Listen
Cult Dynamics
Inclusive/Exclusive Group Theory:
The Paradox of Inclusion vs. Exclusion
The incongruity of people claiming inclusivity while practicing exclusion has proven a fascinating observation. This contradiction stems from psychological, social, and cultural factors influencing class behaviour.
Understanding why so-called inclusive groups often become exclusionary can help individuals recognize manipulative patterns within faith-based communities, advocacy movements, and social institutions. Below are a few core dynamics driving this phenomenon:
1. In-Group vs Out-Group Dynamics
- Social Identity Theory explains how people categorize themselves and others into groups,
leading toward favouritism of their own (in-group) while discriminating against outsiders or out-group.
Even groups advocating for inclusivity can develop an in-group mentality, which can ultimately lead to exclusion of those who don’t perfectly align with said group’s identity, beliefs and/or values.
Application in Religious Groups: High-control religious environments rely on in-group favouritism to create an “Us vs Them” mindset, reinforcing loyalty to their chosen faith while isolating any seen as dissenters.
2. Tribalism & Ideological Purity
Humans have a natural tendency toward tribalism. Forming tight-knit communities based on shared beliefs, values, and ideologies provides a sense of belonging and security. That written, tribalism often leads to exclusion, for deviation from group convictions can be seen as threatening. Such may lead to:
- Purity Tests: Where individuals must conform to increasingly strict ideological standards to remain in the group.
- Gatekeeping: Where existing members decide who is “Worthy” of participation/consideration in any form, including myriad positions/opportunities, not limited to personal or even romantic relationships.
Application in Religious Groups:
- Individuals questioning doctrine may be deemed “Lukewarm” or “Heretics.”
- Ex-members or outsiders are viewed as corrupt influences or “Apostates.”
- Higher thresholds in purity culture breed hierarchical structures of dominance, seldom holding insiders to stringent measures imposed on outsiders.
3. Cognitive Dissonance & Self-Justification
Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person’s actions conflict with their proclaimed values. To resolve psychological discomfort, individuals often rationalize exclusionary behaviour as necessary or justified.
Example in Faith Settings:
- A religious leader claims to preach love and forgiveness, while shunning any who dare question authority.
- A congregation rejects survivors of abuse rather than addressing documented issues and institutional failures.
Faith should never require self-betrayal. Groups that justify harm under the guise of protecting their beliefs are not spiritual communities, but systems of control.
4. Moral Licensing & Perceived Superiority
Moral licensing occurs when individuals believe publicly perceived “Goodness” in one area, grants them a pass to act immorally in another.
In religious communities, this manifests as:
- Leaders abusing power while believing themselves divinely justified.
- Congregations excusing cruelty, shunning, or judgment because they believe themselves chosen/superior.
Self-righteousness does not excuse harm. Any belief system permitting abuse under illusions of moral superiority are fundamentally corrupt.
5. Power Dynamics & Gatekeeping
People in positions of power often use their influence to control membership. This is done by:
- Creating rigid hierarchies where questioning authority leads to exclusion.
- Gaslighting dissenters by making them doubt their own perception of reality.
- Silencing survivors of spiritual, emotional, or sexual abuse within the group.
Application in Religious Institutions:
- Nepotism: Protecting leaders and their inner circle at the expense of victims.
- “You’re not praying enough” – Blaming members for their suffering instead of acknowledging institutional harm.
- “You’re being led astray” – Using spiritual fear tactics to keep people from questioning authority.
Faith should empower, not control. Any system that demands unquestioning obedience is not about spirituality but submission/oppression.
6. Fear of Change & Comfort in Familiarity
Inclusivity requires change, and change is uncomfortable. Many resist, finding comfort in familiar patterns and absolutism.
In religious groups, this appears as:
- Fear of leaving due to punishment in the form of ostracism, divine wrath and ultimately, Hell.
- Demonization of outsiders to maintain loyalty within the group, compounding abuse.
- Refusal to question doctrine for fear it will destabilize one’s worldview.
True faith embraces growth. A belief system that forbids questions instead of exploring them is one built on control, not conviction.
Breaking the Cycle of Cult-Like Behaviour
To challenge exclusivity and manipulation within religious groups, individuals and organizations must actively:
- Promote Self-Reflection - Encourage individuals to examine their actions to ensure they align with values of love and inclusion.
- Create Spaces for Dialogue - Provide environments where people can discuss harmful religious practices without fear of retaliation.
- Educate on Cultic Influence - Raise awareness on how indoctrination works to help individuals recognize manipulation.
- Hold Leaders Accountable - Expose and address abusive power structures within faith-based communities.
Religious faith should be a path to wisdom, not a weapon of control. If a system demands unquestioning obedience, it does not serve its people – it rules them.