How about this for a headline, y'all:Kevin Drum begins to doubt his cult leader
Ha! Now, once again, these fools who claim they're informing you are being exposed for keeping it quiet (They play games with me and cultism - where have they been on cultists over the last two years? Oh, but now that Obama's running again, out comes the only meme that's ever mattered. Coincidence?) These other bloggers have been lying to you, by distracting you with nonsense, and now - BAM! - the real issues are all coming back into focus.
I swear, I am not going to reach out to the world on this - I'm done with that - the world is going to come to me, like Charlie Sheen: 
Whether they like it or not. 
And yes, I'm speaking about several major bloggers, who have made it their job to inform us, but don't. Because they don't like me. Or understand me. Or some other childish reason. The point is, many of them know this shit and aren't informing you - they've been lying to you - while another election has been sneaking up on us. It's time somebody started talking some real shit - and fast.
Or do you want to see this play out, in the exact same way, all over again?
Cult News from Rick Ross
ReplyDeleteA news perspective with analysis from cult expert Rick Ross
02.22.08
Is Barak Obama a “cult” leader?
Posted in Miscellaneous at 7:28 pm by Rick Ross
Has Barak Obama become a “cult” leader, with a following of brainwashed disciples?
This is the recent rhetoric coming from some political pundits shocked by the devotion of the presidential candidate’s supporters.
But the word “cult” has a much more specific and objective meaning, which should not be confused with Obama voters...
Most Americans can recall what a real cult leader is like, someone similar to Charles Manson, David Koresh or Marshall Applewhite.
So as the political rhetoric heats up and each party’s spin machine goes into high gear, perhaps it would be meaningful to remember the facts when using the word “cult.”
I have all the respect in the world for Ross -have spoken with him a couple of times - but I don't know if he's aware that even Obama was calling it "the cult of Obama".
ReplyDeleteJust because Obama skated through to his goal doesn't mean the signs aren't there - starting with an obedient press and followers willing to put his judgement before their own.
I notice you're not taking my word for anything - challenging me with Ross' statement - but Kevin Drum will accept a politician's, like Obama's, before his own?
That shit's cultish and I highly suggest you should be writing him and not me.
WMTC,
ReplyDeleteI got your comment but, for some reason, it's not appearing here:
I didn't include in the post due to space considerations but as Ross points out in his post (see link), when an expert uses the word "cult" it has a specific sociological definition which Obama voters don't even begin to meet
This is different from shouting heads on political talk shows or rock music critics who use the word "cult" in a casual non-literal way (example: The band Nirvana had a "cult following")
This can be confusing for laypeople who haven't studied and so don't understand the distinction.
Assuming you are seious and really do want to understand what a cult is, you should look at Ross' site some time, it's a treasure trove of good, solid information
On the other hand if you just trying to convince people of your own point of view by any means necessary, then obviously you can go ahead and make the word "cult" mean anything you want it to mean.
As Ross points out, those are two completely different goals.
Your willingness to condescend, as though I don't know the difference between a cult and a "cult movie", is something to behold. Have you even looked at this site? And, if so, how dare you? (You obviously, being so full of yourself, haven't bothered to look at much of it before speaking.) I don't need you to help me "understand what a cult is" - my wife was in several and ended up killing three people through her participation. And, I'll add, only a few of them are covered on Rick Ross.com. What does that tell you, genius?
Before I go further, let me try this again:
I have spoken to Rick Ross. Not only that, but on his bulletin board, I am considered a champion. I know this because of all the people who find TMR through discussions there, and - no - I don't participate on it. It's just that most people, those deeply involved in cultism, know more about things than you do.
That said, I'll say that, of course, Rick Ross has a different definition from me of what a cult is - he is dealing with the Charlie Manson's, etc. (what's been defined as "dangerous" cults) while I spread a wider net because I know - not think: know - cultism is now a wider phenomena.
As much as I revere Rick Ross, my hero is Ted "Black Lightning" Patrick. He wasn't an "expert" but, without him, there'd hardly be an acknowledgment of this phenomena. Rick Ross is accepted as an "expert" because he plays by rules Patrick never gave a shit about - and I don't either. (Having your family members sucked into this, and getting you involved in murders, will do that to you.)
My point is, the so-called "experts" are called that because they've made concessions, but, as far as non-professional anti-cultists like me are concerned, the "experts" aren't the only ones who get a say in this:
If Rick Ross doesn't play by the rules, he loses his business and might go to jail, if I don't, I get smart asses like you on my case - now, how would you play it, if you were me?
If anything, it is YOU who don't understand the issues, or the players, or the parameters of this, relying on some media-mediated and defined version of what's going in the anti-cult world. So, please, spare me your condescension because I don't need it:
I save lives and you don't.
My point is, the so-called "experts" are called that because they've made concessions
ReplyDeleteThey're not "experts" because they've "made concessions," they're experts because they've actually pursued a methodical and rigorous course of study in a peer-certified venue
The world of course has plenty of room for enthusiastic amateurs who make up their definitions for whatever "feels right" to them, no matter what the actual professionals say
In like manner, churches across the country play host to the dozens of amateur "cult hunters" who make a living travelling the Christian lecture circuit warning teenager about the dangers of Harry Potter, etc
I had assumed you were someone who was just confused about the distinction between the popular and professional uses of the word "cult," not someone deliberately trying to blur the distinction - but OK, I get it now.
No, you don't "get it" but are still insisting on putting me into a box of your own choosing, which is just an image in your mind.
ReplyDeleteLook, like me, Rick Ross got into this because cultists went after his family, not because he pursued "a methodical and rigorous course of study in a peer-certified venue" - there was no peer-certified venue - there was just a guy who had to save his grandmother and had to figure out who was after her and why. (Ted Patrick got into it because they went after his kid.) You can keep trying to play games, like you know more about it than I do, but that, too, is just your imagination talking.
Like I said, if Rick Ross does things in a certain way, he goes to jail and loses his business - that's a fact. But not everyone involved in this is willing to play by those rules - we've got nothing to lose, so to speak - so there's a big difference in our approaches and how we look at things. I'm not dissing him - actually, I love the guy and everything he does - but he's not the end all and be all of the anti-cult world, and there's more out there than you - as a true layman - are aware, that's all I'm saying.
Not quit fighting with me because, seriously, it's tired. if you want to really discuss something, fine - I'll be more than happy to - but whether or not I know what I'm talking about (when you can see in my endorsements there are many people who know that I do - "I can't thank you enough for saving me" - and that my methods are effective for those who need it) is not something I'm going to entertain or debate.
But thanks for writing anyway - I mean that.
Thanks for responding so politely, appreciate it
ReplyDeleteI want to understand what you're doing here so here's the question
You're not talking about cults in sociological terms - dangerous mind-control groups that brainwash people, so you aren't using the term the way anti-cult people do - that makes sense, I get that
Instead you're using it in more the "hot or not" way - the cult of Madonna, the cult of Obama, the cult of Carls Jr, whatever, right?
Here's what I don't get - on the one hand you're talking about popular fads, and then you seem to bounce back and forth from that to talking about actual cult members, murders, etc...
Aren't you worried that's going to confuse people? Like you're making fads some sinister and way more important than they really are, and making actual dangerous groups seem trivial and silly by putting them on the same level as fads?
You may not like for example every pop song, or every politician or every exercise trend, but to describe them all as "cults" really dilutes the word to the point of meaninglessness... when everyting is a cult then nothing is a cult
And instead of a site about cults what you have is some crank's one-theory-explains-everything conspiracy theory.
Either that or a really out there in joke.
For example, you say that your wife was suppposedly in a cult - but what cult was it? The Moonies? The Children of God?
Or did she commit crimes because some celebrity ordered her too in a song?
There are lot s of people who say that Paul McCartney or some similar figure told them to do terrible things in a song, but those people aren't vitims of cults - they're crazy.
Do you see what I'm getting at?
Yes, I see what you're getting at, but I also get that you're clearly not looking at the links I provided you, because I answered some of this, already, in them.
ReplyDeleteI'm doing something right now, so I can't go too far into this, but let me give you this to consider for now. And, after you read it, ask yourself:
Where has all that led to?
It didn't just go away, did it? Or did they get smarter? And what effect has that had on society?
Then look at this - and, please, look at the links in it - and ask yourself another question:
Is cultism merely limited to the so-called "dangerous cults" now? Or has the phenomena, over decades, gone so mainstream the average person (born after their heyday) couldn't spot one, or their message, if they tried?
I'll be back.
I admire your restraint when being talked to like you're some kind of retard, when you're one of the few and proud actually speaking truth to power.
ReplyDeleteIt's fucked up how deep in denial even the so called truth seekers are.
It amuses the fuck out of me too when people with a two bit degree (I have several, and none of them are worth as much as the education from the school of hard knocks) try and quote other room temperature IQ dickheads, to obfuscate and pour persiflage on people like you, on your own fucking blog, rather than getting out there and lighting fires themselves.
You have the patience of a saint.
I get it (or at least I think I do)... it's where "Words mean things, chief!" is flailing and Crack is winning
ReplyDeleteYeah, there's a "popular" sense of the word "cult," OK - the Beatles had a "cult following"
Then there's also a "sociological" sense, right - the "Manson Family" was mind-control cult
Here's where Crack is connecting the dots, the part that everbody else is missing - the Beatles really were telling Charlie Manson to kill people in the song "Helter Skelter"!!!
WHEREVER the word "cult" pops up it creates a connection. Maybe these can't always be proven, but they still mean something. That's what this blog is about.
This is an interesting conversation, if a little off-base
ReplyDeleteThere was a very good book published by the CATO institute and excerpted by Reason on "The Cult of the Presidency" which you can read a bit about here, that cuts to the chase as far as I'm concerned
Short version: It's not just Obama
"This messianic campaign rhetoric merely reflects what the office has evolved into after decades of public clamoring. The vision of the president as national guardian and spiritual redeemer is so ubiquitous it goes virtually unnoticed. Americans, left, right, and other, think of the "commander in chief" as a superhero, responsible for swooping to the rescue when danger strikes. And with great responsibility comes great power.
It's difficult for 21st-century Americans to imagine things any other way. The United States appears stuck with an imperial presidency, an office that concentrates enormous power in the hands of whichever professional politician manages to claw his way to the top. Americans appear deeply ambivalent about the results, alternately cursing the king and pining for Camelot. But executive power will continue to grow, and threats to civil liberties increase, until citizens reconsider the incentives we have given to a post that started out so humble."
Yeah - as far as you're concerned:
ReplyDeleteI read that last year.
You're still not dealing with what I'm explaining to you, and going for the generalized understanding of the word "cult", ignoring the complete non-acknowledgment of the phenomena we deal with in our everyday lives.
If that's what you want to do, fine, but then why are we talking?
Even dealing with the CATO article, has there been another campaign where the candidate himself called his followers a cult? if so, present it. Has there been another candidate with an Oprah figure - who, for years, people have been saying runs a cult - and who markets one cult-based idea and operation after another (including Scientology - "the world's most dangerous cult" - without anyone making a peep about it) as part of her identity? And can you name me another Secretary of State we've had who we know talks to psychics and whose husband - a former president - has gone on tour with a cult leader and quoted others publicly?
My point is, that author is dealing with something I've moved far beyond, because, like you, he has an outdated idea of the phenomena as his starting point.
Remember the hippies had a motto - "Don't trust anyone over 30"? I'm (almost) saying don't trust anyone old enough to have said that. The Baby Boomers unleashed these forces on us and, while some know what they were doing, most wouldn't recognize cult shit AS cult shit if their lives depended on it.
The rest of us, today, can't afford to be as stupid.
I read your links, they don't say what cult your wife was in or how she killed her victims.
ReplyDeleteThey do say that she had been seeing a psychic, that she did some new age meditation or whatever, but those are fads not mind-control organizations.
They do say that she had some elderly relatives die but not how, you imply it was some combination of negligence and old age but the details are conspicuous by omission.
What any of that has to do with Madonna, Obama, Oprah etc is not entirely clear.... do you somehow blame American pop culture for the deaths of these unfortunates? Is that it?
WMTC,
ReplyDeleteThe way you've changed the subject now, from a general conversation about cults (which I said you could find answers, about my general perspective and your general questions, in the links) to my personal story - and then accused me of leaving you with deficient information when it is you changing the subject - is, once again, tiring and tired. I am not here to be toyed with, fool.
Are you an adult male specimen or aren't you?
Which ever it is, you'd better decide because it's time:
Either stop with the fucking games or get off my blog.
The way you've changed the subject now, from a general conversation about cults (which I said you could find answers, about my general perspective and your general questions, in the links) to my personal story
ReplyDeleteI was interested in finding out at first why you mix up the different definitions of "cult" when you seem to understand the difference.
I pressed you on this, and your response was "my wife was in several and ended up killing three people through her participation" -that's why you don't "make concessions" to the dictionary, I guess.
So, once you changed the topic to your personal story and provided links, I checked them out.
Having done so and requested clarification, I'm not "attacking" your personal story, I'm just noting there doesn't seem to be any "there, there" - so again, I would ask:
What cult was she in, and what was the murder weapon?
That doesn't seem like a very big deal or even an attack. It's a simple question, the kind any reporter would ask.
If you can't answer and are even angry about being asked - despite having devoted a blog to it(!) - then that says something too.
You don't seem to get that your whole approach is ignorant, juvenile, and tiring:
ReplyDeleteYou ask "what was the murder weapon?" in a conversation about cults?
Whoo-boy, are you showing your ignorance there! Please, oh great inquisitor of mine, tell me - what was the murder weapon that killed Lisa McPhearson? Who went to prison for the crime of her death? Explain the easy-opened answers you're searching for - and then tell me you're prepared to be questioning me about anything, like you're qualified. You aren't. I told you, you're living in a world completely detached from reality. Listen to yourself:
If you can't answer and are even angry about being asked - despite having devoted a blog to it(!) - then that says something too.
Yes, it says I tire easily of trying to explain something to an imbecile with a chip on his shoulder who can't accept A) he's in no position to judge me B) doesn't understand the landscape he dares to challenge me on, and C) probably doesn't have the mental capacity to understand when he ought to shut and up, stop being insulting, and try to learn something.
Flying Tiger Comics has already acknowledged the patience I've shown you under the circumstances (you are questioning the victim here, as though I've committed a crime of some kind) without considering that you might be adding to my distress with your bullshit - and that's all it is. And the fact you take this approach with me says much more about you - especially your capacity to be a pain in the ass to those who don't deserve it - than it ever will about me.
I owe you nothing. But I've been willing to try.
Now, for the last time, figure out how to come correct or fuck off.
You could always try just reading the damned blog you know, that costs me nothing - including having to deal with you.