While this was a really interesting podcast to listen to, it was also very very disturbing. For me, besides the 900+ people dying, the most disheartening part of the story was that Jim Jones started off fighting for equality and spiraled down a terrible path. The path he followed seemed to parallel the concept of power we cover today that absolute power corrupts absolutely. While his followers initially joined the church based on a semi-permanent structure of inequality (joining a hierarchically structured church), there was no abuse, or oppression involved. However, Jim shifted his role as leader when he essentially refused to follow a path of temporary inequality, making himself into a god, and causing the deaths of 900 people.<\/p>\n
Obviously, Jim Jones is a great example of a toxic charismatic. He was extremely successful in gathering a following and then manipulating them for his personal goals. What I find really concerning is that despite all of the warning signs, Jones was still able to cause a massacre. Is there not a way that outside intervention could have been better, or the followers could have subverted Jone\u2019s authority? It seems like by now (after WWII with Hitler and this example) that we should have built some kind of safeguard to work against toxic charisma, similar to the ways that groupthink can be dispelled.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
While this was a really interesting podcast to listen to, it was also very very disturbing. For me, besides the 900+ people dying, the most…<\/p>\n