There is little doubt that Safety=Zero is a cult (https://safetyrisk.net/the-cult-ure-of-zero/).
As I looked at the documentary Escaping Utopia (documenting the Gloryvale cult in NZ (https://iview.abc.net.au/show/escaping-utopia) I saw such similarities in the Indoctrination of safety=Zero.
Although the similarities between both are not as extreme, there are many aspects of the Safety=Zero cult that resemble a religious cult. One only has to watch the apocalyptic video Zero Vision – In the Blink of an Eye (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIhgJ93t0Jw) to see the comparison. The language of ‘In the Blink of an Eye’’ is from the Bible (1 Corinthians 15:51-52).
The most difficult thing in leaving any cult is the power of Cognitive Dissonance (https://safetyrisk.net/change-in-safety-and-cognitive-dissonance/). People who are immersed into a cult quickly become anchored to the discourse, language and security of that cult. Once this discourse is empowered by social identity, belonging and politicized, it is not something that can be shifted by rational argument or logic. The nature of any belief is that it develops a faith and logic of its own.
Cognitive Dissonance is not just tension or discomfort in an idea but rather, poses a complete upheaval in identity and makes it most difficult for people to leave a cult. For this reason, escaping any cult is painful, earth shattering and rocks one’s identity/being.
The long history of the counting injury rates as the identity of safety is clear. It was not until 2017 that the zero-mantra become the global identity for safety and for the last 8 years as been central to how global safety organizes its zero convention each year. Indeed, these are no described as safety events, but ‘zero events’ (https://safetyrisk.net/the-global-zero-event-this-is-safety/).
There can be no argument that safety=zero and zero=safety. The language, discourse and political identity of the safety industry is so deeply anchored to zero that it is rarely questioned. Indeed, the only books published against zero are by me (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/).
This lack of questioning and critical thinking is one of the major characteristics of any cult (https://archive.org/details/cultish-the-language-of-fanaticism-epub). Thus the first stage of leaving the zero cult is a disposition of questioning, doubt and skepticism. Unfortunately, the compliance culture of safety and safety indoctrination quashes any sense of open critical thinking. Indeed, critical questioning of safety is understood as being anti-safety.
Just as people are converted into the zero cult, so must they be converted out. Conversion is not a rational or cognitive process but rather an emotional process. Such is the nature of e-motion. It is only after conversion that substance is sought to provide an apologetic and justification for conversion. One of the key components of any conversion is to quickly learn how to demonise opposition. There is nothing more secure to a cult than demonising the enemy. In this way, cultic identity is maintained NOT by what or who one is but rather, by what one is NOT! In many zero organisations challenging zero is met with the sack. To question zero is to question safety.
Once a cult has been established then the sponsors of the cult all fall in line. We saw all the sponsors of zero in Sydney in 2024 (https://safetyrisk.net/the-sponsors-of-zero-are/).
We then get academics (with no expertise in ethics) supporting the immorality of zero as a moral goal (https://safetyrisk.net/zero-is-not-noble-moral-or-sense-able/). Then with academic support the mantra is given legitimacy and substance by global leaders in safety (https://visionzero.global/videos). These ar substantiated by testimonies of people deemed significant on the global safety=zero website (https://visionzero.global/). This is then given political support by ambassadors of zero (https://visionzero.global/ambassadors). This is then supported by marketing, indoctrination campaigns and resources (https://visionzero.global/all-documents).
All of these factors increase ‘sunk cost’ into the cult so that all identity, energy and belonging to the cult has to be sacrificed to leave.
Argueng with a zero believer is no different than arguing with any cult member. Belief is sustained politically and emotionally NOT rationally. Once someone is converted into a cult, the same psychology of conversion is the only way out.
Being converted into any belief is rarely about the content of that belief but rather what that belief provides socially and relationally. So, in the same way, being converted out of belief in zero requires the building of relationships, trust and belonging before the believer can make a leap of faith outside of the cult. Once a relationship of trust is established it is then easier for the leap of faith to be made. However, to get into such a position is risky. One has to sit on the edge of cognitive dissonance in order to provoke the opportunity for conversion.
It’s a catch-22. All risk is like this as is all learning. Without risk there is no movement and, without movement there is no e-motion and no conversion. Tangled up in all of this is the complexities of motivation, psychological safety, perception and risk.
All of these factors play a key part in any escape from a cult.
For more, try reading: Anthropology of Religious Conversion (https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780742517783).
Or, read It Works, A New Approach to Risk and Safety as a case study of a global organization that jettisoned zero and safety improved (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/).
brhttps://safetyrisk.net/how-to-escape-the-safetyzero-cult/
Prompt