See earlier posts in this series:
Sociopathy: What is a Sociopath?
Sociopathy Part 2: The Traits of a Sociopath
Sociopathy Part 3: The Creation of “Its”
Sociopathy Part 4: The Importance of Authority and Obedience
Sociopathy Part 5: The Covetous Sociopath
Charm — The first thing Dr. Stout addresses in the toolbox of the sociopath is a how charming they can be. This is something she talks about a lot. Sociopaths, when it suits their purpose, can be charismatic. If you read Russell Miller’s excellent biography, Barefaced Messiah, he describes Hubbard in just these terms. Anyone who has seen David Miscavige interacting with public Scientologists or non-Scientologists, will know how polite, interested and engaged he can be when he is presenting his “public persona” to the world.
The first such technique is charm, and as a social force, charm should not be underestimated.
The intense charm of people who have no conscience, a kind of inexplicable charisma, has been observed and commented on by countless victims, and by researchers who attempt to catalog the diagnostic signs of sociopathy. It is a potent characteristic. Most of the victims I have known in my work have reported that their initial involvement with a sociopathic person, and their continued association even though she or he caused them pain, was a direct result of how charming she or he could be. Countless times, I have watched people shake their heads and make statements such as, “He was the most charming person I ever met,” or “I felt like I’d known her forever,” or “He had an energy about him that other people just don’t have.”
I liken sociopathic charm to the animal charisma of other mammals who are predators. We watch the large cats, for example, and are fascinated with their movements, their independence, and their power. But the direct gaze of a leopard, should one happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, is inescapable and tetanizing, and the fascinating charm of the predator is often the last thing the prey ever experiences.
The next thing is the natural attraction of danger which attracts the victims of sociopaths into their web. Again, Hubbard was a master at this and his exploits as a daredevil glider pilot, explorer, leader of exciting expeditions, war hero and driver if 300mph race cars on Arcturus were things he repeatedly talked about to impress anyone who would listen. Miscavige has positioned himself as the fearless leader unafraid to tackle the media, the psychs, the government or any other enemies of scientology. Ask any scientologist who they think has the “highest confront of evil” and the almost unanimous reply will be “COB.”
Conventional wisdom has it that dangerous people are attractive, and when we are drawn to sociopaths, we tend to prove out this cliche. Sociopaths are dangerous in many ways. One of the most conspicuous is their preference for risky situations and choices, and their ability to convince others to take risks along with them.
Initially, it can be exciting to be invited into the risky scheme, to be associated with the person who is making choices outside of our ordinary boundaries.
Ability to identify victims — if you have ever had the misfortune of interacting with a sociopath you will know how true this is:
The shameless know us much better than we know them. We have an extremely hard time seeing that a person has no conscience, but a person who has no conscience can instantly recognize someone who is decent and trusting.
When a sociopath identifies someone as a good game piece , she studies that person. She makes it her business to know how that person can be manipulated and used, and to that end, just how her chosen pawn can be flattered and charmed.
Relatedly, people without conscience have an uncanny sense of who will be vulnerable to a sexual overture, and seduction is another very common sociopathic technique. For most people, a sexual liaison involves an emotional tie; even if only fleetingly, and such ties are used by the coldly remorseless to get what they want — allegiance, financial support, information, a sense of “winning,” or perhaps just a temporary relationship that has the appearance of being normal.
Proficient actors/crocodile tears. The ability to portray themselves as put-upon victims wholly undeserving if the terrible mistreatment they have had to endure is something Hubbard and Miscavige share. Not so much the crocodile tears — righteous indignation is their calling card. Though if Miscavige was ever called to account and confronted with the truth, he may well resort to tears… it will be interesting to observe when that day finally comes.
Since the scaffolding of a life without conscience is deception and illusion, intelligent sociopaths often become proficient at acting, and even at some of the particular techniques employed by professional actors.
Paradoxically, the visible signs of emotion at will can become second nature to the cold-bloode — the appearance of intense interest in another person’s problems or enthusiasms, chest-thumping patriotism, righteous indignation, blushing modesty, weepy sadness. Crocodile tears at will are a sociopathic trademark.
Crocodile tears from the remorseless are especially likely when a conscience-bound person. gets a little too close to confronting a sociopath with the truth. A sociopath who is about to be cornered by another person will turn suddenly into a piteous weeping figure whom no one, in good conscience, could continue to pressure. Or the opposite: Sometimes a cornered sociopath will adopt a posture of righteous indignation and anger in an attempt to scare off her accuser.
Titles — nothing really need be said about this. Even Dr. Hubbard…
Being natural actors, conscienceless people can make full use of social and professional roles, which constitute excellent ready-made masks that other people are loath to look behind. Roles help us organize our complex society, and they are tremendously important to us. If we see suspicious behavior, we may eventually question someone named Doreen Littlefield, but we are quite unlikely to question someone called Dr. Doreen Littlefield, no matter how unusual her behavior.
To some extent; the same is true for people who have (legally or illegally) assumed roles and titles in the arenas of leadership, business, organized religion, education, or parenthood.
Distraction — again, so apparent. The great humanitarian and champion of human rights. Defender of the little guy, the downtrodden.
We are distracted from a person’s actual behavior when he represents himself as in some way benevolent, creative, or insightful. We do not suspect people who claim to be animal lovers, for/example. We give extra leeway to those who identify themselves as artists or intellectuals, in part because we attribute any departures from the norm to eccentricities we, as ordinary people, could not possibly understand.
Our respect for people who appear to be inspired and benevolent leaders can be abused — has been abused many times to cataclysmic ends. With a leader, especially one who claims to have a sublime mission, as with a doctor or a priest or a parent, we tend to bestow the qualities of the role on the individual, and to follow the individual accordingly. Benjamin Wolman, founder and editor of the International Journal of Group Tensions, writes, “Usually human cruelty increases when an aggressive sociopath gains an uncanny, almost hypnotic control over large numbers of people. History is full of chieftains, prophets, saviors, gurus, dictators, and other sociopathic megalomaniacs who managed to obtain support … and incited people to violence.” Insidiously, when such a “savior” abducts the normal population to his purposes, he usually begins with an appeal to them as good people who would like to improve the condition of humanity, and then insists that they can achieve this by following his own aggressive plan.
They look like us — unfortunately.
In a confusing irony, conscience can be, rendered partially blind because people without conscience use, as weapons against us, many of the fundamentally positive tools we need to hold society together — empathic emotions, sexual bonds, social and professional roles, regard for the compassionate and the creative, our desire to make the world a better place, and the organizing rule of authority.
And people who do hideous things do not look like people who do hideous, things.
We try, consciously or tacitly, to judge a person’s character by his or her appearance, but this book-by-its-cover strategy is ineffective in nearly all cases. In the real world, the bad guys do not look the way they are supposed to. They do not resemble werewolves or Hannibal Lechter or Tony Perkins staring at a corpse in a rocking chair. On the contrary, they look like us.
Missing you over on YouTube, Mike. Hope you’re doing well.
Hi Mike
I miss you on youtube, but it probably is not the right move.
Apostate Alex is just the opposite of a sociopath. He is now, in the Daily Mail, with anti scientology message. He actually does dangerous things, going against scientology, he dealers with facts, and he tries not to distract. He has the charm, of not being fake. Well done to Alex.
The definition of Sociopath may apply to Andrew Cunanan. For those who’re unaware Cunanan was the perpetrator of a killing spree that ended with fashion designer Gianni Versace.
Something I once wrote about Hubbard: “He’s passed on! This prophet is no more! He has ceased to be! He’s expired and gone to meet his maker! He’s a stiff! Bereft of life, he rests in peace! If you hadn’t nailed him to the chair he’d be pushing up the daisies! His metabolic processes are now history! He’s off the twig! He’s kicked the bucket. He’s dropped his body and moved on to Target Two!! THIS IS AN EX-PROPHET!!”
What are you really implying? Beautiful plumage?
Mike, first of all, thank you for sharing this information. There are people with these characteristics around, and it’s important to recognize them. They don’t look or behave like the villains in movies; quite the opposite. It’s crucial to be able to recognize them.
As for DM, if I were to use a term from scn (just as an example, since hubbard stands for being a ‘source’ of something as useful as a pothole in the road), I would say he’s an NCG (no case gain) by definition. From my point of view, he lacks that aspect of consciousness called the ‘soul,’ not in the common sense of the term, but as that part of us linked to seeing others, to positive creation, to empathy, to the timeless and immaterial sense of what is good. Either one has it, or there’s no saint or divine force that can help them change.
One thing which for me was the final straw, with my Sea Org commitment, was the violence.
What was going on, in my final years, was staff to staff physical violence.
Hubbard put this violence right into “Knowledge Reports” policy, and at least the one “….if you see WDC SMI spit on him for me….” statements from Hubbard to top management persons, I think that order went to Miscavige.
Hubbard is as root for these violence tinged comments which to me I took as NOT do such things, but others clearly thought striking other staff who were deemed ‘saboteurs’ to other staff, was justified.
It’s not, it’s misdemeanor battery. But to report such misdemeanor battery, which I did contemplate, when I watched CO INCOMM punch and slap at a female Divisional boss, in broad view of about 15 of us underlings, and I was on a project not under the women being punched on her arms and shoulders, at least the CO INCOMM didn’t strike her head.
To hear of the number of times Miscavige committed what clearly sounds like misdemeanor battery, and how other Int Base staffers were goaded by Miscavige to follow suit, and do similar to one another, is truly cult behavior.
Cult staff/members can’t let go on such violence, and ought report it to police.
Which is why I had hopes that ex police and ex prosecutors would come to the forums where the Sea Org staff to staff violence is discussed, and offer their advice.
First off, I hope this constant violence behavior is exposed enough to get the Scientology staffers UP to the point of knowing it is the right thing to report this type of “Knowledge Reports” level of future “justified” Hubbard ordered violence.
Hubbard was so wrong, and this to me is the crux of what is most horribly wrong, this violence kick that Hubbard has left as Sea Org staffer and regular staffer options, due to the way “Knowledge Reports” policy has been intrepreted in years past.
Mike, that you were traumatized with years of Miscavige’s physical violence to me appears to rise to the degree felony level violation of the California laws, all by itself. (Repeated/serial misdemeanors I think rise to felony level charges, I don’t know for sure.) I wish Aftermath Foundation of the other Foundation started, get some police/lawyer/prosecutor input on the “Knowledge Reports” level violence incidents in the past and ongoing, by Scientology staff to staff.
I hope future Scientology staffers, all echelons, call 911, go to dispensaries and get their bruises legally photo’d and treated, and then get Scientology’s/Hubbard’s violence forever prosecuted whenever it shows up in the future.
(As psychologically traumatizing as the Fair Gaming lies about you Mike being the one who is violent, LOST to everyone’s thoughts are the number of times Miscavige punched and laid hands on you, all those times by Miscavige striking and laying hands in threat on Int Base staff, needs NEVER be forgotten!)
(My own boss at ASI, when she was returned from just having been “cleaned up/hatted” under RTC, called me singly into her office, then launched into me verbally screaming, for my post failures, and she pulled out a letter opener pointing at my throat, and thrusting the letter opener a second time at my throat so as to tell me she meant it the first time, granted this was across her desk to me sitting in a chair 6-8 feet away thankfully. it is mind completely discombobulating when Sea Org staff threaten violence or do minor misdemeanor battery on one another, it’s why is can’t be forgotten and has to be rooted out and police/911 called when it ever happens again in this “religion angle” “religion” Scientology.)
Miscavige’s history of violence and demeaning of Int Base staff ought be compiled into a document, and submitted to the “new religion” studying journals.
Hubbard again is at bottom, his words have justified the tough battery within limits (supposedly) level of physical violence in Scientology staff ranks. “Knowledge Reports” is the Hubbard most recent writing easily interpreted to engage in this “tough” “battery within limits” level of staff to staff interaction.
Hubbard had no business shackling people to his excessive regulations.
Imagine when Hubbard told Sarge that Hubbard admitted he’d failed, and that Hubbard was not coming back to earth. Imagine if Sarge had grabbed Hubbard by the collar and slapped Hubbard and told Hubbard to straighten up, and “Ron, you better do Treason Condition right this moment!” Because Hubbard was in Doubt/Treason for saying that to Sarge!
Hubbard was never one to assign himself lower conditions, and no one else dared assign Hubbard his own “lower conditions” or stood up to Ron’s nattering and ordered Hubbard to sec checking to find out Hubbard’s misdeeds!!
There are countless flaws in the Scientology regulations which Hubbard deserved his own “lower conditions” for making Hubbard’s extreme feelings “policy” for the movement members.
That whole unbalanced aspect of Hubbard making rules he himself did not abide by, and then on top Hubbard writing allowing staff to go after each other up to misdemeanor level battery on one another, is cult criteria of such a group, and it goes back to Hubbard.
Not only does it take some sociopaths to interpret Hubbard literally, like Miscavige has, but even leaving the “figurative” Hubbard options on the policy regulations list, is grounds to keep calling Scientology a cult.
New Religion scholars minimally have to get into these level weeds about the “new religions” and when I left Sea Org, and in 2005 the newspaper I worked for did an article on me, I wanted to reach out and meet the “new religion” scholars (Melton, Cowan, Bromley) and was invited to speak to them unofficially, which I did. Prof Beverley was there with the others. The violence, to me, was the issue then, and still now, which is so easy to PLEASE bring up.
A “new religion’s” violence characteristics and their justified “scriptures” which are being interpreted to engage in what seems absolutely clearly to be “misdemeanor battery” minimally, has to be discussed and used in the criteria of discussion about this or that “new religion.”
Scientology clearly has scriptural written policy that has been interpreted so as to cause “misdemeanor battery” staff to staff.
The attack at the Doctor’s Office parking lot, to me, is an extension of that “Knowledge Report” justification, because your ex wife could clearly have chosen not to even approach you closely as she and the others did, I so wish that moment had been filmed from the outside. I wonder if Scientology ever filmed that moment.
The point though, Scientology has an irrational violence side, and it traces to Hubbard’s writings, with “Knowledge Reports” being the final word from Hubbard.
Chuck Beatty
ex Sea Org 75 to 03, paperpusher staffer dupe, the whole thing of Scientology is a waste to me today, I never should have walked into Phoenix Org, etc.
This information is sobering. I for one, am a bit reticent on the subject, too much truth as these smiling, predatory representatives of humanity have been encountered numerous times, particularly those you thought were respectable. No one likes being ‘taken for a ride’ and ripped off.
The next encounter, (if it occurs, I’m long in the tooth & suspicious these days) is going to be interesting.
No wonder Miscavige hides like the cockroach he is from ex Scios and the law/media. Can’t wait until he’s cornered.
Martha, you are spot on!
Another great post Mike. You berig up alot of great points to this topic. It describes perfectly what both DMad LRH did/do.