- Topic
I often read blogs and articles about other people that have left controlling groups/cults so I can learn about the experiences of others and how they compare to the experiences of WMS. Scientology has had many members leave mainly due to high profile celebrities leaving and others following. Paul Haggis, one of the former members interviewed for "Going Clear" wrote about his experience in leaving and how and why he ignored the signs for so long before realizing that the critisims leveled at Scientology were true. I find it interesting that not only WMS but many other organizations have the same support from their followers – defending their group, attacking the ones being critical, and refusing to look at evidence against their group. What I have found is that it usually takes the member getting rebuked, criticized or punished before they are willing to be open their mind and read anything critical against their group. Here is what Paul Haggis had to say about his experience:
This is a great article, Ms. Freedom. I've read others featuring Paul Haggis, but hadn't seen this one, and it's probably the best one. Yes, I think pretty much every controlling group follows this same formula. They are not allowed to question at all or cracks could appear. That is what happened to one of the WMS members whom they had called a "spiritual superstar." She questioned something and, as she put it, "Once a chink in the wall appeared, the floodwaters of reality couldn't be held back."
They really do have their members boxed in. They can't question their direct leaders because their leaders claim their commands come from "God" herself. Therefore they would be questioning or disobeying God if they didn't do what their leaders said to do. And the leaders tell them not to question. Boxed in. They have to realize they need to think outside the box, and the Wms is the box.
They create barriers to free thought, questioning, then create a “culture” of their own. Simple rules to break down an individual. They then call it “heavenly culture”, to force a member not to question it.
My take away from Haggis was that one can question all day long, so long as the questioning is within certain parameters; the systems sets it up so that the costs of staying are less than the costs of leaving.
Do you have any examples jw?
Mayor and Mike wrote:
Do you have any examples jw?
Sure. "Everyday" business (or political) life:
Whistleblowers are not protected, even though Obama preached that they would be protected. The costs to open one's mouth with truth incur much more emotional and financial penalties than keeping with the status quo or just leaving the organization quietly. At the upper levels of that of Julian Assange / Edward Snowden, swap the cost of burning in hell for all of eternity with a life sentence in jail. Our country is under attack by radicals that want to kill us….so don't you dare go questioning how many innocent Iraqis or Afghanistanians have been blown up by our bombs. Besides, the terrorists are to blame because the terrorists are using those innocents as human shields.
You question and two results are highly likely: 1) people don't like it and they work to adjust your behavior, 2) you realize that you're a minority of 1 with this opinion (the system constrains it to appear as such) and by default you must be crazy since everyone else is "normal".
I see. You make interesting points there. You really like to look at the big picture, don’t you jw?
In some churches, and that one we are particularly interested in, would make you believe the cost of leaving the group is your salvation and receiving a one way ticket to eternal damnation.
@jw Good parallel. I don’t know if it follows but whistleblowers are usually regarded as being on the right side of history in hindsight(Daniel Ellsberg). If the government uses similar methods of obfuscation in the face of criticism, what should that suggest about undue influence in public life?
I think the difference is that the government can control public opinion( maybe not as dominantly in the case of snowden) across the board, the WMS or any other control group for that matter, can only control the perspective of their congregation.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.