We tend to think of a "cult leader" as someone who *intentionally* sets out to create a cult. But most cult-like things probably *don't* form like that.
A lot of people feel a strong innate *desire* to be in a cult. Michael suggests it's rooted in an infant's need to attach to a caregiver, and to treat them as a fully dependable authority to fix all problems - a desire which doesn't necessarily ever go fully away.
Once someone becomes a teacher of some sort, even if they had absolutely no desire to create a cult, they will regardless attract people who *want* to be their cultists.
There are people who want to find a fully dependable authority figure to look up to, and are just looking for someone who feels like a good fit for the role. (I should note that I have definitely not been immune to feeling this yearning myself.)
To avoid having cultists, "not intending to create a cult" isn't enough; you have to _actively fight against_ people's tendency to idealize you, by doing things that force them to confront the fact that you are actually just a human.
I'm reminded of something I recall @ESYudkowsky once saying: "if you tell your doting followers not to form a cult, they will go around saying 'We Must Not Form A Cult, Great Leader Mundo Said So'."
And furthermore, once people _do_ start pulling you towards a cult leader role, it's going to feel very appealing.
What it feels like from the inside is "all of these people like me and say that I've done a lot of good for them, so clearly I must be doing things right, and since they also listen to me, I can use my position to help them out even more".
It's not just that the cultists are getting "brainwashed" by their leader; it's also that the leader is getting brainwashed _by their cultists_ to take the role that they want the leader to take.
Cults are said to use "love bombing" to attract new recruits, but in at least some cases, it probably also happens that the cult _leader_ is getting love bombed by their followers.
And the temptation to take on that role is powerful not only because it feels nice personally, but also because it _does_ allow you to use your power for good.
One definition for a hypnotic trance that I've heard is that it's a state in which a person's critical faculty is bypassed, which allows the hypnotist to directly make changes in the mind of the person being hypnotized.
And you _can_ do a lot of good that way, such as by implanting suggestions that help people overcome their addictions or phobias.
Being someone's cultist (in this sense) is kind of like them having you in a hypnotic trance. It *is* possible for to use that power in a way that's beneficial, because the critical faculty that might normally reject or modulate the leader's suggestions gets partially bypassed.
But that same power makes it extremely dangerous, since people are not going to think critically about what you say, and may take your words far more literally than you intended, when you didn't think of adding the obvious-to-you caveats about how it *shouldn't* be interpreted.
I'm reminded here again of @Morphenius 's essay on of how people tend to take the kinds of roles that their social environment recognizes and rewards...
...and how people try to tug *others* into the kinds of roles that they can recognize and know how to interact with, and the collective power of everyone doing this causes the social web as a whole to try to pull people into recognizable roles - including "charismatic leader".
(Here we come back to Taft's suggestion that many people have an instinctive desire to get someone into a role that they recognize as a "trustworthy caretaker" one, because the "child" role is one that feels very easy to play - just surrender your judgment to the other person.)
I've been feeling this myself. I've written various things that people like. And I've been having a definite sense of some of my social environment trying to tug me more towards a role as a teacher and as an authority, getting the sense that some people are idealizing me.
(And again, yes, there have been several times when I've had the cult follower energy myself, too - both towards online writers and in some of my romantic relationships.)
And I'm also reminded of siderea's analysis of kingship in Watership Down ( siderea.livejournal.com/1212664.html ), and of how Hazel never thought of himself as a leader originally in the novel, until the characters around him started treating him as one:
> If you demonstrate a concern for the wellbeing of the people in your people, they will start seeing their wellbeing as your concern. Start taking responsibility for how things go in a group, and people will start seeing you as responsible for how things go in a group.
(the relevant discussion in the linked podcast starts at about 32 minutes)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's kinda weird how much harder it feels to speak English than it does to read it. For writing, sentences spontaneously compose themselves in my head, just waiting to be written out.
For speaking, it's often as if I have to forcibly hammer my meaning to the kinds of words that would convey the message, and even then it feels like half the nuance I'm trying to convey is lost and I'm super-aware of everything that I feel like I'm mispronouncing.
It's not just a general "I find writing easier than speaking" thing either, since it's accompanied by a yearning to just be able to switch to Finnish where my intended meanings are much more likely to naturally fall into the kinds of shapes that mostly convey my intent.
Every now and then I look at my Google Drive and find documents that I started writing and of which I have no clue what they're about.
Like this one. Okay? Well, did you? Or did something happen before? What was it? And why is this titled "people details"? I'll never know.
Okay...? In light of what? Where's this going?
I *think* this one was sketching out some Dwarf Fortress -style game that was to simulate individual people who acquired habits by reinforcement learning. Didn't get very far, though.
Says something about me that I'm going through a list of *legal policies* all nerding out, like "okay, hmm, that's good, that's good, that's not so great, okay cool, can I change that one maybe we'll see, hmm..."
I promised to uphold national values instead of enacting democratic reforms but a lot of these policies sound kinda democratic to me, where's my real ultimate supreme power, I can even be impeached :| oh well, this will do (until I can change it maybe)
on the other hand the president has no term limits so that's good
Oof. I was today years old when I realized that _none of the people who ever hurt me did it because there was anything fundamentally wrong with me_.
I don't mean that as in "realized intellectually", I mean as in "realized emotionally so that in any shame-tinged memory that I can think of, the other person decomposes to their inner pain and what they did to me in reaction to that pain and it's obviously not really about me".
So I was doing a lot of meditation / parts work today and came to an early experience where I thought dad didn't care about how he made me feel, and then that got juxtaposed with later memories of how he obviously did care and OH at that moment he just didn't realize how I felt.
Just realized that me always having had a hard time picking a favorite movie/book/whatever has been an instance of being out of contact with my body/felt senses.
In retrospect it's kind of obvious: my thought was usually "things are good on so many different dimensions, how could I possibly ever rank them?" Like this novel might have good world-building but the other one has better characterization so how can I tell which one is better.
Which I now recognize as an instance of the classic "I don't trust/have access to an intuitive judgment of this, so I want some explicit algorithm that lets me make a rational decision" source of paralysis.