Cult of personality lives on
Acrisis, such as the current global COVID-19 crisis, brings out the best in political leaders who provide fact based information. No “instant solutions” but those leaders, supported by the best knowledge available, are more likely to lead the governed in the most beneficial directions under the circumstances.
Fortunately, Canada has such leaders, easily identified by their ability to report fact unsullied by any hint of self-serving leadership which seeks to mislead, defect blame and attempts to consolidate power at any cost.
An aspect of history only rarely taught is the study of what are regarded as “cult” leaders and the subsequently devastating effect this kind of leadership has had on entire populations throughout recent history.
Scott Atran, an anthropologist and founding fellow of the Centre for the Resolution of Intractable Conflict at Oxford University writes about what he calls the “devoted actor” hypothesis, meaning people who are willing to defend religious, political, or moral ideals of the leader even at great cost, when such values are embedded in a desirable group identity; “who we are” and “who I am.”
Very often this arises simply out of a need to “belong.”
So, as an example, while in Canada we might say “I voted Liberal” or “I’m voting for the NDP” Americans tend to say “I am a Republican/Democrat, my father was a Republican/Democrat and so am I.”
That, says Atran, is an indicator of the cult of personality rather than any examination of the characteristics of actual leadership.
Atran identifies many examples throughout history of how the cult of personality, or the cult of the leader arises when a country’s regime — or, more often, an individual leader — uses the techniques of mass media, propaganda, the big lie and constant talk of patriotism as the successful playbook.
Often, a single leader becomes associated with promises of a revolutionary transformation and comes, without any evidence, to be believed to be a benign “guide” for the nation without whom the transformation to a better future could not occur.
This has generally been the message and the justification for those personality cults which arose in borderline totalitarian societies. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Sadam Hussein, Mugabe, Kim Jong II, Bashar Al Assad, Jair Bolsonaro and so many others have littered history with the bodies of those who did not offer subservience or did not comply with the “great leader” as they led their nations to ruin.
Atran points to the constant rallies and demonstrations populated by followers and used to create an idealized, heroic, and worshipful image of a leader, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.
Atran finds the same patterns of behaviour among cult followers as those describing fringe conspiracy theorists. The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader, male or female, and regards the belief system he/she espouses as truth in the absolute.
Questioning, doubt and dissent are discouraged or punished.
Politically and sociologically, large numbers of energetic and decidedly uncritical followers find a home which promises to make their lives easier.
Dr. Megan Remmel of the University of Illinois has written extensively on the topic of personality and politics. She suggests that while political scientists have sometimes recognized the potential significance of a personality cult on political values, attitudes and behaviours, research has been erratic and arbitrary.
Other researchers into cult follower behaviour have identified that the cult follower group sees itself as elitist based mainly on the exclusion on non-followers.
Inevitably, the cult follower group tends to claim a special, exalted status for itself, its leader, and its members, based on social or economic status. Followers see the leader as being alone on a special mission to save the culture from itself.
Justified by the unquestioning support of his/her followers, the cult leader does not see himself/herself as accountable to any authorities.
Members of the notorious cult devised and led by Jim Jones through the ’60s and ’70s were given strict rules of no romance or familial ties, even as their leader had multiple relationships as the “father of all.” Jones eventually led his followers to voluntary mass suicide.
Ordered to drink cyanide-laced Kool-Aid by the charismatic and delusional cult leader, the followers of Jones were a part of the People’s Temple, a Christian organization that integrated anything that Jones wanted to use, from Marxist theories to faith healing.
Nearly 1,000 men, women and children died at Jonestown, in Guyana, on Nov. 18, 1978.
By the 1990s, David Koresh (Howell) claimed to be the voice of God, “the chosen one.” He instructed his followers in the practice of spiritual weddings, by which God chose brides of all ages for him. The heavily armed cult was eventually engulfed in a fiery shootout with U.S. law-enforcement agents.
Charles Manson and his followers believed him to be a new messiah who would lead them to survival after the coming nuclear and subsequent race war.
Writing in the New Statesman, Allen Tate Wood argues that the impact of cult groups on society and the influence they exercise cannot and should not be underestimated. He points out that uncontrolled social mass media has become the tool of influence and persuasion for cult leaders, including political and religious cult leaders.
“The social and economic conditions all over the world have people looking for easy answers, which leaves them vulnerable to the quick-fix philosophy espoused by cults and other groups,” writes Wood.
Of increasing importance to students engaged in any serious study of history is the development of an understanding of how political and religious cults can bring together the worst forms of large scale manipulation, and can lead whole populations to the acceptance of hatred, racism, misogyny and the exponential erosion of small “d” democratic ideals.