Editing Brainwashing (section)

==Anti-cult movement==
{{Main|Anti-cult movement}}

[[File:Philip_Zimbardo_(cropped).jpg|thumb|upright|[[Philip Zimbardo]]]]
In the 1970s and 1980s, the anti-cult movement applied the concept of brainwashing to explain [[religious conversion]]s to some [[new religious movement]]s (NRMs) and other groups that they considered [[cults]].<ref name="BromleyEncy">{{cite book|chapter=Brainwashing|last=Bromley|first= David G.|year=1998|pages=61–62|title=Encyclopedia of Religion and Society|editor=William H. Swatos Jr.|publisher=AltaMira|location=Walnut Creek, CA|isbn=978-0-7619-8956-1}}</ref><ref>Barker, Eileen: ''New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction''. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1989.</ref> News media reports tended to accept their view<ref name="Wright">{{cite journal|author=Wright, Stewart A.|year=1997|title=Media Coverage of Unconventional Religion: Any 'Good News' for Minority Faiths?|journal=Review of Religious Research|volume=39|issue=2|pages=101–115|doi=10.2307/3512176|jstor=3512176}}</ref> and [[social scientists]] sympathetic to the anti-cult movement, who were usually [[psychologists]], revised models of brainwashing.<ref name="BromleyEncy" /> While some psychologists were receptive to the concept, most sociologists were skeptical of its ability to explain conversion.<ref name="BarkerAReview">{{cite journal|author=Barker, Eileen|year=1986|title=Religious Movements: Cult and Anti-Cult Since Jonestown|journal=Annual Review of Sociology|volume=12|pages=329–346|doi=10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.001553}}</ref> Some critics of [[Mormonism]] have accused it of brainwashing.<ref name="Helfrich 2021 p. 15">{{cite book | last=Helfrich | first=R. | title=Mormon Studies: A Critical History | publisher=McFarland, Incorporated, Publishers | year=2021 | isbn=978-1-4766-4511-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tFlXEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA15 | access-date=2023-06-15 | page=15 | archive-date=14 October 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231014211739/https://books.google.com/books?id=tFlXEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA15 | url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Philip Zimbardo]] defined mind control as "the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition or behavioral outcomes."<ref name="Zimbardo 2002">{{cite journal|last=Zimbardo|first=Philip G.|author-link=Philip Zimbardo|date=November 2002|title=Mind Control: Psychological Reality or Mindless Rhetoric?|journal=Monitor on Psychology|url=http://www.icsahome.com/articles/mind-control-zimbardo|access-date=2016-06-02|quote=Mind control is the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition or behavioral outcomes. It is neither magical nor mystical, but a process that involves a set of basic social psychological principles. Conformity, compliance, persuasion, dissonance, reactance, guilt and fear arousal, modeling, and identification are some of the staple social influence ingredients well-studied in psychological experiments and field studies. In some combinations, they create a powerful crucible of extreme mental and behavioral [[Psychological manipulation|manipulation]] when synthesized with several other real-world factors, such as charismatic, authoritarian leaders, dominant ideologies, social isolation, physical debilitation, induced phobias, and extreme threats or promised rewards that are typically deceptively orchestrated, over an extended time period in settings where they are applied intensively. A body of social science evidence shows that when systematically practiced by state-sanctioned police, military or destructive cults, mind control can induce false confessions, create converts who willingly torture or kill 'invented enemies,' and engage indoctrinated members to work tirelessly, give up their money—and even their lives—for 'the cause.'|archive-date=4 July 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160704120313/http://www.icsahome.com/articles/mind-control-zimbardo}}</ref> He suggested that any human being is susceptible to such manipulation.<ref name="Zimbardo 1997 14">{{cite journal|last=Zimbardo|first=P|author-link=Philip Zimbardo|url=http://www.csj.org/studyindex/studycult/study_zimbar.htm|page=14|title=What messages are behind today's cults?|journal=Monitor on Psychology|year=1997|access-date=1 October 2009|archive-date=2 May 1998|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/19980502070642/http://csj.org/studyindex/studycult/study_zimbar.htm}}</ref>

[[Benjamin Zablocki]], late professor of sociology at [[Rutgers University]] said that the number of people who attest to brainwashing in interviews (performed in accordance with guidelines of the [[National Institute of Mental Health]] and [[National Science Foundation]]) is too large to result from anything other than a genuine phenomenon.<ref name="zablocki-p194-201">{{cite book|last=Zablocki|first=Benjamin|title=Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field|year=2001|publisher=U of Toronto Press|isbn=978-0-8020-8188-9|pages=194–201}}</ref> He said that in the two most prestigious journals dedicated to the [[sociology of religion]] there have been no articles "supporting the brainwashing perspective," while over one hundred such articles have been published in other journals "marginal to the field."<ref name="Zablocki1998">{{cite journal|title=TReply to Bromley|journal=Nova Religio|date=April 1998|first=Benjamin.|last=Zablocki|volume=1|issue=2|pages=267–271|doi=10.1525/nr.1998.1.2.267}}</ref> He concluded that the concept of brainwashing had been [[blacklisted]].<ref name="Zablocki1997">{{cite journal|journal=Nova Religio|date=October 1997|first=Benjamin.|last=Zablocki|volume=1|issue=1|pages=96–121|doi=10.1525/nr.1997.1.1.96|title=The Blacklisting of a Concept: The Strange History of the Brainwashing Conjecture in the Sociology of Religion }}</ref><ref name="Zablocki1998" /><ref>Phil Zuckerman. ''Invitation to the Sociology of Religion''. Psychology Press, 24 July 2003 p. 28 {{ISBN?}}</ref>

[[Eileen Barker]] criticized the concept of brainwashing because it functioned to justify costly interventions such as [[deprogramming]] or exit counseling.<ref name="Rusher">[https://web.archive.org/web/20050415093632/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_v38/ai_4580948 Review], [[William Rusher]], ''[[National Review]]'', 19 December 1986.</ref> She has also criticized some mental health professionals, including Singer, for accepting expert witness jobs in court cases involving NRMs.<ref name="BarkerJoke">{{cite journal|author=Barker, Eileen|year=1995|title=The Scientific Study of Religion? You Must Be Joking!|journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion|volume=34|issue=3|pages=287–310|doi=10.2307/1386880|jstor=1386880}}</ref> Barker's 1984 book, ''[[The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing?]]'',<ref>[[Eileen Barker]], ''The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing?'', [[Blackwell's|Blackwell Publishers]], Oxford, United Kingdom, {{ISBN|0-631-13246-5}}.</ref> describes the religious conversion process to the [[Unification Church]] (whose members are sometimes informally referred to as ''[[Moonie (nickname)|Moonies]]''), which had been one of the best-known groups said to practice brainwashing.<ref name="Barker2012">[http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/03/my-take-moons-death-marks-end-of-an-era/ Moon's death marks end of an era] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190829065856/http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/03/my-take-moons-death-marks-end-of-an-era/ |date=29 August 2019 }}, [[Eileen Barker]], [[CNN]], 3 September 2012, Although Moon is likely to be remembered for all these things—mass weddings, accusations of brainwashing, political intrigue and enormous wealth—he should also be remembered as creating what was arguably one of the most comprehensive and innovative theologies embraced by a new religion of the period.</ref><ref name="usatoday2012-09-02a">{{cite news|url=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-09-02/unification-church-rev-moon-dies/57537454/1|title=Unification Church founder Rev. Sun Myung Moon dies at 92|author=Hyung-Jin Kim|work=USA Today|issn=0734-7456|date=2 September 2012|access-date=2 September 2012|quote=The Rev. Sun Myung Moon was a self-proclaimed messiah who built a global business empire. He called both North Korean leaders and American presidents his friends but spent time in prisons in both countries. His followers around the world cherished him, while his detractors accused him of brainwashing recruits and extracting money from worshippers.|archive-date=29 September 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120929230011/http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-09-02/unification-church-rev-moon-dies/57537454/1}}</ref> Barker spent close to seven years studying Unification Church members and wrote that she rejects the "brainwashing" theory because it does not explain why many people attended a recruitment meeting and did not become members nor why so many members voluntarily disaffiliate or leave groups.<ref name="Rusher" /><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20060618211708/http://web.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/diskus/chryssides.html New Religious Movements – Some Problems of Definition] [[George Chryssides]], ''Diskus'', 1997.</ref><ref>[http://faculty.arec.umd.edu/cmcausland/RALi/The%20Market%20for%20Martyrs.pdf The Market for Martyrs] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111212356/http://faculty.arec.umd.edu/cmcausland/RALi/The%20Market%20for%20Martyrs.pdf|date=11 January 2012 }}, [[Laurence Iannaccone]], [[George Mason University]], 2006, "One of the most comprehensive and influential studies was ''The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing?'' by Eileen Barker (1984). Barker could find no evidence that Moonie recruits were ever kidnapped, confined, or coerced. Participants at Moonie retreats were not [[deprived of sleep]]; the lectures were not "trance-inducing" and there was not much chanting, no drugs or alcohol, and little that could be termed a "frenzy" or "ecstatic" experience. People were free to leave, and leave they did. Barker's extensive enumerations showed that among the recruits who went so far as to attend two-day retreats (claimed to be Moonie's most effective means of "brainwashing"), fewer than 25% joined the group for more than a week, and only 5% remained full-time members one year later. And, of course, most contacts dropped out before attending a retreat. Of all those who visited a Moonie center at least once, not one in two hundred remained in the movement two years later. With failure rates exceeding 99.5%, it comes as no surprise that full-time Moonie membership in the U.S. never exceeded a few thousand. And this was one of the most successful New Religious Movements of the era!"</ref><ref>Oakes, Len "By far the best study of the conversion process is Eileen Barker's ''The Making of a Moonie [...]''" from ''Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities'', 1997, {{ISBN|0-8156-0398-3}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Storr |first=Anthony |author-link=Anthony Storr |title=Feet of clay: a study of gurus |year=1996 |publisher=Simon and Schuster |isbn=0-684-83495-2}}</ref>

[[James Richardson (sociologist)|James Richardson]] said that if the new religious movements had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that they would have high growth rates, yet in fact, most have not had notable success in recruiting or retaining members.<ref name="Richardson1985">{{cite journal|title=The active vs. passive convert: paradigm conflict in conversion/recruitment research|journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion|date=June 1985|first=James T.|last=Richardson|volume=24|issue=2|pages=163–179|doi=10.2307/1386340|jstor=1386340}}</ref> For this and other reasons, sociologists of religion including [[David G. Bromley|David Bromley]] and [[Anson Shupe]] consider the idea that "cults" are brainwashing American youth to be implausible.<ref name="brain_wash">{{cite web|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/brain_wa.htm|title=Brainwashing by Religious Cults|work=religioustolerance.org|access-date=23 November 2004|archive-date=19 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120419010810/http://www.religioustolerance.org/brain_wa.htm}}</ref>

[[Thomas Robbins (sociologist)|Thomas Robbins]], [[Massimo Introvigne]], [[Lorne Dawson]], [[Gordon Melton]], [[Marc Galanter (psychiatrist)|Marc Galanter]], and [[Saul Levine]], amongst other scholars researching NRMs, have argued and established to the satisfaction of courts, relevant professional associations and scientific communities that there exists no generally accepted scientific theory, based upon methodologically sound research, that supports the concept of brainwashing.<ref>Richardson, James T. 2009. "Religion and The Law" in ''The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Religion''. Peter Clarke. (ed) Oxford Handbooks Online. p. 426</ref>

In 1999, [[forensic psychologist]] [[Dick Anthony]] criticized another adherent to this view, [[Jean-Marie Abgrall]], for allegedly employing a [[pseudo-scientific|pseudoscientific]] approach and lacking any evidence that anyone's [[worldview]] was substantially changed by these coercive methods. He claimed that the concept and the fear surrounding it was used as a tool for the anti-cult movement to rationalize the persecution of minority religious groups.<ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1023/A:1022081411463| volume=12| issue=4| title=Pseudoscience and Minority Religions: An Evaluation of the Brainwashing Theories of Jean-Marie Abgrall| journal=Social Justice Research| pages=421–456|year = 1999|last1 = Anthony|first1 = Dick| s2cid=140454555 }}</ref> Additionally, Anthony, in the book ''[[Misunderstanding Cults]]'', argues that the term "brainwashing" has such [[Sensationalism|sensationalist]] [[connotation]]s that its use is detrimental to any further scientific inquiry.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field |title-link=Misunderstanding Cults |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-8020-8188-9 |editor-last=Zablocki |editor-first=Benjamin |editor-link=Benjamin Zablocki |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=pJ9Nmc25xNAC&q=sensationalist+connotations&pg=PA21 21] |language=en |chapter=Introduction: Finding a Middle Ground in a Polarized Scholarly Arena |editor-last2=Robbins |editor-first2=Thomas |editor-link2=Thomas Robbins (sociologist)}}</ref>

In 2016, Israeli anthropologist of religion and fellow at the [[Van Leer Jerusalem Institute]] Adam Klin-Oron said about then proposed "anti-cult" legislation: 
{{Blockquote|In the 1980s there was a wave of 'brainwashing' claims, and then parliaments around the world examined the issue, courts around the world examined the issue, and reached a clear ruling: That there is no such thing as cults…that the people making these claims are often not experts on the issue. And in the end courts, including in Israel, rejected expert witnesses who claimed there is "brainwashing."<ref>[http://www.timesofisrael.com/will-israels-first-anti-cult-legislation-harm-religious-freedom] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171019202350/http://www.timesofisrael.com/will-israels-first-anti-cult-legislation-harm-religious-freedom/ |date=19 October 2017 }}, ''[[Times of Israel]]''</ref>}}