Crowd Psychology: How Civilizations Rise and Fall?
Crowd Psychology: Its Influence on the Trajectory of Civilizations
Before we begin, share your predictions in the comments section. And to ensure you stay informed about every episode of this series, don’t forget to subscribe to the channel.
Gustave Le Bon… a name that resonates within the field of psychology, particularly when examining crowd psychology. In his seminal work, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” published in 1895, Le Bon established the foundation for understanding how the individual dissolves into the collective, relinquishing their individual identity to merge into what he termed the collective mind.
Picture a public square teeming with people, each with their own thoughts and beliefs. However, as soon as an individual becomes part of this dense human fabric, a transformation begins to emerge. The sense of individual responsibility gradually diminishes, replaced by a feeling of anonymity and obscurity, as if the individual has become an invisible entity in this turbulent sea of faces. This is precisely the anonymity that Le Bon so accurately described.
Another phenomenon of equal importance is mental contagion, the astonishing speed with which emotions and ideas spread among crowds. Imagine a spark igniting a pile of dry straw, spreading with lightning speed to ignite everyone with the same enthusiasm or unbridled anger. This contagion often leads to irrational behaviors, driven by primal, instinctive emotions rather than balanced, rational thinking, in addition to the inherent suggestibility of crowds. Crowds, as Le Bon observed, are naturally inclined to simplify matters and accept extreme ideas without scrutiny, especially if presented by a leader with the power of suggestion.
The power of suggestion, which Le Bon frequently discussed, has always been the catalyst for the rise of empires. Consider the Mongol Empire, which emerged in 1206. Genghis Khan, who united the warring nomadic tribes under the banner of absolute loyalty, was not merely a military leader, but a skilled psychological strategist. His address to the Kurultai, his declaration of his divine right to rule the world, was not just fleeting rhetoric, but a seed that planted a deep sense of shared destiny in the hearts of his soldiers. That unity, and that unwavering faith, transformed into an invincible force. The siege of Baghdad in 1258, and the execution of Caliph Al-Musta’sim Billah, was not merely a military victory, but a shock that shook the foundations of the Islamic world, and cemented in minds the image of the Mongols as an unparalleled power. Fear, as we know, is a potent tool in consolidating power.
This influence was not limited to the Mongols alone. The Roman Empire, when Constantine converted to Christianity in 313 AD, transformed religion into a tool for unification, leading to a widespread collective religious conversion. Prior to them, Carthage used national slogans and religious celebrations to rally popular support against Rome during the Punic Wars. In 1066, William the Conqueror inspired his army to invade England, asserting his legitimate right to the throne, forever changing the map of English history in the decisive Battle of Hastings. Napoleon Bonaparte, in turn, exploited propaganda and national fervor to boost the morale of his soldiers and achieve sweeping victories in Europe.
With every victory looms the specter of potential defeat. After Napoleon unified France, sweeping across Europe, the country succumbed to a collective delusion of grandeur, oblivious to the harsh realities that began to emerge as an ominous warning. Here, collective hallucination begins, where enthusiasm exceeds the bounds of sound logic. In his book “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” Gustave Le Bon explains how every feeling and every action in the crowd tends to be contagious, and how the individual readily sacrifices their personal interest for the sake of a fictitious collective interest. This dangerous abandonment of individual logic is the gateway through which disasters enter the heart of society.
Consider the dancing mania that swept Strasbourg in 1518, where hundreds danced to their deaths, or the Salem witch trials, where innocent lives were taken based on flimsy, unfounded accusations. These are not merely isolated incidents, but disturbing symptoms of a deeper malady: the loss of collective reason. Even in modern times, we see this phenomenon embodied in the Flat Earth movement, or in the devastating impact of misinformation that distorts the memory of witnesses, or in the phenomenon of moral panic that creates exaggerated and unjustified fear. These are not just bizarre ideas, but latent forces that can erode societies from within. How many civilizations began with lofty ideals, then plunged into the abyss of madness, demonstrating the fragility of the collective mind.
Now, let’s delve into how internal divisions, like cracks that appear in a great edifice, can undermine authority and unleash chaos. In 1793, France witnessed the execution of Louis XVI, a pivotal moment that was not merely the end of a monarchy, but a tearing of the social fabric itself. During the Reign of Terror that followed, the guillotine was not only taking lives, but severing the bonds of trust and cohesion, as thousands perished in a frenzied spiral of fear and lawlessness. Beyond France, this disintegration echoes in the Bosnian War, where ethnic and religious divisions turned into a bloodbath, leaving millions dead and displaced. Or in ancient Rome, when internal conflicts opened the door for the Visigoths to sack the city, revealing the empire’s weakness and the erosion of its prestige. Even in the Haitian Revolution, we see how collective rebellion against injustice can overthrow authority, but it may open the door to rampant chaos. Likewise in China, where internal conflicts during the Ming Dynasty weakened the central government and made it easy prey for the Manchu invasion. Or in Russia, where internal divisions and popular discontent led to the October Revolution, which changed the face of the country forever.
These events are not merely fleeting chapters from history books, but stark, resounding warnings. They clearly demonstrate how internal divisions, when exacerbated by the dynamics of crowd psychology, can undermine the pillars of power and unleash devastating chaos, paving the way for the fall of civilizations.
Thus, as thrones teeter and empires fall, the question remains: are these merely historical coincidences, or is there a deeper pattern that resonates through the ages? And can crowd psychology provide us with a new perspective on understanding these recurring cycles?
Let’s consider Rome, the Eternal City. In its later days, external invasion was not the sole cause of its fall, but internal decay, loss of discipline, and rampant rioting. The Year of the Six Emperors was not merely a power struggle, but an embodiment of the tearing of the social fabric, where the masses lost faith in their leaders and succumbed to chaos. Then let’s compare that to Florence in the Renaissance, where popular leaders like Savonarola rose to power, exploiting the enthusiasm of the masses, before becoming victims of that enthusiasm themselves. Or let’s look at the Mughal Empire in India. After Aurangzeb, it was not external expansion that weakened it, but internal revolts that led to its fragmentation. Even the Classic Maya civilization, with its abandoned cities and buried secrets, may have witnessed internal conflicts that contributed to its collapse. These are not merely separate tales, but echoes of a single, interconnected pattern.
Crowds do not think, they accept everything. These words of Gustave Le Bon resonate throughout history. Could the rise and fall of civilizations be merely a manifestation of this dynamic? Are we doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past, or can our understanding of crowd psychology empower us to break this endless cycle?
But do Le Bon’s words represent the absolute truth? Can history, with its immense complexities, really be reduced to this singular view? Le Bon himself was not immune to criticism. His sweeping generalizations about the collective mind profoundly ignored the nuances of human behavior, as if we were facing a homogenous mass devoid of differentiation.
Even Freud, in his book “Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego,” pointed out that Le Bon did not adequately address the complex relationship between the leader and the audience. Is the leader merely a driver of crowds, or is there a much deeper interaction? Are crowds merely passive recipients, or do they actively participate in decision-making? Historians, for their part, argue that Le Bon’s focus on the low rationality of crowds overlooks their ability to think critically and self-organize, which was clearly manifested in revolutions throughout history. Can we reduce the French Revolution, with all its ideals and aspirations, to merely an expression of a base collective mind? Sociologist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann criticized Le Bon for his assumptions about the overwhelming influence of the media on the masses, which led to the development of the spiral of silence theory. Is the media really capable of shaping our collective consciousness so easily? Is there no resistance? There are those who believe that Le Bon was influenced by his class biases, as he portrayed crowds as a threat to the existing social order, as if they were a destructive force that cannot be tamed. Was Le Bon viewing crowds as merely a danger to be suppressed, or was he seeking to understand the dynamics of power inherent in society?
Modern studies in social psychology confirm that crowd behavior is influenced by multiple factors, including social identity and the surrounding social context. Alternative theories have emerged, such as social identity theory, which explains crowd behavior through group cohesion and shared goals, not merely the loss of individuality. Could our understanding of collective identity be the real key to understanding the rise and fall of civilizations?
Today, these dynamics are embodied in the growing digital crowds. Is history repeating itself in cyberspace? In 2010, Nicholas Christ
About The Author
