Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 10
Herman‘s motivation for writing Trauma and Recovery was to show the commonalities
―between rape survivors and combat veterans, between battered women and political
prisoners, between the survivors of vast concentration camps created by tyrants who rule
nations, and the survivors of small, hidden concentration camps created by tyrants who rule
their homes‖ (Herman, 1992, p. 3). Tyrants who rule religious cults subject members to
similar violations.
To recapitulate, from a psychoanalytic perspective, the cult leader unconsciously
experiences his dependency needs as so deeply shameful that a delusion of omnipotence is
developed to ward off the toxic shame. It is urgent to the pathological narcissist, who knows
unconsciously that he is susceptible to extreme mortification (the sense of ―death‖ by
shame), that this delusion of omnipotence be sustained. Manic defenses help sustain the
delusion, but in addition, followers must be seduced and controlled so that the loathsome
dependence can be externalized, located in others and thereby made controllable. The
leader can then express his unconscious self-loathing through his ―compassion‖ (often thinly
disguised contempt) for his followers‘ weakness. Manically proclaiming his own perfection,
the leader creates a program of ―purification‖ for the follower. By enlisting the follower to
hold the shame that he projects and evacuates from his own psyche, the cult leader rids
himself of all shame, becoming, in effect, ―shameless.‖ He defines his shamelessness as
enlightenment, liberation, or self-actualization. It becomes important to the cult leader, for
the maintenance of his state of shamelessness on which his psychic equilibrium depends,
that there be no competition, that he alone, and no one else in the group, feels shameless.
So while apparently inviting others to attain his state of perfection (shamelessness) by
following him, the cult leader is actually constantly involved in inducing shame in his
followers, thereby maintaining his dominance and control. I have called this
sadomasochistic danse macabre the ―dark side of enlightenment‖ (see Shaw, 2000).
The Question of Pre-Existing and Induced Pathology: Blaming the Victim
As a psychoanalytically informed psychotherapist, I seek to identify what kinds of ideas
about the psychological organization of former cult members might be useful to consider
when seeking to help this population recover from traumatic cult experiences. Are there any
generalizable common denominators in terms of psychological organization and/or life
circumstances that can be useful in understanding how best to help this population? In
addressing these questions, it is necessary to confront two major themes: 1) pre-existing
pathology and induced pathology, and 2) the question of blaming the victim.
Theorists such as Fromm (1965), Becker (1973) and Berger (1967) have sought to
understand the dynamics of dominance and submission, sadism and masochism, that are
built into the human character and which are triggered in individuals and societies exposed
to certain influences. Fromm, and later Becker, were moved to explore these human traits
by the horror of Nazi Germany Berger‘s interest was oriented to the history of religion.
These ideas about man‘s vulnerability to certain ―pathological‖ behaviors can be used to
suggest that those who become cult victims are predisposed to submissive, sadomasochistic
behavior.
More recent theorists have been concerned with the phenomenon of blaming the victims of
rape and battering for asking for, or failing to put a stop to, the abuse they have suffered
(Herman, 1992 Kliger, 1994). McNew &Abell (1995) and Silver &Iacano (1986) use the
term ―sanctuary trauma‖ to describe how one who has already experienced severe trauma,
such as rape, often experiences a secondary trauma in what was expected to be a
supportive and protective environment, such as in a police station, a courtroom, or a
therapist‘s office. Herman (1992) notes that ―those who attempt to describe the atrocities
that they have witnessed also risk their own credibility. To speak publicly about one‘s
knowledge of atrocities is to invite the stigma that attaches to victims‖ (p. 2).
Herman‘s motivation for writing Trauma and Recovery was to show the commonalities
―between rape survivors and combat veterans, between battered women and political
prisoners, between the survivors of vast concentration camps created by tyrants who rule
nations, and the survivors of small, hidden concentration camps created by tyrants who rule
their homes‖ (Herman, 1992, p. 3). Tyrants who rule religious cults subject members to
similar violations.
To recapitulate, from a psychoanalytic perspective, the cult leader unconsciously
experiences his dependency needs as so deeply shameful that a delusion of omnipotence is
developed to ward off the toxic shame. It is urgent to the pathological narcissist, who knows
unconsciously that he is susceptible to extreme mortification (the sense of ―death‖ by
shame), that this delusion of omnipotence be sustained. Manic defenses help sustain the
delusion, but in addition, followers must be seduced and controlled so that the loathsome
dependence can be externalized, located in others and thereby made controllable. The
leader can then express his unconscious self-loathing through his ―compassion‖ (often thinly
disguised contempt) for his followers‘ weakness. Manically proclaiming his own perfection,
the leader creates a program of ―purification‖ for the follower. By enlisting the follower to
hold the shame that he projects and evacuates from his own psyche, the cult leader rids
himself of all shame, becoming, in effect, ―shameless.‖ He defines his shamelessness as
enlightenment, liberation, or self-actualization. It becomes important to the cult leader, for
the maintenance of his state of shamelessness on which his psychic equilibrium depends,
that there be no competition, that he alone, and no one else in the group, feels shameless.
So while apparently inviting others to attain his state of perfection (shamelessness) by
following him, the cult leader is actually constantly involved in inducing shame in his
followers, thereby maintaining his dominance and control. I have called this
sadomasochistic danse macabre the ―dark side of enlightenment‖ (see Shaw, 2000).
The Question of Pre-Existing and Induced Pathology: Blaming the Victim
As a psychoanalytically informed psychotherapist, I seek to identify what kinds of ideas
about the psychological organization of former cult members might be useful to consider
when seeking to help this population recover from traumatic cult experiences. Are there any
generalizable common denominators in terms of psychological organization and/or life
circumstances that can be useful in understanding how best to help this population? In
addressing these questions, it is necessary to confront two major themes: 1) pre-existing
pathology and induced pathology, and 2) the question of blaming the victim.
Theorists such as Fromm (1965), Becker (1973) and Berger (1967) have sought to
understand the dynamics of dominance and submission, sadism and masochism, that are
built into the human character and which are triggered in individuals and societies exposed
to certain influences. Fromm, and later Becker, were moved to explore these human traits
by the horror of Nazi Germany Berger‘s interest was oriented to the history of religion.
These ideas about man‘s vulnerability to certain ―pathological‖ behaviors can be used to
suggest that those who become cult victims are predisposed to submissive, sadomasochistic
behavior.
More recent theorists have been concerned with the phenomenon of blaming the victims of
rape and battering for asking for, or failing to put a stop to, the abuse they have suffered
(Herman, 1992 Kliger, 1994). McNew &Abell (1995) and Silver &Iacano (1986) use the
term ―sanctuary trauma‖ to describe how one who has already experienced severe trauma,
such as rape, often experiences a secondary trauma in what was expected to be a
supportive and protective environment, such as in a police station, a courtroom, or a
therapist‘s office. Herman (1992) notes that ―those who attempt to describe the atrocities
that they have witnessed also risk their own credibility. To speak publicly about one‘s
knowledge of atrocities is to invite the stigma that attaches to victims‖ (p. 2).
