/Nexus - 0222 - New Times Magazine/pages/0017/image.png)
Page Content (OCR)
The Politics of Religion In recent decades a new type of mercenary has appeared on the sociallandscapet Like others, these too are available. for hire: and if put under the spotlight will argue that they fight not for money but In purswt of a 'worthy' cause. Known as 'deprogram mers' or 'exit counsellors', ,their claims warning of the dangers of so-called 'cults' are widely accepted by a poorly-infonned public---even though more aware individuals often notice with some alann that the methodology employed by these mercenaries to 'm)erate' their targets is more than a little unorthodox, and often violent and oppressive. iDig a little deeper and you will discover that behind the veneer of Orwellian double-speak generated by this new Inquisition, a much darker truth is hiding. Any serious investigation of the anti-religious movement reveals that its foundations and filIlctions are primarily political, and that many of its highest profile members are allies of clandestine government agencies which reguIarly employ covert tactics to manip ulate the political processes of entire nations and undennine the personal autonomy of their individual citizens. Similarly, the techniques used by 'anti-cult' organisations paral lel those employed by such agencies and are justified with other emotive labels such as the 'fight against Communism' or the 'war against drugs', namel'y: (I) a problem is covertly created; (2) it is blown out of proportion with a healthy dose of propaganda; (3) a tough but 'necessary' solution is offered to the frightened public by the creators of the problem; and (4) laws are subsequently introduced whi.ch further reduce personal freedoms and rights under the guise of protecting us. The real danger of the growing 'cult awareness' industry is that it is not a movement concerned with hU!Jfan rights, It is simply another expression of the smiling face of fas cism. In 1993, the Cult Awareness Network's (CAN) Executive Director, Cynthia Kisser, told new$papers: "Cults also hurt soci.ety when their members undermine the democratic process by voting in sglid blocks (sic] or by providing free voluntary labour to campaigns in return for fa'\Jours from candidates. "I Concerned lawyers have warned: 'To most people this would serve as a model description of healthy participation by an interest group or party in representative democracy. But apparently to CAN, only groups ofwhich it approves should be allowed to vote in "blocks" and volumeer fQJ' polit ical,campaigns. When groups CAN doesn't /ike ('cults') participate in electoral politics, it 'undermines the democratic process', "Frighteningly, the FBI appears to share this way ofthinlcing. In 1988 and again in 1991 the Bureau lauru:hed investigations of the New Alliance Party, a left-wing electoral party, rationalising this harassment by labelling NAP a 'political/cult organisation'.'IZ fuelling the Engines of Control The problem i.nherent in consjde.rIDg the question of individual religious (and political) freedom is that by defining any target as a 'cult', organisations such as CAN and their international associateS automatically ensure reasonably widespread public acceptance of any action they take against such a group or its members simply Ibecause the label has such sinister connotations. Events such as the Jonestown massacre in 1978 have pennanently implanted such a response in rrrost people old enough to remember that tragic event, and more recent events at Waco achieved. a similar resuJt in much of the younger generation as well as reinforcing it amongst the general public. OCTOBER -NOVEMBER 1994 NEXUS • 17