Ortega y Gasset
Do you agree with Ortega’s claim that we are (as of 1929, when he wrote The Revolt of the Masses) living in what he calls a hyperdemocracy? Explain.
Who exactly is the “ mass man” according to Ortega? Do you agree with his assertion that “the mass crushes everything different, everything outstanding, excellent, individual, select, and choice”? Is Ortega just a petulant snob, or is he on to something? Explain.
Sample Solution
Ortega's claim that we are living in a hyperdemocracy is debatable. While it is true that more people than ever before have been granted access to the political decision-making process, much of this has been done at the expense of individual autonomy and freedom. In Ortega's view, democracy can be used to oppress as well as liberate, with the 'mass man' simply following popular opinion instead of engaging critically with issues.
The “mass man” according to Ortega was an individual who follows public opinion rather than thinking for themselves or engaging critically with ideas and events unfolding around them. He argued that such individuals tend to stifle diversity, viewing anything different from the accepted norm as inferior or unimportant. As a result, he asserted that this kind of mentality “crushes everything different”, leading to a homogenized culture where few creative ideas emerge outside of what is accepted by society at large.
It would be easy to dismiss Ortega's views as petulant snobbery; however, his words can also be interpreted in less cynical terms. It could be argued that he was warning against the danger posed by populism when not tempered by critical thought and rational debate. Readers may disagree about whether or not this danger exists in our current hyperdemocratic age; however there is no denying the importance placed on critical thinking and rationality in any healthy democracy. Those who do not engage critically or think for themselves are easily manipulated into supporting whatever policies their leaders promote - something which history has shown us often leads disastrous consequences for everyone involved (including those supposedly being liberated).
In conclusion then, it seems clear that Ortega's views cannot be dismissed so easily; while his warnings should not stop us from embracing greater democratic freedoms whenever possible, neither should we ignore the potential dangers which come with it if those same freedoms become too distorted by popular opinion and irrational mass thinking.