Trying to find a way to articulate the spectrum of cargo cult to idolatry that is useful. Many cargo cultists who realize that the divine exists within a thing, but aren't forced into faith.
Not sure I have the language and reading to articulate this, so I will try to work around my limitations.
If we look at an idol, we have a (relatively) well delineated idea, represented by a single figure, a mythos that articulates the boundaries of the idea or ideas through narrative.
When we look at an object of cargo cult worship, we see the empty shape, without the meaning.
So if we look at very weak idol today, such as freedom of speech, we can see the true believers who can explain why it's essential for iterative governance, etc, and the cargo cultists who muh private company.
BAP is fairly explicit about elevating masculine beauty to encourage masculinity. Masculinity is not a mere aesthetic flourish, but physiognomy matters. 
With a strong idol, it's very difficult to rationalize ascribing its inversion to it. The weaker the idol, the easier a cargo cult relationship becomes.
Not sure I'm happy with how this thread worked out. Iconoclasm encourages centralization, imo, and cargo cult comprehension is a step towards iconoclasm (denaturing the icon), but with added obfuscation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
