12-12-2020, 02:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-12-2020, 02:07 PM by Eric the Green.)
(12-11-2020, 01:54 PM)David Horn Wrote:(12-11-2020, 09:58 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: So far, no one has defined what a personality cult is. I suppose it would be up to Pbower and Einzige to define since they are the ones who want to use the term. Thus far the only difference is that the goals that the politician are working for are undesirable. That is not at all satisfactory. It changes too much between people...My understanding of that phrase is more about politics than anything else, but surely Charles Manson is a non-political example, so here goes my attempt. For a personality cult to actually be one, the person at the center has to be elevated to superhuman standards by his acolytes. Once that occurs, judgementalism disappears, and the word of the cult leader becomes the word of authority, period, full stop. No one questions the current Kim anymore than they did his father and grandfather. It's hard to say the same about Vladimir Putin, for example, who is certainly powerful and feared, but not adored enough to be at the center of a cult.
That's a good definition. I would say Putin barely qualifies. As for Trump as opposed to Obama, etc., Trump qualifies, and Obama does not, because Trump's ability to create a cult following is his only virtue. His policies are unpopular and ineffective, and his personal qualities and corrupt behavior are abominable otherwise. Only his cult following enabled him to slip into the presidency through the electoral college, and to screw up his job as president and still win 74 million votes.
Obama may be handsome, cool and personally popular, and hated by others for his race, but he is also articulate, his policies were popular and effective, and his behavior is beyond reproach.
