Mass Formation:

The Societal Dis-ease We Should Really Be Worried About

Since I first shared my concerns and decided to take a public stand, my wish has been to bring to light the greater issue behind the stage of the pandemic, which I believe is a far larger and far more dangerous beast than the one everyone is so focused upon. After my controversial public announcement I received many, many messages of support and relieved thanks, but inevitably there were some hateful comments and messages too, from people who immediately labelled me as an ‘anti-vaxxer.’ 

I am not an ‘anti-vaxxer’ (and these types of messages, ironically, serve to prove the point I was trying to make.) I am a human being, a mother, who is gravely concerned about the behavioural dynamics I am witnessing, not just on the global scale of politics and governmental decisions, but within the daily interactions amongst family, friends, neighbours and colleagues.

Over the course of the last few months there have been particular essays and discussions which have greatly helped me in further refining my understanding of what I as a lay-person was instinctively able to observe early on in the course of the pandemic, and which came to a head for me in June of this year, after the triggering event of the violent and destructive riots in South Africa. The work of Charles Eisenstein, Julius Ruechel and Mark Wooding all contributed to helping me solidify a workable understanding of what had previously been a more amorphous fear and I will share links to these in a future email. Yesterday I listened to a podcast by Aubrey Marcus featuring Professor Mattias Desmet, a lecturer in psychoanalytic psychotherapy at Ghent University in Belgium, who lectures on and is writing a book about the theory of mass formation, and also has a master’s degree in statistics.

According to Desmet, mass formation is a 95% unconscious psychological process, both at the level of the masses, and at the level of the leaders of the masses. Mass formation arises when very specific conditions are met, the most central of which is that a large number of people must feel a lack of a social bond and feel isolated. Desmet concedes that even he was under the spell of mass formation and that’s why it took so long for him to identify it despite having lectured on it for years, and that those who are in it can by and large not see it for what it is, no matter how intelligent. These are the societal conditions required for mass formation to arise:

1. Loneliness / lack of social bond

2. Lack of purpose / a sense that life is meaningless

3. Free floating* anxiety and psychological discontent

4. Free floating* frustration and aggression

(*free floating meaning there is no one specific identifiable cause for these feelings)

I think we can all agree that these problems are endemically embedded in modern culture, and that we have all grappled with them at one or at many points in our lives. After the pandemic is over, and covid has faded into the collective memory, we will still face these issues, which will give rise to future mass formations, perhaps far worse than this one. Unless we address them.

If these four conditions are met, and a story is distributed through mass media indicating an object of anxiety and simultaneously providing a strategy to deal with this object of anxiety, all the free floating anxiety within society attaches itself to the provided object of anxiety and its narrative. There is a huge willingness to participate in the suggested strategy, no matter how illogical or absurd, because in this way people feel that they can control their anxiety. A sense of connection arises as the community rises to ‘fight the threat’ in an heroic struggle, which in turn provides individuals with the sense of purpose and meaning that has been missing in the banality of their lives. Sound familiar?

Mass formation can be likened to a form of mass hypnosis. This sudden intoxication of maximal social connection leads to a state of mind where people blindly follow the narrative, even when it is blatantly wrong, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, even if they lose everything that is important to them personally. Just as in hypnosis, attention is focused on a very small sliver of reality and people become unaware of everything that is occurring mentally and physically outside of this narrow field of focus.

Desmet goes on to describe the radical difference between a classical dictatorship and totalitarianism, the difference being the psychological processes at play. In a dictatorship, force and fear are used by one powerful individual (with supporting players) to subjugate the masses. In a totalitarian state it is the masses themselves who call for an extreme, harsh and eventually cruel leader, due to the hypnosis of the mass formation. In a dictatorship, if the dissident voices are silenced then usually the dictator will become milder because he realises that he needs the sympathy of the people. Conversely in a totalitarian state, the moment dissident voices are silenced is exactly when the regime starts to commit its most cruel atrocities. Desmet draws alarming parallels between what we are seeing playing out now and where the trajectory leads, and what occurred in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and the Witch Hunts. 

Desmet asserts that the most important step any of us can take right now is to speak out, and continue speaking out. So many of us fear the consequences of speaking out, of being that poppy growing taller than the rest. But according to what Desmet explains, it is the consequences of NOT speaking out that should terrify us. When there are no opposing factions, no dissident voices, the mass formation grows ever stronger. Usually only 30% of the population are truly hypnotised in a mass formation, with 30% being the opposition who are not hypnotised and want to speak out and do something, and a whopping 40% merely going along with the mainstream narrative because it is too difficult or too scary to do otherwise. If the people who want to speak out unify with one voice then it’s very probable that the 40% of fence-sitters will join them and switch factions, in which case the mass formation will be over. Desmet emphasises the power of the voice in winning over minds - whether through propaganda by the regime to maintain the hypnosis of mass formation, or through questioning and truth-speaking by the dissidents for the purpose of freeing people from the mental fog. Gustave Le Bon in the 19th century said that usually dissident voices do not have the power to wake up the masses, but when they continue to speak out the hypnosis becomes less deep and prevents the masses from committing atrocities. “It is not an option to not speak out,” Desmet sardonically laughs.

The larger a population the worse the processes of mass formation are, because it always needs new victims. It rises around an object of anxiety and that object needs to be destroyed. Therefore in a smaller population the mass formation will peter out more quickly whereas in a large population, once the object of anxiety has been destroyed, the focus may be transferred to a new object of anxiety so that the mass formation can continue in its delusion. All the free flowing anxiety and aggression that existed prior to the creation of the mass formation is now projected onto those who do not want to buy into the narrative. (We can see this happening currently as the object of anxiety is very alarmingly being transferred from the virus itself to the so-called ‘unvaccinated.’) 

Finally the masses will start to commit atrocities against members of the masses themselves. Totalitarianism {and mass formation} always is a monster who devours its own children, as said by Hannah Arendt, philosopher and Holocaust survivor.

At a certain point the totalitarian process causes mentacide - the degradation of all logic, intelligence and critical thinking. The masses become completely at the mercy of the suggestions of the regime, and the needs, rights and characteristics of the individual disappear as the collective becomes all-important. 

We are now facing a mass formation of the largest population (and therefore pool of potential victims) ever seen - a global population of almost 8 billion. We cannot afford to be silent. No matter how frightened we are, no matter how our voices shake. No matter if we do not have all the facts straight (how can anyone in this mess?) or we feel that we are not qualified to speak. No matter if we are for or against the vaccine - this conversation is not about the vaccine. If you are alarmed by what is happening psychologically, societally, it is your duty as a fellow human being to say something. And keep saying it.

As Aubrey points out, many are thinking that something like this could never happen today, these atrocities will never take place in our society. Do you genuinely believe that we have evolved so greatly in the last 80 years that history cannot repeat itself? Do you honestly think that the horrors committed in the name of religion or race, in this very day and age, in countries such as Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Afghanistan, cannot make their way to your door? 

These atrocities start with the seemingly small act of dehumanisation. Every time you slap a derogatory label on someone who has a differing opinion to you, you are fueling the flames of mass formation. Anti-vaxxer, conspiracy theorist, domestic terrorist, selfish… sheeple, blind idiots, elite reptilians, atheist science worshippers… both sides have their hateful terms that make the other seem less than - less than intelligent, less than caring, less than human. We turn them into The Enemy. I urge you to opt out of this narrative which only feeds the division and fear, which in turn fattens the monster threatening to overwhelm us all. Instead choosing to see that the vast majority of people do not have ill intentions and are only trying to do the best they can with the limited information, and the emotional capacity and maturity available to them. Does this mean we acquiesce or let it slide? Hell no… but we can approach others with compassion and a measure of understanding for their own fears, even while asserting our boundaries of bodily sovereignty and autonomy. 

The danger here lies in those who feel so threatened by the actions of the mass formation falling into their own delusion of a common enemy (the regime and supporters therefore) and a new, opposing mass formation is formed with its own equally absurd thoughts and strategies.

Desmet clarifies that, rather than an elite group of psychopaths who are out to kill us all, more likely is that we are dealing with megalomaniacs (might sound just as bad but this is an important distinction) who truly believe they are working in the best interests of humanity as a whole. It is through their own belief in the moral superiority of their actions, that they can justify even methods that harm or potentially kill individuals - as long as it benefits the final outcome for the collective.  (An example of this could be the devastating effects on mental health in adults and children and the shocking increase in anxiety, depression and suicide caused by the lockdown measures, which governments seem to pay no attention to.) Desmet believes that the technocrats and supporters of transhumanism genuinely think that more technocratic control and a new social system is the solution to society’s problems, when in fact it is this trend that has, since the industrial revolution, caused the decline of community, belonging and purpose which has created the fertile ground for mass formation. Desmet says that to try to solve the problem by implementing more of the causative element (mechanistic, reductive, transhumanist thinking) is delusional. Albert Einstein said that you cannot solve the problem with the same kind of thinking that caused it. Charles Eisenstein says that in the Myth of Control, the solution is always more control.

The logical AND soul-led solution (thinking that these are mutually exclusive is part of the problem) is to connect more with each other, spend less time using tech and more time immersing ourselves in nature and in real, in-person connection.

I find it very interesting that not only myself but many people of the same mind, have for some time now been spreading the message that we need to bring back community, and connect with nature. We may not have had the theoretical understanding of these psychological machinations, but intuitively, on a soul level, we know the answer to the problem. Perhaps you have felt it calling to you too. 

Aubrey and Desmet also discuss a mechanism of totalitarianism which was beautifully illustrated in one of Mark Wooding’s videos, which is ‘waves of terror.’ This is a psychological tactic whereby a threat is identified and propagandised, then some relief is given, followed by a ramping up of the fear, then another reprieve, and so on. The reason it is vitally important to be aware of this tactic to gain mental control over a population, is that once you understand how it works you can see it in action and thereby refrain from falling down the fear spiral. This is very pertinent in the happenings over the last two weeks, with the announcement (and subsequent knee-jerk reactions and mass hysteria) of the ‘Omicron variant,’ right before the much anticipated and needed December holidays, family time and celebrations, and on the watershed moment of mandates coming into effect in many countries in the new year, as well as children as young as 5 now being vaccinated.

Sacrifice is a central theme in the enactment of ritual, and ritual has always and still does (whether our modern cultures stripped of all ancestral practices want to admit to it or not) played a pivotal role in social bonding. The sacrifices demanded of us in the fight to obliterate the object of anxiety form a ritual which strengthens the sense of social bonding we have been craving. It is the very act of giving up our freedoms, our rights, our mental health and that of our children, our economic stability, our family time, our holiday celebrations, our gatherings with friends, physical contact, which causes us to feel that we have purpose and are contributing to the greater good. When really what we are doing is feeding the hungry beast of mass delusion. The more absurd, the more sacrifices asked, the better it serves as a ritual. Isn’t it tragically ironic that in our attempt to create social bond and connection, we are sacrificing real connection for a phantom thereof? For goddess’ sake - are we really doing away with hugs, with smiles, with kisses? Desmet points out that while some measures may truly be necessary, it is important to note that people’s willingness to follow orders is not a measure of the validity of the action. When mass formation has taken hold even illogical and pointless requests will be carried out with fervour. 

I can clearly remember that when the pandemic first arrived in South Africa, along with my own barely-controlled panic at witnessing this invisible threat that suddenly behaved like no previous virus ever had ravaging Italy, I had a sense of hopefulness, a renewed faith in humanity as I witnessed how we were coming together to “stay at home and curb the spread.” 

How proud I was of us! The Human Family: there is hope for us after all, I thought. We’ll come out of this better and stronger than ever! (I still believe this is possible, by the way.) I can now see how this phenomenon of social bond through mass fear and ritualised strategy played out in my own psyche. I gleefully played my part in following orders, sticking to full lockdown measures, proudly wearing a mask in public, which of course was only to go buy the absolute essentials. 

But within 3 weeks, with lockdown extended and many questions coming to the fore in the aftermath of the initial panic, the veil of delusion was thankfully broken for me. That doesn’t mean I suddenly had all the answers. Of course not, I still don’t and I don’t think anyone can claim to have them. 

The phenomenon of mass formation results in a vicious spiral, with society declining at an increasingly rapid pace, and always results in its own destruction. Desmet stresses this point - dictatorships can last for thousands of years (for example, the pharaohs of Ancient Egypt), whereas totalitarianism always self-destructs comparatively rapidly. Hannah Arendt in 1953 warned that although Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia had unravelled, this did not mean that the trend towards totalitarianism had ended. She said that very soon a new totalitarian state would emerge, and that it would be a world-wide system controlled not by mob leaders like Hitler and Stalin, but by bureaucrats and technocrats. It would be hard to argue that Arendt didn’t have a gifted foresight. 

In his hope-giving conclusion, Desmet asserts his belief that this global totalitarian order will be much more intrinsically self-destructive than even those of the 20th century, and that it will implode at an even more rapid pace. His advice to us? We have to try to survive outside of the system, in a parallel structure, and just wait until the system destroys itself. My personal recommendation would be that we establish these parallel structures or ‘islands of sanity’ as Charles Eisenstein calls them, focused not only on resistance to the mainstream narrative but more importantly on loving compassion, inclusivity, respect for life and respect for choice of beliefs - whether pertaining to religion/spirituality, or to one’s choice of medical and health care. Endemic to our chosen communities should be the understanding and recognition of our own egos, our biases, our fears, our desire to be right - none of which should be punished or denied, but graciously welcomed into the fold of what it means to be human, while consciously witnessing how all of these inform our automatic reactions so that we can choose to respond more thoughtfully. By bringing the shadow to the light, we mitigate its negative impact, always learning more about ourselves thought the process.

Aubrey closes with a quote by Carl Jung:

“It is not for nothing that our age cries out for the redeemer personality, for the one who can emancipate himself from the grip of the collective psychosis, save at least his own soul, who lights a beacon of hope for others, proclaiming that here is at least one man who has succeeded at extricating himself from the fatal identity in the group psyche.”

Obviously I am no expert in the field of psychology or the subject of mass formation. What I am is a human being who has been living through this experience, just like every other human being on the planet. I am an observer of life, and a writer. I am a mother, whose intuition has been sounding the alarm bells since the get-go. Due to my lack of scholastic expertise I do not always have the terminology nor the understanding to pinpoint exactly what it is that I’m trying to convey or what is niggling at my subconscious; and because I am human and, just like you, have a vested emotional and personal interest in the practical consequences of these psychological under currents, I have also fallen prey to the waves of thought forms, of division, of side-picking, of othering. I can only hope that my layman’s perspective can help make these conversations more tangible and relatable for you, and that through these conversations we can learn more about how to overcome the real virus, together. 

This essay was written by using direct quotes from Prof. Mattias Desmet’s interview on the Aubrey Marcus Podcast, as well as paraphrasing my understanding of what he explained, and drawing on my own experiences, thoughts and conclusions over the last (almost) two years. To hear it in Desmet’s own words please listen to the podcast here on Spotify or here on Apple - I highly recommend that everyone listen to this and share it with as many people as possible.