Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2009, Page 38
innocents. Jihad grants honor it deflects from the unlawful violence and disorder. The
authors of the op-ed piece end with this: ―The label may seem passé, but terrorism is an
internationally recognized word for an internationally recognized crime. If we want to win
the war on words, we would do well to choose the ones we use with greater care.‖27
As far as NRMs go, I am sometimes struck by the lack of complex thinking among some
scholars. For one, they seem to think that if you identify a group as a cult, then you are also
saying that it isn‘t a religion, or a ―new‖ religion, as though one necessarily precludes the
other. They pat themselves on the back and declare ―the cult wars‖ are over. Not so fast, I
say.
Given what‘s happening around the world today, their stance on the ―c‖ word and their
incessant incantation that brainwashing doesn‘t exist places them on the wrong side of
history.
And now a debate among them seems to be about what signifies ―new.‖ How old does
something have to be before it‘s no longer new? I think that misses the point. What is of
interest are the features that signify that something is a cult as we understand that term—
whether it be an NRM, and old RM, a club, a political group, a karate school, a commune, a
family, a psychotherapy group, a UFO group, and so on. In that regard, we must look at the
patterns of structure, social relations, power relations, and behavior that would allow us to
characterize something as a cult.
Equally important, as touched on earlier, by not having a commonly agreed-upon neutral—
or cross-discipline—identifier, we are left with no language with which to talk about those
groups that are not theologically based, like my old group and so many others. Just as the
term terrorism is internationally recognized, I submit that the term cult has a solid
foundation: in the social sciences—that is, in sociology, anthropology, criminology, political
science, social psychology, and psychology in the humanities—that is, in religious studies,
history, and American studies as well as in business and organization theory. Never mind
that some sympathetic academics and cult spokespersons would have us believe—or more
importantly, would have the media, the legal profession, and the general public believe—
that there is no such thing as a cult and no such thing as brainwashing.
In a kind of misguided political correctness, much of the media may have backed down,
opting for sect now most of the time. And some courts may have been fooled by the
aggressive misleading tactics of a few so-called experts, although some courts have seen
through that and have allowed testimony regarding the undue influence of cultic control.
And I can tell you that the general public ain‘t so dumb either. People understand these
terms and have for decades.
Now I don‘t mean to imply that this is so simple, or that there aren‘t some
misunderstandings or instances of jumping the gun or mislabeling that may go on.
Realistically, that‘s the case with anything controversial.
Yes, cult is a contested concept.28 Nevertheless, that doesn‘t mean we should throw out the
term. It has a good foundation it‘s been recognized repeatedly and it serves a purpose.
Do we need to do a better job of explaining it? Sometimes, yes.
Do we need to speak out when it‘s used improperly or too hastily? Yes, of course.
Does the term cult carry a negative connotation? Yes, I suppose it does for some people in
some instances.
Do the cults bear some, if not all, responsibility for that? Yes, I believe they do.
Do cults get desperate and sometimes act out under the threat of outside pressure or the
perception that they are being ―persecuted‖? Yes, some of them do. But that doesn‘t mean
innocents. Jihad grants honor it deflects from the unlawful violence and disorder. The
authors of the op-ed piece end with this: ―The label may seem passé, but terrorism is an
internationally recognized word for an internationally recognized crime. If we want to win
the war on words, we would do well to choose the ones we use with greater care.‖27
As far as NRMs go, I am sometimes struck by the lack of complex thinking among some
scholars. For one, they seem to think that if you identify a group as a cult, then you are also
saying that it isn‘t a religion, or a ―new‖ religion, as though one necessarily precludes the
other. They pat themselves on the back and declare ―the cult wars‖ are over. Not so fast, I
say.
Given what‘s happening around the world today, their stance on the ―c‖ word and their
incessant incantation that brainwashing doesn‘t exist places them on the wrong side of
history.
And now a debate among them seems to be about what signifies ―new.‖ How old does
something have to be before it‘s no longer new? I think that misses the point. What is of
interest are the features that signify that something is a cult as we understand that term—
whether it be an NRM, and old RM, a club, a political group, a karate school, a commune, a
family, a psychotherapy group, a UFO group, and so on. In that regard, we must look at the
patterns of structure, social relations, power relations, and behavior that would allow us to
characterize something as a cult.
Equally important, as touched on earlier, by not having a commonly agreed-upon neutral—
or cross-discipline—identifier, we are left with no language with which to talk about those
groups that are not theologically based, like my old group and so many others. Just as the
term terrorism is internationally recognized, I submit that the term cult has a solid
foundation: in the social sciences—that is, in sociology, anthropology, criminology, political
science, social psychology, and psychology in the humanities—that is, in religious studies,
history, and American studies as well as in business and organization theory. Never mind
that some sympathetic academics and cult spokespersons would have us believe—or more
importantly, would have the media, the legal profession, and the general public believe—
that there is no such thing as a cult and no such thing as brainwashing.
In a kind of misguided political correctness, much of the media may have backed down,
opting for sect now most of the time. And some courts may have been fooled by the
aggressive misleading tactics of a few so-called experts, although some courts have seen
through that and have allowed testimony regarding the undue influence of cultic control.
And I can tell you that the general public ain‘t so dumb either. People understand these
terms and have for decades.
Now I don‘t mean to imply that this is so simple, or that there aren‘t some
misunderstandings or instances of jumping the gun or mislabeling that may go on.
Realistically, that‘s the case with anything controversial.
Yes, cult is a contested concept.28 Nevertheless, that doesn‘t mean we should throw out the
term. It has a good foundation it‘s been recognized repeatedly and it serves a purpose.
Do we need to do a better job of explaining it? Sometimes, yes.
Do we need to speak out when it‘s used improperly or too hastily? Yes, of course.
Does the term cult carry a negative connotation? Yes, I suppose it does for some people in
some instances.
Do the cults bear some, if not all, responsibility for that? Yes, I believe they do.
Do cults get desperate and sometimes act out under the threat of outside pressure or the
perception that they are being ―persecuted‖? Yes, some of them do. But that doesn‘t mean
