
Principles of the American Cargo Cult (2003) - kick
https://web.archive.org/web/20030812081806/http://klausler.com/cargo.html
======
jeremya
I found this very helpful. It gives clear language for a number of things I’ve
thought and felt about public discourse in America. To name a few in
particular, the belief that complicated explanations are suspect and that
certainty is strength. I’ve repeatedly observed that successful people seem to
have very strong opinions and wondered if that was a contributor to their
success.

While it seems most things in this list stem from one or more logical /
informal fallacies, the way the principles are categorized and described makes
the fallacy obvious and, for me, familiar. Since 2003 when this was published,
I believe the network effects of social media have significantly increased the
frequency at which these sorts of fallacies are uttered.

What are the systems at work here that lead to this so-called cargo cult? Is
it easier, psychologically speaking for people, and Americans in particular,
to walk with these mental crutches? Is our education system broken? What
variables are at play here?

~~~
kick
Largely, the American people have been targeted with campaigns to make every
possible combination of events into sport. This isn't a conspiracy, the people
responsible have said as much.

From a _New York Times_ article that quotes the president of _CNN_ , Jeff
Zucker:

 _Zucker is a big sports fan and from the early days of the campaign had
spoken at editorial meetings about wanting to incorporate elements of ESPN’s
programming into CNN’s election coverage. "The idea that politics is sport is
undeniable, and we understood that and approached it that way."_

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/magazine/cnn-had-a-
proble...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/magazine/cnn-had-a-problem-
donald-trump-solved-it.html)

To quote the former-CEO and founder of _Fox News_ (and media consultant for
the Nixon, Reagan, and H.W. Bush Presidential campaigns, on top of an advisor
to the Trump Campaign for debate prep) Roger Ailes in an interview with _The
Hollywood Reporter_ :

 _" We’re competing with TNT and USA and ESPN."_

[https://web.archive.org/web/20150409110830/http://www.hollyw...](https://web.archive.org/web/20150409110830/http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/person/roger-
ailes-0)

These people have worked outside-in to make _everything_ in America sport.
When everything is just a game, nothing matters, and every occurrence is
equal: the only thing that matters is that whatever you're wanting gets in the
headlines _enough_ to where people know what it is.

Some, like Ailes, go into politics to make sure their candidates are
entertaining enough to be known by the widest net of people possible (that
means they win, because it's easier to get people to love you than it is to
get them to hate your opponent).

Others go into the private sector and reap the benefits of making every
headline equally temporary.

You weren't talking exclusively about politics, but I think most of the cargo
cult stems from political/economic desires that have bled into having an
impact on everything else by making all other forms of information have to
wrestle control from the sportsified headlines, time-slots and ad spots.

~~~
philwelch
It's one step deeper than that. It's not that everything is sports. If you
watch sports coverage, the coverage is less and less about the actual sports
and more and more about the underlying drama. Not even sports is sports
anymore. Instead, both sports and politics are being transformed into a
combination of sports and melodrama.

Which American institution lies squarely at the intersection of sports and
melodrama? Professional wrestling. I'm not saying that politics (or even other
sports) are turning into professional wrestling in the sense that the outcomes
are completely rigged, but they are being covered and treated much like
wrestling, even by the participants themselves. So it's no coincidence that
the current President is a member of the WWE Hall of Fame.

~~~
rashkov
Pretty good article making this same observation:
[https://www.edge.org/response-detail/11783](https://www.edge.org/response-
detail/11783)

------
sowbug
_Tragedy is a synonym for calamity_

It took me a little while to figure this one out, since I've always treated
the two words as synonyms (non-ironically, I hope). In case anyone else also
paused at this one, a tragedy is something horrible happening because of a
weakness in someone's character, whereas a calamity is just something horrible
happening. The point of the principle is that victims* of the American cargo
cult treat every tragedy (blame or causality) as a calamity (no blame or
causality), thus losing the opportunity to reflect on their own potential
responsibility.

*term used ironically, I hope

~~~
catalogia
That seems like an anachronistic meaning of the word tragedy. In the context
of dramatic productions, a tragedy does indeed imply a flaw or weakness in
character leading to some unpleasant outcome. But I don't think that
implication is generally present when using the word in other contexts. I
doubt many if any modern Europeans or Americans would find fault with the
statement, _" It's a tragedy when women die during child birth."_ Where the
implication of a personal flaw present in that statement, it would be a deeply
offensive statement. But in practice I think that's an agreeable statement.

It could be the case that Americans have a bias towards seeing calamity
instead of tragedy (that rings true in my opinion), but I don't think that
bias is evidenced in you or other modern English speakers treating the two
words as synonyms.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
Tragedy is avoidable, while calamity isn't.

There's a difference between saying _someone_ is responsible and _the victim_
is responsible.

The Cargo Cult decries the principle of legitimate responsibility, and
consistently attempts to deny the guilt of the true architects of tragedy in
numerous ways - victim-blaming being a very popular one.

In this example, a significant number of Americans would rather an adult woman
die in childbirth than terminate a dangerous pregnancy.

If adult women - who may well be married and have a family - actually do die
because legal abortion is unavailable, those Americans become responsible for
avoidable deaths.

But the magic of the Cult's moral inversion means they continue to consider
their position a wholly good one.

"Good intentions suffice."

This is not the same as - for example - a climate denialist buying beachfront
property in Southern Florida and then being amazed when it floods in a storm
and becomes impossible to sell.

"Consequences are things that happen to others."

These look opposed, but the MO is the same in both examples. Legitimate
responsibility is denied, and replaced by a simplistic self-affirming
moralising certainty which is actively hostile to mature empirical rationality
and empathy.

~~~
catalogia
To be clear, I wasn't trying to make a political point about womens'
healthcare. I think most people would say such a death was a 'tragedy' _even
if_ state of the art medical care had been provided. Somebody dying young is
generally considered tragic in the modern casual sense of the term,
_particularly_ if it was through no fault of the victim.

In retrospect I should have chosen a less sensitive example, so I'll do that
now: In the common modern sense somebody being killed by a falling tree branch
is more tragic than a drunk driver fatally striking the same tree. But in the
more traditional sense of the word tragedy, that's flipped backwards.

------
freetime2
> I wrote these principles after reflecting on the content of contemporary
> newspapers and broadcast media and why that content disquieted me.

I agree that the principles listed are highly present in American media,
especially during an election year. However:

> I really think that most Americans believe these things at a deep level.

I don't think most Americans "believe" these things, so much as these are just
typical human cognitive biases that Americans succumb to. If you were to ask
most Americans whether they agreed with these statements, they would say "no".
But come election time those same people who answered "no" would probably go
and vote for a candidate who exhibited these principles. Or given the choice
to save money for the future or buy some junk on Black Friday, they would
probably choose the junk.

------
shdjdbxnx
To some extent I have all of those.

To a lesser extent, I believe we all have those, even my thoughtful non-
American friends. Some of those flaws might be more characteristic I some
people than in other peoples.

So why call it “American” cargo cult? The only uniquely American aspect is
that our inability to rise above these flaws is destroying the country.

(I’m actually not American. I’ve just lived in the US for over a decade)

~~~
TeMPOraL
I think the author isn't doing any kind of comparison between Americans and
other people - it's just that his focus is entirely on his own country and
culture, so he calls this an American problem. I.e., it is a problem in
America - but might as well be a problem everywhere else too.

------
darkengine
Maybe I'm missing some nuance here, but most of these (excepting maybe
"Complicated explanations are suspect" and "All interconnection is apparent")
just seem like different manifestations of fundamental attribution error.

~~~
catalogia
It reads like a list of fairly reasonable (imho) grievances, but except for a
few they don't really seem related to the cargo cult phenomenon.

Namely these two _do_ seem related to cargo cults: _" The end supports the
explanation of the means: A successful person's explanation of the means of
his success is highly credible by the very fact of his success."_ _" Emulate
the purported behavior of successful people: This is the key to the cargo
cult. To enjoy the success of another, just mimic his rituals."_

But for instance, this one: _" Good intentions suffice: You can always
apologize."_ How is a culture of casual forgiveness related to cargo cults?
That sounds like a Protestant approach to the topic of forgiveness, and
insofar as Protestantism has been influential in America that approach to
forgiveness probably does accurately generalize the American public. But where
is the cargo cult angle?

~~~
f_nachos
Because it's magical thinking to believe that the harm caused by the
consequences of your actions is ameliorated by your intentions beforehand or
your apology afterward. A civilization built on Protestantism wouldn't be less
superstitious for holding these as cultural values. Which is where I guess the
cult part comes in.

~~~
catalogia
It may well be magical thinking, but magical thinking isn't synonymous with
cargo cults. Cargo cults seem like a particular sort of magical thinking; a
subset of magical thinking. As I understand the concept, a cargo cult is
specifically characterized by one group of people superficially emulating
another without understanding the underlying mechanisms in play.

If the Protestant approach to forgiveness is relating to cargo cults, perhaps
it's because they witnessed Catholics talk about forgiveness and decided to
adopt that aspect of the Catholic philosophy without also appreciating the
importance of the Catholic concept of penance (Catholics talk about
forgiveness a lot, but don't give so freely as Protestants.) So perhaps
Protestants are cargo culting Catholics.

I know a few Catholics who'd probably smirk in agreement with the above, but
I'm not convinced of it myself. I'm neither a Protestant nor a Catholic and
although I was raised as one and grew up surrounded by the other, I never felt
I understood either particularly well. So it's possible I've gotten it all
wrong.

------
d-d
I can't say I agree with most of these points, but

 _> Certainty is strength_

 _> [and survivorship bias]_

This I have definitely seen and experienced. Back when I thought I knew
everything some people followed me and copied what I did. I unwittingly became
a leader simply by being arrogant. Now that I have a little wisdom that's all
out the window.

Confidence is magnetic even if its foundations are nonsense. I think the
mechanism is similar to clickbait but maybe less intentional.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Yes, the phenomenon is true, but the point of the article is that it's a
_problem_ , and leads to bad outcomes. In your example, you've "became a
leader simply by being arrogant". Were you, in your arrogance, to make a
mistake, wouldn't your followers walk right into it and suffer the
consequences?

------
dvfjsdhgfv
> Emulate the purported behavior of successful people

This one is very obvious and appears everywhere. People are fascinated by Jobs
and the like, some even go as far as trating their employees like he did,
considering this is one of the critical factors of his success.

------
JCharante
This is scarily accurate, thanks for sharing kick.

~~~
kick
You're welcome! Always happy to share!

------
teilo
Why is this called a "cargo cult"? Whatever the merit of these observations,
this is not what a cargo cult is.

~~~
CrazyStat
""" Emulate the purported behavior of successful people

This is the key to the cargo cult. To enjoy the success of another, just mimic
his rituals. """

------
aklemm
How does this compare to non-American media and culture? Is it simply a human
problem?

------
JackPoach
This is great. And not uniquely American.

------
AgentOrange1234
Such a terrible experience on mobile. Sigh. WTB a new Internet where only ten
html tags are allowed.

~~~
jiofih
Is it? I find a raw page like this better for pure reading than the majority
of “well designed” websites, and reader mode works wonderfully.

~~~
AgentOrange1234
Here is my experience: The text is tiny and I cannot double-tap to zoom into
the article. When I use “reader view” the article disappears except for the
donation section. When I rotate my phone to try to be able to read the text by
making it bigger, a bar at the top eats a chunk of the page at all times and
cannot be closed. A plain vanilla raw page is exactly what I’m wishing for.

