“The fact that millions of people share the same vices does not make these vices virtues, the fact that they share so many errors does not make the errors to be truths, and the fact that millions of people share the same form of mental pathology does not make these people sane.” – Erich Fromm
Tom Wright || Fromm’s critique of mass conformity, societal norms, and collective pathology highlights a fundamental error in human reasoning: the assumption that widespread acceptance equates to correctness, morality, or sanity. His warning is particularly relevant today, as societies normalize dysfunction, coercive control, and the gradual erosion of human rights under the guise of stability, security, and economic progress.
This normalization of harm does not happen in isolation. It is both reinforced and perpetuated by institutions – governments, corporations, media, and even educational and healthcare systems – that dictate the frameworks within which we live. Yet, these same institutions, if reformed or radically reimagined, could be the key to reversing these destructive patterns.
The creeping march of tyranny, the suppression of dissent, and the passive acceptance of suffering are not inevitable. They are products of human decisions – and they can be undone.
Fromm and the Pathology of Mass Acceptance
Fromm was deeply concerned with how individuals surrender critical thinking and moral autonomy to prevailing societal norms. He argued that mass participation in an idea or behavior does not confer legitimacy. In fact, history is filled with examples of widely accepted injustices:
Slavery was once considered normal.
Colonialism was justified through racist ideologies.
Totalitarian regimes gained power not only through force but through the compliance of ordinary citizens.
Today, we see similar patterns. Economic inequality, environmental destruction, mass surveillance, and systemic injustice are rationalized as necessary trade-offs for societal stability. Many accept them not because they are just, but because they are presented as inevitable.
Fromm’s philosophy calls for individuals to resist passive conformity. What is normalized today was once unthinkable, and what seems unchangeable can, in fact, be transformed.
The Role of Institutions in Shaping What We Accept as Normal
Society’s dysfunction is not an accident – it is largely the product of institutional design. From government policies to corporate interests, institutions shape what we accept as possible, desirable, and inevitable.
1. Economic Systems and the Normalization of Exploitation
The pursuit of relentless economic growth has led to normalized burnout, job insecurity, and environmental destruction.
Institutions prioritize profit over well-being, conditioning people to accept stress, overwork, and economic inequality as unavoidable.
Alternative economic models – worker cooperatives, universal basic income, socialized healthcare – exist but are dismissed as unrealistic, reinforcing the illusion that “this is just how it has to be.”
2. Education and the Conditioning of Compliance
Schools, rather than fostering independent thought, often reinforce obedience to authority and conformity.
Critical thinking is sidelined in favor of standardized testing and workforce preparation, producing citizens who are more likely to accept systemic injustices without question.
3. Media and the Manufacturing of Consent
Mainstream media often dictates the boundaries of acceptable thought, limiting public discourse to narratives that serve institutional interests.
Dissenting voices are marginalized, making it difficult for alternative perspectives to gain traction.
The framing of issues – whether political, economic, or social – shapes what the public sees as normal or extreme.
4. Healthcare and the Medicalization of Social Issues
Rather than addressing systemic causes of illness (stress, poverty, pollution), healthcare systems often treat symptoms with pharmaceuticals and short-term interventions.
Mental health conditions, rather than being seen as reflections of a dysfunctional society, are individualized and medicalized, reinforcing the idea that the problem lies within the person, not the system.
5. Government and the Gradual Erosion of Rights
Surveillance is justified as security.
Censorship is framed as protection against misinformation.
Public protests are increasingly criminalized.
Emergency powers, once temporary, often become permanent.
As Hannah Arendt warns, tyranny does not always arrive with dramatic upheaval – it creeps in quietly, normalized through bureaucracy, regulation, and institutional inertia.
Gabor Maté: The Pathology of Normality in Modern Society
Building on Fromm’s ideas, Gabor Maté explores how contemporary society conditions people to accept dysfunction as normal. His concept of the Pathology of Normality suggests that much of what we consider “just the way things are” – chronic stress, disconnection, addiction – is not natural but a reflection of systemic failure.
Maté argues that:
Widespread anxiety and depression are not individual disorders but rational responses to a deeply unhealthy world.
Addiction is not a personal failing but a symptom of unresolved trauma and societal neglect.
People are conditioned to suppress emotions and accept suffering as an unavoidable part of life.
A world that normalizes stress, burnout, and alienation is not a world that should remain unchallenged.
Johann Hari: How Modern Society Has Made Us Sick and Disconnected
Johann Hari further exposes how institutions have created a world where people accept loneliness, addiction, and digital distraction as the norm. In Lost Connections and Stolen Focus, he argues that:
The rise in mental illness is directly tied to social disconnection, job insecurity, and economic pressures.
The attention economy, driven by tech corporations, has rewired our brains to crave constant stimulation while undermining deep focus and thought.
The modern world prioritizes short-term productivity over long-term well-being, leaving people exhausted and disconnected.
Like Fromm and Maté, Hari challenges the idea that suffering is just an inevitable part of life. If loneliness, stress, and distraction are products of institutional design, then those institutions can be changed.
Arendt and Adorno: The Slow March of Tyranny and the Silencing of Dissent
Beyond personal suffering, mass conformity enables the gradual erosion of freedom.
Hannah Arendt warns that tyranny does not always come through violent takeovers; it arrives through the passive compliance of ordinary people who accept incremental restrictions in the name of order.
Theodor Adorno highlights how mass culture and consumerism pacify the population, making people less likely to resist their own subjugation.
When dissent is silenced, surveillance normalized, and freedom traded for security, societies become trapped in a cycle of oppression disguised as progress.
Responding to Cults Without Reproducing Them
If institutions are the root cause of cultish obedience as a means of social control, the belief systems and unspoken assumptions will reproduce themselves in nominal solutions trying to make those beliefs and assumptions the solutions to themselves. Instead of reinforcing conformity and suffering, institutions could be reoriented toward human flourishing:
Economic Reform Revolution: Shifting away from unregulated capitalism toward modes of production that prioritize well-being over profit and can safeguard the individual freedoms of the propertyless.
Education Reform Revolution: Fostering critical thinking, creativity, and civic engagement instead of blind obedience.
Media Reform Revolution: Supporting independent journalism and public discourse over corporate-controlled narratives.
Healthcare Reform Revolution: Addressing root causes of illness rather than just symptoms.
Government Reform Abolition: Protecting civil liberties rather than incrementally eroding them in the name of security.
The question is not whether such changes are possible, but whether we have the will to demand them.
Conclusion: Resisting the Normalization of Harm
The most dangerous assumption is that the way things are is the way they must always be.
Fromm, Maté, Hari, Arendt, and Adorno all highlight that what we accept as normal is often deeply pathological. Whether in personal suffering or the erosion of freedom, mass acceptance of a system does not make it just.
Instead of adapting to a broken world, we must challenge the structures that sustain it. The responsibility is not only individual but collective. Institutions, if reformed or radically reimagined, could help restore human dignity.
Ultimately, the real question is not whether a different world is possible – but whether we have the courage to create it.
