I really enjoy your comments. You’re even handed, considerate, and informative so I think you’ll take this push back well.
The word cult is a slippery term that is generally a perjorative morphing to the intentions of both writer and reader. A more neutral term would be the preferred academic term of “new religious movement” while highlight specific harmful behaviors that might make it either immoral, illegal, or culturally distasteful.
I hope that you see the value in being more specific with the term.
For me, it’s more than just the dangers of their ideas. Its mechanisms of control. Can members come and go freely? Do the members have a livelihood separate from the religious community? Do they have access to other perspective or is their information limited and curated? Do they use their doctrines to create obedience to the leadership? Is their financial obligation to the movement more onerous than other religious groups? Can a member leave tomorrow without being stalked or harassed?
As far as I’ve seen, Falun Gong practitioners generally live normal, secular lives and aren’t financially ‘captured’ by the organization. They might have strange or even ‘subversive’ views, but if the mechanism of total control isn’t there, ‘NRM’ remains the more precise academic fit.
This is not a defense of their views. If our net is just fringe ideas, the net would be cast too wide and catch otherwise socially accepted groups.
I really enjoy your comments. You’re even handed, considerate, and informative so I think you’ll take this push back well.
The word cult is a slippery term that is generally a perjorative morphing to the intentions of both writer and reader. A more neutral term would be the preferred academic term of “new religious movement” while highlight specific harmful behaviors that might make it either immoral, illegal, or culturally distasteful.
I hope that you see the value in being more specific with the term.
I hear your critique, but I do mean it in a negative way, due to beliefs such as the Falun Gong claiming “race-mixing severs connection to the gods,” or believing modern science was created by aliens to take over human bodies. They have been persecuted not for being a new religious movement, but for their dangerous, far-right views and subversion. Does that justify using the word “cult?”
For me, it’s more than just the dangers of their ideas. Its mechanisms of control. Can members come and go freely? Do the members have a livelihood separate from the religious community? Do they have access to other perspective or is their information limited and curated? Do they use their doctrines to create obedience to the leadership? Is their financial obligation to the movement more onerous than other religious groups? Can a member leave tomorrow without being stalked or harassed?
As far as I’ve seen, Falun Gong practitioners generally live normal, secular lives and aren’t financially ‘captured’ by the organization. They might have strange or even ‘subversive’ views, but if the mechanism of total control isn’t there, ‘NRM’ remains the more precise academic fit.
This is not a defense of their views. If our net is just fringe ideas, the net would be cast too wide and catch otherwise socially accepted groups.
I see your point, I’ll try to be more clear next time, but in doing so will need to point out their far-right extremism as well.
I think that’s fair.