One of the review quotes on the cover of
this amazingly written, disturbing, enthralling, absolutely brilliant work (I
could barely put it down) was “part Orwellian groupthink expose.” Although it
is also a tragedy and a suspenseful account of preaching in a Communist country
that forbid foreigners from doing just that, for purposes of this blog, I will
focus on the groupthink part. I am currently in the midst of editing a book on
groupthink in science, and clearly my model of self destructive behavior sees
it as a sacrifice to one’s kin group rather than as a selfish act (Selfish
self-destructiveness? Only if all such people had the IQ of a kumquat).
The book tells the story of growing up
in a cult, in which people were strongly discouraged from talking to anyone or
looking at any source of information that might call into question its belief
system. Going to college was forbidden. People went to meetings several times a
week where the idea that Armageddon was about to happen at any minute was
constantly presented, along with the idea that only the true believers would be
saved.
People who broke the rules or questioned orthodoxy were
“disfellowshipped.” This meant that they were completely shunned by all family
and friends, although they were allowed to sit in the back of the meeting
halls, unacknowledged, to be further indoctrinated with the propaganda in hope
that eventually they would be accepted back into the fold— after a couple of
years of this treatment.
Scorah recounts going to China to surreptitiously
preach the cult’s gospel. Once there, she found that there were many fewer
group members around than she had been used to, and she credits that fact with
how she came to be exposed to other ways of understanding the universe. This in
turn led her to start questioning the group’s theology and its claim to have a
monopoly on the one true religion. She had to have an above-ground job, and
took one working on a podcast about China. One listener began writing to her
and helped her to see how badly she had been indoctrinated.
As she started to engage in critical
thinking, her entire family then acted as if she did not exist (with one major
exception — her sister. Might the sister now be serving in the role of switchboard?).
There has been no contact with them.
But was this the whole story? I think
not. One has to ask the question: why would the author be the one person who
was able to start questioning the groupthink—even with the realistic fear of being exiled
hanging over her head— when the vast majority of her fellow preachers in China did
not fall into this trap? Although it’s impossible to prove on the basis of what
is written about a family in a book, the author’s description of her family
certainly leads one to suspect the usual culprit in such scenarios: family
dynamics and shared intrapsychic conflict with ambivalence.
In fact, her family was not monolithic
in its beliefs in the cult, although they professed to be. Neither of her
parents went to meetings more than yearly, and would not explain to the maternal
grandmother— who was not born into the cult—why that was. Scorah’s father was
an alcoholic and her parents eventually divorced, both huge no-no’s in the
cult. The grandmother also seemed to
take great joy in providing the “benefits” of the cult to the author when Scorah
was growing up.
Together this all sounds like there was strong ambivalence
about the cult’s beliefs within the family, with her parents acting it out.
They may have given up their daughter—who received very little attention from
them according to her own descriptions—to the grandmother as a gift, in order
so that she could make up for grandma's failure to properly indoctrinate the mother.
Furthermore, grandma’s favorite child,
the mother’s brother – I repeat, grandma’s favorite
child—left the fold and then proved the folly in doing so by getting into
drugs. The family predicted that he would eventually end up in jail, and of
course this is exactly what came to pass! This sound exactly like the dynamics I write about in
describing the role of the black sheep.
So perhaps (and I really think it’s
nearly certain) the author had picked up on the family ambivalence over the
cult and its rules. This may have been why she had been attracted to preaching in a
far away, forbidding place all along, where she would no long be subject to
constant drumming in her ear about the group’s orthodoxy.
Another interesting aspect of groupthink
that the author writes about - with the most elegant descriptions of it that I’ve ever read - is existential groundlessness. This is the tremendously aversive feeling one gets when
one breaks the rules or questions the mythology of one’s kin group or social
group:
“But if I didn’t
believe, my life would be over. I was paralyzed, because there was no answer to
this problem. The stakes are too high to do anything.” (p. 171).
“This world was
the only one I had ever been a part of, and I didn’t know who I was without
it.” (p. 200).
“Nothing was as
I had thought it was. And there was nowhere to go back to; I couldn’t, because
it was a dream, it was all a story, all of my life was made up, and I had
awoken to this concrete.”
That last quote illustrates yet something
else about groupthink in the modern world: willful
blindness. Throughout the book Scorah strongly implies that until her
awakening she truly believed, without question or doubt, every nonsensical myth
that was taught to her by her cult. But later in the book she implies that this
was not really the complete truth. For example, on p. 231, she lets on that a
part of her knew the gig: “We policed ourselves to sustain our nirvana. We
shared a willful blindness disguised as innocence and purity…but it takes a
great deal of mental effort to hide from what one sees, whether that effort is
subconscious or purposeful…That once I decided to believe, I believed, no
matter what doubts came…I had been in ‘the truth’ because I was afraid of the
truth.”
No comments:
Post a Comment