Showing posts with label Divine Light Mission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Divine Light Mission. Show all posts

Oct 13, 2019

Young True Believers: Cults or Constructive Contributions?

Older adolescents and young adults are searching for meaning.

Saul Levine M.D.
Psychology Today
October 10, 2019

Young people are often the energetic and idealistic avatars of the future. They are iconoclastic, criticize society’s deficiencies and inequities, and are frequently at the forefront of social change.

But a few decades ago thousands of young people (older adolescents and young adults) seemed enthralled by unfamiliar, sometimes flamboyant, religious groups. They captivated the imagination and adherence of many young adults, while provoking fears in their parents.

The groups were often referred to as "cults," usually with derision. I was particularly involved at the time because I was studying members of such groups, and was the father of three teenage sons.

Our research looked at members of some groups in North America (including Hare Krishna, Divine Light Mission, Unification Church, Children of God, Foundation Church, Process, 3HO, and Scientology, and interviewed members of fundamentalist sects of churches, temples, and seminaries here and abroad. I also authored a government report and book (Radical Departures) on the subject.

The groups were either unusual versions of traditional religions or had newly-minted beliefs about deities and behavior. Each was unique but they shared characteristics like charismatic leaders, intense group ethos, rituals and rites, diet and dress, and fervent beliefs and proselytizing—the very essence of “True Believers.”

They were highly visible, featured in newspapers and newscasts, held huge rallies, and demonstrated or chanted in the streets, where they tried to recruit new members.

Thousands of members left their families, schools, jobs, friends, and lovers to join the groups, and controversies raged about their pros (structure, relationships, personal growth, independence, idealism) and cons (‘brainwashing,” duping, impeding growth, dangerous activities and people).

Each group proclaimed its own pathway to “ultimate truth and inner peace,” and true believers were wholly committed to their new credos. The leaders were idolized (and idealized), often charismatic, sometimes sincere (if misguided), occasionally messianic, unstable, or exploitative.

Young people have always searched for identity, answers to existential quandaries like “Who am I?” “Where am I going?” “Where do I belong?” They often experience anxiety about themselves and their future, search for meaning in their lives and seek answers in a world they find confusing and challenging.

Those most prone to joining the groups felt alienated and demoralized. In this state of dissatisfaction and searching, if they met group members who seemed utterly happy in an idyllic life of communality, benevolence, spirituality and meaning, some were smitten. While many found the recruiting messages off-putting and walked away, others joined in.

New members embarked on paths which unfolded in stages over months:

There was initial exuberance and total involvement in their chosen groups, when they exuded happiness verging on “ecstatic bliss.” They found (at last!) their authentic selves, with meaning and purpose in their lives. There was reduction in tension and sadness, increased optimism, love for co-members and devotion to their leader. They felt genuinely benevolent and engaged in a “higher calling.” This early blissful state was particularly disturbing to families and friends, often leading to emotionally wrenching scenes, rife with anger and fears, sobbing and pain.

After a few months, blind ecstasy and idealism frequently gave way to doubts about the rigid beliefs and rituals and misgivings about abandoning their previous lives and giving themselves to the group. These doubts progressed to discomfort and mistrust, especially when leaders shed their spiritual facades and showed their "true colors." Disillusionment set in, as did longing for family and friends.

Finally, most members would make a decision to leave. These departures were difficult, with pleas and even threats expressed. There was, however, no going back: There was a final schism, over as suddenly as it begun.

The months of intense membership often wreaked havoc on family relationships, with some dramatic lawsuits, “deprogramming” attempts, and arrests. The vast majority, however, were out of their groups in well under two years.

After initial difficulties, ex-members resumed their lives and relationships, and their academic or other pursuits, sometimes with psychotherapeutic help. While relieved that the intense experience was over, some felt they’d learned a lot about themselves. (I do not wish to minimize the personal harm sometimes caused nor the exploitative behaviors of some leaders.)

While those groups are now gone or in remnants, we take no solace, because new versions have arisen. Today there are intense sects which proclaim peace and love, others which urge hate in the name of deities, and still others with messianic or even doomsday scenarios.

Searchers for meaning and fulfillment can always find zealous groups to fulfil their needs (for a while), and likewise, messianic cults will always find followers.

Young people have always been at the cusp of social change, pushing social boundaries. They have experimented with new ideas for human progress and have been engaged in the revolutions of history. They have campaigned for social equality and against racism and violence, and participated in volunteer activities and work with the poor, the aged and the dispossessed. They are active in the struggle against global warming and our carbon footprint.

By the same token, however, we have seen that same youthful energy and ideological searching for a cause directed into militant religious and political zealotry. Extreme nationalists, authoritarian populists, fascists and racists, and urban street gangs tend to attract particularly frustrated and angry young people searching for a cause.

In their search for identity, young people want to believe in captivating ideas and people. In order to feel fulfilled and meaningful, they need to achieve the “Four B’s,” senses of: Being (“I am a worthwhile being”); Belonging (“I am important to others”); Believing (“I live according to a moral code”); and Benevolence (“I am kind to others”).

A humble proposal: Why don’t we as try to captivate that idealism and energy of young people and their need for Believing to work for the common good for both the nation and themselves?

This could be in the form of constructive social actions, as in a significantly expanded AmeriCorps, which would encompass beneficial services to the country. Youth could get college credit and remuneration for work in preschools and nurseries, schools, hospitals and daycare centers, retirement communities and recreation centers, infrastructure or street projects, in the military or even in rehab for minor offenses and drug use.

We could channel their energy and idealism toward their personal intellectual, emotional and social growth, while contributing meaningfully to their country.

This could be an exciting “Win-Win” for young people searching for meaning and fulfillment, and for a nation with its own existential quandaries and needs.

About the Author

Saul Levine M.D., is a professor emeritus at the University of California at San Diego.


https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/our-emotional-footprint/201910/young-true-believers-cults-or-constructive-contributions

Oct 26, 2013

The Man Who Saves You from Yourself Going undercover with a cult infiltrator

Harper's REPORT — From the November 2013 issue "The Man Who Saves You from Yourself Going undercover with a cult infiltrator"
By Nathaniel Rich

Nobody ever joins a cult. One joins a nonprofit group that promotes green technology, animal rights, or transcendental meditation. One joins a yoga class or an entrepreneurial workshop. One begins practicing an Eastern religion that preaches peace and forbearance. The first rule of recruitment, writes Margaret Singer, the doyenne of cult scholarship, is that a recruit must never suspect he or she is being recruited. The second rule is that the cult must monopolize the recruit’s time. Therefore, in order to have any chance of rescuing a new acolyte, it is critical to act quickly. The problem is that family and friends, much like the new cult member, are often slow to admit the severity of the situation. “Clients usually don’t come to me until their daughter is already to-the-tits brainwashed,” says David Sullivan, a private investigator in San Francisco who specializes in cults. “By that point the success rate is very low.”

Sullivan became fascinated with cults in the late Sixties, while attending Fairview High School in Boulder, Colorado. It was a golden age for religious fringe groups, and Boulder was one of the nation’s most fertile recruiting centers, as it is today. (There are now, according to conservative estimates, 2 million adults involved in cults in America.) “You couldn’t walk five steps without being approached by someone asking whether you’d like to go to a Buddhist meeting,” says John Stark, a high school friend of Sullivan’s. Representatives from Jews for Jesus and the Moonies set up information booths in the student union at the University of Colorado, a few miles down the road from Fairview High. Sullivan engaged the hawkers, accepted the pamphlets, attended every meditation circle, prayer circle, shamanic circle. When the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi led a mass meditation session at the university, Sullivan was there, watching from the back of the lecture hall.

Read compete article at Harper's 

Dec 24, 2012

Parents, Children and Cults: A Deprogramming Survey

In order to help parents decide what to do about children in cults, the American Family Foundation’s ADVISOR (predecessor of The Cult Observer), a periodical read by several thousand people, most of whom are disturbed by aspects of the cult phenomenon, published a questionnaire in 1982.

Ninety-four parents responded, providing a variety of data on family background and experiences with cultism. The results were published in Deprogramming: An Analysis of Parental Questionnaires, by Michael D. Langone, Ph.D., AFF’s Director of Research. Despite the methodological problems inherent in such a survey – which render many of the conclusions suggestive rather than definitive – parents and helping professionals searching for constructive responses to cult involvement can benefit by considering the report.

Subsequent issues of The Cult Observer will carry additional excerpts, including parents’ verbatim answers to a variety of questions asked in the survey.

The Respondents


Of the 94 parents who responded to this questionnaire, 72 (77%) had children in five major groups: Unification Church (UC), Hare Krishna(ISKCON), The Way, Scientology, and Divine Light Mission (DLM). Only 22 (23%) had children in other, lesser known groups.

Males predominated over females 63% to 37%, a finding consistent with other studies. Although this sex ratio did not hold for ISKCON, The Way, and especially Scientology, the small numbers in these groups may – but do not necessarily – mean that the differences could be due to chance factors.

The children of 69% of the respondents were no longer in a cult. These ex-members had spent an average of 28.3 months in a cult, whereas the 31% still in a group had been members an average of 81.9 months. 20.7 years was the average age at joining the group.

Nature of Departure


With regard to the question, “Did your child ever quit the cult and then return?,” 15% of the sample’s children had left and returned to the cult (so far as parents knew), nearly all having done this only once. It is not clear how many of these returns were associated with failed deprogrammings.

Of the 62 (68%) converts who were forcibly (i.e., abducted) deprogrammed, 23 (37% of those deprogrammed) returned to the cult. Of these 23, 6 later left the cult voluntarily, while 17 remained in the group. Deprogramming required an average of 8.5 days. Ten of the 62 deprogrammings (16%) resulted in law suits. (This percentage seems much higher than informal reports suggest and should not be treated as representative.)

Twenty-two (23%) of the converts left the group voluntarily, 6 (27% of voluntary leavers) after a failed deprogramming. This finding is consistent with other studies, although some of the latter suggest that the voluntary departure rate (including ex-members who did not come into contact with concerned citizen networks) is even higher. It is interesting to note that none of the 11 DLM members and only 1 (10%) of the ISKCON members in this sample left voluntarily.

Despite the relatively high rate of deprogramming failures (37%), only 7 parents (12% of 54 people who responded to this question) felt that deprogramming was more harmful than leaving the person in the cult.

With regard to rehabilitation [formal counseling prior to a return to non-cult lifestyles], 57% of the respondents employed rehab and 82% felt that rehab was useful.

Deprogramming Failure Rate


The ADVISOR study appears to be the first to systematically collect data pertaining to deprogramming failure rates. The finding that 37% of deprogrammings resulted in the convert returning to the cult may seem high to advocates of deprogramming. However, other data suggest that it may be more or less valid. An informal tabulation of known deprogrammings in Montreal found that 8 of 23 deprogrammings (35%) resulted in the convert’s returning to the cult, a finding very close to that of this study. Even some advocates of deprogramming admit to failure rates on the order of 20%-25% (although some deprogrammers reportedly are much more successful than others). Hence, it seems reasonable to conclude that, on the average, one-fourth to one-third of forced deprogrammings result in the convert’s returning to the cult.

It should be kept in mind that these data reflect only an association between a designated procedure (deprogramming) and an outcome (leaving a cult). The data do not necessarily reflect a causal relationship. Hence, deprogramming successes need not necessarily be due to the deprogramming itself. Some, for instance, may be more a function of reawakening family feelings or fortuitous timing (i.e., “snatching” someone when he/she is on the verge of coming out voluntarily anyway).

Parental AttitudesDeprogramming



[Asked of parents whose deprogramming attempts were unsuccessful] Why do you think the deprogramming failed?


Most parents attributed a failed deprogramming to deficiencies of the deprogrammers, whether in regard to security or sensitivity to psychiatric issues. One respondent, however, noted that “the deprogramming left her with nothing to hang on to,” while another commented that “it should have been a united family effort!”


Do you think the deprogramming caused more harm than would have been caused by leaving the child in the cult? If yes, why?


Even though 37% of deprogrammings did not persuade the person to leave the cult, only 12% of those responding to this question answered “yes.” Most supported this response by noting a major deterioration in their relationship with their child. One person commented that her son’s resistance to the deprogramming led to his being treated like a “hero” by the cult.

Voluntary Departure



If your child left for reasons other than forced deprogramming, what, in your opinion, led him/her to leave the group?


The variety of answers to this question would probably astound those who subscribe to the extreme brainwashing stereotype. According to parents, some converts left because they became aware of deception, manipulation, or broken promises. Some tired of menial work or rebelled against peer pressure. Some, who had been subjected to a failed deprogramming, were apparently moved by their parents’ desperation and later returned home voluntarily. And some left because personal hardships or abuse apparently induced them to reconsider their cult involvement.

Rehabilitation



[Asked of parents whose children underwent formal rehabilitation] Was rehab, on the whole, a useful and successful experience? Why or why not?


The overwhelming majority of respondents praised rehab because it provided their children with emotional support, education about cults, an opportunity to talk to members of other cults, which used similar persuasive techniques, and encouragement to make it in the mainline world. The few negative comments dealt with internal staff problems that detracted from the rehabs effectiveness.

Parental Involvement



Based upon your experiences, what do you think parents can do to influence a child to reconsider his/her cult involvement?


Responses to this question can be placed in several categories. First, those who feel helpless: there is nothing parents can do. Second, those who see deprogramming as the answer – the earlier the better. Third, those who emphasize the importance of maintaining communication, building trust, and challenging the convert respectfully and at the proper time. And fourth, those who feel that the best course of action is to educate young people before they become involved with cults.

Post-Cult Life



Please describe your child’s state of mind in the first few months after leaving the cult.


Responses to this question tended to be consistent with clinical descriptions of post-cult experience. Ex-members were described as confused, lacking in self-esteem, ashamed, distrustful, depressed, guilty, indecisive, unable to concentrate, in a state of floating (snapping back to cultic states of mind), emotionally volatile, angry at the cult, fearful of reprisals, psychologically regressed, and – in some cases – in a state of nervous breakdown. A few ex-members, however, did not appear to have had much difficulty in adjusting.

Post-Cult Needs



In your opinion, what kinds of help do ex-cult members need?


This question also received many comments. The most common response was that ex-members need much love, understanding, patience, and encouragement from family and friends. Many also felt that talking to ex-members, attending a rehabilitation facility, or receiving professional counseling were important. A few mentioned the need for religious guidance or help in obtaining meaningful employment.


What kinds of help do parents and siblings of cult members need?


The majority of the many people responding to this question stressed the family’s need for education, support groups, and counseling. Several also advocated the need to educate helping professionals and legislators.

Conclusions



Parents and helping professionals should note that there are a number of ways to view a convert’s potential departure from a cult.


1. Some converts may never leave – with or without forced deprogramming. (Sometimes this may be unfortunate because the convert’s cult affiliation is harmful. Sometimes, on the other hand, staying in a cult may be beneficial.)


2. Some converts may leave only if they are forcibly deprogrammed.


3. Some converts may leave if they are properly counseled or if they are deprogrammed (the latter being, perhaps, faster, but riskier and more expensive).


4. Some converts may leave if properly counseled, but will not leave if forcibly deprogrammed (because anger at their parents’ manipulations will induce them to stay in the group).


5. Some converts may leave voluntarily, even with no formal intervention.


Unfortunately, there is no easy, reliable way of determining in which of these groups a given person will fall. However, the data of this study suggest that a high percentage of cultists leave without forced deprogramming, that many deprogrammings fail, and that a number of deprogrammings end in lawsuits. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to assume that many who would respond favorably to deprogramming would also respond favorably to voluntary methods of reevaluation. Therefore, parents should deliberate very carefully before deciding to try to have their child deprogrammed. There are other options for helping a family member harmed by cult involvement.