The Devil’s in the Slide: Sleazo Inputs Pt. 1; or What’s New, Pussycat?
If the counterculture didn’t play a significant role in shaping Manson and his followers, we have to look at what did. In Helter Skelter, Bugliosi refers to a semi-private conversation between Manson and himself, supervised by a bailiff. He suspected that Manson had developed the Helter Skelter motive as an informal acolyte of the Process Church of the Final Judgment. To test this theory, he asked Manson if he had ever heard the name Robert Moore. Manson smiled and told Bugliosi that he and Moore were one and the same.
Granted, Moore and Manson look somewhat alike. Yet both deliberately donned the stereotypical appearance of Jesus. Moore claimed to be Christ. Manson allowed his followers to infer that he was Christ (Man’s son). So that they share a physical resemblance isn’t that remarkable. At the same time, they could not have been one and the same. There’s copious evidence to prove that Moore’s movements back and forth between London, Los Angeles and Xtul occurred independently of Manson, who was incarcerated for part of that time.
Bugliosi knew that Manson and Moore were two different people, and understood Manson’s statement as an affirmation of the guru’s teachings, not an alternate identity or alias. Manson simply meant that he and Moore were on the same page. Nevertheless, the connection between the Process and Manson still intrigued the prosecutor, even though he did not present this information in trial. He noted, for example, that Manson and the Process shared a number of key ideas. First, was the fundamental belief in fear. Fear, according to both, made one hyperaware of the truly important, instead of the superficially profound. Manson’s preaching stressed the importance of maintaining a constant state of anxiety. As quoted by the aforementioned Rolling Stone article, he said:
Bugliosi noticed other similarities, some large, some small. For starters, the Process referred to themselves as “The Family,” a name the slippies would come to be known as soon as their notoriety hit the front page. The fascistic bent of the Process that forced Marianne Faithful to leave the group was reflected in their symbol (left) a stylized swastika-like logo consisting of four overlapping ‘P’s.’ Manson and his followers, who explained their reverence to Adolf Hitler by declaring that he “leveled the karma of the Jews, carved swastikas onto their foreheads during the trial.
There’s evidence Manson had some contact with all of these groups, or their teachings. In San Francisco, for example, they lived two blocks away from a prominent Process member, Victor Wild (aka Brother Ely). Many sources place Manson, ever curious about his surroundings, at Wild’s residence during this time. Also, Bruce Davis worked at the Scientology office in London before his days with Manson, and had contacts with the Process.
Sanders cited a person identified only as Blaine, who wrote an article for an unnamed Berkeley newspaper. Blaine reported that he personally knew Manson in San Francisco, and that they had met by chance, despite having a mutual friend.
According to Blaine, Manson participated in a death cult, which he called the Final Church of Judgment (perhaps he meant Process Church of the Final Judgment?). One faction of this cult met at a place called the Devil House, located on Waller Street. This was a particularly chauvinistic bunch, for women were not allowed into the inner sanctum, where the group performed their rituals. Instead, the Waller Devil House had a special room for women to stay while their men did their thing. They even forbade anything but male-on-male sex while in the house.
In December of 1968, according to Blaine, The leader of Devil House, Father P., summoned a meeting. Manson arrived from Spahn Ranch with a woman in tow (judging from the description, most likely Atkins). Once assembled, they conducted a “trial” to determine the guilt or innocence of a member nicknamed Sadyi on the charge of “committing crimes against Haight-Ashbury, against nature and for crimes against Pussycat [a twenty-year-old male, presumably Sadyi’s sex partner].” They charged Sadyi of causing the demon possession of Pussycat, so part of the trial consisted of a torturous exorcism ritual. In the middle of the proceedings, Father P. ordered Manson to steal holy water from a nearby church so that they could carry on.
Despite Pussycat’s victim status, Father P. threatened to kill him. But those in attendance voted to spare his life that night, whereupon Atkins and Manson returned to Spahn Ranch.
Blaine also wrote that Father P. went to Los Angeles to meet with Manson on occasion.
Most interestingly, Bugliosi quoted a contemporary police interrogation of a former Process member in an unrelated case. This unnamed informant related something quite familiar.
During its days in Los Angeles, the Solar Lodge ran a house (they actually owned a number of properties, including a gas station) located at 1251 W. 13th Street, where Manson hung out frequently. According to Atkins, she and other slippies participated in animal sacrifice and blood drinking rituals at some of these properties. They also had mutual interests in the Straight Satans.
By the way, you’ll note that I said “During its days in Los Angeles.” Believing that the predicted cataclysmic race war would ignite soon, Brayton moved her flock out to Riverside County in May of 1969. If the Solar Lodge had planned on taking an active part in starting this conflict, however, their arrest for the torture of six-year-old Anthony Gibbons would have put an end to that.
Manson studied Scientology in prison under the tutelage of a fellow prisoner, and claimed to reach the highest state of achievement, “theta clear.” Some of Manson’s frequent maxims—e.g., “Coming to now,” Cease to exist,” etc.—came from Scientology. Throw in half a cup of apocalyptic Christianity, garden-variety Satanism and a reverence for Nazism, and you’ll have a substantial recipe for what Manson preached to his followers.
In short, Manson wasn’t a thisist, or a thatist. He was eclectic, borrowing from any and all philosophies, traditions and garbage that he happened to come across. Ed Sanders referred to these as “sleazo inputs,” the reckless admixture of outrageous ideas, far-fetched beliefs and hokum that alienated the Mansonites from both mainstream thought and the counterculture.
Of course, there were other sleazo inputs that seem quite fascinating and lurid, when you get down to it, totally on the level of The National Enquirer or The New York Post.
Granted, Moore and Manson look somewhat alike. Yet both deliberately donned the stereotypical appearance of Jesus. Moore claimed to be Christ. Manson allowed his followers to infer that he was Christ (Man’s son). So that they share a physical resemblance isn’t that remarkable. At the same time, they could not have been one and the same. There’s copious evidence to prove that Moore’s movements back and forth between London, Los Angeles and Xtul occurred independently of Manson, who was incarcerated for part of that time.
Bugliosi knew that Manson and Moore were two different people, and understood Manson’s statement as an affirmation of the guru’s teachings, not an alternate identity or alias. Manson simply meant that he and Moore were on the same page. Nevertheless, the connection between the Process and Manson still intrigued the prosecutor, even though he did not present this information in trial. He noted, for example, that Manson and the Process shared a number of key ideas. First, was the fundamental belief in fear. Fear, according to both, made one hyperaware of the truly important, instead of the superficially profound. Manson’s preaching stressed the importance of maintaining a constant state of anxiety. As quoted by the aforementioned Rolling Stone article, he said:
Have you ever seen the coyote in the desert? Watching, tuned in, completely aware. Christ on the cross, the coyote in the desert -- it’s the same thing, man. The coyote is beautiful. He moves through the desert delicately, aware of everything, looking around. He hears every sound, smells every smell, sees everything that moves. He’s in a state of total paranoia, and total paranoia is total awareness.
Bugliosi noticed other similarities, some large, some small. For starters, the Process referred to themselves as “The Family,” a name the slippies would come to be known as soon as their notoriety hit the front page. The fascistic bent of the Process that forced Marianne Faithful to leave the group was reflected in their symbol (left) a stylized swastika-like logo consisting of four overlapping ‘P’s.’ Manson and his followers, who explained their reverence to Adolf Hitler by declaring that he “leveled the karma of the Jews, carved swastikas onto their foreheads during the trial.There’s evidence Manson had some contact with all of these groups, or their teachings. In San Francisco, for example, they lived two blocks away from a prominent Process member, Victor Wild (aka Brother Ely). Many sources place Manson, ever curious about his surroundings, at Wild’s residence during this time. Also, Bruce Davis worked at the Scientology office in London before his days with Manson, and had contacts with the Process.
Sanders cited a person identified only as Blaine, who wrote an article for an unnamed Berkeley newspaper. Blaine reported that he personally knew Manson in San Francisco, and that they had met by chance, despite having a mutual friend.
According to Blaine, Manson participated in a death cult, which he called the Final Church of Judgment (perhaps he meant Process Church of the Final Judgment?). One faction of this cult met at a place called the Devil House, located on Waller Street. This was a particularly chauvinistic bunch, for women were not allowed into the inner sanctum, where the group performed their rituals. Instead, the Waller Devil House had a special room for women to stay while their men did their thing. They even forbade anything but male-on-male sex while in the house.
In December of 1968, according to Blaine, The leader of Devil House, Father P., summoned a meeting. Manson arrived from Spahn Ranch with a woman in tow (judging from the description, most likely Atkins). Once assembled, they conducted a “trial” to determine the guilt or innocence of a member nicknamed Sadyi on the charge of “committing crimes against Haight-Ashbury, against nature and for crimes against Pussycat [a twenty-year-old male, presumably Sadyi’s sex partner].” They charged Sadyi of causing the demon possession of Pussycat, so part of the trial consisted of a torturous exorcism ritual. In the middle of the proceedings, Father P. ordered Manson to steal holy water from a nearby church so that they could carry on.
Despite Pussycat’s victim status, Father P. threatened to kill him. But those in attendance voted to spare his life that night, whereupon Atkins and Manson returned to Spahn Ranch.
Blaine also wrote that Father P. went to Los Angeles to meet with Manson on occasion.
Most interestingly, Bugliosi quoted a contemporary police interrogation of a former Process member in an unrelated case. This unnamed informant related something quite familiar.
A: They [the Process Church] don’t like anybody that they can’t indoctrinate or anybody that is not with them. They are just totally against what they cal the ‘gray forces,’ the rich establishment or the Negroes—“The use of black militancy to promote anti-black hysteria seems quite like Helter Skelter. And if you recall, Georgina Brayton’s Solar Lodge had a similar plan to excite black violence as a rationale for policies that would encourage (white) public support for extermination. Also, as did the Solar Lodge, Manson curried favor with such biker groups as the Straight Satans in an effort to develop them as shock troops for full-scale combat and protection, when and if necessary.
Q: Why don’t they like Negroes?
A: I don’t know. They just don’t.”
Q: “They have a natural hate for the Negro?”
A: They have a natural hate but they would also like to use the Negro as a tool to begin some kind of militant thing. They are really good at picking out angry people.
During its days in Los Angeles, the Solar Lodge ran a house (they actually owned a number of properties, including a gas station) located at 1251 W. 13th Street, where Manson hung out frequently. According to Atkins, she and other slippies participated in animal sacrifice and blood drinking rituals at some of these properties. They also had mutual interests in the Straight Satans.
By the way, you’ll note that I said “During its days in Los Angeles.” Believing that the predicted cataclysmic race war would ignite soon, Brayton moved her flock out to Riverside County in May of 1969. If the Solar Lodge had planned on taking an active part in starting this conflict, however, their arrest for the torture of six-year-old Anthony Gibbons would have put an end to that.
Manson studied Scientology in prison under the tutelage of a fellow prisoner, and claimed to reach the highest state of achievement, “theta clear.” Some of Manson’s frequent maxims—e.g., “Coming to now,” Cease to exist,” etc.—came from Scientology. Throw in half a cup of apocalyptic Christianity, garden-variety Satanism and a reverence for Nazism, and you’ll have a substantial recipe for what Manson preached to his followers.
In short, Manson wasn’t a thisist, or a thatist. He was eclectic, borrowing from any and all philosophies, traditions and garbage that he happened to come across. Ed Sanders referred to these as “sleazo inputs,” the reckless admixture of outrageous ideas, far-fetched beliefs and hokum that alienated the Mansonites from both mainstream thought and the counterculture.
Of course, there were other sleazo inputs that seem quite fascinating and lurid, when you get down to it, totally on the level of The National Enquirer or The New York Post.
Labels: assassinations, cults, domestic ops, Helter Skelter4, mind control



20 Comments:
At 4:45 AM,
SJ said…
If the chauvinists didn't let women in, who cleaned the place? :D
This is one fucked up guy unless the madness had a method and a purpose. I wonder how much of success they saw in their efforts to foster race war.
At 6:14 AM,
Crushed said…
This kind of goes with what I was saying about thee being an almost uconscious link for these sorts of minds for ideals generally rejected by the rest of society.
I don't know why by I was suddenly put in mind of the Bond film, Moonraker.
As if they went to annihilate the world and all in it who reject them, believing it is they, the chosen who are ordained to start again, like Noah after the flood.
I wonder if that's how these satanist/Nazi types think.
At 9:44 AM,
Charles Gramlich said…
Total paranoia is total awareness. You know, that's actually true. hum.
At 10:46 AM,
Enemy of the Republic said…
I know this is leading up to something--you are clarifying what Manson is NOT, and leaving the door open as to what he really is. I am guessing that you believe that the media version is...incorrect???
At 12:46 PM,
X. Dell said…
SJ, other events are going on concurrently with this that indicate other potential impetuses for race war. None of these have anything to do with Manson, his slippies, or his esoteric contacts.
Crushed, that's certainly plausible. People rejected by society might identify more closely with people who are also rejected by society, despite the fact that they are poles apart on fundamental levels.
As for rejection, that was part of the appeal of Nazism, the feeling that the global community turned its back on Germany after the Great War (rejection of the Fourteen Points, the humiliation at Versailles, the reparations, the Young Plan, etc. The response was Deutscheland Uber Alles, the feeling that super-nationalism would be the answer (just their way of getting a little attention).
Charles, I suppose you're right. When totally paranoid, one is totally aware of everything except the difference between an imminent threat and an imagined one.
Enemy, that's correct. I have spent a lot of time taking down the predominant view of Manson. The version of him in our heads belies facts already stipulated. For society, because of media, most people see him as the most evil mass murderer in history. Yet, one has to stipulate that he never murdered anyone. Even if we accept that he ordered people to kill, then when ranking him with other mass murderers (Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas, Richard Gein, John Gacy, et al), then we have to note that his wasn't necessarily the most brutal slayings (even though, they were certainly brutal enough), nor did he rack up the body of the others.
But that's accepting the basic premise that he ordered the murders. And this comes only from people who either have (a) turned state's evidence (e.g., Kasabian), (b) were trying to distance themselves from previous relations from Manson (e.g., Melcher), (c) a prosecution team that needed that presumption to foster a conviction, and (d) the actual killers, who are now looking for a way out of prison. In all these cases, there's overwhelming motivation to color the story (not to mention safety in numbers and repetition).
Moreover, Manson has something at stake in maintaining the public's view of him.
After reading about this case for decades, I'm just not seeing this view as accurate anymore. And by the end of this series, I'm hoping that how I actually view the man has sufficient explanation.
At 2:27 PM,
Libby said…
x--you know, i think this whole series is giving us an insight into an even deeper level of sleaziness than even I knew!!
At 4:14 PM,
dr.alistair said…
this reminds me of a crazy biker type that attached himself to me some years ago when i played in a blues band.
he stated that he had dreams that he was chosen to lead the people out of darkness and into the light. his "let ze peeple in" rhetoric was an obvious play on a band name, but his application of the band`s lyrics were interesting and long since forgotten, but the tone of his presence and the chaos surrounding him reminded me of "man`s son" and the application of semantic juggling i see in religious fanaticism of evengelicals, kabbalists, scientologists, etc., all trying to prove thier point.
and let`s face it, if you believe led zeppelin is singing your song, then you can really rock and roll.
and it sells cadillacs now too.
At 8:43 AM,
JohnB said…
What you have here is what any good-natured cultist chief would do...and in the the USA it is almost always something at least in-part based on some Christian belief, primarily it seems to me some esoteric doctrine (such as just as some ridiculous examples that, "wine was nothing but grape juice back in Jesus' time," or that "women are totally subservient to men", etc) -and that is the gathering of a few significantly recognizable passages and playing on the fears of potential followers. It seems to me that it is all too easy to prey on this aspect of human nature, which would lead me to think that there are probably and most likely plenty of such similiar organizations out there of varying degrees.
The question becomes, what can any of us do about it, especially since these groups hide behind religious freedom? Repealing that right of course would be even worse, but still, it is an annoying fact.
At 2:19 PM,
Monique said…
What's happening to The Golden Ganesh?
At 2:24 PM,
X. Dell said…
Libby, as th tale progresses we'll certainly find no end to the sleaze.
Doc, if it's not wordplay, it's often numerical symbology that's twisted. Truth is, just about anyone can manipulate symbols to mean anything. Someone manipulating them to confirm their power would therefore not be all that difficult. Add to that engineered mystical experiences (here, helped with copious quantities of LSD and other hallucinogens), and you really have the potential for followers to attach increased meaning on the symbols someone presents to them.
John because the US has more Christians than people of any other faith, then it's not surprising that Christianity would comprise a lot of the bases for cult activity here--from The People's Temple, to The Process, to Manson, and beyond).
There are some Eastern tenets in Manson's spiel, but wherever he got it, the bulk of his preaching came from Western traditions, among them Scientology, Satanism, and so on.
That religion plays into fear is part and parcel of the beast. After all, what other institution can claim that it either control or influence your destiny after you die? A court might give a defendant consecutive life sentences, but they obviously aren't enforceable, even if there is such a thing as reincarnation.
I'm currently reading Al Gore's The Assault on Reason. So far, he's talked about the need not for churches to be politically active, but rather to be in a position to control the state--i.e., when you have government policies that reflect the religious dogma of one group that interfere with the First Amendment rights of others to practice other religions, or none at all. The basis of that aspect of the First Amendment (which we rarely talk about) stems from the religious persecution that drove many early colonists away from the US and towards the "New World."
The point isn't to eliminate religion, or to castrate it, but rather to insulate governance from emotionally centered desire. Exposing the mechanisms of dogma would be far more effective than banning a faith. After all, faiths easily go underground. If you want to expose cult behavior that is coercive, violent, and harmful, the best way to do that is to make sure that as many people as possible know what cults look like, how they operate, the consequences of groupthink, et cetera.
At 2:25 PM,
X. Dell said…
Monique, The Golden Ganesh is coming along, but we're still looking for an Australian actress, and waiting for the last few people to submit their recordings. I'm hoping to raise the curtain in about five weeks.
At 2:26 PM,
X. Dell said…
Libby, as th tale progresses we'll certainly find no end to the sleaze.
Doc, if it's not wordplay, it's often numerical symbology that's twisted. Truth is, just about anyone can manipulate symbols to mean anything. Someone manipulating them to confirm their power would therefore not be all that difficult. Add to that engineered mystical experiences (here, helped with copious quantities of LSD and other hallucinogens), and you really have the potential for followers to attach increased meaning on the symbols someone presents to them.
John because the US has more Christians than people of any other faith, then it's not surprising that Christianity would comprise a lot of the bases for cult activity here--from The People's Temple, to The Process, to Manson, and beyond).
There are some Eastern tenets in Manson's spiel, but wherever he got it, the bulk of his preaching came from Western traditions, among them Scientology, Satanism, and so on.
That religion plays into fear is part and parcel of the beast. After all, what other institution can claim that it either control or influence your destiny after you die? A court might give a defendant consecutive life sentences, but they obviously aren't enforceable, even if there is such a thing as reincarnation.
I'm currently reading Al Gore's The Assault on Reason. So far, he's talked about the need not for churches to be politically active, but rather to be in a position to control the state--i.e., when you have government policies that reflect the religious dogma of one group that interfere with the First Amendment rights of others to practice other religions, or none at all. The basis of that aspect of the First Amendment (which we rarely talk about) stems from the religious persecution that drove many early colonists away from the US and towards the "New World."
The point isn't to eliminate religion, or to castrate it, but rather to insulate governance from emotionally centered desire. Exposing the mechanisms of dogma would be far more effective than banning a faith. After all, faiths easily go underground. If you want to expose cult behavior that is coercive, violent, and harmful, the best way to do that is to make sure that as many people as possible know what cults look like, how they operate, the consequences of groupthink, et cetera.
At 3:59 PM,
..................... said…
once again, interesting info for me cause i was basically clueless..
but until i have something of relevance to add, i might just become a lurker ..
At 4:05 PM,
dr.alistair said…
many people arrive pre-hypnotized, looking for a mother/father mechanism to tell them what to do, and so the church and state are best served by helping maintain that helpless, pre-adolescent state in as many people as possible and promote arrested developement courses and media devices any way they can.
"wheeeeeee, isn`t this fun kiddies?"
algore is a frighteningly bland slow-blinking hypnotist that resonates with a hyper-intellectualized society, and people struggle to keep up with his reasoning for fear of seeming stupid.
he reminds me of the arch-bishop of canterbury covered in mel gibson`s blood in the movie braveheart, assuring the man that it will be ok soon.
a friend of mine recently reminded me that there are many poor ideas dressed up glibly that pass criticism because we fall in love with the prose or the theater.
At 4:16 PM,
benjibopper said…
i love your cliffhangers.
i haven't read helter skelter and haven't boned up on manson either way, so this 'alternate version' from the mainstream is an introduction for me, and he is a fascinating character, probably in any version.
on a half-related note, i think i'll check out bill maher's new movie, religulous. in the clip i saw he did a good job making scientology look batshit insane.
At 9:31 PM,
X. Dell said…
Well, Foam, happy lurking.
Doc Alistair, Steve Hassan, Margaret Singer and others who specialized in cult "thought reform" wouldn't eliminate anyone from the "adolescent/pre-hypnotized" state of mind that you describe. Truth be told, anyone can undergo that state through abrupt change, trauma, etc. For example, Manson picked up Atkins whose life was constantly in a state of flux. He picked up Fromme moments after her father kicked her out of the house. True, people like Sandra Good are kinda hard to understand or explain. But I'd bet good money that, if she is what she appears to be (and that's a big caveat), she wouldn't have been a part of the cult had she been in a vulnerable state of mind at some other time.
Frankly, for someone who's read Adorno, Lacann, Lippmann, et al, Al Gore doesn't present much of a challenge. The Assault on Reason is hardly an exercise in intellectualism. If anything, it's a bit simplistic at times, bordering often on deterministic explanations--i.e., explanations that overgeneralize the impact of electronic media et cetera. Nevertheless, I do find the book interesting, for I too am concerned about the increasing inability to critique on merit. Instead, the tendency is to label things with emotionally charged language, and to overrely on vague concepts such as name-calling, cariacture and so forth.
Orwell wrote, in an appendix of 1984, that in newspeak, the purpose was not to make language meaningless. Newspeak would lack qualifiers except for good, the negation 'non,' and the intensifiers 'plus,' and 'double-plus.' So, in newspeak, I couldn't say that Big Brother is a demagogue, a ruthless totalitarian, or even a son-of-a-bitch. I could only say that he's double-plus non-good. Problem is, I don't have language to form a reasoned argument to explain why.
Cult leaders, and others who make a habit of trying to manipulate others, often negate language because it's a tool of reason. Manson did the same thing, referring to death as life (kinda like war is peace), or mayhem as order, or telling his followers to pursue their will by conforming to his.
I'll probably get around to Religious someday, Bemjibopper. Many people haven't read the book. At the same time, much of the public perception comes from either it, or the mvies made from it.
At 2:52 AM,
Lady Prism said…
About your comment: You shocked yourself in front of your audience..ha!ha!ha!ha!ha! I don't think I can top that! hee! hee!
About this post: I can't believe they had to steal holy water LOL! Why not make their own since they were into weird rituals anyway. I know these people are evil and sick but ha!ha!ha!ha! didn't they have any idea at all how ridiculous they all actually were with their silly Pussycat names and delusions of prophetic grandeur....And I didn't realize till now how shady Scientology's beginnings were...Some guy who wrote a book about the merits of Scientology went around on a bookstore tour over here. Wanted to give me a free stress test of some sort, but I declined knowing he would stress me out into buying his book.
You know...I wonder if all these people involved ever realized how crazy they were.
At 12:16 PM,
behindblueeyes said…
I guess I will wait it out and see where you are going with this. Very interesting. I have always been fascinated with the Manson family.
At 1:49 PM,
Middle Ditch said…
On my links there is a lady called Aggie and she might just be game to play the Australian part. She is from New Zealand, close to Australia and I believe with the same sort of accent as Australians.
At 6:17 PM,
X. Dell said…
Yeah, Prism, that was my shocking confession.
Things from people or religions other than ours often do things that seem silly. After all, I'd bet good money that holy water retains the same molecular structure as it di before consecration. But I try to suspend judgment. To me, it's rather tragic that they threatened the young man's life.
You were wise to avoid the "stress test," probably using some e-meter or other claptrap. The Scientologist guy wanted you to buy much more than a book.
Behind Blue Eyes, where I'm headed is an examination of Mae Brussell's theory that the Manson family wasn't what it appeared to be, but rather a puppet of government intelligence operants.
Thank you, Monique. I will give her a shout.
Post a Comment
Linkbacks:
Create a Link
<< Home