[Vision2020] Say What? Everyone Deserves Death

[Ted Moffett]

Chas et. al.

You must be kidding, playing mind games, or playing devils advocate?  You
are too smart for your response to be a serious forthright well considered
answer to my posts in this thread... I'll play along, in the following
response:

In your response you did not address the fact that central to my argument
about cults and religion, is that the belief that "Everyone deserves death,"
as it is applied in religious practice by both "fringe" cults and
"mainstream religion," involves a tactic *characteristic* of the
psychological control methods of cults, as I already described in detail, as
follows again:

 This tactic involves convincing someone they are inherently and inescapably
morally flawed, and that the only way to escape this fatally morally flawed
condition is your and only your belief system; a psychology of control of
human behavior characteristic of cult methods.   You are attempting
to ensure the absolute loyalty of a person to an ideology and community,
based on manipulating their mind and feelings on a fundamental emotional
level, inducing fear of dire consequences if they disobey (eternal hell
fire, for example), that will result in them rejecting all other belief
systems, not based on a calm rational and factual assessment of the truth or
falsehood of the potential ideologies in question.
----------

I think this sort of tactic to control a person's beliefs and behavior is
"extremist," regardless of how "mainstream" it is. Perhaps you do not.
But if you wish to dispute my central claim, explain why you think the
paragraph above is a misunderstanding of the facts regarding how
some religions, even mainstream, use this tactic to control people in a
"cult like" manner, trying to render unthinkable reasonable options that
might be considered if a person following a given religion or church, was
contemplating following another religion, or other options.

Cults attempt to gain control of their members by using tactics that render
the idea of leaving the cult unthinkable, is this not correct?  Name other
institutions in society that try to convince their members that if they
cease to follow the institutions ideology, they are damned for eternity?
For example, if I leave the Democratic Party, I'm told that I will burn in
hell forever?  Can you imagine?  That if I leave the Teamsters, my eternal
soul will be cast into darkness?  Again, any institution acting in this
manner appears alarmingly "extremist" to me.

As to the definition of the word "extremist," and how this word is applied
regarding behavior or beliefs that are or are not within the "norm," I gave
examples of "extremist" mass behavior that does not fit within the expected
"norms" of civilized human rights respecting societies.  These behaviors and
beliefs were supported by a "cult like" herd conformist following of
deranged political leaders, on a mass scale, in Nazi Germany.  And, I would
argue, also in the US, regarding the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which
was illegal, and involved numerous human rights violations and war crimes
(thus it did not conform to the norms of civilized human rights respecting
societies, though supported on a mass scale in the US: extremism supported
normatively).

We could dispute the role of religion in supporting the mass unquestioning
following of political leaders, in Nazi Germany and the US.  I previously
pointed out that the success of the Bush agenda, and the invasion of Iraq,
was "cheered" by Bush's critical evangelical voting block, tens of millions
strong, many of whom actually believed "God" had a role in Bush's
presidency, and thus there was divine sanctioning of the Iraq invasion.
Scary!

I think these examples demonstrate that "extremist" can be "normative," in
some cases, though many will dispute the analysis above applied to the
invasion of Iraq.  No doubt many will think that any comparison to the blind
conformism of the citizens of Nazi Germany to the Nazi party, to any alleged
blind conformism of US citizens to the Bush Iraq policies, to be an
extremist view on my part.

But if accepting this application of the word "extremist," we can then
proceed using it to describe the "psychological control methods of cults"
utilizing the concept that "Everyone deserves death" as "extremist," even if
it involves a "mainstream" religion.

We could quibble, as I guess was a main drift of your response, over whether
using the world "extremist" is correct when describing "extreme" beliefs or
behavior that occur normatively in a given society.  But this quibble does
not address my central argument.

Perhaps you wish to argue that though the support of German society for the
Nazi's during a certain period of history was mainstream, and thus
"normative," it was not "extremist?"

Your response appears to be focusing on semantic difficulties that are a
diversion from my central arguments.

Ted Moffett
--------------
Chas wrote:

 Ted, this might be only a semantic issue.

You are using the word extremist -- meaning far beyond the norm -- to
describe a characteristic of religious faith, when that characteristic
is actually common and ordinary for the faith being described (named
or otherwise, with the obvious example being Christianity).

The concept of Original Sin is a common characteristic of mainstream
Christianity.  This characteristic is shared by some extremist
religious cults.  This is a formulation that I will accept.  I am
confused by your championing of the converse.

Chas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080525/d909bb82/attachment.html