Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 207
toward the Chinese government: Whatever the government says must be a lie, and
whatever the government‘s enemies say about it must be true.
Certainly, China is still a long way from being as open, tolerant, and free as the United
States and other democracies. But is it so bad as to warrant a presumption of deception?
Economically, China has made remarkable strides in recent years, progress that could not
have occurred without an increased level of political freedom and respect for the rule of law.
Although the Tiananmen Square episode remains a vivid memory for most who watched it
unfold on television, the recent peaceful protest marches in Hong Kong suggest to some
that Hong Kong may accelerate China‘s movement toward greater freedom, rather than
have its own freedom suppressed by the Chinese government.
Now, let me not be misunderstood. I am not saying that China is a ―worker‘s paradise‖!
Political freedom, however, does indeed appear to be increasing, even if not as rapidly as
many want. Nonetheless, there are still many human rights problems. A number of
independent agencies support Dr. Robbins‘ assertion that some adherents of Falun Gong
and other religious groups are indeed brutally targeted by the government (e.g., Chinese
crackdown on religion, 2001, 13 December U.N. human rights boss blasts China, 2000, 29
February Up to 1200 temples destroyed in Chinese Crackdown, 2000, 13 December).
The Chinese government can surely be criticized. But that does not mean that the
government‘s claims, or claims by people in mental health agencies, for example, must
always be contradicted. We should approach their allegations with skepticism, not a
presumption of deception. And we should hope that China continues its movement toward
political transparency, the need for which became acutely clear during the SARS epidemic.
Otherwise, we run the risk of falling into an ideological hole in which we automatically
assume that allegations 1, 2, 3 ….n are all false simply because they are made by people
working for or dependent upon the government. Let us look at the claims skeptically, but
also individually.
Cults are Good
Where some approach China with a presumption of deception, others approach cults with a
presumption of benevolence (I here use ―cult‖ in the more general sense of a charismatic
group, not the pejorative sense). Cult members mean what they say, and since what they
say is almost always warm and fuzzy, cults must be good. Falun Gong members say that
the movement is about truth, compassion, and forbearance. Since no sensible person
opposes these aspirations, Falun Gong must be ―good,‖ if one accepts its claims uncritically.
Ironically, some who seem inclined toward a presumption of benevolence with regard to
cults and cult members demonstrate a presumption of deception when those very same cult
members become ex-members and say bad things about their former groups. They are
now said to be apostates telling ―atrocity tales‖ that are motivated by sour grapes and a
desire to save face.
The presumption of benevolence transforms into a presumption of persecution when a cultic
movement commits violent acts. Why do ―good‖ groups do ―bad‖ things? The simplistic
answer some offer is that ―bad‖ people, ―bad‖ movements, or ―bad‖ governments persecute
the groups unjustly and ―drive‖ them to violence. Of course, there is an element of truth to
this assertion, for sociology has a rich literature on deviance amplification. An element of
truth, however, isn‘t the whole truth, and we should eschew simplistic interpretations.
Cults are Bad
The same mentality, but pointing in the opposite direction, can be found among some cult
critics. If a religious group is new, out of the mainstream, and centered on a charismatic
leader, it must be a cult and ipso facto must be bad. Nothing group members say can be
toward the Chinese government: Whatever the government says must be a lie, and
whatever the government‘s enemies say about it must be true.
Certainly, China is still a long way from being as open, tolerant, and free as the United
States and other democracies. But is it so bad as to warrant a presumption of deception?
Economically, China has made remarkable strides in recent years, progress that could not
have occurred without an increased level of political freedom and respect for the rule of law.
Although the Tiananmen Square episode remains a vivid memory for most who watched it
unfold on television, the recent peaceful protest marches in Hong Kong suggest to some
that Hong Kong may accelerate China‘s movement toward greater freedom, rather than
have its own freedom suppressed by the Chinese government.
Now, let me not be misunderstood. I am not saying that China is a ―worker‘s paradise‖!
Political freedom, however, does indeed appear to be increasing, even if not as rapidly as
many want. Nonetheless, there are still many human rights problems. A number of
independent agencies support Dr. Robbins‘ assertion that some adherents of Falun Gong
and other religious groups are indeed brutally targeted by the government (e.g., Chinese
crackdown on religion, 2001, 13 December U.N. human rights boss blasts China, 2000, 29
February Up to 1200 temples destroyed in Chinese Crackdown, 2000, 13 December).
The Chinese government can surely be criticized. But that does not mean that the
government‘s claims, or claims by people in mental health agencies, for example, must
always be contradicted. We should approach their allegations with skepticism, not a
presumption of deception. And we should hope that China continues its movement toward
political transparency, the need for which became acutely clear during the SARS epidemic.
Otherwise, we run the risk of falling into an ideological hole in which we automatically
assume that allegations 1, 2, 3 ….n are all false simply because they are made by people
working for or dependent upon the government. Let us look at the claims skeptically, but
also individually.
Cults are Good
Where some approach China with a presumption of deception, others approach cults with a
presumption of benevolence (I here use ―cult‖ in the more general sense of a charismatic
group, not the pejorative sense). Cult members mean what they say, and since what they
say is almost always warm and fuzzy, cults must be good. Falun Gong members say that
the movement is about truth, compassion, and forbearance. Since no sensible person
opposes these aspirations, Falun Gong must be ―good,‖ if one accepts its claims uncritically.
Ironically, some who seem inclined toward a presumption of benevolence with regard to
cults and cult members demonstrate a presumption of deception when those very same cult
members become ex-members and say bad things about their former groups. They are
now said to be apostates telling ―atrocity tales‖ that are motivated by sour grapes and a
desire to save face.
The presumption of benevolence transforms into a presumption of persecution when a cultic
movement commits violent acts. Why do ―good‖ groups do ―bad‖ things? The simplistic
answer some offer is that ―bad‖ people, ―bad‖ movements, or ―bad‖ governments persecute
the groups unjustly and ―drive‖ them to violence. Of course, there is an element of truth to
this assertion, for sociology has a rich literature on deviance amplification. An element of
truth, however, isn‘t the whole truth, and we should eschew simplistic interpretations.
Cults are Bad
The same mentality, but pointing in the opposite direction, can be found among some cult
critics. If a religious group is new, out of the mainstream, and centered on a charismatic
leader, it must be a cult and ipso facto must be bad. Nothing group members say can be
