Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Is Trumpism a cult?

People will sometimes refer to religious denominations they disapprove of as "cults," but the term has a specific meaning. A cult has the following aspects:

1. A powerful, charismatic leader whose word may not be questioned.
2. The requirement of absolute loyalty - no lukewarm cult members, you're either all in or all out.
3. Members turn over their finances to the cult to prove their commitment

The first point definitely applies to Trump. To his base, he's never wrong, in fact, he's incapable of being wrong, because by definition, whatever he does is automatically the right thing, just because he's doing it. The second point also applies. A good example of this is John McCain, who was a staunch conservative for his entire life, but since that one vote to not overturn the Affordable Care Act, he might as well have been Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Trump followers now hate McCain with a passion, because anything less than absolute loyalty to Trump is unacceptable. Just this past week, conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage, a fanatical Trump supporter, has been subjected to vicious attacks on his Twitter feed after his criticism of Trump's abandonment of the Kurds.

The third point doesn't seem to fit, however, as no one has, to my knowledge, turned over their finances to Trump to go live in a Trump compound somewhere. Although, if you sign up to donate to Trump's campaign, you will find that you're making regular contributions, and the website apparently doesn't have an option to disable this. Also, I'm signed up to receive solicitations from his campaign, and it's a relentless barrage of panicked demands for more money. So some individuals may be susceptible to this.

The demographic of poor, white, rural Trump supporters overlaps significantly with the kind of people who tend to contribute a large portion of their income to televangelists. It would be interesting to conduct a study to determine if contributions to televangelists have decreased during Trump's presidency.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
I think a supplement or alternative to Rule #3 is... [u]would[/u] members turn over their finances to the cult to prove their commitment, [u]if that was an option[/u]. It seems to me the ONLY reason they are not turning over their finances (yet) is because that's [u]not[/u] an option (yet).

As only one example, in the beginning of the "People's Temple," started by Jim Jones, financial servitude was not required. Later communal living transitioned to complete release of individual financial control. Likewise, when you think about those who signed up for [Baby-]trump U and gave massive sums of money for the illusion they were going to be part of Baby-trump's inner circle, even after they suspected they were caught up in a scam (having their picture taken with a life-size cut-out of Baby-trump, instead of the big baby himself, etc.) they continued to turn over their funds.

When Baby-trump no longer has direct access to taxpayer money to pretend as his own, the idea of pooling the money of his breathless followers will be too much for Baby-trump's greed to ignore. Ultimately, like Jim Jones, Baby-trump will be trapped by his own wicked human nature and there will be plenty of Mick Mulvaney's and coat-less Jim Jordan's to corral "the base" into obedient servants of "the movement" designed to strip them of their dignity while convincing them they are indeed special. And, for that, they will be happy and satisfied with their financial and moral decision.