Although historically significant, Le Bon's theories served his own political ends. By pathologising the crowd as attavistic and devoid of reason he offered an excuse to those who might use extreme force to quell mass action. Le Bon's fault lies in his inability to place a crowd in a diachronic framework, that is his analysis rests upon a snapshot in time, failing to take into account the historical and political context. This snapshot also fails to take into account that which the crowd is opposing (government, riot police, military). Rather like filming a fight but focussing only on one fighter, half the story is missing. Rather than losing individual identity, individuals often affirm their identity by mass action and to claim that they lose all sense of reason and logic is flawed. Those that partook in the Velvet Revolution or the recent 'Revolution of Roses' in Georgia, were not devoid of reason but were fuelled by it. Le Bon's work is fascinating and historically significant, but his theory is deeply flawed.