- Topic
Here are the characteristics of cult that I found. I’d like to hear from those who have knowledge of wmscog which ones seem to apply to the wmscog, and why. If you think that some/all do not apply, I’d appreciate an explanation as well.
1. Single charismatic leader.
2. People always seeming constantly happy and enthusiastic. Especially if you discover that they have been told to act that way for the potential new recruits.
3. Instant friends.
4. If you are told who you can or cannot talk to or associate with.
5. They hide what they teach.
6. Say they are the only true group, or the best so why go anywhere else.
7. Hyped meetings, get you to meetings rather than share with you.
8. Experiential rather than logical.
9. Asking for money for the next level.
10. Some cults travel door to door during times when women are home alone. They, and this is rather sexist, think that women are easier to recruit and once they have the woman then it will be easier to snare the husband or partner.
11. Saying that they have to make people pay for it because otherwise they will not appreciate it. This is of course a very silly reason, plenty of people are able to appreciate things which they did not pay for.
12. They do not allow their teachings or practices to be questioned. If you question, then automatically the group assumes that something is wrong with you. It can never be the case that anything is wrong with the group’s practices or teachings. Often they will try to shut you down by accusing you of having a “bad attitude”.
13. They will push you to obey by using guilt. They will demand complete “submission” to the group, its leaders and its teachings. They will do this by making you feel absolutely rotten about yourself. They will ridicule you and attack any weakness you might have (or invent weaknesses you might have if they can’t find any). Their goal is to break your will by causing you mental anguish.
This is a very good list. I think that everything that has been posted on this site for years about the WMS has dealt with the characteristics listed here for the most part. My opinion.
These are the characteristics of a cult you found? Who can reliably define a cult?? Google? Like mountain mom said, you need only to go as far as the forum historicals for a good read on very many of these points. As you have only been registered for nine days, I can safely assume you havn't read them thoroughly, given the depth of the forum and the nature of your question. The major thing you lack in your question is asserting your stance in the very questions that you are asking us to provide answers for. Show us solidarity, and give us your position on these matters first. It will set the table for a better dialogue, rather than give the impression of phishing for information on opposing arguments. We are always happy to help, but we need to know that help is what you want. My ultimate question for you; How do you feel concerning these very questions, concerning the wmscog?
maxwellmcgregor wrote:
Here are the characteristics of cult that I found. I'd like to hear from those who have knowledge of wmscog which ones seem to apply to the wmscog, and why. If you think that some/all do not apply, I'd appreciate an explanation as well.
1. Single charismatic leader.
terrible definition
it is too categorical
even Jim Jones had his lieutenants
good luck convincing anyone in a group that they are being manipulated with this as the opener
2. People always seeming constantly happy and enthusiastic. Especially if you discover that they have been told to act that way for the potential new recruits.
even if this were true by the time you're in so deep as to be participating like this you will be doing so in such a way as to have already convinced yourself that this activity is appropriate
3. Instant friends.
yes, please. can I join a group where people are not going to be my friends rather soon on
4. If you are told who you can or cannot talk to or associate with.
only the church of the idiots would do this.
members would "come to their own conclusions" as to what is appropriate for their spiritual health and well being.
5. They hide what they teach.
this group comes right out, now at least, and says that they tell people up front about Mother
when you have the secret path to salvation you don't view it as hiding, you veiw it as giving people what they can handle, feed babies baby food/adults get the steak, etc.
6. Say they are the only true group, or the best so why go anywhere else.
yup, perfectly logical and really grabs a lot of personality types
7. Hyped meetings, get you to meetings rather than share with you.
umm, businesses do this – you get the information at the meeting. leadership does not give the same info 20 times individually.
8. Experiential rather than logical.
plenty of groups use logic on you. see #6
9. Asking for money for the next level.
cant really address this one but the worldview would be such that the group isn't "asking" for money, rather that the individual advances and this is the cost necessary
subtle alteration in wording affects worldview
10. Some cults travel door to door during times when women are home alone. They, and this is rather sexist, think that women are easier to recruit and once they have the woman then it will be easier to snare the husband or partner.
ugh. get another cliche.
11. Saying that they have to make people pay for it because otherwise they will not appreciate it. This is of course a very silly reason, plenty of people are able to appreciate things which they did not pay for.
then all frats and sororities are cults too because research data indicates buy-in to the Greeks simply because of the effort one goes through in the initiation stage.
12. They do not allow their teachings or practices to be questioned. If you question, then automatically the group assumes that something is wrong with you. It can never be the case that anything is wrong with the group’s practices or teachings. Often they will try to shut you down by accusing you of having a “bad attitude”.
check in with the political correctness of our day. you must call Bruce Jenner Caitlyn now. the macro or micro social atmosphere pushes its influence in a direction and either people get on board with it or they dont get the privelege of playing in the sandbox anymore
13. They will push you to obey by using guilt. They will demand complete “submission” to the group, its leaders and its teachings. They will do this by making you feel absolutely rotten about yourself. They will ridicule you and attack any weakness you might have (or invent weaknesses you might have if they can’t find any). Their goal is to break your will by causing you mental anguish.
I remember friends making me feel guilty all the way back to kindergarten so that they could get something they wanted from me.
just stop with the categorical nature of these lists.
I prefer to view the "cult overlappers" on a spectrum.
example. the claim that the group is elitist. ok, people view their alma matters, frats, military service, etc as elitist. I have seen POS hires of USC graduates by, you guessed it, USC alums that were in the hiring seat. certainly the tie-breaker goes to the person that has something in common with us. people would refer to this as "loyalty". and why not? moreover, if I'm running so-called cult then I just give an example from the everyday world with loyalty as an example and then since that is very logical and makes sense then those making the claim of "cult" get to look very stupid and the group grows tighter because the individual has just been turned stronger towards the group via naive, but well intended, claims.
if we rather view on a spectrum:
ostracism/disfellowshipping/etc that this has potential for abuse or is a red flag then we are not directly (or roundabouts that the member will still view as directly attacking) confronting the member and putting ourselves in danger of the member convincing him/herself that we should be disfellowshipped or red-flag label.
whether or not we are told who we can communicate with or not, that if our communication is limited then we are subject to the source for the information we get. if we belong to the labor union and watch msnbc at night then for the rest of our lives we will be nice liberals toeing the party line because we only get one side of the story. this doesn't mean we belong to a cult but simply that while we are free to intake whatever information we want to take in that the scales are tilted in favor of this side rather than the other. same goes for fox viewers. guess what, both sides give compelling stories day in and day out that keep people tuning in.
being told who you can or cannot talk to. reality tv is full of picking sides and the convincer is usually that so-and-so is a liar. simple as that. AND….it works over and over and over. it works in political elections – those that speak against Hilary are in a war against women. those that speak against Trump are "horrible persons". Trump really says that, too. simple answer: because it works. if the answer is simply because the other side is a liar then who says so? in other words, if we lived in a country in which there was a legal case whereby only the government got to tell its side of the story then the conviction rate would certainly be close to 100%. while I will not go as far as to say that Ronnie and Diane are apples/apples examples of this in the WMSCOG videos that went out, there was a movie on HBO recently and the group depicted put out a video on each and every person from the documentary (spoiler alert: each and every one were liars with axes to grind). those videos were not intended to convince people outside of the group – they were meant to pacify people in that group so that they could go nicely back on their own to business as usual. again, that this is a red flag is as far as we should go in defining these groups. because, all groups are different there are only themes anyway.
adding up all of the red flags, I would argue, is a sum greater than the individual parts. but only the member gets to add them up. otherwise we lead horses to water they will refuse to drink.
First of all, Maxwell asked for similarities with wms, and you didn't answer that, JW. You went off on a very lengthy tangent leading away from his original question/request. Second, many people here are trying to help people identify cults in advance of being approached by them so that red flags go off when they are faced with manipulations. (Red flags should be everywhere when the WMS approaches, based on the criteria listed here.) Prevention of recruitment is really the goal for many, not arguing with members who are already under the influence.
Educating the public is not only the most effective thing, it can be done in an hour seminar in some cases. I've seen evidence of this. A guy I know had only an hour in a seminar on cults when he was in high school, but twelve years later he recognized the wms as a cult with ease after listening to only some basic information about their doctrine, recruitment tactics, and manipulative practices. I am of the opinion that no one here is going to convince a devoted member to quit the wms unless that member is already looking for a reason to leave. It is sad, but they really have to come to the realization on their own and reach out. If they do, we can help, as well would like to do. But till then, I think we just have to help others avoid falling into their trap. I'm all for helping people avoid a lot of pain, heartache, financial ruin, relationship problems, etc. Aren't you?
Maxwell's criteria is very sound and very helpful. I don't think a group is a cult if there is just one or two things there identifying them, but when there are so many, it is glaringly obvious. By the way, I don't call the wms a cult to members. They would only get insulted because, after all, they are too smart to get involved in something like that, right? But there is no doubt it is a cult, and in my opinion, even smart people get fooled by cult tactics.
.
1)often but not always a single charismatic leader
Mother is not charismatic.
needs to include leiutenants that do the work for the leader
needs to include lack of checks & balances on power, which result in power imbalances in favor of leadership; intellectual hegemony will always be either invisible to the member or justified as divine.
2)often but not always sleep deprivation
won't happen up front but after buy-in to varying degrees depending upon the member.
some groups do the opposite and encourage rest.
needs to include sleep interruption
3) often but not always cut off from friends and family. at its abstract level this is the information control. this group will tell you, and JWs will tell you, that they are family friendly. later on it turns into a blame-the-victim mentality in which societal forces, which are invisible to the member, are used to twist love into a relationship based upon conditions. JW stories are out there on YouTube. They love their sons, daughters, etc. but Jehovah comes first and ostracism is the love they show, not knowing this is a function of group hegemony that greatly ret@rds information that the member can receive. Further, this acts toward reinforcing the image that the group is perfect/chosen people.
4) group is perfect, all speaking against the group are liars with axes to grind.
this group sure has a lot in common with another group featured on HBO vis a vis the videos they put out to de-bunk criticism.
only receiving contra-information from the group
members greatly resist doing their own, comprehensive research
5) often fear indoctrination
Hassan on record about generations of curses upon decendants from his moonie experience
bad things will happen if not under the protective umbrella of the group and its ways
reincarnated as a lower life form: a worm, a rat
diseases; outsiders referred to in a deragatory way – rats, diseased, scabs, scum
thoughts outside of the groups can be brain disease or virus
can be disguised as protection; who doesn't want protection? we all get protection
what good any of this in its categorical form in the OP does up front for this to inform and ret@rd the growth of this group depends upon how it is measured. for example, if we stop counting at those that are curious and investigate this site and only count those that quit and ignore those that come here and check off the list thankful that they did not join a cult then we are responsible for our lack of thoroughness in "educating the public". for the latter group will now be more convinced that they are not part of a cult, their membership extended.
while I didn't cow to the request in the OP I consider its categorical nature dangerous at worst and naive at best.
Of course, I disagree that the "categorical nature" is naive or dangerous. I've seen this type of information used to identify cults and avoid involvement. How else could you identify these groups without presenting the info in an organized manner such as this?
I don't disagree with everything you say or all your points, but I wonder how you would identify cults if not in an organized way such as this? How would you educate people as to what to look for? I see that you argue or answer each of Maxwell's categories in a way that a member might. Still, as I said, the main goal for me is not to talk members out of being there. Who here has done that? I don't know of anyone. I have, on the other hand, seen people offer answers and truth to people who already have doubts. And it is different strokes for different folks as far as what makes the light bulb of realization go on in their heads.
Don’t waste time with JW, Mountain Mom. He rode in on the same horse as buyfutcoins.
JW is very passionate about this subject, as shown by all the time he takes to respond to things. Its just that he isn't good at making his intentions clear, in my opinion. JW, could you just say something simply so it could be more obvious? You seem to have a lot of anger, and I don't think any of us are exactly sure what or who your target is.
Intention is to show that there is no perfect list. discuss and improve; debate.
Always someone will fall through proverbial cracks, and those people should be measured and included in the analysis of what is the best approach.
Seeing through the eyes of members is not a sin. Its a gift. So is picking apart lists so as to improve over time.
idk who buyfutcoins is. if anyone with an attitude outside of what the norm on this site shows up and gets painted the same as saboteurs then this site qualifies as a cult vis a vis "us vs them".
JW, we already know there is no perfect list. Not all cults will fit this list, but if there are a lot of similarities checked off, it could alert people. By the way, the Wms seems to fit the list pretty well. Why are you so angry? A lot of the people on here are former members, so I think they know how to see this through the eyes of a member already.
MountainMom wrote:
Wms seems to fit the list pretty well.
it does if one is looking for that/
on the other hand, if one is looking not to be on that list then it is just as easy to use a list like that to justify continued membership.
devils advocate is ok without being written off like a sabotuer
the idea is to show that there is a variety of how this happens, that it is the environment that one is in that makes it hard to see, and that the group is not as exclusive as it appears to be – ie other groups use the same system with tweaks and alterations but its essentially the same thing.
MountainMom wrote:
Why are you so angry?
it aint easy deviating from the norm
JW, I agree that many other groups are similar to the WMS with just a few tweaks and alterations. Like Scientology, the Moonies, and several others as well. But many of the main things are the same such as: excessive control of members, isolation, and damage to relationships, careers, and finances, ultimately. But I think all these groups can be identified with ease once you look at the identifying marks of cults.
And I agree that devil's advocate is not being a saboteur. The thing is, most of us are so far beyond that, that it isn't useful to us. We hav e looked at it every which way already, and devil's advocate is now just irritating and redundant.
ok then, bye.
Sorry, didn't mean to offend you and make you decide to leave. Just telling it like I see it. Maybe someone else has a different opinion or is not at the same place as I am. I've been at this a very long time.
MountainMom wrote:
The thing is, most of us are so far beyond that, that it isn't useful to us.
didnt know the site had been taken over by your group
MountainMom wrote:
We hav e looked at it every which way already
if that were true then the obvious would be to look above and note the pointing out of that. instead the Heinrich guy writes me off as a saboteur and my opinions are met with suspicion and borderline hostility
MountainMom wrote:
and devil's advocate is now just irritating and redundant.
I wonder how people with differing opinions and continual questioning inside of a group like this get treated. pretty sure they conform or go away.
my whole point is how normal the individual parts are to everyday life that it is no wonder that people can't see it.
jw03550 wrote:
if that were true then the obvious would be to look above and note the pointing out of that. instead the Heinrich guy writes me off as a saboteur and my opinions are met with suspicion and borderline hostility
I wonder how people with differing opinions and continual questioning inside of a group like this get treated. pretty sure they conform or go away.
my whole point is how normal the individual parts are to everyday life that it is no wonder that people can't see it.
Glad I'm not the only one 🙂
They mostly mean well though. Mostly.
jw03550 wrote:
ok then, bye.
And he's back!
There are different kinds of Cult
Political – Nazi
Self help – Scientology
Religious – People'e temple, KKK
While there are different ways to identify a cult, I believe when it comes to religious cults there should be a different set of criterias. Even though I am out of the wmscog, I think the chapter on "Heresy" in the book "My Sheep Listens To My Voice" written by GP actually makes lots of sense. To Christians, what is the final authority? It should be the Bible, and not a set of man made rules.
Kai TIng wrote:
There are different kinds of Cult
Political – Nazi
Self help – Scientology
Religious – People'e temple, KKK
While there are different ways to identify a cult, I believe when it comes to religious cults there should be a different set of criterias. Even though I am out of the wmscog, I think the chapter on "Heresy" in the book "My Sheep Listens To My Voice" written by GP actually makes lots of sense. To Christians, what is the final authority? It should be the Bible, and not a set of man made rules.
Really? Interesting… When I had read it (5 times like they asked) I found that chapter in the book to make me question WMS even more, especially the part when they accuse every single other church as heretic and claim that anyone who doesn't follow or questions them as a Pharissee.
My favorite quote that makes me laugh out of My sheep is "Even though false churches call the true church "a heretic" and mock it, it cannot be heretic. Truth is truth even though it is treated as heresy." Now, does that statement make any sense or are they just running members around in circles with that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.