Punk Rock Church—Cult?
February 17, 2018 6:31 PM Subscribe
I came in to say exactly what Samizdata said. Man, that's a lot of people desperately searching for an identity.
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:06 PM on February 17, 2018
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:06 PM on February 17, 2018
I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:29 PM on February 17, 2018 [13 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:29 PM on February 17, 2018 [13 favorites]
It is sad but it sort of seems ingrained in humans to seek a tribe; witness, sports fans, sf fans, etc. We are, after all social animals but our gatherings always seem to tip over into fanaticism all too easily and religion seems to foster fanaticism as part of its modus operandus. Having delivered this pompous pronouncement, I shall slip silently away into my she-shed.
posted by MovableBookLady at 8:37 PM on February 17, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by MovableBookLady at 8:37 PM on February 17, 2018 [4 favorites]
It's mildly amusing that every comment here so far is: "I agree with the previous comment whole-heartedly and it's sad that everyone seems to want to find some place where everyone thinks alike."
posted by koavf at 8:49 PM on February 17, 2018 [35 favorites]
posted by koavf at 8:49 PM on February 17, 2018 [35 favorites]
For a contrary view consider that this is much less about identity and far more about intensity. I am in no way Christian and certainly find the logic and rationale of Evangelicals to be laughable. The passion and experience of being in a group like this is a high. Identity is a justification for the high. I rarely react like this to anything. Music, rallies, any group activity leaves me feeling like me and rarely like part of a group. But for other people the intensity of group activity, from bike clubs to religious revivals stimulates all the feels. It is drugs without the drugs. A great sermon is like a great rock show. People are there for the experience. The experience creates the identity. The social nature of humanity has a range and being on one end of that range is in no way an excuse to belittle those on the other. For those looking to simply identify with something there are easier and closer to home solutions. When talking about punk rockers most of them are already looking to run from easily accessible identities around them.
I collect cult stories. I find them fascinating. one of the most common themes I find is about how the group gave the member something they had never had before. Sometimes it is belonging, sometimes just their first taste of acceptance, sometimes it is an answer to a question that allows everything to seem to click into place, or a mixture of these with still more I have not the time to list.
Please avoid the facile ideas that persist of cults being solely for the weak-willed and lost among us. It leaves you and those you know open to the terrible depredations that so often occur among those who, "had no idea".
posted by Ignorantsavage at 8:57 PM on February 17, 2018 [41 favorites]
I collect cult stories. I find them fascinating. one of the most common themes I find is about how the group gave the member something they had never had before. Sometimes it is belonging, sometimes just their first taste of acceptance, sometimes it is an answer to a question that allows everything to seem to click into place, or a mixture of these with still more I have not the time to list.
Please avoid the facile ideas that persist of cults being solely for the weak-willed and lost among us. It leaves you and those you know open to the terrible depredations that so often occur among those who, "had no idea".
posted by Ignorantsavage at 8:57 PM on February 17, 2018 [41 favorites]
> Halloween Jack:
"I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff."
I'm down. (Truthfully, I should know better, but, other than work, 90% of my social interaction is online.)
(Because that's when I'm a Viking.)
posted by Samizdata at 10:42 PM on February 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
"I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff."
I'm down. (Truthfully, I should know better, but, other than work, 90% of my social interaction is online.)
(Because that's when I'm a Viking.)
posted by Samizdata at 10:42 PM on February 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
Actually reading the article, it seems unlikely that the DBC survivors group is a cult. Merely having a shared goal, even an intense one, is not a cult. And it's pretty natural for people who feel they've escaped a toxic organization to then crusade against it passionately, similar to ex-scientologists, ex-Amway sellers, etc. I also find it rather predictable that the people accusing them of being a cult are the original accused cult leaders. Is this in the defense playbook of conservative white people somewhere? It sounds remarkably like the "I'm not racist, you're a racist for talking about racism" stuff we hear a lot these days.
I mean really, I'm not even sure I agree that the church itself is a cult, at least not in the Jim Jones sense of that word, and like the sociology professor in the article, I'd probably use another term. It's still decidedly not good, but it doesn't sound like quite the same phenomenon as the stuff that went down with the People's Temple or with the Branch Davidians or even with Scientology. Shades of it maybe, or a pre-cursor, but there's a bright red line between charisma and grift and asking or demanding that people die or holding people against their will.
posted by katyggls at 10:45 PM on February 17, 2018 [5 favorites]
I mean really, I'm not even sure I agree that the church itself is a cult, at least not in the Jim Jones sense of that word, and like the sociology professor in the article, I'd probably use another term. It's still decidedly not good, but it doesn't sound like quite the same phenomenon as the stuff that went down with the People's Temple or with the Branch Davidians or even with Scientology. Shades of it maybe, or a pre-cursor, but there's a bright red line between charisma and grift and asking or demanding that people die or holding people against their will.
posted by katyggls at 10:45 PM on February 17, 2018 [5 favorites]
> Ignorantsavage:
"For a contrary view consider that this is much less about identity and far more about intensity. I am in no way Christian and certainly find the logic and rationale of Evangelicals to be laughable. The passion and experience of being in a group like this is a high. Identity is a justification for the high. I rarely react like this to anything. Music, rallies, any group activity leaves me feeling like me and rarely like part of a group. But for other people the intensity of group activity, from bike clubs to religious revivals stimulates all the feels. It is drugs without the drugs. A great sermon is like a great rock show. People are there for the experience. The experience creates the identity. The social nature of humanity has a range and being on one end of that range is in no way an excuse to belittle those on the other. For those looking to simply identify with something there are easier and closer to home solutions. When talking about punk rockers most of them are already looking to run from easily accessible identities around them.
I collect cult stories. I find them fascinating. one of the most common themes I find is about how the group gave the member something they had never had before. Sometimes it is belonging, sometimes just their first taste of acceptance, sometimes it is an answer to a question that allows everything to seem to click into place, or a mixture of these with still more I have not the time to list.
Please avoid the facile ideas that persist of cults being solely for the weak-willed and lost among us. It leaves you and those you know open to the terrible depredations that so often occur among those who, "had no idea"."
I, on the other hand, would argue it is the obverse, that it is, in fact, the relatively guilt-free intensity that provides a shared platform to allow the cult to form it's bond and isolate its self from those that do not "feel the touch of God" so to speak. That passion allows themselves to more readily isolate themselves from non-cultists as "they just don't understand". And, they then know, that there ARE people around them that DO understand and will mutually reinforce the group identity as they stand against the apostate and heretics. Also, as the religious leader then knows, they're the only one that can bring them together to share said high, and reinforce, via their teachings, that those not so blessed are bad and wrong and need to be ignored and isolated.
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow. I have skated around cult involvement myself, at least once. It was only my kneejerk response to what I consider irrational hierarchy that kept me from stepping in. So let's not facilely assume that what you think someone said is what they actually said. (One could argue NO ONE is normal which could explain your case. In mine, it is a basic distrust of unproven leadership.)
posted by Samizdata at 10:53 PM on February 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
"For a contrary view consider that this is much less about identity and far more about intensity. I am in no way Christian and certainly find the logic and rationale of Evangelicals to be laughable. The passion and experience of being in a group like this is a high. Identity is a justification for the high. I rarely react like this to anything. Music, rallies, any group activity leaves me feeling like me and rarely like part of a group. But for other people the intensity of group activity, from bike clubs to religious revivals stimulates all the feels. It is drugs without the drugs. A great sermon is like a great rock show. People are there for the experience. The experience creates the identity. The social nature of humanity has a range and being on one end of that range is in no way an excuse to belittle those on the other. For those looking to simply identify with something there are easier and closer to home solutions. When talking about punk rockers most of them are already looking to run from easily accessible identities around them.
I collect cult stories. I find them fascinating. one of the most common themes I find is about how the group gave the member something they had never had before. Sometimes it is belonging, sometimes just their first taste of acceptance, sometimes it is an answer to a question that allows everything to seem to click into place, or a mixture of these with still more I have not the time to list.
Please avoid the facile ideas that persist of cults being solely for the weak-willed and lost among us. It leaves you and those you know open to the terrible depredations that so often occur among those who, "had no idea"."
I, on the other hand, would argue it is the obverse, that it is, in fact, the relatively guilt-free intensity that provides a shared platform to allow the cult to form it's bond and isolate its self from those that do not "feel the touch of God" so to speak. That passion allows themselves to more readily isolate themselves from non-cultists as "they just don't understand". And, they then know, that there ARE people around them that DO understand and will mutually reinforce the group identity as they stand against the apostate and heretics. Also, as the religious leader then knows, they're the only one that can bring them together to share said high, and reinforce, via their teachings, that those not so blessed are bad and wrong and need to be ignored and isolated.
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow. I have skated around cult involvement myself, at least once. It was only my kneejerk response to what I consider irrational hierarchy that kept me from stepping in. So let's not facilely assume that what you think someone said is what they actually said. (One could argue NO ONE is normal which could explain your case. In mine, it is a basic distrust of unproven leadership.)
posted by Samizdata at 10:53 PM on February 17, 2018 [2 favorites]
Former members also say that Adrian told them to cut off family and friends outside the church because those people lived in sin. They claim he dictated when members should date, marry, or have babies, and men were expected to control their wives. ... If you questioned any of his actions or preaching, former members claim, Adrian would tell you that you were questioning God. He would single out specific members for rebuke from the pulpit.
Bought that T-shirt. That's a cult.
posted by oheso at 12:21 AM on February 18, 2018 [20 favorites]
Bought that T-shirt. That's a cult.
posted by oheso at 12:21 AM on February 18, 2018 [20 favorites]
I also don't think the Survivors group qualifies as a cult, but it certainly does strike me as fulfilling a need for a group identity. Lots of things fulfill that need that aren't cults.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:15 AM on February 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:15 AM on February 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
Usually these stories end with the charismatic leader starting to believe his own lines, locking people into punishments boxes, getting rapey and or murdery, and that is where it crosses the line. This DBC thing just sounds like a middlingly crappy job with a middlingly ego-maniacal boss. The punk angle almost makes it interesting but not quite.
posted by mumblelard at 7:34 AM on February 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by mumblelard at 7:34 AM on February 18, 2018 [2 favorites]
And it's pretty natural for people who feel they've escaped a toxic organization to then crusade against it passionately, similar to ex-scientologists, ex-Amway sellers, etc.
What's interesting is when their idea of what a healthy group identity looks like is shaped by that cult, so they end up recreating those abusive behaviours in some fashion. Ex-Scientologists definitely qualify, but I suspect that internet atheists are strongly influenced by people leaving the American evangelical church and then recreating its hierarchies on the outside.
I, on the other hand, would argue it is the obverse
I don't think the two of you are really on opposite sides here: the literature I've read (which is not enough, to be fair) suggests there's two key ingredients for a cult: the ability to police the boundaries and keep ideas from getting in or out (I'd argue America's ideal of non-interference makes this really easy, which is why cults flourish amongst Americans more easily than other, more nosy cultures) and the cult falsely claiming that it's working towards something greater than itself, which provides that group cohesion (and when they start to realise the cult doesn't actually work towards its stated goals, they still usually go through the motions of reinforcing the abusive structure). If I'm understanding you both correctly, you're each saying one of those two.
posted by Merus at 7:40 AM on February 18, 2018 [3 favorites]
What's interesting is when their idea of what a healthy group identity looks like is shaped by that cult, so they end up recreating those abusive behaviours in some fashion. Ex-Scientologists definitely qualify, but I suspect that internet atheists are strongly influenced by people leaving the American evangelical church and then recreating its hierarchies on the outside.
I, on the other hand, would argue it is the obverse
I don't think the two of you are really on opposite sides here: the literature I've read (which is not enough, to be fair) suggests there's two key ingredients for a cult: the ability to police the boundaries and keep ideas from getting in or out (I'd argue America's ideal of non-interference makes this really easy, which is why cults flourish amongst Americans more easily than other, more nosy cultures) and the cult falsely claiming that it's working towards something greater than itself, which provides that group cohesion (and when they start to realise the cult doesn't actually work towards its stated goals, they still usually go through the motions of reinforcing the abusive structure). If I'm understanding you both correctly, you're each saying one of those two.
posted by Merus at 7:40 AM on February 18, 2018 [3 favorites]
Actually reading the article, it seems unlikely that the DBC survivors group is a cult. Merely having a shared goal, even an intense one, is not a cult.
I tend to agree here. I'm not even sure that I would characterize the DBC survivors group as being driven by a need for identity, per se--honestly, the behavior and associated connection seem to me less about identity and more about a shared need to make sense of trauma. The all or nothing worldview, the fear with which the cult is viewed, the ruminating worry about how best to do something about it--there's definitely a desire to cling to other people who hear and validate that sense of trauma, but it's not people who are searching for identity that wind up in that survivors group. It's people who have experienced a traumatic experience with DBC. They have that identity already; what the group allows them to do is find validation and a means of processing that trauma.
This is not to say that it's a particularly healthy means of trauma processing, I should note. It sounds like a community that formed for what I often think of as "detoxing," in which people who have felt alone with their traumas or isolation discover that they aren't alone and go through a sort of cathartic phase of sharing the rage and grief and sadness that have built up over time. Often communities that form like that have a lot of people who check in, detox, and fade away as they come to terms with the experience that brought them there.
I've seen communities that handle that kind of thing in a way I'd call healthy, in which long term members catch newer members, give them a space to let the built up frustration out, but gently set boundaries that prevent them from fixating on the evilness of the source of the trauma at the cost of being able to move on with their lives. Long term members are people who have dealt with their own issues within the forum but who either are interested in the phenomenon that brought them there or find purpose in helping people who are newly coping. I can think of a number of places that fit that vibe I've watched over the years.
Where it goes wrong is the point where, instead of long term members focusing on being a waypoint for helping newly discovered people transition to a better place, you get some crucial balance longer term members who focus on constantly ruminating over what happened to them and anxiously maintaining hypervigilance over the source of the trauma. The focus becomes less about finding a place of peace for the hurting and more of finding a way to neutralize all possible harm, which is inevitably completely impossible for any group of individual people to do. The anxiety spins out of control and the place of healing turns into a place that amplifies the trauma and anxiety while still passing out that validation hit common to the more healthy form of support community.
But I wouldn't call it a cult. It's not a pattern that develops into a worship of any one person, in my experience. And people who do find a place of peace will fade out of those spaces without being chased: for the people in this community, it's the validation and the endorphins of having community for unhealthy coping mechanisms that keeps them there, not a specific person trying to exert control.
Not every sick system is a cult.
posted by sciatrix at 7:41 AM on February 18, 2018 [3 favorites]
I tend to agree here. I'm not even sure that I would characterize the DBC survivors group as being driven by a need for identity, per se--honestly, the behavior and associated connection seem to me less about identity and more about a shared need to make sense of trauma. The all or nothing worldview, the fear with which the cult is viewed, the ruminating worry about how best to do something about it--there's definitely a desire to cling to other people who hear and validate that sense of trauma, but it's not people who are searching for identity that wind up in that survivors group. It's people who have experienced a traumatic experience with DBC. They have that identity already; what the group allows them to do is find validation and a means of processing that trauma.
This is not to say that it's a particularly healthy means of trauma processing, I should note. It sounds like a community that formed for what I often think of as "detoxing," in which people who have felt alone with their traumas or isolation discover that they aren't alone and go through a sort of cathartic phase of sharing the rage and grief and sadness that have built up over time. Often communities that form like that have a lot of people who check in, detox, and fade away as they come to terms with the experience that brought them there.
I've seen communities that handle that kind of thing in a way I'd call healthy, in which long term members catch newer members, give them a space to let the built up frustration out, but gently set boundaries that prevent them from fixating on the evilness of the source of the trauma at the cost of being able to move on with their lives. Long term members are people who have dealt with their own issues within the forum but who either are interested in the phenomenon that brought them there or find purpose in helping people who are newly coping. I can think of a number of places that fit that vibe I've watched over the years.
Where it goes wrong is the point where, instead of long term members focusing on being a waypoint for helping newly discovered people transition to a better place, you get some crucial balance longer term members who focus on constantly ruminating over what happened to them and anxiously maintaining hypervigilance over the source of the trauma. The focus becomes less about finding a place of peace for the hurting and more of finding a way to neutralize all possible harm, which is inevitably completely impossible for any group of individual people to do. The anxiety spins out of control and the place of healing turns into a place that amplifies the trauma and anxiety while still passing out that validation hit common to the more healthy form of support community.
But I wouldn't call it a cult. It's not a pattern that develops into a worship of any one person, in my experience. And people who do find a place of peace will fade out of those spaces without being chased: for the people in this community, it's the validation and the endorphins of having community for unhealthy coping mechanisms that keeps them there, not a specific person trying to exert control.
Not every sick system is a cult.
posted by sciatrix at 7:41 AM on February 18, 2018 [3 favorites]
I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff.
And so begins a cult.
posted by Splunge at 8:09 AM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
And so begins a cult.
posted by Splunge at 8:09 AM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
I'm actually a little surprised that stuff like this doesn't happen more often with punk kids. When you grow up feeling like an outcast and then meet someone who "gets" you, it's a powerful feeling. You don't have to be an evil genius to take advantage of that. Drug pushers and sexual predators have been doing that for years.
posted by kevinbelt at 9:05 AM on February 18, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by kevinbelt at 9:05 AM on February 18, 2018 [5 favorites]
> Splunge:
"I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff.
And so begins a cult."
I call Grand Leader Maximum for Life! Now, who's got the Doritos and pizzas? Render unto Samizdata that which is Samizdata's.
posted by Samizdata at 10:26 AM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
"I totally agree with Samizdata and soren_lorensen. You know, folks, maybe we should hang out some time. Just to, I dunno, talk about life and stuff.
And so begins a cult."
I call Grand Leader Maximum for Life! Now, who's got the Doritos and pizzas? Render unto Samizdata that which is Samizdata's.
posted by Samizdata at 10:26 AM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
"I'm actually a little surprised that stuff like this doesn't happen more often with punk kids."
Some factions of the straight-edge movement got a little culty, IIRC.
posted by Selena777 at 10:51 AM on February 18, 2018 [5 favorites]
Some factions of the straight-edge movement got a little culty, IIRC.
posted by Selena777 at 10:51 AM on February 18, 2018 [5 favorites]
Some factions of the straight-edge movement got a little culty, IIRC.
It certainly got a little weird and religious.
posted by atoxyl at 1:11 PM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
It certainly got a little weird and religious.
posted by atoxyl at 1:11 PM on February 18, 2018 [1 favorite]
It's mildly amusing that every comment here so far is: "I agree with the previous comment whole-heartedly and it's sad that everyone seems to want to find some place where everyone thinks alike."
I was the 24th person to favorite this. But it's not like I really believe it.
posted by BlueHorse at 1:15 PM on February 18, 2018
I was the 24th person to favorite this. But it's not like I really believe it.
posted by BlueHorse at 1:15 PM on February 18, 2018
Cults forming around the edges of passionate musical subcultures is a time-honored tradition.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:17 PM on February 18, 2018
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:17 PM on February 18, 2018
Cults forming around the edges of passionate musical subcultures is a time-honored tradition.
Heck, the really smart ones do it on purpose. (KLF, Devo, Psychick TV, Dead Can Dance... They Might Be Giants.)
posted by loquacious at 2:13 PM on February 18, 2018
Heck, the really smart ones do it on purpose. (KLF, Devo, Psychick TV, Dead Can Dance... They Might Be Giants.)
posted by loquacious at 2:13 PM on February 18, 2018
>Samizdata
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow.
Nor did I say that you did. This was more a response to soren_loresen's comment about people searching for identity [emphasis mine]. It was a plea to avoid going down the conversational dead end that discussions about this topic can go. It may be a knee-jerk reaction, but one I feel has good cause.
posted by Ignorantsavage at 8:05 PM on February 18, 2018
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow.
Nor did I say that you did. This was more a response to soren_loresen's comment about people searching for identity [emphasis mine]. It was a plea to avoid going down the conversational dead end that discussions about this topic can go. It may be a knee-jerk reaction, but one I feel has good cause.
posted by Ignorantsavage at 8:05 PM on February 18, 2018
> Ignorantsavage:
">Samizdata
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow.
Nor did I say that you did. This was more a response to soren_loresen's comment about people searching for identity [emphasis mine]. It was a plea to avoid going down the conversational dead end that discussions about this topic can go. It may be a knee-jerk reaction, but one I feel has good cause."
Granted, objectively, you didn't. The connotation I read was that you took it as a given and was trying to avoid rehashing it. OTOH, as it seems, as remarked above, it seems pretty clear we were approaching the same goal from different angles, I will back off.
posted by Samizdata at 9:41 PM on February 18, 2018
">Samizdata
At no point did I ever say this was for the weak-willed and lost. I am stating these are accepted as basic needs, despite Maslow.
Nor did I say that you did. This was more a response to soren_loresen's comment about people searching for identity [emphasis mine]. It was a plea to avoid going down the conversational dead end that discussions about this topic can go. It may be a knee-jerk reaction, but one I feel has good cause."
Granted, objectively, you didn't. The connotation I read was that you took it as a given and was trying to avoid rehashing it. OTOH, as it seems, as remarked above, it seems pretty clear we were approaching the same goal from different angles, I will back off.
posted by Samizdata at 9:41 PM on February 18, 2018
Each former DBC member seems to feel mixed about their time there. If it wasn’t for the church, they wouldn’t be who they are today. But, if given the chance of a do-over, they wouldn’t go again.
this rings very true.
I was a member of a fundamentalist christian church for 13 years. this church meets many of the criteria one can find online for being a cult.
I left that church over 20 years ago, and in retrospect, what has been helpful in building a new life was not seeing myself as a victim or even survivor, endlessly rehashing the wasted years and spiritual abuse, but to leave it all behind. Initially I used to spend a lot of time in forums of exchristians, and atheist forums and read and research the group and its origins, but honestly, the group think required to be accepted in those circles turned me off.
What's interesting is when their idea of what a healthy group identity looks like is shaped by that cult, so they end up recreating those abusive behaviours in some fashion. Ex-Scientologists definitely qualify, but I suspect that internet atheists are strongly influenced by people leaving the American evangelical church and then recreating its hierarchies on the outside.
and this is so spot on. I am not an (internet) atheist. Nor do I fit the other category you find in cyberworld which is people agressively pursuing theological arguments agianst the group they used to be a member of, branding them as apostate etc.
It is simply exchanging one obsession with another.
I found relief only when I found my own answers to life's questions, which may or not be shared by others, and accept myself.
I am ok as an individual. It is not important if I am able to convince others or even if others share my opinion.
I do not need to save others and cram my opinion down their throat so they can be saved. Which is not the same as not caring for others - I can offer to listen and help but ultimately they choose.
I really like what Ken Pulliam wrote on fundamentalism (I include the Peter Berger quote):
Modernity, for fully understandable reasons, undermines all the old certainties; uncertainty is a condition that many people find very hard to bear; therefore, any movement (not only a religous one) that promises to provide or to renew certainty has a ready market (Peter Berger, The Desecularization of the World, p. 7 cited by Eller, p. 282). This is why conservative and authoritarian religions are growing. They provide a rock of certainty in a fast-changing world. They provide simple and divinely authoritative answers to the complexities of life. For certain people, this has a tremendous appeal.
When I was 17 and rudderless, drifting, and someone told me (literally) "I know god's plan for your life" it was incredibly attractive, a short cut to the goal of finding my own path. It was not the evangelists and their cultish group behaviour who "made me do it" but it appealed to me on some inner level: a seemingly easy answer to the complexities of life.
posted by 15L06 at 3:45 AM on February 19, 2018 [2 favorites]
this rings very true.
I was a member of a fundamentalist christian church for 13 years. this church meets many of the criteria one can find online for being a cult.
I left that church over 20 years ago, and in retrospect, what has been helpful in building a new life was not seeing myself as a victim or even survivor, endlessly rehashing the wasted years and spiritual abuse, but to leave it all behind. Initially I used to spend a lot of time in forums of exchristians, and atheist forums and read and research the group and its origins, but honestly, the group think required to be accepted in those circles turned me off.
What's interesting is when their idea of what a healthy group identity looks like is shaped by that cult, so they end up recreating those abusive behaviours in some fashion. Ex-Scientologists definitely qualify, but I suspect that internet atheists are strongly influenced by people leaving the American evangelical church and then recreating its hierarchies on the outside.
and this is so spot on. I am not an (internet) atheist. Nor do I fit the other category you find in cyberworld which is people agressively pursuing theological arguments agianst the group they used to be a member of, branding them as apostate etc.
It is simply exchanging one obsession with another.
I found relief only when I found my own answers to life's questions, which may or not be shared by others, and accept myself.
I am ok as an individual. It is not important if I am able to convince others or even if others share my opinion.
I do not need to save others and cram my opinion down their throat so they can be saved. Which is not the same as not caring for others - I can offer to listen and help but ultimately they choose.
I really like what Ken Pulliam wrote on fundamentalism (I include the Peter Berger quote):
Modernity, for fully understandable reasons, undermines all the old certainties; uncertainty is a condition that many people find very hard to bear; therefore, any movement (not only a religous one) that promises to provide or to renew certainty has a ready market (Peter Berger, The Desecularization of the World, p. 7 cited by Eller, p. 282). This is why conservative and authoritarian religions are growing. They provide a rock of certainty in a fast-changing world. They provide simple and divinely authoritative answers to the complexities of life. For certain people, this has a tremendous appeal.
When I was 17 and rudderless, drifting, and someone told me (literally) "I know god's plan for your life" it was incredibly attractive, a short cut to the goal of finding my own path. It was not the evangelists and their cultish group behaviour who "made me do it" but it appealed to me on some inner level: a seemingly easy answer to the complexities of life.
posted by 15L06 at 3:45 AM on February 19, 2018 [2 favorites]
I also find it rather predictable that the people accusing them of being a cult are the original accused cult leaders. Is this in the defense playbook of conservative white people somewhere? It sounds remarkably like the "I'm not racist, you're a racist for talking about racism" stuff we hear a lot these days.
Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender
I've been listening to this podcast, simply titled Cults, which goes over the stories of various cults, rise and fall, and so on, and there's so many common threads from those stories that show up here. You hear enough of these stories and pretty soon when the next story comes around it's almost like ticking off a checklist. In general if your religious organization is centered around a single charismatic leader, maybe keep an eye out for the power poisoning their brain the way power does.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:37 AM on February 19, 2018 [1 favorite]
Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender
I've been listening to this podcast, simply titled Cults, which goes over the stories of various cults, rise and fall, and so on, and there's so many common threads from those stories that show up here. You hear enough of these stories and pretty soon when the next story comes around it's almost like ticking off a checklist. In general if your religious organization is centered around a single charismatic leader, maybe keep an eye out for the power poisoning their brain the way power does.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:37 AM on February 19, 2018 [1 favorite]
« Older “frenetic yet orchestrated ballet of sword slashes... | Take it to the bridge! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Samizdata at 8:03 PM on February 17, 2018 [7 favorites]