Why do some people gravitate to a cult.

Status
Not open for further replies.
bobcat

bobcat

Well-known Member
Location
Northern Calif
I have often wondered this. What happens in one's reasoning that makes them vulnerable to accepting and becoming part of cult behavior.
Secondly, what classifies as a cult, or do we just know them when we see them?
 

I think people innately want to be part of a group. In the beginning of people joining, people might see the group as just another group. When it might get weird over time, the people are already emotionally invested and less likely to want to get out.

There are some groups that do weird things. They're only called cults in the media if people are getting hurt by them. But yeah, I've wondered about how they make that distinction too.
 

I remember wondering how the Manson girls came to worship this skinny, wild eyed, flaky guy. In "Helter Skelter" the writer/prosecutor Bugliosi went into the psychology of the girls quite a bit. I think the main thing they had in common was a lack of any direction in their lives. They wanted to belong to a group, as @caramel says, and they were ripe for a domineering figure to tell them what to do. There was also an unspoken competition to be Charlie's favorite.

I remember those times and how we were beginning to question all the things we'd been brought up to believe. A manipulative person can take advantage of that newly opened mind and get vulnerable people to believe some really outrageous things.
 
How do we define what a "cult" is? Do we look it up in the dictionary? or ask perplexity.ai? Do we read articles that explain what they are? We do all of those things, and yet the definitions leave a lot of room for interpretation, meaning many groups would fall into this definition that function in our society as legitimate groups. Some people think "Scientology" is a cult for an example. I could name 100 more. If they are defined in ways that say people are misled by their leaders and end up doing harmful things to themselves or others, it seems like most groups have this potential, and many are that way.

A lot of them are sanctioned by our society. IDK how we tell the difference when people in so many different groups do really bad things. I am thinking of things like "wall Street", "Horse racing", alternative health groups, political organizations, men's groups, tattoo enthusiasts, ...it might have to do with addictive behavior also. This is a very complex question for me, and too many rabbit holes to figure out a coherent response.
 
caramel said:
I think people innately want to be part of a group. In the beginning of people joining, people might see the group as just another group. When it might get weird over time, the people are already emotionally invested and less likely to want to get out.

There are some groups that do weird things. They're only called cults in the media if people are getting hurt by them. But yeah, I've wondered about how they make that distinction too.
Click to expand...
I think there's a lot to this. In my observation, I believe it can start with 'birds of a feather flocking together'... a common interest, attitude, or need. There may not be a "cult" leader in the beginning. Or there may. But when a leader emerges, s/he will have some sort of charisma, and s/he may know it from the start or realize it later on. Some people will drift away, sensing that a cultish dynamic is developing. But the die-hards are those who've become quite emotionally committed, and will tend to remain.
 
JBR said:
I think there's a lot to this. In my observation, I believe it can start with 'birds of a feather flocking together'... a common interest, attitude, or need. There may not be a "cult" leader in the beginning. Or there may. But when a leader emerges, s/he will have some sort of charisma, and s/he may know it from the start or realize it later on. Some people will drift away, sensing that a cultish dynamic is developing. But the die-hards are those who've become quite emotionally committed, and will tend to remain.
Click to expand...
These "birds of a feather" might be a few people, or 1000 people. We all find people who share our interests and ideas. Jeez, I was just thinking of some of the bands I have played in, mainly when I was younger, but a lot of cult like behavior comes from the "groupie" phenomena.
 
caramel said:
I think people innately want to be part of a group. In the beginning of people joining, people might see the group as just another group. When it might get weird over time, the people are already emotionally invested and less likely to want to get out.

There are some groups that do weird things. They're only called cults in the media if people are getting hurt by them. But yeah, I've wondered about how they make that distinction too.
Click to expand...

That desire to belong also attracts some into gangs.
 
I recall learning in a college sociology class the (so-called) formal distinctions among a denomination, a sect, and a cult, but I'm too exhausted right now to do a proper online search.

I do have to say that the psychologoy of cult fascinates me. @Della, you mentioned Helter Skelter; I found that book and the entire story riveting (especially after listening to the White album and re-reading the book!).

I have a hard time understanding how people, even if they are directionless, become so besotted with a cult leader. I've read up a bit on Jim Jones, and some parents even signed the legal right to their children over to him (!).
 
It seems one tactic that is used is to sew distrust in any powers that be, or to leverage the distrust that is already there. Then to proclaim the message that by associating with the cult leader, he or she will tell you the truth and protect you from being sucked into the main stream mind control.

Alex Jones, and his Infowars program, with all his dedicated followers comes to mind. He even knew what he was doing with all his lies, but it made him rich, so he didn't care who it hurt.

It's a very deceitful art, and people get sucked in every day. I don't know if Jim & Tammy Baker qualify as a cult, but they sure duped a lot of people with their antics. Maybe their kind fall under con-artists instead of cult leaders, but it's probably a fine line.
 
The JW are a cult in my opinion…YEP ….I’ve had dealings with them where an elder of JW decided my youngest son should not be
given any treatment for a major illness he had ….and the fact they encouraged my ,long ~ long ago deceased ex to evict me cause I defied my ex ( and elders of JW )

and took my son to a hospital in the city for treatment where he spent 2 months recovering
from what’s known now days as …Mmmm ….can’t think of name of illness but its consuming any dairy products
he was 6 months old at the time ….he‘s 50 next month
 
Before the 1900's cult meant a variation of mainstream religious worship/ritual. It didn't have negative connotations. When the mainstream groups started describing these groups as being deviations from the main doctrines, they started to be seen as "bad". It really took off after about 1970. So the negative connotations are fairly modern.
 
dilettante said:
Do you know what that word means? You seem to be misusing it.
Click to expand...
These men seem to view women in a way that is different than mainstream thought.


The term “incel” is everywhere. What was once a niche piece of internet slang now populates international headlines and is a frequent topic in discussions about gender, misogyny, violence and extremism.

“Incel” is a portmanteau of “involuntary celibate.” In its most basic form, incel describes someone, usually a male, who is frustrated by their lack of sexual experiences.

The Anti-Defamation League, which works to address hate and extremism, defines incels as “heterosexual men who blame women and society for their lack of romantic success.”

“Incel” can also be used as a pejorative to describe someone who has misogynistic viewpoints or behaviors.

Beyond that, the incel identity shatters into several facets, some of which are considered dangerous both to the public and to the very individuals who claim it.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/us/incel-involuntary-celibate-explained-cec/index.html
 
dilettante said:
Ahh, so you meant it as politically-founded hate speech.
Click to expand...
Since you're defining terms. What does this mean in your context?

Hate speech is a vague term. What do you mean by it?

Here's wiki's non-definition.

Hate speech is a term with varied meaning and has no single, consistent definition. It is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation"
Click to expand...

Hate speech - Wikipedia
 
caramel said:
Since you're defining terms. What does this mean in your context?
Click to expand...
I would think it means what it says: involuntarily celibate. Whether the person is male, female, gay, straight, whatever. Clearly that isn't what was intended above though.

You know perfectly well what hate speech is and the commenter above made it clear that this is his intent. Why are we pretending anything else?
 
dilettante said:
You know perfectly well what hate speech is and the commenter above made it clear that this is his intent. Why are we pretending anything else?
Click to expand...
I am not pretending. I don't know what you mean by hate speech. Who is this "we" that's pretending?

If you know perfectly well what is meant by hate speech, you should be able to define it.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top