I loved the break down of how Scientology finds people. The simplicity is stunning.
People need connection, they need to feel important and that they have agency. Feeling "smart", better than, a member of... feels good.
Promises of a simple, easy, known path to getting what you want will always be appealing.
Figuring it out for yourself will always be harder.
It's no surprise that people take the easy route.
Taniwha 8 hours ago [-]
From my observation Scientology starts by teaching you to be selfish, more self assertish, in the process you end up pushing your friends and family away, but guess what, you have some new friends in the 'church'
Just in case anyone here finds themselves falling into their world I'll save you $0.5M: all your problems are caused by you being infested with murdered space aliens
p_j_w 3 hours ago [-]
>People need connection, they need to feel important and that they have agency. Feeling "smart", better than, a member of... feels good.
Doesn't sound much different from the Abrahamic religions.
codechicago277 3 hours ago [-]
Or Silicon Valley.
ubermonkey 3 hours ago [-]
Going Clear is probably one of my top ten books EVER.
If you enjoyed it, please note that Lawrence Wright has written several other equally fantastic books. He also wrote The Looming Tower, on the runup to 9/11. It covers the geopolitics that led to Islamic fanaticism as well as the intelligence failures in the US that allowed the attacks to happen. I believe fully and unironically that it ought to be required reading.
barbs 3 hours ago [-]
I'd seen and enjoyed the film adaptation, didn't realise it was based on a book
encyclic 19 hours ago [-]
If you want to know about the ins and outs of more personal cons and scams, the Howdunit series of books are great. Ostensibly meant to help writers get details correct, they are fascinating reads. Dating from the 1990's they predate scams and cons using the web, mobile phones, and other tech, but so many cons even today have roots going back to even the 1800's.
No literature list on MLM scams can be complete without Bridget Read's meticulously researched 2025 book "Little Bosses Everywhere".
WheelsAtLarge 13 hours ago [-]
MLMs have to be up there with the biggest scams, ever. My mother was scammed over and over under the guise of friendship. As a kid I remember there was very little money but there was always enough to buy another order of whatever. The ugliest part is that once you become a member you fall into the trap, you become part of the scam and become a scammer too. It's ultimately very sad once you learn it's a legal pyramid that eventually collapses and you're left holding the bag. And your "friends" led you to it.
stonecharioteer 50 minutes ago [-]
I was approached by people trying to get me into a pyramid scheme at least thrice in my life.
One was a friend who got into it in high school and said I could get in on it too for 100 USD (~2004). Another was a random stranger I struck up a conversation with at a bookstore in around 2011. The last was an old boss, who attributes his drastic weight loss to a strange drug that he's peddling and says I can get in on.
It's crazy. I was 17, 24 and 37 and all 3 times I knew there was something super suspicious about these and never engaged.
pjc50 5 hours ago [-]
I would like to add to the list the excellent history of frauds "Lying for Money", by Dan Davies.
dackdel 24 hours ago [-]
sound like you lead a cult called "MERLBE" make everyone read little bosses everywhere.
cogman10 21 hours ago [-]
One definition of a cult I've liked is "A cult is a group you can't leave with your dignity intact". You can really get a good understanding if something is a cult by the way they talk about their ex members. A healthy organization will pretty much just say "Sad to see you go, come back anytime". Unhealthy organizations spend a fair amount of time warning members about how how dangerous/bad/sinful/sad/miserable their ex members are.
And yes, I'd call several mainstream religions cults because of this. I'd not argue that something isn't a cult if they don't fit this definition, but a very large number of the most damaging cults do have this behavior.
jcsager 20 hours ago [-]
Apostasy is treated very severely by many (most?) religions. The cults have just borrowed that concept.
cogman10 20 hours ago [-]
I'd disagree. Most religions don't love apostasy but they also don't actively tell their members to go out of their way to punish or avoid non-believers.
The reason cults severely punish ex members is to protect the flock. They don't want their members to learn from ex members real criticisms of the cult.
It's precisely so when books like mentioned in this thread come up, the cult can say "oh, that's just a bad ex member who's lying".
The idea of "forbidden knowledge" is pretty unique to cults. You won't find, for example, a Methodist church that tells you not to read exmethodist books (do they even exist?). Heck, they probably wouldn't even get upset if you read something like "The god delusion".
This is hardly unique to Islam, many of the more hard-line Christian sects (Jehovahs, Christian Brethren, etc) as well as Haredi Jews also shun apostates.
The main difference is that in countries with shariah, apostasy is not just a sin, it's a criminal offense.
ShinyLeftPad 8 hours ago [-]
There's very few Muslim countries without legal Shariah... Turkey, 4 stans, Albania/Bosnia, and that's about it. Many of them are only "Muslim" as far as majority religion, locals might not even agree with that classification
There's a bunch of Muslim countries with Sharia not in criminal law but in marriage, maybe that's what you mean.
rdtsc 4 hours ago [-]
Based on the wiki about it
> among Islamic jurists, the majority of them continue to regard apostasy as a crime which should be punishable by death
How many mainstream Jewish or Christian groups advocate for that?
skinfaxi 15 minutes ago [-]
Which Islamic jurists? The citation talks about stuff in 1967.
decimalenough 3 hours ago [-]
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
Deuteronomy 13:6–11
lukan 3 hours ago [-]
That was not the question, but what actual christian person of influence today believe that to be taken literal?
I am one of those apostates and there is some social shaming that I can mostly ignore, but so far no one called for my murder or imprisonment.
16 hours ago [-]
TacticalCoder 16 hours ago [-]
> One definition of a cult I've liked is "A cult is a group you can't leave with your dignity intact". You can really get a good understanding if something is a cult by the way they talk about their ex members. A healthy organization will pretty much just say "Sad to see you go, come back anytime". Unhealthy organizations spend a fair amount of time warning members about how how dangerous/bad/sinful/sad/miserable their ex members are.
OK but those without dignity here are the ones acting like that, not the person leaving.
> And yes, I'd call several mainstream religions cults because of this.
Oh definitely. And it's disgusting that their hate speech is protected because it's religious.
graemep 21 hours ago [-]
> And yes, I'd call several mainstream religions cults because of this
Which ones ? Not something I have seen myself
I do like your definition. Its a pretty clear and meaningful distinction and linked to other cult behaviours such as encouraging members to cease contact with ex-members.
CrazyStat 21 hours ago [-]
People I know personally were strongly ostracized after leaving Jehovah's Witnesses (in the US) and the Catholic church (in Latin America). Cut out of their existing social circles, immediate family members refusing to attend their wedding over it, etc.
graemep 6 hours ago [-]
JWs do i as a matter of policy, but I would not call them mainstream.
Not my experience of the Catholic Church at all, having left it myself (and getting married in a registry office etc.), and having friends who have done so in more than one country. Not one of us as had any friend or relative hold it against us.
It might be a feature of a particular region or culture, or reflective of controlling family, but not of the Catholic Church in general.
CrazyStat 3 hours ago [-]
My ex-Catholic's friend's mother refused to speak to him until his first child was born, at which point the draw of a grandchild overcame her aversion I guess. They've (mostly) reconciled now.
kstrauser 21 hours ago [-]
JW was the first one I thought of by that definition.
I was raised Southern Baptist. When I stopped going, the church contacted me a couple of times to say they missed us and asked if everything was OK, and to say they'd love to have us back if we wanted to come back sometime. My parents weren't thrilled but that's less religion, more family dynamics: it was much the same when they found out I didn't support their preferred political party anymore. That was about it, though. The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us.
My thinking on cults is very similar to all this, plus another distinguisher. A cult typically requires you to join before you get all the information about what you're signing up for. I've never been a Muslim, but know that if you walk into a mosque, someone will cheerfully greet you and load you up with a Koran and all kinds of other reading material. Same with any mainstream Protestant church, or the Catholic church, or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc. In fact, many/most churches won't let you join until you've shown that you understand that church's beliefs. Compare and contrast with, say, Scientology, which is notoriously different.
astura 15 hours ago [-]
>The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us
Southern Baptists officially teach that eternal damnation is a literal, conscious, and everlasting punishment in Hell for anyone who dies without personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ. If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is.
I also disagree that Catholic church happily gives you all the information upfront. I didn't grow up Catholic but my parents did, and at least back then Catholic teachings (they both went to Catholic school) very heavily discouraged individuals from reading the Bible. My parents also grew up going to mass in Latin, a language they don't understand. Things are different nowadays.
giardini 13 hours ago [-]
astura says ..."Catholic teachings (they both went to Catholic school) very heavily discouraged individuals from reading the Bible. My parents also grew up going to mass in Latin, a language they don't understand. Things are different nowadays.
"
Almost completely wrong (ask your parents, astura).
It is true that the Catholic Church did not emphasize the Old Testament (OT). They instead emphasized the New Testament (NT) (both NT and OT are parts of the Bible). We were educated about the Protestant Reformation and the differences in faiths. I think the problem is that the Catholic Church has generated so much structure and associated doctrine that they barely have time for OT! In any case, much of this fell into one or more of my Church History classes, hardly my favorite subject.
FWIW I had a completely Catholic education from grade school thru university and nobody ever refrained from referencing the Bible. I've long since left the faith but I kept my sense of humor. Here's my favorite OT joke:
Q: Who's the strongest man man in the Bible (hint: it isn't Samson)?
A: Abraham. He tied his ass to a tree and walked up a mountain!
As for the Latin mass, yes it was there, and if you wanted to know what was said then you could always find out - nobody was hiding anything. I was an "altar boy" (assisted the priest in the rituals) so I learned the Latin mass and, since I went to Catholic schools, I later studied Latin. Latin is a useful language to know as an English speaker and it helps in understanding the so-called "romance languages" (it even aids in understanding English - many word roots are from Latin).
FWIW the traditional Latin mass is still celebrated! Some have stuck to the old Latin rites b/c of their love of the old rituals, the music is better in Latin (got to agree on this one!), etc.
prussia 15 hours ago [-]
Southern Baptists don't specifically believe you have to be a Southern Baptist to be saved though, do they? And they believe in salvation by grace alone. Plus, the whole "once saved, always saved" thing. It's hard to argue it is coercion if they say you can be saved independent of being a Southern Baptist or obeying them, because they don't seem to be holding a whole lot of power then.
ubermonkey 3 hours ago [-]
Correct. There is no such doctrine.
I was raised in an SBC church, though I've long since come to my senses. I have plenty of issues with such places, but your average Baptist church -- even ones still proudly tied to the SBC -- does not meet any of the criteria usually offered for cult status.
graemep 5 hours ago [-]
Its more accessible nowadays, as everything is on the web for free, but the Catholic Church has a long history of publishing its doctrines. I agree the Latin mass was an impediment, but everything else was very open and public.
> If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is.
If you cease to believe in it why would it bother you? If they do not try to cut you off etc. after you leave its very different from cults that order you family to cease contact.
ubermonkey 3 hours ago [-]
"Southern Baptists officially teach that eternal damnation is a literal, conscious, and everlasting punishment in Hell for anyone who dies without personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ. If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is."
You have to be careful with blanket statements like this. Southern Baptist churches are entirely self-run enterprises with no top-down doctrinal control from anyone else. Consequently, there are congregations who would qualify as high-control, culty organizations and there are congregations who welcome LGBTQ folks and such (although it's increasingly true that welcoming / progressive congregations are self-sorting into their own categories/groupings such as the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship).
I don't know of any SB churches that preach specifically that THEIR church is the One True Church, which is usually what that kind of control requires.
Certainly many folks in the SBC church of my youth moved from church to church, or even to other denominations, and nobody thought that was soul-risking behavior. A central tenet of MOST Baptist churches is the primacy of the adherent's personal relationship to the almighty, which is unknowable to others by default, so this tracks.
groundzeros2015 21 hours ago [-]
If that’s the definition both political parties are included.
etc-hosts 13 hours ago [-]
I think a difference would be a Cult focuses on making the cult congregation member feel like their real family is the Cult, which could or could not be related to your biological family.
Leaving whatever you define as your family is always difficult.
The rhetoric from the DNC and Republicans can get pretty out there but I don't think anyone thinks of DNC or Republican party members as their actual family ( I hope )
cogman10 20 hours ago [-]
Not really. Both mainstream political parties don't like each other, but by and large they don't attack someone for leaving the party (from what I've seen).
Perhaps if you are saying attacks of politicians switching parties, which I could see. But I don't think I've ever heard of republicans talking about exrepublicans or democrats talking about exdemocrats. I personally have switched from voting republican to voting democrat. It's not something my family really cares about and I still have good relations with them even though a number of them are pretty MAGA.
Cults will actually have lessons and classes about the evils of ex members. Someone brought up JWs and that's a pretty good example of what I'm thinking of.
groundzeros2015 20 hours ago [-]
I think you’re correct that mainstream leaders of the parties try not to talk about each other in that way and mostly succeed. But I absolutely do know family members and friends treat it with that level of zeal.
kstrauser 18 hours ago [-]
I think that's true of just darn near everything. People are tribal and tend to get uncomfortable when people around them change:
* Their political parties
* Their religions
* Their diets (meat => vegan, or vice versa)
* Their music
* Their computer OS
None of those compare to cult shunning, which is more systematic and absolute. I mentioned in another comment that my parents were sad when I stopped going to church. That's got nothing on having one's entire family and support groups ceasing to publicly acknowledge their existence.
groundzeros2015 16 hours ago [-]
> None of those compare to cult shunning
I absolutely disagree. I’ve seen cult shunning and if there is a version which has mass appeal now it’s politics.
piperflatline 12 hours ago [-]
Born and raised JW, and yup they're the first that popped to mind.
carlosjobim 19 hours ago [-]
Try telling your friends and family that you've decided to not pay taxes anymore and you'll see.
derektank 1 days ago [-]
The author alluded to it, but I really think the BITE model of authoritarian control[0] is something everyone should know about. BITE stands for Behavioral, Information, Thought, and Emotional, which describes the 4 categories of controlling behaviors used by authoritarian groups (from religious cults, to the Maoist movement in post-war China, to multilevel marketing schemes). They really are surprisingly consistent, from controlling what members wear or how they cut their hair and encouraging sleep deprivation on the Behavioral side, to discouraging access to external sources of information, punishing people for asking questions or engaging in struggle sessions to get people to confess to false beliefs, and isolating people from the other people in their life that may love and care for them.
Not everyone or every group that exhibits some of these behaviors is going to be a cult. But the warning signs are something everyone should be aware of.
- "you weren't appreciated before so why hang out with those people"
- "your family didn't understand you, but we do so stay with us"
3. control
- "we have your best interests at heart so you should do X"
- etc
cogman10 21 hours ago [-]
> Not everyone or every group that exhibits some of these behaviors is going to be a cult. But the warning signs are something everyone should be aware of.
I agree, but I'd say a lot of the BITE attributes can be damaging regardless of whether or not the group rises to the level of cult. If your group is doing stuff in BITE you really should be questioning "why" and thinking about whether or not the group policing is actually good for you.
linohh 1 days ago [-]
Steven Hassan, who developed the BITE model, is really missing on that list. You're absolutely correct, not everything that checks the boxes of the model necessarily is a cult, but more often than not it's only a small step to transform into one.
derektank 1 days ago [-]
Hassan’s own account of being recruited into the Moonies while he was in college really highlights an important point too, almost anybody can fall into a cult. They prey on nearly universal human traits. I wish we had an effort to equip everyone with this knowledge in the same way we teach kids to stop, drop, and roll if they ever catch fire. Especially in our hyper-connected age where anyone with an internet connection might be exposed to a cult.
ianburrell 18 hours ago [-]
There should also be training on how to avoid scams. They have gotten so common on the internet and it is easy for anyone to fall for greed or fear. I wonder if being wary about scams would help with cults.
jaggederest 20 hours ago [-]
Another relevant rating scale that is pretty educational, in my opinion:
Never read Michael Lewis's book about SBF. It's so bad it permanently ruined him as an author in my mind, I doubt the verity of any of the other books he wrote as a result of it.
hingler36 22 hours ago [-]
It really revealed how much he relied on the gift of hindsight when writing his earlier books. Nothing wrong with that per se, but it's something he should have been aware of when doing a book on an ongoing event.
xhevahir 18 hours ago [-]
Lewis has a weakness for characters with lots of chutzpah and self-confidence. Morry Taylor, SBF, John McCain, numerous Wall Street guys—he seems to lose perspective when he writes about them.
kmac_ 22 hours ago [-]
Why? I really enjoyed the book, over-colorized, probably written to be made into a movie. He never portrayed SBF in a good or bad light, but he showed the mess SBF and his companions made.
etc-hosts 13 hours ago [-]
Lewis wrote about and gave plenty of interviews outside of the book about how incredibly inciteful SBF was... basically up until the moment of his arrest.
kmac_ 1 hours ago [-]
I got the impression of an "Elizabeth Holmes is wonderful" vibe from those interviews, showing how people perceived SBF. The overall image of SBF from the book is pretty bad, but it's never stated directly.
frankfrank13 1 days ago [-]
Underground, by Murakami, was one of the better books I've read. It mostly covers victims, but the later chapters are interviews with various members of the Aum cult. It does a pretty decent job of presenting the psyche of the type of person who joins, stays, and some that leave. Although mostly relevant for what he calls the "Japanese psyche" I still found it very insightful.
randycupertino 24 hours ago [-]
No One Would Listen by Harry Markopolos about how he knew Bernie Madoff was a ponzi scheme is a great book in this genre. Markopolos went to the SEC with proof, multiple times, and each time the SEC blew him off.
webnrrd2k 20 hours ago [-]
Highly recommend: Life 102 - What to do when your guru sues you
Cultish (by Amanda Montell) is great. It also defines really well how Claude speaks currently---avant la lettre, of course. Language is a big part of the book: one example is how Scientologists can recognize each other in the wild from the language they have unknowingly adopted even for everyday conversations.
dgellow 21 hours ago [-]
I’m native French speaker and do not understand what you mean with “avant la lettre”. That translates to “before the letter”, what do you mean?
mistersquid 20 hours ago [-]
> I’m native French speaker and do not understand what you mean with “avant la lettre”. That translates to “before the letter”, what do you mean?
Metaphorical language, of which French is a rich source, often prevents native speakers from understanding. Literal translations are of no avail.
> avant la lettre : before the letter : before the (specified) word or concept existed [0]
TIL, I should have just googled it, I assumed it was a bad auto complete
Thanks!
BuyMyBitcoins 13 hours ago [-]
As a non-French speaker, I had assumed a native speaker would suspect that this was another instance of English taking something from French and mangling it into something worse.
bondarchuk 3 hours ago [-]
You could say e.g. Spinoza was a punk avant-la-lettre, he was a punk before the word "punk" even existed. I think GP is using it exactly opposite to the normal usage.
omsta 10 hours ago [-]
Ha. In my defense, it is a common phrase in Dutch culture!
21 hours ago [-]
klez 20 hours ago [-]
I think they meant the same as the latin phrase "ante litteram"
A lot of topics on that podcast are extremely relevant to my interests, but I just can't get past Christopher Kavanagh's accent. Maybe I can fix it with AI...
dgellow 11 hours ago [-]
It’s an accent, there is nothing to fix, it’s something you familiarize yourself with
etc-hosts 10 hours ago [-]
I've tried! have you tried? go listen to the podcast.
dgellow 7 hours ago [-]
I’m a regular listener, that’s why I recommended it
internet_points 6 hours ago [-]
what is his accent? (I don't mind listening to it, but now I can't stop trying to place it, hehe)
dgellow 3 hours ago [-]
He’s from Northern Ireland, lives in Japan. I assume a mix of both cultures? I cannot tell exactly, but it’s something you get used to quickly IMHO
gmiller123456 1 days ago [-]
"Seductive Poison" is a good one. It's a story about the "Koolaid suicide" cult. It's one lady's story about how she got indoctrinated, abused, and ultimately escaped from Jonestown. It's told from her perspective, and really does a good job of showing how a seemingly reasonable person can get wrapped up in that.
salutis 18 hours ago [-]
+1 I loved Seductive Poison and have it on my list to re-read.
My favorite read about cults is this short interview with Richard DeMille about Ron Hubbard: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/... The interviewee comes across as extremely level-headed, maybe as a reaction to having been in a cult and escaped.
ktallett 1 days ago [-]
If we are talking about scams an obvious one is Bad Blood, about the Theranos scam.
zabzonk 1 days ago [-]
Not exactly a cult, but... "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" by Tom Wolfe. Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters. It sounds like fun, until it doesn't so much. Soundtrack by The Grateful Dead.
ccppurcell 1 days ago [-]
If you haven't read it already, Fads and Fallacies by Martin Gardner is a great book. A bit more focused on pseudoscience than on cults but Scientology comes up for instance.
naniel 1 days ago [-]
Interesting list! I really enjoyed "The Square and the Tower" by Niall Ferguson. Not exactly in the same realm as these, but pretty close and definitely eye-opening
11 hours ago [-]
groundzeros2015 20 hours ago [-]
I have no sympathy for group bullying, hazing, or manipulation, but the concept of a cult seems to only be possible post-enlightenment. We say there is a secular society outside that we always need to preserve and that sets limits on the level of fanaticism of our private group memberships.
But the unanswered philosophical problem is if you actually believe in those things doesn’t some level of fanaticism make sense?
In 2026 so we are so divorced from organizations and non-secular sources of information that I don’t think we can even talk about the subject. A 1950s neighborhood bowling club looks like a jihadist training camp from our completely detached ways of living.
paulryanrogers 3 hours ago [-]
> A 1950s neighborhood bowling club looks like a jihadist training camp from our completely detached ways of living.
Why? There are still bowling clubs? People just organize themselves into more hobbies and sometimes even virtual communities than before.
groundzeros2015 1 hours ago [-]
Because of the level of commitment, loyalty, and group sacrifice expected.
The article isn’t about subject matter.
Virtual communities require no group sacrifice. You join the lobby and you leave. Maybe there are some niche WOW guilds out there.
1 days ago [-]
pahool 22 hours ago [-]
Stripping the Gurus by Geoffrey Falk is an interesting survey in this vein, albeit covering a previous generation of problematic cults. Gurus like Chogyam Trungpa, Adi Da (or whatever name Franklin Jones was going by at the time), even reaching back to Paramahansa Yogananda and Ramakrishna. His take is perhaps a little juvenile at times, but I think the book is an interesting survey.
fabriceleal 21 hours ago [-]
Ok, now I want the fiction books about cults, scams and schemes.
acid_fish 47 minutes ago [-]
Traumnovelle by Arthur Schnitzler (a novella that inspired the Eyes Wide Shut movie)
zabzonk 20 hours ago [-]
"Illuminatus!" I read this while suffering from the worst attack of flu (fever, hallucinations, the works) I have ever had, Edinburgh circa 1975. I thought I was going mad. Never dared to read it again.
I'm sure these are all entertaining and engaging and reveal some exciting insider details, but it's worth keeping in mind that memoirs like these are closer to fiction than most things we think of as "nonfiction".
They're individual testimonies, often nearly impossible to verify, and written in an era where "autofiction" and "creative non-fiction" are mature commercial genres with their own tropes, standards, forms, and conceits.
If you're intellectually curious about "cults, scams, and schemes", there's a whole other -- drier but more earnest -- world of nonfiction to be found in places like JSTOR or the catalogs of academic presses.
ktallett 1 days ago [-]
As an academic, I wouldn't like to state papers are any different in regards to reliability of sources. They will just be testimonies and author viewpoint.
swatcoder 1 days ago [-]
Well, there's certainly no objectivity in academic sociology or history, but there's a culture of trying to build narratives and justify viewpoints through richer collections of evidence: multiple testimonies, contemporaneous records and primary ephemera, prior publications, etc
In contrast, memoir is often simply held to the standard of "is there strong and ready evidence against this claim, or can it at least hold up as the author's subjective interpretation of some event" because it's purpose and history as a genre is entirely different. Its audiences aren't academic peers hungry for material against which they can safely anchor their own work, but tens of thousands of airplane readers who are hungry for titillation or personal relatability.
pessimizer 4 hours ago [-]
How has a recommendation of 5 bestsellers from nobody in particular manage to sit on the front page for two days with 250 upvotes? Is HN being punked?
snapcaster 4 hours ago [-]
It's an interesting topic and attacking the author as a "nobody" is very rude. If the content was recommended to you by paul graham or some other dork you guys worship would it be better?
nilamo 2 hours ago [-]
Weekends are a different vibe for hn
meigwilym 7 hours ago [-]
It just occurred to me that Trump is an excellent example of a cult leader.
He demands loyalty, acts as he wills and humiliates anyone who leaves.
meonkeys 1 days ago [-]
+1 to Cultish.
Another great one: The Confidence Game by Maria Konnikova.
peteforde 17 hours ago [-]
I'm sure that these are good or even excellent books, but this topic is deep in my nerd wheelhouse and as a list it's alarmingly sparse on the titles people who are deeply into this stuff actually recommend.
The single most glaring omission is the absence of "Combating Cult Mind Control" by Steven Hassan. This is the first book to read or listen to about cults, full stop.
His other books ("The Cult of Trump" and "Freedom of Mind") are solid, too.
thataccount 15 hours ago [-]
I tend to dislike most of these titles, as people read about one cult that has enough exposure such that a book can be written on it, then decide that everything they don't agree with is also a cult and stretch definitions around to confirm that bias. They don't, however, see coca-cola or a thousand other marketing schemes as "cultish" in any way.
LastTrain 14 hours ago [-]
What, since we can’t all be as smart as you we don’t get to read anything?
thataccount 2 hours ago [-]
I think what I'm saying here, if anything, is that people as "smart" as me don't read most of this garbage. So, the corollary to your question is that dumb people read dumb things.
webdoodle 1 days ago [-]
This list is incomplete without Eric Hoffer's True Believer, which is probably a reference/source for all of these other books. It's basically how to build a fanatic, a cult and a mass movement. It's also required reading for Terrorism studies classes, and CIA personnel, the latter, using it to conduct regime change in banarepublics and oil bearing nations.
Of course now it's used on everyone who uses smartphones and social media.
It's a Brave New World, and you're carrying the main tool to mind control you in your pocket. Bonus, you probably pay for it too!
_dain_ 1 days ago [-]
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds is a rollicking fun read
dgellow 21 hours ago [-]
Just know that it isn’t considered a reliable historical record, a good amount of the book is exaggerated and some of the sources were newspaper parodies interpreted as facts. Still a good read though
jsrcout 23 hours ago [-]
Seconded. It's almost encyclopedic in scope. I'm almost embarrassed to admit that the hilarious chapter on English slang of the time was my favorite.
Uhhrrr 22 hours ago [-]
Hoy, cocky!
zenapollo 1 days ago [-]
I can also recommend the book Mindfuckers - a source book on the rise of acid fascism in America. Each chapter is about a different cult from the 60s and 70s including one on the Manson's. Super interesting read.
enragebait 1 days ago [-]
I hope to release a book on how this all has evolved.
One side is the technology of artful misleading, which is usually much stupider than it sounds.
And another side is a forbidden taboo to speak of. An occult secret that lives like a cancer within us.
Through a sustained art of Power human minds may entangle and manipulate each other at any distance. Counter intuitively, this “esp” is merely consciousness entangled. And some have great skill and others delusional cargo cult “gifts.” Those “gifted” rather than rigorously formed are played in games by their handlers who they themselves cannot perceive perched in their own minds (big spacious brains and all.)
This is how the CIA Stargate programs and those since have largely worked. Overt participants are gamed by handlers who can see in everyone’s minds. It is for those who can “mind trip” to a degree, that functional awareness gradually forms. The basic neurological feedback of being messed with by such “Power” is what causes its development.
It is not that some are “psychic”, it is that all minds may be entangled and some have decades of development “screwing around” in the backs of minds. Their own and others.
The modern occult mindfuck is that consciousness has been hacked.
glimshe 22 hours ago [-]
The game "Cult of the Lamb" is a great way to learn about cults :)
cogman10 22 hours ago [-]
Look, fun quick game that I'd not knock anyone for playing.
But it's not informative about cults in the slightest. It's just a caricature of what "satanic panic" [1] people thought a cult was.
Real cults are much more normal, which is why they are so easy to accidentally fall into. The worst cults have pretty mainstream acceptance. Often, they are simply break-offs of already well accepted religions.
I quite like The Cult of Trump due to the relevance to current events.
qingcharles 21 hours ago [-]
Reading these books shines a light on how the current events have come to pass.
pcblues 24 hours ago [-]
Looks like she is still trying to make money. So the cult didn't work out. I left a cult. If she wants to use the word for sympathy, talk about the really bad ones. Start with Nebraska and work back from there. Sympathy farmer.
I loved the break down of how Scientology finds people. The simplicity is stunning.
People need connection, they need to feel important and that they have agency. Feeling "smart", better than, a member of... feels good.
Promises of a simple, easy, known path to getting what you want will always be appealing.
Figuring it out for yourself will always be harder.
It's no surprise that people take the easy route.
Just in case anyone here finds themselves falling into their world I'll save you $0.5M: all your problems are caused by you being infested with murdered space aliens
Doesn't sound much different from the Abrahamic religions.
If you enjoyed it, please note that Lawrence Wright has written several other equally fantastic books. He also wrote The Looming Tower, on the runup to 9/11. It covers the geopolitics that led to Islamic fanaticism as well as the intelligence failures in the US that allowed the attacks to happen. I believe fully and unironically that it ought to be required reading.
https://www.goodreads.com/series/76228-howdunit-series
One was a friend who got into it in high school and said I could get in on it too for 100 USD (~2004). Another was a random stranger I struck up a conversation with at a bookstore in around 2011. The last was an old boss, who attributes his drastic weight loss to a strange drug that he's peddling and says I can get in on.
It's crazy. I was 17, 24 and 37 and all 3 times I knew there was something super suspicious about these and never engaged.
And yes, I'd call several mainstream religions cults because of this. I'd not argue that something isn't a cult if they don't fit this definition, but a very large number of the most damaging cults do have this behavior.
The reason cults severely punish ex members is to protect the flock. They don't want their members to learn from ex members real criticisms of the cult.
It's precisely so when books like mentioned in this thread come up, the cult can say "oh, that's just a bad ex member who's lying".
The idea of "forbidden knowledge" is pretty unique to cults. You won't find, for example, a Methodist church that tells you not to read exmethodist books (do they even exist?). Heck, they probably wouldn't even get upset if you read something like "The god delusion".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam
The main difference is that in countries with shariah, apostasy is not just a sin, it's a criminal offense.
There's a bunch of Muslim countries with Sharia not in criminal law but in marriage, maybe that's what you mean.
> among Islamic jurists, the majority of them continue to regard apostasy as a crime which should be punishable by death
How many mainstream Jewish or Christian groups advocate for that?
Deuteronomy 13:6–11
I am one of those apostates and there is some social shaming that I can mostly ignore, but so far no one called for my murder or imprisonment.
OK but those without dignity here are the ones acting like that, not the person leaving.
> And yes, I'd call several mainstream religions cults because of this.
Oh definitely. And it's disgusting that their hate speech is protected because it's religious.
Which ones ? Not something I have seen myself
I do like your definition. Its a pretty clear and meaningful distinction and linked to other cult behaviours such as encouraging members to cease contact with ex-members.
Not my experience of the Catholic Church at all, having left it myself (and getting married in a registry office etc.), and having friends who have done so in more than one country. Not one of us as had any friend or relative hold it against us.
It might be a feature of a particular region or culture, or reflective of controlling family, but not of the Catholic Church in general.
I was raised Southern Baptist. When I stopped going, the church contacted me a couple of times to say they missed us and asked if everything was OK, and to say they'd love to have us back if we wanted to come back sometime. My parents weren't thrilled but that's less religion, more family dynamics: it was much the same when they found out I didn't support their preferred political party anymore. That was about it, though. The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us.
My thinking on cults is very similar to all this, plus another distinguisher. A cult typically requires you to join before you get all the information about what you're signing up for. I've never been a Muslim, but know that if you walk into a mosque, someone will cheerfully greet you and load you up with a Koran and all kinds of other reading material. Same with any mainstream Protestant church, or the Catholic church, or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc. In fact, many/most churches won't let you join until you've shown that you understand that church's beliefs. Compare and contrast with, say, Scientology, which is notoriously different.
Southern Baptists officially teach that eternal damnation is a literal, conscious, and everlasting punishment in Hell for anyone who dies without personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ. If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is.
I also disagree that Catholic church happily gives you all the information upfront. I didn't grow up Catholic but my parents did, and at least back then Catholic teachings (they both went to Catholic school) very heavily discouraged individuals from reading the Bible. My parents also grew up going to mass in Latin, a language they don't understand. Things are different nowadays.
"
Almost completely wrong (ask your parents, astura).It is true that the Catholic Church did not emphasize the Old Testament (OT). They instead emphasized the New Testament (NT) (both NT and OT are parts of the Bible). We were educated about the Protestant Reformation and the differences in faiths. I think the problem is that the Catholic Church has generated so much structure and associated doctrine that they barely have time for OT! In any case, much of this fell into one or more of my Church History classes, hardly my favorite subject.
FWIW I had a completely Catholic education from grade school thru university and nobody ever refrained from referencing the Bible. I've long since left the faith but I kept my sense of humor. Here's my favorite OT joke:
Q: Who's the strongest man man in the Bible (hint: it isn't Samson)?
A: Abraham. He tied his ass to a tree and walked up a mountain!
As for the Latin mass, yes it was there, and if you wanted to know what was said then you could always find out - nobody was hiding anything. I was an "altar boy" (assisted the priest in the rituals) so I learned the Latin mass and, since I went to Catholic schools, I later studied Latin. Latin is a useful language to know as an English speaker and it helps in understanding the so-called "romance languages" (it even aids in understanding English - many word roots are from Latin).
FWIW the traditional Latin mass is still celebrated! Some have stuck to the old Latin rites b/c of their love of the old rituals, the music is better in Latin (got to agree on this one!), etc.
I was raised in an SBC church, though I've long since come to my senses. I have plenty of issues with such places, but your average Baptist church -- even ones still proudly tied to the SBC -- does not meet any of the criteria usually offered for cult status.
> If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is.
If you cease to believe in it why would it bother you? If they do not try to cut you off etc. after you leave its very different from cults that order you family to cease contact.
You have to be careful with blanket statements like this. Southern Baptist churches are entirely self-run enterprises with no top-down doctrinal control from anyone else. Consequently, there are congregations who would qualify as high-control, culty organizations and there are congregations who welcome LGBTQ folks and such (although it's increasingly true that welcoming / progressive congregations are self-sorting into their own categories/groupings such as the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship).
I don't know of any SB churches that preach specifically that THEIR church is the One True Church, which is usually what that kind of control requires.
Certainly many folks in the SBC church of my youth moved from church to church, or even to other denominations, and nobody thought that was soul-risking behavior. A central tenet of MOST Baptist churches is the primacy of the adherent's personal relationship to the almighty, which is unknowable to others by default, so this tracks.
Leaving whatever you define as your family is always difficult.
The rhetoric from the DNC and Republicans can get pretty out there but I don't think anyone thinks of DNC or Republican party members as their actual family ( I hope )
Perhaps if you are saying attacks of politicians switching parties, which I could see. But I don't think I've ever heard of republicans talking about exrepublicans or democrats talking about exdemocrats. I personally have switched from voting republican to voting democrat. It's not something my family really cares about and I still have good relations with them even though a number of them are pretty MAGA.
Cults will actually have lessons and classes about the evils of ex members. Someone brought up JWs and that's a pretty good example of what I'm thinking of.
* Their political parties
* Their religions
* Their diets (meat => vegan, or vice versa)
* Their music
* Their computer OS
None of those compare to cult shunning, which is more systematic and absolute. I mentioned in another comment that my parents were sad when I stopped going to church. That's got nothing on having one's entire family and support groups ceasing to publicly acknowledge their existence.
I absolutely disagree. I’ve seen cult shunning and if there is a version which has mass appeal now it’s politics.
Not everyone or every group that exhibits some of these behaviors is going to be a cult. But the warning signs are something everyone should be aware of.
[0] https://freedomofmind.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/The-BIT...
1. love bombing
- make you feel welcome/loved/accepted
- lots of attention etc
2. isolation
- "you weren't appreciated before so why hang out with those people"
- "your family didn't understand you, but we do so stay with us"
3. control
- "we have your best interests at heart so you should do X"
- etc
I agree, but I'd say a lot of the BITE attributes can be damaging regardless of whether or not the group rises to the level of cult. If your group is doing stuff in BITE you really should be questioning "why" and thinking about whether or not the group policing is actually good for you.
https://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_102
Metaphorical language, of which French is a rich source, often prevents native speakers from understanding. Literal translations are of no avail.
> avant la lettre : before the letter : before the (specified) word or concept existed [0]
[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/avant%20la%20lett...
Thanks!
But the unanswered philosophical problem is if you actually believe in those things doesn’t some level of fanaticism make sense?
In 2026 so we are so divorced from organizations and non-secular sources of information that I don’t think we can even talk about the subject. A 1950s neighborhood bowling club looks like a jihadist training camp from our completely detached ways of living.
Why? There are still bowling clubs? People just organize themselves into more hobbies and sometimes even virtual communities than before.
The article isn’t about subject matter.
Virtual communities require no group sacrifice. You join the lobby and you leave. Maybe there are some niche WOW guilds out there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Illuminatus!_Trilogy
They're individual testimonies, often nearly impossible to verify, and written in an era where "autofiction" and "creative non-fiction" are mature commercial genres with their own tropes, standards, forms, and conceits.
If you're intellectually curious about "cults, scams, and schemes", there's a whole other -- drier but more earnest -- world of nonfiction to be found in places like JSTOR or the catalogs of academic presses.
In contrast, memoir is often simply held to the standard of "is there strong and ready evidence against this claim, or can it at least hold up as the author's subjective interpretation of some event" because it's purpose and history as a genre is entirely different. Its audiences aren't academic peers hungry for material against which they can safely anchor their own work, but tens of thousands of airplane readers who are hungry for titillation or personal relatability.
He demands loyalty, acts as he wills and humiliates anyone who leaves.
Another great one: The Confidence Game by Maria Konnikova.
The single most glaring omission is the absence of "Combating Cult Mind Control" by Steven Hassan. This is the first book to read or listen to about cults, full stop.
His other books ("The Cult of Trump" and "Freedom of Mind") are solid, too.
Of course now it's used on everyone who uses smartphones and social media.
It's a Brave New World, and you're carrying the main tool to mind control you in your pocket. Bonus, you probably pay for it too!
One side is the technology of artful misleading, which is usually much stupider than it sounds.
And another side is a forbidden taboo to speak of. An occult secret that lives like a cancer within us.
Through a sustained art of Power human minds may entangle and manipulate each other at any distance. Counter intuitively, this “esp” is merely consciousness entangled. And some have great skill and others delusional cargo cult “gifts.” Those “gifted” rather than rigorously formed are played in games by their handlers who they themselves cannot perceive perched in their own minds (big spacious brains and all.)
This is how the CIA Stargate programs and those since have largely worked. Overt participants are gamed by handlers who can see in everyone’s minds. It is for those who can “mind trip” to a degree, that functional awareness gradually forms. The basic neurological feedback of being messed with by such “Power” is what causes its development.
It is not that some are “psychic”, it is that all minds may be entangled and some have decades of development “screwing around” in the backs of minds. Their own and others.
The modern occult mindfuck is that consciousness has been hacked.
But it's not informative about cults in the slightest. It's just a caricature of what "satanic panic" [1] people thought a cult was.
Real cults are much more normal, which is why they are so easy to accidentally fall into. The worst cults have pretty mainstream acceptance. Often, they are simply break-offs of already well accepted religions.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_panic