ICSA e-Newsletter, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2008
Governments and Cults[1]
Michael Kropveld
Abstract
This paper briefly reviews the
history of Info-Cult/Info-Secte, discusses terminology, and reviews certain
aspects of government and cults, an area in which Info-Cult/Info-Secte has
collected a large amount of information. Social, cultural, and historical
factors can influence how a country responds to cult-related problems, as can
the experience of cult-related violence in the country. Education, research, and
victim assistance are appropriate actions of governments with regard to cults.
I started Info-Cult following my brief experience with the
Unification Church (UC) in Booneville, California in 1977. My involvement with
this subject resulted from a close friend’s recruitment into the Church. The
story about his kidnapping and deprogramming from the Church was featured in an
award winning series of newspaper articles written by Josh Freed in 1977. These
articles formed the basis for the bestselling book Moonwebs: Journey into the
Mind of a Cult and the Genie Award winning film Ticket to Heaven.
Following the publication of the newspaper articles, Josh received numerous
requests for information about cults. It was the need for the public to know
more about cults and to seek help for cult-related events in their lives or in
the lives of a loved one that led to the creation in 1980 of Cult Project, which
is what Info-Cult was then called.
For the first 10 years, Cult Project
operated under the auspices of the B’nai Brith Hillel Foundation of Montreal and
received significant funding from the Montreal Jewish Community in addition to
donations and grants from the provincial and federal government.
In the beginning, the Cult Project focused
on the negative aspects of cults, although our
contention was that not all cults were problematic; hence, a distinction was
made between “cults” and “destructive cults.” During this
period, some contemporary studies and scientific papers described a member of a
destructive cult[2]
as a victim of a leader who was depicted as a tyrant.
Many parents and researchers were seeking to understand what prompted the
radical behavioural change of cult members. One of the hypotheses put forth was
the use of mind control (brainwashing) to get members to submit to the daily
life of the group. Cult Project subscribed to those views and to the belief that
destructive cults could be harmful to some of their members. It did not,
however, believe that all cultic groups were problematic.
In the early ‘80s, our major source of
information on “destructive cults” was from former cult members’ accounts in
books and newspaper articles.
Early on, Cult Project placed a lot of
importance on collecting information on cults and over time its documentation
centre diversified its sources and started to collect information on new
religious movements and sociological studies of religious and political groups.
The view that certain destructive cults
can cause their members physical or psychological harm or financial loss
prompted Cult Project to set up prevention and awareness programs on the dangers
of destructive cults and mind control techniques. Other services that we
implemented included a documentation center which was accessible to the public
as well as an information and assistance phone line to respond to questions from
relatives, ex-cult members, students and the media.
For the first 10 years, our centre’s
clientele was mostly composed of:
·
Relatives of cult members;
·
Ex-cult members;
·
Students and teachers.
Discussions with “cults” and their
members were rare. It was only in the mid-eighties that certain cult members
began to approach us in order to:
·
Obtain information on their group;
·
Provide us with information on their group ;
·
Criticize the functioning of Cult Project;
·
Obtain information on how to leave their group;
·
Find out about help available once they left
their group.
Cult Project had few ties with groups
identified as cults and destructive cults, primarily because:
·
Cult Project was perceived as an “anti-cult”
organization;
·
Cult Project’s interventions were focused on
ex-cult members and the families of members;
·
Cult Project was rarely approached by “cults”,
and did not initiate discussions with these groups.
In 1990, Cult Project was dissolved and
Info-Cult ("Info-Secte" in French), an independent,
bilingual and non-denominational charitable centre, was born.
The mandate of Info-Cult is "To promote
the dignity and integrity of the individual, the respect of collective and
individual rights, the freedom of thought and expression, and the right of
access to information.” Info-Cult’s objectives are:
- To promote the study of cult
phenomena;
- To sensitize, inform and educate
the public about these phenomena;
- To assist people with problems
related to these phenomena."[3]
In a recent newspaper article, a Quebec
Provincial Minister had this to say about approaches to the issue of cults:
“In France the question is looked at from a religious perspective. There
is a political movement that wants to manage the cults whereas in Quebec we
favour a North American approach based on consumer protection.”[4]
The minister’s views reflect the position Info-Cult has
taken for nearly 30 years in protecting consumers.
Info-Cult offers, among other services,
an assistance phone line, educational programs, support to ex-members and
families, research, and a documentation center which is one of the largest of
its kind in North America. This center houses a broad range of information on
the cult phenomenon from sources around the world as well as
group-generated and critical literature.
Info-Cult’s funding comes in the form of an annual grant
from the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services, discretionary funds from
different Provincial Ministers, foundations, private groups, and individual
donations, as well as fees for certain services.
In addition to parents, ex-members, students and teachers,
Info-Cult’s clientele has expanded through the years to include members of
different new religions and other groups as well as academics, mental health
professionals, attorneys, law enforcement, media, and others.
Since its founding, Info-Cult has
networked with individuals and various organizations worldwide, who are
interested in “cults”, new religious movements and related groups and subjects.
These contacts, including individuals and groups from various Canadian provinces
as well as from countries around the world, have helped to diversify the
information available at our documentation centre and to foster exchange with
regard to this phenomenon. As well, increasing interest and communication
with academics with varying viewpoints has helped to broaden Info-Cult’s
analysis and perspective on the issue. Info-Cult has also had numerous contacts
and meetings with members and representatives of “cult” groups, spiritual
organizations, and new religious movements.
The choice of vocabulary is in itself
problematic when it comes to describing, understanding, and researching the cult
phenomenon. Today, the term “cult” has by and large a pejorative connotation.
Consequently, some argue against its use.[5]
Indeed, the term “cult” can lead some to view certain groups as being
“dangerous.” While the term is not ideal, it is highly improbable its use will
be eliminated; therefore, if the term is used, it should be done so judiciously,
and one should be conscious of its limitations.[6]
Info-Cult’s view is that individuals can have a positive
experience in a so called “bad” group or a bad experience in a so called “good”
group. The reality is that groups in our society exist on a continuum and there
are a variety of factors that influence the experience someone might have in a
group. These factors include:
- The general functioning and
evolution of a group;
- The relationship among its members;
- The leader's influence on the
members;
- The characteristics that help to
identify groups that may harm some of their members or pose a risk to public
security at certain periods in their history.
A recent publication by Info-Cult, entitled
The Cult Phenomenon: How Groups Function,
reflects the ways in which Info-Cult has evolved over the years with regard to
how groups function, the reasons why individuals join such groups, and the
nature of the relationship between leaders and their members and society.
For 28 years, Info-Cult’s board of
directors and staff have reflected upon and asked questions about the cult
phenomenon. Based on numerous written works and discussions with researchers,
professionals and others, several observations can be made.
-
Cults are not a new social
phenomenon. Throughout history, such groups have been viewed by their
community not only as minority groups but also, from the perspective of
dominant normative groups, as deviant sub-groups with a potential to cause
physical or psychological harm, or financial loss to their members;
-
Not all groups identified as cults
pose a risk to their members. It is, however, important to recognize that
certain groups can violate the rights of their members;
-
Participation in the life of a
group provides an opportunity for social participation, socialization, and
solace, but it also creates a risk in certain groups of psychological and/or
physical exclusion.
Info-Cult recognizes that the risks
posed by a group to its members may vary:
·
From one person to another;
·
According to the situation and circumstances ;
·
From one group to another;
·
From one region to another, in the case of
international groups;
·
Depending on the particular developmental stage
of the group;
·
Depending on internal or external conflicts.
Info-Cult avoids simplistic “yes” or “no” responses to
complex questions such as “Is Group X a cult?” or “Is the group my loved-one
joined dangerous?”
Info-Cult supports the need for new
research to further our understanding of this phenomenon and improve our ability
to respond more effectively to calls for help.
Although Info-Cult has evolved over the years, certain
positions on accessibility, kidnapping, and legislation have remained constant:
·
Info-Cult has always operated out of a known location and is
easily reachable by phone.
·
Contrary to a popular belief concerning “anti-cult” groups,
Info-Cult has not supported or assisted in the use of coercive measures to
remove someone from a group. In situations where Info-Cult has been asked about
that option, we have consistently counseled against it.
·
Existing laws are sufficient in dealing with the multiple problems
associated with “cults” and cultic groups.[7]
Government and Cults
For the uninitiated, a cursory look at the issue of “cults”
can lead one to believe that diametrically opposing positions exist in
governments’ responses. On the one hand, there is France, whose government has
taken what can be described as an active role in dealing with “cults.” On the
other hand, in the United States there is a strong opposition to any government
involvement, be it their own or other governments.
Upon closer examination, we see a more complex and nuanced
picture of governments and “cults.” Take Canada, the country I come from, where
there is no position on this issue, or consider countries such as Switzerland
and the Netherlands, which have responded differently to the cult phenomenon.
Certain social, cultural, and historical factors can help
us understand why some governments decide to intervene when dealing with
“cults,” whereas some do not.
Social, cultural, and historical factors
For example, a country's historical context can have a
significant impact on the actions a government chooses to take with regard to
the cult phenomenon. Consider the following:
During the course of its modern history, has the country
come up against an anti-democratic or totalitarian group? For example many
European countries have had first- hand experience of being occupied by a
Totalitarian movement. The experience of “Nazism” during WWll has had a profound
impact on the’ psyche of many European countries, and therefore it should come
as no surprise that some of these countries have a lower tolerance to groups
that are viewed as totalitarian. A totalitarian group, in contrast, has never
occupied North America.
Another consideration is whether or not a particular
country has ever witnessed violent acts such as mass suicides or murders or
terrorist attacks, perpetrated by “cult” leaders and how they have reacted to
these tragedies. For example, the murders, arson and “assisted suicides”
carried out by members of the Order of the Solar Temple (OTS) elicited different
responses[8]
in the countries where the tragedies occurred.
·
The French government set up a parliamentary commission.
·
Switzerland's federal government set up a commission of inquiry.
·
In Canada there was a provincial coroner’s report into the deaths
that occurred in the province of Quebec.
One factor that might account for this
difference is that Canada and the United States were settled by immigrants
from different countries with diverse ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds
and, in the case of the United States, separation of church and state was
institutionalized early on.
A second factor that might account for actions of a
government is how it positions itself with regard to religious groups. In most
democratic and so-called secular countries, the roles of religion and State are
clearly defined. Mechanisms for recognizing religious groups are clearly set
out. Groups that wish to obtain status as a religious organization must meet
specific criteria. In other countries, the relationship between religion and
state is ambiguous.
Governmental factors
Are countries that have a more centralized governing
structure more prone to take an aggressive stance towards cultic groups than
countries that have a less centralized, more laissez-faire approach? What role
do charities play? For example, in countries such as the United States and
Canada, who are seen as having a less centralized more laissez faire style of
government, the charity sector plays a vital role in filling the gaps left by
the government.
As some researchers[9]
have noted, religious groups have to fight for access to privileges. The more
difficult it is to acquire status and privileges associated with being
recognized by the government, the more conflictual is the relationship between a
particular group and the government.
The Western European Governmental response to “cultic”
groups can be described as global, that is, instead of looking at one tragedy or
a unique situation, they attempt to understand cult phenomena and assess the
risk that cults represent for their respective countries.
With the exception of the 1980 Hill report on the Study
of Mind Development Groups, Sects and Cults in the Canadian province of
Ontario, one can describe Canada and the United States response to “cultic”
groups as situational. This means that a specific issue related to a cult or
religious group is addressed instead of the cult phenomenon in general.
In most of the parliamentary reports on this issue that I
have examined, the solution most widely recommended is to provide the public
with information about cults, new religious movements, spiritual or other
groups. Government reports emphasize the need to educate the public about how
these groups function, their recruitment methods and their philosophies. The
goal is to provide the public with as much information as possible so that
individuals can make informed choices about whether or not to join a group.
Governments cover the gamut from taking a strong position
in opposing "cults" to doing nothing. With such a range of responses, is there a
suggested approach for governments to take and would it be possible to achieve a
consensus given that actions are rooted in assumptions about ourselves and
others that, in turn, are inseparable from the historical, political, legal,
cultural, social, personal context/worlds in which we live? As the author and
diarist, Anais Nin (1903 - 1977) wrote, “We don't see things as they
are; we see things as we are.”
With that in mind I propose that an acceptable and viable
approach for governments is to look at the most critical areas, such as
Information and Education, Victim Assistance, and Research, where the potential
exists for getting governments to devote time, energy and resources.
Support for informing and educating the public has been
recommended in different governmental reports. Moreover, government officials
and private and professional organizations in many countries have voiced their
support for this option when asked to respond about problems related to “cults.”
To conclude, it is important to realize that “cult”
tragedies have occurred, and chances are they will occur again. Whereas they
represent a very small percentage of the range of groups that exist in our
society, these gruesome and tragic acts reinforce the public's perception of
cults as being dangerous. As a result, people look to the government to deal
with this issue.
The majority of new groups, even those that may be
considered cults, are not tragedies waiting to happen; neither will every person
involved in such a group be harmed. Every year there are new groups that
emerge—religious, spiritual, educational, therapeutic, human potential, occult,
etc. A number of them may, at first glance, appear peculiar because their
beliefs or lifestyles are different from the norm. This does not necessarily
mean that the group is a "cult" and represents a threat to its members or
others. A fundamental issue is a group's actions and conduct. Does the group
harm individuals, physically or psychologically? Does it pose a threat to
society? If the response to these questions is in the affirmative, governments
can and should intervene. However, in doing so, they must respond in a
democratic fashion, respecting everyone’s rights and needs, and they must avoid
adopting draconian measures.
Notes
[1]
This paper
was presented as part of a panel discussion, “Government and Cults:
Toward a Common Ground,” at the April 16-19, 2008 conference of INFORM
and CESNUR at the London School of Economics. The opinions expressed in
the paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
views of other people associated with ICSA or InfoCult/InfoSecte.
[2]
R.
Delgado, “Religious Totalism,” Southern California Law Review 15 (1977),
pp. 1-99; M. T. Singer, “Therapy with Ex-Cult Members,” Journal
of the National Association of Private Psychiatric Hospitals vol. 9,
no.4 (1978), pp.14-18; P. A. Verdier, Brainwashing and the Cults (Hollywood,
CA: Wilshire Book Company, 1977); L. West, M. Singer, “Cults, Quacks, and
Nonprofessional Psychotherapies,” in I. Harold, A. Kaplan, M. Freedman
and B. J. Sadock, Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, 3rd ed.
(Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, Co., 1980), vol. 3, pp. 3245-3258; L. J. West, “Cults, Liberty, and Mind Control,” in
D.C. Rapoport and Y. Alexander (eds.), The Rationalization of Terrorism
(Frederick, Md: Alethia Books, 1982), pp.101-107.
[3]
These objectives are stated in the corporation’s regulation number
1990-C.
[4]
Le Soleil, le 20 février 2008
(translation from the French done by the author).
[5]
R. Bergeron,
Vivre au risque des nouvelles religions (Montreal:
Médiaspaul, 1997); R. Campiche, Quand les sectes s’affolent. Ordre du
temple Solaire, Média et fin de millénaire (Geneva-Lausanne: Labor et Fides-Institut d’éthique Sociale, 1995); J. P. Willaime,
Sociologie des religions, 2nd ed. (Paris: P.U.F., 1998).
[6]
See also: Rosedale, Herbert, & Langone, Michael. On using the
term “cult.” http://www.icsahome.com/infoserv_articles/langone_michael_term_cult.htm
[8]
A. Gest, & J. Guyard. Commission sur les sectes en France. Assemblée
Nationale (1995). :
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/rap-enq/r2468.asp; P. Morin, Ordre du Temple Solaire: Rapport
d’investigation du Coroner. Bureau du Coroner,
Gouvernement du Québec. (1996). Email communication with Jean-François
Mayer May 3, 2008. Initially this commission was started to look at
attacks made in a Swiss newspaper (Tages-Anzeiger, Feb. 4, 1997) against
Jean-François Mayer, an expert on cults, who was at the time a Federal
civil servant and had been requested to contribute to a report then
being prepared by a consultative commission of the Ministry of Justice
about Scientology. The Parliamentary commission decided to hear from Mr.
Mayer and others and finally decided to take the opportunity to find out
about cults, which led to the idea of a report on cults.
[9]
B. Wilson and J. Cresswell.
(eds.). New
religious movements challenge and response. New York: Routledge, (1999),
pp. 5-21;
R. Stark and W. S. Bainbridge. The future of religion: Secularization,
revival and cult formation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
(1985); R. Stark, W. S.
Bainbridge. A Theory of Religion. New York: David Lang. (1987); R. Stark, W. S.
Bainbridge, and D. P. Doyle. Cults of America: A Reconnaissance in Space
and Time. Sociological Analysis 40 (1979), pp. 347-459.
|