More thoughts on mass hysteria – “social media-induced mass hysteria”, the problem of the “people”, female hysteria, the creation of a “cause”, and other things

Recently, I was talking about mass hysteria and some of its traits.  In addition, I spoke of some new aspects of mass hysteria that have appeared in this century.  As part of this I also began to speak about the mania surrounding the Trump presidency as it is becoming an excellent example of mass hysteria.

Here are some of my thoughts:


I first said that, to me, the commotion around the Trump presidency is a social phenomena . . . it really has nothing to do with Trump or politics, though people make it sound as if it is and it appears that way.  To say that it is all about Trump means that he is doing everything but he actually does very little.  According to my observation, the greatest actions are coming from the media and the people.  In fact, from the very beginning of the election I have seen all this as a mass hysteria. 

I have been interested in mass hysteria for some time.  One of the reasons for this was that I was brought after one . . . the Vietnam War protests/Hippie movement.  As a result of this, I have been to looking at, and interested, in mass hysteria.  This began in the 1990’s.  Because I was familiar with it I can often see traits of it.  It wasn’t even a month into the election (if I recall right) that I said to my dad, “I fear that we may be looking at a media-induced mass hysteria”.  I then went on to say some things which includes something like this: “If this is the case then this has the potential of getting bad.  I fear what may happen.  With all the media today this could easily get out of control, and if it does, it can tear this country apart.”  The signs of mass hysteria were clear at the very beginning which suggested that “a storm was brewing” and that it had the potential of getting bad.  Because of this, I looked at the 2016 Presidential election as one of mass hysteria . . . not of politics, not of Trump.  That’s a point of view I’ve seen no one else take.  To me, this is an inquiry into mass hysteria and I think its very revealing.


Mass hysteria is often viewed as a situation where a population goes “berserk” in some way, usually as a result of some sort of a fear or panic.  There is truth in this but it describes a more extreme version of it.  This is not the only way it appears.

One way it can be described is a that mass hysteria is a group of people reacting to some emotion, as a group, in a mindless way.  This “emotion” can be any emotion, such as fear and panic, but it can even be something like a patriotism or a sense of unity.  In this way, mass hysteria isn’t necessarily “bad”.  Typically, though, when mass hysteria is spoken of it generally refers to the “bad” side of it.

In my statement above I made several important points about the “bad” side of mass hysteria and what it can do:

  • That things can get bad in a mass hysteria.  It can cause a lot of unnecessary hatred, conflict, disputes, and so on.
  • That mass hysteria can tear a society apart It can cause such conflict that it can divide a country in two.  It can even be a prelude to civil war, but it takes a bit more for that to happen.  It seems, to me, that many wars, and civil wars, actually have a beginning in mass hysteria.  It as if becomes the fuel for the conflict.

These show that mass hysteria is not something to look at lightly.  I’ve learned to be very cautious about mass hysteria and to approach it as if it is a wild animal that might strike at any time.  In other words, mass hysteria is something that has the potential of becoming tragic and should be taken seriously and looked at with great caution.  Luckily, most mass hysteria’s fizzle out after a while.

Despite this, I believe that a lot of problems in history are really a result of mass hysteria.  But, in Western history, these problems are often said to be caused by other more grander things such as:

  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Religion
  • Class struggle

I think it would be safe to say that just about any problem involving a mass of people is a result of mass hysteria or it at least plays some role in it.  What this means is that mass hysteria plays a far greater role in history and society than we think.

I often think that we are moving into a “new era of mass hysteria” in the twenty first century.  This is because of things like these:

  • Overpopulation
  • The prevalence of media
  • The creation of a more “personalized media” . . . social media
  • A long history of disputes and conflicts that are never resolved
  • The growth of new disputes and conflicts

These create a great growth medium for mass hysteria.

But mass hysteria will not be credited for a lot of these problems.  Instead, it will be given the more grander explanations, as described above.  In this way, I think the effects of mass hysteria is something that is not really acknowledged.


It seems that mass hysteria generally causes a tension in a society. This is often rooted in a number of things:

  • A fear or apprehension that ends up causing two groups of people to be opposed to each other.
  • A prevalence of some emotion, such as fear or panic, in a group of people.

These can cause various forms of conflict and disputes in the society that can cause a lot of bad feelings, hatred, and so on.

It generally takes additional qualities to take place for the mass hysteria to create further problems.  These often consist of an event that touch upon a “sensitive” aspect of the tension.  These events could cause things like a riot, killings, and war.  If none of these events take place then the mass hysteria often will fizzle out and disappear.  This shows that mass hysteria is often a “base”, or “beginning”, for greater problems.  Its because of this that mass hysteria is not really viewed as a cause for these greater problems . . . that’s generally ascribed to the “events”.  The effect of this is that these “events” tends to hide the effects of mass hysteria.


Some of the signs of mass hysteria that I saw include:

  • Repetitive misinterpretation – I kept reading articles, or heard statements, where people would say that Trump was saying something but when I found out what he was saying it was totally different.  This is not unusual:  mass hysteria tends to make people see things that aren’t there.  
  • A quality of being out-of-control with themselves – People seemed to get overly emotional about things to the point that it seemed completely out-of-place and disconnected.
  • Blind following – This refers to a tendency where people just blindly follow society, trend, social mood, etc. almost like an automaton.
  • Bizarre claims –  I started to hear these weird and bizarre claims that didn’t seem to make sense and were outrageous.
  • Repetitive claims of fear and feeling threatened when there is no sign of it – Every time I turned around people were claiming Trump was plotting, conspiring, etc. against people (oftentimes, these were females and minorities,).
  • People can’t justify their fear or feelings – One thing that I have asked people is “what, exactly, has Trump done that’s so bad?  Tell me WHAT IT IS.  I don’t want to hear some vague explanation or personal opinion.”  So far, no one has been able to answer “what it is” in a convincing way.  Their justification is usually some vague explanation that tends to refer to an insult they feel or a reaction to the overall social mania.
  • The feelings of threat spread out into everything – They start to see threats everywhere and in everything, even unrelated to Trump or politics.  
  • My own response:  I behave in ways I don’t understand – This refers to how mass hysteria affects me.  It starts to have a control over me.  In short, I started to feel affected by it as well.  I’ve learned that when I do this its often a sign of mass hysteria.

Many of the signs of mass hysteria are a result of a phenomena where a person loses their mind and replaces it with what I call the “mass mind”.  This is a “mind” that originates from the perception of the social situation.  One relinquishes their mind and lets the “mass mind” dictate them, their thoughts, and their feelings.  This causes a number of things:

  • One loses control of ones self
  • One is controlled by society and the social situation

As a result of this, people do things they wouldn’t normally do, they feel feelings they don’t normally feel, they over react, and so on.  This is the origin of many signs of mass hysteria.  Its also a basis for much of the behavior in mass hysteria.

Because a person “loses ones mind” in mass hysteria many people are not aware that they are in mass hysteria.  In addition, when they look back on it, on reflection, they are not aware of it.  In this way, mass hysteria tends to create something like an amnesia to the people who are affected by it.  Its probably no surprise that I’ve never heard anyone admit that they have been part of a mass hysteria . . .  nobody is aware of it!


From what I saw, and still see, this mass hysteria was prompted by insults and being offended, whether they be real or imagined.  Most of these were because of Trump’s blunt manner.  Whether he says things that is insulting, or not, doesn’t really matter . . . our only interest is the reaction.  His manner took many people off guard.  In a way, people didn’t know how to react and still don’t know how to react.  I sat and watched it spiral out of control and collected some statements of the reaction in this article, Thoughts on a media-induced mass hysteria . . . the “Trump panic”.  You can read some of those if you want a laugh and to see how ridiculous it often got.  As near as I can tell, this may be the first mass hysteria caused by insults, and being offended, in history, as I know of no other.  This makes this a very unusual and unique form of mass hysteria.

This hysteria over insults got so out of control that they began to be taken as a threat.  By this I mean that they were reacted to as if it was some form of an attack.  It got to the point that people became frightened, as if Trump was going to imprison or do harm to them if he became president!  These threats were being created, out of nowhere, as if from an assembly line from anything involving Trump:

  • Any perceived insults became an automatic threat
  • Any blunt or rude statement was taken as a threat
  • Any odd or unusual thing Trump did was molded into a threat

Once the hysteria started people started to see threats, attacks, and such, in everything Trump did.  Some of the more extreme people talked as if Trump wanted to put all females, minorities, and immigrants in concentration camps.  Can you believe that?  The democrats are still trying to say Trump used the Russians to rig the election.  Can you believe that?  Yeah, I’m sure that a person running for the President of the U.S. would do those things.  Stand back and take a look at all these claims and, remember, these are coming from the “people” and the media . . . not Trump!

And so, after all the panic over threats, and all the bad Trump was supposed to do, that so many people raved about . . . which has materialized?  Has ANY materialized?  I’m not aware of any.  If you take a look at what people said during the election, and for some time afterwords, and even what some people say today, its quite clear that its been over reacted and blown out of proportion . . . a sign of mass hysteria.

I have always said that I think its very important for people to look at WHAT WAS SAID BY THE PEOPLE AND MEDIA during this presidency but this needs to be many years in the future, after things have calmed down.  I think people are going to be amazed and ashamed and even disgusted.  It will also make a lot of what I’m saying more clear, I think.


There is something which I call a media-induced mass hysteria.  This is a mass hysteria that is basically created, and sustained, by some form of media.  Basically, there is a close association between media and mass hysteria.  In many cases, if there was no media, there would be no mass hysteria.  In short, media is often the medium and avenue of mass hysteria.  Media makes hysteria contagious and makes it spread.  I would say that the media was instrumental in this mass hysteria.

And, recently, a new form of media has appeared:  social media.  This new form has had great impact on the mass hysteria of the Trump presidency.  In fact, it seems to me, that this may be the first social media-induced mass hysteria in history.

A social media-induced mass hysteria seems to have additional qualities than the normal media-induced mass hysteria, such as:

  • It seems to revolve more around petty details
  • It seems more out of control
  • It is affected more by little things people say
  • It spreads more easily (it goes “viral”)
  • Individual people are more hysterical
  • It is more personalized

These are all caused by the unique qualities that are caused by the social media.  Some of these unique qualities include:

  • Its based on individual actions, generally reading or hearing things
  • Its based more in personal reaction that one does privately
  • There is more of a personal involvement, one can make inputs and statements, for example

A big distinguishing quality of the social media is that its more personal-based and isn’t as socially oriented . . . society is a backdrop to personal action.  Even though its social-based the actions one does is primarily personal and private.  In this way, social media-induced mass hysteria often gives the illusion of being a personal act, that one does on ones own.  In the normal media-induced mass hysteria people tend to follow the “social situation”, often mindlessly and mechanically, with little personal input.  In this way, people “find themselves doing what other people are doing”, often without knowing why.  This is because its more social-based than personal-based, as we see in the social media version.


Because this is mass hysteria this is really an issue of the “people” and that’s where I looked.  In other words, while everyone was looking at Trump I was looking at the “people”.  I observed their behavior, their actions, their words.  I watched this whole thing looking in the opposite direction of everyone else .  .  . I was looking toward the people.  As a result, I saw a totally different image of what was going on.  Because I saw what the people were doing, and that everything was coming from them, it appeared that this whole thing is “an act of the people”.

This issue brought up questions in regard to the “people” in mass hysteria and in a democracy where the emphasis in on the “people”.  In some respects, because democracy places emphasis on the “people”, and hysteria comes from the “people”, it means that democracy is prone to mass hysteria.

This then brought up the question of “who are the people”?  I began to see this as a big dilemma that isn’t easy to answer.  Some of the basic problems of the “people” include:

  • It is not an individual but its made up of individuals
  • It is not of one mind but it acts as one mind
  • Its unified and not unified

Defining the “people”, then, reveals a great irony and paradox:  it exists and doesn’t exist.  This creates several conditions:

  • Accountability.  One of the things that was clear was how the “people” tended to only portray themselves as innocent in everything and saw themselves that way.  Not only that, no one blamed the “people” for anything.  In other words, the “people” did not have accountability for what they did.  
  • Anonymity.  The “people” are treated almost like a non-entity, as if they weren’t even there.  The “people” seem as if they don’t exist.  

As a result of this, the “people” tend to have “free reign”, without fault, without blame, and almost non-existent . . .

When a ruler does something bad he can be criticized, condemned, punished, and even killed and the people are often all-so-willing to do it.  Previously, I said that mass hysteria can get bad and can become tragic.  I also said that mass hysteria originates from the “people”.  This means that the “people” can do a lot of bad and cause tragedies.  In fact, a lot of problems, and tragedies, that have happened in history are caused by the “people” more than the ruler, leader, or government.  The problem is that the “people” are hardly ever criticized, condemned, or punished for it and they certainly aren’t acknowledged for the problems they cause nor do they see themselves as at fault. This is the problem of the “people” that I saw in this mass hysteria and, I think, all mass hysteria.

One of the reasons why this is important is because the “people” are often the greatest power, and threat, in any society but, yet, they aren’t accountable or treated as an entity.  It is just “them” or “they”, undefined and unable to locate.  This condition, it seems to me, has been going on for centuries. In fact, I think that this absence of acknowledging the “people” has caused many misunderstandings and misinterpretations in history.

But, after watching this hysteria, I began to say:

  • The people need to be seen as an entity
  • The people need to be held accountable for what they do
  • The people need to be seen as the cause for the problems they create

In other words, the “people” need to be taken out of the veil of hiddenness they are currently hiding behind.


By far the worst people in this mass hysteria were the females.  In many ways, the female is responsible for all this nonsense and for getting it out of control.  They are also the ones who seem to be keeping it going.

During this election, a number of females were insulted by various things Trump may or may not of said.  I say “may or may not of said” because many females, I’ve found, have no idea what he said . . . or care.  What they’re reacting to is the emotions of other females or the emotions of social mood.  Its not what was said, or the message of what was said, that’s important (of course, that’s not what they say).  Its all about the emotions.  As a result, their “logic”, so to speak, is ruled by emotions which gives it a whole new angle than actual logic.

It seems that there are several emotions that can make female hysteria particularly bad.  These are:

  • If they feel hurt, threatened, harmed, damaged, etc.  I’ve even seen cases where all they have to do is feel that they “might of been hurt or offended” and they go hysterical.
  • If it is sexually related.  Often, if the “sexual offense” is particularly strong many females will became as if fixated on it.  This is why many females became obsessed about sexual abuse and other sexually-related things in this mass hysteria . . . they felt “sexually offended” by Trump.

Once they felt one of these they would then use the social media to express their dissatisfaction or opinions.  It would spread like wildfire through the social media, particularly by other females.  Almost always it is motivated by some emotion, often of feeling hurt or threatened.  The emotion spread like a disease and snowballed out of control as a result.

Its no mistake that there is an association between female hysteria and females feeling “hurt” and the reference to sex.  The very term “hysteria” means “womb sickness”.  This is no mistake as childbearing makes females prone to mass hysteria.  This is because of a number of things associated with childbearing:

  • The absence of self.  This refers to the instinctual sense of caring for the child that is seen in motherhood, where the female “looses herself in the child”, so to speak, as part of mothering.  This absence of self gives the female a tendency to “get out of control” easily.
  • The sense of being damaged or hurt in some way.  This refers to sex and childbearing which is perceived as damaging to the female.  This can be perceived both mentally and physically.  As a result, females tend to over-react to any “hurt”, especially if it is sexually related.  
  • The sense that the male is involved.  The male tends to get a lot of blame, in many cases.  This, of course, is because of the innate sense the male plays in childbearing.
  • The sense that “someone else is involved”.  This, of course, refers to the innate sense of the child.  It makes girls prone to blame and accuse people.  In fact, in female hysteria many females take great pleasure in accusing people!
  • The sense of “self-importance”.  This originates from the instinctual self-preservation qualities of the mother instinct.  It tends to make females take everything too seriously.

Basically, these make females quick to panic over a threat, real or imagined, particularly if it is sexual in origin, and which they take too “personally” and which they like to accuse the male . . . the very qualities of female hysteria.  You see, deep down, its all about childbearing and motherhood.  (I’ve discussed details of this phenomena in other articles in this blog.)

The “womb sickness”, and the emphasis on emotions, causes a number of interesting effects in the female:

  • It is one of the reasons why females are prone to mass hysteria
  • It is one of the reasons why females get carried away with mass hysteria
  • Its one of the reasons why female hysteria tends to spiral off in other directions that are unrelated to what caused it
  • It is one of the reasons why female hysteria tends to become “personal” and they start taking everything as personal, even though it wasn’t
  • It is one of the reasons why females tend to not let go of an “abuse”, whether real or imagined, but hold onto it, sometimes to the day they die

A common thing we see in mass hysteria, and is prevalent with females, is a tendency where females feel the hurt, offense, etc. coming from other females but, yet, really don’t feel it deep down personally.  In short, they feel other peoples feelings as if its is their own.  A good example of this is how many females in the so-called “women’s march” had no idea what they were marching for.  They were blindly following social media and the social mood.  Despite this blind following, they still felt “hurt” even though they couldn’t define what “hurt” them.  Remember, its the emotion that counts.  This is a good example of how the “mass mind” takes over the normal mind, and controls them, in mass hysteria. It dictates what they do and how they felt.  As a result of all this, some females were running around like a chickens with their head chopped off moaning about feeling offended and so on, when nothing has happened!  Some females are still doing that today.

A sign of mass hysteria is when the mania goes beyond the event, into unrelated things, and this became prevalent with females, and to excess.  Examples include:

  • Many females became offended by everything
  • Many females began to see abuse in everything
  • Many females became fixated on any form of abuse
  • Many females became fixated on sexual abuse (This coming from sexual-based insults they heard, or supposed they heard, from Trump)
  • Many females started to falsely accuse males, in general, of some form of abuse (A lot of males were falsely accused of sexual abuse following this election)
  • Many females took the behavior of a few people and overgeneralized it to the entire population (for example, if one female was sexually assaulted then they act as if they all were)
  • Many females exaggerated events to make it sound like abuse
  • Many females fabricated abuses that don’t exist
  • Many females began to use the hysteria as a means to express their unhappiness and frustrations with life
  • Many females began to use this hysteria to complain about things that had nothing to do with politics or the situation

These became prevalent as a result of Trumps statements and election to President.  It even started a movement called the “Me Too movement”.  In this way, female hysteria tends to “spread over” into other areas unrelated to Trump and politics.  This shows that this is not about Trump or politics, but the female herself.

Another sign of hysteria is that people work themselves into such a state of fear and panic that it causes problems for them.  This happened a lot in this mass hysteria.  Some of the things that happened, once many females found out that Trump won the election, include:

  • They cried for over an hour!
  • They had “cry-in’s” where they sat in a circle and cried about it!
  • They had to have a counselor to help them deal with it!

Can you believe that?  But it happened!  I used to tell people that I was a “Trump trauma therapist” as a joke.  Its a good example of how hysteria can lead to a number of “issues”  and other problems.

The female character tends to be prone to mass hysteria which is why they succumbed to it so easily.  This is a well known fact.  Normally, female hysteria tends to subside somewhat quickly as there is usually no social means of its spread.  But, with the social media, the hysteria gained a new medium of spreading allowing it to grow and grow.  In many ways, this hysteria shows that female mass hysteria and the social media don’t mix that well.


Watching this mass hysteria revealed a number of things about the nature of mass hysteria:

  • Of how something small can snowball into something big, such as how an insult can turn into mass hysteria.
  • Of how people can “loose their minds” so easily.   That is, they replace their mind with the “mass mind”.
  • Of how people create abuses and threats in things that don’t really exist.
  • Of how conspiracy theories, and stories, are created to justify the hysteria.  They end up creating theories and explanations to justify their “cause” and behavior.
  • Of how, in mass hysteria, people are “crazed” and can’t think straight, as if they are drugged.
  • That the ease in which females fall to hysteria causes great doubt in them.  Females are too quick to hysteria, let their emotions control them too easily, get too fixated on them, and are often unable to let them go.  To be frank, watching the females behave in all this has destroyed a respect for them.
  • The problem of media, especially social media.  These have an incredible power over people that cannot be underestimated.
  • Though mass hysteria can causes tension in society it needs other things to truly get out of control.  This is why mass hysteria often fizzles out over time.  But it can be the base for greater problems, such as war, if certain things appear.

Looking at history one can see how these conditions apply to many events in history.  In fact, one could say that a lot of history describe these qualities in some way or another.

I seem to think that if it wasn’t for a number of things a lot of problems would of been avoided in history:

  • The ease of fabricating of conspiracies, threats, theories, etc. motivated by some fear
  • The ease of the spreading these fabrications/fears, such as the media

If it wasn’t for these, and the hysteria they caused, a lot of conflict, suffering, and killing would of been avoided in history.


It seems, to me, that what all this means is that nothing is really going on . . . its all a delusion!  Of course, it doesn’t look that way if you are in the “mass hysteria frame of mind”.  It reflects my saying:

“Mass hysteria is almost always a panic over nothing”

Its when you look at a mass hysteria afterwords, when everything has calmed down, that its often clear how much has been fabricated, blown out of proportion, and a delusion.  Look at some of the stuff that many people were in a panic over in this presidency but didn’t happen:

  • No one has had their rights taken from them
  • No one is being taken advantage of
  • No one is being oppressed
  • No one is being enslaved
  • No one is being put in concentration camps
  • Females are not being targeted
  • Minorities are not being targeted
  • Trump has not started WWIII
  • Trump has not worked with the Russians to take over the U.S.

. . . and so on.

What has happened?  Really . . . nothing, just a bunch of people making a big deal out of insults, real and imagined, and blowing them out of proportion in a great wave of mass hysteria.  In the process they fabricated false threats, caused unjustified hatred, caused unnecessary tension, and so on.

A good example of this “blowing things out of proportion” nonsense is the “women’s march”.  Early on, I heard it said that it is a “march against the Trump presidency” because of the “rhetoric” that surrounds the election.  This is another way of saying that they were insulted by what he said.  Their first site said that Trump’s rhetoric scared and frightened many females and they were scared for their future.  That’s practically an admission of hysteria . . . unjustified fear.  But, yet, what has happened to them beyond some words that would warrant all this fear, hatred, and actions which they have taken to such extreme lengths?  Don’t you think they grossly over-reacted?  Don’t you think that they ought to admit that they got carried away with their fear and needlessly took it farther than it had to go?  But we won’t hear that from the “people” . . . they’re anonymous and not accountable remember.  Besides, they’re female . . . they’re oppressed victims of the tyrannical male.

In the “women’s march” we see some interesting, and familiar, things:

  • They are motivated because they were insulted
  • The insults were turned into threats causing needless blind fear
  • The fears, threats, and problems they envisioned would happen has not materialized in this presidency
  • In this way, they are marching against fears, threats, and problems that has no basis in reality
  • Despite this, they are still marching as if this imagined fear, threats and problems are going to happen   
  • This is because they will not let go of the fear they fabricated in their minds (which is another way of saying that they have gone “hysterical”)
  • They also will not admit their over-reacting because they are fixated on the fear
  • They’ve even went further and turned this into some sort of a righteous cause like it was some sort of a crusade

All because they feel insulted!  This is a good example of the mass hysteria mentality and, more specifically, the qualities seen in female hysteria.

But it brings up another quality seen in mass hysteria:  the “cause”.


Many mass hysteria’s are continued on long after the cause has disappeared by the creation of some form of a “cause”.  A “cause” is often a defensive reaction caused by mass hysteria.  To put it another way, the “cause” comforts people who are inflicted by mass hysteria by protecting them from the fear the hysteria provokes.  

More often than not a “cause” is viewed as a “righteous cause”, or “high cause”, based in high and mighty principles that caters to the persons mentality and beliefs.  The fact that a “cause” tends to be “high and mighty” is a reflection of the nature of mass hysteria.  It shows some interesting things:

  • The hysteria and the “cause” are often identified with each other.  Because the “cause” is a reaction to hysteria it often has similar qualities of the hysteria.
  • The hysteria is viewed as being removed from the self.  The hysteria is perceived as something separate from the self.  This is because it originates from “another mind”, so to speak (the “mass mind”).  As stated above, the “cause” is often identified with the hysteria, and has similar qualities.  Because of this, it makes it so that the “cause” is felt as something removed from ones self.
  • The hysteria is felt as having power over ones self.  Because of the power the mass hysteria has over a person it is perceived as being “higher” than ones self, of having a control over a person.  In short, its power gives a sense that we are its minions.  This give the “cause” a “high and mighty” quality.
  • The “cause” is based in an accepted “principle”.  The “defense” of the “cause” is created to comfort the persons self and, therefore, caters to their inclinations and beliefs.  This comforting belief, then, becomes the “principle” of the “cause”.

These show a number of points:

  • The “cause” becomes the “alter ego” of the hysteria, so to speak.  In this way, the hysteria lives through and in the “cause”. 
  • The “cause” is a result of an unconscious awareness that the hysteria is a reflection of “another mind”, that is not ones own (the “mass mind”), but with a sense that one “has a mind”.  As a result, the “cause” is created by ones mind to defend ones self against the control of the “mass mind” has over a person.  The “cause”, then, is really a defense against the power the “mass mind” over ones own mind.  In this way, it reflects something like a “conflict of minds” within a person.

Once the “cause” is created it as if “locks” the mass hysteria into an abstract form, the “principle of the cause”.  In this way, it keeps mass hysteria alive and constant and can last centuries.  It seems to stay “alive” in a number of ways:

  • The hysteria remains an active emotion conveyed through the abstract form
  • The hysteria remains as an abstract idea held in the abstract form but is no longer an active emotion (this often means that the origin of the hysteria has been forgotten)

What this shows is that mass hysteria can last centuries.  One reason for this is because the hysteria has been “converted” into a non-emotional abstract form.  That is, the emotion is replaced by logic.  In this way, it becomes something like a “logical hysteria”, so to speak.

Because of this, mass hysteria can have dramatic impact on cultures and societies years after the hysteria was active.  Different hysteria’s can build up over time and as if overlay one another in a culture.  One could even say that, in some cases, a significant part of some cultures is made up of a number of mass hysteria’s that have been overlaid upon each other, and maintained as “causes”.  These could be centuries after it appeared and whose origin may even be completely forgotten but, yet, the hysteria persists in the abstract form through the “cause”.  So what we see is that the creation of a “cause” tends to guarantee that it doesn’t disappear, even when its no longer relevant and its origin is forgotten.

One of the problems of the “cause” is that, because its a reaction against hysteria, it tends to be defensive in nature which means that it tends to never be resolved.  In other words, the “cause” just keeps going on and on and offers no solutions.  Its primary purpose, really, is to comfort, not to resolve.  It becomes like a security blanket.

One of the effects of this is that its not always easy for a “cause” to disappear.  It seems several things help it disappear:

  • It fizzles out over time
  • It is replaced by other conflicts
  • It is overshadowed by change and other events
  • A new generation appears that see’s no relevance in it

Another effect of a “cause” is that it causes a tendency to do what I call “reenacting the hysteria”.  In other words, once a “cause” is established there is a tendency to keep the mass hysteria going by seeing it everywhere and interpreting everything in the context of the mass hysteria.  In this way, the hysteria is kept alive by perpetually reenacting it.  This causes a tendency to do things such as:

  • Distort things
  • Show a bias
  • Misinterpret things

This causes something like an overall warpage of interpretation.  I tend to believe that a lot of the interpretations of things reflect the warping caused by “reenacting the hysteria”.   I think it far more prevalent than what it may seem.


I’ve often said that we need to seriously think what this mass hysteria says about the U.S.  As I said above, this whole hysteria is based in insults, of people being offended and bothered by what Trump says.  This country went into a frenzy over this, going into panic, causing hatred, etc. . . . all over words.  We need to seriously think what it says about a country that professes its the greatest country in the world, that says its the “home of the brave”, but yet went into a hysterical frenzy, of panic and hate, over words!  Do you want to be remembered for that?

That’s what it seems like to me, anyways.

Copyright by Mike Michelsen

This entry was posted in Current affairs and events, Government and politics, Historical stuff, Male and female, Mass communication: media, social media, and the news, Mass hysteria, mass society, and the mob, Modern life and society, Mother instinct, womb sickness, female hysteria, and such, Society and sociology, The 2016 Presidential election and things associated with it, The U.S. and American society, Twenty first century and post cold war society and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s