The Real Reason We Want to See MAGA as a Cult
It's hard to pinpoint exactly when the word cult affixed itself to Donald Trump and his movement. It may have been as early as 2016, when, weeks before the Iowa caucus, Trump declared with god-man-like aplomb that he could shoot someone in Times Square and not lose a vote. It may have been mid-2018, when Bob Corker, a Republican senator from Tennessee, fretted as he left office about the 'cultish' turn in the party. Or maybe it can be traced to a New York Times editorial board op-ed, published a few days before Corker's comments made the news, which nervously noted the rapid transformation of the Republican Party into a machine for devotion to a single mortal. Certainly, by January 6, 2021, and the mouth-frothing fervor of Stop the Steal, cult had gone from being a political jab to a term of art, widely employed to describe the apparently invincible thrall in which Trumpism holds millions of Americans.
The impulse to understand MAGA this way is owing in part to the efflorescence of stories about cults across pop culture. From Wild Wild Country's account of the rise and fall of the self-styled free-sex guru Rajneesh for a generation of wealth-seeking believers in Reaganomics to The Vow's portrayal of NXIVM's transformation from corporate management seminar to sex-trafficking ring; from Warren Jeffs's polygamous Latter-day Saints–offshoot commune in Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey to the charismatic hold of spiritual influencer Teal Swan in The Deep End, thirst for tales of charismatic leaders, secret rituals, and salacious scandals seems unquenchable. Between the major streaming platforms, Netflix, Hulu, Max, Disney+, and Prime, more than five dozen cult documentaries are currently available in a panoply of flavors: sex, UFO, meditation, doomsday, and on and on. We are in a billion-dollar cult culture boom.
As a mass delusion fueled by charisma, shared grievance, aspiration, and a stubborn rejection of inherited truths, Trumpism bears no small resemblance to these insular, shadowy communities of faith and heterodoxy that have enthralled and entertained us. Over the past near-decade, people across the otherwise fissured political spectrum have become armchair experts in strange but potentially revolutionary groups, their imaginations caught up in escalating radicalism. And across dozens of stories, they are hooked by a single enticing promise: All cults fall. In TV cults, the skeptic is always vindicated.
This, in fact, is the real satisfaction of the cult narrative: the reinforcement of the fantasy that we who watch are different—better, smarter, and more equipped to hold power and influence—than those who believe. Having spent hours engrossed in the details of being in a cult, we imagine ourselves to have understood a dangerous phenomenon without ever having been subject to that danger. Not only might we glimpse that elusive Secret, we see the invisible wires and sleights of hand and, maybe most importantly, the way it all turns out. We already know that it is doomed. We are the new prophets, gifted with future sight.
In the waxing days of Trump's second presidential act, this is the true appeal of seeing MAGA as a cult: It's an alibi for liberals who are less trying to fathom the reasons for the man's return than dreaming of his movement's catastrophic collapse. The same combination of moral superiority and narrative certainty that foresees the imminent end of Heaven's Gate as they look to the sky for escape also fuels the internet's hunger for signs of #MAGARegret and makes the gleeful schadenfreude of 'FAFO' (fuck around and find out) a new political rallying cry. As the Democratic Party continues to wring its hands in meek and ineffectual dismay over the Trump administration's daily onslaught, its base has discovered the illiberal pleasures of scrolling TikToks that stitch videos of Trump supporters weeping over slashed farm subsidies or shuttered businesses against a gospel choir chorus of 'I never thought the leopards would eat my face.' Sadism, reveling in the suffering of others, is—as a rule—frowned upon, but when its satisfaction is turned toward a cultural phenomenon we have been told is too extremist or dangerous to exist in the mainstream, it comes to be a salutary violence. For their own good. Hard lessons, like a sharp slap to interrupt a hysteric outburst, school people back into good behavior. Except when the finding out doesn't seem to come.Despite having been told for so long that they were wrong—uneducated, impolite, fanatical, gullible, racist, backward—MAGA supporters ascended to the highest ranks of American politics. From inside the Oval Office, they hear their own rageful, incoherent sputtering at the injustices of the Deep State and The System issuing from the mouth of the most powerful man in world. It's heady, it's fortifying, it's vindicating. This is the part of the cult narrative where the tearful pleas of loved ones to come home bounce back 'Return to Sender.' This is also the part that devotees of cult media and Trump opponents struggle to come to terms with: People don't want to leave what has given them such psychic and social gratification, especially to return to what didn't serve them in the first place.
So we wait, with unconcealed anticipation, for the MAGA faithful to suffer the same fate as the brainwashed devotees of Mother God, who were arrested for carting their leader's mummified body through the desert in hopes of finding the salvation she promised, or of Charles Manson, whose 'family' followed him all the way to prison for life. Meanwhile, Trump supporters seem to remain impervious to the lessons they were supposed to have found out. And indeed, the more they refuse to repudiate the president and their own beliefs, or admit the causal connection between his policies and their tribulations, the more the left fantasizes their misfortune. We crave their reckoning as the satisfying (and promised) final act in the real-life docuseries we've been mainlining since before the pandemic. But what if the arc of history doesn't bend toward justice so much as turn back in on itself? What if the story of cults that so tidily predicts the end of Trump is as anesthetizing and deluding as the ideology it claims to oppose? It's gripping entertainment, but cult media's promises of guaranteed closure are not so much real as a compensation for what we already know.
After the cameras stop rolling, after scenes of comforting closure are edited together, the story of a cult goes on. It continues in the courtroom, as undaunted adherents of Warren Jeffs crowd the spectator box. It continues as millions of Americans keep flocking to Rajneesh's Indian ashram. People continue to believe. Cults don't just die, they shift so that they can meet new social and psychic needs. Cult documentaries can't tell us what happens next because their power lies in their endings—the fiery siege, the tearful confession, the moment of brutal awakening—endings that are designed to produce social repression.
Repression, Freud says, is the 'relaxation of the censorship—the formation of a compromise.' Everyone gives up a little (or a lot) of what we want in exchange for the muffled security of being 'normal.' A standard assumption about groups that share unconventional beliefs and rituals is that, by declaring them a cult and pushing them outside the bounds of acceptable society, we can curtail their influence. Indeed, that is precisely what these documentaries aim to do; to show and then contain the dangers that cults pose to the social compact. The truth is that when we've agreed to live within the safe strictures of normativity, it is almost unbearable to see people living beyond our psychic means. We must believe there's a cost.
Crafted to impress upon everyone who tunes in precisely what the price of straying outside the bounds of decorum and constraint is, cult media has inadvertently written a new coda. That final episode is the beginning of the story's second life: the memes, the merch, the folklore, the obsession. Jonestown didn't end with the Kool-Aid; it became a metaphor for not heeding caution. Manson went to prison but became a cultural icon. Stalin was embalmed, but his political blueprint persists—in India, in Turkey, in America. The cult documentary's finale is just the opening act of its cultural immortality. Our hunger for the collapse of Trump's movement isn't just about justice—it's about the thrill of witnessing a story we know how to consume. But history doesn't follow scripts. Faith and loyalty are not so easily shaken. What appears to be the end of the story is, in fact, often a lesson against the calculus of consequences. Cults don't disappear; they go viral. And the reckoning we're waiting for? It might just be the prologue to something we don't yet know how to fear. After all, 30 years after the fiery siege in Waco, the scene of the inferno out of which abandoned followers of David Koresh staggered blinkingly into federal custody, Donald Trump held the first official rally of his second presidential campaign there. One end, another beginning.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump's Administration Has Asked Ally Serbia to Accept Deportees
President Donald Trump's administration is pushing Serbia and other Balkan nations to take in migrants deported from the US, according to people familiar with the matter. The requests to countries in the region are ongoing and part of a broader strategy to find foreign governments willing to receive migrants sent from the US, including some who originally entered under Biden-era protections, according to the people, who requested anonymity because the talks were private.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Trump Aide Spells Out How Elon Musk Could Gain Ultimate Revenge On The President
Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin explained Wednesday why she believes tech billionaire Elon Musk could now actually 'tank Donald Trump's entire legislative agenda.' Griffin, a co-host on ABC's 'The View,' warned that Musk's vocal opposition to Trump's so-called 'big, beautiful' spending bill could sway Republicans in Congress, especially those worried about the consequences to their seats if they cross the world's richest person. Musk recently slammed the bill as a 'disgusting abomination' for how it will hike the national debt. He had previously staked his reputation on slashing federal spending in his now-ended role running Trump's unofficial Department of Government Efficiency. Trump, for now, has remained silent on Musk's criticism. Griffin, who served in the Trump administration during his first term, noted how the bill has measures on energy, border security and extends Trump's tax cuts. 'If Republicans decide, 'Oooh, we don't want to get on the wrong side of Elon,' that is what Donald Trump is banking it all on,' she continued. 'And that is kind of devastating for his administration.' 'On the flip side, those Republicans, if you're in a House district, you're like, 'I'm afraid of Donald Trump,' but Elon Musk, because of the dark money system we live in, he can come in and primary you by just pouring millions and millions into your race.' All Musk needs to do, she suggested, is 'peel off a handful of Republicans' to tip the balance of power in the House. Watch here: Critics Cackle Over Mike Johnson's Awkward Confession About Elon Musk Phone Call 'You Wussed Out': David Mamet Reveals Trump's 20-Minute Call After He Committed A MAGA Sin Critics Gasp At Trump Official's 'The Thing That Matters' Declaration
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump has demolished the liberal myth. Migrants shouldn't be treated equally
Sometimes the best policies are the ones that produce the shrillest wails from the Left. Such may be the case with Trump's latest travel ban, which by rights should spark serious soul-searching in Britain. Overnight, the President announced restrictions on the citizens of 12 countries. This was a response to the recent terror attack on Boulder, Colorado, in which an Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, is alleged to have thrown firebombs and sprayed burning petrol at a Jewish vigil on Sunday in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. Although Egypt is not on the list, Homeland Security officials said Mr Soliman was in the country illegally, having overstayed a tourist visa, but that he had applied for asylum in September 2022. So far, so Trumpian. (He took similar measures during his first term, after all, and they were repealed by Joe Biden who called them 'a stain on our national conscience'.) But then came the kicker. 'We will not let what happened in Europe happen in America,' Trump said. Ouch. If the months of Trump 2.0 have so far shifted the Overton window across the West, allowing even the likes of Sir Keir Starmer to contemplate – at least rhetorically – tackling immigration, then such a travel ban should be welcomed on these shores as well. Already, the usual suspects are accusing Trump of being 'racist'. But a glance at the range of countries on the list shows that this is not a question of race, or even religion. Rather, it is a question of homeland security, and that holds a stark lesson for Britain. A few months back, official data revealed that though foreigners comprise just 15 per cent of the population of our country, they commit 41 per cent of all crime and up to a quarter of sex crimes. In the first nine months of 2024, almost 14 per cent of grooming suspects were Pakistani, five times their share of the population. Two nationalities – Afghans and Eritreans – were more than 20 times more likely to account for sexual offence convictions than British citizens, according to the data. Overall, foreign nationals were 71 per cent more likely than Britons to be responsible for sex crime convictions. Based on convictions per 10,000 of the population, Afghans with 77 convictions topped the table with a rate of 59 per 10,000, 22.3 times that of Britons. They were followed by Eritreans, who accounted for 59 convictions at a rate of 53.6 per 10,000 of their population. In March 2025, data from the Ministry of Justice revealed that foreigners, who claim £1 billion a month in benefits, were also responsible for large proportions of violence, robbery, fraud and drug offences, between 2021 and 2023. There was no data for terrorism offences or acts of anti-Semitism. But does anybody want to hazard a guess? Which brings us to a fundamental question. Why? Why does Britain need to allow the criminals of the world to come to our shores to abuse women and girls, run criminal enterprises, foster terrorism and anti-Semitism, and claim benefits in the process? Obviously not all foreigners from these countries behave in this way. But facts aren't racist. Large numbers are pulling down our pants, spanking our buttocks and pulling them up again. In fact, the problem is not one of race but one of politics and culture. In my new book, Never Again? How the West Betrayed the Jews and Itself, which is coming out at the end of September, I look at groundbreaking research published in April by cognitive scientists Scott Barry Kaufman and Craig Neumann. They found that 'citizens in democratic countries have more benevolent traits, fewer malevolent traits, and greater well-being' than those living under autocratic regimes. Based on a study of 200,000 people from 75 countries, people living under autocracies were found to be much more likely to exhibit the 'Dark Triad' of negative personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. In democracies, by contrast, more people displayed the 'Light Triad' of humanism, faith in humanity and 'Kantianism', or treating people with dignity in their own right rather than viewing them as a means to an end. Obviously, this is not related to race. Russians are hardly black, but they hardly live in a democracy either. It is a case of cognitive development. The problem occurs when, in an age of global travel, 'Dark Triad' migrants who grew up in despotic regimes encounter gullible 'Light Triad' officials in the democracies, whose empathies are easily played upon. That is why we find British judges ruling that an Albanian convict should avoid deportation because his son had an aversion to foreign chicken nuggets, a Pakistani drug dealer could stay so he could teach his son about Islam, and a paedophile of the same nationality should not be sent home since it would be 'unduly harsh' on his own children. These real-life cases, reported by the Telegraph, provide a clear collision of the 'Dark Triad' traits in the criminals and the 'Light Triad' tendencies in the judges. It is a chemical reaction waiting to happen, and the vast majority of the population, wherever they are born, are suffering the consequences. In other words, we are being taken for fools. No foreign criminal has a God-given right to set up home in Britain just because he fancies it. This is our home, and although we are delighted to welcome strangers, that generosity should be withdrawn from those who nick our television and threaten our children – even if their own happen to like the chicken nuggets in our fridge. Trump has now thrown down the gauntlet. What is the British Government going to do to set our own house in order? Will it take an anti-Semitic outrage like the firebombing in Colorado before the Prime Minister takes action? Will he take action even then? Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.