Catcup

This is my own personal opinion here in brackets, you may feel otherwise. So what do you need to begin to control a person or group? Find out what their need is, and show them exactly how you can meet it. [Done easily through observation & questions] Demonize a scapegoat. [Traditional, organized churches. Unbelievers. Cop-outs. Unbelieving family members...., ] Get your target to begin to agree with you. [Easily done if you've tapped their need and identified their problem areas...] Make a small request you think you can get them to agree to. [Come meet my friend, come to a fellowship, picnic, concert, Headquarters ... ] Get them to fulfill their request publicly [Comes to fellowship, participates in singing, prayer, sharing] Get them to make a public declaration. [Sure, I'll come back, I'll take the class... ] Repeatedly. [Takes the class, attends more functions, responds positively to leadership...] Watch their response. [Are they receptive so far? If so, up the ante...] Make demands which increase in frequency and intensity. [Abundant sharing. Deeper involvement. Report back to me. Give me your schedule...] Keep up the public declarations of support. [WOW, Staff, Way Disciple, Way Corps, ...] By then, the hook is set, and the demands continue to ratchet up tighter and tighter. You know the drill...

As requested previously on another thread, here are more notes on Social Psychology and how people, groups, and organizations are led to do distasteful things against their better judgement. I will give you just a few basics and examples, some of which I have exerpted from a paper I did a while back, and then I will leave it up to you to draw your own parallels: Human beings want to appear consistent in what they say and what they do. They naturally are invested heavily in public image, and once they make a public act, declaration or statement, even if they might not feel 100% comfortable with it, they will tend to attempt to bring their beliefs in line with that statement, declaration, or action. So, human beings tend to believe what they say. In other words, if you can get a person to say it, he will eventually try to believe it, in order to justify himself. Various means have been used for centuries to capitalize on that basic human instinct, but the media and the sales world have long been familiar with two phenomena unique to humans that combine with our need to be consistent, and use them consistently with great success: The foot-in-the-door and lowball phenomena. These phenomena have been understood and used by many, for various purposes. The foot-in-the-door phenomenon is basically, if you can get someone to agree to do a small thing for you, it is harder for them to say no to you the next time they are asked. If you can get them to agree to do it once, you have your foot in the door in order to later make another request, to which they are more likely to agree. For example, politicians know that if you can get someone to agree to place a small sign in their yard, next time you may be able to get them to agree to two or three larger ones. The low-ball phenomenon is that once you can get someone to agree to some small, minimally intrusive, sometimes insignificant request or terms, the terms and/or requests can then be switched, or ratcheted up in intensity, and the person is less likely to object. For instance, when you go in to a car dealership and agree to the basic package, then you find pretty soon there are a lot of "add-ons" which many find difficult to resist. (By the way, both of these phenomena were taught to my Corps, the 6th Corps, in our Christian Motivational Techniques Class as a means to sign people up for the class, in witnessing, and in undershepherding. It was interesting to see them show up in a Soc.Psy class in detail with their applications...) Also, when someone receives favors from another whom they know to do, or to have done evil, they are then somewhat invested in not only that person, but in their own public image. Making public confessions of support for the person help to quiet any internal dissonance. As an example of how all those phenomena can be brought to bear in groups, consider the case of World War II Germany. In order to understand the factors, the societal context must be considered. World War II Germany was a society suffering the brutal effects of a humiliating defeat in World War I. The resultling Treaty of Versailles burdened Germany with what they viewed as unfair reparations, which crippled their economy, in turn creating immense hardships upon the population in general. Ervin Staub, a prominent Social Psychologist, says such conditions predispose a society to dangerous ideologies (Staub, 2003 The Psychology of Good and Evil: Why Children, Adults, and Groups Help and Harm Others). Ideologies that focused the blame for Germany's problems on the Jews were particularly popular. At the very least, as far back as 1919, the consistent devaluation and dehumanization of the Jews could be seen and heard in newspapers and political speeches. Understanding these aspects of German society at that particular point in time is key to understanding what resulted. Staub declares that "Culture not only affects group behavior, but shapes individual psychology." For example, the typical German soldier who was born around 1920 would have been raised from birth in a cultural atmosphere emphasizing respect for authority, and on a steady diet of growing virulent anti-Semitism, political instability, and economic hardship. Through the foot-in-the-door and lowball phenomena, this soldier would have witnessed and participated in an increasingly constrictive legislation and repression against the Jews and the confiscation and destruction of their businesses and properties, which he would have grown to feel was justified. He may have been indoctrinated through the Hitler Youth program, and most certainly in other propaganda with the ideology that his Aryan race was superior, and that Jews were vermin to be exterminated. This young man would have come of age at the pinnacle of Hitler's rise to power, participating in passionate Nazi rallies in which he would make public declarations of his commitment to Nazi ideals, and, in the need to appear consistent, bring his attitude in line with his declarations. Eventually, he readily embraced Hitler's assertion that Jews were the cause of all of Germany's ills and must be eliminated to ensure the survival and purity of the superior Aryan race. Thus, this young man and a multitude of others like him, dedicated themselves to implementing Hitler's Final Solution. Also, for example, if you are familiar with the entire series of Stanley Milgram's experiments, they showed how easily we can succumb to social prssures and figures of authority. Normal, everyday people are in fact capable of unthinkable actions, especially in the face of authority figures and under social pressures. These pressures can sometimes be more powerful than even our most heartfelt moral values. In coarser words, Milgram showed us you don't have to be a "nut job" in order to follow one. He removed, for anyone who cares to see, any false impressions we may have that we are too clever to fall for a ruse, or too strongly connected to our ethics to violate them, especially against our own wishes. He also showed how important it is to maintain connectedness and reach out within a group to find support in order to resist a malevolent authority. His study and the above comparison with what happened in WWII Germany, can find valid applications wherever people must function within hierarchical organizations such as educational institutions, corporations, social, religious, political organizations, or in government. So what do you need to begin to control a person or group? Find out what their need is, and show them exactly how you can meet it. Demonize a scapegoat. Get your target to begin to agree with you. Get them to make a public declaration. Repeatedly. Watch their response. Make a small request you think you can get them to agree to. Get them to fulfill their request publicly. Make demands which increase in frequency and intensity. Keep up the public declarations of support. Now, you have pretty much hooked them and they will do the rest for you. Draw your own conclusions, parallels, or whatever.

There were both males and females in the group. I don't know if they tied them up as boy/girl/boy/girl. I don't remember whether she said. She did say, that whatever any one person had to do, they all did it together. I supposed you would have to briefly untie to pull on/off sleeves and such. But she did say they had to shower attached to each other and it was a challenge not to peek....

The toilet paper thread on the Just Plain Silly forum reminded me of this. Just wondered if any of you ever experienced this in the fellowlaborer program. Cxlia Cxrter, a 6th Corps sister, while sharing with us in a women's meeting on how to wipe our bottoms (YES!-- told to use only two squares of tissue), also told us of an experience she had during fellowlaborers on her apprentice year, that I found reaaaally peculiar. The fellowlaborers lived in a Way Home, and I don't remember how many there were, but it was a mixed group. They were all tied together with rope, from one hand to another, and they all had to live that way for a period of days, don't remember exactly how many. With all seriousness she talked about how they had to eat together, sleep together, shower together, and --------- use the toilet, all tied to each other wrist to wrist. Now just try to imagine the person you are tied at the wrist with trying to wipe his or her arse.......... Yep, she said they did it, and "learned so much about each other in the process." Indeedy do....

Act fast, Linder, the arse you save may be your own! You're used to that, though. Seriously, my first year in the 6th Corps, the women had a meeting in the hallway one afternoon, and we were schooled on how to wipe our bottoms. Yes. Cxlia Cxrter shared that during her fellowlaborer experience, they were all instructed by a Corps person to only use 2 (TWO) squares to wipe your bum.

Oldies, if you think that organization is capable of having a legitimate comeback if it focuses on "the right stuff," you might consider going back to the organization and attempting to spearhead the reform movement, or at least help. Don't hold your breath while waiting for change, though. Way too many of us who had access, tried for decades, and after wasting our lives there, found it impossible. But farbeit from me to discourage you from trying....

Yes, just imagine, and then multiply the intensity. Then, when coming from LCM, quadruple that.

It's probably more like four semesters to cover it. You have to understand the historical, economic, social, and political context of Germany during the first and second world wars in order to even begin to address the psychological aspects of the populus at that time. Many historians are now beginning to view World Wars I and II as the continuation of the same war since the issues in the first war remained unresolved and provided the fuel for the second. The issues are broad and span several decades and many countries, some of which do not even exist as such today. The worst conflict of the 20th century began with a single bullet in Sarajevo and ended with an atomic Bomb over Japan and involved the entire world. A whooole lot of bad happened to the people on the planet in between. Just a few thoughts: Just like Hitler didn't create the social, economic, and political chaos that resulted from the end of World War I in which the people of Germany were destitute, defeated, unfairly saddled with the entire war debt, strugglilng under a worldwide depression and starving. VPW didn't create the social, economic, and political chaos that existed in the late 1960's that caused an entire generation to question everything and search for answers in drugs, religion, and rock & roll. I realize I risk an oversimplification here, but in the most fundamental of terms, both men were in the right place at the right time (or at the wrong place at the wrong time) to take advantage of conditions that produced a population looking for a reason to feel good about themselves. --Oh, a post script about Wikipedia-- we warn our students not to use Wiki as a source. I know some profs who will give a paper an automatic F if Wiki is listed in the bibliography. Wikipedia has a problem, in that it is an open encyclopedia, which means anyone can contribute to it. That means you can't really trace the credentials of the people who are contributing information, and Wikipedia doesn't control who contributes. Especially if you get into some of the information posted about some figures in the middle east, it looks like the information is well supported in footnotes. However, if you take the time and do the work to look up and trace all the footnotes, they do not lead to primary source documents, and many are dead ends. It's not that there is NO good info in Wiki, it's just unreliable. You never know what you're going to get, and if you don't do the actual work in looking up the footnotes and verifying sources, you can look pretty foolish in the academic world. Wiki is full of erroneous information, some of it posted there deliberately by trolls. The husband of a professor I know (who is also a professor) is part of a band of trolls who deliberately post erroneous anatomical information on Wikipedia, which Wiki is slow to remove. For example if you are looking up occiput, information in the past may well have told you the location of the occiput is in the set of bones that make up the sacrum and tailbone. It was this professor's way of telling lazy students who relied on internet info, that they didn't know their arse from their head, because the occiputal bone is in the skull!

The other thread is ChasUFarley's "What It Was" thread. Oak's statement is not the point I was attempting to make, however it is valid. Anyone who puts bread in the mouth of a starving person, and lifts the self esteem of one who has been defeated, can be viewed by that person as a hero figure who is doing good to them. Many Germans viewed Hitler in that way, and were therefore willing to look the other way or justify his actions, because of how their lives improved under his leadership. No problem. It's easy to misunderstand things on the net, plus some folks can glean even more out of a statement when they look at it from another angle, so it can carry a different meaning for them. The social psychology comparisons are quite interesting. One needs to examine what conditions must exist in order to precondition a person or a group of people, or even a nation, and open them to a dangerous ideology. There are applications not only to the individual, but to groups of people in many areas: the workplace, educational systems, religious organizations, social systems, and political systems. Any of them can become oppressive and abusive under certain circumstances That's not the first time I've heard that quote, and it is disturbing indeed.

Read the context of the comparison in question on the other thread. It was a response to a comment by Hamm, regarding Hitler seducing the people of Germany. Not mentioned in this current thread, is the figure of speech sarcasm, which both Hamm and I were employing on the other thread. However, there are definite comparisons between Hitler and Wierwille if you go deep into social psychology and look specifically at how large groups of people are motivated and deceived, and that is what I was referring to, not a comparison between the degrees of evil involved. But I'd need a semester or two to explain it to you in the context of two subjects. Sorry if it went over anyone's head. My summer is usually reserved for lighter stuff.

After the pm explanation, I think I get the picture you are talking about. Would love to see it, sounds really humerous!--And like I said, the German language is not exactly my forte... thank you for clearing up my misunderstanding!

LOL, sorry, Bumpy!!!!! That's what I get for not hanging out at the Cafe enough and learning the new folk!!! Even more that gets lost in the translation!

sorry, double post...

Only VPW never bothered to "buy out" the competition. He simply outright stole and baldfaced lied. That's all I got out of it too-- had trouble understanding her German, never figured out what she was talking about-- I asked her what she was saying about bad heavy women? Any way, I asked her what she meant, and if I understood what she was talking about, she then challenged my knowledge of history. So I gave up and I'm asking to communicate in a language I think most of us fully understand....

And perhaps we should speak English among those who primarily speak English. I'm told it's rude to do otherwise....

Ich bin ein doppelter Major, eine Geschichte und eine Psychologie. Wer sind die schlechten Frauen, in Ihrer Meinung? I do know my history, just not the best at understanding German....

Um, was war es Sie sagte über schlechte schwere Frauen? :unsure: Der umlaut Schlüssel ist im Menü des Tropfens unten des "Einsatzsymbol" Teils von Ihrem toolbar. :)

You defenders of Trickster Paul Wierwile, I have a request: "The Word is the Ministry and the Ministry is the Word!" --A famous quote, often repeated publicly by VPW. Evaluate that statement, please, reconciling it with: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" John 1:1 In the algebra and logic that I learned, things equal to the same thing, are equal to each other.

You can find quite a few Sunni who still sing his praises and now long for the "good old days"...

:o Oh, my! :o

Which posters, specifically? I know you to have had a problem accepting the truth of the extent of the damage VPW inflicted. Perhaps the magnitude of his error is shocking to you. That does not mean the poster manified what happened. I believe in the early days, when VP was allowing them to function and attract people, they were. However, as I and others expressed before, VP allowed them to function in order to siphon off people into his organization, then he gradually usurped God's rightful place, and began to squelch people and pervert the truth. We have, and have deemed it putrid. At that time, twi was a group of people with varied motivations that was governed by a man who was bent on changing and unifying people's alliegences to himself, slowly, and deliberately. Your mileage may vary and you are welcome to your opinion-- just don't be shocked if yours is different from every one else's, and accuse them of exaggerating.

The song expressed thankfulness, yes. But it was used to support and continually reinforced the entire "Father in the Word" concept, which was incrementally used to throne Wierwille into a spot in people's hearts that should have been reserved for God alone. Eventually the concept was used to strongarm allegience from God to men. Unfortunately the stand VP took was on the backs of other people from whom he stole and those his ministry destroyed.

Nope, sorry, I will continue. By the time that song was written, VP had already begun to usurp God's position in our hearts, as simple thankfulness to another human being began to turn into a reverence for a person who began to take on too much power and authority over our lives, an air of infallibility, and demand our alliegience. The song supported it, and VP capitalized on it.

Well, as much as I loved their music and appreciated their hearts, at least one set of lyrics WAS, and marked the turning point from God to man. "Somewhere in Ohio, a man...." I rest my case.

Especially comparing the rise of Nazism with The Way International makes a perfect parallel.