Cults

The term cult can apply to any small group dedicated to a common set of spiritually oriented beliefs or philosophies, but because of tragedies associated with cults, the term has taken on a decidedly negative meaning. For many, the term refers to a particular kind of group, one with a self-appointed, dogmatic, and charismatic leader who promotes deceptive-coercive recruitment practices to ensnare individuals to join a totalitarian community organized to solicit funds and secure favors that benefit neither the group's members nor society.

However, not all cults fit this negative description, and a good many do demonstrable good. Some cult experts prefer the terms “new religious movement” and “alternative religions” as ways to label these groups without negative bias. Among experts, then, there are roughly two groups generally referred to as “cult critics” and “cult sympathizers.” Regardless of the type of expert, the most frequently posed research questions have been:

• Why do cults emerge?
• Who joins cults?
• Why do some cults become violent or lead to violent endings?

To some extent, cults emerge as reactions to social movements and societal change. For example, many of the cults that emerged in the 1970s were reactions to the social upheavals of the 1960s, particularly to the widespread rejection of white, middle-class values of the 1950s that included narrow conceptions of the role of women and a value system that was insensitive to diversity. Even before the civil rights movement and anti-Vietnam demonstrations, American youth in particular began to challenge conventions. The cults of the 1970s were, then, extensions of these efforts to challenge convention.

As for who joins cults, no single stereotype applies. Members of cults have at one time or another been described as young and idealistic and easily manipulated by authority figures. However, there is no distinct type of individual likely to join a cult or new religious movement—at least not according to the available research.

There are, however, conditions that support or encourage people to join cults. These conditions include mild depression; being in a transitional stage, and being dissatisfied with traditional, mainstream religious institutions. For example, young people entering college may feel unusually lonely and lost; so that joining a cult may help them feel connected and oriented. As another example, the members of Jim Jones's cult, the “People's Temple,” were mostly poor African Americans who had suffered from racism and poverty. They found in the socialist and egalitarian [Page 104]philosophy of the People's Temple support that they could not find elsewhere. In short, cults serve important functions for members that have more to do with specific circumstances than with character traits.

The question of why some cults turn violent or lead to violent endings is central. The two most-discussed examples are the People's Temple and the Branch Davidians. In each of these cases, the majority of members died in a tragic ending. Many fault the leaders, Jim Jones and David Koresh, respectively. However, many also fault the poor judgment of outsiders (e.g., government officials) who exerted what some say was unnecessary pressure and force that precipitated the violence. In each of these cases, it was not the beliefs of the organizations that precipitated government intervention and led to their demise, but the suspected abuse of members.

...