be read in dialogue with similar attemptsacross Europe to theorize the modern
massesinthe ageofrevolutions, from GabrielTarde’swritings on crowdmental-
ity and the power of suggestionto Scipio Sighele’swork on collective psychology
and the criminal mind. Much of what became the dominant conservative view on
massification is based on LeBon: the presentation ofmodernization and urban-
ization asahistory of loss (i.e., of community and tradition),the explanation of
mass phenomena interms of contagion and suggestion, the characterization of
the mass soul through its irrational, unconscioustendencies, and the portrayal
of the masses in highlygendered terms,that is, as impulsive, instinctual, and ir-
rational–in short,asfeminineand feminizing. Rather surprisingly,TheCrowd
includesalesser-known line of argument that complicates this almostclichéd
view of massification asadenunciation of socialism. Repeatedly, Le Boncon-
cedes thatthe crowd can alsobeheroic and selfless. Not alwaysreducible to
base instincts, it is sometimesguidedbylofty ideas. InThePsychology of Social-
ism,hedescribes thatthe appeal of socialismwasstrongest not among Parisian
workmen, artisans,and small proprietors but among intellectuals, bohemians,
and discontents of all kinds–addingafurther complication to the standard ex-
planations of classpolitics.Todayitmight be temptingtodrawaclear line be-
tween (the history of)mass psychologyand modern sociologyand their different
perspectivesonclass society andmass society,but when it comesto emotions,
the conceptual differencesbetween mass and class sometimes disappear and
drawattentionto shared defensive strategies.Togiveone example,aversion
of LeBon’ssoul of the masses, namelyinthe form of the proletarian soul,reap-
pears in the writingsofWerner Sombart (1863–1941) and other social and cultur-
al conservatives. ForSombart,whose later studies on moderncapitalism estab-
lished him as one of the leading sociologists of his time, the proletariat was not
onlyadirect resultofthe forces of modern industrialization and capitalist devel-
opment;italsoembodied all of its social and culturalproblems. InDas Proletar-
iat(1906,The Proletariat),aslim volume written foraseries on contemporary life
edited by Martin Buber,Sombart starts withafamiliar definition:“Proletariat is
what we call the social class in our modernsociety that is composed of penniless
wageworkers, who [...]are obliged totemporarilyhand over their labor power to
acapitalist entrepreneur forawage.”¹⁷However,this initial focus on economic
relations of exchange(i.e.,“temporarilyhand over”)remains at odds with his
culturalconservative quest for the essence of the proletariat,especiallythose
Werner Sombart,Das Proletariat. Bilder und Studien(Frankfurt am Main:Rütten&Loening,
1906),3. Areprint with commentary byFriedhelm HengsbachSJ was published in2008 by Met-
ropolis.
42 Chapter 1