Beyond Jonestown – The Faces of Cult Leaders
Blind Faith: How Mortals Become Gods
Cults have always fascinated me. How does a man (the majority are men but I will be including women in this series) lacking any spectacular attributes manage to persuade a crowd to follow him blindly and hang on his every word?
You certainly need charisma, even if this is merely faked. You don’t need film star good looks as the majority of my ‘chosen few’ will show but you do need a common theme. A common theme gives your followers a goal, a dream, a determination and if you tell it often enough then it becomes a reality whatever the actions needed to attain that end result.
If we view the current climate in the United States, it is hard for any of us with an ounce of intelligence to understand why people still venerate Trump when, to us, it is clear that their darling leader is not working in their best interests. And yet there they are believing every lie and every soundbite without any self-awareness or checking the facts.
Maybe it is because it suits their narrative, that it gives them permission to be themselves, to feel wanted, to feel a part of something. Their needs are simple. There is no need to look beyond the blinkers. They have everything they need.
There is no doubt that Charles Manson created his ‘family’ by attracting vulnerable, anchorless and drifting spirits whose needs were simple. ‘Fuck me, feed me and keep me high’ was the cry of a Manson follower as she swam on a sunny day unaware that Manson wanted far more from his followers than just an easy life.
Jim Jones gathered his flock in a self-sufficient commune, mesmerising them into submission to suit his dark ends. He created a ‘hole in the market’ that many disaffected souls were only too willing to fill. His teachings and master-manipulations resulted in that dreadful day of November 18 1978, a day that is still on everyone’s lips in the phrase ‘drink the Kool-Aid’.
However bizarre we view these cults or however misguided we believe the followers to be I do realise that this is still a complex and emotive issue and, in its way, an extreme variation on every human’s desire to trust. This portrait series of those more infamous leaders merely highlights the times when this trust has been misused and lead to tragic consequences.
EJ
Jim Jones: The Architect of Jonestown
Jim Jones remains one of the most infamous figures of the 20th century, a man whose twisted vision of equality, control, and salvation culminated in one of history’s greatest mass tragedies. As the founder and leader of the Peoples Temple, Jones began as a charismatic preacher advocating racial integration and social justice, but his growing paranoia and authoritarianism transformed the movement into a nightmare that ended in the deaths of over 900 people in Jonestown, Guyana, in 1978.
James Warren Jones was born on 13 May 1931 in rural Indiana, United States. His early life was marked by poverty and isolation, which seemed to instil in him both a hunger for recognition and a fascination with religion. As a teenager, he became deeply involved in church activities, displaying a precocious ability to attract followers through impassioned oratory. By the 1950s, Jones had formed his own congregation in Indianapolis, naming it the Peoples Temple Full Gospel Church.
At first, Jones appeared to be a progressive visionary. His sermons championed racial equality, economic justice, and communal living at a time when segregation still defined much of American life. The church became a sanctuary for the marginalised, drawing a diverse following of Black and white congregants who admired Jones’s inclusive message. He forged alliances with political figures and civic leaders, and for a time, his movement was celebrated as a model of interracial cooperation and social activism.
Yet beneath the surface, darker currents were already flowing. Jones’s leadership grew increasingly autocratic, demanding absolute loyalty from his followers. He began to portray himself not merely as a preacher but as a messianic figure — the embodiment of divine will on Earth. Dissent was punished, and personal freedoms were curtailed in the name of collective salvation. Members were subjected to surveillance, public humiliation, and manipulation, all justified as tests of faith and discipline.
By the late 1960s, Jones’s paranoia had intensified. Convinced that his enemies — including the government, the press, and intelligence agencies — sought to destroy him, he relocated the Peoples Temple first to California, where the group’s membership expanded, and later, in 1974, to the remote jungles of Guyana in South America. There, he established Jonestown, a supposed socialist utopia free from oppression and racism.
Initially, life in Jonestown seemed idyllic to many newcomers: lush surroundings, communal labour, and a sense of purpose. But the façade soon cracked. Living conditions deteriorated, resources were scarce, and Jones’s health and mental state declined. He relied heavily on drugs, his speeches became increasingly incoherent, and his obsession with loyalty deepened into delusion. Loudspeakers broadcast his ramblings day and night, and armed guards patrolled the settlement to prevent defections.
The turning point came in November 1978, when U.S. Congressman Leo Ryan travelled to Guyana to investigate allegations of abuse within Jonestown. After a tense visit, several residents requested to leave with him, prompting Jones to order their murder at the nearby airstrip. In the chaos that followed, Ryan and four others were killed.
Back in Jonestown, Jones initiated what he called “revolutionary suicide”. Under his orders, followers — including hundreds of children — consumed a cyanide-laced drink. Those who resisted were forced. In total, 918 people died. Jones himself was found dead from a gunshot wound, likely self-inflicted.
The tragedy of Jonestown endures not only as a shocking act of mass death but as a cautionary tale about the dangers of blind devotion and the seductive power of charisma. Jim Jones’s transformation from idealistic reformer to paranoid tyrant illustrates how noble causes can be perverted by the cult of personality. His story challenges us to remain vigilant — to question authority, however benevolent it may appear, and to remember the fine line between faith and fanaticism.

Jim Jones
Charles Manson: The Cult Leader Who Shattered an Era
Charles Manson remains one of the most infamous figures in modern criminal history, a name synonymous with manipulation, delusion, and the dark potential of charismatic control. His orchestration of the brutal 1969 murders in Los Angeles not only ended several lives but also marked the symbolic death of the idealistic 1960s counterculture. The so-called “Manson Family” crimes shocked the world, revealing how a self-styled prophet could turn peace-seeking youth into cold-blooded killers.
Born on 12 November 1934 in Cincinnati, Ohio, Manson’s early life was defined by neglect, instability, and crime. His mother was a teenage runaway and petty criminal, and Manson spent much of his youth shuttling between reform schools and prisons. By the time he reached adulthood, he was already well-versed in manipulation and survival through deception. These formative experiences laid the groundwork for the control he would later exert over others.
In the mid-1960s, following his release from prison, Manson drifted to San Francisco at the height of the hippie movement. There, amid the haze of free love and psychedelic experimentation, he discovered a fertile environment for his brand of pseudo-spiritual charisma. Preaching a blend of biblical mysticism, apocalyptic prophecy, and distorted readings of popular culture—particularly the music of The Beatles—he attracted a small following of impressionable young people. Many were alienated from mainstream society, seeking meaning and belonging in a world they felt had failed them. Manson offered that sense of family, albeit one rooted in manipulation, drug use, and psychological dominance.
The “Family” eventually relocated to the Spahn Ranch, a dilapidated film set on the outskirts of Los Angeles. There, under Manson’s guidance, communal living gave way to paranoia and apocalyptic fervour. Manson became obsessed with what he termed “Helter Skelter”, a phrase he borrowed from The Beatles’ song but reinterpreted as a prophecy of an impending race war. Convinced he was destined to lead his followers through this chaos, he began preparing them for violent confrontation.
The events of August 1969 would immortalise Manson and his followers in infamy. Over two nights, members of the Family brutally murdered seven people. The first attack took place at the home of actress Sharon Tate, who was eight months pregnant. Tate and four others were slaughtered in an act of unimaginable cruelty. The following night, Leno and Rosemary LaBianca were murdered in their own home. The killings were intended to incite racial conflict and draw attention to Manson’s apocalyptic visions, yet instead they exposed the delusional madness at the heart of his cult.
Manson was eventually arrested, tried, and convicted of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder, even though he had not personally carried out the killings. His ability to manipulate others into acting on his deranged beliefs was, in many ways, the most chilling aspect of his crimes. During the trial, his behaviour—marked by erratic outbursts and bizarre displays—cemented his reputation as both madman and manipulator. In 1971, he was sentenced to death, though the sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment when California temporarily abolished capital punishment.
Throughout his decades behind bars, Manson remained a symbol of evil and a subject of grim fascination. He continued to attract followers, gave cryptic interviews, and maintained that he was misunderstood. For psychologists, sociologists, and criminologists, Manson’s case remains a haunting study of charisma turned malignant—how vulnerability, ideology, and manipulation can combine to catastrophic effect.
Charles Manson died in prison on 19 November 2017, aged 83. Yet his legacy endures, not as that of a revolutionary prophet, but as a grim warning about the dangers of blind devotion and the seductive pull of ideology. The Manson murders shattered the illusion of the 1960s as a decade of pure love and liberation, revealing instead the darkness that can emerge when power, fear, and delusion converge.

Charles Manson
Anne Hamilton-Byrne: The Enigmatic Leader of The Family Cult
Anne Hamilton-Byrne remains one of the most notorious and perplexing figures in Australian history. As the charismatic and manipulative leader of The Family cult, she orchestrated one of the country’s most disturbing spiritual and psychological scandals. Her influence, built upon a blend of pseudo-Christian mysticism, New Age philosophy, and authoritarian control, left lasting scars on the lives of her followers and, most tragically, on the children she raised within the cult.
Born Evelyn Grace Victoria Edwards in Sale, Victoria, in December 1921, Anne’s early life was marked by hardship and instability. Her mother suffered from mental illness and was frequently institutionalised, while her father was largely absent. These early experiences of neglect and chaos arguably shaped her later obsession with control, discipline, and spiritual order. After working as a nurse and yoga teacher, she began to cultivate a following in the 1960s among Melbourne’s middle and upper classes—particularly those involved in yoga, psychotherapy, and alternative spirituality.
At the heart of Hamilton-Byrne’s message was the claim that she was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ, and that her followers were chosen to prepare the world for a coming apocalypse. The Family blended elements of Christianity, Hinduism, and various occult teachings into a confused but compelling doctrine that attracted doctors, lawyers, and even social workers. Her charm and beauty—combined with a serene, maternal presence—made her an alluring figure to those searching for meaning in an increasingly secular society.
The group’s most sinister aspect was its treatment of children. Through a combination of fraudulent adoptions, coercion, and manipulation, Hamilton-Byrne and her followers amassed a group of at least fourteen children during the 1970s and 1980s. These children were dressed alike, their hair bleached blonde, and they were told that Anne was their biological mother. Life at the cult’s property at Lake Eildon was harsh and regimented. The children endured physical punishment, psychological control, and forced doses of sedatives such as Valium and LSD under the guise of spiritual enlightenment. They were denied education and normal social contact, growing up in an environment entirely shaped by Hamilton-Byrne’s delusions.
Hamilton-Byrne’s control over adults was just as powerful. Many of her followers were highly educated professionals, including psychiatrists who helped supply the cult with drugs and cover up the illegal adoptions. Members were encouraged to surrender their wealth and property to the group, reinforcing Hamilton-Byrne’s lavish lifestyle and her belief in her divine right to command. She presented herself as both a spiritual leader and a mother figure, capable of guiding her followers to salvation—but in truth, her rule was built on fear, manipulation, and psychological abuse.
The downfall of The Family began in the late 1980s, when a series of investigations—spurred by the escape of several of the children—exposed the cult’s activities. In 1987, police and social workers raided the Lake Eildon property and rescued the remaining children. What followed was a long and complex legal process that spanned continents. In 1993, Hamilton-Byrne and her husband Bill were finally arrested in the United States and extradited to Australia. However, despite the horror of the revelations, the charges they faced were limited to fraud and perjury. They were fined but never served significant prison time.
Anne Hamilton-Byrne retreated into obscurity during her later years, living quietly in Melbourne as her health deteriorated. She suffered from dementia and died in 2019 at the age of 97. Yet her legacy endures as a chilling example of how charisma, spiritual pretence, and psychological manipulation can combine to devastating effect.
Today, The Family is remembered not just as a cult, but as a cautionary tale about the dangers of blind faith and unchecked authority. The courage of the survivors—particularly those who escaped as children and later spoke publicly—has ensured that Hamilton-Byrne’s crimes will not be forgotten. Their stories serve as a reminder that beneath the polished surface of spiritual leadership can lurk profound cruelty, and that truth, though slow to emerge, ultimately triumphs over control and deception.

Anne Hamilton-Byrne
Marshall Applewhite: The Leader of Heaven’s Gate
Marshall Herff Applewhite, born on 17 May 1931 in Spur, Texas, became one of the most infamous religious cult leaders of the late twentieth century. Known primarily as the co-founder of the Heaven’s Gate movement, Applewhite’s life and teachings remain a haunting example of the intersection between religious extremism, psychological vulnerability, and the search for transcendence in an increasingly technological world. His story is one of charisma, delusion, and tragedy, culminating in the mass suicide of his followers in March 1997 — an event that shocked the world and left an indelible mark on modern understandings of cult dynamics.
Applewhite was raised in a deeply religious household; his father was a Presbyterian minister. This early exposure to Christian doctrine had a profound influence on his worldview, instilling both a fascination with spiritual matters and an internal conflict regarding faith and authority. After studying philosophy at Austin College and earning a master’s degree in music from the University of Colorado, Applewhite pursued a career in teaching and performing. He possessed a resonant baritone voice and even aspired to sing opera professionally. However, beneath this artistic ambition lay a man wrestling with issues of identity, sexuality, and purpose.
In the early 1970s, Applewhite’s life began to unravel. He was dismissed from his position at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, reportedly due to an inappropriate relationship with a male student. This personal and professional crisis left him adrift, searching for meaning. It was around this time that he met Bonnie Nettles, a nurse with an interest in theosophy, astrology, and New Age spirituality. Their meeting in 1972 proved transformative: Applewhite and Nettles came to believe they were divine messengers chosen to prepare humanity for an imminent evolutionary leap to a higher level of existence.
Together, Applewhite and Nettles developed the doctrines that would form the basis of Heaven’s Gate. They taught that the Earth was due for a form of “recycling” and that only those who transcended their human condition could ascend to the “Next Level” — a non-corporeal realm inhabited by advanced extraterrestrial beings. Their theology was an eclectic blend of Christian eschatology, science fiction imagery, and Gnostic-style dualism, in which the human body was seen as merely a “vehicle” or “container” for the true self. Followers were encouraged to detach from earthly desires, including family, possessions, and sexuality, in order to prepare for transformation.
In the mid-1970s, Applewhite and Nettles — known to their followers as “Bo” and “Peep” — attracted a small but devoted group of adherents. They travelled across the United States, holding meetings and recruiting people who were disillusioned with mainstream religion but hungry for spiritual purpose. They predicted that a spaceship would arrive to transport them to the Next Level, though when the prophecy failed to materialise, many followers drifted away. Despite such setbacks, Applewhite and Nettles maintained their conviction, framing unfulfilled prophecies as tests of faith.
After Nettles’ death in 1985 from liver cancer, Applewhite’s teachings took a darker turn. He reinterpreted her passing as an example of how one could ascend to the Next Level without a physical spacecraft, through the shedding of the body. This redefinition of ascension laid the groundwork for the group’s eventual mass suicide. By the mid-1990s, Heaven’s Gate had become an isolated, tightly controlled community living in California. They adopted uniform clothing and hairstyles, relinquished individuality, and even practised voluntary castration to suppress sexual impulses.
In March 1997, Applewhite told his followers that the appearance of the Hale–Bopp comet was the sign they had been awaiting. Believing that a spacecraft was trailing behind it, he convinced thirty-eight of his adherents to join him in “exiting their vehicles” — a euphemism for suicide — to board the vessel spiritually. Over three days, the members ingested a lethal mixture of barbiturates and alcohol, carefully arranging their bodies in identical black clothing and trainers. Applewhite was among the last to die.
The Heaven’s Gate tragedy has since been studied as a case study in the psychology of cults, charisma, and belief. Applewhite’s ability to blend religious language with science-fiction symbolism resonated with a generation caught between faith and technology. While his message ended in destruction, it also revealed enduring human anxieties about death, transcendence, and belonging. Marshall Applewhite remains a chilling reminder of how spiritual yearning, when untethered from critical thought, can lead to catastrophic ends.

Marshall Applewhite
Amy Carlson: The Self-Styled ‘Mother God’ of Love Has Won
Amy Carlson, better known as “Mother God”, was the controversial leader of the spiritual movement Love Has Won. Born in Dallas, Texas in 1975, Carlson’s life began in an ordinary middle-class American setting, far removed from the world of fringe spirituality and online devotion that would later define her. Yet by the time of her death in 2021, she had become a notorious figure — venerated by followers as a divine being, and denounced by critics as a manipulative cult leader whose delusions had tragic consequences.
Carlson’s early life gave few clues to the extraordinary claims she would later make. She reportedly did well in school, was intelligent, and for a time led a conventional life. She married young, had three children, and worked in the restaurant industry. However, in her early thirties, she began to express an increasing interest in New Age spirituality. According to those who knew her, Carlson’s worldview changed dramatically after she became involved in online spiritual forums around 2006. She began to claim that she was receiving direct messages from divine entities, and by 2009 had left her family to pursue what she described as her “spiritual mission”.
That mission culminated in the formation of Love Has Won, an internet-based spiritual movement blending New Age mysticism, conspiracy theories, and apocalyptic prophecy. Carlson presented herself as the 534th incarnation of the divine source — an embodiment of Mother God sent to guide humanity through its “ascension” into a higher state of being. Her followers believed she had lived previous lives as figures such as Jesus Christ, Joan of Arc, and Marilyn Monroe.
The beliefs of Love Has Won were an eclectic mix of cosmic spirituality, pseudo-science, and online conspiracy culture. Carlson taught that the Earth was a living consciousness, that humanity had fallen under the control of “cabal” forces, and that she alone could restore balance to the planet. She and her followers regularly streamed live videos on YouTube and Facebook, where they spoke of “5D ascension” and “Galactic Federation” messages. The group’s digital presence allowed it to reach a global audience, particularly during the rise of online spirituality in the late 2010s.
Life within Love Has Won was far from the loving ideal that Carlson publicly preached. Former members have described an environment of emotional manipulation, strict control, and bizarre rituals. Carlson’s authority was absolute; followers referred to her as “Mom” or “Mother God”, and any dissent was treated as betrayal. Her drinking was notorious — despite claiming to be divine, she reportedly consumed large amounts of alcohol and colloidal silver, the latter of which turned her skin a bluish-grey colour. Members were encouraged to regard her physical decline as evidence of her absorbing the world’s negative energy rather than the result of neglect or illness.
By 2020, the group’s erratic behaviour and online outbursts drew the attention of both media and law enforcement. Carlson’s increasingly frail condition was visible in videos, where she appeared weak, slurring her words and often unable to sit upright. In April 2021, her mummified body was discovered in a remote Colorado home. She was wrapped in a sleeping bag, her face covered in glitter, and surrounded by decorations suggesting a shrine. Authorities arrested several members of the group, though charges were later dropped.
Carlson’s death marked the end of Love Has Won as an organised entity, yet her influence lingers. Some former followers continue to revere her as a spiritual guide, maintaining splinter groups and online channels in her name. Others have since spoken out about the psychological damage they suffered and the manipulative tactics that kept them loyal.
Amy Carlson’s story is a stark illustration of how the digital age can amplify charismatic delusion. What began as a lonely woman’s spiritual searching grew — through the reach of social media — into a movement that blurred the line between faith and fanaticism. Her followers’ devotion speaks to a deep human hunger for meaning, while her demise exposes the dangers of unchecked power and self-deification. In the end, Carlson’s proclaimed ascension to godhood served only to highlight the fragility of those who sought salvation in her image.

Amy Carlson
David Berg: The Controversial Founder of the Children of God
David Brandt Berg (1919–1994) remains one of the most controversial religious figures of the twentieth century. As the founder and spiritual leader of the movement known variously as the Children of God, The Family of Love, and later The Family International, Berg constructed a complex blend of evangelical fervour, apocalyptic prophecy, and unorthodox sexual teachings that profoundly shaped, and ultimately destabilised, his followers’ lives.
Born in Oakland, California, into a devout Christian household, Berg was the son of travelling evangelists. His early years were steeped in the Pentecostal revivalism of the 1930s, where emotional expression and direct experience of the Holy Spirit were emphasised. However, even as a young man, Berg displayed a restless dissatisfaction with conventional religious structures. He struggled to find acceptance among mainstream churches and was dismissed from several posts within Christian organisations due to his abrasive personality and doctrinal disputes.
By the late 1960s, amid the turbulence of the counter-cultural era, Berg discovered a new audience. Disillusioned youth, searching for purpose outside materialistic society, proved fertile ground for his message of spiritual revolution. In 1968, he founded the Children of God in Huntington Beach, California. Presenting himself as Moses David—a modern prophet—Berg urged his followers to reject worldly institutions and dedicate themselves wholly to spreading God’s love.
At first, the group appeared as an energetic Christian mission, known for its communal living, street witnessing, and free distribution of literature. Members abandoned their possessions and families, moving into communal homes where they lived under strict religious discipline. Berg’s apocalyptic teachings warned of the imminent end of the world and the collapse of capitalist society. His charisma and prophetic confidence gave the movement a sense of divine urgency.
However, as the 1970s progressed, Berg’s control over his followers grew increasingly authoritarian. He communicated primarily through Mo Letters—a vast series of illustrated pamphlets that combined spiritual exhortation with personal revelations. In these writings, Berg introduced doctrines that blurred moral boundaries and redefined sexual ethics within the group. Most controversial was the practice he termed “flirty fishing”, in which female members were encouraged to use sexual relationships as a means of evangelism and recruitment. This policy, framed as an expression of God’s love, sparked outrage and accusations of exploitation.
Berg’s movement underwent multiple transformations to evade legal scrutiny and public criticism. Renaming itself The Family of Love and later The Family International, it continued to spread globally, establishing communes across Europe, Latin America, and Asia. Critics accused the group of coercive control, child abuse, and manipulation—charges that the leadership often denied or minimised. Former members have since provided testimonies describing traumatic experiences, isolation, and psychological conditioning.
Throughout these controversies, Berg remained a reclusive figure. He rarely appeared in public and communicated with his followers through letters and audio tapes, portraying himself as a persecuted prophet in exile. His writings mixed Biblical interpretation with apocalyptic visions, conspiracy theories, and a fixation on divine sexuality. Followers revered him as “Dad” or “Grandpa”, viewing his pronouncements as the direct word of God. This insularity deepened the cult-like atmosphere of the movement, where dissent was often equated with spiritual rebellion.
Berg died in 1994, reportedly in Portugal, leaving behind a legacy that continues to divide opinion. After his death, The Family International sought to reform its image, renouncing many of Berg’s teachings and apologising for the movement’s past abuses. Yet his influence remains embedded in its origins and in the lives of those who once followed him.
To some, David Berg was a visionary who attempted to create a community of faith outside a corrupt society. To others, he was a manipulative leader whose self-proclaimed prophecies masked psychological control and abuse. His story stands as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked charisma and the fragility of idealism when entwined with absolute authority. In examining Berg’s life and movement, one sees both the allure and the peril of spiritual revolution untethered from accountability.

David Berg
Why the MAGA Movement Can Be Described as a Cult
The question of whether the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement qualifies as a “cult” invites serious reflection. While the term “cult” carries heavy baggage and technical definitions among psychologists, there are compelling parallels between MAGA’s dynamics and markers traditionally associated with cult-style movements. Below I outline the reasons why one might describe MAGA in cult-like terms — while also noting caveats.
1. Charismatic leadership and personalised loyalty
One of the hallmark features of cults is the presence of a charismatic authoritarian figure around whom loyalty becomes not just political but quasi-religious. In the case of MAGA, the role of Donald Trump is central: many supporters treat his statements as beyond reproach and place his persona at the heart of the movement’s identity. Cult-expert Steven Hassan has argued that MAGA’s loyalty to Trump is akin to “authoritarian mind-control cult” behaviour. The very slogan “Make America Great Again” becomes less a policy programme and more a badge of belonging. This fusion of leader-devotion and identity provides a strong cult-like template.
2. Us-vs-them mentality, information control and echo chambers
Cult movements often thrive on a worldview divided between an enlightened “us” and a corrupt, conspiratorial “them”. For MAGA, there is frequent invocation of narratives like “the deep state”, “fake news”, “election stolen”, and an external media elite that cannot be trusted. Sociological analyses note that MAGA adherents often dismiss mainstream sources and prefer alternative media ecosystems: one article describes the movement as creating a “closed feedback loop, a psychological echo chamber” that blocks criticism. Cults also emphasise behaviour and rituals tied to loyalty. In MAGA, visible markers such as the red cap, rallies, specific slogans or chants serve as rites of belonging.
3. Suppression of doubt, ostracism of dissenters
In many cults, doubters are labelled traitors, removed from the in-group, or pressured to conform. Within the MAGA movement, critics within the Republican fold (for example those who opposed Trump or his election claims) have been ostracised, disciplined or excluded. Studies note that MAGA’s internal culture discourages open criticism and that leaving the movement may incur social cost. Such mechanisms reinforce conformity and identity entrapment, which are classic cult attributes.
4. Emotional mobilisation, existential framing
Cults typically offer a story of existential significance: an imminent crisis, a hidden enemy, a special group that has truth and must act. MAGA frequently frames its narrative in apocalyptic terms (“our country under siege”, “the election stolen”, “patriots vs. traitors”), which cultivates high emotional arousal, fear, urgency and identity fusion. This intensity shifts support beyond policy preference to emotionally driven allegiance.
5. The BITE model and behavioural indicators
Hassan’s BITE model (Behaviour, Information, Thought and Emotional control) is often applied when assessing cults. Some analysts argue that MAGA shows many of these features: behavioural expectations (attendance, visible signage, rally actions), information control (discrediting external media, promoting aligned outlets), thought control (black-and-white ideology, “with us or against us” framing), emotional manipulation (fear of outsider threat, praise for loyalty). These parallels make the “cult” descriptor more than rhetorical flourish.
6. Why the label is contested
That said, many experts caution against simplistic labelling. For instance, cult specialist Rick Allen Ross has argued that while Trump shows traits similar to cult leaders, MAGA as a movement lacks the full structure of an authoritarian cult: there is no isolated compound, no single rigorous hierarchy, and participation remains voluntary rather than coercive. Moreover, millions of supporters identify for diverse reasons (economic anxiety, cultural identity, political beliefs) rather than purely leader-worship. Thus, the term “cult” may obscure those complexities.
7. Concluding reflection
In sum: describing MAGA as a cult is defensible in so far as the movement exhibits multiple key cult-like dynamics: charismatic leadership, information control, identity rituals, emotional mobilisation, suppression of dissent. These traits signal that some supporters experience MAGA not just as a political affiliation but as an immersive worldview. However, using the term in an academic or technical sense may overstate the case, given the differences in scope, structure and voluntariness compared with classic destructive cults.

