12-12-2020, 08:52 PM
(12-11-2020, 06:01 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:Personality cults are usually indoctrinated which is why they're considered derogatory. Liberal's are into indoctrination. Trump's not. Trump's a practical businessman who built a small empire of his own and achieved celebrity status by creating his own hit show who took a major cut in pay and a reduction in lifestyle to serve as our President.(12-11-2020, 05:33 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: "Personality cult" is a derogatory term as most see it. It is obviously more difficult to put the label on someone like Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter... If we are talking about national leaders, do you really want to assign one to Barack Obama as you would to Benito Mussolini? If one can attach it to any leader, then the term becomes meaningless.
In a genuine democracy, one would not expect to see the image of the President attached everywhere. To be sure, the personality cult around Trump is still 100% voluntary... but I can only imagine that having no Trump paraphernalia might have become harmful to one's business opportunities or advancement on the job had Trump won. (He didn't, so I guess we can flush the Valium down the toilet and save the vodka for a suitable celebration -- like getting a vaccine for COVID-19).
George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Sir Winston Churchill, Mohandas Gandhi, or Charles de Gaulle get the recognition for legitimate deeds.
Personality cult, political popularity, legitimate recognition for deeds, they have some similarity. A bunch of people get behind a leader for good (or perhaps not good) reason. You are correct that 'personality cult' is a derogatory label. We would have to define exactly what such a personality cult is other than working towards something something you don’t like.
What is the difference between the cultures following Churchill and Mussolini other than your admiring one culture over another? Is there something specifically in the style of leadershp that can be pointed out as bad?
