Posted by:
Lot's Wife
(
)
Date: May 29, 2019 01:56PM
I spent an hour reviewing our troll's activity on this board and inadvertently learned some things about the board community. This post will summarize some of them.
The man whom we know as Bruce McDonkie is in fact DE, a former Mormon, former evangelical, former Baha'i, former follower of Dr. Dahesh. We know that he was expelled from at least three of those groups, more than once for threatening physical violence and even murder. Underlying this chaos is a self-reported diagnosis of mental illness. Searching my memory, the word "Dahesh" and the word "Baha'i" (not even bothering with his favorite sexual terms or political "tells") revealed over 20 different probable pseudonyms, including bendiendo, SonofLaban, phsycic, Mandy Moore, Doctor Dahesh, John dehlin (not), boilerluv, seeker of light, zenith, procrusteanchurch, Ex Aedibus, Questionsforexmos, Anon E. Moss, Aenon E. Moss, nba999, Lurk999, X.o.r.o.l [remove the periods], serge, and many more. I wouldn't be surprised if I have a few of those wrong but the picture remains the same.
What was also interesting, however, was seeing how RfMers treated him in those many threads. What I found was that there were different categories of posters. Surprisingly, a lot of posters put aside their general skepticism and ardently embraced his rants if those rants reinforced their personal interests. He was thus defended, at times strenuously, by the spiritualists among us, also those who believe in NDEs or spiritual visits from the dead; but there were also one or two people who routinely defend specific religions who vouched, sometimes strongly, for some of his assertions. There was also occasional zealous support, mainly from male posters but curiously also from some women, for DE's misogyny and his racism.
Another category was RfM posters who condemned almost everything DE wrote on the grounds that someone who is obviously mendacious cannot be trusted on any topic. Even when DE sounded coherent, these skeptics consistently kept their distance. Among them were Hie, DavetheAtheist, Brother of Jerry, and some more. (Apologies to those whom I am missing.) Then there were the empathetic sort who were warm to DE and his fellow travelers but withheld any judgment. Summer is high on that list although there were others as well.
From these observations I propose three conclusions. First, there has been a shift in attitudes on RfM. Five or seven years ago there was much less tolerance for racism and misogyny than there is now. Part of the subsequent evolution is probably due to the changing political dialogue in the rich countries; another part may stem from the refuge status that RfM has given those who are not welcome on the alternative ex-Mo sites. But for whatever reason, critical mass has been achieved and the number of people who firmly endorse DE's political and racial and gender views has risen dramatically over the last several years.
Second, the DE experience provides some evidence for Mark Twain's (sometimes confused with EOD) observation that the vast majority of people will believe whatever it is in their material interests to believe. They will proclaim good will and morality at all times, but the best indicator of what they will actually do and think is self-interest. In short, "does that statement confirm my beliefs?" It appears that DE wittingly or unwittingly played on that tendency, obtaining support in his various arguments from people who are generally logical but suspended that discipline when they desperately wanted what he said to be true. The predisposition to "forgive" bad behavior and espouse someone whose views are sympatico with one's own is not something about which humans should feel great pride.
Third, the RfM record indicates that Twain may have overestimated the degree of popular venality. The number of people who consistently maintained their independent judgment was, I would argue, reasonably high--perhaps 20 or 25%. Maybe this is because honest and critical thinkers are more common among those who have escaped from cults. Maybe it stems from the generally higher level of education among those who participate in a rather esoteric internet community. But for whatever reason, it appears that a decent chunk of our community is strong enough to maintain their integrity even when temped by the fruit of fraudulent self-affirmation.
Are these musings relevant to Mormonism? I think they are. For a time ED was a Mormon apologist, embraced by many, respected by many. Like many religionists, he later shifted from one faith to another. A narcissist, he used these religions to assert his intellectual and moral superiority; he sought a following and grew furious when people realized he was a charlatan. In short, he resembles in some respects the early Mormon prophets--and some of the modern ones--as well as a number of charismatic political leaders.
There is also, however, information to be gleaned about Twain's misanthropic remarks regarding the plasticity of human moral judgment. At various times ED enjoyed a lot of support here. Sometimes a poster would denounce him until he said something that poster liked, and then a deep emotional alliance formed--sometimes never to die. Other posters would defend him long after his current incarnation was no longer credible in the fear that renouncing him would undermine their own religious or political values. In short, there were brief times when some incarnation of ED exercised a cultish influence over RfM. He wasn't the most competent fraud, but he was good enough to deceive many for considerable periods of time when it was in their interests to be deceived.
Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2019 05:26PM by Lot's Wife.