Editing Anti-cult movement (section)

== Controversies ==

=== Polarized views among scholars ===

Social scientists, sociologists, religious studies scholars, psychologists and psychiatrists have studied the modern field of "cults" and new religious movements since the early 1970s. Debates about certain purported cults and about cults in general often become polarized with widely divergent opinions, not only among current followers and disaffected former members, but among scholars as well. Most academics agree that some groups have become problematic or very problematic but disagree over the extent to which new religious movements in general cause harm.<ref>David G. Bromley and Phillip E. Hammond, eds. ''The Future of New Religious Movements''. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1987.</ref> An article on the categorization of new religious movements in US media criticizes the print media for failing to recognize social-scientific efforts in the area of new religious movements and its tendency to use anti-cultist definitions rather than social-scientific insight."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=van Driel |first1=Barend |last2=Richardson |first2=James T |author2-link=James T. Richardson |date=1988 |title=Research Note Categorization of New Religious Movements in American Print Media |journal=[[Sociology of Religion (journal)|Sociological Analysis]] |language=en |volume=49 |issue=2 |pages=171–183 |doi=10.2307/3711011 |jstor=3711011}}</ref>

Scholars in the field of new religious movements confront many controversial subjects:
* The validity of the testimonies of [[#Former members|former members]].<ref>[[Thomas Robbins (sociologist)|Thomas Robbins]]. "Combatting 'Cults' and 'Brainwashing' in the United States and Western Europe: A Comment on Richardson and Introvigne's Report." ''[[Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion]]'' 40, no. 2 (2001): 169–176.</ref><ref>David G. Bromley, ed. ''Falling from the Faith: Causes and Consequences of Religious Apostasy.'' Sage Focus Editions. London: Sage Publications, 1988.</ref><ref name=":3" />
* The validity of the testimonies of current members.<ref>[[James R. Lewis (scholar)|James R. Lewis]], ed. ''[[Scientology]].'' Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.</ref>
* The validity of and differences between [[exit counseling]] and coercive [[deprogramming]].<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Dick |last=Anthony |author-link=Dick Anthony |title=The Fact Pattern behind the Deprogramming Controversy: An Analysis and an Alternative|url=https://socialchangenyu.com/review/fact-pattern-behind-the-deprogramming-controversy-an-analysis-and-an-alternative-the/|access-date=2023-01-02|website=N.Y.U. Review of Law & Social Change|language=en-US |volume=9 |issue=1 |year=1981 |pages=73–89}}</ref><ref>James T. Richardson. ''Conversion Careers: In and Out of the New Religions.'' [[SAGE Publishing|Sage]] Contemporary Social Science Issues. 1977. Reprint, London and Beverley Hills, CA: Sage, 1978.</ref>
* The validity of evidence of harm caused by "cults".<ref>David G. Bromley and J. Gordon Melton, eds. ''Cults, Religion, and Violence.'' [[Cambridge]]: [[Cambridge University Press]], 2002.</ref><ref>[[Massimo Introvigne]]. "'There Is No Place for Us to Go but Up': New Religious Movements and Violence." ''[[Social Compass]]'' 49, no. 1 (2002): 213–224.</ref><ref>Paul R. Powers. ''[[Religion and violence|Religion and Violence]]: A [[Religious studies|Religious Studies]] Approach.'' London and New York: [[Routledge]], 2021.</ref>
* Ethical concerns regarding new religious movements, for example [[free will]] and [[freedom of speech]].<ref name=":6">Dick Anthony and Thomas Robbins. "Law, Social Science, and the 'Brainwashing' Exception to the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]]." ''[[Behavioral Sciences & the Law|Behavioral Science and the Law]]'' 10, no. 1 (1992): 5–29.</ref>
* Opposition to "cults" vs. [[freedom of religion]] and [[religious intolerance]].<ref name=":6" /><ref>[[Roy Wallis]]. "Paradoxes of Freedom and Regulation: the Case of New Religious Movements in Britain and America." ''[[Sociological Analysis]]'' 48, no. 4 (1988): 355–371.</ref>
* The objectivity of all scholars studying new religious movements.<ref>Eileen Barker. "Religious Movements: Cult and Anticult Since [[Jonestown]]." ''[[Annual Review of Sociology]]'' 12, no. 1 (1983): 329–346.</ref><ref>Anson D. Shupe and David G. Bromley. ''The New Vigilantes: Deprogrammers, Anti-Cultists, and the New Religions.'' Sage Library of Social Research. London and [[Beverly Hills, California|Beverley Hills, CA]]: Sage, 1980.</ref><ref>Anson D. Shupe and Susan E. Darnell. ''Agents of Discord: Deprogramming, Pseudo-Science, and the American Anticult Movement.'' London and [[New Brunswick, NJ]]: [[Transaction Publishers]], 2006. {{ISBN|0765803232}} {{OL|22732556M}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field |title-link=Misunderstanding Cults |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-8020-8188-9 |editor-last=Zablocki |editor-first=Benjamin |editor-link=Benjamin Zablocki |language=en |editor-last2=Robbins |editor-first2=Thomas |editor-link2=Thomas Robbins (sociologist)}}</ref>
* The acceptance or rejection of the [[APA Task Force on Deceptive and Indirect Methods of Persuasion and Control]] report and the [[Brainwashing|brainwashing thesis]] generally.<ref>Alberto Amitrani and Raffaella Di Marzio. "'Mind Control' in New Religious Movements and the [[American Psychological Association]]." ''[[Cultic Studies Review]]'' 17 (2000): 101–121.</ref><ref name=":7">David G. Bromley and James T. Richardson, eds. ''The Brainwashing/Deprogramming Controversy: Sociological, Psychological, Legal and Historical Perspectives''. Studies in Religion and Society. [[Lewiston, New York]]: [[Edwin Mellen Press]], 1983.</ref><ref>Eileen Barker. ''The Making of a [[Moonie]]: Choice or Brainwashing?'' 1984. Reprint, Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1989.</ref><ref>David G. Bromley and Anson Shupe. "Anti-cultism in the United States: Origins, Ideology and Organizational Development." ''[[Social Compass]]'' 42, no. 2 (1995): 221–236.</ref>

=== Brainwashing and mind-control ===
{{Further|Brainwashing}}
Over the years various controversial theories of [[religious conversion|conversion]] and member retention have been proposed that link mind control to NRMs, and particularly those religious movements referred to as "[[cult]]s" by their critics. These theories resemble the original political brainwashing theories first developed by the [[CIA]] as a propaganda device to combat communism,<ref>Dick Anthony. "[[Pseudoscience]] and [[New religious movement|Minority Religions]]: An Evaluation of the Brainwashing Theories of [[Jean-Marie Abgrall]]." ''[[Social Justice Research]]'' 12, no. 4 (1999): 421–456.</ref> with some minor changes. [[Philip Zimbardo]] discusses mind control as "the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes,"<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zimbardo |first=Philip G. |date=November 2002 |title=Mind control: psychological reality or mindless rhetoric? |url=https://www.apa.org/monitor/nov02/pc |journal=[[Monitor on Psychology]] |volume=33 |issue=10 |pages=5}}</ref> and he suggests that any human being is susceptible to such manipulation.<ref>{{Cite web|title=What messages are behind today's cults?|first=Philip G.|last=Zimbardo |author-link=Philip Zimbardo |url=https://www.planetdeb.net/spirit/cult.htm|access-date=2023-01-02|website=Monitor on Psychology |date=May 1997}}</ref> In a 1999 book, [[Robert Jay Lifton|Robert Lifton]] also applied his original ideas about thought reform to [[Aum Shinrikyo]], concluding that in this context thought reform was possible without violence or physical coercion.<ref>[[Robert Jay Lifton]]. ''Destroying the World to Save It: [[Aum Shinrikyo|Aum Shinrikyō]], [[Apocalypticism|Apocalyptic Violence]], and The New Global [[Terrorism]].'' New York: [[Henry Holt & Co.]], 1999.</ref> [[Margaret Singer]], who also spent time studying the political brainwashing of Korean prisoners of war, agreed with this conclusion: in her book ''[[Cults in Our Midst]]'' she describes six conditions which would create an atmosphere in which thought reform is possible.<ref>[[Margaret Thaler Singer]]. ''[[Cults in Our Midst]]: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace.'' [[San Francisco, CA]]: [[Jossey-Bass]], 2003.</ref>

[[James T. Richardson]] observes that if the NRMs had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that NRMs would have high growth rates, yet in fact most have not had notable success in recruitment. Most adherents participate for only a short time, and the success in retaining members is limited.<ref>James T. Richardson. "The Active vs. Passive Convert: [[Paradigm]] Conflict in Conversion/Recruitment Research." ''Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion'' 24, no. 2 (1985): 163–179.</ref> For this and other reasons, sociologists of religion including [[David G. Bromley]] and [[Anson D. Shupe]] consider the idea that cults are brainwashing American youth to be "implausible."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Robinson |first=B. A. |date=22 August 2007 |title=About 'cults': Allegations of brainwashing by new religious movements (a.k.a. 'cults'). |url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/brain_wa.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120419010810/http://www.religioustolerance.org/brain_wa.htm |archive-date=19 April 2012 |access-date=29 May 2022 |website=Religious Tolerance |url-status=usurped |publisher=[[Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance]]}}</ref> In addition to Bromley, [[Thomas Robbins (sociologist)|Thomas Robbins]], [[Dick Anthony]], [[Eileen Barker]], [[Newton Maloney]], [[Massimo Introvigne]], John Hall, [[Lorne L. Dawson]], Anson D. Shupe, [[J. Gordon Melton]], [[Marc Galanter (psychiatrist)|Marc Galanter]], [[Saul Levine]] of [[Mount Wilson FM Broadcasters, Inc]], among other scholars researching NRMs, have argued and established to the satisfaction of courts, relevant professional associations and scientific communities that there exists no scientific theory, generally accepted and based upon methodologically sound research, that supports the brainwashing theories as advanced by the anti-cult movement.<ref>James T. Richardson. "Religion and The Law." In ''The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Religion'', edited by Peter B. Clarke. Oxford Handbooks Online, 2009. 426.</ref><ref name=":7" />

=== Deprogramming and exit counseling ===

{{Further|Deprogramming}}

Some members of the secular opposition to cults and to some new religious movements have argued that if brainwashing has deprived a person of their free will, treatment to restore their free will should take place, even if the "victim" opposes this. Precedents for this exist in the treatment of certain [[mental illness]]es: in such cases medical and legal authorities recognize the condition as depriving sufferers of their ability to make appropriate decisions for themselves. But the practice of forcing treatment on a presumed victim of "brainwashing" (one definition of "[[deprogramming]]") has constantly proven controversial. [[Human-rights]] organizations (including the [[ACLU]] and [[Human Rights Watch]]) have criticized deprogramming.<ref>{{Cite news|first=Eleanor|last=Blau|date=6 February 1977|title=A.C.L.U. AIDE WARNS ON SEIZING CULTISTS; A Danger Is Seen in Actions by Parents Who Seek to 'Deprogram' Children Held Brainwashed|work=The New York Times |url=https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1977/02/06/936907202.html?pageNumber=175|access-date=2023-01-02|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/china/ |title=Dangerous meditation : China's campaign against Falungong |date=2002 |publisher=[[Human Rights Watch]] |isbn=156432270X |location=New York, NY |lccn=2002100348 |oclc=49045959}}</ref> While only a small fraction of the anti-cult movement has had involvement in deprogramming, several deprogrammers (including a deprogramming pioneer, [[Ted Patrick]]) have served prison terms for acts sometimes associated with deprogramming including kidnapping, while courts have acquitted others.<ref name="nyt-08301980" /><ref>{{Cite news|title='Cult Buster' Acquitted In Abduction |url=https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19940119&slug=1890492|access-date=2023-01-02|work=[[Seattle Times]] |date=19 January 1994}}</ref>