Two Views of Mass Society.

This article presents information about the two major intellectual sources of the theory of mass society. The first and major source may be termed the aristocratic criticism of mass society; the second, the democratic criticism of mass society. Not all intellectual rejections of revolutionary change have been based on the idea of mass society. Similarly, not all democratic criticisms of totalitarianism are based on a theory of mass society and may properly be defined as the decisive social process with the loss of insulation of non-elites and the rise of elites bent on total mobilization of a population. The success of totalitarian movements is contingent upon the vulnerability of existing elites. An accessible elite should not be equated with a vulnerable elite for the strength or weakness of elites depends upon a host of factors other than their degree of accessibility. Thus it is that popular mobilization generally is the work of counter-elites, since they are not inhibited by commitments to the social order, nor by constraints resulting from participation in a balance of power. But the opportunity for widespread participation in society does not automatically call forth mass action unrestrained by social relations and cultural norms.