Antelopians’ racial, gender and religious expectations furthermore played a big role in fueling this moral panic. Labelling a group as deviant can create a self-fulfilling prophecy: according to Hampshire and Beckford (1983) a label of deviance inspires a refusal to conform, only furthering the distance between both groups. Stork explained that Bhagwan almost relished this: driving around in his Rolls-Royces made “people take notice [of] him and [made] them see that he was different and almost [created] this self-fulfilling prophecy” (Stork 2021).
The CDA showed that the media played an active role in fueling moral panic. While the reporting may have been a projection of reporters’ own fears and anxiety about the commune, the way that the media reported about the commune, Bhagwan and Sheela, reinforced stereotypes, highlighted the differences between locals and Rajneeshees by employing an ‘us vs. them’ frame, and heightened (moral) panic amongst locals by using war-coded, conflict-oriented and fear-fueling rhetoric. Headlines such as “Atiyeh picks Antelopers over Interlopers”, “Antelope residents circle wagons against Rajneesh invasion” and “Guru followers win battle for Antelope” only fuel the conflict by creating clear sides and using war-like rhetoric.
The promotion and showing of the Ashram in Poona (1978) documentary also fueled moral panic. Jane said about this: “What I didn't realize at all until I watched Wild Wild Country was that [Dobrowolny] brought that film to Portland, and everybody in Antelope went to Portland to see it. You know, when I realized that, it was clear to me that there was no hope from the very beginning. That was it. We might as well have packed up and gone away, because there was no way that that was going to work” (Stork 2021). The images of the encounter group therapy were so violent and shocking that it is only logical that seeing this instilled fear in the Antelopians and did not benefit the relationship with Rajneeshees. The footage painted an atrocious picture of the rituals of the Rajneeshees and only strengthened the deviance of the Rajneeshees in the eyes of the Antelopians. It also evoked associations of other ‘cults’, which only fueled the already ongoing moral panic further.
9.1 Limitations and discussion
In this research encountered several limitations. Firstly, out of the six people approached for interviews, only two were willing (Ma Anand Sheela and Jane Stork). These two women were both followers of Rajneesh and lived in Rajneeshpuram. People that were approached that were not based in the commune itself either did not respond or refused the invitation for an interview. Les Zaitz, for example, the investigative journalist for the Oregonian at the time, declined the invitation because it was “40+ years ago!”. Secondly, there were serious and possible ethical implications of travelling to Switzerland to visit Ma Anand Sheela in her home in Maisprach during a pandemic. At that time, The Netherlands was advising strongly not to travel unless absolutely necessary, and since Sheela lives and works in
a care home that she owns, the possibility of bringing COVID-19 into this space with vulnerable elderly is a risk that, ethically, is undesirable to take. Conducting an interview over Zoom instead of in-person, does have limitations. Non-verbal and visual cues which are usually used to build rapport between interviewer and interviewee and gain the trust of the interviewee, are missing (Halperin and Heath 2017: 297). Since the time in Oregon was an emotional one with big implications for Sheela as well as Stork, it is possible that an online interview yields fewer results than an in-person interview would have. However, ethically, it was the right decision.
Furthermore, the 76 articles from the Oregonian were initially supposed to be supplemented with original news segments that were featured in the documentary Wild Wild Country.
However, these were only available in the Portland Archives, which are only accessible in person. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, these files were therefore inaccessible.
Since this research is based on a case study, the generalizability of this thesis is low.
That does not mean, however, that it cannot add to existing literature surrounding the case itself, as well as the practical field of identity politics and conflict. For example, Fiske’s theory on bias and intergroup conflict (2002) is applicable to the Rajneeshpuram v. Antelope conflict.
She says that people who are comfortable in their in-group tend to ignore out-groups, except for when a perceived threat is posed to the in-group: then a murderous hostility towards the outgroup can be prompted. This holds true for both sides: the first act of aggression was towards the Rajneeshees, who posed a threat to American norms and values. This, in turn, was the threat that set off the murderous hostility at the Rajneeshee side. Kennedy and Pronin’s (2006) research also holds true: a bias-perception coming from the Rajneeshee side influenced the way the Rajneeshees looked at their relationship with Antelopians and guided Sheela’s actions. A bias-perception spiral can be identified in this conflict.
The application of the theory of Moral Panic furthermore adds a new layer of understanding to this conflict. Plenty has been written about the commune’s time in Oregon, the downfall, the cultural differences and the crimes committed. This thesis is the first, however, to focus on the events up until the bombing of Hotel Rajneesh and attempt to uncover specifically the reason for escalation. This research is furthermore unique in offering the theory of moral panic as an explanation of the escalation. It therefore adds to the literature surrounding this conflict. This research furthermore attempted to provide insight on the influence of minority identity on conflict escalation. Minority identities often inherently deviate from the hegemonic norm – white, cisgender, heterosexual, middle-class, Christian males (Kiesling 2006). The theory of moral panic provides tools to explain and contextualize this, but also inspires more questions: could a minority's mere existence, which deviates from the ‘norm’, feed a (subconscious) moral panic? The field of conflict resolution and minority politics would benefit from more research into this phenomenon.
Implications for the practice of conflict resolution would be t0 include more attention to the way the brain functions. This research has shown that to understand why a moral panic is created or why implicit attitudes and biases are influential in a conflict, it is crucial to understand neurological functions. Literature such as Kennedy and Pronin (2008) about
“bias-perception conflict spirals is so much more fruitful when neurological functions creating bias are taken into account. This thesis is also an example of how important it is to keep an open mind when trying to understand a conflict. As Forchtner (2011: 1) said: it is crucial to CDA that the analyst makes their own position and standpoint transparent. This research was started on the expectation that the United States is a racist, sexist and religiously biased country, and which must have meant that those forces were responsible for the escalation of this conflict. The CDA did not yield data to support this claim, which forced the author to look further, finally leading to the application of the moral panic theory. Revisiting the data revealed a moral panic with its roots in racial, sexual and religious deviance. It is crucial to the practice of conflict resolution to be aware of one's own biases, otherwise a tunnel vision will always show nothing but the expected path.
The results from this research provided a few direct opportunities. First of all, further research would benefit from including the original news segments that can be found in the Portland Archives, as well as other news sources in Oregon. The Oregonian may be the biggest paper in the state, but there are many others that could be interesting to include in further research. The limited scope of this research also meant that interpretation played a big role in this research. Broadening the scope and including more data will allow for better claim making and stronger conclusions. Secondly, further research is necessary to be able to explaint he discrepancy between the literature and findings when it comes to the influence of gender and sexism on the escalation of this conflict. Thirdly, further research should include the events that happened after the bombing in 1983 to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the role of racism, sexism and religious bias in the entire conflict. While the chosen events were emotional ones which were expected to reveal more implicit bias, the ‘real’ escalation happened when Sheela started importing weapons onto the ranch and poisoning an entire town to sway an election. Research that would replicate this study should include articles from 1981-1985 to be able to gain a deeper understanding of the forces at play in this conflict. While this research focused on the role of racism, sexism, religious bias on solely the escalation of this conflict, the scholarship of identity and conflict would benefit from more comprehensive research with a broader scope.
This thesis is the description of research which attempted to gain a more in depth understanding of the escalation of this conflict. The research question “What was the influence of (racial, gender, religious and political) bias on the escalation of the Rajneeshpuram v.
Antelope conflict?” was expected to yield a satisfying and substantial answer through which the escalation could be (at least largely) explained. This was not the case however, which meant that the search for explanations continued. While the theory of moral panic granted a much more satisfactory explanation, conducting the research and writing this thesis made it increasingly clear that this conflict was much more complex and nuanced than could be covered in this thesis. It is precisely this deep complexity and nuance, however, that make this case so interesting.
“So there are no black and white reasons. No black and white situations. And life is never black and white. And still, we are so in [the] habit of looking for black and white. This
is how life had meant to be, and so [it] is.” – Ma Anand Sheela (2021)
Bibliography
Sources used in Critical Discourse Analysis
Abel, M.R. (1983). “Remember Indians”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. August 10th:
C8.
Ayers, H.E. (1983). “Define religion”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. August 3rd: B10.
Call, C. (1982). “Rajneesh dream”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. February 25th: B6.
Callister, S. (1981). “Group buys large ranch in Oregon”. The Oregonian. August 12th: C9.
Callister, S. (1981a). “Followers of Indian guru work to turn ranch green”. The Oregonian.
August 30th: D1.
Callister, S. (1981b). “Town wary of neighbors”. The Oregonian. August 30th: D8.
Callister, S. (1981c). “Guru stirs questions over ranch”. The Oregonian. August 31st: B1.
Callister, S. (1981d). “Guru arrives at followers’ ranch”. The Oregonian. September 3rd: B1.
Callister, S. (1981e). “1000 Friends seeks switch in ranch ruling”. The Oregonian. December 20th: D4.
Callister, S. (1981f). “Court asked to block vote on new city”. The Oregonian. December 24th: A5.
Callister, S. (1982). “New city ‘fits’ Oregon, followers say”. The Oregonian. February 20th:
A12.
Callister, S. (1982a). “For Antelope. Court asked to bar disincorporation vote”. The Oregonian. March 27th: A16.
Callister, S. (1982b). “Antelope resident scores cult”. The Oregonian. May 12th: A19.
Callister, S. (1982c). “Guru’s kin faces deport action”. The Oregonian. May 18th: C6.
Carter, H.M. (1981). “Guru’s ranch progress related”. The Oregonian. October 7th: D3.
Church, F. (1982). “Atiyeh picks Antelopers over interlopers”. The Oregonian. March 13th: 1.
Cooper, D.E. (1983). “Implication off”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. August 8th: B6.
Crick, R. and Senior, J. (1983). “Rajneeshees tighten security, decry violence”. The Oregonian. July 30th: B3.
Dobrowolny, W. (1978). “Ashram in Poona”. India: Poona.
Graham, S. (1982). “Commune may enter politics”. The Oregonian. April 17th: 1.
Hallman Jr., T. (1983). “2 British officers join Portland police on patrol”. The Oregonian.
July 18th: B1.
Hayes, J. (1981). “Land-use group, farmers challenge incorporation vote”. The Oregonian.
December 1st: C5.
Hill, J. (1983). “Papers filed by attorneys for Bhagwan”. The Oregonian. August 5th: D4.
Hortsch, D. (1982). “Fearing ‘religious cities,’ group forms to monitor activities of commune”. The Oregonian. March 18th: D28.
Maxa, R. (1982). “For Lear Heiress, Bhagwan’s spell grows cold”. The Oregonian. March 21st: A14.
McCurdy, M.K. (1982). “Cities anywhere?”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. February 28th: E2.
Murphy, C. and Murphy, D. (1983). “You said it!”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. July 30th: B7.
Ota, A.K. (1982). “State board dismisses appeal opposing new Rajneesh city”. The Oregonian. March 14th: B1.
Page, R.I. (1983). “Deplore acts”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. August 4th: B10.
Polz, M. (1982). “Discrimination?”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. April 30th: C10.
Sand, P. (1982). “Commune runs up tab of $23,500 at state auction”. The Oregonian. March 21st: B1.
Senior, J. (1981). “Guru’s disciples invite 300 to yule celebration”. The Oregonian.
December 16th: C6.
Senior, J. (1981a). “Lawsuit challenges incorporation bid for Rajneeshpuram”. The Oregonian. December 29th: B3.
Senior, J. (1982). “Antelope zoning review ends in verbal brawl”. The Oregonian. January 15th: A21.
Senior, J. (1982a). “250 donate $460 against new ‘city’”. The Oregonian. January 27th: B5.
Senior, J. (1982b). “Rajneesh summer festival plans told”. The Oregonian. March 12th: D2.
Senior, J. (1982c). “Antelope residents circle wagons against Rajneesh invasion”. The Oregonian. March 14th: B4.
Senior, J. (1982d). “City-Rajneesh dispute reviewed by state officials”. The Oregonian.
March 23rd: B4.
Senior, J. (1982e). “Commune demands permits”. The Oregonian. March 25th: D2.
Senior, J. (1982f). “Atiyeh backs plan to disband Antelope”. The Oregonian. March 27th:
A16.
Senior, J. (1982g). “Antelope must issue four permits, judge rules”. The Oregonian. April 6th: B4.
Senior, J. (1982h). “Both sides dispute Antelope-Rajneesh compromise story”. The Oregonian. April 10th: A19.
Senior, J. (1982i). “Judge rules in favor of election in Antelope”. The Oregonian. April 13th:
D16.
Senior, J. (1982j). “Disincorporation vote draws invasion of onlookers”. The Oregonian.
April 14th: B5.
Senior, J. (1982k). “Antelope awaits its faith as faithful, fearful flock to ballot box”. The Oregonian. April 15th: 1.
Senior, J. (1982l). “Guru followers win battle for Antelope”. The Oregonian. April 16th: 1.
Stowell, C.D. (1982). “Defending homes”. The Oregonian, Letter to the Editor. March 19th:
F6.
Sullivan, A. (1983). “Group survives bitter fight over sale of hotel”. The Oregonian. August 1st: B1.
The Oregonian (1981). “Rajneeshpuram: ranch or city?”. The Oregonian, editorial.
November 1st: D2.
The Oregonian (1981a). “Ruling favor guru devotees”. The Oregonian. November 6th: B8.
The Oregonian (1981b). “Ashram”. The Oregonian, movie calendar. December 4th: G7.
The Oregonian (1981c). “Rajneesh’s followers to sell Jersey center”. The Oregonian.
December 31st: B8.
The Oregonian (1982). “Antelope plans vote to kill city”. The Oregonian. March 11th: C1.
The Oregonian (1982a). “Guru followers reply to Atiyeh”. The Oregonian. March 14th: B4.
The Oregonian (1982b). “Rust criticizes Atiyeh views”. The Oregonian. March 16th: D10.
The Oregonian (1982c). “Antelope plans on agenda”. The Oregonian. March 21st: B7.
The Oregonian (1982d). “‘No Soap, Radio’ mixed comedy bag”. The Oregonian. April 15th:
D7.
The Oregonian (1982e). “TV Click Sunday”. The Oregonian. April 18th: TV4.
The Oregonian (1982f). “‘Sale of Antelope property spurs ownership question”. The Oregonian. May 4th: B4.
The Oregonian (1983). “Rajneeshees scout 75 acres in Banks for future investment”. The Oregonian. July 21st: D4.
The Oregonian (1983a). “Initiative cleared”. The Oregonian. July 22nd: B4.
The Oregonian (1983b). “Defamation suit names Rajneeshees”. The Oregonian. July 23rd:
C3.
The Oregonian (1983c). “Rajneesh ban courts bigots”. The Oregonian, Editorial. July 24th:
E2.
The Oregonian (1983d). “Suit claims Rajneesh defamation”. The Oregonian. July 26th: B8.
The Oregonian (1983e). “Rajneeshees rap land rules”. The Oregonian. July 26th: B8.
The Oregonian (1983f). “Bomb suspect’s companions sought”. The Oregonian. July 31st: B1.
The Oregonian (1983g). “Back off, de-escalate tension”. The Oregonian, Editorial. August 1st: D6.
The Oregonian (1983h). “LA apartment yields bomb-related evidence”. The Oregonian.
August 2nd: B1.
The Oregonian (1983i). “Man charged in hotel blasts has surgery”. The Oregonian. August 3rd: B2.
The Oregonian (1983j). “Suspect in hotel arson moved to jail”. The Oregonian. August 10th:
C6.
The Oregonian (1983k). “Rajneeshees add enterprises”. The Oregonian. August 16th: D7.
Wagner, S. and Manley, P. (1983). “Sketches released of 2 sought in hotel bombing”. The Oregonian. August 5th: D1.
Zaitz, L. (1982). “Commune leader says Atiyeh fanned flames of bigotry”. The Oregonian.
March 17th: B2.
Zaitz, L. (1983). “Other suspects hunted in Rajneesh hotel blast”. The Oregonian. July 30th:
1.
5th Avenue Cinema (1981). “ASHRAM”. The Oregonian, advertisement. November 15th: 22.
5th Avenue Cinema (1981a). “ASHRAM”. The Oregonian, advertisement. November 18th:
D13.
5th Avenue Cinema (1981b). “ASHRAM”. The Oregonian, advertisement. November 21st:
F7.
Additional literature
Abbott, C. (1990). “Utopia and bureaucracy: The fall of Rajneeshpuram, Oregon”, Pacific Historical Review, 59(1): 77-103.
Ancheta, A.N. (2006). Race, rights, and the Asian American experience. New Brunswick:
Rutgers University Press.
Archer, D.N. (2019). “The Housing Segregation: The Jim Crow Effects of Crime-Free Housing Ordinances”, Michigan Law Review, 118: 173.
Association of Religion Data Archives (ARDA) (2010). “State Membership Report”,
https://www.thearda.com/rcms2010/rcms2010a.asp?U=41&T=state&S=name&Y=1 980. Accessed on May 18th, 2021.
Banks, A.J., and Hicks, H.M. (2016). “Fear and implicit racism: Whites’ support for voter ID laws”, Political Psychology, 37(5): 641-658.
Barson, M. (1992). Better Dead Than Red: Nostalgic Look at Russiaphobia Red-Baiting, and Other Commie Madness. New York: Hyperion.
Beatty, K.M and Walter, O. (1984). “Religious Preference and Practice: Reevaluating their Impact on Political Tolerance”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 48: 318-29.
Bellah, R.N. (1988). “Civil Religion in America”, Daedalus, 117(3): 97-118.
Bentele, K.G., and O'Brien, E. E. (2013). “Jim Crow 2.0? Why states consider and adopt restrictive voter access policies”, Perspectives on Politics, 11(4): 1088-1116.
Bower, G. (1981). “Mood and memory”, American Psychologist, 36: 129–148.
Bowser, B.P. (1985). “Race relations in the 1980s: The case of the United States”, Journal of Black Studies, 15(3): 307-324.
Brader, T. (2005). “Striking a Responsive Chord: How Political Ads Motivate and Persuade Voters by Appealing to Emotions”, American Journal of Political Science, 49(2):
388-405.
Bromley, D.G., Shupe Jr., A.D., and Ventimiglia, J.C. (1979). “Atrocity tales, the Unification Church, and the social construction of evil”, Journal of Communication, 29(3): 42-53.
Brown-Dean, K.L. (2020). “Op-Ed: The 2020 election did not kill off identity politics.
Instead, the strategy was reborn”, Los Angeles Times.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-11-08/identity-politics-2020-election-born-again. Accessed on March 16th, 2021.
Buckwalter, D.W., and Legler, J.I. (1983). “ANTELOPE AND RAJNEESHPURAM, OREGON—CLASH OF CULTURES A CASE STUDY”, Urbanism Past & Present, 8(16): 1-13.
Canipe, L. (2003). “Under God and Anit-Communist: How the Pledge of Allegiance Got Religion in Cold War America”, Journal of Church & State, 45: 305-323.
Carmichael, S., Ture, K., and Hamilton, C.V. (1992). Black power: The politics of liberation in America. New York: Vintage.
Carus, W.S. (2002). Bioterrorism and biocrimes: the illicit use of biological agents since 1900. Colorado: The Minerva Group, Inc..
Cassino, D., Lodge, M. and Taber, C.S. (2014). “Implicit Political Attitudes: When, How, Why, With What Effects?”, The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication: 1-18.
Collins, A., and Loftus, E. (1975). “A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing”, Psychological Review, 82(6): 407–428.
Collins, A., and Quillian, M.R. (1969). “Retrieval time from semantic memory”, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8(2): 240–247.
Conroy, J.O. (2018). “An apocalyptic cult, 900 dead: remembering the Jonestown massacre, 40 years on”, The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/17/an-apocalyptic-cult-900-dead-remembering-the-jonestown-massacre-40-years-on.
Accessed on May 21st, 2021.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics”, University of Chicago Legal Forum: 139-167.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and the Violence Against Women of Color”, Stanford Law Review, 43: 1241–1299.
Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., and Sheikh, A. (2011). “The case study approach”, BMC medical research methodology, 11(1): 1-9.
Cummings, M.S. (1994). “Charisma and Control in Rajneeshpuram: The Role of Shared Values in the Creation of a Community”, Utopian Studies, 5(1): 158-161.
Demar, G. (2009). “The National Reform Association”, The American Vision.
https://americanvision.org/3026/the-national-reform-association/. Accessed on May 18th, 2021.
Denzin, N.K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Dimock, M. and Wike, R. (2020). “America is exceptional in the nature of its political divide”, Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/13/america-is-exceptional-in-the-nature-of-its-political-divide/.
Accessed on March 16th, 2021.
Drake, L.E., & Donohue, W.A. (1996). “Communicative framing theory in conflict resolution”, Communication research, 23(3): 297-322.
Eisenhower, D.D. (1954). Statement by the President Upon Signing Bill to include the words
“Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/statement-the-president-upon-signing-bill-include-the-words-under-god-the-pledge-the-flag. Accessed on May 18th, 2021.
Fahs, B., Dudy, M., and Stage, S. (2013). The moral panics of sexuality. New York City:
Springer.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. Pearson Education.
Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). “Critical discourse analysis”. In: Van Dijk A.T. (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction: 258–284. London: Sage.
Filsinger, E. (1976). “Tolerance of Non-Believers: A Cross-Tabular and Log Linear Analysis of Some Religious Correlates”, Review of Religious Research, 17: 232-240.
Fiske, S.T. (1998). “Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination”. In: Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T.
and Lindzey, G. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, 4(2): 357-411. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Fiske, S.T. (2002). “What we know now about bias and intergroup conflict, the problem of the century”, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(4): 123-128.
Foner, P.S. (1976). “Frederick Douglass on Women’s Rights”, Contributions in Afro-American and African Studies, 25: 312.
Forchtner, B. (2011). “Critique, the discourse–historical approach, and the Frankfurt School”, Critical Discourse Studies, 8(1): 1-14.
Fritscher, L. (2021). “What is Xenophobia?”, Very Well Mind.
https://www.verywellmind.com/xenophobia-fear-of-strangers-2671881. Accessed on June 2nd, 2021.
Froese, P., Bader, C., and Smith, B. (2008). “Political tolerance and God's wrath in the United States”, Sociology of Religion, 69(1): 29-44.
Gadlin, H. (1994). “Conflict resolution, cultural differences, and the culture of racism”, Negotiation Journal, 10(1): 33-47.
Gaertner, S.L., and Dovidio, J.F. (1986). “The aversive form of racism”. In: Dovidio, J.F. and Gaertner, S.L. (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination and racism: 61–89. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
Gagnon, J.H., and Simon, W. (1968). “Sexual deviance in contemporary America”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 376(1): 106-122.
Gallup, G.H. (1972). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1935-1971. Three volumes. New York:
Random House.
Gallup Jr., G. (1985). “Religion in America”, The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 480(1): 167-174.
Gamson, W.A., and Modigliani, A. (1987). “The changing culture of affirmative action”. In:
Braungart, R.G. and Braungart, M.M. (Eds.), Research in political sociology, 3: 137–
177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
Gerhard, J.F. (2001). Desiring revolution: second-wave feminism and the rewriting of American sexual thought, 1920 to 1982. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gladchuk, J.J. (2013). Hollywood and Anticommunism: HUAC and the Evolution of the Red Menace, 1935-1950. London: Routledge.
Goldman, M.S. (2009). “Averting apocalypse at Rajneeshpuram”, Sociology of religion, 70(3):
311-327.
Goode, E. and Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). “MORAL PANICS: Culture, Politics and Social Construction”, Annual Review of Sociology, 20: 149-171.
Grace Church (n.d.). “The Role of Women”, Grace Church.
https://www.gracechurch.org/about/distinctives/role-of-women. Accessed on May 19th, 2021.
Gray, S. (2018). “10 Propaganda Posters from Soviet Union for International Woker’s Day”, Widewalls. https://www.widewalls.ch/magazine/10-propaganda-posters-from-soviet-union-for-international-workers-day. Accessed on May 22nd, 2021.
Hall, S., Critcher, C., Jefferson, T., Clarke, J. and Roberts, B. (1978). Policing the Crisis:
Mugging, the State, and Law and Order. London: Macmillan.
Halperin, S. and Heath, O. (2017). Political Research. Methods and Practical Skills. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Harpalani, V. (2013). “DesiCrit: Theorizing the Racial Ambiguity of South Asian Americans”, NYU Annual Survey of American Law, 69: 77–184.
Heaven’s Gate: The Cult of Cults (2020). Miniseries, HBO Max. December 3rd, 2020.
Hebb, D.O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Higham, J. (1970). Strangers in the land: Patterns of American nativism, 1860-1925. New York: Atheneum.
Homeland Security Digital Library (n.d.). “Rajneeshee Bioterror Attack”, Department of Homeland Security. https://www.hsdl.org/c/tl/rajneeshee-bioterror-attack/.
Accessed on June 7th, 2021.
Huston, J.L. (1999). “Property Rights in Slavery and the Coming of the Civil War”, The Journal of Southern History, 65(2): 249-286.
Introvigne, M. (1995). “The secular anti-cult and the religious counter-cult movement:
strange bedfellows or future enemies?”. In: Towler, R. (ed.) New religions and the new Europe, 32-54. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
Introvigne, M. (2000). “Moral panics and anti‐cult terrorism in Western Europe”, Terrorism and Political Violence, 12(1): 47-59.
Jefferson, T. (1776). The Declaration of Independence. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript. Accessed on May 30th, 2021.
Jenkins, P., and Maier-Katkin, D. (1992). ‘Satanism: Myth and reality in a contemporary moral panic”, Crime, Law and Social Change, 17(1): 53-75.
Johnson, L., and Lloyd, J. (2004). Sentenced to everyday life: Feminism and the housewife.
Oxford: Berg.
Jones, J. (1978). “The Jonestown Death Tape (FBI No. Q 042)”, Audio recording.
https://archive.org/details/ptc1978-11-18.flac16. November 18th, 1978.
Joshi, K.Y. (2006). “The racialization of Hinduism, Islam, and Sikhism in the United States”, Equity & Excellence in Education, 39(3): 211-226.
Kamer, M.A. (2020). “Linked Fate among Sexual Minorities. A comparative study between the Netherlands and the United States”, BSc Thesis Political Science. Amsterdam:
University of Amsterdam.
Kamer, M.A. (2020a). “Ma Anand Sheela: secretary to The Bhagwan. What can I say? Tough titties”, The Politics of Gender and Diversity in Theory and Practice. Amsterdam:
University of Amsterdam.
Kappil, F.M. (2017). “Search of Occidental Space in Hollywood Films to Overcome Xenophobia”, Singularities, 4(2): 68-74.