The Trump Open Political Personality Cult

It is well observed by political historians that a new era of political leadership in the Western Democratic society is being shaped by popularism. Donald Trump is at this point the most extreme example of a popularist leader. As many have asked, ‘how did he successfully rise to this position?’ To explain his popularity I will examine his case through the question of whether he displays the quality of a leader akin to an Open Political Personality Cult. Humanity must review the dangers of destructive leadership as it transitions into the integral era of globalism.

THE TRUMP OPEN POLITICAL PERSONALITY CULT

Author Carl Hoffman reflecting on his experience of a Trump Rally

The Age 23/10/2020

Hoffman stood in line for days with crowds of supporters, travelling across the country from Minnesota to Texas to Mississippi interviewing hundreds of attendees and immersing himself in their culture.

He said that to those on the Left, the rallies are a "black mass of American politics at which Trump plays high priest, recklessly summoning the darkest forces" within the nation.

To the MAGA faithful, however, the rallies are a form of pilgrimage, combining classic FM hits played at high volume, evangelical religious revival tropes, and professional wrestling buffoonery, with clearly defined heroes and villains, binding people together and making them feel a part of something bigger than themselves.

“Trump had found influence not through the cultivation of years of relationships, of studied political favours and lever pulling in back rooms, but through an unruly, feral, electric mob - incubated and indoctrinated online - that was made flesh and blood and nourished weekly in a new kind of ritual,” Hoffman said.

WIDESPREAD DISRUPTION

Since mid-2016 my soul has become restless with the arrival of Donald J Trump on the Presidential election scene. To my disbelief, the bombastic, divisive liar, denigrated opponent after opponent and so blasted his way to the Republican nominee for President. Against all polls and predictions, he proceeded to defeat the well-credentialled career Politician, Hillary Clinton. It prevented her from becoming the first woman President of the United States with dreams dashed for such a historic accomplishment. Large swathes of Americans and countless numbers from across other western nations were stunned. The collective pain was deep and felt as if suffocating under a pall of grief. The bizarre outcome had happened with regard to arguably the most important political position on the planet. The leadership of the free world had fallen into the hands of a man who would soon prove to be a narcissistic, lying diplomatic disaster. Daily I had been caught in the great vortex of media news bites, hardly missing a beat on his every word and action. I know I was not alone for wherever one went it was the go-to conversation piece, even ahead of the weather and the once-in-a-century pandemic sweeping every country and continent with its mounting death toll or the latest football results and predictions. It seemed nobody could avoid the magnetic pull of the Trump phenomenon.

I am writing to share some definition and clarity of thought and feeling as I search for a clearer window of truth to stir my hope of finding a way to respond to the ill equipt popularist politician. I note the words proclaimed by St John in chapter one of his gospel, ‘the light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it.’ Can this truth apply to the present darkness of many people’s states of mind?

The bizarre phenomenon of such a human, who has rejected so many long-established conventions of civil behaviour yet without criticism from his core supporters, remains astounding. The unflinching declarations of devotion and elevated praise expressing sentiments equal to ‘he is God’s messenger to us’ astounds any thoughtful person. How could this support remain so elevated and rock-solid? What is the nature of this relationship with his people? The word not infrequently used is the Trump cult. Does that sound harsh? I have reason to believe that this needs to be taken seriously. In my early years of ministry, I had reason to learn some things about the nature of cults and there is a wide variety of experiences this covers. I want to examine the possibility of the Trump phenomenon being what would be called an ‘Open Political Personality Cult’.

COMMUNITY

The context of my reflection is community. David Augsberger writes that ‘the Community is the prime context of life’. John Donne’s image of devotion tells us that ‘No man is an island, entire of itself'. In modern society, solitary confinement is regarded as the supreme form of punishment.

The dynamics of human communities are increasingly subject to analysis by complex systems theory. For example, Peter Senge is a systems theorist who has analysed the nature of communities and their dynamic inter-relational nature. His particular field of interest focuses on the realm of the business world through the paradigm of relational systems. The importance of understanding the enormous potential of the community is highlighted by Senge in his declaration that he believes the business community is the particular community that has the greatest chance of transforming society for good by enhancing its quality of team relationships and moral reasoning.

The broader philosophical perspective of integral theorists, led by Ken Wilbur, sees potential links between quantum mechanics and human consciousness. This approach effectively views the entire cosmos at the quantum scale as a means to describe the very nature of the evolving creation – physical, biological, cognitive, - as innately relational. It, therefore, builds by fulfilling healthy purposes. It is the forward movement of communally-focused human effort (‘energy’) that enables humanity to flourish. Wilber notes that the progress is not steady and there is the regular appearance of pathology whereby the flow of human effort is inward and focused on the individual and leads to the degradation of life at a range of scales. Its most fundamental failure is the fragmenting and isolating of the individual from the community. It is characterised by the stagnation and reversal of energy turning back within itself becoming wasteful, self-serving, divisive diminishing, and often retrograde.

With regard to community, therefore, pathology is witnessed in the destruction and minimisation of both people and the community. For a community to flourish it needs nurture and freedom for the flow of creative energy. However, not all failing examples of human life, community, and societies are of the same nature. Cults are a particular style of failed community displaying a combination of unique traits which prevent people from flourishing according to the historic norms perceived as appropriate for the well-being of all people.

Cults can run across a wide range of relationships from tightly closed to more open groups of communities. They can be found when two or three people are drawn together such as in a family or even an informal group of so-called friends. More broadly they can be found in interest groups, organisations, businesses, and certainly, religious gatherings. Arguably the worst are closed groups where people have little freedom either within or beyond the parameters of the group's orbit. Subtle but also significantly damaging are open cults.

THE GENERAL NATURE OF CULTS

THE PERSONALITIES

A cult essentially revolves around the two vital dynamics of leader and membership. The community is shaped to meet the excessive needs of the leader which is mostly driven by control and fear. The leader will commonly have some form of behaviour that might even indicate a personality disorder but which he or she will have learnt to mask through coping over the years of life. The practice of manipulating members is common, with sexual favours not infrequently known. In the worst cases, the perception of the leader is so fancifully orientated toward their self-importance that they elevate their sense of superiority, to even go so far as to make claims of divinity, the Christ, a blessing from God, the greatest ever, or simply the delusion of a mythological character. The Messianic complex is a common term.

The followers develop a deep commitment and devotion to such leaders. Some will collude with the leader by affirming the listed titles to the leader or declaring their love of the leader.

At heart, the power of the connection between the two may in some situations be particularly strong and will have connected at a level of deep psychic experience to override other important skills of important human functioning. Such effects could range across a variety of behaviours such as the minimisation of reason, and feelings of either fear or infatuation. The nature of such an interior connection can be complex and difficult to manage.

IDEOLOGY

The lure is the ideology. Groups normally have a purpose to the community which will offer something of a reward to serve the members well. The goal could be either practical as in a business or alternatively more subtle with political or religious benefit. It is characterised by the dualistic notion of the right and the wrong, such as when we ask whether we are on the right track, the good, the enlightened, or chosen one. Non-members are proclaimed to be misguided and destined for catastrophe. This is very common for religious cults. The leader is perceived to have unique insight or direct connection with God. Hence the people’s total devotion, loyalty, or obedience is typical. Not only is the group cause elevated but to attempt to rebel or leave the group is to end up joining the outcast destined to suffer the ultimate damnation.

It is certainly a great issue for young people, for in the fragile teenage years or in young adulthood when breaking from the conventional upbringing and hunting for a new idealistic purpose for life, or clarification of identity, they can be easily attracted to offers of success and even taught that all their problems are caused by parents and that by joining the group you can overcome them. Enormous suffering has been caused by the breakdown in parental-child relationships associated with cults.

THE STRUCTURE

The structure is best illustrated by the image of a rake rather than of a pyramidical hierarchy. The leader fosters individual relationships to maintain control. He or she can play one off against another by using fear to develop mistrust with other members by being told by the leader that they are confiding in them because they are special and must be careful of in turn confiding in others. The leader presents him or herself as the only trustworthy person. The leader will denigrate others and request that their special relationship remain their secret.

Groups may appear to have a hierarchy for orderly communication or accountability but the leader rarely abides by such conventions and continues to sabotage it through the personal interaction which becomes the primary structure.

METHODS OF COMMUNICATION

The leader is supreme and always right. They rarely listen to or seek others' opinions for they claim to have a superior sense of the greater good. It may involve leaders claiming to receive supposedly direct knowledge from beyond. In extreme cases, this may be related to schizophrenic symptoms such as hallucination, visual or auditory. Punishment such as belittling or deprivation, such as isolating, shaming, or bullying could be utilised for control.

Needing excessive affirmation, the cult leader will revert to any means to attract it. It may include the strange tactic of demeaning and diminishing the value of others to finding ways to keep elevating oneself.

A REVIEW OF D.J.TRUMP’S BEHAVIOUR

Enormous concern about Trump and his detrimental effect upon not only America and its standing in the world as the democratic beacon, but his destructive impact upon relationships with other countries, or more subtly upon democracy itself and the future of the world. Such concerns necessitate a review of his life to answer the question as to the legitimacy of assessing him as having fallen into the category of creating an ‘open political personality cult.’ His power has become excessive for little has been able to dint his standing amongst his substantial following. This is far from the only attempt to address this question for many books have been written trying to uncover the mystery of his personality and behaviour.

His arrival on the political scene as formerly a TV personality and Developer was surprising for knowledge of his character and behaviour was clearly out of step with the conventional politician. It was broadly believed that there was no chance of his success. The question of intrigue but one never answered would be, why he wanted to try his hand at politics. Speculation has been no more revealing than it was for publicity for financial purposes. That he should attempt to take the top job without ever having stood for any political position at the national or local level is typical of someone with the greatest ego.

IDEOLOGY

Even more surprising in the context of the previous question is that Trump does not have a defined ideology other than behaviour that serves to feed his ego, which of course has been shaped by the family belief that there are only winners and losers. His goal of being a winner is measured by the goal of developing a reputation for accumulating money. He prioritises this and has illustrated this message through his business deals, a record of this may be found in his book, The Art of the deal. The recent unofficial disclosure of his tax papers would present the opposite picture, that he is in fact a businessman in significant debt. It is commonly known he has a trail of six business bankruptcies. Regarding any kind of an identifiable ideology, the closest might be said to appear in his capturing control of the USA Republican party. This needs to be balanced against his history of once supporting the Democratic party. One might conclude that for his egotistic purposes any platform will do.

THE VULNERABLE

Despite his lack of ideology certain groups are more likely to remain vulnerable to his messaging which will be constructed according to whatever suits him. Clearly, he appeals to White Supremacy. Further, still the connection with the white evangelical faith community has been baffling for his character and areligious lifestyle make them unlikely bedfellows, yet this conservative faith community has become a major supporter group. On the surface, it would appear that the enticement of doing something for them which is of very high importance to their belief system, such as the issue of the ‘right to life’ belief has seen them bypass any other tenants of their faith. While he has no history of faith, morality, or ethics, he has feigned religious gestures, such as the photo shot with the bible held high above his shoulder outside the Church located next to the White House.

COMMUNICATION

From the beginning of his entry into public life, his prime approach has been to divide and denigrate. Little if no reference is made to people by a name other than accompanied by some disparaging term. To denigrate is his default form of communication. edged that he divides and denigrates, both racially and sexually. The USA is now a deeply conflicted country with regard to people’s opinion of him. Rather than attempt to rectify this situation he seeks the opportunity to fuel it further, believing it to be for his advantage.

While the white house has a very clear hierarchical line of authority in conjunction to its array of committees, Trump takes no notice of it. Recently a leader of his party was asked how Trump's visit to the hospital with a case of the covid-19 virus would impact the Republican party’s election campaign. The reply indicated that the campaign was Trump. There was no other strategy.

One of the most distinctively Trumpian methods of communication has been his ‘online tweeting.’ Through this method, he bypasses the partys to pay little more than lip-service to his party and its structures, to keep personal contact with his base supporters. This is his version of the ‘rake image' of communication typical of cult leadership. His speeches are usually incoherent rambles with a full display of dramatics. His style is to emotionally entertain and rouse his audience. This often involves the instigation of simplistic disparaging chants, such as ‘Lock her up’ or ‘Four more years’, ‘Make America Great Again.’ His supporter base revels in these communal war crys, which willingly feed into his insatiable appetite for attention.

His choice for media is one channel alone (Fox) where he frequently and spontaneously rings in and expects immediate conversation which continues until he determines that he’s had enough. While denigrating the Main Stream Media as ‘Fake News” he has manipulated this one media outlet for his unquestioned voice. In turn, he has turned his entire supporter base against any reasonable assessment.

CONTROL

His need for control is very apparent within the White House where he demands that one displays complete loyalty. His staff must tell him exactly what he wants to hear, praise him or face dismissal. This is a common message that is leaked from the White staff on a regular basis in conjunction with the number of reported dismissals in his administration which has been beyond what anyone could possibly imagine could ever happen. It clearly indicates a problem behind the walls of the Presidency.

AN OPEN CULT

I have raised the question of whether his approach to leadership bears the traits of an open cult. In an open cult, one is technically free to come and go despite the environment making it hard to do so. The most problematic cults are naturally those that have a clear boundary around them. The open cult is far more subtle, for the boundary is intended to be a psychological one. The divide between members and non-members is substantially developed. To create messages that are embedded in members' minds means that should one leave one is not just leaving but having described the enemy so specifically, one is joining the opposition. In Trump's case, the wearing of red baseball caps and refusal to wear a health mask becomes an outward sign of whether you are in or not. To leave in the present climate would challenge one as to whether they would ever wear a mask. The psychological barrier is not insignificant.

CHARACTER

There is probably no person more obviously a liar than Trump, so much so that one really has to ask how deeply he lives immersed in a fantasy world of his own making. St John’s gospel records, in chapter eight, Jesus’ arguments with the Jewish leaders of his time, and introduces the term ‘the Fathers of Lies’. Trump must surely surpass them as the most blatant.

Beyond the excessive lying, stories of bullying (US election debate), denigrating (captured or fallen soldiers (called losers and suckers), sexual promiscuity (prostitution), bribery (Ukraine), and Explosive outbursts of anger (White House) all build a picture that is becoming ever more clear of the character of the man.

ARCHETYPAL LEADERSHIP AND A FRACTURED NATION

To delve further into the cult relationship between Trump and his core supporter base, one initially needs to precisely identify the style of his cult relationship. It is well defined as an open political personality cult. Externally, the American political context means that on one level people are free to join and leave any ‘party’ as all Americans by the constitution have such a freedom. Two examples are the Never Trumpers and the Lincoln Party, both groups formed of people formerly Republicans who refuse to support Trump under any circumstance. It will mean not voting for the Republicans while Trump is their leader. Across a great divide and for many others the thought of leaving the Republican party led by Trump is a denial of the hope they believe they have found in him and the need for being part of his fold. A connection has been made with this man as their leader. Such a connection is disconnected from what would be called a thought-through assessment or conviction of an ideology. The connection goes deeper than common sense and suggests a psychic depth that defies the behaviour to which people would normally aspire. His declaration that women are happy to be intimately groped, or that it is acceptable that young children are separated from their parents because they are refugees; that derogatory names can be used to refer to people who differ in opinion; that public fun can be made of physically deformed people; that an outlandish statement can be made that should he shoot someone his people would continue to support him. The continual self-aggrandising claims of being the best ever, or suggestions that he is in some way the representative of God, all point to behaviour that is the most disturbing and the lowest form of human behaviour. An egregious liar and someone with a tactic of dividing community on race or politics, who continually behaves outside rules or law, is a business failure and an incoherent speaker, is a person who is difficult to defend as anything but an enemy of the very society he presents himself to lead. He is a disastrous human. Yet having lost any reasonable standard of assessment his people remain devoted. The thrill of standing in an emotionally aroused crowd at one of his rallies affirms the connection of unwavering devotees and grants an emotional level of identity that defies any reasonable assessment of the substance of his rhetoric.

Public office leadership, particularly at a national level, represents a fundamental necessity of great importance to any society. The identity of citizenship has become deeply ingrained over an extended period usually from birth and contributes vitally to the importance of belonging. As a universal fundamental of all people, modern psychology would refer to leadership as an archetypal experience. Well before the modern psychological understanding of experience, the foundational importance of leadership was recognized in St Paul’s claim in Romans 13, that all government was instituted by God. Different descriptions but the same meaning. Such an Archetypal description of leadership points to a figure who epitomises the highest standard of the community’s values. This historic practice of the sanctity of leadership lived out in generation after generation over countless centuries and millennia has so shaped the mind that the notion of leadership has become a deeply ingrained structure of the mind analogous to a river channel incised into the bedrock. Acquiescence to identification with a national archetype of leadership, particularly through the experience of being chosen by the citizenry, is to accept not merely a surface appointment but one with extraordinary importance to the people. It is a ‘covenantal relationship’ forged by long traditional practice. It is expected that the leader will represent the values of the highest standing of that nation. This is the psychically trusted expectation of the people. In America, it has so divided the nation between those unquestioning devotees and the greatly disillusioned.

WHERE ARE WE NOW?

Why have so many Americans ignored the very ideals and values that they would normally proclaim? They are in a situation whereby they support a person who does not represent the quality of person that their nation would otherwise proclaim as worthy of America. How does it happen that a significant proportion of the population comes to support a leader whose character and values are antithetical to those which they traditionally believe? While I am as cautious as anyone to be too definitive, I find it helpful to remind myself that the human mind is complex in that it is threefold. The brain is categorised as reptilian (instinctive), limbic (social) and neo-cortex (insightfully intelligent) Cohesive operation of all three produces the complete human being. The incohesive operation, sadly, leads to diminished humanity. Thus, human behaviours may range from the spiritual to the depraved.

When a large class of people ignores much of the higher capacity of human behaviour in support of an Archetypal leader who represents the lowest display of behaviour, a base instinctive connection has been forged which is the substance necessary for a ‘cult’. Such a leader has connected with people who are presumably so aggrieved by the misfortunes of past disappointments within a highly competitive society where the successful are ‘trumpeted’ and the failed neglected. In the case of Trump, his narcissistic hypocritical-styled Archetypal leadership has so deeply connected with the many aggrieved of society to the point they have lost much of their aspirational identity. They are so psychically linked to the false promises of his slogan rhetoric that nothing will shift them. Are they emotionally entrenched members of an open personality cult? I believe at least dangerously close.

CHAOS THEORY

To summarise the combination of all of the above traits of personality and behaviour might best be described as ‘chaos theory’ as it serves well to appeal to the aggrieved and most disillusioned and vulnerable of society. It presents a figurehead displaying a method that challenges the long-established members of the establishment. The societal structure these most powerful have developed over time has proved the means that ultimately prevents the common person from establishing a life of more than the most basic. It provides an explanation as to why these greatest victims of the system that has let them down, have turned their support to Trump and his chaotic approach to renewal under the banner of ‘Making America Great Again’ believed to so clean the conventional leadership swamp.’ Far from achieving this outcome, while Trump’s chaotic approach has certainly caused great waves, it really has failed and added further to the muddying of the waters. It has proved you cannot bring down the whole structure the nation has been built upon to achieve the purposes the aggrieved hope for. Four years of his chaotic approach has worn out the society and left it worse than it was before.

15/10/2020

NOTE:

Since witing this article much more information about Trump and his supporters has become known. For example several books have been written on the nature of existing conspiracy groups. It appears that Trump and the QANON conspiracy group joined forces for their purposes served one another well. It was a marriage of convenience. In time I will post a paper on modern day conspiracy groups, particularly QANON.