Brainwashing without force

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.mindcontrol,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
From: msb@netcom.com (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 10:12:25 GMT

In article <Zsx4VQn.milne@delphi.com>,  <milne@delphi.com> wrote:
>CAN claims that "brainwashing" occurs during simple conversations between
>people.
>
>Factually, there is no such thing as "brainwashing" in the absence of torture
>and physical coercion. For two decades, courts, government agencies and even
>members of the American Psychological Association have debunked the entire
>notion that brainwashing is possible without physical duress.

This is a very interesting question, because it deals with the 
effect of culture and other environmental factors on human 
consciousness.

  Brainwashing - a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to
  give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and
  attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas

                    -- Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1981

If we take this definition strictly, "brainwashing" implies
force, but what we are really interested in is whether the
*effects* of forcible brainwashing--regimentation and profound
changes in beliefs and attitudes--can be achieved with little or
no physical coercion.

The answer is certainly "yes", as any rational person can attest
after talking at length with a fervently believing Moonie, Hare
Krishna, white supremacist, fundamentalist Christian, objectivist, 
or scientologist.

Most of these people have not been physically beaten or otherwise
tortured, yet they often end up believing in such absurd ideas as:

 o Jesus died for our sins.  [fundamentalist Christians]

 o Homosexuals are evil, and should be killed.  [some
   fundamentalist Christians]

 o Doctors who remove an embryo before it even has a brain are 
   killing a person and deserve to be murdered.  [some
   fundamentalist Christians]
   
 o The world is ten thousand times as old as the scientific
   evidence indicates.  [scientology]

 o The world is only one-millionth as old as the scientific
   evidence indicates, and "God" put dinosaur bones into deep
   rock strata to test our faith.  [Christian creationism]
   
 o All evil in the world is caused by Jews and dark-skinned 
   people.  [white supremacists]
 
 o People who can't find work deserve to starve to death
   [objectivism/libertarianism].

 o Wealthy people necessarily got that way by being "productive",
   and this entitles them to have rights proportional to their
   wealth:
   (1) to control the mass communication of ideas (by buying
       and controlling mass media),
   (2) to elect legislators, presidents, governors, etc. (by 
       financing political campaigns and ads), and
   (3) to destroy the biosphere (by logging, mining, and 
       polluting).  [objectivism/libertarianism]
       
 o People who smoke marijuana don't have souls.  
   [Church Universal 'N' Triumphant]

 o The world is controlled by a secret cabal of British drug
   dealers, Jews, and homosexuals.  [LaRouchies]

 o People are possessed by billions of harmful spirits, which
   must be exorcised at great expense to the member, and profit
   to the "Church".  [scientology]
   
 o Lying and deception in the interest of the group is morally
   right.  [Moonies, Krishnas, scientologists].

 o Our leader/founder is the wisest person ever born and is 
   infallible.  [all of the above]
   
 o It is right and proper that one should work like a dog for the
   group for bare subsistence, and thereby make the extremely
   wealthy leaders even richer.  [all of the above]
   
These certainly *are* the same as the results of forcible
brainwashing, since no one is *born* believing such garbage,
and most aren't even brought up believing it.

Members of cults are motivated to go out and act on these
beliefs, often with harm to other people.  Certainly they
make great efforts to spread the beliefs to others.**

How are these profound changes in beliefs and attitudes
accomplished?

 o We are all raised in a Dominator culture.*  Thus we are all
   trained from infancy to obey authority and to believe those
   who say they know the truth.
   
 o Conversely, very few people are taught (or learn on their own)
   to examine their own minds and beliefs, and to figure out where
   their beliefs came from and whether or not they are correct.
   Most people simply think that whatever they happen to believe
   just *is* true.
   
 o Prospective suckers, er, members, of cults are told that the
   group is working for the betterment of the human race.  This
   is supported by a carefully crafted set of lies which has been
   refined over the years to successfully convince people.
   
 o All the people around the new member believe the crap.  This
   has a hypnotic effect.  In a Dominator culture, it is the
   greatest taboo to disagree with the prevailing beliefs.
   
 o The member is told that wonderful things will happen to him
   and to others if he believes and cooperates, but that terrible
   things will happen if he doesn't.
   
 o Members are often subjected to sleep deprivation, malnutrition, 
   long sessions of chanting, meditating, singing, or bizarre
   psychological programming and exercises [scientology] which
   effectively destroy rationality, will, and skepticism.

 o Members are strongly discouraged from talking to (or reading 
   anything by) non-believers, which prevents them from getting
   any sane input to counter the group's lies.
   
The central principle of non-forcible brainwashing is that "you
can attract more flies with honey than with vinegar", i.e., it is
much easier and more effective to reprogram a person's mind by
lying to them and getting them to *want* it and participate in
it, than it is to torture them until, e.g., they swear allegiance
to Chairman Mao and sign a confession about germ warfare.

I'm sure the conversion percentage of the cults mentioned above is 
far higher than that of the Chinese or Korean communists with 
U.S. prisoners (who resisted strongly).

For an excellent illustration, just read Kim Baker's twelve-part
story.  Despite being a very intelligent, caring, and courageous
woman, Kim was sucked into Scientology by means of its carefully
crafted set of lies, ended up believing it, and did a certain
amount of harm as a result (mostly, pulling in additional victims).
She finally became (literally!) disenchanted when she found out 
that Hubbard favored apartheid, which she had long hated and fought.

Likewise, see the affidavits of Fishman, Tabayoyon, Wollersheim,
Mayo, the Youngs, etc.  These are all intelligent people.  If they
can be brainwashed, then so can most people.

It is *not* done with the victims' (informed) consent, because it
is accomplished by telling them many lies, over and over again.

This is what cults do.  This is what the Cult Awareness Network
(and FACTnet) warns people against (*not* religion per se).  

CAN is a tiny organization with very little funding, staffed
mostly by volunteers; they can't even afford to hire a computer
person to put them on the Net.  Why do all the above organizations 
hate CAN and attack it in print and in the courts incessantly?

Because CAN *informs* people about how cults program people's
minds.  Call it brainwashing or not, that's what cults do.

A person who is made aware of cult methods will generally be
immune to their programming.  That is why the cults hate and
attack CAN.


* _The Chalice and the Blade_, by Riane Eisler, 1988, ISBN
  0-06-250-289-1.  An overview of the archaeological work of 
  Marija Gimbutas and others.  It explains the macro-history of
  human culture, and shows how domination, patriarchy, and war
  result from cultural programming, not human nature.

** Memetics Web page -- http://www.xs4all.nl/~hingh/

Scientology Web page -- http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html

From: hingh@xs4all.nl (Marc)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: 8 Mar 1995 19:24:15 GMT


o o o Jesus died for our sins.	[fundamentalist Christians]

He DID die for our sins, didn't he?  (It didn't help)
       
o o o People who smoke marijuana don't have souls.
      [Church Universal 'N' Triumphant]

Absolutely true!  People who don't smoke marijuana neither.

o o o People are possessed by billions of harmful spirits, which
      must be exorcised at great expense to the member, and profit
      to the "Church".  [scientology]

Compare: people are possessed by thousands of harmful mind viruses.
[memetics]


o o o Conversely, very few people are taught (or learn on their own)
      to examine their own minds and beliefs, and to figure out where
      their beliefs came from and whether or not they are correct.

This is in fact what many religious people do:	examine their own belief
(e.g. by reading the bible), figure out where their belief came from
(the bible answers that question), and of course the belief IS correct
from the point of view of these people.
Just like your own beliefs about reality are only correct according
to your own belief system.
   
o o o Prospective suckers, er, members, of cults are told that the
      group is working for the betterment of the human race.  This
      is supported by a carefully crafted set of lies which has been
      refined over the years to successfully convince people.

Most such 'lies' aren't "crafted" intentionally.  They evolve.
   
o o o Members are often subjected to sleep deprivation, malnutrition,
      long sessions of chanting, meditating, singing, or bizarre
      psychological programming and exercises [scientology] which
      effectively destroy rationality, will, and skepticism.

You have been subjected to years of unhealthy rational study which
effectively destroys spirituality, personal growth, and tolerance.


o o o Likewise, see the affidavits of Fishman, Tabayoyon, Wollersheim,
      Mayo, the Youngs, etc.  These are all intelligent people.  If they
      can be brainwashed, then so can most people.

Not including you?

o o o It is *not* done with the victims' (informed) consent, because it
      is accomplished by telling them many lies, over and over again.
      This is what cults do.  This is what the Cult Awareness Network
      (and FACTnet) warns people against (*not* religion per se).

What cults do seems to be quite similar to what CAN does (evangelizing).
Does CAN warn people against CAN?

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
From: tony@sidaway.demon.co.uk (Tony Sidaway)
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 03:27:23 +0000

In article <3jl08v$qgo@news.xs4all.nl> hingh@xs4all.nl "Marc" writes:
>
> What cults do seems to be quite similar to what CAN does (evangelizing).
> Does CAN warn people against CAN?

I don't get this.  The only people I see evangelizing about CAN are the
Hubbardologists.  CAN has an even lower profile on the net than CoS.
Are they running informercials on cable TV, or something?

BTW thanks to the clamheads for telling us about CAN.  That Cynthia
Kisser sounds really cool.

Maybe somebody should post an address for donations to CAN, or something.
Milne could put it in his sig file.

-- 
Tony Sidaway
tony@sidaway.demon.co.uk
"The most horrible thing they have done is to put out hundreds of messages
all over the net that say "free phone sex", with the scientologists'
toll-free phone number on it: 1-800-367-8788" --an211810@anon.penet.fi
"Poor little clams - snap! snap! snap!" --SubGenius Pope Charles of Houston
From: Richard Pocklington <pockling@sfu.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.memetics,alt.feminism
Subject: Dominator Culture
Date: 7 Mar 1995 17:43:55 GMT

=7F 
> * _The Chalice and the Blade_, by Riane Eisler, 1988, ISBN
>   0-06-250-289-1.	An overview of the archaeological work of
>   Marija Gimbutas and others.  It explains the macro-history of
>   human culture, and shows how domination, patriarchy, and war
>   result from cultural programming, not human nature.

It is also one of the more popular bogus meme complexes around.
Not that I don't think that programming is important, anything I've
posted earlier will attest to that, but let's not get off into meme
myth fairy land.  This book is full of shady archaeology, it draws 
broad conclusions from little data.  Heck, this ancient goddess
worship just might be true, but then again maybe all those ancient
venus images were the worlds first pornography.

I'm glad that the hypothesis is out there, but you should be 
aware that it stands on shaky evidence.

There are some good reasons to believe that human warfare is 
ancestral and non-warlike states (which are possible) are derived.
For example, there is evidence that genocidal warfare occurs in
both humans and chimps (Goodall).  Also when we look at world cultures 
=7Fwe see that most peoples that were contacted by europeans were 
warring amongst themselves already, including those such as the 
Tasmanians, who had been isolated from all other cultures for 
(likely) thousands of years.  Genocidal wars were also present in
tribal people in North America (let alone South America).

	 Thus if there is a 'dominator' culture,
it is the result of not one event which spread across the globe, but
that type of culture was independantly derived in many human cultures
all over the planet.  If this is so, then we have good reason to 
believe that non-dominator type cultures are not an evolutionary stable 
strategy.  Thus domination might not be directly under genetic 
influence, but it is still a probable consequence of the 
pre-dominator state. 

 This suggests that we should try to develop a likely
reconstruction of that state, in order to avoid it, for it will
be invasible by dominator culture all over again.  

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
From: msb@netcom.com (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 09:28:16 GMT

Marc <hingh@xs4all.nl> wrote:

>o o o Jesus died for our sins. [fundamentalist Christians]
>
>He DID die for our sins, didn't he?  (It didn't help)

He was murdered by people who were motivated by a contagious and
pandemic emotional illness which had infected them.  This sickness
has ravaged the human race for the past 5,000 years.  It is the
cause of patriarchy, rape, hatred and murder of gays and lesbians, 
greed, loss of contact with, and destruction of, the environment,
cruelty to animals, lust for power, Fascism, war, and genocide.

Wilhelm Reich called it the "Emotional Plague", and Riane Eisler
labelled it the "Dominator Paradigm" ("Dominator Culture").
It arises sometimes when a society is subjected to extreme and
prolonged stress, for example, starvation, which causes a chronic 
activation of instinctual fight-flight-freeze instincts.  This
in turn results in depression, anger, suppression of free-flowing
breathing and sexuality, and loss of full contact with reality.
It is passed on to children by emotional abuse and indoctrination.

It is a mind-virus (meme or meme-complex) which arises and spreads
by emotional and physiological, as well as cognitive, means.  One
of its most lethal embodiments is the Old Testament of the Judaeo-
Christian Bible.

>o o o People who smoke marijuana don't have souls.
>	  [Church Universal 'N' Triumphant]
>
>Absolutely true!  People who don't smoke marijuana neither.

Marc, if you have proof that people don't have a spirit part,
I'd be interested in seeing it.  There is a fair amount of 
anecdotal evidence for ghosts and ESP.

Anyhow, the point about the C.U.'n'T. is that they believe
that other people *do* have souls.  Their doctrine is an
excuse to hate people who use psychedelics.  That "Church",
like the Church of Stupidology, is strongly fascist.

>o o o People are possessed by billions of harmful spirits, which
>	  must be exorcised at great expense to the member, and profit
>	  to the "Church".  [scientology]
>
>Compare: people are possessed by thousands of harmful mind viruses.
>[memetics]

I'm not sure individuals have *that* many mind viruses, but it
certainly seems likely that their effects are often attributed
by Scientology victims to "body thetans" (BTs).

>o o o Conversely, very few people are taught (or learn on their own)
>	  to examine their own minds and beliefs, and to figure out where
>	  their beliefs came from and whether or not they are correct.
>
>This is in fact what many religious people do: examine their own belief
>(e.g. by reading the bible), figure out where their belief came from
>(the bible answers that question), and of course the belief IS correct
>from the point of view of these people.

Today I saw these horrifying words on an auto license plate
holder:

  God said it.
  I believe it.
  That settles it.

>Just like your own beliefs about reality are only correct according
>to your own belief system.

I don't think that all belief systems are equally valid in 
relationship to reality.  However, the evaluation of belief
systems is a very complex business, requiring an eclectic
and self-aware outlook, an honest dialog between believers, 
and various other factors.

>o o o Prospective suckers, er, members, of cults are told that the
>	  group is working for the betterment of the human race.  This
>	  is supported by a carefully crafted set of lies which has been
>	  refined over the years to successfully convince people.
>
>Most such 'lies' aren't "crafted" intentionally.  They evolve.

I think it's usually both.  

>o o o Members are often subjected to sleep deprivation, malnutrition,
>	  long sessions of chanting, meditating, singing, or bizarre
>	  psychological programming and exercises [scientology] which
>	  effectively destroy rationality, will, and skepticism.
>
>You have been subjected to years of unhealthy rational study which
>effectively destroys spirituality, personal growth, and tolerance.

True, but I think I've recovered from it to a substantial degree.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that *all* activities of meditating, 
singing, etc., are harmful, only that if very prolonged, they can
serve as aids to indoctrination.

>o o o Likewise, see the affidavits of Fishman, Tabayoyon, Wollersheim,
>	  Mayo, the Youngs, etc.  These are all intelligent people.  If they
>	  can be brainwashed, then so can most people.
>
>Not including you?

Definitely including me.  I was infected by Ayn Rand's "Objectivism",
as a result of reading her book _Atlas Shrugged_, and being around 
other believers.  I went around for decades telling people that
there is no such thing as economic exploitation, that a free
market will solve all social problems, that public schools (and
all other tax-supported institutions) are evil, and that
"non-productive" people (i.e., those without jobs) don't really
deserve to live.

Now I hear these same ideas coming out of Rush Limbaugh and other
"conservative" (I would say near-Fascist) media figures.

>o o o It is *not* done with the victims' (informed) consent, because it
>	  is accomplished by telling them many lies, over and over again.
>	  This is what cults do.  This is what the Cult Awareness Network
>	  (and FACTnet) warns people against (*not* religion per se).
>
>What cults do seems to be quite similar to what CAN does (evangelizing).
>Does CAN warn people against CAN?

What is it that you think CAN evangelizes about, the danger of
cults?  Do you think that Scientology, the Moonies, Fundamentalist
Christianity and Islam, etc., are not dangerous?

CAN is not pushing any particular belief system.

From: hingh@xs4all.nl (Marc)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: 14 Mar 1995 16:04:39 GMT

Mark Bilk:
>(talking about the "Dominator Paradigm")
>It is a mind-virus (meme or meme-complex) which arises and spreads
>by emotional and physiological, as well as cognitive, means.  One
>of its most lethal embodiments is the Old Testament of the Judaeo-
>Christian Bible.

I'm quite sure you realise that this type of statements are offensive
for all Chistians and Jews, not only cultists.
What effect do you intend with such rhetoric?
If you sincerely want to put an end to
	 "patriarchy, rape, hatred and murder of gays and lesbians,
	 "greed, loss of contact with, and destruction of, the environment,
	 "cruelty to animals, lust for power, Fascism, war, and genocide
you'd better stop calling names, and start an OPEN DIALOGUE with the
people infected by this meme-complex.

What this small world needs is TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE.
Clearly, cults and fundamentalist religions are not tolerant.
But don't let them force you to be equally intolerant!

Look at it this way: by being intolerant, cults try to infect you with the
virus of intolerance.

++marc
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.support.ex-cult,alt.memetics
From: ar@zeus.uk.mdis.com (Alastair Rae)
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 17:39:11 GMT

The problem here is that the meme analysis is fine for the detached
observer who feels they understand what's going on in the mind of a
cultist. But it don't work for "curing" the infected mind.

Imagine the scene: "Hey, Mister! Your heart-felt beliefs are really a
mind virus that you caught off of some proselytising carrier." In some
countries that would get you beaten up, locked up or killed. (That's if
they understood what you were raving about in the first place.)

By accepting a tautologous meme set, the Christian, Jew or other cultist
close their mind to rational thought. You can say what you want, in
their newsgroups or elsewhere, but all you'll do is get up their noses.
With any luck they won't issue a fatwah against you.

---
Home page
The opinions expressed here are probably not those of my employers
Newsgroups: alt.memetics
From: bv056@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Richard Kulisz)
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 14:52:54 GMT

In a previous posting, Marc (hingh@xs4all.nl) writes:
> Mark Bilk:
>>(talking about the "Dominator Paradigm")
>>It is a mind-virus (meme or meme-complex) which arises and spreads
>>by emotional and physiological, as well as cognitive, means.  One
>>of its most lethal embodiments is the Old Testament of the Judaeo-
>>Christian Bible.
>
> I'm quite sure you realise that this type of statements are offensive
> for all Chistians and Jews, not only cultists.
> What effect do you intend with such rhetoric?
> If you sincerely want to put an end to
>	    "patriarchy, rape, hatred and murder of gays and lesbians,
>	    "greed, loss of contact with, and destruction of, the environment,
>	    "cruelty to animals, lust for power, Fascism, war, and genocide
> you'd better stop calling names, and start an OPEN DIALOGUE with the
> people infected by this meme-complex.

open dialogue ... just another keyword like info hypeway. Already I'm
against you.

Trying to get back to memetics because it only seems to be used as a tool
for arguing against fundies - good in itself but not here -; the memes for
diassociation from nature, sexism, patriarchy, homophobia are all very
present in religion, particularly fundamentalist religion. It's not name
calling if it's the truth ... which makes it more effective. The way it
was said was in the style of name-calling ... dumb, real dumb.

> What this small world needs is TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE.

Yes ... tolerance ... then we can absorb you religious SOBs into the main
population!!!! HAHAHAHAHA - now you can't say you haven't seen a troll.

> Clearly, cults and fundamentalist religions are not tolerant.
> But don't let them force you to be equally intolerant!

Why? just for the sake of being different? lame argument.

> Look at it this way: by being intolerant, cults try to infect you with the
> virus of intolerance.

I can be very intolerant and it will be as a gene ... a feature ... not a
disease. Memes are in the domain of 'shifting passions of the masses', of
beliefs, of basic assumptions, knowledge.

Attitudes are not really the same. If it's thought out it's not a seperate
meme in itself but a natural conclusion from all the other memes ... a
virtual meme.

From: hingh@xs4all.nl (Marc)
Newsgroups: alt.memetics
Subject: Re: Brainwashing Without Force; CAN (was: The Myth of Brainwashing)
Date: 18 Mar 1995 12:23:18 GMT

>> you'd better stop calling names, and start an OPEN DIALOGUE with the
>> people infected by this meme-complex.
>open dialogue ... just another keyword like info hypeway. Already I'm
>against you.
>Trying to get back to memetics because it only seems to be used as a tool
>for arguing against fundies - good in itself but not here -; the memes for
>diassociation from nature, sexism, patriarchy, homophobia are all very
>present in religion, particularly fundamentalist religion. It's not name
>calling if it's the truth ... which makes it more effective. The way it
>was said was in the style of name-calling ... dumb, real dumb.

"It's the truth", that's only your vision, and never an excuse for
name-calling and intolerance.
If everybody gets a fair chance to explain his or her "truth" using
'rational' arguments, and all parties are willing to listen without 
prejudice to their opponents' view, we get what I'd call an 'open 
dialogue'. (agreed, it's a cliche term)
I don't think you're pleading for anything else then such an open
discourse, or do you?

>> What this small world needs is TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, TOLERANCE.
>Yes ... tolerance ... then we can absorb you religious SOBs into the main
>population!!!! HAHAHAHAHA - now you can't say you haven't seen a troll.

An alternative of "absorbing" the SOBs would be what?  Exterminating them?

>> Clearly, cults and fundamentalist religions are not tolerant.
>> But don't let them force you to be equally intolerant!
>Why? just for the sake of being different? lame argument.

We NEED to be tolerant towards religions, for the sake of preserving the 
valuable memes religious meme pools contain.  We NEED all the ancient 
wisdom we have on this planet.  We just cannot build a stable and 
flexible global society with only a handful of (fairly recently evolved)
western atheist memes.
Note that this requires more than a passive 'laissez faire' tolerance -- 
we need to convince fundamentalists of the fact that their wisdom is only 
valuable in a context of tolerance and open discourse.
This is a hard job.  One thing however is clear: aggressive rhetoric 
won't do any good.

>> Look at it this way: by being intolerant, cults try to infect you with the
>> virus of intolerance.
>I can be very intolerant and it will be as a gene ... a feature ... not a
>disease. Memes are in the domain of 'shifting passions of the masses', of
>beliefs, of basic assumptions, knowledge.
>Attitudes are not really the same. If it's thought out it's not a seperate
>meme in itself but a natural conclusion from all the other memes ... a
>virtual meme.

Okay.  (I said 'virus', not 'meme')

Try to figure out what you're fighting: are you fighting against religion 
per se, or against the intolerance of some religions?

++Marc