What is a cult?

A cult is a group of people who live their lives in line with specific rules and beliefs. These beliefs often have religious connotations and the threat of excommunication if disobeyed. There is usually a leader who must be obeyed and who controls everything. Control is a key word, as the right to have different thoughts, or opinions is generally quashed and seen as disloyal.

I’ve heard people call things like Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses “cults” solely on the basis that they’re small and “weird”. To me, that is inaccurate. But if we’re talking about the difference between a “religion” and a “cult”, I would have to agree with this definition: “a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents”. Control, coercion, a charismatic leader (and often abuse)...those are the things that characterize a cult for me.

So, according to you two, the Republican party is a cult? Control, Coercion, excommunications… all there, just like in a church.

I think the fact that you can substitute “political” for “religious” in your answers and still be correct muddies the waters a bit.

@jerv it depends on your point of view on that one!
I doubt the vast majority of republicans immerse themselves so fully that their political party is every part of their life. They can go home. A cult is the only home for people unlucky enough to be involved.

1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

A cult is the first step in the creation of a culture.

1) The purest meaning of the word:

A subculture as distinct and separate from the culture in which it resides. It will always have religious connotations because it will speak for the identity of those involved.
These religious overtones may or may not be its primary identifiers, but it is what usually provides the impetus for the cult.

2) The word as commonly used in these modern times.

A label used to show up any subculture in a negative light, for reasons justifiable or not.

For example., The Jehovah witnesses can be an organisation or a cult, depending on how you want your audience to view it.

Similarly the word pagan was used to describe those outside of the main culture which was very distinct in nature. Those without need not have a distinct culture other than being separate from the main.

Nowadays since the main culture is not as distinct, the word will still be used to seek to bring disrepute to any individual or organisation that challenges the status quo.

The best way that I can describe it is a group whose ideology is defined by the identity their leaders. If a group can last for multiple generations (which requires that all leadership be replaced over time), then it is not really a cult.

That would make Apple a cult based on Steve Jobs.

Of course Apple is a cult.

They’ve branded themselves under the archetype of “Forbidden Fruit”… notice the bite out of the logo. They certainly didn’t try to hide that image.

And much like Scientology, they pointed to others who Think Differently. Apple may be the ultimate Cult of Personality.

They tried desperately (in earlier days) to give their users a feeling of possessing secret knowledge shunned by others. Now that cult has evolved into an entire culture, threatening the previous culture in a serious way. It’s a new way of doing things. A way which threatens the old way. The leader is now martyr, taken before his time, as if God plucked him out of existence before all the knowledge was revealed. He lives on in books, movies, and legend.

To me a cult is an entity which there’s usually a central figure (these could be more than one sometimes) at the core of it, demanding obedience to its/his/her themselves and their rules/way of life. Cults usually don’t appreciate freethinking or nonconformism either.

Fear is usually used to keep followers in line, whether the fear is devrived from the propaganda of the belief itself or the leader/s. To me all authoritarian systems demanding worship or obedience to a central power figure are cults.

I don’t confine cults just to some religions or groups of outcasts either, for cults can be political, economical or philosophical in nature. Not all cults to me are dangerous or authoritarian, but most of them aren’t fond of freethinking or different views or having their own viewpoints challenged. Well, maybe there’s a difference between a cult and a cult mentality.

MIlo here :The huge group of people who worship me.

@spiritual Great answer. Thanks. I can follow that.

@DominicX Thanks. I would agree that whatever subservience the early converts had to the respective founders is not long passed, and thus they are religions, not cults. People called them cults when each was founded, and perhaps at that time with more reason.

@jerv Ha! Maybe not entirely accurate, but there are those disturbing similarities when it comes to the party’s hold over its vocal base.

@antimatter Yep, doggone dictionaries cover all the bases for the word. Thanks.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies Perhaps you are right. Tribalism probably gets its start with veneration of some particularly noteworthy leader who is wise in the ways of man and nature, and bold in the hunt and battle. Interesting thought. Thanks.

@kess Great answer. Thanks. I should have made it clear in the question details that your first sense of the word is what I was interested in.

@PhiNotPi Certainly the leader/s being venerated, sometimes to the point of taking on god-like authority, is a key difference between a cult and a social subculture of any other kind. I think you are right that most cults die with the demise of their founder/s or they become increasingly less like a cult. Mormonism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses both began life as cults, but became much less cult-like as their founders were replaced by newer generations. Scientology is a strange case, though. The way it is heading, David Miscavige may be more like a destructive, malignant pied piper than L. Ron Hubbard ever was. Time will tell on that one.

@jerv & @RealEyesRealizeRealLies Ha! Hilarious, and true.

@Paradox25 You win understatement of the year for your noting that, ” Cults usually don’t appreciate freethinking…” The only one I can think of that had twin leaders was the Solar Temple led into mass suicide by Luc Jouret and Joseph DiMsmbro.

@Milo Thanks for adding to my already hectic workload. Now I must interview a large number of cats and catalog their belief systems.

ET… These are truly troubling times. I cannot remember an era when so many cults were so disenchanted with the other. Never in my life have I been so concerned that we are limiting the tipping point for what we are. No fear. Astonishment of mediocrity is what I experience. I await the mutation. It won’t be comfortable for those who don’t see it coming.

@ETpro; Milo here: Call my PR guy, send a large check and we’ll provide the research.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies Waiting is.

@Milo A 3 foot x 10 foot check for $0.02 is in the mail. I do hope that’s large enough to solicit your 2 cents worth. :-)

@ETpro I didn’t have your example in mind, or anything similar to that concerning outcast/fringe cult groups. I’ll just end my rant by stating that you may be rather surprised on what I consider to be true cults.

@Paradox25 If it is something you don’t wish to share publically, please PM me. I would definitely like to hear it.