Personality Cult or a Mere Matter of Popularity

This paper introduces a theoretical model for distinguishing between mere popularity and personality cults.
The inflated use of the personality cult concept in news media entails a need for clarity in differentiating cult phenomena.
The model is based on Max Weber’s concept of charismatic authority, consisting of three parameters:
1. Widespread symbolic elevation
2. Resilience
3. Religious parallels
Both representational and social practice dimensions are essential to constitute a personality cult.
Examples of Trump, Putin, and Ardern demonstrate the model's ability to distinguish cult from non-cult phenomena, indicating only Trump and Putin firmly exhibit cult characteristics.
Popular politicians like Ardern are more equivalent to celebrities lacking the authority and power typical of personality cult leaders, showing potential cult-like tendencies but lacking in social practices.
The phenomena can be perceived as existing on a continuum from mere admiration or popularity to a personality cult.

The fascination with Vladimir Putin’s machoism has heightened interest in personality cults understood as the exaltation of an individual’s authority parallel to religious worship (Pisch, 2016: 53-54).
Personality cults are not only associated with non-democratic leaders like Putin but also with democratic figures like Donald Trump, who acknowledged a cultish quality about himself (Aslan, 2017).
Despite a relatively favorable perception, even leaders like Jacinda Ardern have been claimed to have acquired a ‘global cult’ (Ganesh, 2020).
Key differences exist among political leaders in their communication styles, images, and popularity.
While scholarly attention on distinguishing personality cults from mere popularity has been limited (Hendriks, 2017), Weber’s concept of charismatic authority is pivotal in analyzing these phenomena.

The distinction between charisma and celebrity is critical. Charisma involves personal devotion and trust in leadership facing challenges through rallying followers (Weber, 1994).
Charismatic authority is defined as a ‘certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary’ (Weber, 1968: 241).
Celebrities do not possess the additional power tied to charismatic authority; they primarily achieve prominence through media coverage (Turner, 2013: 10).
Hendriks delineates between the technologies and contexts that construct charisma against those for celebrity, applying different operational measures.

Hendriks outlines nine characteristics of the charismatic ideal type which contrast with celebrities who generally possess media prominence devoid of transcendent abilities.
The characteristics include possessing unique knowledge linked to a transformative mission, attracting followers, and exerting authority deemed ethical beyond basic economic life (Hendriks, 2017: 361).
Celebrities symbolize commercialism and the status quo rather than revolutionary leadership contrary to charismatic figures who embody qualitative transformations.

The Model Parameters: A comparative model introduced here incorporates three parameters based on Weber’s principles integrated with Plamper's distinctions.
1. Widespread Symbolic Elevation
2. Resilience
3. Religious Parallels
Modern personality cults are characterized as products of mass politics utilizing mass media and are fundamentally secular (Plamper, 2012).

This parameter gauges whether the elevation exists at various societal levels, reflecting genuine worship and even ironic depictions reinforcing a narrative.
Plamper indicates modern cults emerge from mass politics, leveraging mass media to reach common populations rather than an elite.
Implications: Variability in representational practices from grassroots acknowledgment to official endorsements, showcasing the dialectical relationship between followers’ recognition and leaders’ constructed exceptionalism.

The second parameter assesses the extent to which political success or failure redirects representations and public sentiments towards cult leaders.
If failure leads to diminished popularity, resilience is noted to be low; conversely, continued popularity amongst failures indicates a strong resilient cult.
Conclusion: Historical examples, like Hitler, reflect resilience in leader personas and public detachments from operational failures.

This parameter captures whether leaders possess depictions or rituals akin to religious venues celebrating them.
The effectiveness of cults is accentuated through iconic representations where followers are involved in rituals symbolizing devotion.
Evidence suggests modern leaders who receive quasi-religious treatment both in image and social practice draw distinct parallels underpinning authority.

Stalin epitomizes a classic personality cult due to widespread symbolic elevation demonstrated through state propaganda.
Depictions often viewed him in a quasi-religious manner, and followers engaged in sycophantic rituals affirming his divinity; this serves as a benchmark for understanding modern cult dynamics.

The analysis of Putin, Trump, and Ardern against the constructed model highlights their distinctions:
- Putin showcases widespread elevation and resilience across both dimensions.
- Trump achieves notable reverence fused with modern media efforts, while examples of sycophantic behavior underscore loyalty signaling among followers.
- Ardern, contrasting with these dynamics, lacks substantial resilience or cult-like engagement, indicating her status is less of a personality cult and more akin to civil religion.

This theoretical model distinguishes between popularity and personality cults by evaluating three parameters rooted in Weberian charisma.
The case studies elucidate that while Trump and Putin embody full-fledged characteristics of personality cults, Ardern demonstrates limited cult-like tendencies pointing towards potential civil religion due to praises emerging chiefly in international contexts, rendering her lack persistent authority.

Further investigation into personality cult variations across historical contexts and between regimes remains warranted, alongside the impact of emerging media forms on leader-cult dynamics.