Malcolm, you are welcome, but I have a confession to make: it was not really me who wrote a couple of the posts I've made here lately. Now I shall cite my source for that material.

The posts I made on the 15th and 17th of this month were exerpted very short passages from a book which provides a history of Scientology and a biography of L. Ron Hubbard. This book is entitled A Piece of Blue Sky, and it was written by Jon Atack. I culled these passages from notes that I'd made while reading the book.

What I did was, simply cut and paste certain passages, and then modified them to make them pertain to McKay. I pretty much took the word "Hubbard" out and put "McKay" in, and modified certain other details.

But still it's quite amazingly applicable a desciption of McKay and his mental/emotional/spiritual state; what resulted still fits McKay like a hand in a glove.

Would you not agree?

Look at this carefully and you'll see what I lifted, and from where I appropriated the passages.

[www.cs.cmu.edu]

As regards your question about how long it would take a given perosn to become a lost cause (so to speak). I'll have to think that one over more and will answer in the near future.

Dave tells us dat Joe iz da new leader. Joe, dat nuttah iz playing games wiff ya cuz he wants ta keep ya in dere.
Maybe ah be wrong, Lets see, ya had nahh faith in Americans an' nahh faith in da system an' nahh faith in Oobama an' ya wuz wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Obama iz in power now an' he speaks every day about da changes he iz gonna make ta da USA.

You th'o't ya iz da leader o' da Jesus Christians an' ya havent told us what ya gonna do. what changes iz ya gonna make? Are ya gonna bring any love an' real forgivenesss ta dat group ?
all we's see iz ya cussin yo' family who raised ya wiff nahh respect man.
Do ya really th'o't dat iz what Jesus specs Joe? Put yo brain back in and git reflectin.

Quote
Malcolm Wesley WREST
Just as a matter of interest, in your experience, how long would you say that someone could spend in a situation of servitude to Mckay, before becoming a "lost cause" themselves.....the "long termers" in the JesusChristians are (IMO) just now so hopelessly "invested" in it all, that they basically would fall into the "battered wife syndrome" (...have learnt to tell themselves that the penniless David-worship that they live in, is somehow "worth it all" (i.e. by learning not to "wonder" they have adopted a pyschological coping strategy of avoidance), and that they thus no longer have the self-esteem to stand up for themselves and be seen to question the "apostle" for themselves in any meaningful sense of the word)...I would put the point of "no-return" at some 7 - 10 years....(it's difficult to think of many former members who were involved for that length of time and "lived" (to escape and then) to tell the tale...

That's big big question, Malcolm, and I'd have to say (having thought it over for a couple of days) that it all just depends so much on a given individual and their time, place, and circumstances that this would be practically impossible to predict or set to some kind of timetable.

Of course, the longer a given individual has been enmeshed in such a group, the more difficult in the long run it would be for him or her to exit the group. Simply put, the longer a person is in, the more difficult and painful a process it will be to get out. Members of such groups have varying degrees of investment in their respective situations.

There are people who have left high-control abusive groups after decades of involvement. I know a man who left his particular group after twenty-five years of involvement, and this man was in leadership, too. So I am inclined to believe that there are no truly lost causes, that there is nobody who is so completely invested in such a group that they'd be beyond reaching, or who would be beyond leaving on their own eventually.

It comes down in my opinion to the inculcation of a state of learned helplessness in a given individual, and then a gradual retraining process that replaces that learned helplessness with learned optimism. It's an individual's being subjected a process of indoctrination which will gradually undermine both trust in oneself and teach learned helplessness to the recruit, and to convince him or her that his only hope of salvation is to abandon self-direction and to plunge himself into lifelong participation in and allegiance to the group.

In the case of the Jesus Christians, most people who get involved eventually leave, fortunately; it might take days, weeks, months, or years, but most people who get involved with the McKays eventaully see through the manipulation and leave their association anyway.

For the unfortunate few that never have left the group, the learned helpelessness might be ingrained into their psychological makeup, it might be all-pervasive their psyches and very much personalized into the individuals' identity, and they may come to see this helplessness as a permanent condition, but I don't think anybody except for the most malfunctional and personality-disordered persons are ever truly to be written off as hopless cases. I do believe the McKays to be inveterately malfunctional and disordered persons, especially Dave.

Having said that, I believe the McKays to be beyond the "point of no return" and that they will keep doing what they have been doing until Dave McKay dies. Then the Jesus Christians will, over time, basically dissolve. David McKay keeps the group together, the Jesus Christians are essentially his "mirror", and no other person could keep it together the in the same form.

Does this answer your question, Malcolm?

On the other hand...

Saying that "...the longer a given individual has been enmeshed in such a group, the more difficult in the long run it would be for him or her to exit the group..." is my opinion, not a fact.

Perhaps the longer someone is involved in a given group, the more their disdain grows, and the more 'ready' they are to leave. So again, the matter in my opinion has to be evaluated on a case by case basis, according to the individual and their circumstances.

What say you, Malcolm?

Dear Oerlikon,

Yes...I see what you mean... there are so many "individual variations" that any "average" value becomes meaningless (too wide a spread of figures to be able to find a meaningful "central tendency"...) Hmmm....and of course...I'll admit that we are obliged to continue to hold out hope for everyone...

(I presume that you have some background in Psychology?...."learned helplessness" predates Linton doesn't it??...
..."learned wickedness"....might accurately describe the process in Davids' own instance, I believe....)

David of course (semi)directly tells us his own opinion of who believes is incontrovertibly loyal to him (and who he worries isn't!....by his "rankings" and his "treatment" of his minions.....the fact that David has engineered the "promotion" of Joe informs us that he is a little nervous of Joe's commitment to the cause....hence Joe is being won over with further "inducements" (the privilege of "public recognition" and "esteem" within the JesusChristians) the better to convince him to remain on board and to reinforce the delusion that "righteous" David "truly believes" in his abilities)...and here of course, I am merely concurring with some of the observations that "free of DM" has previously made...


Joe is still going to a LOT of effort to "prove" himself "worthy" to the calling, evidenced by the "strength" of his rejection of his parents....the (David imitating) rants that he posts just look so terribly like "denial" to me....that I find his postings strangely more encouraging than not!


Boyd and Sheri (Davids' elder daughter) have actually remained innocently true to the orginal idealism that David first discreetly prostituted in order to kick start his own little cult of self-worship (these days David is not even particularly consistent in the lies that he employs...)....once David has passed on (to a worse world!)....I agree that the JC's are unlikley to have the administrative inertia for the "headless" body, due to its size alone, to simply mindlessly stagger on and on and on, as the COGs have in their family of love and other guises....

...it would be nice then if Ross (and anyone else who may have retained a semblance of humanity) could be able to achieve some measure of "rehabilitation" through ultimately a "normalizing" association with Boyd and Sheri.....

I otherwise imagine there will ultimately be a split of some rancour(with the group largely dissolving as you say)...with a divorce or two and some nervous breakdowns in amongst it all....circa 2020 or earlier...(giving David another ten years of "life"...if I may use the term so loosely!!)

(If you're not aware of this fact, David feels extremely threatened by Boyd and Sheri and hence has (groundlessly) vilified them, in order to circumvent any communication between them and the "flock of sheep"....that he is busily fleecing!)

What follows is a pertinent extract (pp. 20-21) from a book entitled Bounded Choice: True Believers and Charismatic Cults, by Janja Lalich. I recommend Bounded Choice for anyone seriously interested in understanding the psychological dynamics of the cult phenomenon.

[books.google.com]

Individuals in a cult context are constrained not only by a bounded reality-one product of the self-sealing system-but also by bounded choice. This occurs when the individual reaches what Lifton described as a state of personal closure. ("Closure" in this sense does not mean completion, as it is sometimes used, but a turning inward and refusal to look at other ideas, belifs, or options.) I suggest that a state of person closure should be considered the individualized version of the larger self-sealing system. Thus, as a person identifies and unites with the bounded reality of the group and its belief system, becoming a devotee by making that charismatic commitment to the self-sealing worldview, another process begins to take place. That is, individual perspective and personal decision making become limited and constrained, and that restritction comes as much from within as from without. In the context of closure and constraint, choices may exist, but they are severely limited. In such situations, the person can be described as being in a state of bounded choice.
From:

[www.icsahome.com]

The interaction between the individual and the charismatic system is the key to understanding bounded choice theory. The believer responds to the intellectual and emotional pull of the group with commitment that is renewed through ongoing interaction, and in the process develops a new self. The leader’s vision of the path to salvation has transformational power.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2009 01:18AM by Oerlikon.

Quote
Liverpool Writer
I had some dealings with a cult about ten years ago. I have not been able to find out much about them since, but here are the facts I have.

1. They called themselves simply "the Christians".
2. They originated in Australia.
3. They distributed comic books on the streets in return for donations. Their comic book was called Fair Dinkum, harshly criticizing mainstream churches.
4. They demanded that members give over all material things to the group, supposedly to be sold to raise money for the poor.
5. They had a mission for at least a short time in Liverpool, England.
6. Their leader in Liverpool was a man called Roland.

I spoke to a young man who left his family without telling them and found himself trapped and unable to leave. Eventually he "escaped". He was certainly physically abused while he was there, and possibly sexually. I also know they had been going from door to door in Liverpool and exploited some old persons by arranging to take their furniture without their full consent (taking full advantage of their vulnerability and confusion about what was happening).

Does anyone recognize this?

This is horrible. Although this thread was begun in 2005, this is the first that I have heard of it. I hope that more information about this group is disseminated so that people will know and be able to respond. If the charges are true, I believe the leaders of this group should be subject to civil penalties as well as jail time.

--eaglecage

Dear Eaglecage,

I would say that David's utter lack of success as a cult leader (there would be probably only be a few hundred people at the utter outside who have been in and out of his doors, one way or another, over the last 30 years) is one reason why he has been so fortunate enough to escape serious scrutiny by authorities.....

....It would certainly seem to me that Chris Butler would have impacted negatively on far many more lives than David McKay might even hope to dream of....and probably the same might be said of Chris Hansard or Katie Byron.....

However I would definitely see David as potentially subject to prosecution under a number of Crimes in Australian (NSW) Law.....(as the Jesus Christians remain "registered" under Australian federal company law, with a registered address in Sydney Aust. they would still remain subject to the law of NSW....)

By way of explanation....

The abduction of Bobby Kelly in England a couple of years back, would also constitute a crime in Australia, (depending upon the lads' age at the time of the incident)

87 Child abduction

(1) A person who takes or detains a child with the intention of removing or keeping the child from the lawful control of any person having parental responsibility for the child, without the consent of that person, is liable to imprisonment for 10 years.
(2) A person who takes or detains a child with the intention of stealing from the child is liable to imprisonment for 10 years.

The clandestine recruitment of Joe while he was under the age of 18 is really little different from "grooming"....

66EB Procuring or grooming child under 16 for unlawful sexual activity

(1) Definitions In this section:
"adult person" means a person who is of or over the age of 18 years.
"child" means a person who is under the age of 16 years.
"conduct" includes:
(a) communicating in person or by telephone, the internet or other means, or
(b) providing any computer image, video or publication.

David is (currently) beyond the reach of this particular law until it is redefined to broader "servitude", not simply "illegal sexual activity"...however I would personally see the predatory nature of Davids abusive relationship with others, being ethically no different to the broader intent of the legislation (the protection of minors), ...just the ultimate "crime" being a little different!...the recent push to outlaw "motorcycle gangs" and their activities in Aust. may lead to a broadening of some laws to extend their "reach"...

(David struggles to find recruits this days hence his search for the "vulnerable" has had to widen somewhat.....!)

The circumstances of the split of the JesusChristian community in the middle 90's, where David and (henchman) Roland threatened David son (now no longer a member of the group) and the others who dared to wish for some indenpendance from David's autocratic direction, would appear to me to potentially leave David liable to charges under section 99 of the Crimes Act.

99 Demanding property with intent to steal

(1) Whosoever, with menaces, or by force, demands any property from any person, with intent to steal the same, shall be liable to imprisonment for ten years.
(2) A person is guilty of an offence under this subsection if the person commits an offence under subsection (1) in the company of another person or persons. A person convicted of an offence under this subsection is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.
(3) It is immaterial whether any such menace is of violence or injury by the offender or by any other person.

David's "interaction" with the family of members of the Jesus Christians in general (say specifically for example the behind the scenes "bargaining" with Fred Ngogre in Kenya to silence him with the threat of loss of access to his grandson, while his daughter Betty was briefly a member of the Jesus Christians) would to my mind, clearly fall within the field of extortion and blackmail

PART 4B - BLACKMAIL

249K Blackmail offence

(1) A person who makes any unwarranted demand with menaces:
(a) with the intention of obtaining a gain or of causing a loss, or

Here I make no mention of the practises of "false pretences" and "obtaining advantage" by deception....(also Criminal Offences under the NSW Crimes Act...) I believe that changes to the law in the future might serve to prevent him harvesting the organs of his members for financial advantage (buying publicity and "cost reimbursement" payments that fall into accounts he directly controls)...this practice has momentarily halted as he has literally run out of kidneys to hock.....!

In brief, these are some illustrations of the legal avenues that I believe might be potentially open to authorities to pursue.....

The private litigation that might be potentially be entered into against David would have to be the subject of another posting.....

Dear Oerlikon,

Thank you for the referral to the publication you recommend. I will see if it is possible to order (over here....in Korea!!)

You are welcolm, Malcolm. Thank you for your familiarity with Australian law.

To answer your question from earlier, no, I have no formal background in psychology, and am not familiar with the work of a Linton.

Please excuse me for not having answered your question earlier.