Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1998, page 38
When people left, we always said that they had “dropped out.” I suppose that
kind of implies that by leaving you were falling down or showing weakness! We
also often said that they had “degenerated.” There was never a good reason for
calling it quits.
Conclusion
This article has explored the techniques used by some groups on the Left to maintain high
levels of conformity, activism, and intolerance on the part of their members. None of this
necessarily implies that radical movements to change society are inherently destined to
become obscure cults, or that a radical critique of modern society is inappropriate. In the
final analysis, the condition of society is a vitally important issue, and requires a political
rather than a psychological analysis. However, the evidence plainly suggests that a number
of traditional Leninist or Trotskyist assumptions endanger internal democracy, political
thinking, and what must be a central goal of any movement seeking wider influence --the
regular updating of ideas to retain relevance.
In particular, the Trotskyist conception of the role of the revolutionary party has become
transmuted into a rationale for the creation of tyrannical fiefdoms locked into a spiral of
irrelevance, fragmentation, and ideological petrifaction. Rigid adherence to democratic
centralism, a term which appears to be an oxymoron, reflects an excessive veneration for
“October,” which in turn precludes an updated historical analysis of the 1917 Revolution and
its aftermath. Accordingly, the Trotskyist tradition eschews innovation. Those marooned in
its static preoccupations find themselves condemned to an ever greater isolation, in which
the search for other footprints in the sand is always in vain. This is combined with a
catastrophist political analysis which (despite its frequent falsification by events) spurs such
intense activism that the energy, time, and confidence required for political reflection is
consumed by party building. Such party building is generally signified by the presence of
innumerable factions--and the absence of a party. The question therefore arises: To what
extent can the CWI and Trotskyist groupings in general be regarded as cults?
It has been suggested here that political cults possess six main distinguishing features,
namely:
1. A rigid belief system
2. An immunity to falsification
3. An authoritarian inner party regime
4. A leadership able to exercise arbitrary power
5. The deification of leader figures
6. An intense level of activism
The discussion of the CWI suggests that virtually all of these were present within the
organization, to one extent or another. However, no evidence has been presented that CWI
leaders enjoyed a privileged lifestyle above other members, either sexually or financially. In
addition, aspects of party ideology that reinforced conformism, including its enthusiasm for
democratic centralism, have been identified. Much of this also suggests that the grouping
concerned made ready use of the means by which Lifton (1961) suggested that social
influence can be exercised to create ideological totalism. Nevertheless, not all of these
elements were used equally, and their relative impact clearly varies from group to group.
Thus, Tourish and Irving (1995) have argued that it is useful to conceptualize the issue of
cultism as a continuum. At one end of the spectrum we find voluntary associations of people
cooperating to work out their ideas and develop a shared sense of purpose. At the other end
are manipulated individuals, compelled to uncritically accept the theories of unchallenged,
When people left, we always said that they had “dropped out.” I suppose that
kind of implies that by leaving you were falling down or showing weakness! We
also often said that they had “degenerated.” There was never a good reason for
calling it quits.
Conclusion
This article has explored the techniques used by some groups on the Left to maintain high
levels of conformity, activism, and intolerance on the part of their members. None of this
necessarily implies that radical movements to change society are inherently destined to
become obscure cults, or that a radical critique of modern society is inappropriate. In the
final analysis, the condition of society is a vitally important issue, and requires a political
rather than a psychological analysis. However, the evidence plainly suggests that a number
of traditional Leninist or Trotskyist assumptions endanger internal democracy, political
thinking, and what must be a central goal of any movement seeking wider influence --the
regular updating of ideas to retain relevance.
In particular, the Trotskyist conception of the role of the revolutionary party has become
transmuted into a rationale for the creation of tyrannical fiefdoms locked into a spiral of
irrelevance, fragmentation, and ideological petrifaction. Rigid adherence to democratic
centralism, a term which appears to be an oxymoron, reflects an excessive veneration for
“October,” which in turn precludes an updated historical analysis of the 1917 Revolution and
its aftermath. Accordingly, the Trotskyist tradition eschews innovation. Those marooned in
its static preoccupations find themselves condemned to an ever greater isolation, in which
the search for other footprints in the sand is always in vain. This is combined with a
catastrophist political analysis which (despite its frequent falsification by events) spurs such
intense activism that the energy, time, and confidence required for political reflection is
consumed by party building. Such party building is generally signified by the presence of
innumerable factions--and the absence of a party. The question therefore arises: To what
extent can the CWI and Trotskyist groupings in general be regarded as cults?
It has been suggested here that political cults possess six main distinguishing features,
namely:
1. A rigid belief system
2. An immunity to falsification
3. An authoritarian inner party regime
4. A leadership able to exercise arbitrary power
5. The deification of leader figures
6. An intense level of activism
The discussion of the CWI suggests that virtually all of these were present within the
organization, to one extent or another. However, no evidence has been presented that CWI
leaders enjoyed a privileged lifestyle above other members, either sexually or financially. In
addition, aspects of party ideology that reinforced conformism, including its enthusiasm for
democratic centralism, have been identified. Much of this also suggests that the grouping
concerned made ready use of the means by which Lifton (1961) suggested that social
influence can be exercised to create ideological totalism. Nevertheless, not all of these
elements were used equally, and their relative impact clearly varies from group to group.
Thus, Tourish and Irving (1995) have argued that it is useful to conceptualize the issue of
cultism as a continuum. At one end of the spectrum we find voluntary associations of people
cooperating to work out their ideas and develop a shared sense of purpose. At the other end
are manipulated individuals, compelled to uncritically accept the theories of unchallenged,
