“…The “mass man,” as I understand him, then, is specified by his character, not by his numbers. He is distinguished by so exiguous an individuality that when it meets a powerful experience of individuality it revolts into “anti-individuality.” He has generated for himself an appropriate morality, an appropriate understanding of the office of government, and appropriate modifications of “parliamentary government.” He is not necessarily “poor,” nor is he envious only of “riches”; he is not necessarily “ignorant,” often he is a member of the so-called intelligentsia; he belongs to a class which corresponds exactly with no other class. He is specified primarily by a moral, not an intellectual, inadequacy. He wants “salvation”; and in the end will be satisfied only with release from the burden of having to make choices for himself. He is dangerous, not on account of his opinions or desires, for he has none: but on account of his submissiveness. His disposition is to endow government with power and authority such as it has never before enjoyed: he is utterly unable to distinguish a “ruler” from a “leader.” In short, the disposition to be an “anti-individual” is one to which every European man has a propensity: the “mass man” is merely one in whom this propensity is dominant…”
Here's a bit more from Michael Oakeshott:
“…The “mass man,” as I understand him, then, is specified by his character, not by his numbers. He is distinguished by so exiguous an individuality that when it meets a powerful experience of individuality it revolts into “anti-individuality.” He has generated for himself an appropriate morality, an appropriate understanding of the office of government, and appropriate modifications of “parliamentary government.” He is not necessarily “poor,” nor is he envious only of “riches”; he is not necessarily “ignorant,” often he is a member of the so-called intelligentsia; he belongs to a class which corresponds exactly with no other class. He is specified primarily by a moral, not an intellectual, inadequacy. He wants “salvation”; and in the end will be satisfied only with release from the burden of having to make choices for himself. He is dangerous, not on account of his opinions or desires, for he has none: but on account of his submissiveness. His disposition is to endow government with power and authority such as it has never before enjoyed: he is utterly unable to distinguish a “ruler” from a “leader.” In short, the disposition to be an “anti-individual” is one to which every European man has a propensity: the “mass man” is merely one in whom this propensity is dominant…”