Interesting read. Framing things as a "cultic relationship" makes a lot of sense to me. The part about using your experience as a basis of truth determination being flawed and a source of vulnerability also was pretty insightful.
I'm a little surprised by mention of pushback and accusations of being cult apologists, only because what they're describing as their method is pretty similar in principle to some widespread and empirically validated therapies for more common things. It's just much more invasive, to understate things. I guess at some point there are probably basic immediate safety issues that arise, where taking time has its own risks.
The piece left me thinking that the reasons people become involved with and attached to cults might not be different at some fundamental level from a lot of other psychological problems they get themselves in — just a matter of degree or pervasiveness.
> The piece left me thinking that the reasons people become involved with and attached to cults might not be different at some fundamental level from a lot of other psychological problems they get themselves in — just a matter of degree or pervasiveness.
It's kind of hard to articulate but the thing with cult and cult-like movements, and also somewhat cons & scams, is the "vulnerability" they exploit is the raw material of human connection.
A person who is immune to cult recruitment is a person who never feels isolation, desire, loneliness, grief, hope, fear of loss or lack of control, a person who never wants a hug or someone to talk to, who feels nothing at a smile from a stranger or the giggle of a baby.
Is that a person worth trying to be? I don't think so. To the degree you're open to human connection you're proportionally vulnerable to malicious connection too. Everyone, no matter how resilient, will go through periods of relative need, want, and weakness and at those times they are vulnerable. There are risk factors for getting involved, just like with say addiction, but no one is completely immune. If the wrong person is around you at the wrong time in your life you're in danger.
A person immune to a cult is not someone who doesn’t feel those things, but rather a person who can tell when someone is pushing those buttons/feelings in a context that is not in their best interests - and has the strength to remove themselves or fight back.
Arguably, the ones who are most sensitive to cults are those who have the biggest buttons for these things AND refuse to/are unable to acknowledge when those buttons are being pressed (because they ‘don’t feel it’ - but they do, and either don’t have the tools, or have been trained to not use them, to stop them from being pressed.
This comes up really frequently for unhealed past trauma, because that is basically what PTSD or bad childhoods do to you. Make it so you can’t see what’s happening clearly, or use the wrong tools to deal with what is happening, because you’ve either been overwhelmed with those emotions in the past to the point you’re relatively numb to them, or you’ve been raised/trained to not respond in a healthy way to them.
Notably, there is a very high correlation with unhealed trauma and PTSD with a lot of the conservative voting base (but certainly not all!).
> A person who is immune to cult recruitment is a person who never feels isolation, desire, loneliness, grief, hope, fear of loss or lack of control, a person who never wants a hug or someone to talk to, who feels nothing at a smile from a stranger or the giggle of a baby.
You're describing a cult leader BTW. I've met one. Scary person underneath that mask he was wearing.
Also I now know what a degree in business management is good for.
>A person who is immune to cult recruitment is a person who never feels isolation, desire, loneliness, grief, hope, fear of loss or lack of control, a person who never wants a hug or someone to talk to, who feels nothing at a smile from a stranger or the giggle of a baby.
Is it? Surely you can feel all those things and also be cynical enough to think no group can really provide a satisfying alternative.
A satisfying alternative to what? Some of these things can only be provided or alleviated by relationship and community.
A cult recruiter (or MLM or whatever) is offering what you need, it's just not a sincere offer. Your ability to assess that, to judge which relationships can safely meet these needs, is exactly what is compromised by having those experiences.
A satisfying alternative to legitimate connections, formed organically.
>A cult recruiter (or MLM or whatever) is offering what you need
No, it's offering a shallow facsimile of it, with the intent of exploiting you.
>Your ability to assess that, to judge which relationships can safely meet these needs, is exactly what is compromised by having those experiences.
Yes, that is what I'm saying. You can be able to enjoy all those things you said, and also have the ability to judge when someone just wants to manipulate you, or exploit you, or when the offer is too good to be true.
It's rather like romantic relationships. We do have a drive to and benefit from connections with other people, but in various circumstances can end up with a "cult of two" (folie a deux) mutually destructive situation or a one-sided exploitation situation.
I'm a little surprised by mention of pushback and accusations of being cult apologists, only because what they're describing as their method is pretty similar in principle to some widespread and empirically validated therapies for more common things. It's just much more invasive, to understate things. I guess at some point there are probably basic immediate safety issues that arise, where taking time has its own risks.
The piece left me thinking that the reasons people become involved with and attached to cults might not be different at some fundamental level from a lot of other psychological problems they get themselves in — just a matter of degree or pervasiveness.