The Barbarian Within

Ortega y Gasset’s Prophecy of a Civilization Devoured by Its Own Entitled Children

We live in an age of unprecedented access to comfort and information, yet we are haunted by a creeping sense of incompetence and chaos. Political discourse devolves into shouting matches, expertise is derided as elitism, and the complex machinery of civilization is treated like a birthright, not a fragile inheritance. Nearly a century ago, the Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset diagnosed this very sickness. In his terrifyingly prescient work, he warned of the rise of the ‘mass man’—a new kind of human who takes for granted the world he inhabits, demanding its fruits without understanding its roots, and in doing so, becomes a barbarian from within, ready to dismantle the very structures that sustain him.

José Ortega y Gasset’s 1930 treatise is a seminal philosophical critique of the rise of mass society in the early 20th century, highlighting the potential dangers of populism and the unqualified masses in democratic governance. Ortega’s central thesis posits that the “mass man”—an individual who feels entitled to the benefits of civilization without understanding the responsibilities required to sustain it—poses a significant threat to societal order and democratic institutions. The work has garnered attention for its prescient observations regarding the relationship between individual agency and the collective will of society, reflecting ongoing concerns about the efficacy of democracy when influenced by superficial understandings of governance and civic responsibility.

Prominent themes include the dichotomy between individualism and collectivism, the role of intellectualism in guiding public discourse, and the critique of state intervention that undermines personal autonomy. Ortega also warns against the rise of anti-intellectualism and the passive nature of the masses, advocating for a renewed commitment to critical engagement and informed dialogue in civic life. His reflections on the historical context of society further assert that individuals are shaped by their circumstances, calling for a more nuanced understanding of democratic participation that goes beyond mere majority rule. The book’s relevance extends to contemporary discussions surrounding the influence of social media and populist movements, making Ortega’s insights increasingly significant as societies grapple with the complexities of governance in the modern world.

The Historical Crucible: A World in Upheaval

The historical context of José Ortega y Gasset’s work is deeply rooted in the political and social upheavals of the early 20th century. This period was marked by significant events such as the rise of populism, the aftermath of World War I, and the broader democratization processes occurring across Europe and the Americas. Ortega’s work emerged as a reaction to these developments, as he grappled with the implications of a society increasingly shaped by the “mass man”—a term he used to describe individuals who, while benefiting from modern civilization, lacked a corresponding sense of responsibility or understanding of the efforts required to sustain it.

Ortega’s critique of mass society is particularly relevant against the backdrop of the Industrial Revolution, which he argued led to a dramatic increase in urban populations and a corresponding rise in the average individual’s sense of entitlement. He observed that the “mass man” perceived life as easy and plentiful, fostering a belief that he was inherently capable of governing and making decisions without the guidance of the traditional elite. This shift indicated a departure from previous societal structures where the average person was generally led by more knowledgeable figures.

The interwar years, particularly after the Spanish Civil War, contributed to Ortega’s reflections on the nature of democracy and governance. His concerns regarding the potential for the tyranny of the majority, wherein the rights of the minority could be overshadowed by the demands of the masses, echoed fears articulated by earlier thinkers like Alexis de Tocqueville. Ortega feared that such a dynamic could lead to a hyper-democracy, where the masses directly impose their will outside of established legal frameworks, thus threatening the stability of democratic institutions.

I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America. The majority has enclosed thought within a formidable circle. A writer is free inside that area, but woe to the man who goes beyond it.

Alexis de Tocqueville

Furthermore, Ortega’s declining health and his retreat to Argentina during these tumultuous times influenced his perspective, as he sought a form of neutrality amid the chaos of war and political strife. His observations on the “vulgaristocracy,” a new form of public discourse enabled by social media and a culture of instant gratification, suggest that the challenges he identified in the early 20th century have only intensified in the contemporary era. Thus, the historical context surrounding his work underscores Ortega’s enduring relevance as a thinker who critically examined the implications of mass society and the evolving nature of democracy.

The Core Diagnosis: Ortega’s Main Themes

Vital-Reason and Individualism

In “The Revolt of the Masses,” José Ortega y Gasset explores the tension between Vital-Reason and the emerging mass mentality. He asserts that the modern individual experiences a dichotomy between the lived experience of Vital-Reason, which emphasizes personal and subjective understanding, and a positivistic worldview that offers an idealistic, yet superficial, explanation of human reality. This foundational theme demonstrates how the mass man’s perception of existence often dismisses the complexity and contingency inherent in life.

The Mass Man

Ortega introduces the concept of the “mass man,” distinguishing him from the common man. The mass man is characterized by a sense of self-sufficiency and a belief in his inherent perfection, devoid of any compulsion to adhere to societal norms when they conflict with his self-interest. This individual perceives the benefits of civilization as his natural right, thus negating the intricate social interconnections that give rise to these benefits. In this way, Ortega critiques the potential dangers of a society governed by such individuals, who are driven by direct action and a lack of respect for opposing views.

The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.

Gustave Le Bon

The Role of Democracy

The author underscores the fragility of liberal democracies, positing that they often fall victim to chaos and the inability to govern effectively. Ortega argues that true leadership must come from the best among us—those who possess a broad education, intellectual humility, and the capacity for self-improvement. This idea challenges the notion that democracy can thrive solely on popular will, suggesting instead that a noble elite should guide society toward betterment.

Historical Context and Social Dynamics

Ortega’s philosophy emphasizes the historical context of society and individual identity. He argues that individuals are not isolated entities but rather products of their historical and social milieu. This perspective asserts that understanding human life requires a recognition of its historical dimensions, as individuals enter the world at specific times and places, shaped by the dynamics of their era.

Populism and Authoritarianism

Reflecting on contemporary political climates, Ortega’s warnings about the rise of authoritarianism resonate with modern audiences. He identifies a mass mentality that transcends class and education, fueled by the proliferation of social media and a culture of populism that can distort genuine democratic principles. By analyzing the past, particularly in the context of Spain’s chaotic Second Republic, Ortega’s insights into the vulnerabilities of democratic systems serve as a cautionary tale for the future.

Anatomy of the Collapse: Key Arguments

The Illusion of Nobility and Qualification

Ortega y Gasset critiques the notion of hereditary nobility, arguing that it represents a “mirrored light” of past achievements rather than authentic merit. He posits that true nobility should stem from individual accomplishments, where the son’s status is earned rather than inherited. This inversion, present in Chinese culture, suggests that the son ennobles the father through his own efforts, highlighting the dynamic nature of social status as dependent on merit rather than lineage.

The Role of the Masses in Society

A central theme in Ortega y Gasset’s analysis is the function of the masses within societal structures. He contends that the mass is inherently passive, requiring direction and organization from “superior minorities.” This perspective implies that mass individuals lack the capacity to act independently and must be guided to realize their potential. Such guidance is crucial in maintaining order and fostering progress within society.

Critique of State Intervention

Ortega y Gasset warns against the dangers of state intervention, suggesting that it often leads to the erosion of individual and group autonomy. He argues that the state’s expansion, particularly through an increased police force, signifies a shift towards authoritarianism that can stifle spontaneous social efforts. This shift threatens the very essence of human agency and the potential for individual contributions to society, positioning the state as an “anonymous machine” that acts in place of the populace.

The Dangers of Anti-Intellectualism

The author expresses concern over the rise of the “pseudo-intellectual” class, which he argues undermines genuine intellectual discourse. Ortega y Gasset claims that this phenomenon results in a cultural milieu where superficiality prevails, leading to a decline in meaningful discussion and the rejection of objective standards. He highlights that the mass rejects the obligation of dialogue and critical engagement, which are essential for the flourishing of ideas and democratic processes.

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’

Isaac Asimov

The Need for Reform

Despite his critique of the masses and the state, Ortega y Gasset emphasizes the necessity for reform rather than abolition of existing structures like parliaments. He argues that valid objections to traditional governance methods should lead to their improvement rather than their elimination.