Advertisement

Brainwashing Theories in European Parliamentary and Administrative Reports on Cults and Sects

  • James T. Richardson
  • Massimo Introvigne
Part of the Critical Issues in Social Justice book series (CISJ)

Abstract

Religious minorities in Europe today are often perceived as a social problem, traditionally thought of as “a condition which is defined by a considerable number of persons as a diversion from some social norm which they cherish” (Fuller & Myers, 1941, p. 22). Recent scholarship suggests that although a social problem’s beginnings are subject to empirical verification, the way they develop and are represented, constructed, or negotiated is the result of complicated social processes (Richardson, 1997).

Keywords

Religious Group Consumer Protection Moral Panic Religious Minority Religious Movement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anthony, D. (1990). Religious movements and brainwashing litigation: Evaluating key testimony. In T. Robbins & D. Anthony (Eds.), In gods we trust (pp. 295–344). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  2. Anthony, D. (1996). Brainwashing and totalitarian influence: An exploration of admissibility criteria for testimony in brainwashing trials. Ph.D. Dissertation. Berkeley, CA: Graduate Theological Union.Google Scholar
  3. Anthony, D. (1999). Pseudoscience and minority religions: An evaluation of the brainwashing theories of Jean-Marie Abgrall. Social Justice Research, 12, 421–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anthony, D., & Robbins, T. (1992). Law, social science, and the “brainwashing” exception to the First Amendment. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 10, 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anthony, D. & Robbins, T. (1995). Negligence, coercion, and the protection of religious belief. Journal of Church and State, 37, 509–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anthony, D., Robbins, T. & McCarthy, J. (1983). Legitimating repression. In D. Bromley and J. Richardson (Eds.), The brainwashing/deprogramming controversy (pp. 319–328). New York: Edwin Mellen.Google Scholar
  7. Assemblée Nationale (1996). Les Sectes en France. Rapport fait au nom de la Commission d’Enquête sur les sectes (document n. 2468). Paris: Les Documents d’Information de l’Assemblée Nationale.Google Scholar
  8. Assemblée Nationale (1999). Rapport fait au nom de la Commission d’Enquête sur la situation financière, patrimoniale et fiscale des sectes, ainsi que sur leurs activités économiques et leurs relations avec les milieux économiques et financiers (document n. 1687). Paris: Les Documents d’Information de l’Assemblée Nationale.Google Scholar
  9. Assemblée Nationale (1997). Audit sur les dérives sectaires. Rapport du groupe d’experts genevois au Département de la Justice et Police et des Transports du Canton de Genève. Geneva: Editions Suzanne Hurter.Google Scholar
  10. Barker, E. (1984). The making of a Moonie: Brainwashing or choice? Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Barker, E. (1989). New religious movements: A practical introduction. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  12. Barker, E. (1996). But is it a genuine religion? In L. Griel & T. Robbins (Eds.), Between sacred and secular: Research and theory on quasireligion (pp. 97–109). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  13. Barthélemy, D. (1999). Intervention of the French delegation at the OSCE Supplementary Meeting on Freedom of Religion. Vienna, March 22, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. Baumann, M. (1998). Channeling information: The stigmatization of religious studies as an aspect of the debate about the new religious movements in Germany. In E. Barker & M. Warburg (Eds.), New religions and new religiosity (pp. 204–221). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Besier, G. & Scheuch, E. K. (1999). Die neuen In-quisitoren. Religionsfreiheit und Glaubensneid. Zurich: Interfrom.Google Scholar
  16. Bromley, D. G. (1983). Conservatorships and deprogramming: Legal and political prospects. In D. Bromley & J. Richardson (Eds.), The brainwashing/deprogramming controversy (pp. 267–293). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  17. Bromley, D. G. (1988). Falling from the faith: Causes and consequences of religious apostasy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Bromley, D. G. (1998). The politics of religious apostasy: The role of apostates in the transformation of religious movements. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Casanovas, C. E. (1999). El fiscal al Juzgado de instructión numero nueve. Santa Cruz de Tenerife.Google Scholar
  20. Chambre des Représentants de Belgique (1997). Enquête parlementaire visant à élaborer une politique en vue de lutter contre les pratiques illégales des sectes et les dangers qu’elles représentent pour la société et pour les personnes, particulièrement les mineurs d’âge. Rapport fait au nom de la Com mission d’Enquête, 2 vol. Bruxelles: Chambre des Représentants de Belgique.Google Scholar
  21. Commission de gestion du Conseil National (1999). “Sectes” ou mouvements endoctrinants en Suisse. La nécessité de l’action de l’Etat ou: vers une politique fédérale en matière de “sectes”. Rapport de la Commission de gestion du Conseil national du 1 er juillet 1999. Bern: Commission de gestion du Conseil national.Google Scholar
  22. Commission pénale sur les dérives sectaires (1999). Rapport de la Commission pénale sur les dérives sectaires sur la question de la manipulation mentale. Geneva: Commission pénale sur les dérives sectaires.Google Scholar
  23. Conseil fédéral (2000). Response du Conseil fédéral au rapport de la CdG-CN: “’Sectes’ ou mouvements endoctrinants en Suisse—La nécessité de l’Òaction de l’Òétat ou vers une politique fédérale en matière de ’sectes’”. Bern: Conseil fédéral.Google Scholar
  24. Council of Europe—Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights (1999). Illegal Activities of Sects: Report (Doc. 8373). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  25. Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Denaux, A. (2002). The attitude of Belgium authorities toward new religious movements. Brigham Young University Law Review, 101–130.Google Scholar
  27. Deutscher Bundestag (1998). Endbericht der Enquete-Kommission “Sogenannte Sekten und Psy-chogruppen.” Bonn: Deutscher Bundestag.Google Scholar
  28. Dipartimento delle Istituzioni, Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino. (1998). lnterrogazioni sulle sette religiose. Bellinzona: Dipartimento delle Istituzioni, Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino.Google Scholar
  29. Dillon, J. & Richardson, J. T. (1994). The “cult” concept: A politics of representation analysis. SYZYGY: Journal of Alternative Religion and Culture 3, 185–197.Google Scholar
  30. Enquete-Commission on “So-Called Sects and Psychogroups.” (1998). Final Report of the En-quete Commission on “So-Called Sects and Psychogroups”: New Religious and Ideological Communities and Psychogroups in the Federal Republic of Germany. (English translation) Bonn: Deutscher Bundestag, Referat Öffentlichkeitsarbeit.Google Scholar
  31. European Parliament, Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs (1997). Draft Resolution on Cults in the European Union. Brussels-Strasbourg: European Parliament 1997.Google Scholar
  32. Fuller, D. C. & Myers, D. (1941). The natural history of a social problem. American Sociological Review, 6, 21–51.Google Scholar
  33. Ginsburg, G. & Richardson, J. T. (1998). ’Brainwashing’ evidence in light of Daubert. In H. Reece (Ed.), Law and science (pp. 265–288). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Greil, A. L. (1996). Sacred claims: The “cult controversy” as a struggle over the right to the Religious label. In D. Bromley & L. Carter (Eds.), The issue of authenticity in the study of religions (pp. 46–63). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hexham, I. & Poewe, K. (1999). “Verfassungs-feindlich”: Church, state, and new religions in Germany. Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, 2, 208–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hunter, E. (1953). Brain-washing in Red China: the calculated destruction of men’s minds. New York: The Vanguard Press.Google Scholar
  37. Introvigne, M. (1999a). Defectors, ordinary leave-takers, and apostates: A quantitative study of former members of New Acropolis in France. Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, 3, 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Introvigne, M. (1999b). Religion as claim: social and legal controversies. In J. G. Platvoet and A. L. Molendijk (Eds.), The pragmatics of defining religion: Contexts, concepts and contests (pp. 41–72). Leiden-Boston B Kôln: Brill.Google Scholar
  39. Introvigne, M. (2000). Moral panics and anticult terrorism in western Europe. Terrorism and Political Violence, 12, 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Introvigne, Massimo, and J. Gordon Melton (eds.). 1996. Pour en finir avec les sectes. Le débat sur le rapport de la commission parlementaire. 3rd ed. Paris: Dervy.Google Scholar
  41. James, Gene. (1986). Brainwashing: The myth and the actuality. Thought: Fordham University Quarterly LXI (241): 241–257.Google Scholar
  42. Jenkins, Philip. 1996. Pedophiles and priests: Anatomy of a contemporary crisis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Jenkins, Philip. (1998). Moral panic: Changing concepts of the child molester in modern America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kriele, M. (1998). The legal-political recommendations of the sect commission. Zeitschriftfur Rechtspolitik (Magazine for Legal Politics) 9, 349.Google Scholar
  45. La Scientologie en Suisse. Rapport préparé à l’intention de la Commission Consultative en matière de protection de l’État. (1998). Bern: Département Fédéral de Justice et de Police.Google Scholar
  46. Lewis, J. R. (1986). Reconstructing the “cult” experience. Sociological Analysis, 47, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lewis, J. R. (1989). Apostates and the legitimation of repression: Some historical and empirical perspectives on the cult controversy. Sociological Analysis, 49, 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lifton, R. J. (1963). Thought reform and the psychology of totalism. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  49. Lifton, R. J. (1987). The future of immortality and other essays for a nuclear age. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  50. Lifton, R. J. (1999). Destroying the world to save it: Aum Shinrikyo, apocalyptic violence and the new global terrorism. New York: Metropolitan Books-Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
  51. Lutte contre les sectes. (1999). Séance du Sénat français du 16 décembre 1999 (minutes).Google Scholar
  52. Miller, D. 1983. Deprogramming in historical perspective. In D. Bromley & J. Richardson (Eds.), The brainwashing/deprogramming controversy (pp. 15–28). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  53. MILS (Mission Interministérielle de Lutte contre les Sectes) (2000). Rapport d’activité. Paris: MILS.Google Scholar
  54. Ministero dell’Interno, Dipartimento della Pubblica Sicurezza—Direzione Centrale Polizia di Prevenzione. (1998). Sette religiose e nuovi movimenti magici in Italia. Rome: Ministero dell’Interno.Google Scholar
  55. Motilla, A. (1999). New religious movements in Spain. In New religious movement and the law in the European Union. Proceedings of the meeting: Lisbon, Universidade Moderna 8–9 November, 1997 (pp. 325–340). Milan: Giuffré.Google Scholar
  56. Observatoire Interministériel sur les Sectes. (1997). Rapport annuel 1997. Paris: La Documentation Française 1998.Google Scholar
  57. Richardson, J. T. (1985). Active vs. passive convert: Paradigm conflict in conversion/recruitment research. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 24, 163–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Richardson, J. T. (1986). Consumer protection and deviant religion. Review of Religious Research, 28, 168–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Richardson, J. T. (1991). Cult/brainwashing cases and the freedom of religion. Journal of Church and State, 33, 55–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Richardson, J. T. (1993). A social psychological critique of “brainwashing” claims about recruitment to new religions. In J. Hadden & D. Bromley (Eds.), The handbook of cults and sects in America (pp. 75–97). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  61. Richardson, J. T. (1995b). Minority religions, religious freedom, and the pan-European political and judicial institutions. Journal of Church and State, 37, 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Richardson, J. T. (1996a). “Brainwashing” claims and minority religions outside the United States: Cultural diffusion of a questionable legal concept. Brigham Young University Law Review, 1996, 873–904.Google Scholar
  63. Richardson, J. T. (1996b). Les resistances aux groupes religieux minoritaires en France. In M. Introvigne & Melton, J.G. (Eds.), Pour en finir avec les sectes (pp. 73–84). Paris: Dervy.Google Scholar
  64. Richardson, J. T. (1996c). Sociology and the new religions: “Brainwashing”, the courts, and religious freedom. In P. Jenkins & S. Kroll-Smith Eds.), Witnessing for sociology: Sociologists in court (pp. 115–134). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  65. Richardson, J. T. (1997). The social construction of Satanism: Understanding an international social problem. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 32, 61–85.Google Scholar
  66. Richardson, J. T. (1999). Social justice and minority religions. Social Justice Research, 12, 241–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Richardson, J. T. & Kilbourne, B. (1983). Classical and contemporary uses of brainwashing models: A comparison and critique. In D. Bromley & J. Richardson (Eds.), The brainwashing/ deprogramming controversy (pp. 29–46). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
  68. Richardson, J. T., van der Lans, J. & Derks, F. (1986). Leaving and labeling: Coerced and voluntary disaffiliation for religious social movements. In K. Land & G. Lang (Eds.), Research in social movements, conflict, and change (pp. 97–126). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  69. Richardson, J. T., & van Driel, B. (1994). New religions in Europe: A comparison of developments and reactions in England, France, Germany, and The Netherlands. In A Shupe & D. Bromley (Eds.), Anticult movements in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 129–170). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  70. Robbins, T. & Anthony, D. (1982). Deprogramming, brainwashing, and the medicalization of deviant religion. Social Problems, 29, 283–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rodríguez-Valdés, E. (1999). Informe pericial que so-licita el Juez a instancias del Ministerio Fiscal del juzgado de primera instancia, instrucción nE 4. Santa Cruz de Tenerife.Google Scholar
  72. Shupe, A. & Bromley, D. (1994). Anticult movements in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  73. Solomon, T. (1981). Integrating the Moonie experience: A survey of ex-members of the Unification Church. In T. Robbins & D. Anthony (Eds.), In gods we trust: New patterns of religious pluralism in America (pp. 275–294). Princeton: NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Stamm, H. (1997a). Der Staatsschutz und der Freund der Sekten (State security and the friend of the sects). Tagesamzeiger Zurich, Feb. 4.Google Scholar
  75. Stamm, H. (1997b). Naïve Staatsschhtzer (Naïve state security agents) Tagesamzeiger Zurich, Feb. 4.Google Scholar
  76. Swedish Commission (1998). In good faith, society and the new religious movements (Official English-language summary). Stockholm: Norstedts Tryckeri AB.Google Scholar
  77. Witteveen, T. A. (1984). Overheid en Nieuwe Re-ligieuze Bewegingen. Gravenhage: Kamerstukken.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • James T. Richardson
  • Massimo Introvigne

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations