That's a very loaded question, so I’ll try to unpack it carefully. First of all, it is important to see that the study of Western esotericism involves much more than studying “esotericists.” Today it is not so hard to find groups or individuals who understand the terminology as a marker of identity, meaning that they would accept or even actively embrace it as a label for who they are and what they stand for. Whether implicitly or explicitly, such esoteric identities always involve some element of defiance in the face of negative mainstream perceptions, and often they are backed up by some kind of historical narrative about hidden or secret or discredited wisdom. Rather than being direct and explicit (“I’m an esotericist”), they may well be indirect and implicit, for instance when modern practitioners who do not self-identify as such still think of themselves as part of the great chain of ancient or perennial wisdom referred to as “the esoteric tradition.” Such affirmations of an esoteric identity almost always reflect the idea that “esotericists” and their beliefs have been treated unfairly by the cultural mainstream, have lost the battle for legitimacy, and have been suppressed or marginalised by the powers of the establishment. Self-identified esotericists of course do not see themselves as “losers,” but if they are asked, most of them will readily concede that the traditions or modes of thinking and practice that they value have become victims of a historiography written by the “winners.” They know that they are on the wrong side of the hegemonic discourses or dominant grand narratives of Western culture.

This use of “esotericism” as an identity marker is relatively recent. The very term emerged during the second half of the eighteenth century and is evidently part of the identity politics of that period. The perspectives and worldviews that we nowadays associate with “modern science” and “Enlightenment” were winning the battle against their opponents and assuming a position of hegemony in public discourse. To clearly establish their identity – to explain who they were and what they stood for – the advocates of Enlightenment needed to juxtapose themselves as sharply as possible against their polemical “others”: religious bigotry, priestly deceit, blind credulity, belief in magic, irrational delusion, superstitious practices, and so on.