Cults and the sole supplier syndrome

This article contains a few thoughts about a feature of many cults and cult-like organisations, a feature that I think of as the sole supplier syndrome.

Cult leaders and members may push the message that they and their organisation are the sole source of something - for example, information, hope for the future, democracy for an oppressed nation or even salvation. You will never get what you want without their help; only they can inform you about and explain something; only they have the answers; they are the elite and nothing and no one else is any good to you.

It is best to beware of anyone who tries to attract your interest and recruit you by playing the sole supplier game. You can expect to hear a lot of this sort of thing:

“We are your only hope.”  “We are the only ones who can tell you what is really going on.” “Without us, the evil regime will never be overthrown.” “When civilisation collapses, you will die unless you join us now and learn survival skills.”

It is important to understand that this is what they all say. It is a case of same game, different players.

If you buy their messages, they may try to get you to support or even commit everything that you have to their cause or movement.

Cults and their representatives want your money; they want to fool, manipulate and intimidate you. If you seem suitable for membership, they will want to draw you in and control you, your life and your thoughts. They will want you to reply on them for everything and depend on them alone.

In order to avoid being taken advantage of, it is essential to research everything and to expose the implied messages, subject them to reality testing and determine what the ulterior motives and hidden agenda are.

Leaving a cult - much easier said than done

“Why don’t they just leave when they find out what they have got into?”

It is much easier to ask why people don’t just leave when they learn what happens behind the scenes in a cult or cult-like organisation than it is to find acceptable and comprehensible answers. It is not easy for outsiders to understand the external pressures and techniques and internal thought processes that keep people inside.

The best sources of answers and explanations are ex-members. They are the ones with the excruciatingly painful personal experience of cult life, and some of them may be able to explain what was going on in their minds and in their lives in terms that ‘civilians’ can understand.

The deeper in that people go, the worse life often gets but the harder it is for them to get out. I am not talking about people on the fringes and in the outer circles who may wander in then drift away or drop out: I am talking about long-term, hard-core members.

I am also mainly talking about people who might think about leaving, not those few who genuinely feel at home in their organisation or the large number of unfortunates who have lost all sense of self and self-preservation.

People are discouraged and prevented from leaving

The message given, overtly or covertly, to many cult members is, “Don’t you dare leave, you traitor. It will be much the worse for you if you do!”

Cults make it difficult for members to leave in as many practical, guilt and fear-based and emotional blackmailing ways as possible. They use manipulation,  intimidation and coercion to keep dissenting members in line.

Life after leaving a cult: predictable paths people take

There is a lot of information available about cults, cult-like organisations, cult leaders and cult members and ex-members. I compiled some ideas and information myself from personal experience, ideas for which my researches found much independent confirmation. 

I made posts on a forum that no longer exists. I want to overhaul the material and put a few extracts on here, in the hope that they will be of use to someone.

I will start at the end, with a short account of what I know about people who have left one of these sinister organisations.

Groups most cult leavers fall into

Many people who leave a cult just want to recover and get on with whatever lives they can make for themselves, perhaps after telling their stories to a few people.

A few high-profile people may expose the practices and describe their experiences mainly for the money, attention and publicity. I am thinking of celebrity ex-members of organisations such as Scientology here. One of them has a TV show.

Then there are those who go into the mechanics of cult leadership and operation in great detail. They take action on an intellectual level. They do a lot of reading and research and consult a variety of sources. They want to understand what forces were at work, mainly for their own benefit. They may also hope to educate others and deter them from joining; some write very helpful books and articles. This is possibly the best option, but not everyone has the necessary resources.

Most ex-members will think that they are lucky to be out of it, but a few may feel lost and miserable and blame themselves for not being able to meet the (unrealistic) requirements and (outrageous) demands. They feel that they failed to make the grade. They feel inferior, not good enough for the elite organisation. They have let the leader and the cause down.

They have been expelled from Paradise and the gates locked behind them. They may be unable to cut their losses and move on with their lives, even when they have support, options and opportunities. They may feel even worse than they did when inside. They may be very depressed and just give up on life. Someone once explained all this to me when I asked about people who had left, but not spoken out against, a cult.

Popcorn time and popcorn timing

I really liked the expression 'popcorn time' when I heard it for the first time a few years ago. It is a spectator sport alert, a neat and clever way of telling people to get ready because an amusing show is about to start.

I have seen it used a lot recently, and this has reminded me of a popcorn-related incident from the past.

It all started when I took some young children to a shopping centre to see the Christmas attractions. There was a popcorn-making machine there that fascinated my young friends. The popcorn danced on a jet of air; they watched this for a long time.

It was obvious that they wanted me to buy them some popcorn, but a small paper cup cost a small fortune and the popcorn didn't even look very good. As a matter of principle, I won't pay exorbitant prices for low-quality products.

The youngest girl cried and I felt guilty. I remembered getting some really good popcorn from Marks & Spencer a while back, so I promised them that I would bring some with me the next time I came to see them. 

I went to one branch of M & S but couldn't find the popcorn I wanted, which was one big bag with eight small individual bags of Butterkist inside, delicious and ideal for distributing to children. I went to another branch and looked everywhere. I remembered to check the sweet stands near the tills, but the popcorn I wanted wasn't there.

I decided that M & S must have played their usual game of bringing out something edible that people like very much then discontinuing the product. 

King Charles II and synchronicity

I have been doing some research into the English Civil War, the Commonwealth and the Restoration.

I was looking for examples of the swing of the pendulum from one extreme to the other and the way that some people reject one way of life only to adopt one that is equally bad and damaging.

Reading about the Restoration reminded me of a time when I read a lot of historical novels, many of which featured the Merry Monarch King Charles II. He seemed very glamorous to me and much more interesting than most of England's kings. I was impressed by his involvement with the Royal Society and his patronage of Sir Christopher Wren.

I decided to refresh my memory about his life and reign when I got the chance, in the light of all the things I had learned since I read about him when I was just a schoolgirl.

I took some time out to go and meet a former colleague. She put a book into my hands; she said that when she told her husband she would be seeing me, he took a book from his bookcase and said, “Give her this.” 

The book was about the life and times of King Charles II!

No one knew that Charles II was very much on my mind. I have only met her husband once, a few years ago, yet somehow he sensed what I was thinking about.

Perhaps it was just a coincidence, but the universe often ensures that I get the books I want. I just wish that this would work for other things...

This is the book in question:

Born at the end of November

Some of the writers who have been mentioned in previous articles were born during the last two days of November. 

Here is some interesting information to mark the occasion.

Born on the 29th
November 29th is the 333rd day of the year (except in leap years). 

Amos Bronson Alcott entered this world on the 29th November 1799; Louisa May Alcott, his daughter, was born in the early hours of the 29th in 1832, thus they were born exactly 33 years apart.

C. S. Lewis was born on the 29th November 1898.

Madeleine L’Engle was born on the 29th November 1918.

Born on the 30th
Angela Brazil was born on the 30th November 1868.

L. M. (Lucy Maud) Montgomery was born on the 30th November 1874.

Influences and connections
For the Alcotts, sharing the same birthday was not the only connection. Bronson died in March 1888; Louisa died 2 days later.

C. S. Lewis died one week short of his 65th birthday and one hour before President John F. Kennedy died.

Louisa M. Alcott, L. M. Montgomery and Angela Brazil all wrote classic girls’ books.

One of Madeleine L’Engle’s main characters is called Meg; so is one of Louisa M. Alcott’s.

Madeleine L’Engle said this about books she read in childhood:

“My favorite was Emily of New Moon by Lucy Maude Montgomery, who is better known for her Anne of Green Gables books. Emily wanted to be a writer. Emily and I had a lot in common. Emily lived on Prince Edward Island and I live on Manhattan Island. Both are islands! Emily's father was dying of bad lungs and so was mine…“

Both C. S. Lewis and Madeleine L’Engle have been called Christian myth-makers. When asked whether her work has been compared to his, she replied:

“Yes, it has. I think that the main difference is that C. S. Lewis has more answers and I have more questions…”

C. S. Lewis created a flying horse, wrote a book called Surprised by Joy and married an American called Joy.

Madeleine L’Engle’s winged unicorn is called Gaudior, which has a meaning connected with joy and rejoicing. 

Being born at the end of November means that they were born under the astrological sign of Sagittarius. 

Flying horses, centaurs, philosophy, joyful religion and angels are all very Sagittarian. 

Two positive propositions

Accepting that unseen influences are at work in people’s lives can result in depression - and even paranoia - where some of the negative influences are concerned. Here are some positive ideas to help balance the books.

Reversing the minus sign

A while back, the idea came to me that some of the people who have a very negative effect on others could have an equally positive effect if they would only decide to clean up their act and be a force for good instead of evil.

The more innate power to influence people and events someone has, the greater their potential for either causing damage and destruction or making the world a better place.  The more power they have, the more people they can either save or lead to disaster.

This is similar to being overdrawn at the bank: if the sign were changed from minus to plus, a small deficit would become a small credit but a huge overdraft would become a huge credit balance.