Mattias Desmet’s theory of Mass Formation Under Scrutiny

A critical analysis by David Hughes, Valerie Kyrie and Daniel Broudy

It did seem odd to me at the time that a relatively unknown psychologist, rehashing Hannah Arendt, Joost Meerloo, et al, and adapting for COVID, would so quickly rise to prominence. I checked out his Research Gate account and it didn’t look like this was his long-standing area of expertise. However, Mattias Desmet was everywhere, explaining how we are our own worst enemies because of “mass formation”. Curious still was the praise he was getting, being hailed as “one of the most sincere, thoughtful, and important intellectuals of the twenty-first century,” who “stands shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Arendt, Jung and Freud”. Maybe it was professional jealousy, or maybe something else that just didn’t sit right with me about such accolades. I have to admit that I didn’t buy his book, and my impressions were from reviews and interviews ( Harrison Koehli has done a great multi-part review/analysis here). So it was very enlightening to read this critical analysis on Unlimited Hangout.

The review is very long, but if you have the time I’d encourage you to read it, if you are interested. Hughes, Kyrie and Broudy go into some depth on the contrasting perspectives of Desmet’s mass formation thesis and one of a ruling class intent on replacing capitalism with technocracy through mass atrocity. Desmet’s thesis holds that

under societal conditions of free-floating anxiety, loneliness, meaninglessness and discontent, populations are ripe to believe stories that offer an object for their fear and anxiety. With a shared purpose, in a state of hypnotic fixation, populations fall into formation en masse, on a mission to annihilate the object of their collective angst.

This population neuroses and auto-oppressive impulse is in contrast to the mechanisms of atrocity. Mass atrocity, fueled by disingenuous official measures and official Science™ in the name of Covid-19 countermeasures, is a likely prime mover, as the authors point out. There remains a ‘mass psychosis’ but it is driven by a different causal mechanism than the innate ‘mass formation’ propensity Desmet proposes.

Simply put, under atrocity-generating conditions, society’s roles and relationships are perverted such that members of a society begin to march, en masse and in formation, into the abyss of their own destruction. Not “like flocking starlings”, as Desmet argues, but under instruction. As in any other shared societal struggle against a common enemy, the public mind must be effectively conditioned, regimented and, as Edward Bernays noted, universally and continuously occupied, “every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers” with optimal levels of fear and outrage so that the projected sacrifice of bodies will be judged as necessary and justified.

Now I have to say that I do agree with much of what Desmet says about the mechanistic world view of modernism and its dissociation with reality and dangers (I’ve written much about this, more recently here). And certainly what Arendt had to say in The Origins of Totalitarianism remains a classic for good reason and I appreciate Desmet highlighting her work to this generation (although you really do need to read it entirely and in context, not cherrypick to back a pet theory). But I feel what Hughes, Kyrie and Broudy have elucidated about the human condition and the current atrocity is enlightening. Actually, you will probably feel, as I did, that it’s confirming of what we intuitively understand about this whole situation. It just takes some effort to articulate it well, as these authors have done.

I won’t say anymore, as my intention is just to point you to the article.

https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/11/investigative-reports/covid-19-mass-formation-or-mass-atrocity/