Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1992, Page 24
SP (Suppressive Person) Order: Fair Game. May be deprived of property or injured by
any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be
tricked, sued, or lied to, or destroyed.66 *****
The Church of Scientology has been accused of using private detectives, attorneys, and the
legal system to harass critics in attempts to silence them.67-70 Thaler Singer appears to have
been a systematic target of harassment by some groups: Dead rats have been placed
carefully on her doorstep her home has been vandalized, and she has personally caught a
stranger entering her home through a window dozens of her research interview tapes have
been stolen she was detained by immigration police in a foreign country on a false report
lodged by one of the cults that she was a member of the Irish Republican Army (IRA).
In sum, using “the big lie” in an environment that promotes “fair game” is the modus oper-
andi of some current groups that have much to lose and little to gain by allowing their
practices to be exposed to the public. Our purpose here is to expose some of the deceptions,
distortions, and dissimulations propounded by “cult apologists.”71 The apparent goal of cult
apologists seems to have been to misrepresent the issues, to distort or deny the existence of
the scientific and legal literature, to make false attributions to critics of totalistic groups, and
to create a false sense of social danger to direct attention away from the real dangers
inherent in totalistic groups.
Deceptions, Distortions, and Dissimulations
For brevity, in the following discussion we use the descriptor “distortion” to introduce each
issue. The distortions listed here are merely examples of attempts in the literature and in
public forums to confuse the issues raised by the practices of many exploitative groups.
West‟s conceptualization of these practices as public health issues is a helpful reference point.
Distortion 1: Brainwashing Does Not Exist, or if It Does, It Cannot Be Proved
The assertion that brainwashing does not exist or that it cannot be proved is a core, though
incorrect, assertion. This chapter has already reviewed the scientific basis for what we are
calling “exploitative persuasion.” It would be very easy if the “technology” of thought reform
could be reduced to a simple equation that says “If you do a, b will happen if you do x, y will
follow.” However, we are dealing with intrapsychic and psychosocial aspects of being human,
and such reductionist approaches are simplistic and impossible. The vast literature already
cited that, together, makes up the theory of thought reform has a significant common thread
it documents techniques that influence behavior and attitudes. These techniques do not
depend on physical coercion to effect the behavioral or attitudinal changes.
The scientific and anecdotal documentation of techniques that can influence behavior and
attitudes is so threatening to some groups that their representatives have launched an un-
founded and contrived campaign to get the American Psychological Association and the
American Sociological Association to declare that coercive persuasion and thought reform do
not exist. Cult apologists allege that experts on exploitative persuasion are unreliable there-
fore, they (the apologists) must reinterpret what the experts mean. In doing so, cult apolo-
gists rewrite history and distort facts to support their contention. Two (of many) examples
follow.
One author blatantly misrepresented the written record when he wrote, In discussing the
brainwashing theory of Communist influence on Koreaan [sic] P.O.W.‟s, [LJ] West repeatedly
argued that this theory was a “hoax” (p. 143).72 In fact, West32 was not stating that
*****In 1968 and again in 1970, the Church of Scientology issued a new order stating that "Fair Game" would no
longer appear on any written policy documents. However, some believe that the "Fair Game" policy appears to con-
tinue as a means to suppress criticism of the church. As recently as 1984 and 1989, justices in U.S. and London
courts ruled that "Fair Game" practices had been applied to plaintiffs in cases that appeared before them.63
SP (Suppressive Person) Order: Fair Game. May be deprived of property or injured by
any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be
tricked, sued, or lied to, or destroyed.66 *****
The Church of Scientology has been accused of using private detectives, attorneys, and the
legal system to harass critics in attempts to silence them.67-70 Thaler Singer appears to have
been a systematic target of harassment by some groups: Dead rats have been placed
carefully on her doorstep her home has been vandalized, and she has personally caught a
stranger entering her home through a window dozens of her research interview tapes have
been stolen she was detained by immigration police in a foreign country on a false report
lodged by one of the cults that she was a member of the Irish Republican Army (IRA).
In sum, using “the big lie” in an environment that promotes “fair game” is the modus oper-
andi of some current groups that have much to lose and little to gain by allowing their
practices to be exposed to the public. Our purpose here is to expose some of the deceptions,
distortions, and dissimulations propounded by “cult apologists.”71 The apparent goal of cult
apologists seems to have been to misrepresent the issues, to distort or deny the existence of
the scientific and legal literature, to make false attributions to critics of totalistic groups, and
to create a false sense of social danger to direct attention away from the real dangers
inherent in totalistic groups.
Deceptions, Distortions, and Dissimulations
For brevity, in the following discussion we use the descriptor “distortion” to introduce each
issue. The distortions listed here are merely examples of attempts in the literature and in
public forums to confuse the issues raised by the practices of many exploitative groups.
West‟s conceptualization of these practices as public health issues is a helpful reference point.
Distortion 1: Brainwashing Does Not Exist, or if It Does, It Cannot Be Proved
The assertion that brainwashing does not exist or that it cannot be proved is a core, though
incorrect, assertion. This chapter has already reviewed the scientific basis for what we are
calling “exploitative persuasion.” It would be very easy if the “technology” of thought reform
could be reduced to a simple equation that says “If you do a, b will happen if you do x, y will
follow.” However, we are dealing with intrapsychic and psychosocial aspects of being human,
and such reductionist approaches are simplistic and impossible. The vast literature already
cited that, together, makes up the theory of thought reform has a significant common thread
it documents techniques that influence behavior and attitudes. These techniques do not
depend on physical coercion to effect the behavioral or attitudinal changes.
The scientific and anecdotal documentation of techniques that can influence behavior and
attitudes is so threatening to some groups that their representatives have launched an un-
founded and contrived campaign to get the American Psychological Association and the
American Sociological Association to declare that coercive persuasion and thought reform do
not exist. Cult apologists allege that experts on exploitative persuasion are unreliable there-
fore, they (the apologists) must reinterpret what the experts mean. In doing so, cult apolo-
gists rewrite history and distort facts to support their contention. Two (of many) examples
follow.
One author blatantly misrepresented the written record when he wrote, In discussing the
brainwashing theory of Communist influence on Koreaan [sic] P.O.W.‟s, [LJ] West repeatedly
argued that this theory was a “hoax” (p. 143).72 In fact, West32 was not stating that
*****In 1968 and again in 1970, the Church of Scientology issued a new order stating that "Fair Game" would no
longer appear on any written policy documents. However, some believe that the "Fair Game" policy appears to con-
tinue as a means to suppress criticism of the church. As recently as 1984 and 1989, justices in U.S. and London
courts ruled that "Fair Game" practices had been applied to plaintiffs in cases that appeared before them.63
