|
FINAL REPORT OF THE ENQUETE COMMISSION ON "SO-CALLED SECTS AND PSYCHOGROUPS" |
|
Minority opinion submitted by Ursula Caberta y Diaz, Alfred Hartenbach, MP, Dr habil. Hansjörg Hemminger, Renate Rennebach, MP, Gisela Schröter, MP, Dr Bernd Steinmetz and Professor Dr Hartmut Zinser, members of the working group of the SPD's parliamentary group in the Enquete Commission on "So-called Sects and Psychogroups", with regard to Chapter 6.1 "Opinion of the Enquete Commission on the General Societal Phenomenon of New Religious and Ideological Communities and Psychogroups" Debates on the conflicts arising from new religious and ideological communities and psychogroups have taken place numerous times and have been launched from various points of view since the 1960s. Until the early 1990s, too little significance was attached to the overall societal dimension of the phenomenon; attention was devoted primarily to the individuals affected. Discussion of the various groups was usually based on the practices and values of such communities. It is these that give rise to the conflicts described in the Final Report of the Enquete Commission. The first societal institutions to take note of the problem were the Protestant and Catholic Churches, but even they often failed to recognise its overall significance. To this day, the Churches still regard the appointment of experts on religious beliefs and ideologies to be an adequate means of dealing with the phenomenon. Depending on the staffing of these Church institutions and the funds available, their treatment of the phenomenon ranges from counselling for individuals to public statements, also concerning the overall societal context. Apart from one or two reports to the parliaments of individual German states it was not until later that the government turned its attention to various groups that constituted a source of conflict. One of the main reasons why the overall social problem was recognised fairly late in Germany is that the occurrences (and related conflicts) were regarded as the fate of individuals. It has been established that the problem of the communities with the greatest potential for conflict is a matter that concerns our society as a whole. Diversionary tactics on the part of such communities -- that are often put over by the media, too -- and playing-down by those not affected or inadequately informed must not be allowed to divert the discussion from the fact that since the mid-1980s various groups have not confined their activities to "enlightening" individuals with their doctrines; the groups with the greatest potential for conflict also aim to establish their values as a political platform in Germany. In addition to the need for ongoing information activities by Church and private institutions, it must also be the task of government to differentiate clearly between the various new religious and ideological communities and psychogroups with regard to their doctrines and practices, quite apart from the often tragic individual fates provoked by them. In the repeated public discussions of the citizens' disillusionment with politics currently prevailing in Germany, too little attention has been paid to the fact that many people have relied on the feasibility mechanisms that apparently exist in society in order to fulfil their personal, individual wishes. Hpwever, since the radical changes that have taken place at least since the early 1990s, many have found themselves up against their personal limits. Often they put the blame for this on the political system or the institutions on which it rests. Numerous new religious and ideological communities and psychogroups offer deceptive or fictitious solutions to the problems faced by individuals or society as a whole. Involvement in these groups is often synonymous with a withdrawal from the political system and real life. The political discussion of withdrawal from or rejection of the established modes of behaviour of our society is too often restricted to the perceptual patterns that were valid until the early 1980s. The changes in our society have led many people to turn their backs on traditional forms and institutions and follow political, religious/ideological or other extremes instead. This may be perceived as a threat to democratic stability. It is therefore necessary to realise that values influencing individuals' activities through new religious and ideological communities and psychogroups are a form of political and social protest. In the most extreme cases such values do not coincide either with the predominantly Christian values and standards of our country or with the concepts anchored in the Constitution that have to be defended primarily by political means. In future, political discussions must give higher priority to this opposition. Otherwise we have to fear a further growth of such conflict-generating groups in the field of new religious and ideological communities and psychogroups and thus more problems affecting our society as a whole. The Enquete Commission has investigated the most important aspects of the overall phenomenon. The resulting recommendations for action are minimum requirements that have to be urgently implemented in the short term. At the same time, it is necessary to initiate additional measures in the fields of research and politics.
|