What warnings would Eric Hoffer give about the fanaticism of the AIDS activists like Act Up?

 From Perplexity

What warnings would Eric Hoffer give about the fanaticism of the AIDS activists like Act Up?

Eric Hoffer’s Warnings on Fanaticism and Their Relevance to ACT UP

Eric Hoffer, the influential author of The True Believer, deeply analyzed the psychology and dangers of fanaticism present in all types of mass movements. While he did not specifically address AIDS activism or the group ACT UP—whose activism began long after his most influential work—his general critiques provide insight into how he might have assessed the risks associated with highly zealous activism, even for just causes.

Key Warnings Hoffer Would Likely Apply

Motivation Rooted in Insecurity

Hoffer asserted that the core of fanaticism is a deep sense of personal incompleteness and insecurity, which leads individuals to seek belonging and self-worth through passionate commitment to a cause, sometimes regardless of its particular content or justice.

He argued, “The fanatic is perpetually incomplete and insecure. He cannot generate self-assurance out of his individual resources... but finds it only by clinging passionately to whatever support he happens to embrace”.

Risk of Intolerance and Disconnection

Fanaticism, in Hoffer’s view, can inspire intolerance toward any dissent or difference, both outside and inside the movement.

He warned that fanatics "fear compromise and cannot be persuaded to qualify the certitude and righteousness of their holy cause," leading to a refusal to listen to criticism or alternative views.

Universal Dangers, Regardless of the Cause’s Morality

Hoffer stressed that even a cause with just, urgent goals can fall prey to the same psychological dangers: a movement’s moral clarity can morph into self-righteousness, creating an “us vs. them” mindset and encouraging destructive tactics.

He described mass movements as potentially interchangeable, as the psychological needs they fulfill override the uniqueness of their particular programs or beliefs.

Hatred and Obsession as Unifying Forces

"Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life,” Hoffer wrote, cautioning that obsessive grievance and collective outrage can supply meaning for followers, undermining critical thought and leading to a loss of the very values the movement may intend to defend.

Movement Prioritization Over Individual Good

Mass movements, according to Hoffer, may begin to prioritize their own survival and visibility over deliberative or humane methods, risking harm to individuals and alienating outside supporters, even while achieving real progress.

Applying Hoffer’s Framework to ACT UP

While ACT UP achieved significant changes in public health policy, drug approval, and public awareness on AIDS, Hoffer’s warnings would serve as a caution against letting the ends justify the means, or letting the group’s zeal perpetuate intolerance, alienation, or inflexibility. His philosophy would not dismiss the justice or necessity of AIDS activism, but would encourage:

Ongoing self-reflection on methods and motivations.

Guarding against internal and external intolerance or exclusion.

Avoidance of violence or tactics that sacrifice broader values.

Encouragement of diversity in tactics and perspectives within the movement.

Summary Table: Hoffer’s Warnings Applied

Principle Hoffer’s Warning Implications for ACT UP

Motivation Rooted in insecurity/incompleteness Encourage self-awareness, not just group identity

Intolerance Resistance to compromise and criticism Value dissent and adaptation

Unifying Power of Hatred Obsessive grievance can take over Balance outrage with constructive goals

Moral Equivalence of Causes Fanaticism can taint both just and unjust causes Methods matter as much as the mission

Leadership & Identity Charismatic leaders can breed conformity Guard against cults of personality

Hoffer's writings provide a lens to recognize and counter the pitfalls of fanaticism in any movement, no matter how just. He would likely advocate for vigilance against intolerance, rigid thinking, and the corruptions of unmediated zeal, even as he acknowledged the genuine motivations and historic necessity of groups like ACT UP.