The Cult Test

by Gursant Singh ⌂ @, Yuba City California USA, Wednesday, June 02, 2010, 12:26 (4200 days ago)

The following was copied from this website:

The Guru is always right.
The Guru, his church, and his teachings are always right, and above criticism, and beyond reproach.

In some cults, the guru is dead, but the principle is the same. I use the word "guru" loosely here; in many cults the charismatic leader has the title of minister, priest, yogi, swami, prophet, or all-knowing wise man. Or even, "Chairman Mao." In any case, the leader is always right.

Likewise, the teachings of the guru are always right, and when he dies, his writings become holy scriptures, infallible and unquestionable. And the guru's church is always right, and the guru's successors are always right, and everything about the cult is always right.

Jeffrey Masson had this to say about phony gurus:

Every guru claims to know something you cannot know by yourself or through ordinary channels. All gurus promise access to a hidden reality if only you will follow their teaching, accept their authority, hand your life over to them. Certain questions are off limits. There are things you cannot know about the guru and the guru's personal life. Every doubt about the guru is a reflection of your own unworthiness, or the influence of an external evil force. The more obscure the action of the guru, the more likely it is to be right, to be cherished. Ultimately you cannot admire the guru, you must worship him. You must obey him, you must humble yourself, for the greater he is, the less you are — until you reach the inner circle and can start abusing other people the way your guru abused you. All this is in the very nature of being a guru.
My Father's Guru, Jeffrey Masson, 1993, page 173.
(Please note that there is another kind of "guru" — the genuine kind. Jeffrey Masson was writing about his own experiences with a "spiritual teacher" — Paul Brunton — who was a fraud and a fake. But there are some real ones around, even if they sometimes seem as rare as hens' teeth.)

Lafayette Ronald
"L. Ron" Hubbard
The degree to which the cult glorifies the leader is often absurd. L. Ron Hubbard, the leader of Scientology, was lauded as the most magnificent person who had ever lived — indeed, he was single-handedly the greatest cause of human advancement in all time, because he had been reborn in lifetime after lifetime, returning to Earth again and again, each time bringing yet another great discovery or advancement to humanity. It seemed that L. Ron Hubbard had been, in successive reincarnations, most all of the greatest and most famous men who had ever lived, throughout all of human history.

The Scientology organization publishes a series of 20 books — the "RON series" — which exalt L. Ron Hubbard in all of his aspects: RON the Filmmaker, RON the Master Mariner, RON the Auditor, RON the Philosophy of Administration, RON the Adventurer/Explorer, RON the Artist, RON the Photographer, RON the Writer, RON the Humanitarian, RON the Horticulturist, RON the Music Maker, RON the Poet/Lyricist, etc... Hubbard's practice was to dabble in something a bit, like sailing a sailboat for the summer, and then declare himself a Master of the art, deserving of another book...

In many of the cover photographs on those books, Hubbard gazes upwards, towards Heaven, to tell us that he is a spiritual visionary who is above mundane earthly concerns. Coincidentally, on the cover of the Hari Krishna (ISKCON) book The Science of Self Realization, the creepy fraudulent guru A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada strikes exactly the same lofty "spiritual" Heaven-gazing pose. Those phony gurus sure do like to gaze up towards Heaven a lot. (Perhaps because they know that that's about as close to Heaven as they are ever going to get...)

A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

L. Ron Hubbard

A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

L. Ron Hubbard

A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

Not to be outdone, Moon's Unification Church claims that Sun Myung Moon and his wife are "The Perfect Parents," the only two perfect people on the planet Earth. And Moon is the new Messiah, here to finish the work that Jesus Christ didn't quite manage to get done right...

Reverend Sun Myung Moon and his wife, and some expendable followers.
The Reverend Sun Myung Moon is boss of the Unification Church, more commonly known as the "Moonies". Now into his eighties, the South Korean sage proclaims that the Virgin Mary was not a virgin and that he and his wife — the "True Mother" — are Christ's heirs, on earth to finish Christ's work and unite all Christian churches into his. He has also done time in a US penitentiary for tax evasion.

It just goes on and on. In cult after cult, the leader is just the greatest thing. "Ultimately you cannot admire the guru, you must worship him."

If you have any doubts about whether the cult worships the guru, just ask a member, "What are the 10 biggest mistakes that the guru made in setting up the organization and formulating its doctrines?" True believers will give you a look of horror and insist that the guru has never made any mistakes... "The very idea is unthinkable."

There is one big disadvantage for the guru when the cult declares that he is perfect — he has to act that way, and at least do a good job of faking it. If he is found to be stealing all of the money and screwing all of the girls, it can hurt his believability. A few cults have a clever work-around that spares the cult leader from having to be perfect: Somebody Else, like a dead saint, or an angel, or Jesus, or the Virgin Mary, is the perfect one, and the cult leader merely "channels" the Perfect Master's messages. In that way, what the leader says is still unquestionably true and unchallengeable, because it comes from a Higher Power, but the cult leader can indulge in all of the pleasures of the flesh himself without creating a contradiction. After all, he never said that he was perfect, or any more holy than anybody else. He is just more attuned to the Higher Spheres, and able to hear the Voice of a Higher Power...

Oh, and of course the received messages will suit the leader's whims. Suppose, for instance, that there is a cute young woman whom the leader fancies, but she has gotten involved with another male member of the group. Well, suddenly the Angel or Ascended Master is criticizing that other fellow for indulging in base desires, and telling him to knock it off and have nothing to do with women. Then, when the cult leader jumps on the same young woman, the Ascended Master has no criticism of him... Funny how that works. You can use your own imagination to dream up another dozen similar tricks.

2. You are always wrong.
The individual members of the cult are told that they are inherently small, weak, stupid, ignorant, and sinful. Cult members are routinely criticized, shamed, ridiculed, discounted, diminished, and told in dozens of ways that they are not good enough.

This cult characteristic is sometimes expressed in the infantization of the cult members: They refer to the leader as "Father", while he refers to them as "my children."

Cult members are also told that they are in no way qualified to judge the Guru or his church. Should you disagree with the leader or his cult about anything, see Cult Rule Number One. Having negative emotions about the cult or its leader is a "defect" that needs to be fixed.

A corollary to this rule is the practice of lowering members' self-esteem by a variety of methods:

Elders or higher-ranking members will berate the newer members and tell them that their work or their spirituality isn't good enough. Again, the beginners are abused by the guru and his henchmen until they reach the inner circle, at which time they can turn around and do it all to someone else who is just beginning.

It is almost a universal cult characteristic that, in the opinion of the cult leader and other elders, newcomers cannot think correctly. They are too "new", or "unspiritual", and they haven't been members long enough, or they haven't prayed or chanted or meditated long enough, or they haven't been off of drugs and alcohol long enough, or something... It's always something.

Members will criticize themselves and confess all of their sins and faults, sometimes engaging in public self-criticism or confession sessions. This is used by everybody from Maoist Chinese Communist groups to Christian cults.

Sometimes other members will attack them and criticize them in "group therapy" sessions, or Synanon games.

Members are taught not to trust their own minds or their own judgement:
Your thinking has been corrupted by sin.
Your judgement is no good.
Your thinking is no good.
Your mind is no good.
You have a criminal mind.
You have an alcoholic mind.
You need a complete make-over.
Your thinking is controlled by your addictions.
Your thinking is controlled by your sexual desires.
Your thinking is controlled by Satan.
You haven't been chanting or meditating or doing yoga long enough to have a clear head.
You haven't been off of drugs and alcohol long enough to have a clear head.

Members are taught not to trust their own motives:
Your motives are no good; everything you do is just for yourself.
You are selfish, vain, egotistical, self-seeking, and always trying to get your own way.
You are just seeking ego-gratification.
You are lazy.
You are always trying to do things the easier, softer way.
You just want to get laid.
You just want to get drunk or high.
You just want to avoid the hard work of getting right with God.
You just want to be happy.

Members are taught not to feel their own feelings.
Steven Hassan wrote

Since mind control depends on creating a new identity within the individual, cult doctrine always requires that a person distrust his own self.
Combatting Cult Mind Control, Steven Hassan, 1988, page 79.
The fawning hero-worshipper and sociology professor Dr. Lewis Yablonksky praised Synanon's mind-control tactics like this:

The development which takes place is best described as a "resocialization process." The individual is, in a fashion, "brainwashed" to give up his old deviant patterns.
The Tunnel Back, Synanon, Lewis Yablonsky, page 261.
Prof. Yablonsky seems to have really gotten a kick out of watching tough old thugs beating up on the wimpy newcomers — he just gushes with praise for their skill in tormenting the newcomers:

Attacking the Criminal Past: A "Haircut"
The criminal-addict's self-concept makes him inept and keeps him on the wrong side of the law. A postulate at Synanon is that this face to the world must be changed and a new one developed. At Synanon, this is vigorously attempted. It involves a "180-degree" turn from the offender's past patterns of behavior.

Charles "Chuck" Dederich
Chuck [Dederich] described part of Synanon's resocialization process in this area to my graduate class in Social Welfare at U.C.L.A.:
"First you remove the chemical. You stop him from using drugs, and you do this by telling him to do it. He doesn't know he can do it himself, so you tell him to do it.
The next thing you do is attack the language. Eliminating their criminal language is very important."
Language is, of course, the vehicle of culture and behavior; and at Synanon, it is instrumental in shifting the behavior patterns that the addict has used in the past. He begins to use a new, still-undeveloped set of social-emotional muscles. This shift is not accomplished by loving and affectionate cajoling or by discussion of the criminal's symptoms of addiction and crime. There is minimal symptom reinforcement of criminal patterns. Behavior and thinking are modified by verbal-sledgehammer attacks. The attack is modulated and tuned by the expert synanist. The individual is blasted, then supported, and he seems to learn to change his behavior as a result of this positive traumatic experience.
An important method of attack therapy in Synanon is the "haircut." This form of verbal attack employs ridicule, hyperbole, and direct verbal onslaught. In part, the "haircut" attack keeps the rug pulled out from under the recovering addict. As Chuck [Dederich] describes it: "If he gets set, begins to feel a little complacent, and feels he's in control of himself — which, of course, he isn't — he may even think he can reward himself with a little dope or a pill. Then, of course — BLOUIE — he's dead again." This, of course, is also the classic pattern of the rise and fall of the alcoholic.
The elements of exaggeration and artful ridicule are revealed in this "haircut." In addition, the pattern of attack and then support is demonstrated. A typical "haircut" goes beyond the bad behavior of the moment and into a more serious problem, and this is also revealed in the session. Unlike synanons, it is not interactional. A "haircut" is usually delivered by several older Synanon members to younger members.
The Tunnel Back, Synanon, Lewis Yablonsky, pages 239-242.
So the new member is always kept off balance and the rug is constantly pulled out from under him by the attacks of the elders. He is taught that he cannot trust his own thinking, because he is just a criminal addict, and newcomers can't think right. All of that is in addition to the regular confession sessions, called "synanons" and "The Game", and "The Perpetual Stew". And that was supposed to brainwash the new member into being a wonderful transformed drug-free person. Too bad the technique didn't work.

Also note the assumption that the member never recovers. He cannot ever be allowed to feel healed and in control of himself — he must be knocked down every time he tries to stand up — which leads to the next item, No Exit.

Incidentally, the pattern of behavior described there as a "positive traumatic experience" — "blasted, and then supported" — is actually a textbook example of the classic pattern of abuse called "battering". It's what abusive wife-battering husbands do to their wives: beat them up, and then sooth and comfort and reassure them, and apologize and tell them that it won't happen again, and then turn around and beat them up again, then sooth and comfort and reassure them again... And the effect it has on the wives is to paralyze them with fear and anxiety — they never know what to do because they never know what's going to happen next. They end up so confused that they don't know if they are coming or going. And plenty of wife-beating husbands rationalize their actions by saying, "Well, I had to teach her a lesson. It was for her own good."

And while Yablonsky was describing only nonviolent attacks on the junior Synanon members, it didn't stay that way. Later on, things got really bad. As Chuck Dederich later said, "Nonviolence was just a position we took. We change positions all of the time." In the end, Synanon became very violent. Dederich and two of his goons were even arrested for attempted murder, to which they pleaded guilty. They actually put a big old rattlesnake, minus rattle, in the mailbox of a lawyer who was suing them, and it bit him. He just barely survived, and his arm was crippled for life.

3. No Exit.
There is simply no proper or honorable way to leave the cult. Period. To leave is to fail, to die, to be defeated by evil. To leave is to invite divine retribution.

Members are often taught that all kinds of bad things will happen to them if they leave: They will lose all of the spiritual progress that they made while they were in the cult, or they won't be able to get into Heaven, or the Devil or demons will get them, or they will relapse and die of drugs and alcohol... That is another standard cult characteristic: The Cult Implants Phobias, and more of the usual threats and fears are listed under that item.

Obviously, if everybody leaves the cult, then the phony guru's game is over. So he is the one who really has reason to fear people leaving.

There are often tremendous obstacles to leaving:

There is usually some form of peer pressure, where loyal cult members will work 'round the clock on any member who has doubts about the cult and longs for his or her old life. (The other cult members don't want to get left behind, and splitters shake their own "faith".)
The obstacles may be physical ones, like where the cult lives communally in an isolated area, and the cult won't give the member a ride back to "the evil other world".
Often, the cult has taken control of all of the members' checkbooks and credit cards, and the member is literally penniless and will have great difficulty getting out.
In extreme cases, like in Rev. Jim Jones' People's Temple, they even shot those who tried to leave.
William Olin wrote about Synanon:

The only subject you could never talk about in Games was splitting, for once you did, no one trusted you any more, and your former brothers and sisters couldn't squeeze you out fast enough. As [the cult leader] Chuck [Dederich] was fond of saying, "That's just the way it is."
Escape From Utopia: My Ten Years in Synanon, William F. Olin, page 179.
The Scientology "Code of Honor" includes these items:

2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.
3. Never desert a group to which you owe your support.
And Scientologists who are members of the "Sea Org" (sea-going organization) sign a billion-year contract, swearing to serve the cult leader L. Ron Hubbard in all future reincarnations for the next billion years. How's that for not ever leaving the group?

A corollary to the "No Exit" rule is the demonization of those who leave:

They are evil, weak, and selfish.
They are stupid and foolish.
They are wandering in darkness, unable to see.
They are traitors, quitters, turn-coats, disloyal, deserters.
They have sold out.
They are Enemies of the Cross.
They have chosen Evil over Goodness.
They are losers, trying to throw stones at winners.
They didn't chant enough, or they didn't meditate enough, or they didn't do enough yoga.
They weren't really trying.
They didn't follow the procedures correctly.
They were unable to resist the temptation to sin.
They hid their problems, and didn't reveal them to the group.
They couldn't overcome their cravings for sex, alcohol, or drugs.
They couldn't give up their attachments to money and possessions.
They couldn't be honest.
They were always stupid, real losers.
They never could get it right.
They are the spawn of Satan.
They were always trying to destroy our movement.
They were never a part of us to begin with.
We are much better off without their bad influences.
The musician Carlos Santana was an admirer of Sri Chinmoy for a while, he said in a Rolling Stone interview, but, "Everything about [Chinmoy] turned to vinegar." And he said that after he left, the group became "vindictive."
When some people left Jim Jones' People's Temple commune in Guyana:

In a barrage of angry meetings, Jones vilified the defectors as "murderers" — defectors not merely from Jonestown but from socialism, who would rather "pay taxes which buy guns to kill black babies" than stand with the poor and oppressed trying to build a better society in Jonestown. With a no-more-Mr.-Nice-Guy edge in his voice, he announced the beginning of a campaign to fight dangerous bourgeois backslipping within the community; and then fell silent for another few weeks.
Awake in a Nightmare, Ethan Feinsod, 1981, page 142.
In some cults, members are told to absolutely avoid any contact with people who have left the cult. They are told that the departees are evil and dangerous, and must be shunned and ostracized. Good Scientologists may not have any contact with people who have been "declared Suppressive Persons." Jehovah's Witnesses may not talk to or associate with those who have been "disfellowshipped." Likewise, good Moonies may not communicate in any way with those who have left. That is an act of self-preservation for the cult: They don't want to risk their members being told some sensible things by people who were lucky enough to get out.

Such ostracism also acts as a strong deterrent to people who may be thinking about leaving. Cardigan, in "Mainstream Cults," makes the point that the fact that every member of the cult knows for certain what will happen if they leave is a potent psychological threat. It goes beyond a vague, remote, "you'll burn in Hell for eternity" threat. It's an immediate, here-and-now threat: "We will not associate with you ever again. You will be completely cut off and totally alone." No one wants to risk being completely ostracized by his or her friends. And since most cult members associate almost exclusively with just other cult members, such ostracism means being cast completely adrift, and left totally friendless and alone.

Michael Rogge describes the dilemma of those who leave this way:

The true nature of the so-called friendships within the group will only be revealed after a devotee has left the fold. Members have seen this happen, but did not give it a thought at the time, because it happened to someone else. But when they undergo the same fate themselves they will feel the humiliation of not being greeted anymore, marriage gone — even not being recognized by one's own children anymore.
The outcast feels thrown in an abyss. He is cut off from social contacts, his life in pieces.
The magnitude of this desperate experience should not be under-estimated. The renegade will feel deep shame. He may have confessed in the group intimate secrets, which are now being ridiculed by his former so-called friends.
The expulsee, deeply hurt, may become embittered and even enter into a suicidal mental state.
A few cults, like Yogi Bhajan's 3HO, specialize in kicking people out as a means of practicing terrorism; you either instantly obey all orders and believe everything you are told, or you are gone, banished in disgrace. But that still isn't an honorable exit.

In the Jehovah's Witnesses, Jehovah 'sifts out' those not truly 'in the truth', those without 'the right heart condition' which is why people leave or must be "disfellowshipped". In the eyes of the cult, no one leaves for legitimate reasons.

On the other hand, some other cults, like Scientology, are extremely possessive: they won't allow members to leave at all, under any conditions. Some cults, including Scientology, will even track down and physically retrieve runaways. Scientology actually maintains fortified and armed prison camps where out-of-favor Scientologists are hand-cuffed, chained, and imprisoned, like the "Gold Base" — the Gilman Hot Springs Scientology base, and the "Happy Valley" camp near Hemet, California. Members who attempt to run away are sent there for "RPF" — "Rehabilitation Project Force".

In the earliest days of Alcoholics Anonymous, the alcoholics were all just a part of the Oxford Group cult. Clarence Snyder had gathered a group of alcoholics in Cleveland, Ohio, who made the weekly trek to Akron to attend the Oxford Group meetings there. Then he decided that the alcoholics would be better off separated from the Oxford Group. When Snyder announced that the Cleveland alcoholics would henceforth be holding their own independent meetings, the Oxford Group attacked:

Clarence said, "I made the announcement at the Oxford Group that this was the last time the Cleveland bunch was down as a contingent — that we were starting a group in Cleveland that would only be open to alcoholics and their families. Also we were taking the name from the book 'Alcoholics Anonymous.'
"The roof came off the house. 'Clarence, you can't do this!' someone said.
"'It's done.'
"'We've got to talk about this!'
"'It's too late.'
"The meeting was set for the following week [May 11, 1939]," Clarence said. "I made the mistake of telling these people the address. They invaded the house and tried to break up the meeting. One fellow was going to whip me. All in the name of pure Christian love!"
Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers, page 164.
Clarence's wife added,

"As a matter of fact," Dorothy said, "at one of our very first meetings, all the strict Oxford Group contingent came up from Akron and was very bitter and voluble. They felt we were being extremely disloyal to everyone in doing this. It was quite a step to pull away from Akron."
Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers, page 165.

The A.A. members who wrote the book Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers were falsifying history a bit there — this is exactly backwards: "Also we were taking the name from the book 'Alcoholics Anonymous.'"

Actually, it was Clarence Snyder who made up and first used the name "Alcoholics Anonymous" for his group. The book got the name from Clarence Snyder, not the other way around, but the true believers in New York City who were busy perpetuating the A.A. mythology didn't want to give too much credit to Clarence Snyder, because Clarence Snyder dared to criticize Bill Wilson's financial dishonesty.

This was William Olin's exit experience. First, he spoke to the group about the problems that were making him think about leaving Synanon, and the cult's response was harsh:

There once was a time, however, when I had been convinced from the top of my pointed head to the soles of my flat feet that we did have a very important answer — the Synanon Game. ... I had been a true believer in its almost limitless possibilities, as I used to ponder a big mural in the Oakland House which depicted a circle of Game chairs superimposed on the United Nations building.
Ever since moving in, however, my enjoyment of and trust in the Game had gradually diminished until the root beer incident [when Chuck Dederich poured a can of root beer on a woman who disagreed with him], when both took a nosedive. The magic circle had deteriorated into a monodimensional psychic cattle prod for keeping us troops in line — especially regarding whatever the Founder's latest fad was. If you didn't like it, of course you could scream yourself blue in the face, but that wouldn't affect policy one iota. The Synanon Game had become a placebo and I felt disenfranchised. I supposed that newcomer Games still served their original purpose of positioning animals fresh off the streets as well as giving them a chance to vent their spleen. But that didn't do much for me personally — not at this point in my life.
Besides, the torrent of newcomers had become just a trickle as our population steadily dwindled. Although the doors were still nailed open, character-disorders who had even one cylinder working peeked inside at the madness awaiting them and opted for the program down the block, which usually resembled Synanon in the early sixties. The decline in popularity held true for squares as well. ... ...Game Club attendance was way down, and consequently, so was the influx of new lifestylers. Over the years, the box had obviously flipped on us, but since nobody was willing to admit this, the movement seemed doomed. Instead of thoughtful dialogue, all I heard from the little Chucks were silly rationalizations laced with the latest buzzwords like, "Pressure always reduces quantity but improves quality" and "At this time, we are tacking towards population compression." Bullshit, Synanon was dying of arrogance.
I expressed misgivings about the explosive combination of no-think and extremism — especially in light of current directions in Chuck's "great conversation," such as childlessness and physical violence. Young men clamoring for vasectomies so they could lay their balls on the line for Synanon and their devout female counterparts gaming about abortions did not entirely thrill me. Worst still was singling out anyone "standing in our way" — either a bureaucrat like the county planning director or a simple soul like Gambonini — as an "enemy of Synanon." Nobody had been more positive about self-protection than I was, but once again, we had "gone right past the money." Did anyone in the Temple really know what the hell we were up to anymore? Not only had my faith in the Game process diminished, but my trust in the entire movement was rapidly disintegrating, and I suspected that everything was not being made public, as I had once so naively believed. Instead of stirring slogans like "Character is the only rank," the well-worn chestnut about the corruptive propensities of power kept running through my head like an old song.
A newer dopefiend, who had taken an open chair to talk to his girlfriend, got visibly agitated as I babbled on. Finally, he blurted angrily, "Hey, motherfucker, if you don't like it here — why don't you just get the fuck out?" After thanking him for his astute comment, I admitted that the question he raised was the very one that had plagued me for a year.
... Before long, Phyllis [Olin] returned from her break, looking as white and drawn as when she had left. Apparently, she hadn't slept very much. Several of the stewers immediately positioned her with, "Your asshole husband says he's going to split. How about you?" She neither flinched nor answered directly, but instead used her Stew to talk about the black cloud that had hung over our marriage for so long and how she had looked forward to this moment with both anticipation and dread. Even though she had watched me suffer for months and knew what was on my mind, this would be our very first conversation about the possibility of my leaving Synanon — God, how straight we had played it.
After a fitful nap in the Stew Dorm, I boarded a Synacruiser for my return to the Homeplace, where I had work to do. Was it my imagination, or did I pick up a certain coolness from my fellow passengers? Well of course! I already knew that part of my Stew had been broadcast, and no communal gossip traveled faster than split talk.
What turned out to be an abbreviated stay at the Homeplace was positively unreal. It began the moment I picked up my farbus (now filled with drawings and papers) and headed for the Connect to check in. The Lodge door opened and out popped a long-stemmed beauty wearing a T-shirt I hadn't seen before. Emblazoned in red across her chest were the words, "I Love It Here." My knees jellied and I had to fight the impulse to jump back on the jitney. Everyone's automatic smile seemed more mechanical than ever and their "hihowareya" greetings even more perfunctory. I felt like an undesirable alien in an island of humanoids.
Things were no better at the translator's office. Old friends were unmistakably distant — especially Bob Greenfeld. After brief conversation about a couple of projects, he disappeared and I lost myself in the familiar narcotic of work for the rest of the afternoon. Not surprisingly, I found myself in a Game with Bob that night. He immediately let me have it with both barrels. I had never seen him so angry. Apparently, after I had "spilled my guts" in the Stew, he had been decimated in a Big-Shot Game for his "sick contract" with me. The specific indictment had been that his lust for my translator skills had blinded him to the obvious truth that "I was no longer on Synanon's side — just a sour, ungrateful asshole on the way out the door."
Bob got lots of support in our game, and I was urged to leave in a rich variety of rhetoric. Betty, a sweet woman who had once worked with Phyllis in the School, was especially scathing in her remarks. Two weeks later, she was gone herself. A Synanon truism was that "All projections are valid."

Charles "Chuck" Dederich
For some reason, Chuck wasn't inviting me to lunch these days. I couldn't even look at him — I felt like such a traitor. After hurriedly eating with two of our cooks whose table conversation ranged from vegetable roughage to mid-term abortions, I slipped off to the bunkhouse to read and think. Just as I was about to go running, Jady Dederich's dog-robber came by to inform me that my presence was requested in a Game that was already in process. Oh-oh, I thought, I'll bet this is it! I put my pants back on, jogged over to the 'Big Game' room, and took a seat, surrounded by 'Homeplace heavies'.
After the wrap-up of some weighty action between our princess/director and her commoner consort, the focus shifted to me. Someone began an indictment about the gross impropriety of my sour presence at the Homeplace, when Jady imperiously interrupted and positioned me unambiguously, "I want to hear your answer to one question — right here and right now and I don't give a shit about anything else you might have to say. Are you making plans to split from Synanon?"
... I heard my own voice from far off somewhere, intoning, "Yes... I am." The Game shifted off me immediately, and after a few minutes I left and went for my run.
Bob Greenfeld invited me to supper, where he announced that my services were no longer required at the Homeplace. In Synanese, I was 'being shipped out on a door.'
The following afternoon, I jitneyed over to the Executive Offices at the Ranch for my appointment with Dede [Chuck Dederich Jr.]. I was surprised to find that Pete was there too. They asked me if what they had heard about my splitting was true. All true. What, in God's name, did I have waiting for me out there? Nothing — except, perhaps, my freedom. They both laughed and agreed with each other that I had gone totally crazy. Freedom to what — starve? Die of loneliness — or maybe, boredom? Yeh, I admitted, it did look a little rough, but I'd survive. ...
[A few days later...]
A few hours before departure time for San Francisco, an old friend served me with divorce papers from Phyllis. I hadn't expected that. Upon a moment's reflection, though, I should have. A real Synanite doesn't muddle around indecisively for very long but takes a strong position — Boom, just like that! And Phyllis was certainly one of the most loyal soldiers of them all.
Escape From Utopia: My Ten Years in Synanon, William F. Olin, pages 248-249, 251-252, 254, 255-256, 257, 258.
Bill Olin's reward for ten years of selfless service to Synanon was that they hated him for leaving, and harshly condemned him for it. Of course. The departure of a respected elder shook the certainty of the true believers, and planted doubts in their minds, and made them ask themselves what they were really doing and why they were doing it. They couldn't tolerate that, so they angrily blamed Olin for their discomfort.

Olin's story also illustrated several other common cult characteristics, besides No Exit:

The Guru is always right. Everything Chuck Dederich said was always right, period. His orders, or his latest fad, were to be followed without question, even if it meant being sterilized or aborting a much-longed-for baby.

You are always wrong. Olin actually felt bad — guilty — for standing on his principles and speaking up for what he believed was true and right, and choosing to not participate in the evil any longer. He was made to feel like a deserter and a traitor for choosing right over wrong, truth over falsehoods, and freedom over slavery. "I couldn't even look at him [Chuck Dederich] — I felt like such a traitor."

That "You are always wrong" attitude also clearly shows in the demonization of those who choose to leave.

Likewise, the cult members gave us lots of examples of Ad Hominem and Personal Attacks On Critics.
"You are a piece of dirt if you dare to criticize our cult, the Founder, or his wonderful teachings. And you are insane if you are thinking about leaving the wonderful cult."
When Olin criticized the faults of the cult, they responded by calling him a "motherfucker" and an "asshole". And Dede and Pete agreed that Bill Olin "had gone totally crazy" when he decided to leave Synanon.

Grandiose claims and bombastic idealism. "We are special. We are the wave of the future. The United Nations could learn something from us. Only we have a style of life worth living. Everybody else is dying of loneliness and boredom, while we build Heaven on Earth."

Sacred Science. "We have the new technology, the panacea, that will save the world — The Synanon Game."

Confession sessions. "The Game" and "The Stew" were just modified confession or self-criticism sessions, very similar to the Red Chinese brainwashing self-criticism sessions where they reversed the logic and everyone had to criticize someone else. In The Game and The Stew, everyone ganged up on one person at a time, and ripped them to shreds. Then they would "flip the box" and lavishly praise the person they had just crushed. Then they would rotate the target to someone else and repeat the routine until everyone had had his ego destroyed.

Pseudo-democracy. You can voice your opinion, and even scream it in Game sessions, but your opinion doesn't really matter and will actually change nothing.

Royalty and The Inner Circle — "Saint Charles" Dederich, "Princess Jady Dederich", 'Prince Dede', the "Homeplace heavies", and "The Big-Shot Game". Any purported "equality" in the cult is a hoax.
Everybody is equal, but some people are more equal than others.
And the slogan was "Character is the only rank", but that wasn't how things really worked.

Different levels of information — The general membership didn't know everything that was happening; that knowledge was reserved for the inner circle.

Which brings up, Dual Purposes. Synanon began as an idealistic drug and alcohol rehabilitation program, and ended up being whatever Charles Dederich said it was. Lastly, he said it was a religion and a research project exploring how Synanon could supply the leaders with rich, luxurious, elegant lifestyles. (No joke. That's the literal truth. That's what he said.) At the end, "fine dining" — two-hour, multiple-course dinners of the finest available cuisine — was one of the inner circle's major daily tasks.

True Believers and Inability To Tolerate Criticism. They all intensely believe in their cause — they believe that it is perfect, and they can't stand any doubts or criticism of their group or its activities.

Cloned copies of the leader — the "little Chucks".

Isolationism or separatism. The cult has a siege mentality of "us versus them out there." And there is no reality outside of the cult. Life outside of the cult is seen as absurd, shallow, lonely, hard, boring, and pointless.

Enemy making. Anybody who won't do what the cult wants is an enemy of the cult. Olin mentioned the county planning director, whom Olin found to be an okay guy when he went and talked with him, or Gambonini, the rancher next door, who had done nothing to Synanon. --Which, in turn, revealed the growing paranoia of the cult. And even the old-timer Synanon member William Olin himself was labeled "no longer on Synanon's side" for telling the truth about some of the faults of Synanon.

— Which shows yet another cult characteristic: You Can't Tell The Truth.

Cult-speak, Slogans and Thought-terminating Clichés.
"Character is the only rank."
"Pressure always reduces quantity but improves quality."
"We are tacking towards population compression."
"All projections are valid."
"Take a strong position."
"Flip the box."

Denial. True believers deny the truth, and cannot tolerate any criticism.

Isolation, ostracism, and shunning of splitters.

A system of rewards and punishments. When Olin announced his desire to leave, all respect, praise, and positive feedback vanished. He was subjected to numerous rounds of torment and torture, verbal assaults and psychological attacks, as well as ostracism and shunning. Olin was also punished by the group attacking his co-worker, Bob Greenfeld, for Olin's "crime" of leaving.

Obligation and reversal of reality. Even though William Olin was a non-addict "lifestyler" and a successful architect who had joined Synanon because he had believed in it as a utopian social movement, and even though Olin had given Synanon his life savings and had worked for Synanon for free for ten years, the cult claimed that Synanon had given him everything, and that he was "just a sour, ungrateful asshole."

Note the statement that Olin would starve outside of Synanon. There was no recognition of the reality that he was a competent non-addict architect who was quite capable of making a living and taking care of himself outside of Synanon. That little "you will starve" slur also smacks of Phobia Induction — trying to make Olin afraid to leave. And, it may also be the other cult members giving voice to their own suppressed fears that they would starve if they tried to leave the cult.

Conditional friendships and conditional love. Your "true friends for life" who give you "unconditional love" will withdraw their "love" in a flat minute if you violate the cult's rules, and fall out of favor, by doing something stupid like saying that you want to leave. Your own wife might even immediately divorce you.

Members get no respect. They get abused. The rank-and-file membership worked more than full time for wages that ranged from $2 to $25 per week, while the inner circle explored elegant lifestyles and fine dining. And still, the leader Chuck Dederich often berated the members by saying that he was forced to support all of their incompetent lazy asses. That's another example of "You Are Always Wrong.", and it's also an example of "You Owe The Group".

And then Synanon was extremely intrusive, and violated people's personal boundaries and invaded their private lives to an unwarranted degree, even for an organization that was supposedly a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program. The leader Dederich said that he didn't want any more children around, and he actually felt entitled to order all of the men (except himself) to get vasectomies, and the pregnant women had to get abortions — even women who really wanted their babies, and had been trying to get pregnant for years.

4. No Graduates.
No one ever learns as much as the Guru knows; no one ever rises to the level of the Guru's wisdom, so no one ever finishes his or her training, and nobody ever graduates.

As Synanon degenerated from a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program into a crazy cult, graduation ceased:

The End of "Graduation". Other changes also influenced Synanon's growth and development. The end of the policy of "graduation" in 1968, for example, implied an end-of-the-road mentality for dope fiends that was not validated by the many splittees who had experienced success on the outside. Every Synanite knew about these happy outcomes. Many also knew that a major reason for the policy change was a renewed focus on containment and a resentment toward Synanon "graduates" who took positions with other drug-rehabilitation organizations. The end of graduation was particularly ironic in light of the de facto graduation program established for juvenile offenders in the mid-1970s.
The Rise And Fall Of Synanon; A California Utopia, Rod Janzen, page 226.

Sometimes the wording of "graduates" is deceptive. In Werner Erhard's "est" "human potential" cult, people were called "graduates" as soon as they had completed their first 2-weekend course of "training." But then they were immediately pressured to take another course, so that the "benefits" of the first course would really take hold. And then they were supposed to take yet another course, and then another and another (and each course cost hundreds of dollars, of course). So they may have "graduated" from the first course of training, but they were never really finished with their expensive est training.1

Scientology does the same thing too. First you are a "pre-clear", and then you graduate and become a "Clear", but then you need to become an "Operating Thetan", but then you need to become a higher-level Operating Thetan, working your way up through the levels from "OT I" through "OT VIII", which are increasingly expensive, many tens of thousands of dollars for each of the higher levels. (And, as long as the cult leader L. Ron Hubbard was alive, they kept inventing yet another higher level.) And then they have something else called a "Class XII"... Then you need to learn how to do it all to somebody else — you need to learn how to be an Auditor, or a Case Supervisor (C/S), and brainwash other people. There are many more levels of that. It costs at least $375,000 to do all of the levels and all of the courses. Only rich celebrities like John Travolta and Tom Cruise could afford it all. And even then, you still aren't quite clear enough to graduate and leave Scientology.

5. Cult-speak.
The cult has its own language. The cult invents new terminology or euphemisms for many things. The cult may also redefine many common words to mean something quite different. Cult-speak is also called "bombastic redefinition of the familiar", or "loading the language".

"Loaded Language" is one of Dr. Robert J. Lifton's Eight Conditions of Thought Reform — an essential part of any effective brainwashing program. The cult-speak may include a bunch of well-worn slogans, which Dr. Lifton called "thought-terminating clichés. The special words constrict rather than expand human understanding, and the slogans stop thought.

Beginners have to learn all of the new terminology in order to fit in, and understand what is being said. Then, the new language has the effect of separating the newcomer from his old world, and from his old circle of friends. His new cult friends will tell him that "Only another cult member understands", and it will be true. When he babbles nothing but cult-speak, nobody but another cult member will be able to understand.

Loading the language and redefining words has a long history. Lewis Carroll described it very well in the Alice in Wonderland sequel, Through the Looking Glass:

"... and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get unbirthday presents."
"Certainly," said Alice.
"And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!"
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,'" Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knockdown argument for you.'"
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knockdown argument,'" Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master — that's all."
Alice was too puzzled to say anything, so, after a minute, Humpty Dumpty began again. "They've a temper, some of them — particularly verbs, they're the proudest: adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs. However, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!"
"Would you tell me please," said Alice, "what that means?"
"Now you talk like a reasonable child," said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. I meant by 'impenetrability' that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life."
"That's a great deal to make one word mean," Alice said in a thoughtful tone.
"When I make a word do a lot of work like that," said Humpty Dumpty, "I always pay it extra."
"Oh!" said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark.
"Ah, you should see 'em come round me of a Saturday night," Humpty Dumpty went on, wagging his head gravely from side to side; "for to get their wages, you know."
(Alice did not venture to ask what he paid them with; and so, you see, I can't tell you.)
Alice in Wonderland & Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis Carroll, p. 238.

Back in the "real world", because leaving the cult is one of the worst crimes that a member can commit (according to the cult), most cults have a special term for leaving, like "going tai-tan", "backsliding", "leaving the fold", being "lost in maya", being "trapped in samsara", "straying from the path", "falling from grace" or simply "going out". When that dreaded phrase is uttered, everyone knows what it means.

Sometimes euphemisms or redefined phrases can take on truly evil dimensions. Adolf Hitler's "special handling" of the Jews, and sending them to the "final solution", are classic examples. And this one is really gruesome: the poison gas Zyklon B, with which millions of Jews were killed, was called "material for the resettlement of Jews".

Likewise, Mao Tse Tung sent his enemies and critics to slave labor on remote farms for "re-education" so that they would learn to "blossom properly".

When Rev. Jim Jones gave the order to murder the 276 children at the Jonestown People's Temple commune, he didn't say, "Kill those kids" or "Give them the cyanide." He asked, "Would someone help those children in crossing over?"

Throughout the entire second half of the twentieth century, various United States Presidents used the term "police action", rather than "war", to get around limitations on Presidential powers, and to avoid having to tell the public that we actually were in yet another war. President Nixon would not say that the U.S. and South Vietnamese armies had actually "invaded" Cambodia; it was only an "incursion".

"An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public." — Talleyrand.

Carl Sagan called such terminology "weasel words".

There are plenty of contemporary examples of loading the language, or bombastically redefining words:

In many cults, "You must have faith" really means, "You must believe what I'm saying."

"The Lord will reward you" really means, "I'm not going to pay you."

In one cult, "Sharing the love of God" means practicing prostitution to get money for the cult, and "Allowing God to bless others" means cheating people out of money which then goes to the cult.

In David Berg's "Children of God" cult, "FF" means "Flirty Fishing", which means women members practice prostitution to get more money and new male members for the cult.2

Likewise, in The Children of God, "forsaking all and following the Lord" means giving all of your worldly wealth, including your house, to the church, and then obeying the orders of David Berg,3 which often includes the women practicing prostitution, and their husbands pimping them on the streets, to get the cult more money.

And David Berg redefined "true spiritual freedom" and "perfect love" to mean that all of the women in the Children of God cult, even his own daughter, should freely have sex with him.4

To the Moonies, "heavenly deception" means misleading, deceiving, and lying to nonmembers to promote the church's goals.

Scientologists are actually supposed to read Scientology literature with the Scientology dictionary in hand. Any time they read something that they do not understand, or disagree with, they are supposed to look up the words in the Scientology dictionary to get their new official meanings. Thus, the members allow Scientology to redefine the whole language, and actually, to redefine reality.

In Scientology, "EOC" — "End Of Cycle" — is church jargon for suicide. Scientologists have actually been sent out as assassins, with orders to kill critics of Scientology and then EOC after the target was terminated.6
Another aspect of loading the language is constant redefinition or reinterpretation of anything and everything, whenever it is convenient. For instance, you may be reading the teachings of a phony guru, and find errors and logical inconsistencies in his teachings, and point it out to members. The true-believer cult members will answer, "Oh, you don't understand. What it really means is..." And then they will explain and reinterpret the guru's words until he sounds like a genius who deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Eventually, it seems like everything means something else, and nothing is as it appears...

Another twist on that constant redefinition game is that some groups let words have two very different definitions, simultaneously. Which definition will be used at any given time depends on the circumstances. Thus, the very same sentence can have different meanings at different times. This is especially true of cults that hide the truth from newcomers. An innocent-sounding saying may have an entirely different meaning after you learn the real meanings of the words.

When it comes to sheer density of incomprehensible psycho-babble or techno-babble, Scientology is hard to beat. This quote comes from someone who quit Scientology, and is now criticizing it, but he still hasn't quite "cleared" his language yet:

I sec-checked a new OT VIII completion from Spain on the subject shortly after he completed OT VIII (I was ordered to sec-check him despite that I was OT VII and he was OT VIII because I was the only OT 7 Nots auditor there was...
I had given him his whole upper level bridge from OT Eligibility to Solo Nots EP check. ...
Three people who were in their early 50's died of cancer, months after completing new OT VIII. As a result, the New OT VIII C/S was RPFed (Laura Wolfe, wife of Milton Wolfe who was jailed on behalf of the GO and later ended up as CO FSSO (FSSO: Flag Ship Service Org, The service org on board the Freewinds.) The replacement C/S, Sue Walker, wife of Jeff Walker, one of the original Class XII who was Snr C/S Int at the time (and who later blew and got declared I'm told — If he got declared he should be contacted, he was a very good friend of mine and we had much respect for each other. ...)
Wow. Can you believe that they talk like that all of the time?

"Sec-check" means "security check" — a process of questioning a Scientologist while he holds the lie-detector tin cans, to see if he is loyal enough and has the right beliefs. It's a kind of inquisition, not unlike the Catholic Inquisitions of the Middle Ages.
That quote also reveals the extreme beliefs of Scientologists. Scientology claims that when someone's mind has been properly processed — they call it "auditing" — that he will get mind over matter powers, even immortality. Hence Scientology also teaches that dying of cancer is just lazy immoral behavior. When those three very high-level Scientologists (OT-VIII, Operating Thetan Level 8) died of cancer, Scientology punished their trainers — — called "auditors" or "case supervisors" (C/S) — for "unethical" behavior — for having failed to fix the clients' minds properly, and for having failed to teach the clients how to be immortal.

RPF means "Rehabilitation Project Force", which means torment and torture, even getting sent to the Scientology prison camp at Hemet, California. Strange but true.

And notice the shifting of blame: When someone dies, it means that their case supervisor has failed, not that the Scientology teachings are really all a pack of lies from a paranoid schizophrenic. The Scientologists continue to believe that nonsense even though the nutcase leader of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, up and died of a stroke.

Oh well, better luck in the next lifetime.

6. Group-think, Suppression of Dissent, and Enforced Conformity in Thinking
The cult has standard answers for almost everything, and members are expected to parrot those answers. Willfulness or independence or skeptical thinking is seen as bad. Members accept the leader's reality as their own.

Ask a candid question,
Get a canned answer.

There are two corollaries:

A) Independent or critical thinking is discouraged, especially critical thoughts about the leader or the group or the cult's teachings.
B) Positive thoughts and statements about the leader and the group are encouraged.
In cults, no criticism of the leader, his teachings, or his organization is seen as valid — such criticism is always automatically wrong, just because it criticizes the guru, his teachings, or his group. (And of course such criticism of the guru or his group also breaks Cult Rule Number One, "The Guru Is Always Right".)

Dissent and disagreement are also seen as impolite and inappropriate. One should "respect" the "traditions" and "ancient teachings". "They are much older than you are. After all, what do you know? Just go along with it."

Cults also assert that questioning the group's doctrines will lead to bad results. You might not get into Heaven, or you might not get enlightened, or your doubts will make you backslide, or something like that.

Cults consider it immoral, or at least a serious spiritual failing, for someone to think independently, rather than parrotting the standard slogans and text. And actually criticizing the illogical or irrational aspects of the cult's doctrines is considered a very serious moral offense. Cults will even claim that you are harming other cult members by questioning the craziness — you are keeping others from going to Heaven, or you are weakening their faith, or you are leading them into temptation and you are leading them to their downfall, causing them to become "lost souls".

Cults almost invariably have strong contempt for the intellect, human intelligence, and any attempt to think independently. They even use the word "intellectual" as an insult.
The reason for such a strong anti-intellectual bias is simple: critical and analytical thought is very threatening to a cult's precepts. The cult's irrational dogma simply cannot stand up to rational examination, so the intellect is treated with scorn and contempt to try to preclude such examination.

Anti-intellectual attitudes, and contempt, fear, and hatred of the intellect — to the extent that the very word "intellectual" is a term of abuse — are typical of totalitarian regimes from Nazi Germany to Maoist China. They are also common features of totalist cults.

Group-think is not restricted to cults. It is a common problem throughout the world of groups and organizations. In her youthful drunkalogue, Smashed, Koren Zailckas encountered it while she was a football cheerleader who partied with the jocks:

The experts say that jocks are susceptible to "group-think," a decision-making model that includes collective rationalization (i.e.: "There is no I in TEAM") and the illusion that shit can't happen.
Smashed, Koren Zailckas, page 128.

Many cults claim to have some divine, infallible teachings, "Sacred Science", "The True Word of God", "so of course any criticism of the guru or his teachings is always wrong, and downright evil, because it is going against God." ...Or because it is going against The Spiritual Principles of the Cosmos, or it is going against Nature, or whatever the purported Higher Principle is...

In some cults, dissent is considered synonymous with demon possession because 'Satan opposes the group's great works.' Criticism of the cult, the cult leader, or his teachings is seen as proof that someone is dominated by evil forces.

In many cults, the attitude is, "Those who agree with us are 'saved'. Those who disagree with us, or criticize our group, our beliefs, or our leader, are 'the lost', or 'the unsaved'."

Likewise, in cults, there is a reversal of judgement. The cult itself is never judged, or subject to judgement; rather, the people who comment on the cult are judged by what they say about the cult. People who say good things about the cult are deemed (by the cult) to be good people. People who say bad things about the cult are deemed to be bad people.

Frank Buchman's Oxford Groups/Moral Re-Armament cult (that was the precursor of Alcoholics Anonymous) insisted that anyone who criticized 'The Movement' was immoral:

Moral Re-Armament cannot be honestly opposed on intellectual grounds because it is basic truth.... Opposition to Moral Re-Armament has special significance. It always comes from the morally defeated.
Remaking Men, by Paul Campbell and Peter Howard, page 66.
Dissenting members are advised to seek a consensus in all matters. One fundamentalist Christian cult taught, "In the abundance of counselors there is safety. He who trusts his own mind is a fool."

Likewise, the Love Family cult told members who tried to think critically, "What's inside your mind is lies. We are your mind. The group is your mind."5

Cults can be quite harsh in punishing deviant or critical speech or thought.

As Synanon degenerated from a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program into a crazy cult, dissent was suppressed:

In debates of Synanon policies on the floor, often too few representatives of the commune were involved. And once decisions had been made, it was dangerous to critique them. Those who did so were silenced with accusations of whining, negativism, or lack of commitment. Such indictments were often accompanied by allegations of contracting with other residents who felt the same way — other dissenters — though the very act of dissent was an essential contract-breaking activity. There was, in other words, no way one could effectively or appropriately disagree with decisions made by top officials. One was caught in a Catch-22 net of conformity. As Bill Olin described it, "The magic circle had deteriorated into a mono-dimensional psychic cattle prod for keeping us troops in line."9

9. Olin, William F., Escape From Utopia, 249.

The Rise And Fall Of Synanon; A California Utopia, Rod Janzen, pages 218-219.

Group-think usually means no real thought at all; just repeat the buzz-words and slogans and follow the program. And group-think usually just means that the group thinks that the Guru is always right.

Jeffrey Schaler wrote in his paper Cult Busting:

One way of testing the cult nature of a group is by challenging the ideology binding the group together. We can discover something about the nature of a group by how well its members tolerate opposition to the ideology that holds the group together. How well do members tolerate difference of opinion, opinion that challenges the very ideological heart of the group?
Members of the cult are like a colony of insects when disturbed. A frenzy of activity and protective measures are executed when core ideologies are challenged. The stronger the evidence challenging the truthfulness of the group ideology, the more likely members of the cult are to either lash out in a more or less predictable fashion, fall apart, or disband into separate cult colonies.

Another aspect of group-think is something that might be called "group-feel." The cult dictates what feelings or emotions good members are supposed to feel. Usually, all members are supposed to maintain a cheerful disposition all of the time, happily proclaiming that the guru and his teachings are just wonderful and will save the world, or some such thing. Anger is permitted only when criticizing non-conforming or under-performing cult members, or when faulting outsiders — especially when condemning "enemies" of the cult and other outsiders who criticize the cult, and when condemning competing cults or groups. Otherwise, everybody wears a smiley happy face. Negative emotions about the cult or its leader are considered especially bad — a sure sign that someone is failing the standards of holiness.

7. Irrationality.
The beliefs of the cult are irrational, illogical, or superstitious, and fly in the face of evidence to the contrary.

The Hari Krishna cult (ISKCON), for example, believed for many, many years that the Earth was flat, in spite of our astronauts' journeys into space, and all o

powered by my little forum