning of mass formation psychology.

Mass formation psychology studies examine how collective ideologies and group dynamics can shape individual behaviour and beliefs. While much of the research in this field has focused on the formation and maintenance of fascist regimes, the concept of mass formation psychology has broader implications for understanding how group dynamics influence people in various contexts.

However, it is essential to approach this topic with a critical eye. Some scholars have questioned the assumptions that underpin the study of mass formation psychology, including the idea that individuals within a group are automatically susceptible to conformity or that groupthink is inherently negative. By adopting a contrarian perspective, we can interrogate the assumptions and beliefs that underpin the study of mass formation psychology and develop a more nuanced and critical understanding of the factors that underlie collective behaviour.

Understanding Mass Formation Psychology in Fascism

The concept of mass formation psychology concerning Fascism is a complex and controversial topic that many scholars and thinkers have explored. Among the most influential are Nietzsche, Gentile, and Machiavelli.

The Will to Power: Nietzsche’s Influence on Fascist Thought

Nietzsche believed that Fascism was a product of the “will to power,” which drives human behaviour. However, a contrarian perspective challenges this view by highlighting that such an approach emphasizes the domination of the strong over the weak and can be seen as a justification for oppression and violence.

Critiquing the Will to Power: A Contrarian Perspective on Nietzsche

A contrarian approach questions Nietzsche’s notion of the “will to power” by pointing out that it can be interpreted as a justification for oppression and violence. Rather than emphasizing the domination of the strong over the weak, it is crucial to focus on empowering individuals and fostering a society that recognizes and respects individual rights and freedoms.

The Primacy of the State: Gentile’s Vision for Fascist Society

Gentile believed that the individual should submit to the will of the state to achieve a higher collective purpose. At the same time, Machiavelli argued that successful leadership required using any means necessary to maintain power.

Challenging Authoritarianism: A Contrarian View of Gentile’s Ideas

A contrarian approach questions Gentile’s notion of the importance of the state by pointing out that it prioritizes authoritarianism and the suppression of individual freedoms. In contrast, it is crucial to prioritize individual liberty and autonomy and empower individuals to participate actively in society.

The Ends Justify the Means: Machiavelli’s Influence on Fascist Leadership

Machiavelli’s idea that the ends justify the means can be seen as justifying any action, no matter how unethical.

Prioritizing Ethical Decision-Making: A Contrarian View of Machiavelli’s Ideas

A contrarian approach to Machiavelli’s ideas questions the notion that the end justifies the means and instead prioritizes ethical decision-making and moral integrity.

The Value of a Contrarian Perspective: Interrogating the Assumptions and Beliefs Underpinning Fascist Thought

By adopting a contrarian perspective, one can interrogate the assumptions and beliefs that underpin the mass formation psychology of Fascism. This approach entails challenging the notion that the state is the ultimate good and affirming the importance of individual liberty and autonomy. It also involves rejecting the idea that the end justifies the means and prioritizing ethical decision-making and moral integrity.

Developing a Nuanced and Critical Understanding of Mass Formation Psychology in Fascism

While the ideas of Nietzsche, Gentile, and Machiavelli have contributed to our understanding of the mass formation psychology of Fascism, a contrarian perspective allows us to question and challenge these ideas. By doing so, we can develop a more comprehensive and critical understanding of the factors contributing to this political ideology and work towards creating a society prioritising individual liberties, ethical decision-making, and moral integrity.

References

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper & Brothers.
Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S. (1956). When prophecy fails: A social and psychological study of a modern group that predicted the world’s destruction. Harper & Row.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin.
Kershaw, I. (1999). Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris. W. W. Norton & Company.
Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from Freedom. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioural study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378.
Arendt, H. (1951). The origins of totalitarianism. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Lipset, S. M., & Raab, E. (1978). The politics of unreason: Right-wing extremism in America, 1790-1970. University of Chicago Press.