From hinves@world.net Sat Oct 19 22:01:37 1996 Received: from world.net (sydney2.world.net [198.142.12.2]) by shellx.best.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA20599 for ; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:01:15 -0700 Received: from hinves (sydney63.world.net [192.190.215.63]) by world.net (8.7.4/8.6.6) with SMTP id PAA02404 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:02:37 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961020050615.00684cdc@world.net> X-Sender: hinves@world.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:06:15 +1000 To: ariel@best.com From: Martin Hinves Subject: Mind Control Part 2 Status: RO 4) The Cult of Confession. In a group where purity is demanded, personal confession is an obsession. A confessional structure is imposed, that can be unique to the group, under which confession to one's sins is mandatory. The structure imposed is usually either a one-over-one or many-over-one system, during which periods of criticism (and self-criticism) are performed with the aim of a forcing personal change towards the puritanical desired state. The control system is absolute and flows only one way to enforce it's authority and existence. It has been stated that repititious confession in a totalistic ideology is an expression of extreme arrogance in the apparent name of humility. Central themes at play here are the "I practise this penitence to be able to judge" and "the more I accuse myself, the more I have a right to judge you" - those who practise this will usually claim it is not them but the "higher purpose" that judges and is responsible. This is a central theme in any continuing small group confessional process. It could be theorised that the more I confess the more I can judge, and the greater I am in the eyes of the "higher purpose". During the confession process an adoption of personal purification and purging of impurities takes place. Also it is a symbolic surrender to the "higher purpose" . It can lead to a sense of relief from the earlier manipulated guilt feelings that have arisen. The main result of participation though is the sense of intense intimacy with fellow confessors, that promotes an assimilation of one into the Movement. Sometimes rather that promoting total exposure of oneself and eliminating personal secrets it can intensify them. A complex web of what to confess/what not to confess can result leading to an inner struggle within the member. Sometimes it is easier to "make-up" confessions of past or imaginary sins than face actually confessing something that is really being felt (for example one has a history of "sins" in an area or knows what scores points so problems in the chosen area are "confessed" to rather that what is really causing the anxiety). This control makes it impossible to obtain a reasonable balance between worth and humility. My own veiws on this control is that in a Christian sense it denies the power and essence of God's Grace and Love. As Sin and Accountability(performance) are now quantifiable, confession is now a manipulative tool that is man made and as such harmful. In a totalistic ideology your are never truely forgiven for what you have confessed. Step out of line and your "sins" that you have confessed to will be brought back to haunt you. You really never are free (as you should be under God's Grace) of guilt - from what you have confessed. Time and time again failure to reach the judged levels of correct performance will be attributed to either a "sin" you have not yet confessed to or a "sin" that you never really dealt with - never fear those in charge will tell you when you are not performing properly or your image is not what it should be. You are the problem and Grace has been robbed of it's power by being replaced by a man-made alternative. 5) Sacred Science. Here the totalistic doctrine obtains an aura of sacredness, ultimately becoming the only moral vision for human existence. This sacredness becomes apparent in the denial of any questioning of the basic assumptions of groups views or position; and the reverence demanded from group members for those who originate, preach, and perform the "Message". The "Message" itself can become sacred too. (Where Doctrine is more important that a person is covered below). Indeed the ultimate moral vision held becomes by a process of fallible cliams of logic, an absolute in itself and unchallengeable. Indeed one who criticizes, or holds alternate veiws becomes not only irreverent but has crossed the bounds of acceptable conduct by questioning that which cannot be questioned. It has been theorised that part of the problem with the Western mind (that is to say a person brought up in the Western World) is our scientific outlook on the world. We see science as an answer to everything, or having the potential to provide the answer for everything. In a way we inadvertantly worship science as it can provide all our answers and needs, weather this be by physical production (all our material needs can be met) or mental conditioning (I can make my own success and get what I want). As a result of our upbringing in this society we are vunerable to applying this same "sacred" attitude in our search for a belief system - it makes us feel secure in a way ! It is in application that we can make the mistake of turning something but scientifically "derived" into something sacred. In Christian terms we commit idolatry (such as Man - even one's Leaders) , by worshipping an idol not God. When the science has become sacred, a person can experience guilt or fear when exposed to ideas that do not fit in. Due to other controls existing the experience of exposure to these non-conformist ideas decreases thus leading to a false "proof" of what has become sacred. All evidence presented by the group to it's members/prospective members will be carefully presented/doctored to "proove" what has been declared sacred. (Simply - because nothing has been found to disprove what I've been told it must be true as everything I've found shows that it is true !). Indeed some controls may be openly established to prevent questioning of the sacred science. (such as authoritarian leadership, and blind obedience - when someone challenges you - don't fight it - you take the challenge as you need it) 6) Loading the Language. This simply is the restructuring of the language to suit the group. A greatly simplified language can have extensive appeal and psychological power. Phrases and simple words come to replace the normal language usage and their meaning is greatly emotionalised or exaggerated. A series of cliches evolve that compress highly complex issues into simple words. In extreme cases an all encompassing "jargon" appears (often promoting the beliefs of the Sacred Science) which promotes a sense of exclusiveness and elitism. To an outsider this way of expressing vocally may even seem dull and colorless but to the group member it is a language all it's own rich in expression far beyond normal vocabulary. The aim of this control is constriction (As we express ourselves vocally, since language is an essential medium for doing so by constriction we are able to have our capacities for thought and feeling narrowed). Each group will have it's own jargon ( a simple word like "awesome" could be used to express a positive occuring event or feeling,"fallaways" could describe those who left the group,"devisive" those who left - or were kicked out for unorthodox veiws or "weak" to describe someone not doing well; a simple phrase like "I'm on fire/I/m fired up" could express that you are feeling positive, or " I have a critical heart" that you are struggling with group doctrine and you are the problem). In some cases you could say "He talks like us" is the same like "He is one of us". A newcomer to the group is often forced to learn, usually by mimicry, this language to communicate with other members as his normal use of language is often quite inappropriate. Initially a sense of insight and security may occur as the simplistic nature of communication now is enforced. Gradually though this will pass and a negative feeling will develop due to communication frustration. When faced with this dilemma the member will either proclaim loudly the ideological jargon (to demonstrate conformity, hide the problem, and provide protection from what will happen upon showing unorthodox words and phrases) or adopt a complex inner separation whereby group (public) and non-group (private) languages are in existance.(For instance at work a member may communicate fairly "normally" but when with a group the member will communicate using the loaded language. Either way imagination is inhibited in the struggle for expression. All jobs, groups, etc will have a jargon. The Military has one, Scientists have one, Doctors have them. I believe they are a symptom of a group mentality, often to promote exclusiveness and elitism. It is where communication is restricted or channelled into sole use of this jargon that I see a problem. For example "collateral damage" is military jargon for non military damage, I can say to a soldier either "the collateral damage was low" or " that bomb struck near the target and destroyed not only the bunker but two buildings, a jeep and an ambulance" - he would understand both and could reply to a question on what damage a bomb did by stating either. This to me is no constricting of communication. But if for example "fallaway" was a term for a person who had left the group for whatever personal reason (and doctrine stated that they must burn in the fires of Hell until they repented and came to realize that they had never had it so good as in the group) and all that a group member could express about them was "there was sin in their life"/" they had not been trained enough" without being able to express in normal everyday language why that person had left then something is definately wrong, to my way of thinking. Communication has been restricted to only the groups language and doctrine. 7) Doctrine over Person. (A further evolution along the path of the Sacred Science). Here the doctrine taught is greater than the person such that the character and personality of the member is directed (not into one's areas of potentials, nature or inate gifts) to fit the rigid inflexible doctrinal mould of what a person should be like.( A person may be artistically talented but active sports are doctrinally correct so this talent is not accepted/ a person may have an inate gift in an area that doctrine states is wrong so this gift is not used/ a person may have to conform to certain sexually based doctrinal characteristics that are incompatible i.e womens rights, submission, dominance etc). The doctrine, and it's abstractions is greater than anything human.(The doctrine expresses intense evangalism so ALL must intensely evangelise, the doctrine states that sacrifice is supreme so ALL must supremely sacrifice, the doctrine states that the image you show is important so ALL must project a good image). You must be like what the doctrine states you should be like, you must act like the doctrine states you must act, to do otherwise causes a problem as the doctrine is always correct. (This typically shows itself in problems for the member when they are forced to adapt their personality in an area, and speed they are uncomfortable with. Immediate compliance is often the call by leadership which compounds the problem. The member has developed internal controls that focus on life as it should be experienced as doctrine states, which will often be at odds with contradictions or experiences. Guilt may result as a not following doctrine, either felt personally or imposed by others when the non-orthodox action/belief is exposed. Often the doctrine implies that doubts about the doctrine are the results of an individuals own evil or non-effective performance.( You are feeling unhappy as there is some undealt with sin in your life/ You are feeling unhappy as you have not been evangalising/praying/tithing enough). You are the problem not the doctrine. History is often rewritten to prove that the doctrine is correct. Nothing that challenges the doctrine as the Sacred Science is permitted. Human experience is belittled when compared to the all powerful Doctrine. 8) Dispensing of Existence. In a totalistic environment polarisation of veiws has occurred. It evolves from an "Us" versus "Them" thought pattern into an "Existence" versus "Non-Existence" dichotomy. The rational goes something like this : If one has an absolute vision of truth (Us) then those who have not this vision of truth (Them) are tainted. Since they are evil/tainted/living in darkness, they are outside our frame of reference and existence and do not have the right to exist. With the underlying assumption that there is only one path of existence, salvation etc all others are invalid and false and those not following doctrine have no right to exist. All obstacles to this rational must be destroyed or disarmed. Literally, those not of our group have no right to exist. (Which explains a lot about the treatment by totalistic groups of those who meet this criteria, or criticise the group; and must be dealt with accordingly; Nazism and Judaism being one example that comes to mind in an extreme form). A person not of the group (One of Them) when convinced of the validity of the groups doctrine can undergo a severe psychological shock of fear for their existence and undergo a conversion experience (becoming One of Us), as a literal means of securing existence for the future. Once accepted, being one of the elite (One of Us) can produce positive feelings for the person due to the new doctrine. Existence cannot be confirmed by the individual anymore. Existence is now in the hands of the group. It is dependant upon a sense of total merger with the ideological doctrine taught, creed (I beleive - therefore I am) and submission (I obey therefore I am). By living this in this environment, often with a peak intensity of experience life can be seen to "gain meaning". Existence has just been justified, but when you step from the group into the outside world, you enter the area of Non-existence. To my understanding, unless great effort is made to undo the doctrinal distortions associated with a totalistic groups ideology, most people when they leave the group (having done so understanding they are leaving a the area of Existence and are entering the area of Non-Existence) will undergo an intense trauma. Often the only way to deal with this trauma is rationalising denial of anything conected with where they have come from. To me this indicates that when people leave a religious ideological group, unless the core doctrinal fallacies are corrected, they will have nothing to do any religion or will fall victim to similar totalistic systems. Denial of anything to do with religion is a mechanism of dealing with the trauma of coping from going to the unperfect outside real world (Non-Existence/becoming one of Them) from an unreal environment that was set apart (Existence/One of Us). Not only does the person have to cope with what they beleived but also what they did while part of the group. Paranoia is useful when they are out to get you..... It keeps you alive longer... The problem with paranoia is that it makes you think you are important enough to worth the trouble to persecute in the first place.