
How totalism works - pepys
https://aeon.co/essays/how-cult-leaders-brainwash-followers-for-total-control
======
CalChris
Sounds like Scientology and a dozen other isms. However, why after freeing
yourself from something so insipid would you then dedicate a PhD to studying
it? That's insane. It's like getting out of prison and setting up a lean to
tent next to the prison wall.

~~~
chris_st
I dunno, seems brave to me. I think she's trying to shed light on something
horrible, to help others. Hope it helps...

~~~
gbhn
I've known people who have left groups not as intensely controlling as this,
but very controlling. There is typically a very long period where they aren't
directly controlled by the group, but are very much still "engaged" in the
sense that their interests still intersect quite a bit with the group.
(Wanting to spread warnings, rescue people they know, etc.)

I'm sure there's a psychological model for this, but I think that's why
there's so many "ex-XYZ" groups. Leaving is both abrupt and lengthy.
Especially so, I imagine, for a group so totally psychologically consuming.

------
gumby
She is doing important work. The attachment theory is just as applicable to
emergent phenomena than Nazism or death cults. Just consider those (depending
on your PoV): "violent radical leftists"/"idiotic racist Trump supporters" \--
just announcing such labels requires a strong binding to what you consider the
"opposite" (and correct) view.

------
rjeli
Here's a chilling story from a local cult currently operating in the Bay Area:
[https://www.facebook.com/confessionsucberkeley/posts/8829034...](https://www.facebook.com/confessionsucberkeley/posts/882903461742282)

------
kovrik
What strikes me is the fact that many people can definitely and clearly
believe that 'cults are bad and dangerous', but be religious at the same time!
It seems weird that people can't see that church and cults are basically the
same thing.

------
sebastianconcpt
Good piece. Also Posmodernism and Nihilism create this context in mass making
narrative and hysteria be the new source of life meaning (which they never
provide). Due to nihilism it really isn't life meaning so the psyche is
desperately set to seek political meaning externally i.e. the collective and
"fight for social justice". Which is endless and unattainable but the seeking
desire fills the gap. Simultaneously, posmodern techniques erode values and
logic so reality becomes "maleable" (so the guy more vulnerable to be
manipulated into "mass of manouver", "useful idiots", etc). This way people is
set in a downward spiral of all kinds of marxist self-victimisms (blaming the
100% of oneself miseries to any external "structure" which is trendy to attack
at any given epoch). Is sad to see people falling into this.

~~~
tryitnow
You're setting up strawmen here.

Any belief system will have extremists - doesn't mean that belief is bad.
Perhaps we can judge belief systems by the proportion of extremists they
produce? Postmodernism and Nihilism don't look so bad in this regard, whereas
religious cults, hardcore racists, and Leninists have pretty bad track
records.

And it's interesting that you call out Marxists, but not fascists, Nazis, and
religious zealots. Care to elaborate on that?

~~~
sebastianconcpt
We can include all extremists alright. I've pointed out Marxists because
Postmodernism is a child of the Frankfurt School. Basically the left cultural
war on the west to facilitate revolution.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBK5aKOr2Fw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBK5aKOr2Fw)

------
rwmj
I wonder if this is a "bug" in humans, or serves some evolutionary purpose --
perhaps in keeping small tribes together.

~~~
fallingfrog
From what I've read, the tendency to form cliques or tribes goes back to the
hunter-gatherer days, while heirarchy and authority are a newer development
that appeared with the first large agricultural societies. We've all been
indoctrinated from birth to a culture of authority to some degree or another,
but it continues to feel oppressive to be told what to do all day at work. So
you tell people that you're providing them an escape from all that, that
you're going to set them free, but the habit of reflexive submission is so
ingrained that you can use that urge to enslave them more completely.

~~~
fallingfrog
So to me it looks like the friction between the desire of the individual to
not be controlled, and the requirement of civilization that they do what they
are told, is a fundamental flaw that can never be reconciled, and will always
create an opportunity for a charismatic leader who will say, I will set you
free- but first, I need your unquestioning obedience.

------
cousin_it
Does the US have more cults than European countries? Or is it just that US
folks who leave cults are more vocal about it?

------
empath75
I feel like sean spicer and Kelly Anne Conway might want to read this.

------
nosound_badday
It doesn't help that a lot of it isn't illegal.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Well, it's worse than that. Irrational belief systems are actually generally
considered to be worthy of respect, which makes it culturally difficult to do
something about the cases where the effects of those beliefs are extreme.

~~~
ue_
I personally respect them for if I did not respect them then it would be an
affront to freedom. As much as the concept of "tolerance" is criticised (more
recently from those people who, I think rightly, are tired of only being
"tolerated") I think that people should be allowed to believe whatever they
want to believe.

I think the problem is when mockery of such systems is disallowed. I don't
know about other religions, but the Buddhist approach has been to neither
become prideful and puffed up when one congratulates one's religion, but not
to lose one's temper or become sad when one criticises it. In the former case
one should say "yes, you are right, well said". In the latter, one should say
"no, you are wrong, here is why..."

Unfortunately I can't find the citation in the Buddhist Pali Canon at the
moment despite searching for what I thought were the keywords, though what I
say is probably what one might expect from Buddhism.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
> I personally respect them for if I did not respect them then it would be an
> affront to freedom.

First, please distinguish respect for the person from respect for their
beliefs.

A person's beliefs (as long as those do not include the intent to harm others)
should have no effect whatsoever on what rights they have, and on being
accepted and treated as a human being equal to all other human beings in
society. That is respect for the person.

However, when a scientologist believes that Xenu's army dropped hydrogen bombs
into vulcanoes in order to free the thetans from their bodies (or whatever
exactly the story is, theology is not my expertise), there is absolutely no
room for respect for that, it is bullshit and should be called out as just
that.

And there is one very important reason for that: Respect for those beliefs by
society is one factor that keeps people trapped in these belief systems, which
is very much the opposite of freedom.

There are more than enough people who will tell you that they wished someone
had shown them earlier how ridiculous and irrational the beliefs they were
indoctrinated into were instead of validating it by pretending it was worthy
of respect, because they could have started earlier to live a life free from a
completely irrational fear of hell, for example.

Respecting ideas that suppress people's free development does not contribute
to freedom.

> I think the problem is when mockery of such systems is disallowed.

Well, yeah, but that is directly interlinked with the idea of respect for
irrational belief systems. Mocking something is inherently not respecting the
thing.

