When someone claims to be Jesus, it raises both suspicion and expectation. Ambivalence melts away and coalesces into hard opinion on one side or the other.
The Texas shootout is a new reminder of the risk involved when someone identifies, organizes and interprets certain ideals, theories or opinions and then tries to personify them.
More Top Picks Shop Vacs
The difference between a cult and a larger, organized body of believers boils down to acceptability. The audience must be ready for the message in order for the leader to gain support and the cult to expand.
This will not happen to the violent Branch Davidians of Waco. The resort to gunfire did not match the self-proclaimed divinity and messianic rhetoric of its leader. The great sadness is that too many gullible people were swept up by the cult’s distorted belief system.
In its own twisted way, the Waco incident tells us something about America in an era of declining expectations. The temptation is great to grasp at something that speaks of hope for the future, no matter how ill-examined or ill-advised the ideas may be.
This eagerness for radical change poses a great danger to people worried about the nation’s direction. Equally, it poses a danger upon the leader trying to win their support for a particular set of ideas. Nothing is more profound than the anger people can work up for someone who has inspired them, then turned around and disappointed them.
It may seem somewhat tortured to speak, in the same breath, of the infamous Waco incident and Bill Clinton’s energetic sales blitzkrieg on his economic program, but not so when one considers the fragile relationship always existing between leader and follower.
Unlike the message of the Davidians, the Clinton program enjoys widespread support, even among many business executives not given to opening their minds to the blandishments of a Democratic president. Some executives who do not support his plan have, for the time being, decided to keep their skepticism in check and give it a chance.
The public seems far ahead of the politicians in wanting change. This has been a pleasant surprise for Clinton as he criss-crosses the nation preaching the gospel of shared sacrifice and higher taxes. It gives him a power that he never thought he would have in dealing with Congress on the deficit.
Some say Ross Perot paved the way for Clinton to present an economic plan emphasizing austerity, but this is not entirely true. Turning that idea around brings us closer to the mark. Americans paved the way for Perot to deliver a bold message for change during the campaign, just as they are now bolstering Clinton as he sells his ideas.
It doesn’t even seem to matter that Clinton broke a slew of campaign promises or gave a distorted picture of his plan in his speech to Congress, or failed to mention that the final cost of the savings and loan bailout are not included in his plan. All is forgiven by a populace eager to be led.
Clinton folks are basking in the glory of the president’s highly effective sales program. It will help ensure a speedy passage by Congress but launch the administration into new, uncharted economic waters.
And this is the danger. Expectations seem to be rising to an unrealistic level, as many Americans have the false impression that the modest sacrifices called for by Clinton will bring prosperity in a short period of time.
Though Clinton is a far more effective leader than Jimmy Carter, one can recall a similar situation during the Georgian’s presidency. Carter lifted expectations early in his presidency, but the public turned on him when the economy went sour.
Nothing is more profound than the anger people can work up for someone who has inspired them, then turned around and disappointed them. In going directly for the hearts of American voters, Clinton has raised the stakes of his presidency. If this does not work out, their faith in him could evaporate.
Clinton’s problem is that he could still be bolder and bring about even greater change by moving aggressively now. Why be timid when you have the unique opportunity to transform the U.S. economy and put it on a firmer course?
Americans may not be economic sophisticates when it comes to the details, but they certainly know whom to blame and whom to credit when the results are in.