Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1986 Page 7
Judaeo-Christian tradition (epitomized by the resurgence of the creation-evolution
controversy). But a considerable portion of the disturbance comes from the repercussions of
cultic groups, alien cultural systems which have discovered that our tolerant, open culture -
especially in its current state of ―self-doubt‖ -is an attractive market for peddling ―new‖
roads to happiness and salvation.
Cultism
The recent upsurge of cult activity began during the 1960‘s, a time when intellectuals and
young people challenged many traditional values and social institutions. Initially, much of
the cultic activity was related to radical political movements (e.g., the Symbionese
Liberation Army, which captured and brainwashed Patty Hearst) or the drug subculture. By
the early 1970‘s, however, many cultic religious groups had come into being or significantly
enlarged their membership.
Although most of these groups received little public attention, a few became the focus of
considerable controversy. Most notable among these were the Unification Church (the
Moonies), the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna), Scientology,
The Way International, and the Children of God. These groups tended to proselytize among
white, middle-class, educated young people, many of whose parents began to criticize cults
publicly.
These parents reported that their children had undergone radical and sometimes very rapid
personality changes that resulted from brainwashing (mind-control, thought reform, and
coercive persuasion are other terms used to characterize the process), as described in the
work of Korean POW researchers. As more parents spoke out (joined by increasing numbers
of disaffected ex-members of cultic groups), an informal network began to develop, and
numerous citizen groups came into being, most of which later became affiliates of a national
umbrella organization, the Citizens Freedom Foundation (now renamed the Cult Awareness
Network).
Initially, very few mental health professionals or clergy participated in this growing network.
Most professionals tended to subscribe to the then popular stereotype that only disturbed
youths would join cults and that disturbed youths generally came from disturbed families.
For this reason, parents were rarely able to obtain professional help. Many, consequently,
resorted to desperate measures, such as abducting their children and forcing them to listen
(usually with the help of ex-members of cults) to ―the other side of the story.‖ The term
―deprogramming‖ became associated with this procedure, for brainwashed converts were
perceived as being programmed to believe whatever their leaders wanted.
As time passed, a handful of professionals began to recognize that mother wasn‘t always to
blame, that cult conversion often did result from very powerful persuasive techniques, and
that cults often did exploit and harm converts (Clark 1979 Singer, 1979 Clark, et al.,
1981). Citizens‘ groups, meanwhile, succeeded in convincing legislators to conduct a
number of hearings on cults.
As more and more parents, ex-members, and professionals began to testify publicly, the
media began to pick up their stories, especially after the Jonestown tragedy. A new
stereotype began to emerge. Instead of viewing converts as crazies from crazy families, the
public began to see cults as malignant groups which turned young people into non-thinking
zombies, alienated from their families, and obeying every whim of the cult leader.
The widespread dissemination of this one-sided analysis stimulated a forceful counterattack
by cult propagandists, but also by thoughtful individuals worried that public overreaction
could result in policy decisions that would threaten the freedom of non-cultic religious
groups. The fears of these individuals, however, were not realized. State conservatorship
bills designed to help remove cultists from their groups in order to test their psychiatric
Judaeo-Christian tradition (epitomized by the resurgence of the creation-evolution
controversy). But a considerable portion of the disturbance comes from the repercussions of
cultic groups, alien cultural systems which have discovered that our tolerant, open culture -
especially in its current state of ―self-doubt‖ -is an attractive market for peddling ―new‖
roads to happiness and salvation.
Cultism
The recent upsurge of cult activity began during the 1960‘s, a time when intellectuals and
young people challenged many traditional values and social institutions. Initially, much of
the cultic activity was related to radical political movements (e.g., the Symbionese
Liberation Army, which captured and brainwashed Patty Hearst) or the drug subculture. By
the early 1970‘s, however, many cultic religious groups had come into being or significantly
enlarged their membership.
Although most of these groups received little public attention, a few became the focus of
considerable controversy. Most notable among these were the Unification Church (the
Moonies), the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna), Scientology,
The Way International, and the Children of God. These groups tended to proselytize among
white, middle-class, educated young people, many of whose parents began to criticize cults
publicly.
These parents reported that their children had undergone radical and sometimes very rapid
personality changes that resulted from brainwashing (mind-control, thought reform, and
coercive persuasion are other terms used to characterize the process), as described in the
work of Korean POW researchers. As more parents spoke out (joined by increasing numbers
of disaffected ex-members of cultic groups), an informal network began to develop, and
numerous citizen groups came into being, most of which later became affiliates of a national
umbrella organization, the Citizens Freedom Foundation (now renamed the Cult Awareness
Network).
Initially, very few mental health professionals or clergy participated in this growing network.
Most professionals tended to subscribe to the then popular stereotype that only disturbed
youths would join cults and that disturbed youths generally came from disturbed families.
For this reason, parents were rarely able to obtain professional help. Many, consequently,
resorted to desperate measures, such as abducting their children and forcing them to listen
(usually with the help of ex-members of cults) to ―the other side of the story.‖ The term
―deprogramming‖ became associated with this procedure, for brainwashed converts were
perceived as being programmed to believe whatever their leaders wanted.
As time passed, a handful of professionals began to recognize that mother wasn‘t always to
blame, that cult conversion often did result from very powerful persuasive techniques, and
that cults often did exploit and harm converts (Clark 1979 Singer, 1979 Clark, et al.,
1981). Citizens‘ groups, meanwhile, succeeded in convincing legislators to conduct a
number of hearings on cults.
As more and more parents, ex-members, and professionals began to testify publicly, the
media began to pick up their stories, especially after the Jonestown tragedy. A new
stereotype began to emerge. Instead of viewing converts as crazies from crazy families, the
public began to see cults as malignant groups which turned young people into non-thinking
zombies, alienated from their families, and obeying every whim of the cult leader.
The widespread dissemination of this one-sided analysis stimulated a forceful counterattack
by cult propagandists, but also by thoughtful individuals worried that public overreaction
could result in policy decisions that would threaten the freedom of non-cultic religious
groups. The fears of these individuals, however, were not realized. State conservatorship
bills designed to help remove cultists from their groups in order to test their psychiatric
