Just a quick note on definitions - what most people refer to as a cult is technically a 'sect' - which is a tight-knit group of people with specific shared beliefs. The whole David Koresh thing, for example, that was a sect, not a cult.
A cult, at least in the sociology of religion, refers to a loser network of people - something like the new age movement, with more disparate beliefs - hence maybe the link between the words cult and culture.
So being part of an off-grid movement, you may be part of a cult! But not a sect, unless you progress/ regress deep into the woods, cut yourself off completely and develop your own tight doctrine of rules that all your clearly delineated members MUST subscribe to!
Of course, neither sects nor cults are necessarily bad.
I remember some fascinating research on sects actually that basically showed that people who join them tend to be better educated and had typically gone through some kind of trauma or been something of a loner as a teenager - motivations for joining are just completely normal.
Just something I remember from teaching the sociology of religion a way back.
thank you for the clearification. Perhaps you may want to get onto Wikipedia and enlighten them about their definitions then! lol
Well these are only 'sociological definitions'
Unfortunately I can't remember the reference off the top of head. However, I'm planning on adding the sociology of relifion to my WP blog from August - I'll make a point of stopping by Wiki when I get onto the NRM topic!