Mass Society and Political Movements: A New Formulation

Abstract

The theory of mass society is criticized for its consideration of the sole restraining effects of primary and secondary groupings and for its failure to recognize that these groupings can also remain neutral or exert mobilizing effects, that they have important communicating effects for the diffusion of a new movement, and that these effects are strongly affected by the presence of strains, a factor which is underestimated by mass theory. On the basis of these points, it is suggested that under severe strains, mobilizing and communicating effects will tend to predominate over restraining effects, at least in the early phases, and that integrated individuals and pluralist societies will be more prone to political movements than atomized people and mass societies. The theory of mass society is paradoxically sound only when there are no or few strains, that is, when the chances of a movement are slim to start with, or when the modes of participation in a movement, rather than the attraction to it, are considered.