Jose Ortega y Gasset, the most famous Spanish philosopher of the 20th century, left behind a highly interesting body of work that touches on a wide range of topics that preoccupy the modern human. Born in 1883, he lived through all the important events that shaped the modern world, so his works represent an extremely fascinating chronicle of the problems and uncertainties of this tumultuous century.
His book The Revolt of the Masses, the most translated Spanish book of the 20th century, was published in 1930 in Madrid and immediately sparked heated reactions. It appeared in a very unstable historical moment, a period that still felt the consequences of the Great War (1914-1918), and the problems that led to the war remained unresolved. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, many felt that the specter of war was rising again. The Great Depression (1929-1932), which impoverished a large part of the population in Europe and the USA, was at its peak. The old world of liberal democracy and a growing economy collapsed. With the first shots fired in 1914, the world could no longer regain its stability or prosperity. Totalitarian regimes came to power in Italy, the USSR, and Germany, whose true nature was just beginning to emerge.
At this historical moment, a lull before the explosion of World War II, Ortega y Gasset attempts to analyze the man who has dominated the past few decades, and prophetically describes the kind of society such a man will create. He also explains the healthy foundations of society that the world was rapidly and decisively moving away from.
Historical circumstances
The historical circumstances that preceded this rebellion date back to the previous century. The second half of the 19th century brought unprecedented material progress and improvement in the standard of living to the peoples of the western hemisphere – from healthcare to education, from housing to travel and communication. In addition, stable liberal democracies, founded on universal suffrage and strong rule of law. elite, the programs of which voters could choose from, enabled security for both property and human life. The balance of power established among the leading European states was a guarantee of peace and prosperity, so until the outbreak of World War I in 1914, it seemed that the world was inexorably progressing towards a secure, brilliant future that would be increasingly humane and wealthy.
However, the balance of power was disrupted, the Great War broke out, and the amount of barbarism and bloodshed that followed revealed how thin the veneer of civilization was in a society that boasted of being the most advanced in the world. Old empires collapsed, such as the Austro-Hungarian, German, and Ottoman Empires, stable social orders were shattered, states became impoverished, and value systems were shaken to their core. In Russia, a Revolution began that took on capitalism, religion, and citizenship, toppling the fundamental pillars of the old society. The European was left disoriented and without guidance.
This was the world stage for one elite. a sociologija mase. Čovjek-masa je obilježen nedostatkom individualnosti i autentičnosti. On slijedi trendove i običaje bez ikakve kritičke svijesti. Njegova potreba za ispunjenjem dolazi izvana, kroz konzumerističke proizvode i medijsku manipulaciju. Njegovo ponašanje je impulzivno i površno, a njegove odluke su često iracionalne i nedoslijedne. Zbog nedostatka samosvijesti, on se lako manipulira i koristi u političke svrhe. Ortega y Gasset upozorava na opasnosti koje proizlaze iz širenja ovog fenomena i naglašava potrebu za kritičkim mišljenjem i očuvanjem individualne slobode. spoiled child.
This is a man without any special talents or competencies, an average person prone to small pleasures and a peaceful private life. Most people belong to this type and there is nothing wrong with that. Imagine a humble person who, wondering if he is talented at something, stands out from any crowd – only to discover that he doesn’t stand out in any way. This person will feel average and ordinary, untalented, but will not feel like a part of the “masses”.
Ortega defines the revolt of the masses as the phenomenon where such a person begins to reject any authority and stops obeying all higher instances, be it the government, religious institutions, moral code, or something else; when the masses as the majority stop listening to the minorities who previously led and guided them. The mass-man suddenly acts as if he knows best, has his own ideas, and has decided to focus his life on acquiring as much prosperity for himself and his loved ones as possible.
The masses on stage
The basic problem at that time is He sees one of the flaws of societies in the fact that large masses of people, who previously obediently occupied their place in society, suddenly burst onto the stage of cultural and political life. Under the influence of their reckless passions and emotions, the masses, left to their own devices and capable only of destruction and lynching, found themselves in the hands of demagogic leaders who abused their immense power. He says about the characteristics of the masses:
The masses are only interested in prosperity, and at the same time are unsympathetic to the causes of that prosperity. As they do not see the advantages of civilization as a miraculous invention and construction, which can only be maintained through great effort and attention, they believe that their role boils down to their resolute demand, as if it were their inherent rights.
An ordinary person will not believe It claims to be excellent, but an ordinary person will publish mediocrity or mediocrity itself as a right… He has very specific “ideas” about what is happening or must happen in the universe. Therefore, he has lost the ability to listen. Why would he listen when he already has all the answers within himself?… There is no question in public life where he, blind and deaf, does not impose his “opinion”.
A mass-man would be lost if he were to accept debate, he instinctively rejects the obligation to accept any objectively higher authority. Therefore, it has recently become fashionable in Europe to “interrupt the debate,” and every form of communal life that would imply obedience to objective rules is scorned, from conversation, to science, to parliament. This means that coexistence of culture, which is subject to norms, is rejected, and a barbaric life is returned to. All regular formalities are abolished, and what is desired is directly imposed, according to the principle of “direct action.”
Civilization is predominantly the will for communal life. If one does not care In the eyes of others, he is uncivilized and a barbarian. Barbarism is a tendency towards separation. Therefore, every barbaric era was a time of human isolation and fragmentation, where small, divided, and hostile groups arose.
Jose Ortega y Gasset was born on May 9, 1883, in Madrid. His father, Jose Ortega Munilla, and mother, Dolores Gasset Chinchilla, owned a publishing house and published newspapers, which had a strong influence on Ortega who published feuilletons and essays in newspapers throughout his life, and also edited the magazine Revista de Occidente. He began his education in a Jesuit college in Malaga and continued at the Instituto de Malaga, where he studied philosophy, literature, and law. He obtained his university degree in philosophy and literature from the Complutense University in Madrid, where he also earned his Ph.D. in philosophy in 1904. He spent time in Germany three times for further training, then considered the philosophical mecca, at the universities of Leipzig and Marburg, before becoming the head of the department in 1910. He taught metaphysics at his home university in Madrid. He traveled to Argentina several times, where he held highly attended lectures and left a profound impact with his philosophical thought. During the unrest at the University of Madrid in 1929, he supported the students and resigned from his position at the university. At that time, he held a legendary course titled “What is Philosophy?” in cinemas and theaters in Madrid. The attendance was incredible, citizens flocked to his philosophical lectures, fighting for tickets, which is a kind of historical curiosity. In 1931, he accepted a position as a representative of the province of León in the Constituent Assembly of the Second Spanish Republic, but quickly became disillusioned with politics and left it. Leaving Spain with the outbreak of the Civil War, he went to Paris and held a series of significant lectures throughout Europe, socializing with leading intellectuals. In mid-1939, he continued his exile in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and returned to Europe in 1942. ežu elite. Smatra da su elita odgovorna za stanje društva i da je njihova ravnodušnost i pasivnost dovela do negativnih promjena. On ističe da su elite dužne preuzeti odgovornost za svoje postupke i djelovati u korist čitavog društva. Također naglašava važnost obrazovanja i kulturnog razvoja, jer smatra da će samo obrazovane elite moći izvršiti svoju ulogu u društvu na pravi način. Ortegin pristup prema krivnji elita odražava se i u njegovom filozofskom pristupu, u kojem se zalagao za aktivnu ulogu pojedinca i njegovu odgovornost za društvo u kojem živi. The elite that have ceased to provide an example of a cultured and noble life, one dedicated to overcoming their own limitations and improving their own character. Due to the growing materialism, the then-leading minority began to devote themselves to industry, trade, and profit-making. An era of aristocratic decadence ensued, where they gave up leadership and left the masses to themselves.
A true aristocrat, a member of the creative minority, is someone who demands a lot from themselves and is never satisfied with what they have achieved. They willingly take on difficult tasks and are always searching for a place where they can best serve. The word “aristocracy” itself comes from the Greek words “aristos,” meaning “best,” and “krateo,” meaning “to rule,” so it refers to the rule of the best, the most capable.
For me, nobility is synonymous with a life spent in work, always set in a way that one must surpass oneself, transform from what one is now into what is presented as an obligation and demand.
Nobility is known for: t means known throughout the world, famous, standing out from the anonymous crowd. It implies an extraordinary effort that is the reason for fame. It corresponds, therefore, to noble, brave, and excellent… An excellent person, a member of the elite, is determined by the intimate need to independently address norms outside of oneself, superior ones, to whom they willingly submit themselves. Contrary to popular belief, it is the excellent person, not the mass, who lives in essential slavery. They do not like their life if it does not serve something transcendent. Therefore, they do not perceive the need to serve as oppression. It is a life full of discipline – a noble life. Nobility is defined by demands, by obligations, not by rights. Noblesse oblige (Nobility imposes obligations).
Creative life implies a regime of high hygiene, splendid decor, constant stimuli that provoke awareness of dignity. Creative life is energetic, and such a life is only possible in one of these two situations: either when a person rules or when they are in a world where someone whom we recognize as having all the rights rules. in that function…
Because the basic role of elites has always been, or had to be, to be an example.
Human life, by its own nature, must be directed towards something, glorious or humble endeavor, brilliant or ordinary destiny… Because to live means to have a specific task – to fulfill a duty – and if we avoid dedicating our life to something, we avoid it… Liberated from ourselves, every life remains left to itself, empty and has nothing to do. Egoism is a labyrinth… To live means to strive for something, to move towards a goal. The goal is not my journey, it is not my life; the goal is something I direct my life towards and therefore it is outside of it, far away. If I decide to selfishly move alone in my life, I will not progress, I will not get anywhere; I will spin and turn in the same place. That is a labyrinth, a path that brings nothing…
Ortega y Gasset mentions the noble life, a life of action and creation, as an ideal. Since only a few are capable of such demanding life, it is necessary for these minorities to govern in society. Without such creative minorities, the rest of society lacks orientation and a goal to strive for. Life turns into a barren, repetitive routine. For him, a healthy society is always aristocratic in its structure, meaning it must be governed by certain principles that enable the existence of power and those who are ruled by their consent and respect for a specific project implemented by the authorities.
By “power,” material wealth and physical force are not primarily implied. This stable and normal relationship among people called power never lies in force… Power is the normal implementation of authority and is always based on public opinion… even those who want to rule with janissaries depend on their opinion and the opinion that other inhabitants have of them… The truth is that power cannot be wielded with the help of janissaries. Ruling does not mean seizing power, but peacefully implementing it. Overall, ruling means sitting… Power means the supremacy of one opinion, or rather, spirit… As most people I don’t have an opinion… the spirit must have power… because without spiritual power, without a ruler, chaos reigns in humanity.
Ortega concludes that the European lacks a purpose, a mission that he should fulfill, to which he could dedicate his life and thus enrich it, pulling him out of the hypnotic routine of mass life.
He sees this project in the unification of the European cultural sphere, believing that the borders of nation-states have long been more of an obstacle than a guarantee of security. He fervently advocated the idea of a united Europe, considering it a project that the elite should orient themselves towards and a goal that they could lead the disoriented masses towards, giving them a sense of purpose and enterprise once again.
The Present and the Revolt of the Masses
When today, from a historical distance of eighty years, we read this work and consider its basic ideas, we notice that many thoughts can be applied to the present. The mass-man has prevailed in all states, and the ruling power that serves him is exactly as Ortega described. He described him as visionless, without a goal, trying to rule from day to day by satisfying the interests of the masses. Over time, the masses stopped believing in strong dictators (they brought Lenin, Mussolini, and Hitler to power during a period when they began to take on a leading role on the world stage) – they now prefer those who promise them material wealth and great rights, without calling for duty and obligations towards the community. The differences between those who rule and those who are ruled no longer exist.
Although this work is predominantly sociological in its theme, we can still notice that the solution to this gray situation lies within the individual themselves. Ortega presents the reader with the structure and psychology of the mass-man in order to warn them of the danger of surrendering to the powerful process that transforms them into such a person. Since he has always had a strong desire for improving society and communal life, Ortega believed that the emancipation of the individual, their acceptance of the ideal of a noble life, is the key to a better world. That.