"The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind" is a highly renowned book, to the extent that even if people haven't read it, many will pretend to have read it. There is much controversy surrounding its evaluation online. I will now discuss my opinion.
Firstly, let's talk about the shortcomings of this book:
-
Although it is generally considered a sociological work, it was written before the emergence of scientific methods in sociology, such as statistical surveys. The arguments presented in the book cannot be considered scientific, as they often rely on personal subjective judgments and anecdotal observations with one or two examples. The methods of sociology require systematic data collection and analysis to provide results based on data, rather than relying on subjective judgments.
-
The book is filled with absurd racist views and discrimination against women. It can be argued that this was common during the author's time, but it also indicates that this booklet, which is based on personal observations, should have become outdated.
-
The ideas presented in the book are not novel; they have been discussed by others before the author and have been further researched in a more rigorous manner after him.
However, the continuous popularity and attention given to this book indicate that it is not as simple as it seems. Since its publication in 1895, it has been reprinted at an average rate of less than one year per edition, reaching the 29th edition by 1921. It is still a bestseller in China today. If the book was poorly written, yet still remains popular and frequently mentioned, it further proves that the masses are just a crowd that interprets the text as they wish.
One viewpoint in China is that the Chinese title of the book is well chosen, as everyone can easily use it as a weapon to refer to a group they dislike as the "crowd." If the book were titled in its original French name, "Psychologie des Foules," it would not have attracted as much interest.
This may have some truth to it, but it also holds an irreplaceable position in academia. The propositions he expounded upon have been extensively analyzed by later generations. The success of this book, whether viewed positively or negatively, proves its value.
Looking at the historical background of its publication, the constant cycle of revolution and restoration in France, and the frequent changes in government, left people exhausted. The masses were like grass in the wind, constantly repeating the same patterns. The author, a doctor, was not much different from a witch doctor before the emergence of modern medicine in the West. He conducted amateur research in crowd psychology and expounded on social psychology emphasizing ethnic characteristics and racial superiority. Initially, he developed measurement methods for the physical characteristics of different races, and later developed a theory of racial classification. For example, he believed that Anglo-Saxons were intellectually superior to Latin people, and other ethnic groups and women were inferior.
Le Bon's ideas were destined to appear, even if he himself had never existed. It just so happened that at that time, he presented his concise, comprehensive, and assertive words. Interestingly, the love for assertive statements is also a characteristic he believes the masses blindly follow.
I think this might be due to the following reasons:
Firstly, the book's concise and assertive system of induction is in line with the reading habits of ordinary people, or what he calls the "crowd." As for the lack of evidence and the inability to stand alone, there have been countless examples in later generations that provide even more shocking evidence supporting certain points in the book.
More importantly, the book discusses a problem that we have not been able to solve: what is the public, the development of history, human progress, and what is democracy? Politicians often flatter the public with their words, but in reality, they either think that those who vote for others are fools or that those who vote for themselves are fools.
The author himself holds conservative views and has a deep fear of revolution and the masses. This is also true for conservatives like Burke and Lord Acton. Understanding the face of the masses goes beyond the ideological left or right. This understanding is not so easy and pleasant for many well-intentioned people. For example, Fromm's concept of "escape from freedom" and Arendt's notion of the "banality of evil." Ambitious left or right politicians flatter the masses while exploiting them, often with success. Nowadays, based on big data, similar to Cambridge Analytica, platform websites, or scam groups, one can accurately select a large audience for their own benefit.
As for the praise for the Anglo-Saxon people during their heyday, the success of conservatism was merely a historical coincidence. No one, whether it be the king, nobility, or emerging bourgeoisie, could overthrow each other, which protected the private property of the emerging bourgeoisie. Britain's development began with the steam revolution and the free trade of industrial products, which inevitably led to the rise of a large working class in industries such as textiles and coal. The industrial revolution and the rise of nationalism also inevitably gave the working class a voice, making Britain a typical representative of a bloated welfare system. However, without social welfare, who would buy industrial products? History pushes society forward, and we cannot reminisce about the golden age of the British Empire. The current British Parliament is more like a show where the public pays to watch spitting matches.
Times have changed, and now conservatism in various countries represents the voice of the disillusioned in globalization and technological progress. Just like the divided situation that the United States faces as it inherits the British Empire.
Due to the resurgence of Reagan-Thatcher conservatism, many right-wing intellectuals in China's previous generation were conservatives. However, since the cornerstone of conservatism is tradition and experience, what are they conserving? Therefore, we can see that many of them have taken strange development paths, such as Confucianism, Christianity, Austrian economics, and so on. Representative figures include Qiu Feng, Liu Junning, Li Zichang, and others, as well as some unnamed individuals whose ultimate paths are only filled with humor and sadness. (For those unfamiliar with Liu Junning, you can look up his sermons. They advocate for women to be submissive and bear many children. Similar to other representative figures like Wang Yi.)
Finally, let me share my viewpoint. Due to cultural and innate differences, there are significant variations among individuals. It is not possible to make generalizations. The most important factor is the influence of cultural atmosphere on the next generation. What we need to do is establish an open, diverse, respectful, and understanding cultural atmosphere, and move away from cultivating hatred and prejudice in closed cultural environments. Although humans have differences in endowment and capabilities, in an open environment, individuals can still exist as independent beings. Although human history, especially in the past century, has faced many challenges, ultimately, hatred has not been able to overpower love and tolerance. Significant progress has been made in areas such as racial equality, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights (the equal rights and freedom of the weak and minority groups are core issues in the fight for freedom, although this may not be so obvious, it is indeed true). As for the future, it is not something we can know.
There are many translations of this book, and I recommend the translation by Feng Keli. It includes an introduction by Feng Keli and an English version by Morton.