Residents of the commune later committed suicide by drinking a flavored beverage laced with potassium cyanide; some were forced to drink it, some (such as small children) drank it unknowingly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid
I have a longstanding interest in social psychology and the way a cult generally arranges to control people is to cut them off financially, socially, etc. This is the same way that abusive husbands typically treat their abused wives. One study sought to identify character traits that made abused women more likely to kill their abusive husband and could not do so. Instead, they found that the women who murdered their abusive husbands were the most isolated, the most abused, the most painted into a corner. In short, they were women who found themselves with no other way out.
I suppose if you work for the man or are enthralled by his billions or some such, that's going to hold sway for some people. But I have trouble comparing his Twitter debacle to what cults do.
Anyway, just rambling on. Not actually interested in discussing this Twitter mess that I am mostly trying to avoid discussing in spite of the entire world seeming to discuss nothing else.
But if you have some citations to back up your social psychology related statement, I would be interested in seeing those as it's an area of interest of mine.
This fits with my general knowledge of how such things work. TLDR: Those with the most skin in the game were the most likely to try to save face and double-down on their stated beliefs. Those who had lost less had an easier time going "Whoops! I was wrong!" and getting on with their lives:
Some of the believers took significant actions that indicated a high degree of commitment to the prophecy. Some left or lost their jobs, neglected or ended their studies, ended relationships and friendships with non-believers, gave away money and / or disposed of possessions to prepare for their departure on a flying saucer, which they believed would rescue them and others in advance of the flood.
As anticipated by the research team, the prophesied date passed with no sign of the predicted flood, causing a dissonance between the group's commitment to the prophecy and the unfolding reality. Different members of the group reacted in different ways. Many of those with the highest levels of belief, commitment and social support became more committed to their beliefs, began to court publicity in a way they had not before, and developed various rationalisations for the absence of the flood. Some others, with less prior conviction and commitment, and / or less access to ongoing group support, were less able to sustain or increase their previous levels of belief and involvement, and several left the group.
This is not inconsistent with what we know about the process by which people are radicalized and become members of extremist political groups and the like. Part of the process is that it becomes increasingly difficult to get respect, make meaningful social contacts etc with people outside the group. Once you pass some point of extremism, outsiders become openly hostile and their reactions give you no good path back from your position.
Being seen as "crazy" or "wrong" or "stupid" is too much to bear. Better to reject the entire world -- knowing it won't be nice to you at this point -- than to admit "Okay, maybe that wasn't the most rational thing to do."
So...cancel culture? Criticize the current #thing and get cut off financially and socially.
That would make #thing a cult, no?
One of the groups that formed out of it is still active today more than 150 years later.
In line with what I have noted elsewhere:
Many followers had given up their possessions in expectation of Christ's return...
There were also the instances of violence: a Millerite church was burned in Ithaca, New York, and two were vandalized in Dansville and Scottsville. In Loraine, Illinois, a mob attacked the Millerite congregation with clubs and knives, while a group in Toronto was tarred and feathered. Shots were fired at another Canadian group meeting in a private house.
Perhaps we shouldn't give people so much hell for simply being wrong?
Not exactly a citation, but none of the predictions or claims of the original QAnon poster have come true or been proven. Yet the Q movement is still around, and for some of them their beliefs are getting stranger.
When a cult leader fails to deliver, or otherwise issues a prediction that never materializes, the cult member usually grow stronger in the cult’s convictions. This is kind of a counterintuitive psychological phenomena but it has been demonstrated quite a few times. There may be something of a cognitive dissonance driving this. It is that after you see your cult leader fail, you can either dismiss all your prior believes, or change your version of reality to match the cult’s altered dogma. It seems as if doing the latter is easier for most people, so this is in turn what most people do.