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.
In the same way, we teach students the derived results of mathematics, instead of just telling them the axioms and assume they can figure out the consequences themselves.
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?
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.
The author was prolly just picking a name that the mentality was most like.
I think I take your general meaning though.
> There is no long term
> Certainty is strength, doubt is weakness
> Emulate the purported behavior of successful people
> The end supports the explanation of the means
But you're right in that it can be explained by fundamental attribution error in some part. It's still more understandable when the quite broad cognitive error (it's called fundamental for a reason!) is instantiated to some common manifestations.