Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2008, Page 9
realizes that ―many of the most dangerous cults can be described as totalitarian‖ (Taylor,
2004:43). Third, she realizes that ―coercive techniques may be applied to keep members in
the group‖ (Taylor, 2004:44), although not all groups need to use them. This statement
certainly is in line with ones that Ben Zablocki and I have made about some groups using
brainwashing techniques in efforts to retain members (Kent, 2001:367-368 Kent and Hall,
2000:75 Zablocki, 1998 2001:174-177). Finally, while rejecting any notion that ―a
particular process called ‗brainwashing‘ ...is distinct from ...other psychological processes‖
(Taylor, 2004:44), she nonetheless realizes the brainwashing term alerts us to the ―dream
of control‖ that dangerous cults and their leaders hold:
When the apocalypse comes, it is the cult which will survive and inherit the
new dispensation the rest of the world will be dead, or at best enslaved. In
the here and now, the cult leader typically insists on increasingly severe
control over his members‘ lives, often encouraging them to refer to him as
God or God‘s representative on earth ....(Taylor, 2004:45)
Because cult leaders and members hold these grandiose visions, she concludes,
―Brainwashing as control fantasy [by cult leaders] remains extremely relevant‖ as a concept
(Taylor: 2004:45).
Much of the remainder of her study discusses how the extreme social psychological
pressures that people undergo in brainwashing programs change the neurology and
physiology of the brain. In doing so, Taylor has given the discussion about brainwashing
grounding in medical science that complements and extends the social scientific discussions
about the processes. Her definition of brainwashing, however, still assumes that targeted
individuals must be in such a program unwillingly, which is a highly contentious assumption
not shared by several others cited in this article. Regarding a wide range of research, she
concludes, ―the studies suggest that brainwashing, in its aspect as process, is best regarded
as a collective noun for various, increasingly well-understood techniques of non-consensual
mind change‖ (Taylor, 2004:23). While many might disagree with the implication that
brainwashing always takes place in nonconsensual settings, few researchers doubt that the
particular techniques employed in brainwashing attempts simply are well-understood social-
psychological phenomena.2 Taylor reminds us, too, that the techniques also involve
physiological alterations and reformulations within the brain.
Teen Behavior Modification Programs
In the mid-1980s, Louisiana and Georgia officials developed facilities for teenage boys who
had gotten in trouble with the law for various offences (Selcraig, 2000:67). Soon similar
facilities appeared in other sections of the United States, and various camps and programs
opened in other countries. Parents who were concerned, if not at times desperate, about
their children‘s (real or imagined) behaviors sent their children to these programs, as did
juvenile justice officials in many states. Criticisms arose, however, about the often brutal—
and sometimes deadly—punishments that the ‗inmates‘ suffered, and some of those brutal
punishments led to charges that the teens were undergoing brainwashing programs.
For example, a parent, Karen Burnett, who withdrew her son from the Dundee Ranch
Academy in Costa Rica, looked at what her son had been through and concluded,
‗It‘s really a brainwashing technique. It‘s to keep them hungry, keep them
stressed, break them down, emotionally, psychologically, get them to admit
to their crimes, then build them back up. And in the building back up process
...you rebuild what you want.‘ (quoted in Smyth, 2003)
Likewise, psychologist Larry Brendtro, president of a nonprofit and advocacy group for
troubled children called Reclaiming Youth International, looked at the accounts of the
realizes that ―many of the most dangerous cults can be described as totalitarian‖ (Taylor,
2004:43). Third, she realizes that ―coercive techniques may be applied to keep members in
the group‖ (Taylor, 2004:44), although not all groups need to use them. This statement
certainly is in line with ones that Ben Zablocki and I have made about some groups using
brainwashing techniques in efforts to retain members (Kent, 2001:367-368 Kent and Hall,
2000:75 Zablocki, 1998 2001:174-177). Finally, while rejecting any notion that ―a
particular process called ‗brainwashing‘ ...is distinct from ...other psychological processes‖
(Taylor, 2004:44), she nonetheless realizes the brainwashing term alerts us to the ―dream
of control‖ that dangerous cults and their leaders hold:
When the apocalypse comes, it is the cult which will survive and inherit the
new dispensation the rest of the world will be dead, or at best enslaved. In
the here and now, the cult leader typically insists on increasingly severe
control over his members‘ lives, often encouraging them to refer to him as
God or God‘s representative on earth ....(Taylor, 2004:45)
Because cult leaders and members hold these grandiose visions, she concludes,
―Brainwashing as control fantasy [by cult leaders] remains extremely relevant‖ as a concept
(Taylor: 2004:45).
Much of the remainder of her study discusses how the extreme social psychological
pressures that people undergo in brainwashing programs change the neurology and
physiology of the brain. In doing so, Taylor has given the discussion about brainwashing
grounding in medical science that complements and extends the social scientific discussions
about the processes. Her definition of brainwashing, however, still assumes that targeted
individuals must be in such a program unwillingly, which is a highly contentious assumption
not shared by several others cited in this article. Regarding a wide range of research, she
concludes, ―the studies suggest that brainwashing, in its aspect as process, is best regarded
as a collective noun for various, increasingly well-understood techniques of non-consensual
mind change‖ (Taylor, 2004:23). While many might disagree with the implication that
brainwashing always takes place in nonconsensual settings, few researchers doubt that the
particular techniques employed in brainwashing attempts simply are well-understood social-
psychological phenomena.2 Taylor reminds us, too, that the techniques also involve
physiological alterations and reformulations within the brain.
Teen Behavior Modification Programs
In the mid-1980s, Louisiana and Georgia officials developed facilities for teenage boys who
had gotten in trouble with the law for various offences (Selcraig, 2000:67). Soon similar
facilities appeared in other sections of the United States, and various camps and programs
opened in other countries. Parents who were concerned, if not at times desperate, about
their children‘s (real or imagined) behaviors sent their children to these programs, as did
juvenile justice officials in many states. Criticisms arose, however, about the often brutal—
and sometimes deadly—punishments that the ‗inmates‘ suffered, and some of those brutal
punishments led to charges that the teens were undergoing brainwashing programs.
For example, a parent, Karen Burnett, who withdrew her son from the Dundee Ranch
Academy in Costa Rica, looked at what her son had been through and concluded,
‗It‘s really a brainwashing technique. It‘s to keep them hungry, keep them
stressed, break them down, emotionally, psychologically, get them to admit
to their crimes, then build them back up. And in the building back up process
...you rebuild what you want.‘ (quoted in Smyth, 2003)
Likewise, psychologist Larry Brendtro, president of a nonprofit and advocacy group for
troubled children called Reclaiming Youth International, looked at the accounts of the
