In cults and the social justice movement, the cult is always right

Within a cult, the cult doctrine is sacred. It can never change, and it can never be criticized. This is true even when the doctrine contradicts itself.

In her book, Cults in our Midst, cult psychologist Margaret Thaler Singer explains that cult doctrine is protected with a closed system of logic.

If you criticize or complain, the leader or peers allege that you are defective, not the organization. In this closed system of logic, you are not allowed to question or doubt a tenet or rule or to call attention to factual information that suggests some internal contradiction within the belief system. If you do make such observations, they may be turned around and argued to mean the opposite of what you intended. You are made to feel that you are wrong. In cultic groups, the individual member is always wrong, and the system is always right.

You are always wrong, the cult is always right.

For example, let’s look to Antifa. Antifa is infamous for violence against people they disagree with. So much so, that in an all-too predictable move, they threatened violence at UBC in order to shut down an event discussing Antifa’s violence. Since then, they’ve also assaulted a Democratic Socialist politician in Texas. And that’s just in the last few weeks.

But if you dare to oppose Antifa for this behaviour, you will quickly be admonished as a fascist. The logic being, Antifa stands for “Anti Fascist”, so anyone opposing them is therefore pro fascism.

Of course, the idea that we should judge a group by their name, rather than their actions, is ridiculous. The use of a label as a means of defense also illustrates the cult manipulation strategy of language loading.

Remember; you are always wrong, the cult is always right.

Or we have the case of biological men competing against biological women in women’s sports. Of course, women’s sports were invented to give women a level playing field on which to compete, since women simply aren’t competitive with men in terms of muscle mass, height, weight, bone density, lung capacity, etc.

But women who speak out against biological males competing in female sports are told that they are the problem.

This is coming from trans athlete Dr. Rachel McKinnon, a biological male who set a world record in women’s cycling.

The hypocrisy of McKinnon’s statement is outstanding.

But–you are always wrong, the cult is always right.

Most disturbingly, we see how social justice treats parents who do not bow to cult doctrine. It’s normal for parents to refuse to allow their child any kind of permanent body modifications, such as tattoos or piercings, until they are legal adults. It’s also normal for parents to refuse invasive, experimental medical treatments for their children. If children are suicidal because they are unhappy with their bodies (such as in the case of anorexia), it’s normal to send the child to counseling or a rehabilitation center to develop a positive body image.

But what about when your 13-year-old daughter wants to halt puberty, take drugs to grow a beard instead of breasts, and send herself down a path towards sex change surgery, all while permanently sterilizing herself?

Well, in that case, any opposition to these procedures makes you a terrible parent, if not downright abusive. You’ll barely escape charges of “family violence” for even attempting to talk your child out of it.

Not that it will matter, of course; because when it comes to healthcare for your child, you are always wrong, the cult is always right.

The fact that the father was not allowed to talk to the press about this story also contributes to the strategy of control of the environment; there are no interviews showing the father’s side of the story, or the side effects that such treatment would entail. There aren’t even comments open on the article, leaving us with only one perspective.

Looking at another manipulation strategy, we see that one of the tenants of social justice states that certain identity groups are oppressed, and therefore, no one outside the group should be allowed to criticize it. For example, everyone with a non-LGBT sexual orientation or identity needs to suspend any criticism on all things involving LGBT subjects, including legislation, school curriculum, public events, etc.

But, because social justice doctrine must be protected from all criticism from everyone, we end up with the concepts of internalized homophobia, internalized racism, internalized misogyny, etc. This means that people are shamed and cancelled for criticizing the actions of their identity groups.