Apologies in advance for a trip into philosophical musing, rather than current events…
As part of my effort to understand our current disaster of a government, and especially my understanding of the people who continue to support it, I’ve been re-reading an old classic: Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer,” which I hadn’t read since college. (A long time ago!) Hoffer addressed the phenomenon of mass movements, and the reasons for their appeal and emergence. Basically, he argued that attachment to such movements is due to a personal emptiness and an accompanying need to feel a part of something larger than the self.
As I read, I highlighted observations that seemed particularly relevant to our current time (somewhat challenging in a Kindle!), and especially relevant to the appeal of MAGA and White “Christian” nationalism.
Hoffer wrote that “the less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready is he to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.” In “The True Believer,” he frequently notes the religious character of mass movements and revolutions–writing that the hammer and sickle and the swastika “are in a class with the cross.”
Hoffer argued that people join mass movements to escape individual responsibility–that membership in a mass movement offers frustrated and/or unhappy folks a refuge from “the anxieties, barrenness and meaninglessness of an individual existence.” Belonging allows one to escape an “intolerable individual separateness” by immersion in and identification with a tribe of some sort.
Hoffer’s analysis points to one of the many ways we can “slice and dice” a population and explain otherwise mystifying political differences.
As regular readers of this blog know, I’m a “true believer” in civil liberties. I celebrate America’s Bill of Rights because it protects an individual autonomy I cherish–the right of each of us to live a life in accordance with our individual goals and beliefs, so long as we do not harm the person or property of others and so long as we recognize the equal rights of those who differ.
It took me a long time to recognize that for some people individual liberty and autonomy are terrifying, and recognizing the equal rights of those who are different is heresy.
When I was at the ACLU, I sometimes debated the folks–mostly academics– who argued against “too much” liberty and championed a point of view called “communitarianism.” Communitarians argued that social cohesion was more important than liberal individualism and the emphasis on civil liberties and civic equality that were an outgrowth of Enlightenment philosophy. Their position was that, since individuals are necessarily “embedded” in various groups and institutions, they need to conform to the overarching values of those groups in order to find meaning in their lives.
Obviously, there’s a mean between extremes–too much liberty is anarchy and too much community is communism. The Greeks were right to advocate a “golden mean.” (It is also obvious that what constitutes “too much” is a matter of opinion…)
How does this very abstract debate operate in American society?
Civil libertarians understand that some people disapprove of others, but we take the position that “If you don’t like gays, or Jews, or Muslims, or whoever, fine. Don’t hang out with them. Don’t invite them over for dinner. But don’t try to take away their rights. Live and let live is the American creed. Those who are intent upon elevating the beliefs of their religions or cultures–their “tribes”– will advocate for rules that impose their tribal beliefs on society at large, disadvantaging or even outlawing people of whom they disapprove.
If there is a middle ground, I’m having trouble envisioning it.
If Hoffer and others are right–if people who are frustrated with their lives and terrified of freedom and personal responsibility are prime targets for membership in intolerant mass movements–we need public officials who understand the need to address the causes of that frustration to the extent possible. We live in a time of dramatic, complex and unsettling technological and environmental change, much of which is beyond the ability of even a wise and competent government to ameliorate–and right now, we don’t have a wise or even minimally competent government.
But diverting public monies from wars of choice to measures improving the quality of life and a rational social safety net would be a start…
Great 🙂 Thanks Prof
Indeed, that would be a good start. It would also be good to stop threatening children with threats of eternal hellfire and damnation. If we want a healthy society, the goal should be to reduce fear, not exacerbate it.
Didn’t Plato argue for a Philosopher King?
Here are the ratings from the Happiness Index:
As of 2025 and 2026, Finland remains the global leader in overall national happiness, while Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, and China consistently report the highest levels of direct trust in their governing institutions.
Would those all be sorts of philosopher kings?
Many on this blog – and elsewhere – have posited that the grievances of the self-pitying white male has created this version of division, hate and bigotry all personified by Donald Trump and his exploitation of those grievances. That certainly fits the theme of this essay.
Yes, churches and schools have all contributed too. The seemingly righteous philosophy of teaching the absence of failure in schools does not prepare the individual for the inevitable frustrations of failing or not achieving their goals – real or imagined. The American Dream itself is today a fantasy as we see the oligarchs grabbing for all the money and destroying the opportunity for self-growth an self-worth enhancement among our citizens.
Those who lack self-introspection will rebel in some way to their frustrations of high expectations. No, Barney, the streets are not paved in gold.
I also read Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer” either in high school or college (also a long time ago). I remember naively thinking as I read it that Hoffer was describing people from “somewhere else”, and I felt fortunate to be living in the modern day U.S. Recently I ran across that old dust-gathering book on my shelves. I started to read it again and realized that it wasn’t going to be a casual read. I put it aside until I had time to really study it and take notes. Hoffer’s observations are just as relevant today as when the book was published in 1951; the book really hits home. It is aptly described by one book seller as “an old book for today’s mayhem”.
I just read a piece about a speech a reformed MAGA follower gave at a recent Democratic event, and the thing that struck me was he got involved in MAGA, because it was exciting, and something larger than himself. It gave him a sense of purpose and an instant community which allowed him to not have to think about his own problems. This seems to fit with a lot if the themes raised by “The True Believer”.
“Individual liberty and autonomy” is what I would call “Adulting” and I would say, Yes, it is hard, even to this day.
Thanks, my dad gave me HOFFER a zillion years ago, made me smile thinking of him. Now want to read it again. Great post.
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest…”
— John Adams, 1776
I also read Hoffer in college. I hadn’t thought about it in decades, but it came flooding back in the second paragraph of this post. What I think is that there’s something in each philosophy that has value. The difficulty is in determining which parts have value.. Individual liberty is great, but community is essential to society. We need to acknowledge community in order to let individuals lead a life worth living.
The hardest part is finding the right balance. Finland has done a great job of that. They have invested in good schools, good medical care, and good infrastructure.. They – and the rest of Europe – were forced to rebuild after WW II. They didn’t just rebuild, they also restored. They kept those things that represented their history.
The Japanese have a similar story in terms of infrastructure destroyed and rebuilt with care. They also have invested in education and healthcare in an Asian method that is more directed than the European model. They have a lot of people on a very small system of islands. What they have in common with Europe is concern for the welfare of every citizen. In the USA too many of us care only for our individual welfare. If you can’t keep up it’s because you aren’t worthy, in essence, the prosperity gospel.
Belonging to a group demands giving up personal freedom to conform. This is not totally beneficial. When the fruit of a person’s labor/output is taken over by authorities and used counter to the wellbeing of the individuals, the effect is destructive. It’s disincentive and wearing to even try.
Great blog today and I’ll ad Eric Hoffer’s book to my reading list.
Great post on one of my two favorite books dealing with this issue.
The other is Fromm’s “Escape from Freedom”. His thesis was, sadly, exemplified by a friend, an exceedingly intelligent women, lawyer, and social worker – an all around great person. She explained why she decided to become very religious. Modern life, she explained, has too many options, too many chances to make the wrong choice. Now, her religion tells her what to do and she doesn’t have to worry about being wrong. She no longer needed to think
I don’t have a problem with her choosing religion. To each their own. I just think her fear of freedom is a sad reason.