The feedback from the Universal Medicine group, its followers, some members of the public and even affected families can give one the impression that there is a question mark remaining over whether Universal Medicine is a cult. There is a general misunderstanding of the nature of cults in the public at large, however the implacable nature of UM as a cult is not in a shadow of doubt to the well-informed. The only question is, what trajectory is the group following as they tend to have an arc of development?
I’ve cut and pasted a commonly used cult evaluation chart (the FBI have used this for cult evaluation in the US). The higher the score the more potential danger the group poses. Of course, the rankings are subjective and dependent on your knowledge of the group’s machinations. I’ve put my score in bold next to each question. (Don’t let it influence you, which of course is now quite impossible- ah, the irony)
The commonly held misapprehension is that members are held against their will in a compound or tricked into slavish adherence to the group and its leaders after a honeymoon period. While groups do exist like this, the vast majority of contemporary groups are ‘open cults’. That is, the members more or less function as they would have done before being recruited by the cult. Many cult members ‘feel good’ and this takes precedence over logic and inconsistencies. In the case of Serge ( and like many narcissistic cult leaders) this means ignoring glaring integrity issues and questionable ethics. The accountability website has done an sensational job of highlighting many of those.


Members of these groups- UM included- are not aware that theirs is a cult and that their leader suffers from a personality disorder. If they did, then the group could and would not exist. It is in a sense, easier to believe the grandiose claims of the cult leader, than the far simpler truth that their leader has a personality malfunction. The payoff is a sense of purpose, community, and superiority ( poorly masked by love-speak).
At the limits, the metaphoric walls that keep members contained are sets of behviours that are dictated (or offered as choices) by the group ( for UM that is food, music, sport, relationships, sexual behaviour, feminine identity, art, information) and the ‘penalty’ for leaving which is usually a spiritual punishment; the thought of which is ineffable and subsumes the logic of making a rational choice based on the information at hand. In the case of UM this is bad karma, further bad incarnations, going down the imaginary initiation scale, not becoming an initiate or member of the ‘hierarchy’; and of course rejection by the group mind which is extremely powerful. There exist groups that hold a real gun to their heads of the members, but they are few. The metaphoric gun for modern groups is turning the mind of the follower against itself, by keeping them sufficiently simultaneously dumbly happy and confused therefore disabling their sense of mortal and spiritual danger.
The stakes have risen for Serge in the last year. Rather arrogantly (one of his favourite words) he predicted the ‘new era’ and imagined himself as it’s chief advocate. In his mind Universal Medicine was a growing force ready to take on the world. Instead, he has been met with a steady stream of right-minded criticism and the soured fruits of his efforts- a wall of distraught families and unhappy partners. His medicine has been exposed as a large scale scam and his business practices called into question. Whether he knows it or not, the relevant agencies are aware of his every move and the sins of his the past and present. Long forgotten ghosts no doubt will come back to haunt him. What we need to remain vigilant of now is Serge ratcheting up the rhetoric out of an understandable sense of paranoia and foreboding. He and the group are currently following the cult-under-pressure play book to a tee. And there’s more revelations to come.
For people with loved ones in the group, keep an eye on your family member and remember, arguments won’t get them out. Real love just might.
**********************************************************************************************
The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame
Factors:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Low High
1 Internal Control: Amount of internal political and social power exercised by leader(s) over members; lack of clearly defined organizational rights for members. 10
_________________________
2 External Control: Amount of external political and social influence desired or obtained; emphasis on directing members’ external political and social behavior. 8 – increasing steadily with RMRC, womens groups etc
_________________________
3 Wisdom/Knowledge Claimed by leader(s); amount of infallibility declared or implied about decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations; number and degree of unverified and/or unverifiable credentials claimed. 12- Serge is off the scale here.
_________________________
4 Wisdom/Knowledge Credited to leader(s) by members; amount of trust in decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations made by leader(s); amount of hostility by members towards internal or external critics and/or towards verification efforts. 12- Serge is off the scale here also
_________________________
5 Dogma: Rigidity of reality concepts taught; amount of doctrinal inflexibility or “fundamentalism;” hostility towards relativism and situationalism. 12- Serge is also off the scale here ( surprised?)
_________________________
6 Recruiting: Emphasis put on attracting new members; amount of proselytizing; requirement for all members to bring in new ones. 10- UM has a very clever model of focusing on women health issues and word of mouth, plus satellite agencies of ‘practitioners’ that have paid for the privilege to recruit for UM/Serge
_________________________
7 Front Groups: Number of subsidiary groups using different names from that of main group, especially when connections are hidden. 10- Oops like Serge hits the mark here too.
_________________________
8 Wealth: Amount of money and/or property desired or obtained by group; emphasis on members’ donations; economic lifestyle of leader(s) compared to ordinary members. 10- And again… surprising? Not really.
_________________________
9 Sexual Manipulation of members by leader(s) of non-tantric groups; amount of control exercised over sexuality of members in terms of sexual orientation, behavior, and/or choice of partners. 12- Yes. He’s a royal flush. His mass scale manipulation of the sexuality of his members is monumental. What he does more privately is yet to be examined.
_________________________
10 Sexual Favoritism: Advancement or preferential treatment dependent upon sexual activity with the leader(s) of non-tantric groups. 10- Based purely on the pretty girls that stay with the Benhayons sent from overseas and interstate, and the known activity of match-making for his own children, ex-wife and favoured inner members.
_________________________
11 Censorship: Amount of control over members’ access to outside opinions on group, its doctrines or leader(s). 10- Members are told which books to read, to avoid newspapers, dissenting sites, and to clear books they have to read of bad energy.
_________________________
12 Isolation: Amount of effort to keep members from communicating with non-members, including family, friends and lovers. 8- They havent perfected this yet. But they make an effort when they know someone is dissenting.
_________________________
13 Dropout Control: Intensity of efforts directed at preventing or returning dropouts. 7- Not sure of this internal mechanism.
_________________________
14 Violence: Amount of approval when used by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s). 2- That is giving Serge the benefit of the doubt.
_________________________
15 Paranoia: Amount of fear concerning real or imagined enemies; exaggeration of perceived power of opponents; prevalence of conspiracy theories. 10- Large scale paranoia of imaginary enemies and persecution from past life times.
_________________________
16 Grimness: Amount of disapproval concerning jokes about the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 10- They don’t like a joke at all.
_________________________
17 Surrender of Will: Amount of emphasis on members not having to be responsible for personal decisions; degree of individual disempowerment created by the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 10- While its alleged it is a choice, that is false. The members are totally dis-empowered from differing opinions to Serge and other members.
_________________________
18 Hypocrisy: amount of approval for actions which the group officially considers immoral or unethical, when done by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s); willingness to violate the group’s declared principles for political, psychological, social, economic, military, or other gain. 15- Serge’s assertions are completely at odds with his own behaviour past and present.
_________________________