It is a little-known fact that the incarceration rate of the United
States is 6 to 19 times the rate of other Western European nations[ii]; one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. Knowing this, one must necessarily ask, "Why, in the richest and most prosperous nation on the planet, do we have such problems?". That analysis is complex, and there is much to consider as "cause"; I would venture to say that perhaps something that was never considered, is the core of the problem, and everything else we see is merely the symptomology[iii] which creates an apparency[iv] of being "the cause".
Since the problem seems to getting worse, it is amazing that some would call themselves "experts" (in criminology, et al.), since all of their efforts (presumably) directed at solving the problem, has only exacerbated
[v] it. Where the application of a science or a technology fails to produce a result that is efficable
[vi] and repeatable, one must question the validity of the science, technology, or methodology.
"The workability of a postulate is established by the degree to which it explains existing phenomena already known; by the degree that it predicts new phenomena which when looked for, will be found to exist; and by the degree that it does not require that phenomena which do not exist in fact, be called into existence for its explanation".[vii]
Scientology Logic #19
Current paradigms[viii] dictate that every "new" form of out-ethics behavior[ix] that arises can (and must) be suppressed by a corresponding new law or legislation. The reality of the matter is that the sanctions of law, or the wrath of God, for that matter, has never been proven to deter[x] someone who "was going to..." from going ahead and doing what he or she was intent on doing. Statistically speaking, the application of the current "thinking" has made the problem worse
or at least there seems to be a corollary.
Politicians are loathe to confront the fact that laws, no matter how well-intentioned, at best, do nothing, and more often than not, they exacerbate the very problem that was targeted. We reason "logically" that "it must work", and when it doesn't work, having no other technology to apply to the problem, we conclude that since it must work, but isn't working, it must be that we are not doing enough; so more legislation is enacted, and an interminable litany[xi] of laws are passed, and we find ourselves in a quagmire, at the mercy of lawyers to interpret and finagle the loopholes, and worse off than when we started. Time to re-evaluate. Use Logic # 19.
So we see "the workability of a postulate" that laws can solve a problem, fails the test of a physical (methodological) science. The truth; what is workable, must lie somewhere else. To punish an offense, and even to have the technology to ensure the absolute certainty of the apprehension of a criminal, will do nothing to solve the crime problem. Attempts to suppress criminal behavior (or any behavior, for that matter) by the sanction of law, does three things, primarily:
#1 it increases the severity of the offenses.
#2 it results in "better planning" with the resultant premeditation ending in unsolved (or really weird) crimes.
#3 it causes the aberrations[xii] to surface as other behaviors.
No, the solution does not lie in the opposite postulate; i.e.: not passing any laws. Certainly, "...there is nothing new under the sun", only new ways to do the old things.
Our society is trapped in its own consideration, which is confined within the pendulum swing of "law
no law"; the extremes of which is a police state and anarchy[xiii] respectively. Aberration unresolved, evolves. Unresolved aberration seeks an outlet along the path of least resistance.
"Paul Cromwell, a criminologist, and former Commissioner of the Texas Board of Prisons, aptly summarized the sorry state of affairs: 'Prison systems are criminogenic
they create criminals'".
Therefore, we see that attempts at suppression often result in re-manifestation of the thing we seek to suppress. The intention of society to rid itself of crime is good; but "the road to hell", as the old adage goes, "is paved with good intentions". As bad as the situation seems, there is an answer... it may not be quite the thing politicians want to hear, because they can't figure out a way to exploit it for their own gains... but there is an answer nonetheless.
It is futile to deal with aberration by attempting to suppress "acting-out" behavior with the sanction of law; all that does is fill the prisons, and creates criminals by mere definition. Judicial and prosecutorial witch-hunts and convictions by mere
political correctness follow, ending with the dissolution of the society after it degenerates into a Nazi-like Orwellian nightmare. We should study our history without worrying so much about recalling dates by rote repetition.
The source of aberration can be dealt with by merely understanding it; and it is really not that difficult to comprehend. Society, and the criminal that society seeks by law to remove from its midst are, as we shall see, both trapped by their own considerations. Rehabilitation of one necessarily leaves the other in a state of aberration.
At the root of the problem lies a basic misunderstanding of the nature of Man. This is a topic of a book[xv] all in itself, and it is best summarized by:
"Man is basically good [that is; he tries to be
right]...when a person finds himself committing too many harmful acts... he becomes his own executioner... causatively, unconsciously, or unwittingly, Man puts ethics in on himself by destroying himself; and he does himself in without assistance from anybody else".[xvi]
This is a profound statement, and it is supported from a variety of sources, even clinical psychologists who document the symptomology and come to the wrong conclusions, or entirely fail to understand it:
"Psychodynamically, the theory is that the painful affect[xvii] resulting from guilt, is aggression against the self for having transgressed an inner standard of acceptable behavior".[xviii]
The concept of a person "putting ethics in on himself" (causing his own punishment) is also supported in the Bible:
"...Behold, ye have sinned against the Lord: and be sure your sin will find you out". Numbers 32:23
Therefore, what we have is a "basically good" person, who (for any of a number of reasons), has transgressed against his own ethics, and ends up destroying himself. We must pause here to define two words that are commonly misunderstood (even by Funk & Wagnall and Webster):
ETHICS Is a God-given standard of behavior which is "in us" from birth; you might say that it is an "instinct" about right and wrong, and you'd be only half-correct. Ethics cannot be changed; only aberrated by drugs or psychology.
MORALS Are a codified[xix] set of laws or rules of behavior, which are derived from the collective ethics of individuals in the society. One might say that morality is an amalgam[xx] of the ethics of the citizens of a particular country, or members of a society, tribe, etc. Morals are usually codified laws upon which a society agrees, should be a standard that all abide by.
Often, there is disparity[xxi] or antinomy[xxii] between the two. One must come to terms with this individual issue. In the past, the unifying force that sought to align ethics and morals was the unattainable Biblical absolutes of divine law; our original Judeo-Christian values that used to be the "moral compass" our nation was founded on. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court grossly erred in its rulings
driven by "political correctness" separating not only church from state, but also God from country. There is confusion of ethics and law, but confusion is part of, but not the core of the problem.
We have arrived at a point where infanticide[xxiii] is a form of birth control,[xxiv] "rap" music lyrics: "...merry mutha-fu---in' Christmas, and a fu---ed-up New Year..." et al. are played over the public airwaves, crucifixes soaking in a jar of urine is "art" and protected by the 1st Amendment, but it is against the law, and an actionable tort[xxv] to mention God (while teaching the Evolutionist
Pagan religion as "science") in public schools; and where virtual[xxvi] child pornography which is functionally identical and practically indistinguishable from "the real thing", is similarly protected. We wonder why we're going to hell in a hand basket? Laws won't change any of it; laws (only) make trafficking in what is prohibited (but still in demand), more profitable for the purveyors[xxvii] and it adds the prohibited behavior as one of the elements of the game; it is either an obstacle (a law against it), or a freedom (a "right" permitted or tolerated). The effect is that there is no effective deterrent for the behavior at either extreme. Aberration is persistent and contagious. Morals, or "the law", which is an amalgam of the public's ethics, can be proven ineffective at any point approaching the two extremes. The answer lies with the individual.
The TV shows, the "music", the "art", and the abject filth that is permitted as "free speech", along with the problem of drugs, violence, and sexual immorality, are not the cause of the problem, but the symptoms of it. We attack symptoms; we suppress the sneezing, the cough, the fever, and the runny nose, and because we fail to deal with the underlying causes, we end up with "walking pneumonia"... metaphorically speaking.
The cure, if indeed one can be applied, is to first, stop doing what has been repeatedly proven itself entirely ineffective. One cannot repair a broken crankshaft by rebuilding the fuel pump, and no amount of effort expended on postulating "it must be the fuel pump" will get that car off the lift. The law is not the solution; it never has been, and no amount of
wishing it to be so, will
cause it to be so. We have Ph. Ds amongst us who will try to convince you otherwise... and because their credentials are "impressive", is the reason people believe them, and the reason we're in such a mess in this country today.
The study of sociology[xxviii] is often based on psychology[xxix], and neither can be called a "science" or a knowingness[xxx] ("Ology" from the Greek "Ologia" or "to know") in the empirical (factually verified, methodological scientific) sense. This is especially true of the latter profession.
Contrary to whatever the sociological or psychological theories may tell you, there is no such thing as "criminal thinking", but there is such a thing as aberrated perceptions (which are errantly called "cognitive distortion" by the
shrinks). The behavior that results from aberrated perceptions, is primarily based upon unconscious[xxxi] Reactive Mind comparisons to data accumulated from past experiences under trauma, can indeed be anomalous, unpredictable, and totally irrational. The distortion is not cognitive[xxxii] but perceptive[xxxiii]. The "error", which presents itself as an apparency of "a criminal mind", can be thought of as a fully functional computer that is being fed false (bad) data. The computation of the computer (computor
[xxxiv] in this case) is correct; the result (behavior) is wrong (incorrect, inappropriate, out if character, illegal, immoral, illogical, etc.). This is why "cognitive therapy", i.e.: the attempt to fix the computor (when the computer ain't broke and can't be broken) has dismal efficacy
ZERO percent. Making this seemingly minor distinction is therapeutic in its own right, as it sets one on the correct path towards the cause. When a person violates his / her own ethics (especially if that person is ethical most of the time), it creates an internal conflict or antinomy that psychiatry calls "dissonance", which is defined:
"Cognitive dissonance is a motivational or negative drive state, which is aroused when a person simultaneously holds two cognitions that are inconsistent with each other... an uncomfortable state of [emotional] arousal or tension which individuals are motivated to reduce... a function of a person's behavior that violates his own self-concept".[xxxv]
A person who commits an Overt (harmful act) must necessarily conceal it. In Scientology[xxxvi] this is calked
"Overt / Withhold", or "O/W". A condition then develops which psychology errantly calls "denial" with the implication that it is willful deception on the part of the offender; in reality, it is no such thing. What is commonly called "denial" in the true sense is simply an
inability to confront.
This condition is a natural reaction that the person takes to protect self-image; part of which is being right (we will get to that). The very fact that he finds his out-ethics behavior disturbing or repulsive is healthy. He seeks to "disconnect" or withdraw from it, but his conscience won't let him. The reason the Overt (Instant Offense) is committed is always related to mis-perceptions not mis-cognitions. Subsequently confronting the behavior (or being confronted with it) causes recoil. He cannot un-do the offense, he cannot change the image of 'self' or the ethics that dictate it, and he cannot confront it. He then (naturally) seeks to place the blame (responsibility) outside of himself, or on circumstances he has no control over. The lyrics of the song in the musical "West Side Story" titled "Officer Krupkee" comes to mind:
"...we're depraved on account-a we're deprived!"
Blaming never really works. In Scientology, "blame" is defined as "the assignment of cause". The computor will eventually retract blame to himself. This evokes the feeling of guilt, which is the action of conscience
the unsolvable antinomy between ethics and behavior called "dissonance". When guilt is publicly revealed, it becomes "shame", which is the action of the computor's perception of the way others see him, and / or judge him for his actions. When others (do, in fact) judge him, and label him as <whatever he did>, it has the effect of holding him fixed in valence[xxxvii], and his "guilt" becomes (Bradshaw's) "Toxic Shame"; a condition on the Dianetic tone scale which is just above apathy. The behavior then lives up to expectations because the person needs to "be right" if he cannot be ethical. The label becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In order to escape dissonance, the person will enter into a series of rationalizations that Scientology calls a "service facsimile". It is a "service" because it serves to reduce dissonance, and a "facsimile" because it is virtual reality. The function of a service facsimile is an attempt to explain (first to himself, and then to others) why he is not responsible for his behavior. Invariably, he inflicts upon himself more of a cruel and unusual punishment that any sanction of law could devise. By his own consideration, he unwittingly self-destructs in order to suppress his own behavior; the subsequent sanction of law, only adds insult to self-inflicted (spiritual) injury. A person in this state of what is known in "therapeutic" circles as "Toxic Shame" will invariably develop pathology; he becomes physically and / or emotionally ill. The condition in the extreme is often fatal by his own hand. He is often "helped along" this path by (psychiatric) "therapy".
"Most clinicians know that outcome research on psychotherapy is flawed. People are never really cured in any absolute or real sense".[xxxviii]
"Psychotherapy results are disappointing. Chronic trauma victims often remain stuck in their patterns".[xxxix]
Therefore we see that psychotherapy is not efficable in the empirical sense, by a leading psychiatrist's own admission. There is one more thing
one last thing that someone who has offended does before he succumbs, and forever disappears into the rat-hole he inevitably stepped into; He attempts to be last-ditch[xl] right. He does this by asserting that he is right, even when he is very wrong. He (for lack of a better analogy) attempts to "prove" he is right in the face of his own consideration that his behavior was out-ethics.
He asserts his "rightness" by the only means at his disposal
he repeats the behavior
(commits another Overt or crime).
This is the core etiology of criminal recidivism; it is no more complex than that. The key to its avoidance is not a plethora of imposed or self-imposed restrictions, but a simple knowingness of the mechanism; knowing where the trap lies. Indeed, the (external) imposition
of suppression in the absence of this knowledge provides additional impetus for the ex-offender to assert his rightness over the suppression;
the assertion itself quickly becomes divorced of empirical rightness, which can, and often does, lead to the escalating severity of offenses. The analogy is that a ball thrown hard to the ground, will rebound higher than the point it was released, than if the ball were merely dropped.
If a society puts energy into suppression, the energy returns to that society seven-fold in the form of what can be called "rebellion", "resistance", or "reaction".
Call it what you will, but an offender with no option to make amends to those offended; a recompense of his own choosing
either directly or vicariously will inevitably re-offend. Because our courts and prisons are so bent on the idea that the threat of punishment is a deterrent to crime, and refuse to examine the facts, is why crime and just plain out-ethics behavior is out of control in the United States, and in many Western European nations that subscribe to this "crime and punishment" philosophy.
A simple example of how the compulsion "to be right at all costs", is a person who speeds down the highway in his car, and gets into an accident. He does not confront his speeding as cause (i.e.: that he was wrong by driving 85MPH in a 55MPH zone); if he survives, he asserts his rightness by repeating the "pedal-to-the-metal" behavior. It is not defiance of the law per se'; it is the
attempt to be last-ditch right. We should not, therefore, be surprised that he becomes "accident prone"; the next ditch he runs into because of his effort to be last-ditch right (asserted rightness tends to escalate), may be his "last-ditch" for real.
The rehabilitation of any aberration (assuming, of course that an aberration is present, and an Overt or offense has in fact been committed) is acceptance of responsibility, which necessitates the ability to confront. One cannot normally do this without assistance and support, and the absence of obstacles such as compulsion and false data. Once confronted, the person must then be able to withdraw from the confrontation and return to life victorious. The basic fallacy in psychotherapy is primarily that the person being "treated" is kept in the confrontation indefinitely (as long as the "shrinks" can make money, or exploit insurance or health care providers), and is thereby trapped in the valence (or false identity) that seeks to assert "rightness" over suppression.
For as long as dissonance is provoked, there can be no final victory.
DEFINITION: "Responsibility is the ability and willingness to assume the status of full source and cause for all efforts and counter efforts on all [eight] dynamics".[xli]
One can only confront true data. One cannot (with sanity intact) confront false data (from whatever source) in any other way but to call it what it is. Quixotic battles are, at best, an exercise in futility, and at the extreme, a ticket to a padded room. In Scientology, it is an axiom that "In order for anything to persist, it must contain a lie [or false data]". Truth; the objective reality of a problem once found and confronted, resolves it, and erases aberrations with certainty and finality.
We must make a distinction here that is very important: Full responsibility is not fault; it is recognition of being at cause:
"A soldier on the field of battle may "blame" being shot on the sniper, the selective service, the stupidity of the government, but nevertheless had full responsibility not only for being there and getting shot, but for the sniper, the selective service, and the stupidity of the government".[xlii]
Another psychological approach to the suppression of aberrant behavior (which is intractable using psychology) is a method called "Associative Cognitive Therapy":
"The person is made to associate 'wrong ideas with pain [or unpleasantness], so that he 'will not have these ideas', or will be 'prevented from doing those things'. A crude example is to [administer] electric shock a person every time he smokes a cigarette. After several 'treatments' he is supposed to associate pain [or discomfort] with the idea, and so give up smoking".[xliii]
"The person so treated now MUST smoke, but CAN'T smoke. These two things are opposed [dissonance results]. That is known as frustration
[which is] a form of insanity. MUST reach CAN'T reach; MUST withdraw
CAN'T withdraw [MUST confront CAN'T confront] is total basic insanity. Thus psychiatry is making people insane".[xliv]
"Associative Cognitive Therapy" has a first cousin:
Pain-Drug Hypnosis (aka:
Black Dianetics). Both are outgrowths of Pavlov's dog, and the belief that Man is an animal; a stimulus-response mechanism and an aggregation of cells that "evolved" out of a "primordial soup" that somehow, over billions of years, became
sentient. These "theories" are insidiously nefarious. Moreover, the methodologies that work with dogs, rats, monkeys and cats, don't work with human beings, because human beings are driven by the need to be self-determined.
In fact, Man is only as sane as he is self-determined and to the degree that he can be cause over effect in his environment.
A human being is, by nature, a spiritual creature, no matter what he believes, or professes not to believe. A true healing is comprised of many things; among them are:
The resolution of an aberration by confronting it, and taking full responsibility
to become cause over effect.
The removal of suppression, which motivates errant assertiveness.
An opportunity to make amends of one's own choosing; either directly or vicariously.
To be trusted and held accountable as the rehabilitation of the ability to trust oneself.
To forgive and be forgiven ("connectedness" restored).
All of this, and what arises out of it can be summarized in a spiritual sense, and sealed thus:
"Repentance is self-judgment God-ward, while remorse is regret over the consequences of sin. Repentance being a change of both mind and attitude
[Metanoia[xlv]] condemns the sinful self, whereas remorse [merely] mourns over the wreckage".[xlvi]
The English poet John Donne wrote:
"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee".
The late author / humanitarian L. Ron Hubbard, paraphrasing Donne, wrote:
"One does not send to find for whom the bell tolls, without full willingness to have tolled it, and to have caused the cause of its tolling".
the knowledge or anatomy of cause(s).
Justicia Newsletter of
Judicial Process Commission, Rochester NY (from USDJ Statistics)
[iii] Symptomology symptoms or effects manifested and known.
[iv] Apparency that which "appears to be", but is not what it appears to be.
[v] Exacerbate to make a condition or situation worse.
[vi] Efficable effective, competent, having predictable results.
[vii] "What is Scientology?" ISBN
# 1-57318-122-6 Id at 636
[viii] Paradigms dogmas, doctrines, or beliefs.
[ix] Out-ethics behavior a misdeed that is inconsistent with one's ethics and personal principles.
[x] Deter to prevent or give pause to; discourage.
[xi] Interminable litany endless and tedious.
[xii] Aberration abnormal; a contamination of sanity.
[xiii] Anarchy complete lawlessness; an absence of government and / or law.
[xiv] Source: booklet: "Psychiatry Eradicating Justice"
Id at 25 see www.Net4TruthUSA.com/cchrlinks.htm
[xv] Source: "Our True Colors" David Todeschini
see bookstore on: www.lulu.com/spotlight/Net4TruthUSA for availability.
[xvi] Source: "Ron The Road To Self-Respect"
Id at 48 ISBN# 1-57318-046-7
[xvii] Affect (Psychology term) the range of emotions (in Dianetics, this is called "Tone").
[xviii] Source: "Trauma Victim" Lee Hyer, et al.
Id at 455 ISBN# 1-55959-047-5
[xix] Codified written, ordered, and established rigidly.
[xx] Amalgam a compound of dissimilar metals or elements mixed together as an alloy.
[xxi] Disparity disagreement, dissimilar, conflicting, opposed.
[xxii] Antinomy (legal term) A paradox caused by a contradiction; "catch-22".
[xxiii] Infanticide The murder of an infant or small child
Roe vs. Wade).
[xxiv] See: "Please Dont Do This" my booklet on abortion on www.Net4TruthUSA.com/abortion.htm
[xxv] Actionable Tort cause for a lawsuit to be brought.
[xxvi] Virtual emulating reality; an apparency.
[xxvii] Purveyors merchants or sellers / distributors.
[xxviii] Sociology the study of societies, cultures, customs, etc.
[xxix] Psychology the study of the "soul" (psyche) that denies human spirituality.
[xxx] Knowingness the state of full assurance or knowledge.
[xxxi] Unconscious below awareness; subliminal.
[xxxii] Cognition the realization (awareness) of thought. Cognitive the act of thinking.
[xxxiii] Perception / perceptics sensory (5 senses) or conclusions.
[xxxiv] Computor "one who computes" (or thinks) as opposed to a thing that computes; a computor is human (sentient); a computer is a machine.
[xxxv] Source: "Trauma Victim" Lee Hyer, et al.
Id at 685, 686 ISBN# 1-55959-047-5
[xxxvi] Scientology an applied religious philosophy
literally means "knowing how to know". Scientology incorporates Dianetics technology in pastoral counseling called "auditing" (which means "to listen").
[xxxvii] Valence a false identity (persona) assumed unwittingly.
[xxxviii] Source: "Trauma Victim"
Lee Hyer, et al. Id at 73 ISBN# 1-55959-047-5
[xxxix] Source: "Trauma Victim" Lee Hyer, et al.
Id at 78 ISBN# 1-55959-047-5
[xl] Last ditch a last resort, or final effort.
[xli] Source: "Advanced Procedures and Axioms"
L. Ron Hubbard Id at 123 (Brackets mine).
[xlii] Source: "Advanced Procedures and Axioms"
L. Ron Hubbard Id at 126
[xliii] Source: "A New Slant On Life" L. Ron Hubbard
Id at 123
[xliv] Source: "A New Slant On Life"
L. Ron Hubbard Id at 125 (Brackets, emphasis mine throughout).
Metanoia (Greek) A complete change of heart usually dramatic and for the better.
[xlvi] "My Brother's Keeper" newsletter
of Christian Ambassadors prison ministry www.Christian-Ambassadors.org - Id at 1, 2 (article by David Todeschini)