Why has every society throughout history that has engaged in Cult of Personality objectively been shit?

Why has every society throughout history that has engaged in Cult of Personality objectively been shit?

Napoleon
Augustus

So Trump's US will be shit?

>liberals literally havent stopped bitching about him to the point where it has become annoying

>cult of personality

>Napoleon
>Augustus

That just makes my point even further.

Extensive political abuse, surveillance and censorship by Napoleon including the reinstitution of slavery and Augustus never advocated Cult of Personality, he never wanted to be seen as a God.

Go away. I want to have a serious discussion.

Only because declaring himself god-emperor would have been pursuing the trappings of power with huge downsides. The title is meaningless when he could just incrementally take everything and actually have power even without the title. Augustus was smart.

As for you points on Napoleonic France. I will let you first define/ exemplify the opposite of "objectively shit."

I should wish to define "objectively shit" as the removal of individual liberties and a lowering of living standards or repression of possibly higher living standards.

Next, provide an example of such a place.

Kim Jong Il/Un North Korea, Stanlinist Russia, Castro Cuba, any of the crazy emperors of Rome etc.

>and Augustus never advocated Cult of Personality

Literally his entire principate system was based on "Everyone remember how fantastic and respectable I am, you can count on me, and nobody else. I'm your man."

Just because he didn't overtly try to make himself king doesn't mean he didn't create a cult of personality, you know.

No, I mean provide an example of some place that is not 'objectively shit.'

I don't understand?

Do you really need examples of non-Cult of Personality societies which are not "objectively shit"? There are plenty which are pretty obvious.

Then name the, if you would..

As far as I can tell your premise falls apart completely, as there is nothing opposite of your claim. You could have very well have said "Why has every society throughout history objectively been shit?" There are none I can think of that weren't or aren't heavily flawed.

Are you really going to suggest that the USA in the 20th century or Britain in the late 19th century was "objectively shit"?

Both had great flourishing of culture and living standards and increased liberties.

Slaves
suffrage
various other forms of oppression
disregard for civil liberties
exploiting colonies
atrocious treatment of those under their rule
drug conflicts
black operations
spying on citizens
etc.

Yes but no society is perfect, what we are discussing here is the fact Cult of Personality societies tend to be even more shit and oppressive.

Some of the greatest leaders of men have had these cults of personality.

I'd add Washington and ben Franklin (not a leader but still important) to the list.

But these men didn't actively enforce Cult of Personality through state or media propaganda measures so they technically do not count.

If you're willing to disregard all those horrible things, so be it. There is nothing objective about it though.

The term was used provocatively. Don't be a sperg.

Sorry, I forgot that words have no meaning.

You need to go back

>just like conservatards couldn't stop complaining about obongo
its like pottery

they did. just look at all the paintings washington had done of himself. he was known to be extremely conscious about his public appearances

You tell me

Why do you think OP?

I think it's because when society turns to shit, people's collective unconscious starts to look for a Hero to save them from the Chaos and institute Order, and it doesn't matter if that hero comes from the good and redeemable parts of their personality, as long as he institutes order again.

And too much order it turns out, is about as bad as too much chaos.

>Throughout history.
Cult if Personality is relatively recent.

You can't use the same labels wit Monarchies since the Dynasty is an institution and not about just one particular guy.