alt_religion_scientology/FACTNetARS20020302

There have been several newspaper stories published recently implying that
brainwashing and mind control do not exist. This is very unusual in that,
suddenly before the trial of suspected terrorist cult members, we start
seeing spontaneous articles from different news sources telling the American
public that mind control does not exist.

This has happened before. If you want to see an excellent reply to the last
time a similar disinformation/misinformation campaign was activated then
read the article below the dotted line. Also, below that, find a table that
compares Education, Advertising, Propaganda, Indoctrination and Thought
Reform.

These have generously been donated to the FACTNet website by Margaret Singer
specifically for the purpose of empowering our subscribers regarding their
search for clarity regarding these issues.

Whenever someone tells you that mind control does not exist, just ask
yourself one question: "If mind control does not exist then why are
intelligence agencies all over the world currently spending millions of
dollars on research into mind control and other forms of coercive
psychological influence?"

Yours Respectfully,
FACTNet Staff

---------------------

{A better, prettier, version of this article can be found at
http://www.factnet.org/Thought_Reform_Exists.htm . (This is especially
pertinent regarding the last section. Which is a table (grid) that cannot be
shown in this e-mail but can be seen very well if you go to the above URL.)}

Thought Reform Exists: Organized, Programmatic Influence
("Thought Reform" throughout this article can be read as synonymous with
"Brainwashing" & "Coercive Persuasion".)

Margaret Thaler Singer, Ph.D.

Recently, cult apologists have attempted to create the impression that the
concept of thought reform has been rejected by the scientific community.
This is untrue.

As recently as May of this year, the new Diagnostics and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) published by the American Psychiatric
Association cites thought reform as a contributing factor to "Dissociative
Disorder Not Otherwise Specified" (a diagnosis frequently given to former
cult members). Thought reform (notes 1,2,3 below) and its synonyms
brainwashing and coercive persuasion (4.5) were also noted in DSM-III (1980)
and is DSM-III revised (1987), as well as in widely recognized medical texts
(6.7).

Thought reform is not mysterious. It is the systematic application of
psychological and social influence techniques in an organized programmatic
way within a constructed and managed environments (5,7,8,9,10). The goal is
to produce specific attitudinal and behavioral changes. The changes occur
incrementally without its being patently visible to those undergoing the
process that their attitudes and behavior are being changed a step at a time
according to the plan of those directing the program.

In society there are numerous elaborate attempts to influence attitudes and
modify behavior. However, thought reform programs can be distinguished from
other social influence efforts because of their totalistic scope and their
sequenced phases aimed at destabilizing participants' sense of self, sense
of reality, and values. Thought reform programs rely on organized peer
pressure, the development of bonds between the leader or trainer and the
followers, the control of communication, and the use of a variety of
influence techniques. The aim of all this is to promote conformity,
compliance, and the adoption of specific attitudes and behaviors desired by
the group. Such a program is further characterized by the manipulation of
the person's total social environment to stabilize and reinforce the
modified behavior and attitude changes. (8,9,10)

Thought reform is accomplished through the use of psychological and
environmental control processes that do not depend on physical coercion.
Today's thought reform programs are sophisticated, subtle, and insidious,
creating a psychological bond that in many ways is far more powerful than
gun-at-the-head methods of influence. The effects generally lose their
potency when the control processes are lifted or neutralized in some way.
That is why most Korean War POWs gave up the content of their prison camp
indoctrination programs when they came home and why many cultists leave
their groups if they spend a substantial amount of time away from the group
or have an opportunity to discuss their doubts with in intimate (11).

Contrary to popular misconceptions (some intentional on the part of
naysayers), a thought reform program does not require physical confinement
and does not produce robots. Nor does it permanently capture the allegiance
of all those exposed to it. In fact, some persons do not respond at all to
the programs, while others retain the contents for varied periods of time.
In sum, thought reform should be regarded as "situationally adaptive belief
change that is not subtle and is environment-dependent". (8,10)

The current effort by cult apologists to deny thought reform exists is
linked to earlier protective stances toward cults in which apologists
attempted to deny the cults' active and deceptive recruitment practices,
deny the massive social, psychological, financial, spiritual and other
controls wielded by cult leaders and thus dismiss their often destructive
consequences.

These earlier efforts to shield cults from criticism rest on a seeker theory
of how people get into cults, which overlooks the active and deceptive
tactics that most cults use to recruit and retain members. When bad things
happened to followers of Jim Jones or David Koresh, the twisted logic of
some apologists implied that these "seekers" found what they wanted, thus
absolving the cult leader and his conduct.

Finally, to promulgate the myth that though reform has been rejected by the
scientific community, cult apologists doggedly stick to faulty understanding
of the process contrary to findings in the literature, they ---- that
physical coercion and debilitation are necessary for thought reform to
occur, and that the effects of thought reform must be instant, massive,
uniform, universally responded to, and enduring.

The recent upholding of thought reform in DSM-IV is but one more piece of
evidence that this orchestrated process of exploitative psychological
manipulation is real and recognized within the professional psychiatric
field. To say then that the concept of thought reform is rejected by the
scientific community is false and irresponsible. The phenomenon has been
studied and discussed since 1951, and continuing studies by social
psychologists and other behavioral scientists have solidified our
understandings of its components and overall impact.

© 1994 M.T. Singer {The Cult Observer, Vol.11, No.6 (1994): 3-4.}

References:

1. Lifton, R.J. (1961). Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism. New
York: W.W. Norton. (Also: 1993, University of North Carolina Press.)
2. Lifton, R.J. (1987). Cults: Totalism and civil liberties. In R.J.
Lifton, The Future of Immortality and Other Essays for a Nuclear Age. New
York: Basic Books.
3. Lifton, R.J. (1991, February). Cult formation. Harvard Mental Health
Letter.
4. Hunter, E. (1951). Brainwashing in China. New York: Vanguard.
5. Schein, E.H. (1961). Coercive Persuasion. New York: W. W. Norton.
6. Singer, M.T. (1987). Group psychodynamics. In R. Berkow (Ed.). Merck
Manual, 15th ed. Rahway, NJ: Merck, Sharp, & Dohme.
7. West, L.J., & Singer, M.T. (1980). Cults, quacks, and nonprofessional
psychotherapies. In H.I. Kaplan, A.M. Freedman, & B.J. Sadock (Eds.),
Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry III, 3245-3258. Baltimore: Williams &
Wilkins.
8. Ofshe, R., & Singer, M.T. (1986). Attacks on peripheral versus central
elements of self and the impact of thought reforming techniques. Cultic
Studies Journal. 3, 3-24.
9. Singer. M.T. & Ofshe, R.(1990) Thought reform programs and the
production of psychiatric casualties. Psychiatric Annals, 20, 188-193
10. Ofshe, R. (1992). Coercive persuasion and attitude change.
Encyclopedia of Sociology. Vol. 1, 212-224. New York: McMillan.
11. Wright, S. (1987) Leaving Cults. The Dynamics of Defection. Society
for the Scientific Study of religion. Monograph no. 7, Washington, DC.

--------------------------

>From Cults In Our Midst (
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0787902667/factnet-20/104-9374991...
1130 )

Table 3.2. Continuum of Influence and Persuasion

Focus of body of knowledge:

Education - Many bodies of knowledge, based on scientific findings in
various fields.
Advertising - Body of knowledge concerns product, competitors; how to sell
and influence via legal persuasion.
Propaganda - Body of knowledge centers on political persuasion of masses of
people.
Indoctrination - Body of knowledge is explicitly designed to inculcate
organizational values.
Thought Reform - Body of knowledge centers on changing people without their
knowledge.

Direction & degree of exchange:

Education - Two way pupil-teacher exchange encouraged.
Advertising - Exchange can occur but communication generally one-sided.
Propaganda - Some exchange occurs but communication generally one-sided.
Indoctrination - Limited exchange occurs, communication is one-sided.
Thought Reform - No exchange occurs, communication is one-sided.

Ability to change:

Education - Change occurs as science advances; as students and other
scholars offer criticisms; as students & citizens evaluate programs.
Advertising - Change made by those who pay for it, based upon the success of
ad programs by consumers law, & in response to consumer complaints.
Propaganda - Change based on changing tides in world politics and on
political need to promote the group, nation, or international organization.
Indoctrination - Change made through formal channels, via written
suggestions to higher-ups.
Thought Reform - Change occurs rarely; organization remains fairly rigid;
change occurs primarily to improve thought-reform effectiveness.

Structure of persuasion:

Education - Uses teacher-pupil structure; logical thinking encouraged.
Advertising - Uses an instructional mode to persuade consumer/buyer.
Propaganda - Takes authoritarian stance to persuade masses.
Indoctrination - Takes authoritarian & hierarchical stance.
Thought Reform - Takes authoritarian & hierarchical stance; No full
awareness on part of learner.

Type of relationship:

Education - Instruction is time-limited: consensual.
Advertising - Consumer/buyer can accept or ignore communication.
Propaganda - Learner support & engrossment expected.
Indoctrination - Instruction is contractual: consensual
Thought Reform - Group attempts to retain people forever.

Deceptiveness:

Education - Is not deceptive.
Advertising - Can be deceptive, selecting only positive views.
Propaganda - Can be deceptive, often exaggerated.
Indoctrination - Is not deceptive.
Thought Reform - Is deceptive.

Breadth of learning:

Education - Focuses on learning to learn & learning about reality; broad
goal is rounded knowledge for development of the individual.
Advertising - Has a narrow goal of swaying opinion to promote and sell an
idea, object, or program; another goal is to enhance seller & possibly
buyer.
Propaganda - Targets large political masses to make them believe a specific
view or circumstance is good.
Indoctrination - Stresses narrow learning for a specific goal; to become
something or to train for performance of duties.
Thought Reform - Individualized target; hidden agenda (you will be changed
one step at a time to become deployable to serve leaders).

Tolerance:

Education - Respects differences.
Advertising - Puts down competition.
Propaganda - Wants to lessen opposition.
Indoctrination - Aware of differences.
Thought Reform - No respect for differences.

Methods:

Education - Instructional techniques.
Advertising - Mild to heavy persuasion.
Propaganda - Overt persuasion sometimes unethical.
Indoctrination - Disciplinary techniques.
Thought Reform - Improper and unethical techniques.

--------------

This editorial opinion provided by FactNet, Inc. FactNet is a nonprofit
Internet archive and newswire service dedicated to protecting freedom of
mind by reducing harms caused by cults and mind control. FactNet's web page
is located at http://www.factnet.org and has received over 21,000,000 hits.
Re-distribution and proper re-posting of this document is appreciated.
Please use proper net etiquette when doing so.
--
F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.
PO Box 3135
Boulder, CO 80307-3135 USA

* Web site http://www.factnet.org/
* E-mail mailto: manage@factnet.org
* Donations http://www.factnet.org/donation.htm
* Subscriptions to Newsletters http://lists.factnet.org/mailman/listinfo/factnet-news