Cultivating Cults

In this article Sleuth Hound takes a deep dive into the diabolical world of cults. Why do people join cults? What kind of people are drawn to them? Are we all vulnerable to the allure of the Kool Aid Kings? If so, can we safeguard ourselves and others from the pull of these nefarious groups?

The term “cult” is arguably not amenable to ready definition, perhaps because of the variety of groups that tend to be encapsulated under its umbrella. However, according to cult expert, Janja Lalich, all cults possess four attributes, namely: a charismatic and charming leader, some kind of ideological transcendental belief system (whether political or religious) which entails an indoctrination process, systems of control which usually become increasingly coercive over time and mechanisms of influence wherein more entrenched members model ‘correct’ behavior to the group’s fledgling participants. As will be seen later on such a neat definition doesn’t work for everyone but for our initial purposes it is a handy starting point.

Sleuth Hound examines some of history’s most controversial and infamous cults in what will hopefully prove to be a tantalising foray into the often intriguing, albeit dangerously frightening world of ‘cults.’ Ideally, this might prove educational in the hopes of enlightening people as to the “red flags” often associated with these pernicious groups.

The Summer of Helter Skelter

The 60s and 70s were an intoxicating hyped up cocktail of sex, drugs and rock’n’roll. Politically, it was also a somewhat turbulent time with swathes of men forcibly conscripted to fight in the trenches of ‘Nam, a deeply unpopular hot pocket in the Cold War of attrition. Famous archived footage shows napalm falling from the skies like acid rain and protestors back at home taking to the streets chanting, “Hey, hey, LBJ how many kids have you killed today?” Controversially, Jane Fonda (aka “Hanoi Jane”) was taken to task for posing with the Viet Cong. ‘Nam was a different kind of battlefield too: the Americans weren’t used to guerilla warfare, and they faced many challenges in navigating Vietnam’s thick jungle terrain, culminating in the ill-fated use of Agent Orange to clear vegetation.

Jane Fonda with Viet Cong, Source: Google

It was against this often-turbulent socio-political backdrop that the anti-establishment, “fuck the government,” ideas of musician Charles Manson began to take root in California. Inspired by various racist rhetoric, Charles Manson appropriated the Beatles song “Helter Skelter,” believing that the lyrics contained a secret code about being on the precipice of an apocalyptic war between racist and non-racist whites wherein the racists would succeed and acquire dominion over black people. In his book entitled Helter Skelter (1974), prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi wrote in graphic detail about the events culminating in the rise of the Manson Family and the La-Bianca/Tate murders. This was later turned into a movie of the same name, released in 1976.

While the lurid details of the Manson family’s rise to infamy are rather involved, this article offers a truncated version of events. During the late 60s Manson, whose endeavors as a musician were at best hapless, began to accrue a cult following, drawing in mostly drifters who had lost their way. At its peak, the cult had about 100 acolytes who often spent their time hyped up on hallucinogenic substances and psychedelics. Members would often congregate on the Manson family ranch, known as the Spahn ranch, located in Los Angeles, CA.

As mentioned, the family’s notorious activities festered during a complicated time in history: on the one hand there was a much-maligned war raging in Asia, and on the other hand, it was the height of the sexual revolution, with hippies, peace-protestors and flower children setting off in the droves to celebrate Woodstock on Yasgur’s Farm. While people were casting off the shackles of the conservative 50s, life on the Manson family ranch was hardly a Bohemian love-in, with Manson busy indoctrinating his followers with radical ideas which would spark a series of heinous murders. Although the Manson family is suspected of being involved in dozens of murders, the family’s most famous victims were the LaBianca family and actress, Sharon Tate.

Between August 8 and 10, 1969, Manson galvanised his followers to commence Helter Skelter, encouraging them to carry out a killing spree in order to begin his ideological ‘race-war.’ During this spree the group entered the home of Hollywood director, Roman Polanski and his heavily pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, brutally and mercilessly murdering her. Subsequently, the family committed other grisly murders including butchering Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. Below are pictures of Sharon Tate:

Here are pictures of the LaBiancas, also savagely slaughtered by the Manson Family:

Members of the Manson Family would later go on trial. What captivated many people was the fact that Manson had entranced a number of women to do his dirty work for him. People were curious as to how he had bewitched these young women to carry out such grotesque acts of violence against humanity. In particular, the three key Manson women were Leslie Van Houten, Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkel. In a bizarre and obscene spectacle, the women were often seen attending court holding hands, laughing and singing songs as though they were under Manson’s devilish spell. All of the women and Manson himself would be convicted for their roles in the hideous crimes.

The women would later argue, in attempted bids at freedom, that they had acted not of their own volition but rather because they had been manipulated by Manson. While there may be some truth to that, and he arguably preyed on these women’s vulnerability to an extent, none of them have ever been granted parole (Susan Atkins is deceased as of 2009 due to terminal brain cancer).

Waco Whackos

The Manson family, although one of the most famous cults, is hardly the only group of whackos to attract negative media attention over the years. In 1993 it was the Branch Davidians, led by David Koresh, that stole headlines in an encounter that would lead to an FBI standoff. The Branch Davidians were originally set up in 1959 by Ben Roden as an offshoot of the Seventh Day Adventists and they quickly drew in followers. Again, usually people who were lost and seeking a sense of illusory belonging. They established shop at the Mount Carmel settlement in Waco, Texas.

By the mid 80s Roden was succeeded after an acrimonious power struggle by Koresh who controversially took many “spiritual wives” and was allegedly very abusive. Furthermore, the family began to stockpile weapons which evidently sparked the interest of the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) who obtained search and seizure warrants. This culminated in a bloodied and protracted siege and a much-maligned FBI stand-off. The FBI stationed outside the compound for 51 days with agents engaging in various tactics in an attempt to get the Davidians to surrender, including: playing loud Tibetan chanting music, disrupting electrical supply to the building, causing sleep disturbances with loud noises and spotlights, among other strategies.

Of course, this made the Davidians feel victimised and, after many years of being indoctrinated against the government, this cemented their determination not to capitulate to external intervention. The final tragic dénouement occurred after US Attorney General Janet Reno authorised an FBI raid on April 19, 1993. The FBI stormed the compound, releasing tear gas into the air and triggering a lengthy siege. The Davidians, feeling they were under threat, counter-attacked, setting fires, hurling grenades and unloading rounds of ammunition at the FBI. 75 people, including Koresh perished that day, with only 9 Davidians surviving the assault. Understandably, the FBI’s conduct on this day drew heavy criticism, with some regarding it as governmental overreach.

Mount Carmel compound, Waco in Flames after FBI stand-off, 1993

Some commentators, including Dr Megan Goodwin (a visiting fellow at Northwestern University, specialising in religious minorities), have argued that Waco problematises the definition of “cults.” Dr Goodwin argues that the label “cult” is often applied too readily in endeavors to ostracize and ‘delegitimatize’ certain groups therefore making it easier for governments to justify executive overreach and shut down groups they deem inauspicious to their own agendas.

My standard joke is that ‘cult [equals] religion/community [you] don’t like…the political ramifications of identifying something as a cult are real and often violent.

After all, there is no standard way to define a cult. The designation of “cult” is more often an aesthetic value judgment — a religious group that “seems weird” — rather than an academic one.

By resisting the term ‘cult,’ I’m not suggesting that David Koresh didn’t exploit his community…I’m suggesting that using the term ‘cult’ to describe the Branch Davidians at Waco helped the ATF decide that the community, and Koresh specifically, were irrational or being held against their will and that they needed saving.

Dr Megan Goodwin

Her sentiments are echoed by fellow academic, Catherine Wessinger, a scholar of religion who also argues that labelling a group as a cult necessarily makes it easier for the government to play “nanny state” over them. Sleuth Hound recognises that the term cult is necessarily nebulous and capable of being misused by miscreant government officials.

The potential for such government-led harm should not be underestimated in light of recent scandals. For example, we have certainly seen governments infiltrating relatively benign activist organisations in order to suit their own macabre aspirations including in the Spy Cops debacle in the UK. In summary, the Spy Cops case involved under-cover police officers infiltrating usually harmless left-wing activist groups and posing as fellow activists, with some officers even developing personal relationships with female members. Such behavior has since been widely condemned as unconscionable and an abuse of power.

Blind trust in governmental benevolence is rarely sagacious. However, while Sleuth Hound recognises the aforementioned foibles and the ability of governments to misuse the term “cult” against groups it doesn’t like, there certainly are groups that are worthy of this designation and that we must be careful of because they are preying on the minds of vulnerable people. Working out which groups are truly harmful and worthy of the label “cult” is not always an exact science or fine art.

Drinking the Kool Aid

The current article derived its titled from another cult encounter in the historical archive: Jonestown. In the mid-1960s, the fanatical Reverend Jim Jones, a charismatic and dangerous leader, established the Peoples Temple, settling on the outskirts of a town called Ukiah. Followers believed that the Peoples Temple would grant them reprieve from an apocalyptic nuclear holocaust. Due to the extravagance of his ideas, he was eventually driven out of mainland USA and the Peoples Temple established themselves in Guyana. After concerns emerged that many members were being held against their will, Congressman Leo Ryan made a visit to Guyana in 1978 to inspect the settlement. When he tried to leave several days later, he and several of his entourage were shot and killed by members of the group.

In the aftermath of the shootings, Jones sent out a radio message to his followers instructing them to engage in a mass suicide. Members were ordered to imbibe fruit drink laced with intoxicants including cyanide, culminating in the death of over 900 people, many of whom were just children. This is where the term “drinking the Kool aid” arises from and it is an expression used to denote people who subscribe to dangerous and fanatical ideas. Images of the scattered corpses are a visceral reminder of the potential harms of these brain-washing fringe groups.

Scattered Corpses at Jonestown, Source: Google

Scientology Secrets

One of the other groups that has drawn criticism and been described as a “cult” in recent times is Scientology. Fashioned on the teachings and writings of science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology has drawn in many big celebrity names including Tom Cruise. Critics of the “religion,” including former member Leah Remini, have described it as dangerous and have pointed to alleged pervasive abuse that occurs within the group.

The group’s current leader, David Miscavage, is widely regarded by his critics as a dangerous and violent narcissist. Concern has also been raised over his missing wife Shelly Miscavage who has not been publicly seen since August 2007.

According to sources, Shelly was apparently growing increasingly critical of Scientology and David Miscavage allegedly took action to silence her. Campaigns to find Shelly have so far been to no avail, with many putting law enforcements’ perceived disinterest in the case down to the power and stranglehold that the Church of Scientology has over politicians and bureaucrats. Below is a documentary on the Shelly Miscavage case:

Cult fiction?

This article considered the emergence of cults throughout history. People join cults for many and varied reasons, often due to a psychological need to belong or some personal vulnerability. While there are some convenient definitions often given for the term cult, Sleuth Hound recognised the challenges of defining what a cult actually is. Indeed, there is a risk that a government may label any group it deems an ideological threat to the establishment to be a “cult,” thereby making it easier to exact force upon the group and its members.

While it is important to acknowledge these aforesaid risks, it is also important to recognise that there are many groups that do in fact represent a threat to the well-being of society. In fact, many of these such groups engage in the use of ‘grooming’ tactics (i.e., buying people gifts, inviting people to extravagant dinners, lavishing people with compliments etc.) in order to draw vulnerable people into their web. While there is no surefire way to protect society’s vulnerable from such insidious behavior, being cognisant of the recruitment methods and red flags of these groups can certainly help to identify and thwart their potential harm.