scientology & celebrities

if i ever come to regret a cause that I was involved in or supported - political, religious, social, professional, etc - i hope I have the courage to admit I believed in it and did so with full possession of my mind and not that I was convinced into it

― Mordy, Monday, July 2, 2012 9:27 PM (21 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

not sure there's always a difference there mords

the church has committed abuses of control, power and violence in its history that go far beyond anything Scientology has ever done or is capable of doing. Nakedly.

also if u look at who cults recruit - it's most often intelligent or at least educated ppl - saying its just dumb ppl who believe irrational things is just plain wrong

if i ever come to regret a cause that I was involved in or supported - political, religious, social, professional, etc - i hope I have the courage to admit I believed in it and did so with full possession of my mind and not that I was convinced into it

― Mordy, Monday, July 2, 2012 8:27 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i've read at least a couple articles by/about ex sci people and they were p upfront about all the reasons they stayed with it, and never really made any claims about being brainwashed. but at least some people have left the org because they were party to people being brainwashed. some of those people were susceptible (mentally ill, young, broke), some started off ok and became susceptible (you can give ppl depression btw, Science Fact).

"the church has committed abuses of control, power and violence in its history that go far beyond anything Scientology has ever done or is capable of doing. Nakedly."

ok.

-you can snark about the Catholic Church and the military and frats and Earth First! and whoever, but scientology is patently, nakedly, about control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition

So? That's not today's Catholic church, although I don't think there are any apologists for that institution here either

So? That's not today's Catholic church

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

i guess i didn't preempt your expected response there: my point isn't that the church/frats/radicals haven't done bad stuff, just that scientology has built into it, on purpose, and by design, from the get-go, justifications and methods for being manipulative. the catholic church may have bloated into some kind of monstrous controlling thing over the years, but i'm not sure that it, or Psi U, convened at the outset to bilk people out of their money and use them as labor

Catholic church didn't buy an anti-religion phone support hotline and then coach families into accepting Catholicism when they called asking about their kid's weird Catholic interest either

u think that article is really long already and then you realize that it is connected to a dozen other wiki pages about church sex abuse cases divided by countries xxp

What I'm referencing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_Awareness_Network

sneaking suspicion the number of abuses per capita is a bit higher in scientology

I've met Catholic priests and nuns and none of them told my friends I was a subversive person and not to talk to me

what are you trying to argue exactly? scientology is a special historical flower and not another example of known human institutions + trends? good luck w/ that

No? That scientology is bad, it's recent, and we can stamp it out now!

if you give me a time machine I will consider other options

oh cool. what are you doing to stamp out scientology?

man you are normally so good at this sort of thing, mordy, but this is just weak sauce. yes, thank you for reminding an ex catholic that the catholic church isn't great. and that the institution, like many others, will pervert itself in self-defense.

but i'm still pretty sure that it was not initially predicated on eventually being the bad old catholic church that everyone hates; the sex abuse scandals aren't inherent to catholicism (imo), they are a product of its organization. scientology, otoh, has been a cynical enterprise from day one; that it employs abusive psychiatric trauma prescriptively seems like it shouldn't be all that shocking a claim. and no, it isn't unique, but it is distinct.

I meant the societal "we" really

i understand that you're passionate about this gbx, but i'm not really finding anything you're writing compelling and i'm not even sure what you're trying to argue. scientology is worse than the catholic church bc despite committing far less human abuses they were cynical from the beginning? and what's your end game here? that we ban it in the united states? that we pull all the members out and force them to sit in exit counseling? what exactly are you trying to convince me of?

there's a good breakfast spot nearby where the view is the back of a large scientology building and there's all these weird identically dressed scientologists scurrying around wearing black dress pants and gray t-shirts. looks like a really boring ikea or something.

Square One! I love that breakfast spot...

^^

That we keep them from infiltrating the IRS again, make sure local law enforcement in areas where they have a heavy presence treat them without preference, and pursue legal action against the organization when they violate actual laws, which has happened?

if i ever come to regret a cause that I was involved in or supported - political, religious, social, professional, etc - i hope I have the courage to admit I believed in it and did so with full possession of my mind and not that I was convinced into it

― Mordy, Monday, July 2, 2012 6:27 PM (10 minutes ago)

so you don't consider yourself to be particularly manipulable and make a point of taking personal responsibility for all your decisions. that's great; i feel the same way. but we shouldn't allow our sense of self-sufficiency to blind us to the fact that human beings are in certain respects manipulable and are at times manipulated. this doesn't absolve supposedly manipulated individuals of responsibility for their decisions on a personal level, but it does help explain why things happen the way they do on a demographic (impersonal) level. if you A) seek out needy and apparently manipulable people, and B) follow a few relatively simple "brainwashing" procedures in indoctrinating them, then you will probably increase your horde of blindly obedient followers.

it's not unknown in l.a. for scientologists to harass folks, like i've said. probably elsewhere, too, but here it happens a lot. like my neighbors!

mostly people who have left the church or who are kinda anti-church. lots of PI's hired to follow people, drones knocking on doors and hey, not doing anything wrong, just coming by with gentle reminders and leaving notes.

What I'm referencing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_Awareness_Network

Careful with anything that site references. CAN was taken over by Scientology and turned into a propaganda machine in 1997 - http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/60minutes/60min-transcript.html

scientology is worse than the catholic church bc despite committing far less human abuses they were cynical from the beginning?

Didn't realize this was a competition...

tom bergeron hosts "strange sects"

Yeah, the wikipedia article seems relatively unscathed right now. Key point:

In her book Researching New Religious Movements, Arweck wrote that individuals began to fear that Scientology would "use CAN's name to cause confusion", and these fears solidified with the appearance of "New CAN".[57] Board members of the "Old CAN" said the "New CAN" was nothing but a front group for Scientology.[26] A section of its website relating to the Aum Supreme Truth sect authored by Nick Broadhurst, a New Zealand Scientology Spokesman,[58] stated that the real source of the crimes committed by Aum were drugs and psychiatric treatments the cult administered to its members.[59] Broadhurst thanked the Scientology subsidiary Citizen's Commission on Human Rights for usage of material in his report.

So basically, a Scientology front spread information that the Japan subway poison gas attacks happened because the members were undergoing psychiatric treatment. Regardless of your opinion of modern psychiatry and the issues therein, they're spreading disinformation about mental health.

i had an argument with a friend once, who was sorta shilling what you are: that scientology is just as nuts as any other crazy old religion, and that if ppl want to believe in xenu and john travolta then cool man. that if i'm going to respect the beliefs of any other religion, then i ought to respect those of scientology. and that if they're doing bad stuff then that's just because organized religion begets bad stuff, the way of the world, bro. which is horseshit: this is a religion of recent coinage, promulgated cynically by the guy that made it up and told everyone he made it up for the money, and organized to take people's money in the most efficient way possible.

xp mordy i am trying to convince you that (a) it is possible for institutions to "brainwash" people (b) denying systematic psychiatric trauma as a means of control is tantamount to denying a lot of what we know about behavioral science (c) that that very same denial shits all over the experiences of people damaged by scientology and the Church and whoever else and that (d) scientology's beginnings and complete embrace of psychology as a tool (whilst decrying it as an evil) is distinct from most other organized religions (but not their fundie wings), and that that is Bad.

Worth a read:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/article1214690.ece

gbx otm

and just to make sure i've got it right.:

as i recall, you said that brainwashing was not a thing, and that ppl or their stupid parents used it to justify bad decisions they made. then, after the points were made that brainwashing basically is a thing, and that scientology is explicitly designed to entrap and manipulate people ("brainwash" them), and that that is bad, you said the catholic church had the spanish inquisition and that priests abused children.

(a) it is possible for institutions to "brainwash" people

your only argument to this effect has been that stockholm syndrome and battered spouse syndrome exist

(b) denying systematic psychiatric trauma as a means of control is tantamount to denying a lot of what we know about behavioral science

this is very vaguely put and i think indicates a very limited idea about what behavioral science and psychology are about

(c) that that very same denial shits all over the experiences of people damaged by scientology and the Church and whoever else

i don't know why your particular narrative is more positive towards ppl 'damaged by scientology and the Church and whoever else' and mine shits all over their experience. do you think the independent scientology movement feels like you're treating their choices w/ respect when you claim their belief in scientology comes from being brainwashed?

(d) scientology's beginnings and complete embrace of psychology as a tool (whilst decrying it as an evil) is distinct from most other organized religions (but not their fundie wings), and that that is Bad.

i don't know what to do about this claim at all. like why is it even included?

Also, the pope doesn't have a wife who's been missing since 2006.

tbf, the victims of the spanish inquisition and the abused children usually weren't too into catholicism after the fact, whereas the coercion in scientology's methods are directly related to getting people to adhere to the group's beliefs

w/all due respect why are you so defensive about scientology, mords, it seems to go beyond the usual "hey it's just as bad as any other religious organization"

A section of its website relating to the Aum Supreme Truth sect authored by Nick Broadhurst, a New Zealand Scientology Spokesman,[58] stated that the real source of the crimes committed by Aum were drugs and psychiatric treatments the cult administered to its members.[59]

wow wow wow

If they can have an independent scientology spinoff that doesn't use coercion and doesn't have the bad shit, I don't think anyone here would care? It just wouldn't be much like current Scientology, according to our knowledge of it.

when you claim their belief in scientology comes from being brainwashed?

literally no one is claiming this. in saying A) that something like what we call "brainwashing" does exist and is effective in gaining and maintaining control over people, and B) that scientology does seem deliberately constructed to do this, we are not saying that all believers in scientology are "brainwashed".

your only argument to this effect has been that stockholm syndrome and battered spouse syndrome exist

and that the tactics cults use to gain control over needy and desperate people are in fact effective

^ there's plenty of evidence of this out there

we can call it something other than "brainwashing" if you prefer

having been deeply immersed in religion growing up it's funny how much of it lingers with me insofar as having an "effect", though it may have more to do with nostalgia to some degree. but i mean catholic guilt is a "thing" for a lot of people, even some of those who have exited without looking back once.

maybe patty hearst has wistful memories of robbing banks, too.

silver lining of scientology: lots of good jazz fusion records!

as i recall, you said that brainwashing was not a thing, and that ppl or their stupid parents used it to justify bad decisions they made. then, after the points were made that brainwashing basically is a thing, and that scientology is explicitly designed to entrap and manipulate people ("brainwash" them), and that that is bad, you said the catholic church had the spanish inquisition and that priests abused children.

i think that a lot of ppl use brainwashing as a way of explaining why family/friends are involved in things they can't understand. i think they use it to talk about scientology. i think they use it to talk about all kinds of things - religious organizations, fraternal organizations, military organizations. i think they use it to talk about ppl doing all kinds of things that are a lot more understandable than xenu. they do it bc it's an easy shorthand so that you don't have to break down all the nuances of the 'brainwashing.' what makes ppl susceptible to these organizational relationships. why are some ppl prepared to hear this stuff and believe it. i think the festinger book does a much better job of exploring these questions without developing a broad theory of brainwashing.

i'm not invested in defending scientology. i've had first hand conversations with people who got in trouble with them over last few decades, including family friends who were blackmailed by them and a man who they threatened to kill. i've called them evil above on this very thread. i just am making a case that the evil they are is a very familiar evil, and that people's relationships to them aren't so different from various organizations + religions throughout human history. i don't think you need this 'brainwashing' or 'cult' jargon to diagnose what is going on with them. and in fact it obscures from actually understanding what is going on versus sensationalizing it.

Mordy I once read a book called Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids which is about teen death camps for well-to-do concerned parents, but it really convinced me of how malleable the human mind and will can be in certain artificially induced situations ––– like est encounter meetings, extended eye contact, etc. It's a book I think you'd find interesting if nothing else. If you read it, tell me what you think, I know we'd have a nice chatz about it.

I think when you decide you're 100% in control of your mind, your will, etc., you're making yourself more pervious to the subtle and malignant ways our all too fallible minds can be changed without even consciously knowing it.

this conversation is dumb, but abbott's post otm

i'm not invested in defending scientology. i've had first hand conversations with people who got in trouble with them over last few decades, including family friends who were blackmailed by them and a man who they threatened to kill. i've called them evil above on this very thread. i just am making a case that the evil they are is a very familiar evil, and that people's relationships to them aren't so different from various organizations + religions throughout human history. i don't think you need this 'brainwashing' or 'cult' jargon to diagnose what is going on with them. and in fact it obscures from actually understanding what is going on versus sensationalizing it.

― Mordy, Monday, July 2, 2012 10:13 PM (38 seconds ago) Bookmark

i dunno man. it's 'sensationalistic' to talk about the differences between Scientology and other religions? like the differences are totally minor and surface level? i think it's fair game to treat it as a relatively unique phenomenon.

i've personally found, since high school, accounts of cults, cult members, and brainwashing to make really titillating films, novels, true crime accounts, journalist accounts, etc. i think it ties into my interest in psychopathy since often a charismatic psychopath is at the center of these narratives. but i don't think the way we talk about them are very illuminating as to explaining why they exist, what they fulfill for people, etc. i think we pathologize the phenomenon (to use the language of a different discipline) and that it's superficial.