In the link below, the referenced New Yorker Article, discusses tribalism in politics - it has some bashing of both sides, but overlooking those, it makes some interesting points. It breaks down American politics into 7 factions and it discusses the problem with identification with a tribe, assuming the positions of the tribe as a deterrent of having to think. If Scientology is about anything it is controlling thought. As I read the article, I began to wonder if there were tribalism in Scientology, and which tribes existed and their various endemic viewpoints. What do they identify with? I guess there is an uninterested tribe which would be the casual book buyer, a person who has perhaps attended a lecture and has no desire to participate further. If however they become involved and take further courses, they may see themselves as a sort of tribe. They may call themselves Scientologists to their fellow coursemates, but not to their "wog" friends. They may see themselves as ethical, and in a sort of self help mode. Sort of proto scientologists The next would be the people who consider themselves Scientologists. They apply Scientology to their lives, they agree with the tenants of Scientology - they self police and avoid entheta. You see in them the blocking of thought and refuse to discuss opposing or different viewpoints of The Subject Of Scientology. Whether they are in, flying under the radar, or indi scientologists, the viewpoint is the same - they believe. They may harbor doubts, or think were they in charge they would do things differently, but as a whole the subscribe to Hubbard's teachings. These are sheep to be shorn, recruited, and of little importance, unless they are members of another tribe - whales. Whales, whether celebrities or business persons or high income producers, either resent the constant reging for donos or feel they would rather pay for expansion, than expend their own time to do so. They are sort of a subset of the above, though are love bombed and catered to, and given a mantle of being a big being. While they may consider themselves valuable contributors, the top groups sees them as a never ending fountain of cash and as such, will go to great lengths to insulate them from entheta, counter intention, and the like. However the top tribe has no compunction about declaring them if they fall from grace. The next tribe is one that is disappearing, as it is replaced by Sea Org members. That is the mission and class 4 org staff members. Many moonlight to make ends meet or have a working parent or spouse that supports them, while they toil away trying to deliver services, or do their post duties. While many have become tech and policy wonks, they have an underlying feeling their efforts are being wasted in the incessant emergencies, the too little too late, any income being vacuumed uplines, so they are constantly underfunded, and expected to make it go right nonetheless. They are in a constant battle with the Sea Org tribe that rips off their staff, public, pc's and students and other assets. The Sea Org is a fractured tribe, with many sub tribes, though they have a central identity, they are stratified, depending on where they are posted, ( Gold, Int, CMO, Flag etc ) and the posts held ( reg, IAS, MAA, tech or qual) They have a disdain of every tribe below their own as being dilatant, lacking true dedication that their sub tribe exhibits. They would rather be trapped in the Hole at Int than be on the RPF in Pac Base. They have a very strong tribal identity as the bearers of Hubbard's and COB's torch into the inky blackness of reactive mind dominated think. Their fearless leader and his inner circle could be seen as a small, ruthless tribe, however, never having met them - I couldn't comment with any accuracy as to their beliefs, their identity considerations. I would welcome amplification of the above - I was a staff member, gave the IAS over $120 K, was a class 6 and on OT 7 so hopefully my observations are some what correct, based on my experience of over 40 years on lines. If you see inaccuracies, please contribute. Below is a link and some quote from the article. It isn't overly long and worth reading, whatever political tribe you belong to. Mimsey https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail...s-insights-into-tribalism-in-the-age-of-trump "We live in a time of tribes. Not of ideologies, parties, groups, or beliefs—these don’t convey the same impregnability of political fortifications, or the yawning chasms between them. American politics today requires a word as primal as “tribe” to get at the blind allegiances and huge passions of partisan affiliation. Tribes demand loyalty, and in return they confer the security of belonging. They’re badges of identity, not of thought. In a way, they make thinking unnecessary, because they do it for you, and may punish you if you try to do it for yourself. To get along without a tribe makes you a fool. To give an inch to the other tribe makes you a sucker." "I’m using “tribalism” to refer to what George Orwell, in an essay he wrote at the end of the Second World War, meant by “nationalism”: “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests. . . . The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” Our tribes are competing for power over the state, the media, public opinion, the verbal battleground. When politics becomes a perpetual tribal war, ends justify almost any means and individuals are absolved from the constraints of normal decency."