I'm back! I got a few things done, but I'm stuck at home now because a repairman is coming. I'm also waiting to hear back from a couple doctor's offices. I need to take care of some urgent business (in person), but it will have to wait until Monday now. I do have things to do at home, but it's almost time for lunch anyway. That's how my mornings go:
1) get up, take my first meds/supplements and sit down to coffee and water while I do my 45-minute stimulator session. (That's what I was doing for most of the earlier posting today).
2) get breakfast (which I can't have till some time after I've taken my first round of meds/supplements) and take my regular breakfast meds/supplements.
3) after that I do the regular things people do to get ready for the day like wash up and make the bed and the like.
By the time I've finished these things 2+ hours has lapsed and I'm well into the day, especially if I didn't get to bed until late, which is quite often, and consequently get up after 9:00. This is why I try not to make morning appointments, but if I have to I can manage it.
My one little incipient cucumber is definitely looking more like a baby cucumber today, but the other rosemary plant, the one I hadn't transplanted outside yet, keeled over and I think it gave up the ghost. My impression is that they both were straining so much to get the sunlight coming through the window (although I did try to position them favorably by the window) that they were practically growing horizontal and eventually they just completely fell over.
Now back to what I was writing about earlier...
***
The title of this chapter is titled "Charisma" and is about cult leadership. The mission I was with doesn't exactly fit the type of cult organization described in this book in that it wasn't charismatic leader(s) that started it. Rather, once they were chosen for the positions in the organization charisma was one of the tools used to create unity, bonding and a sense of obligation to the organization. I think cult organizations can develop leaders like this, but we're not talking here (vis a vis the mission in Vienna) along the lines of founding leaders like Sun Myung Moon or the like. The organization in Vienna was found rather intentionally by the joint effort of 5 initial organizations, to which others later were added. I don't know if the charisma part was decided on intentionally, if that's the way things are done in other missions (especially to "closed" countries) and so it was an easy carry over, or if it just developed because of the personalities of those put in leadership positions, or a combination of these things. But however this charisma of leadership things developed, it was there and soundly in place by the time I got to Vienna.
"In its ability to make one feel good, charisma (in the mind of the believer) can seem a high, and part of the addiction of members to a cult is an addiction to the charisma of the cult. It is easy, then, for the initiate to feel that should he leave, he will be unable autonomously to supply the highs to which he has become habituated. Yet sooner or later, the initiate will leave, (almost all do), and when he does, a pattern of behavior may ensue that will be difficult to distinguish from the withdrawal symptoms of a recovering substance addict: disorientation, paranoia, depression, demoralization, and acute identity crisis." (p. 114)
I don't know what the more recent research about this kind of things is, and it probably would be a good idea to find out if I were to pursue this line of my autobiography further, but here I'm just going to respond to what Alper says.
I really can relate to this statement. It was very difficult for me to disentangle myself from the group emotionally and my journal the year afterward conveys a lot of this - I'll share portions of my journal with you later on at some point. It was a kind of a high too, and there was always a carrot hung out regarding rewards to be had by becoming an insider and wholehearted member. On the other hand, the stick of not completely abandoning oneself to the will of the group and the charismatic leadership was to have these elusive and purported rewards withheld, which emotionally was a terrible thing. Part of the socialization, and I am the most familiar with the socialization of secretaries on the staff, is the complete devotion to one's boss, who was especially to be trusted. And since information in the organization was departmentalized for security purposes, it was by far most important to have this devotion to one's boss, which was quite a complex relationship. Only department heads had secretaries, although some departments had secretaries that also served other members, so the power and charisma of the department head was shared with the secretary also. At group meetings the charisma of the leaders, as well as stories that bonded us together, were highlighted and no one, that I knew of, questioned the leaders. They were sort of above that, and in any case, they were thought of as benevolent and also had information to which others weren't privy, so I don't think there was thought to be any reason one wouldn't acquiesce before them, and recognize their charisma and leadership. On the other hand, I'm not aware that there was anyone who was considered unexpendable. So even though the leadership had this unquestioning following, if something ever happened to any one of them someone else would be able to fill their shoes and the same acceptance would presumably be expected towards the new leader(s).
Being part of the group you had an instant mega family that was loving and caring and took care of each other. And at some point I began to see that they also had a hold on people because of the knowledge thing, and that there was some commonality between their use of knowledge and the gnostic religions and organizations, like the Mormons and Masons, where the members are awarded with more and more secret knowledge the deeper one goes into the group. I believe this theme will come up again in some literature on how certain organizations and businesses operate.
Certainly, however, can understand how some of the withdrawal symptoms mentioned by Alper could apply to the Vienna situation. The thing is, though, that if you leave there in their good graces and on good terms you might not really have to go through this so much because you'll keep in touch with the members and may even help out with things like fund-raising and public relations with the churches back home. I think it was somewhat different for me in lieu of the fact that I had put some 7 years into preparations to work in that field, whereas, for examples, the other secretaries hadn't really put in any such preparation, except they had secretarial experience and their Christian faith, of course. Certainly, I was given a harder time than any of the other secretaries. In fact, I'm not aware of anyone else who really got the level of treatment I did, although there were 2 others with a little similarity.
***
The next chapter in this book deals with the seductive personality of cult leaders. I don't know that in the context of the mission in Vienna any of the leadership innately had this quality, but I think it was developed in the organization. I'm not sure how the relationships were handled in other positions in the organization, so mainly I'm just going to describe what seemed to be a modus operandi with the secretaries and their bosses.
"The seductive person does not seem interested in relating for the sake of relating, in wanting to be with the other person in order to experience intimacy; rather, he is intent on gaining something private, narcissistic, and decidedly nonmutual. Seductiveness... implies that if what is desired were openly asked for, it would not be given. It follows that trickery and misdirection are tools of the trade... Getting what he wants is synonymous with corrupting the other person." (p. 117)
In this case, I think the bosses wanted to know they could completely trust their secretaries and that's what they wanted. It could be a carrot, and if that all that was required for the initiate, the new secretary, to become completely trusting and transparent with her boss, then it may have ended there. But if that wasn't enough, as in my case, a stick was also used. These things weren't as explicit as I'm making them seem though.
The corruption part, I think, included getting the initiate to wholeheartedly internalized the logic of why they used the tactics they did and how it was really spiritually justified, etc. I'm talking here about the half-truths, ends-justifies-the-means and other such ethical issues.
***
There is a lot in this chapter that doesn't fit my experience of the mission in Vienna. Here is one sentence that I find helpful, although the surrounding text doesn't fit:
"... [S]eductive behavior is opposed to mutuality, and can be more suitably described as a contest, a game, or a zero-sum power struggle, in which there essentially can be only one winner and one loser." (p. 118)
This was definitely a one-way win-lose relationship. The organization was very hierarchical. I suppose that anyone who easily went along with it would disagree that they "lost" by conceding.
***
"[T]he seductive person tends to view relating as an operational, externalized, step-by-step stragety, and relationships are accordingly judged on the merits of the particular strategy: i.e., a relationship that is failing - a person who is not being successfully seduced = a miscalculation or the application of the wrong strategy." (p. 118)
This is one possible understanding of some of what happened to me in Vienna, but I'm not sure what the leadership (and in a trickle-down way the others also) were thinking at various stages of my time there. I certainly do think that there was an element of deliberateness, though, and also that they misjudged me, although I can't be completely sure at what points they misjudged me, because I'm not sure what they intended for me. There were a lot of ambiguities and seemingly contradictory signals for me.
***
"So potent and persuasive is the seductive power of cults and cult leaders that on occasion it has been likened to brainwashing. Yet the association with the terror and force used to brainwash POWs is tenuous at best. Most cults do not come close to equaling the absolute physical control of their members that can be achieved in prisons and concentration camps. Accordingly, the indoctrination tactics are vastly more psychological, In a cult, the main threat seems to be, in one form or another, expulsion." (p. 126)
Although I did look at some brainwashing literature, and may delve into this later, I agree with this statement. And I need to reiterate here that the mission I was with was not a cult, it was pretty sort of an arm or one expression of mainstream Western evangelical Christianity, and the workers entered it quite willingly, if perhaps not completely knowingly. But then it's not unusual to start work with a new organization and find out it's not what you expected. But I do think that the isolation (away from the home churches) and nature of the ministry somehow led to some cult-like characteristics in the organization. I'm not aware of anyone else besides me who left the mission with such bad relations with them. I'm not saying there never was anyone else, but that I'm not aware of anyone else, and I'm sure I was the only one the 2 years I was there. I did work out my full 2 years (the initial commitment), but it may have been foolish to stay on that long given the circumstances and what was going on. I had a lot at stake though, considering everything I put into preparing for that ministry. I don't know if expulsion or isolation were used as sticks with others or not, but if so, it would have had to have worked to bring him/her in line, at least if it was used with anyone I knew there.
***
"In the cult, the psychological equivalent of 'brainwashing' seems to occur in a fairly orderly sequence of steps. First, there is the concentrated seduction and indoctrination of the potentially new member. Almost simultaneously, there is a universal devaluation of everything in the world outside the cult: society, friends, parents, teachers, culture, religion. Concomitantly, there is a continuous attempt to supply substitute gratifications for what one has been asked to reject in the normal world: new philosophical teachings, pleasure, socializing, sexual partners, creative outlets, a system of reward and recognition -- all are offered, and are supposed not to come only from the inner world of the cult. When this has taken hold in the mind of the disciple, he is hooked, and the ultimate threat, expulsion, will be as devastating to him as enforced physical withdrawal is to the drug addict." (p. 127)
Again, this doesn't exactly apply to my situation in Vienna, but I think there are some helpful aspects of these insights nonetheless. This basically, as I understand it, is the socialization into the mission fold. For those who had no other interests and were like a blank slate in this new country where they knew nothing and nobody, this was an easy and mostly painless process. However, while my secretarial background was limited, I was overqualified otherwise and set about using my free time in ways that, while perhaps harmless, interfered with the mission's attempts to properly socialize me into their fold.
I might have neglected to point this out earlier, but I don't take well to being forced into a mold. (E.g., how as early as in junior high I enjoyed flitting between social groups.) There were several things that seemed illogical to me at the beginning, and a few of them included things like 1) If I completed my job and was free in the evenings or weekends, couldn't I just do as I like, especially if it wasn't contrary to the explicit interests of the mission? 2) If not, did they want to control me 24/7? 3) Did I have to limit my social life and relations to only people in the organization? If so, why?
Now I'm being fairly explicit here, but this was actually played out in the realm of the (mostly) unspoken. I had no idea I was entering such a totalitarian organization, and if I had I might not have gone.
But if I'm right and there were cult-like elements, then I was definitely acting/thinking outside the realm of the {mostly implied or unspoken) acceptable.
***
"An important part of this process, which greatly reinforces it, is the rites of passage. At some point the disciple will be asked to provide proof of commitment by performing a difficult service... On one level, such a rite of passage is meant to represent, in the mind of the disciple, a kind of burning of bridges. On another level, in the mind of the leader of the cult, it is perhaps a test of unconditional love: Will you never abandon me no matter what I demand of you?" (p. 128)
In the context of the mission in Vienna, I think the "rite of passage" is being given the assignment to turn around and be involved in the initiation of a newer arrival to the group. To be able to do that, one has to have internalized the norms and values of the organization to be able to guide someone else in it. There may have been other rites, but that's the one I'm aware of, and I do think it's a pretty strong one. Once you've begun passing these things on to someone else then you have a stake in it too and it would be hard to turn back at that point. Supposedly, if you pass that (and subsequent test then your boss will entrust more and more of the insider knowledge and responsibility to you.
***
I'm not done with this book yet, but I have to go again. The repairman came, but by the time he left it was 2:15 and the person I need to see about this other problem is most reliably caught before 3:00, and I thought by the time I got there it would be hit or miss if I was successful, especially on a Friday. So I have to take care of that Monday as a top priority; it's regarding my health insurance.
I'll continue this later. Bye for now...
~ Meg
