Post by philiprosenthal on Feb 6, 2007 7:08:06 GMT
DESENSITISATION, JAMMING, THEN CONVERSION
How does the sociological cult within EN defend their practices to their other leaders and to outside church leaders? A common manipulative strategy used by such groups is: the three steps of desensitisation, jamming, then conversion.
Desensitisation means trying to get people to accept or give up fighting something which they previously regarded as wrong. This can be done in a number of ways. Repetition in small doses is one good method. Include here the boasting about the group and the personality of the leader. Positive spin on evil and weak excuses for mistakes instead of repentance is another. In the case of scandal, the strategy is to give people just enough information so that they are less shocked by the truth when it comes out, but not the whole truth that might lead them to react and demand change. People hear of others being unfairly treated in the organisation, but they are just told they don't know the full story (which they are not told anyway) - so they might not be happy, but they just accept it and think they wouldn't achieve anything by protesting anyway. People are told the scandal is being 'dealt with', 'investigated' etc. - and time drags on until they have lost initial interest in it. The issue is discussed in passing at meeting after meeting, with no conclusion or resolution until people are tired of it. Excuses are made such as 'showing grace' (which is selective to protect leaders and not followers) to avoid confronting sin in leadership. What is abhorent (e.g. tolerating scandal) is now associated with all kinds of good things like 'grace', 'love', 'relationship', 'forgiveness'. So people are desensitised to evil.
The second step is 'jamming'. That means jamming the message of the few dissenters who do speak up. The word comes from the practice of communist countries trying to jam the broadcasts of western news into their nations by broadcasting at the same frequency something else much louder. They jam by exaggurating what the dissenter is saying and telling this to everyone so that the dissenter sounds unreasonable, offensive and to be ignored and marginalised. So for example, with regard to a scandal, the whistleblower said that if the facts were true and the persons accused of cover-up were not able to explain themeselves, then they should resign. Then the cult-defenders misreported this inside and outside as saying that the whistleblower had called for all the church leaders to resign. Now clearly this would be unreasonable and unfair. Only a handful were directly covering up - so it is not fair to punish everyone else as well. But the strategy works, because it makes various other leaders think the whistleblower is rash and unreasonable. The whistleblower is attacked acting out of wrong motives and misc other offences. The aim here is to try not only to discourage people from listening to the whistleblower, but to discourage them from associating with him or worse becoming a whistleblower/dissenter themselves. The whistelblower/dissenter is associated with all kinds of evil things. Things like 'anger', 'intolerance', 'unforgiveness', 'revenge', 'bad relationships', 'harshness', 'uncooperativeness' are associated with the one telling the truth.
Then the last step is conversion. People have been desensitised to evil and the true message has been jammed and the dissenters discredited. Now the deceieved are in a fog about what is right and what is wrong. The two are muddled up with all sorts of positive and negative spin. In this state of confusion, they opt to remain loyal to the cult. They compromise. They stop speaking up against evil. They accept and sometimes even defend what they never would have considered doing so before.
Sometimes the deceived person starts off as the dissenter/whistleblower but simply can't resist the social pressure of the group. Because the costs of leaving are too high, he eventually capitulates and starts to actually believe the new compromised and confused position. Then he becomes a more solid cult-follower.
This process happens again and again, as the cult-recruit goes on a downward slide accepting one compromise after another - until he cannot see Biblical right from wrong.
Anyone else seen this pattern?
How does the sociological cult within EN defend their practices to their other leaders and to outside church leaders? A common manipulative strategy used by such groups is: the three steps of desensitisation, jamming, then conversion.
Desensitisation means trying to get people to accept or give up fighting something which they previously regarded as wrong. This can be done in a number of ways. Repetition in small doses is one good method. Include here the boasting about the group and the personality of the leader. Positive spin on evil and weak excuses for mistakes instead of repentance is another. In the case of scandal, the strategy is to give people just enough information so that they are less shocked by the truth when it comes out, but not the whole truth that might lead them to react and demand change. People hear of others being unfairly treated in the organisation, but they are just told they don't know the full story (which they are not told anyway) - so they might not be happy, but they just accept it and think they wouldn't achieve anything by protesting anyway. People are told the scandal is being 'dealt with', 'investigated' etc. - and time drags on until they have lost initial interest in it. The issue is discussed in passing at meeting after meeting, with no conclusion or resolution until people are tired of it. Excuses are made such as 'showing grace' (which is selective to protect leaders and not followers) to avoid confronting sin in leadership. What is abhorent (e.g. tolerating scandal) is now associated with all kinds of good things like 'grace', 'love', 'relationship', 'forgiveness'. So people are desensitised to evil.
The second step is 'jamming'. That means jamming the message of the few dissenters who do speak up. The word comes from the practice of communist countries trying to jam the broadcasts of western news into their nations by broadcasting at the same frequency something else much louder. They jam by exaggurating what the dissenter is saying and telling this to everyone so that the dissenter sounds unreasonable, offensive and to be ignored and marginalised. So for example, with regard to a scandal, the whistleblower said that if the facts were true and the persons accused of cover-up were not able to explain themeselves, then they should resign. Then the cult-defenders misreported this inside and outside as saying that the whistleblower had called for all the church leaders to resign. Now clearly this would be unreasonable and unfair. Only a handful were directly covering up - so it is not fair to punish everyone else as well. But the strategy works, because it makes various other leaders think the whistleblower is rash and unreasonable. The whistleblower is attacked acting out of wrong motives and misc other offences. The aim here is to try not only to discourage people from listening to the whistleblower, but to discourage them from associating with him or worse becoming a whistleblower/dissenter themselves. The whistelblower/dissenter is associated with all kinds of evil things. Things like 'anger', 'intolerance', 'unforgiveness', 'revenge', 'bad relationships', 'harshness', 'uncooperativeness' are associated with the one telling the truth.
Then the last step is conversion. People have been desensitised to evil and the true message has been jammed and the dissenters discredited. Now the deceieved are in a fog about what is right and what is wrong. The two are muddled up with all sorts of positive and negative spin. In this state of confusion, they opt to remain loyal to the cult. They compromise. They stop speaking up against evil. They accept and sometimes even defend what they never would have considered doing so before.
Sometimes the deceived person starts off as the dissenter/whistleblower but simply can't resist the social pressure of the group. Because the costs of leaving are too high, he eventually capitulates and starts to actually believe the new compromised and confused position. Then he becomes a more solid cult-follower.
This process happens again and again, as the cult-recruit goes on a downward slide accepting one compromise after another - until he cannot see Biblical right from wrong.
Anyone else seen this pattern?