:eek: 
:mad: 
:o 
:eek: :smack: ;j :
mad:
Were their mnore cults in the sixties and seventies then their are today? i heard somewhere that more young impressionable hippies were recruted by cults in the 60’s and 70’s than today
Um… I’d say the majority of youth today is just as impressionable as it was 40 years ago.
Define cult.
This article gives a good perspective on 20th century cults. While there probably was an increase of what might be termed “cult activity” (i.e. the formation of small, new, non-traditional religious groups) during the 1970’s, this had more to do with a general religious revival and an increased interest in Eastern religion than it did with young people being more impressionable. The U.S. has a history of periodic religious revivals that goes back to the Great Awakening in the early 18th century.
Religioustolerance.org has a lot of great information on cults from various perspectives, using various definitions of “cult”.
i didnt really mean to say that yesterdays youth was more impressionable Than today’s , But that anybody who would get thiemselves into a cult (i imagine) must be pretty impressionable
Definition of a cult: Antything that convinces you to believe in something that you can’t use math or logic to define.
In that case EVERY religion fits the criteria of a cult.
I think that was zen101’s point.
<nods at Dignan’s response>
Note: I’m not judging any member of a cult or the value of these cults. I just don’t value one brand of snake oil over any other brand and a placebo can certainly be a useful tool for the “faithful”, be they required to drink blood and eat flesh transubstantiated from a deceased demi-god or shave their heads and hand out flowers while dressed in saffron robes.
Hmm… the belief in Gravity is a cult? LIFE is a cult?
Gravity can be expressed mathematically and follows a logical curve. So no, I don’t suppose it fits.
Life isn’t a belief, it just is. Believing in life can be expressed mathematically and follows logical patterns (life does, not those living).
Come on, I expect better from someone with such a handle. Animists are usually pretty good at this sort of thing.
And I expect better – much, much better, from someone who’s been around for two years.
Take that crap to GD.
I read a pretty interesting book which I can’t find right now :smack:, or remember the name :smack: or author :smack:, but it made a compelling case that many if not most cultists are not particularly impressionable. Cults just use tried and true recruitment methods-
[ul]*Overwhelm the recruitees with friendliness and affection.
*Overwhelm the recruitees with praise. Make them feel special. Tell them they have a unique aura of holiness, an exceptional pyschic gift, a true talent for sales, or whatever the cult’s schtick is.
*Isolate the recruitees, and/or use sleep -deprivation techniques, and/or keep them hungry, and/or use manipulative meditation or massage techniques. You want them to not be at their usual level of physical stamina or mental acuity.
*Keep them ignorant. Don’t tell them that you the cult leader are the reincarnation of Jesus until they have already been suckered in. Don’t ask them to sign over their property until you are sure they are hooked. [/ul]
This mystery book also defined economic (think pyramid schemes) and political cults as well as religious cults.
Sugaree I think you sort of missed probably the most important factor in defining a cult. Cult philosophies try to define themselves as seperate from society as a whole. They generally try to set up a Us vs Them approach. Example: “You don’t really want to be a part of that materialistic dod eat dog world out there do you? Live with us and discover your true enlightened human nature.”
This is IMO territory but I do believe in the west, eastern ideas are more easily manipulated to form a cult. Young people looking to reject their current society would naturally be drawn to them. Also the eastern tradition of giving your Guru the respect/obedience usually reserved for a parent is a powerful tool for misuse. Don’t get me wrong though, I’m a big Buddha fan.
Isolation and seperation aren’t the same thing?
IMHO, political and economic cults can really thrive on Western principals, and as far as religious cults go, I wouldn’t be surprised to see more small Christian cults than ones based on Eastern ideas in the US. I was horrified to witness one in action in a small town.
We may be yelled at for debating very very soon
Yes, cult is a debatable term, at least in the cultural connotation it currently is clothed in. The most vocal cult-opponents often themselves are in religions that have been labeled cults by others. To get back to the OP, the new religious movements of today have just changed flavor a bit. There are now big swings toward radical reactionary religious experiences as opposed to the ganja-tokin’, Eastern mystical new agers of yesteryear. Sure those guys are still around too, but they have sort of lost their novelty.
The media has adjusted to the fact that new religious movements have been and will continue to pop-up, so they aren’t as likely to publicize these groups until a Jim Jones, David Koresh, or Heaven’s Gate occurs. Then suddenly there will be a torrent of exposes to figure out where all these new religions are coming from. Then the frenzy will die down and someone will post to a message board, “Is it just me, or are the less cults then there used to be?”
The internet is a wonderful resource for finding out about cults… go on a cyberspace journey and find how many groups YOU would call cults and post to GD or IMHO.
“Isolation and seperation aren’t the same thing?”
Well, maybe I should have said “glossed over”? The way you used it, “Isolate the recruitees, and/or use sleep -deprivation techniques, and/or keep them hungry, and/or use manipulative meditation or massage techniques” sounded to me like the prison/torture style isolation rather than philosophical isolation. Our points do seem different to me, IMHO. No offense meant.
Certainly no offense taken
In my first post, in response to Blueangel’s comment about impressionability, I was really outlining recruitment techniques instead of defining a cult. And for recruitment, a cult would slip into the isolation gently. Using the us vs. them approach at the first meeting would cause the potential victims to think, “Oh my God, they sound like a cult,” and run away. Instead, the recruiters would…invite the potential member on a weeklong retreat with no outside phone contact. Or keep them so busy with meetings, study sessions, meditation, what have you, that they have no time to see their friends or family. Hell, they have no time to even think about what is really going on.
Then the talk about us vs. them can start.
And that’s people who are no more susceptable or gullible than most get recruited.
I guess i just didnt consider the facts when i reffered to the cult people as “impressionable” it was a bit shallow of me to assume that anyone who could get themselves into a cult must be unsure and unknowing other than just being slowly incorporated into something that they didnt really look into
I’m still waiting on Blueangel’s definition of cult.