you seem to believe I'm talking about formal public classifications. I'm talking about Scientology as a set of cultish practices; it would be a cult regardless of how it was considered in the 60s. Scientology was not the only group with cultish practices he was knowledgeable of. He borrowed practices (and members) for his "family" from all communes around him in LA and SF, specifically the Diggers, and also cobbled some bullshit from his fundamentalist family, the pimps he met and emulated in jail, and fucking dale carnegie. He like knowing how people have and retain power in organizations.
Is there a reason you're so into his being a scientologist only? And I'm not really speculating about him emulating pimps, lmao, nor about his philosophy coming from his fundie family or Carnegie. Nor about his interactions with other hippies. And all I'm saying is that the dude was drawn to groups which emphasize ruthless group cohesion and singular leaders. Like why are you so defensive of that? Especially since you're talking about 1 bio out of many.
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Leave a comment