Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2009, Page 37
that we are so aware of and attuned to—and that are certainly at play here. One of the
more highly regarded terrorism experts recently repeated what he wrote in an earlier
book,22 that young Muslim youth are not susceptible to brainwashing,23 and therefore that
is not an explanation for why they get involved in terrorist organizations and activity. If
Marc Sageman understood what brainwashing was, he couldn‘t possibly make such a close-
minded statement.
Ironically, Sageman goes on to describe the four-step process by which the youth get
radicalized—a process that, for him, somewhat magically goes from personal experience, to
ideology, to a social network where they chat about things, to action. Not a single word
about the change process an individual must go through to proceed from talk to action,
especially when it involves violent, extremist action. No mention of the key elements of
influence (possibly even, dare I say, coercion?) critical to such a process.
While terrorism is an important issue, we must also bear in mind that a culture of fear has
been generated—at least in the United States—that may make terrorist activity appear to
be a bigger threat than it is. A recently released study by researchers at Simon Fraser
University indicates that if we set aside the war in Iraq, acts of terrorism and resultant
casualties have gone way down in the past five years—by more than 40 percent since
2001.24 In addition, there‘s been a 54 percent decline between 1985 and 2004 in the
number of groups in the Middle East and North Africa using violence. One cause for this,
according to the study, is the tremendous drop in support for Islamist terror organizations
in the Muslim world. Much historical evidence reveals that once they lose public support,
terrorist campaigns tend to be abandoned or defeated.
We saw that very phenomenon here in the U.S. in the 1970s, when the Weather
Underground, a group of radical left-wing extremists, split off from the more moderate
antiwar group, Students for a Democratic Society. The Weathermen blew up some
buildings—and themselves—becoming very quickly isolated and irrelevant. So did the radical
group Earth First!, when it advocated tree-spiking and other potentially violent acts to stop
logging. Many lost interest and switched their support to more moderate environmental
groups. The same dampening effect took place when extremists spurred on by the Army of
God and several other hate groups incited the murder of abortion doctors. At least three
doctors and four clinic staff were killed.25 Clinics were bombed and vandalized staff and
volunteers were stalked and harassed. Ultimately, the outcome was marginalization of that
brand of ideological extremism and isolation of its perpetrators.
So while we certainly want to keep our sights on terrorist groups that use cult techniques to
recruit and convert loyal followers into deployable agents, we must not forget what I
consider to be a top priority—all those cults in our midst.
***
I‘ve mentioned political groups and terrorist organizations in the same sentence that I‘ve
used the word cult. Let me be clear about what I mean when I use the ―c‖ word. Moreover,
I‘d like to address the ongoing controversy surrounding it—a debate that, unfortunately, still
plagues us and sometimes distracts us and diverts us from our greater goals.
In a recent New York Times op-ed piece, the authors argue that terrorists like to be called
jihadists because it associates them with a term that has positive connotations,26 just as
some cults surely would like to be called a ―new religious movement‖ (NRM) because it puts
them in a positive light (except of course a cult like the one I was in, which was political:
―religious‖ is hardly an appropriate identifier for such a group, which is exactly part of the
problem with the NRM term). In the case of terrorists, once they‘re called jihadists, it puts
them smack dab in the middle of a religious framework, turning the discussion toward
theology and away from their terrorizing and intimidation of the public and the murder of
that we are so aware of and attuned to—and that are certainly at play here. One of the
more highly regarded terrorism experts recently repeated what he wrote in an earlier
book,22 that young Muslim youth are not susceptible to brainwashing,23 and therefore that
is not an explanation for why they get involved in terrorist organizations and activity. If
Marc Sageman understood what brainwashing was, he couldn‘t possibly make such a close-
minded statement.
Ironically, Sageman goes on to describe the four-step process by which the youth get
radicalized—a process that, for him, somewhat magically goes from personal experience, to
ideology, to a social network where they chat about things, to action. Not a single word
about the change process an individual must go through to proceed from talk to action,
especially when it involves violent, extremist action. No mention of the key elements of
influence (possibly even, dare I say, coercion?) critical to such a process.
While terrorism is an important issue, we must also bear in mind that a culture of fear has
been generated—at least in the United States—that may make terrorist activity appear to
be a bigger threat than it is. A recently released study by researchers at Simon Fraser
University indicates that if we set aside the war in Iraq, acts of terrorism and resultant
casualties have gone way down in the past five years—by more than 40 percent since
2001.24 In addition, there‘s been a 54 percent decline between 1985 and 2004 in the
number of groups in the Middle East and North Africa using violence. One cause for this,
according to the study, is the tremendous drop in support for Islamist terror organizations
in the Muslim world. Much historical evidence reveals that once they lose public support,
terrorist campaigns tend to be abandoned or defeated.
We saw that very phenomenon here in the U.S. in the 1970s, when the Weather
Underground, a group of radical left-wing extremists, split off from the more moderate
antiwar group, Students for a Democratic Society. The Weathermen blew up some
buildings—and themselves—becoming very quickly isolated and irrelevant. So did the radical
group Earth First!, when it advocated tree-spiking and other potentially violent acts to stop
logging. Many lost interest and switched their support to more moderate environmental
groups. The same dampening effect took place when extremists spurred on by the Army of
God and several other hate groups incited the murder of abortion doctors. At least three
doctors and four clinic staff were killed.25 Clinics were bombed and vandalized staff and
volunteers were stalked and harassed. Ultimately, the outcome was marginalization of that
brand of ideological extremism and isolation of its perpetrators.
So while we certainly want to keep our sights on terrorist groups that use cult techniques to
recruit and convert loyal followers into deployable agents, we must not forget what I
consider to be a top priority—all those cults in our midst.
***
I‘ve mentioned political groups and terrorist organizations in the same sentence that I‘ve
used the word cult. Let me be clear about what I mean when I use the ―c‖ word. Moreover,
I‘d like to address the ongoing controversy surrounding it—a debate that, unfortunately, still
plagues us and sometimes distracts us and diverts us from our greater goals.
In a recent New York Times op-ed piece, the authors argue that terrorists like to be called
jihadists because it associates them with a term that has positive connotations,26 just as
some cults surely would like to be called a ―new religious movement‖ (NRM) because it puts
them in a positive light (except of course a cult like the one I was in, which was political:
―religious‖ is hardly an appropriate identifier for such a group, which is exactly part of the
problem with the NRM term). In the case of terrorists, once they‘re called jihadists, it puts
them smack dab in the middle of a religious framework, turning the discussion toward
theology and away from their terrorizing and intimidation of the public and the murder of
