Jonestown Massacre: Social Psychology's Destructive Power - Essay Sample

Introduction

The Jonestown massacre showed the world the destructive power of social psychology when it lands on the wrong hands. 25 years of research into the events that happened in the little-known town in South America, have shown similarities between the mind control techniques used by the Jones, the cult leader, and those described in the fictional book, "1984" by George Orwell. Orwell had a good understanding of social psychology, and several cult leaders have effectively used his depictions of mind control. As a result, social psychologists need to develop remedies to mind control research studies that they conduct. Most of these studies are done for knowledge and understanding of the human mind, but cult leaders take them and use them to advance their agenda, which could have fatal consequences, as it did in Johnstown. The influence of a destructive cult can be resisted by having knowledge of the manipulative techniques employed by cult leaders, developing a healthy self-identity, having high self-esteem, a certain level of pride, avoiding peer pressure, developing healthy self-concept and resisting social influence.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Knowing the techniques and methods used by cult leaders is the first line of defense against joining these organizations. Cult leaders employ a series of scientific techniques to attract followers into their cult. Cult leaders and their trainers have been known to systematically impose social influence that result's in behavioral changes for the cult members (Collins, 1982). The social impacts such as the use of group pressure, isolation, love bombing, self-incrimination, public humiliation, paranoia, and brainwashing. Tactics such as public humiliation and self-incrimination were used by Jim Jones to prevent his cult members from disobeying him (Osherow 2011). Others create the "us vs. them" mentality, which makes one view everyone else as an enemy except for the cult members. Knowing these techniques can help someone know the extent that he or she is willing to go for the sake of the cult.

People would naturally perceive themselves as members of a group (Baron, Bryne & Branscombe, 2006). Such a perception means that people would emphasize and concentrate on how they are similar to their group of social settings. Destructive cults would work to change that perception by changing the mindset of the potential recruit to look at how they are different from other people in their social setting. Through that technique, the cult member breaks down the connections that the recruit had to the rest of the world. They will isolate them from their friends and family. Isolation is one of the main techniques that cult leaders use to recruit and maintain followers. That is done to reshape a person's judgments, beliefs, and practices. The social connections supported by a person form part of their self-identity, and breaking down these social connections allows the cult to reshape the person's self-identity.

It should go without saying that high self-esteem is one of the methods for minimizing compliance with the demands of cult members. A person with low-self esteem is easier to break down and rebuild. People with low self-esteem tend to have less belief in their values and capability. As a result, they will view themselves as helpless in certain situations and likely to obey the directions given to them by the cult master. As a result, low self-esteemed people make for obedient cult members. Studies by Wyatt-Brown (2013), indicates that slave masters used the same techniques to get their slaves to obey their commands. They would break down their self-esteem to a level they can manage, hence reducing the chances of rebellion. While destructive cults are not the same as a slaver, they both thrive under the same principle, where the person being oppressed underestimates their capability to take control of the situation and refuse to comply. But the low-self esteemed members of the society are not the only ones that end up in cults.

Compliance with the demands of destructive cults can be minimized by recognizing and avoiding activities that humiliate and or place the individual in a position of inferiority. Public humiliation is used to break down the confidence and belief of cult members or recruits. These activities can range from simple unorthodox initiation rituals to harsh punishments inflicted on the members to create obedience (Osherow 2011; Milgram 2011 ). These activities are designed to erase self-identity, reduce self-esteem, and increase compliance. These activities don't have to be pain-inflicting. Some may, such as initiation rituals, are packaged as fun activities that introduce the person in the group. A ritual that may seem simple such as walking naked may have ulterior motives. For example, it may make the recruit feel exposed, vulnerable, and lower their dignity. At that point, it becomes easier to convince the recruit to take part in even more humiliating activities designed to humiliate them further.

The influence of destructive cults can also be resisted through recognizing and limiting the impact of group pressure. Ash (2011), conducted experiments to determine the effects of social pressure on an individual. In the experiments, the impact of social pressure was so significant that the participant was changing their answers to be in line with that of the majority, although their first answer was correct. That shows how social pressure can lead someone astray regardless of whether their original path was correct. Cults lure in people using social pressure. They would use a person's social connections to gain access to the individual. Some people are led into cults through their spouses, children, and even friends. It gets easier if the new recruit sees a person they know and trust in the group. The cult leaders use such familiar social connections to apply pressure on the potential recruit to join the cult. The group pressure is so significant that it is likely to overcome those who had previously successful lives. That is how people who previously had successful and productive lives end getting sucked into cults. Some psychologists refer to it as the "we" philosophy. That is, "we have the truth, you do not have" (Collins, 1982). As a result, not bowing to social pressure is one of the ways someone can overcome the allure of joining a destructive cult.

A strong self-concept is needed to overcome the influence of destructive cults. Self-concept can be defined as the beliefs and ideas that someone holds about self. A staunch idea of self-concept can resist compliance with the demands of a destructive cult if they are independent. The self-concept of a person is affected by a lot of factors such as culture and gender. According to Baron et al. (2006), people from individualistic cultures are expected to have an independent self-concept that is separate from those of others. Men are also to have a more independent self-concept as compared to women. Women are expected to develop their self-concept depending on their connections and relationships with others hence resulting in interdependent self-concept (Baron et al., 2006). Social forces that are present in a destructive cult setting are used to influence the self-concept that people have. Unfortunately, the social forces not can change a person to participate in activities that they would not have previously thought of.

An experiment conducted by Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo (1973), wanted to find the impact of social pressures on emergent behavior. In the experiment, the researchers simulated a prison setting to identify how both the guards and the prisoners responded to their role-playing, labeling, and social expectations. Despite the participants being students, the experiment quickly escalated as the guards started displaying increasingly aggressive behavior that forced the researchers to call the experiment (Haney et al., 1973). It was one of the most critical experiments in the field of social psychology because it indicated just how powerful social forces could be in influencing individual behaviors, including self-concept. Some of the actions performed by the guards would never have been performed in a typical environment because it went against their beliefs and virtues. But seeing other people doing the same actions somehow made it more comfortable. The same logic applies in a cult setting where close friends and relatives within the cult would tolerate and, in some cases, take part in harmful activities towards one of their own because of the social forces. One should, therefore, develop boundaries in their life. Make sure they establish those lines which they are not willing and will not cross at whatever cost. Such limits will prevent one from getting pushed by social pressures and end up committing despicable acts against themselves, or their fellow humans.

Conclusion

Cults appeal to some of the most basic human needs, such as the need to belong. The allure of being in a group setting with people who seem to hold similar beliefs and seek to achieve one goal can be appealing to many people. Although not all cults are destructive, the ones that end up being destructive started as a regular harmless gathering of people with the same beliefs. Ultimately most people are usually in too deep into the cult by the time the cult turns destructive. Most remedies for minimizing compliance with the demands of a deadly cult require confidence in one's abilities. The concepts of self-identity, self-esteem, self-efficacy, pride, and self-concepts are beneficial for minimizing compliance with cult demands. It is difficult to identify the destructive power of a cult as that power usually lies with one person, who is the cult leader. The more delusional the leader is, the higher the chances of the cult turning destructive. Therefore, people need to set the boundaries of the extent they are willing to go before deciding to join a cult regardless of whether it is harmful or not.

References

Asch, E. S. (2011). Opinions and Social Pressure. In A. Joshua & E. Elliot (Eds.), Readings about the social animal (pp. 17-26). Worth Publishers.

Baron, R. A., Byrne, D., & Branscombe, N. R. (2006). Social psychology, 11/E. Aufl, Boston.

Collins, G. (1982, March 15). The psychology of the cult experience. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/1982/03/15/style/the-psychology-of-the-cult-experience.html

Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1972). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison (No. ONR-TR-Z-09). STANFORD UNIV CA DEPT OF PSYCHOLOGY.

Milgram, S. (2011). Behavioral study of obedience. In A. Joshua & E. Elliot (Eds.), Readings about the social animal (pp. 17-26). Worth Publishers.

Osherow, N. (2011). Making sense of nonsensical: An analysis of Johnstown. In A. Joshua & E. Elliot (Eds.), Readings about the social animal (pp. 17-26). Worth Publishers.

Wyatt-Brown, B. (2013). The mask of obedience: Male slave psychology in the Old South. In Society and Culture in the Slave South (pp. 134-167). Routledge.