13 VOLUME 7 |ISSUE 3 |2016
By Michael D. Langone
I have arrived at the content of this essay through my research
and clinical work with abuse victims of cultic groups over a
period of 35 years. Different people define the term cult in
different ways. I have found it more useful to focus on cultic
dynamics in relationships, rather than cults per se. We may
characterize a cultic dynamic by a fervently held ideology and
an entitled, often charismatic leadership that seeks to induce
others not only to comply with the high level of demands
issuing from the ideology, but also to wholeheartedly embrace
the ideology. An authoritarian dynamic, such as one finds in
a prison, enforces compliance, but a cultic dynamic enforces
compliance and belief. We may view a cultic dynamic, then, as
a special case of an authoritarian dynamic.
According to this view, Orwell’s 1984 described a cultic
dynamic in the interrogation and indoctrination of Winston
Smith. The authorities could easily have disposed of Smith
with a bullet in the head. Instead, they exerted great effort
to convert him to the ideology against which he had initially
rebelled. They wanted him to obey and believe, and they
were willing to inflict much pain and abuse on him to achieve
this goal. Thus, the book ends with the famous conversion
statement, “I love Big Brother.”
The irony of such a cultic dynamic is that the expressed
ideology, which appears to be so important, tests members’
degree of subjugation rather than the degree to which they
hold “right beliefs.” As in 1984, cult ideologies can change,
sometimes radically, depending upon the needs of the leader.
Certain core beliefs, or what we could call ruling propositions,
must be enforced rigidly: “Guru is God incarnate” “Pastor Ron
is a prophet of God” “I love Big Brother.” But the ideology
attached to these ruling propositions is changeable and
disposable. When followers shift their beliefs as the group’s
ideology changes, they demonstrate their fundamental
subjugation to the will of the leader. Today they passionately
exclaim that “A is true.” Tomorrow they passionately exclaim
that “A is false.” What doesn’t change is that they passionately
exclaim whatever the leader wants.
Origins and Prevention of
Abuse in Religious Groups
Based on a paper presented to the World Parliament of Religions, October 17, 2015, Salt Lake City, Utah
By Michael D. Langone
I have arrived at the content of this essay through my research
and clinical work with abuse victims of cultic groups over a
period of 35 years. Different people define the term cult in
different ways. I have found it more useful to focus on cultic
dynamics in relationships, rather than cults per se. We may
characterize a cultic dynamic by a fervently held ideology and
an entitled, often charismatic leadership that seeks to induce
others not only to comply with the high level of demands
issuing from the ideology, but also to wholeheartedly embrace
the ideology. An authoritarian dynamic, such as one finds in
a prison, enforces compliance, but a cultic dynamic enforces
compliance and belief. We may view a cultic dynamic, then, as
a special case of an authoritarian dynamic.
According to this view, Orwell’s 1984 described a cultic
dynamic in the interrogation and indoctrination of Winston
Smith. The authorities could easily have disposed of Smith
with a bullet in the head. Instead, they exerted great effort
to convert him to the ideology against which he had initially
rebelled. They wanted him to obey and believe, and they
were willing to inflict much pain and abuse on him to achieve
this goal. Thus, the book ends with the famous conversion
statement, “I love Big Brother.”
The irony of such a cultic dynamic is that the expressed
ideology, which appears to be so important, tests members’
degree of subjugation rather than the degree to which they
hold “right beliefs.” As in 1984, cult ideologies can change,
sometimes radically, depending upon the needs of the leader.
Certain core beliefs, or what we could call ruling propositions,
must be enforced rigidly: “Guru is God incarnate” “Pastor Ron
is a prophet of God” “I love Big Brother.” But the ideology
attached to these ruling propositions is changeable and
disposable. When followers shift their beliefs as the group’s
ideology changes, they demonstrate their fundamental
subjugation to the will of the leader. Today they passionately
exclaim that “A is true.” Tomorrow they passionately exclaim
that “A is false.” What doesn’t change is that they passionately
exclaim whatever the leader wants.
Origins and Prevention of
Abuse in Religious Groups
Based on a paper presented to the World Parliament of Religions, October 17, 2015, Salt Lake City, Utah
