I'm a little worried about how some of us "confident" guys who are striving to be leaders, or the best we can be could quite easily teeter into the cult leader label if we polished certain soft skills enough. Actually, thinking out loud, it seems a combination of mastering soft skills and understanding various aspects of human study seem to be core requirements.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2021
- Messages
- 802
I wouldn’t worry too much. The development of certain skills is just a part of their life cycle. It’s something they all held in common. Something they all just so happened to have done. It isn’t like a step by step guide where you do this thing then this next and you’re leading a cult. It’s more of an illustration of a part of how the leader came to be.
I guess you can say we hold that in common but there’s alot more to it.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 6,551
Near Death experiences, and low points of life. Guys, don't get me started.
At any time, with what I know, I'm going to turn into a villain. Any man, can.
z@c+
The idea of having a cult isn't necessarily so bad! haha, I kid.
Though, the idea of cult leaders, or even people that are not socially acceptable cult leaders, or socially moral like the Tinder swindler are fascinating because of how they have these skills of persuasion and influence. If you want to define "good" and "bad", for the sake of simplicity. The idea would be what is the "it" these guys have that lets them use these qualities for "bad", can we find this "it", is it measurable and can be learnt? If yes, is it possible to use it for "good"?
That is probably the idea behind my initial notion of "the idea of having a cult isn't necessarily so bad" in terms of understanding people: why me, what made you think my set of beliefs or system of navigating life is so profound that you would discard your entire way of life to submit to me?
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2021
- Messages
- 2,196
The term 'cult leader' is mostly just a label for people to apply to things they don't really understand and are afraid of.
The way I see it, it's unethical to be destructive as opposed to constructive. The test of constructivity is functionality. Bad people cause disfunctionality and destruction, while good people build up the people and places they go. That's the litmus test.
There are a lot of people who are the furthest thing from 'cult leaders' who consider themselves highly moral, whose fearful influence does nothing but stick a spanner in the gears of people trying to reach their potential, fragmenting their identity and setting each part of their self against another. This is far worse and more common than any charismatic lunatic, and at least as destructive.
Life waits for no one. Everything lies on the other side of the force of a man's will, and most men need a figure to show them what they could be. The number of lives that were wasted in fear and hesitation will always eclipse those burned out too quickly in trying to reach for too much, and the numbers are always growing.
I was fortunate enough to have a father that many would consider far too demanding and controlling, but it made me exceptional. I intend to do the same for the next generation. When I look around all I see are people suffering from a lack of the kind of identity that a good leader builds in them, hesitant and unwilling to commit to life, accepting the fear of others as their own. Too many people are afraid of what they might become or encounter when they haven't even left the starting line. Women have no time for such men, and opportunities don't take pity on them.
When I see all the depression and neediness that is rampant in the world today, I realise that people were build with potential they cannot readily access themselves. Everyone is part of an ecosystem, made up of other people and the challenges of life, that should have forced them to connect with that potential. But this ecosystem is broken, and is being replaced by a safety net that will end up holding nothing but misery.
The hardest battle a man fights is the one in his head about what he will do and be, for which there are no clear answers. But since judgement comes anyway, and possibly the worst pain comes from doing nothing, a man needs to be somewhat fatalistic and act before he is sure he is ready.
And that is true not just for becoming what he needs to be for himself, but for others as well.
That is very much true.
Would I be right in thinking that with all this in mind you would say that the "cult leader" as we know it is someone who inspires people to such an extent that they would pledge loyalty to them?
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 813
I understand where you're coming from @CassieDon, But there is nothing wrong with aspiring to be a "Cult Leader"
The term has a negative view because it is associated with negativity, but leadership of any kind comes from power, and power is amoral not immoral. A lot of regular guys are conditioned into believing power is a bad thing, but it's actually IMO a shit test devised by nature to make sure every man can't be KING...
Kings can do amazing things for their community if their intentions are in the right place. But kings also need followers to move their agenda forward, and if every follower tries to overtake his position it will cause a lot of problems.
So nature created checks and balances to ensure the power dynamics within communities are maintained, by injecting "MORALS" into regular folk that will deter them from ever striving for greatness, while allowing the cream of the crop to rise to the top... But only if they're able to see through the BS and pass nature's shit test
Because is you follow this community, you probably have a thirst for power, so own that sh*t and instead focus on being the best cult leader you can be.
And as a side benefit your women will adore you for it
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2021
- Messages
- 2,196
But what is loyalty based on?
The concept of loyalty for nothing doesn't really exist. Loyalty through fear alone doesn't really work either.
Loyalty is an exchange, so the question is, what do you give someone in return?
I don't know how I would define the term 'cult leader' as it's a negative label with no clear concept. There are people who demand from others more than they would normally give, but again, the question is, for what purpose do they demand these things? Some cult leaders were obviously very destructive people. But the term is used far too broadly to be meaningful. Some people demand loyalty from others and in return actualise or inspire them.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 813
People are not loyal to cult leaders
They will always be most loyal to themselves. But cult leaders tend to have a talent for tapping into peoples fantasies and positioning themselves as the messiah that can lead them into making those fantasies a reality
Therefore, they will be most loyal to the dream and not the leader
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 6,551
I'm not sure.
They are loyal to the fantasy. But I'm not sure you chose the right followers.
Girlschase members for example, are pissed when I say that as long as you believe that beautiful women is <insert>, she or life as it is, will reflect that belief.
One might ask now:
So Zac, I throw away the belief that beautiful women are <insert>. You piece of crap.
What is the answer? What should I do now?
Here's the answer: I don't know.
If i did, maybe you be my peasant
z@c+
That's a good point. Put another way, couldn't you argue they are loyal to the cult leader by proxy in that the cult leader makes themselves a totem of the individual member's dreams?
You mentioned a book about Primal Branding in an earlier post (going by the time approx a month ago), would you happen to recall the name of the book in question?