Hello everyone!

I am a student at the UW Madsion, and I am conducting a research project on FDR and its ethical and legal implications. If anyone feels comfortable answering a few questions for me, it would be greatly appreciated: (feel free to add any comments, opinions and/concerns at the bottom)

1. Are you, have you even been, or do you know someone who is a member of this space?

2. What are the primary factors that being people into this space?
What do members have in common?




3. Ethics: How is the site funded? How do Stefan Molyneux and his wife Christina Papadopouous make money? Is it ethical?




4. Many critics have said Molyneux preying on and exploiting vulnerable young adults? What is your opinion?
Is his community a cult? Is their activity protected under the first amendment?




5. Do you believe Molyneux conducting is unlicensed therapy sessions during his public call-in radio show that he uploads as podcasts on the site?

6. Why did you choose to leave the site/ what factors keep you involved in the site? (If applicable)

7. What advice would you give anyone considering entering the community?



Thank you so much for your time/help!

Marie Smith

Hello Marie,
In addition to this site, visit
www.fdrliberated.com
www.molyneuxrevealed.com

Certainly answers all questions and also has solid reference material for a college research type paper.

You should also interview a few parents who have experienced a defoo.
If you care to send me a private message here on LIMI, I will respond.

Hi, Marie! Welcome to the forum!

First and foremost, if you are doing ethnographic research on FDR, then do NOT proceed until you have grounded yourself in the basics of destructive cults and how they operate. Most people don't know a lot about modern destructive cults (and that's why its probably better to call them undue influence groups). They use specific techniques of "brainwashing" that were crudely pioneered during the Korean War. Today, of course, torture has been replaced with much more powerful stuff. Once you understand the techniques, your understanding of the FDR community will go to a whole new level.

I've written a brief history of modern undue influence groups here. Here's another good basic introduction from Rick Ross.

This is an important step because if there's one thing I've learned, what most people intuitively believe they know about destructive cults and the people who join them is wrong. (That included me at one time!)

student_ethnographer wrote:

1. Are you, have you even been, or do you know someone who is a member of this space?

I have never been a member. I do not know anyone who is currently a member. Through my participation on this board and the articles I have written for FDR Liberated, I have met a number of ex-members. One of the proudest accomplishments in my life is meeting people who told me they would have gotten completely involved in FDR if they had not first read my site.

student_ethnographer wrote:

2. What are the primary factors that being people into this space? What do members have in common?

Typically, they are very smart, strong willed, and searching for something. They are quite often 20-somethings who are exploring politics and economics. At some point, they encounter Ayn Rand. They learn a bit about philosophy. In the past, the only next steps for these folks would be loftier intellectual circles like the Mises Institute (which, sadly, seems to have gotten a little less lofty lately). Things changed when Stefan Molyneux came onto the scene. Sometimes they view Stefan Molyneux's videos on YouTube (he posts under the name Stefbot) and come to FDR to learn more. He is a very good explainer of difficult ideas.

The dark side of all this is that Molyneux himself had a tragic childhood and has grown up believing that all parents are bad. That is a basic and essential part of his philosophy. Since a lot of 20-somethings struggle with their parents anyway, that all sounds good to them at first. Somehow, he is able to push them all the way to discarding their family and friends entirely.

I divide the membership of FDR into three groups: True Believers, Patients, and Uncommitted.

True Believers are the actual cult members who are "all in." They have defooed; they protect the dogma; they are the thought police. They tend to live alone and have menial jobs because they are unable to associate well with others thanks to Molyneux's "relationship counseling." There are a few couples who are True Believers, but relationships often don't survive well at FDR.

Patients aren't really as deep into the actual philosophy (and certainly not economics) of the site. They're there because FDR represents "freedom" to them--which alway translates into freedom from their family. To them, the voodoo "philosophy" of books like Real-Time Relationships is very meaningful, along with the 1980s-type "recovery" psychology that peppers much of Molyneux's thinking. Many Patients have serious family issues and a few have mental-health issues. They are the true tragedy at FDR because they are at the worst possible place on the planet to receive the help they need.

Whenever it can get away with it, FDR offers everyone the same truth and the same solution. Your parents are evil and you should defoo. There is at least one FDR True Believer who operates a "Child Abuse Awareness" group on Facebook that I believe he uses to lure people to FDR as potential Patients. Patients sometimes evolve into True Believers. What makes FDR so suspicious to me are the number of people who arrive with ambivalent attitudes toward their parents or even loving attitudes toward one parent and who, over time, change their views of their parents as the worst evil on this earth, never to be spoken to again. FDR may have its share of Patients, but I think they're getting some bad medicine!

The Uncommitted are the majority of FDR members. They mostly treat it as a Web site/forum, probably one of several forums they routinely visit. They like much of what Molyneux says about philosophy/politics/economics but typically (though not openly) discard his curious and destructive psychological views. They are not "all in" with Molyneux's philosophy, but adopt it selectively. They can be Molyneux's best defenders on other sites. I think this is the fastest-growing segment and it does present an interesting problem for Molyneux. If you listen to his podcasts or read his books, you quickly see that in his view they are hypocrites. In his heart, he is an absolutist and believes there is no middle ground. He has even called them out in his podcasts, saying the reason they can't go "all in" is because they have harmed people in their lives.

For the most part, however, he doesn't challenge them because he needs their money badly. Of the three groups, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the largest share of donations come from the Uncommitted.

I'm certain that Molyneux plays some kind of mind game with himself to make it all work out. Perhaps he tells himself the Uncommitted are just a few more conversations/podcasts away from becoming True Believers. I think the truth is that most of them simply move on after a while.

student_ethnographer wrote:

3. Ethics: How is the site funded? How do Stefan Molyneux and his wife Christina Papadopouous make money? Is it ethical?

The site was originally funded by Molyneux's wife. Now I believe it is completely donation-funded. I believe from that perspective the site is ethical.

What I'm not so positive about is Christina's practice. She practices as family counselor but according to some (now removed) podcasts, the origin of the "nearly all parents are horribly bad" psychological view and the subsequent need for defooing originated from her. At what point does she mention that to her patients?

student_ethnographer wrote:

4. Many critics have said Molyneux preying on and exploiting vulnerable young adults? What is your opinion? Is his community a cult? Is their activity protected under the first amendment?

"Preying on" and "exploiting" are loaded terms. They suggest evil intent and I don't believe Molyneux and his wife fit that description at all. I believe that Molyneux views himself as benefactor and genius philosopher spreading the secret to true happiness. No one is a bigger believer in the cult than the cult leader!

And yes, I think their activity is fully protected

Having said that, it certainly isn't a matter of opinion that FDR targets and acquires 20-somethings with the intent to change their beliefs. FDR's view that your parents are bullies and you don't love them as well as the origin and purpose of FDR are on public record in Molyneux's and his wife's own words:

The Foundation of FDR (Pay close attention to what Molyneux refers to as his wife's "answer" and you'll understand my concern about her ethics as family counselor.)

Prying Them Loose. The purpose of the FDR enterprise is fully explained here.

student_ethnographer wrote:

5. Do you believe Molyneux conducting is unlicensed therapy sessions during his public call-in radio show that he uploads as podcasts on the site?

Yes, I do.

student_ethnographer wrote:

6. Why did you choose to leave the site/ what factors keep you involved in the site? (If applicable)

I stay involved with what I do because it fascinates the heck out of me.

student_ethnographer wrote:

7. What advice would you give anyone considering entering the community?

My advice? I know of someone once who gave much better advice than I could. I would share what she said.

Jeanne Mills was a former member of Jim Jones' People's Temple, but she left prior to the Johnstown murder-suicide in 1978 that left 911 adults and children dead. Jim Jones hated defectors, especially ones like Jeanne who tried to expose the destructive cult for what it was. Defectors sometimes died under mysterious circumstances.

Jeanne, her husband, Al, and their daughter Daphne were found murdered. Jeanne and Al were assassinated execution style. Daphne was shot in the head with exploding bullets.

Before she died, Jeanne once wrote about what it's like to be surrounded by a destructive cult--a chilling reminder of how easy it is for anyone to become a victim of such a group:

Jeanne Mills wrote:

When you meet the friendliest people you have ever known, who introduce you to the most loving group of people you have ever encountered, and you find the leader to be the most inspired, caring, compassionate and understanding person you have ever met, and then you learn the cause of the group is something you never dared hope could be accomplished, and all of this sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true! Don't give up your education, your hopes and ambitions to follow a rainbow.

I can't add much to that.

student_ethnographer wrote:

Thank you so much for your time/help!

My pleasure.