I grew up a Jehovah's Witness (now attend a Presbyterian Church), and every piece of data in this article that touches them is bullshit.
The idea that gold-rimmed glasses are banned is just bizarre. You may see a different pair of Witnesses come by at different times because that was who was out that day, not because there is any tactic. There are no "immediate superiors." You are not disfellowshipped for "questioning an order," the idea that you even get "orders" is foolish. I suppose that idleness is a sin in some vague way, but it's not highlighted, and is no more so than for other Christians (ie., the Protestant work ethic). You can't lie or cheat, but you can drink. Maybe he's thinking Baptists? Also, you are not allowed to "lie for the cause." Witnesses don't refuse medical treatments in general, but do refuse blood transfusions.
Getting every single point wrong takes some special talent.
So I assume everything else in the article about similar (or more cultish groups) is also wrong, though I am not an expert.
On the other hand, someone should definitely write an article about why the Apostle Paul was a great startup founder.
As an ex-Jehovah's Witness, I agree this article gets a lot of things wrong. But they also are a crazy cult. I suggest the book "Crisis of Conscience" from an ex-governing body member if you're interested in JW's seedy history[1]. They started as a numerology-obsessed doomsday cult and evolved from there - the last time JWs sold off their possessions in anticipation of the end of the world was 1974, but it wasn't the first time. Today things aren't quite as bad, but they're still bad:
1) I wasn't allowed to have non-Jehovah's Witness friends or participate in after-school activities
2) Higher education was discouraged (I understood that it had been prohibited in earlier years, but they liberalized with the times). The idea is that you should spend your life serving the lord and not seeking material gain.
3) Reading non-Jehovah's Witness books on religious topics is prohibited. Some of the Church Services ("meetings") consist of reading verbatim word-for-word material handed down from the central organization ("the society"). Sermons ("talks") are written by cobbling together recent material put out by the society.
4) They practice shunning of ex-members (JWs will not talk to an ex-JW. I have no friends from childhood that will speak to me)
5) They do require a huge time commitment - door-to-door ("field service") at least once a week and three meetings per week.
6) They believe all other religions are products of the devil, sent to deceive mankind. Theirs is the only correct one.
With respect, I don't think the article gets every point wrong, but there may be some merit in what you have written.
I did a bit of reading. First, if you search the web, you can find articles about wire-rimmed glasses being banned for some period of time in some Jehovah's Witness congregations. I didn't find anything about gold-rimmed glasses specifically:
I'm not sure I would link a source that is about "Christian and Mayan spirituality and our approach to health and fitness" that gets all its information from a site called towerwatch.com with the motto "Helping Christians Reach Jehovah's Witnesses with the Gospel of Our Savior Jesus Christ".
The Organisation as they call it is hierarchical. That's why you have elders, district overseers, governing body, etc. I've seen elders stepped down for not being perfect examples of fathers in their own families, or if one of their children are disassociated. People do get disassociated for challenging the order in the way of not following rules. They also regularly guilt trip their members for their idleness. Not having highlighted the answers in your Watchtower for example before the Sunday meeting must mean you don't do Bible study with your family like good parents. Pioneers (people who door knock full time) must complete so many hours of services per month.
I'm an ex-JW, I only lasted 1 year. If I had the same mentality that I have now back when I was 13- I would launch a service in highlighting people's answers. It would have been a hit for highschool kids and college kids who need to study. I won't be surprised if there is some type of underground website of kids sharing answers and what not.
I grew up a Witness too (left some time ago). I like the spirit of the article but the inaccuracies do undermine the credibility of their sources. Here's what they got wrong:
"...talk about... New Light and the Ark of Salvation".
New light is the term used in Watchtower publications whenever doctrine is changed. It's not something that would be discussed with potential converts (householders to use their parlance). Ark of Salvation I'd never heard used in the over 16 years while attending (it could of course be a new or older term).
"...lead Witness would bring along a different assistant. ...according to accounts from people who have left the sect - it’s quite deliberate and it’s designed to get you hooked."
This wasn't a tactic I'd seen used or was told to use for return visits (returning to an interested person's house) or bible studies (reading and answering questions with them from a Watchtower publication). It wasn't stipulated in the publications used to direct the ministry: Our Kingdom Ministry or Organised to Accomplish Our Ministry.
"It is forbidden to wear gold rimmed glasses in the Jehovah’s Witnesses"
Completely wrong. I knew several Elders (local leaders of the congregation) who did.
"Anyone who questions an order is kicked out for ‘disfellowship’"
I did question fundamental Witness doctrine (no blood transfusions, smoking, no birthdays) and I wasn't disciplined in any way. Just like questioning your bosses decisions at work it's at their whim how they take it: if you're disciplined or not. Disfellowshipping (shunning of congregation members) isn't rare and it does happen for questioning doctrine ('apostasy') but the extreme statement made is not correct.
"every member has many basic duties... sell crafts"
No. Jehovah's Witnesses don't do these typical church coffee morning/bingo type fundraising activities. They only accept donations from the public for publications and personally donate money as they wish.
"cannot... drink"
Wrong. Alcohol in the congregations I attended was treated in the same way the general public treat it.
There were a couple of year that buying a functional motorcycle from HD was difficult. It was more buy the cycle and fix it (or get someone to fix it for you).
In other words, the market "makes" people who aren't really vulgar act like they are? I'd rather say caring about money first and foremost itself is a symptom of vulgarity.
I started out reading because I thought it might be interesting. I continued to read only to see what else they'd get wrong. Of the referenced things of which I have some knowledge and experience (Harley's and their owners, for example), they got it fundamentally wrong. I can only assume they were just as inaccurate with the things I don't know much about.
To back my assertion, let's take Harley as an example. HOGs (which really are members of Harley's paid Harley Owners Group club, not Hells Angels members) were scaring off the well-to-do customers? The outlaw biker image is what kept HD in business. You may be an orthodontist during the week, but you can play dress-up and be a bad ass biker on the weekend. I don't when the lawyers were scars to buy a HD, but it hasn't been in the last 35 years that I've been riding.
It seems like the author started out with a premise, and then either pulled facts to suit their point, distorted the facts, or just plain made shit up.
The article implies that Linux had a planned marketing strategy (like a cult) .. I dont agree with this, I am pretty sure that the growth was quite disorganized, it just happened to be a better product.
Which is a great parallel with organized religions, where "better products" in their times raised to be the mainstream.
There is one hallmark of a cult which this document misses: there is no legitimate reason for leaving a cult.
From the cult member's perspective, this is really a manifestation of the problem of induction. Everything is going great (the article's "love bombing" phase) until one day you want to leave or break a rule or both, and then in an instant everything is upside down and you lose everything.
I guess the business equivalent would be switching costs: leaving the Apple ecosystem is rough for your iTunes collection. For most people this really pales in comparison to the losing-all-your-friends pain of leaving a cult, but maybe not for a hipster.
That "switching cost" doesn't just apply to cults. I know for sure it applies to at least certain streams of Islam and Judaism. I wouldn't be surprised (but don't know for sure) if it applied to certain streams of Christianity too.
You may consider those religious streams cults at your own discretion :)
1. I don't like the term "cult" and the baggage associated with it. "Cult" seems to mean "religion with fewer than 10 million adherents". The more politically correct (but also more useful term) is NRM: New Religious Movement. They don't all end up here: http://walkthrough.starmen.net/earthbound/image/maps/happyha... . Forming communities is one of the major reasons why people subscribe to religions of all sizes (anxiety about death isn't it, contrary to modern claims; although few are sure exactly what ancient people believed, belief in gods seems to pre-date belief in a desirable afterlife by millennia) and the power law dynamic of community formation applies. Small doesn't mean "bad".
2. Corporations themselves are like cults in accord with this depiction, between the largely unnecessary administrative hierarchies, the drudge work, the unquestionable assertions from authority, and the us-versus-them mentality. Many gods are fictional psychopaths invented by ambitious people for material gain, and many corporations are... well, the same. Quite literally, corporations are treated as persons despite their psychopathic lack of balance and humanity, much like that of an ancient god.
3. VC-istan is a cult for avowed non-cultists or, to continue the company-as-cult metaphor, an atheist religion. Instead of executives, it's VCs at the top. Instead of PMs, the middling ranks are full of EIRs and "founders" who aren't taking real risks because the VCs have already decided who's in the in-crowd (if they don't like an idea but you're in their world, they "mentor" you till you converge on something they'll fund). Instead of "middle managers", there are "tech leads". Startup equity (disbursed, to rank and file, at insulting low levels) is designed to make worker bees feel like owners (and put in long hours) and bullshit perks are used to create a "halfway house" college feel for people forced into prolonged adolescence by high housing prices and social sacrifice. Instead of managers meeting behind closed doors to decide your year end "performance" bonus based on political factors, investors and large-company purchasers meet behind closed doors to discuss the acqui-hire that will determine your financial future... but it's the same thing.
4. Man, I think I'd be good at starting a cult. Maybe I should Kickstart that shit.
TBH, when I see the word cult, I think of culture, which leads to a community. So when you say people subscribe for the community, it's completely understandable.
The idea that gold-rimmed glasses are banned is just bizarre. You may see a different pair of Witnesses come by at different times because that was who was out that day, not because there is any tactic. There are no "immediate superiors." You are not disfellowshipped for "questioning an order," the idea that you even get "orders" is foolish. I suppose that idleness is a sin in some vague way, but it's not highlighted, and is no more so than for other Christians (ie., the Protestant work ethic). You can't lie or cheat, but you can drink. Maybe he's thinking Baptists? Also, you are not allowed to "lie for the cause." Witnesses don't refuse medical treatments in general, but do refuse blood transfusions.
Getting every single point wrong takes some special talent. So I assume everything else in the article about similar (or more cultish groups) is also wrong, though I am not an expert.
On the other hand, someone should definitely write an article about why the Apostle Paul was a great startup founder.