It seems that the disincorporation election did open the eyes of Americans outside of Oregon.
Reporters from all over the country flocked to Antelope to report on the unusual election (Wild Wild Country 2018b). However, then assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Weaver recalls receiving many calls from locals, asking them when they were planning on “doing something about these Rajneeshees” (ibid.). He told them that for now, the U.S. Attorney’s Office was not going to pursue this case. However, “if things change or it becomes something bigger and greater than this, please call us” (Weaver as quoted in Wild Wild Country 2018b). John Silvertooth, City Council member and local rancher, explains in the documentary Wild Wild Country (2018b) how he was in contact with the David Frohnmayer, Attorney General, after he found the incriminating Rajneeshee documents. From that moment on, the Attorney’s office had a legal reason to pursue the case, and even prioritize it: the documents mentioned immigration fraud and wiretapping which are both considered a felony under U.S. law. Frohnmayer filed the suit to challenge the incorporation of Rajneeshpuram on the basis of separation of church and state. Explaining the urgency, he said: “when you have a religion exercising the power of a government, then you have an intermingling of church and state which is such a fundamental civil liberties issue that it has to be addressed and we couldn’t avoid it” (Frohnmayer as quoted in Wild Wild Country 2018c).
Lastly, the public discussion of this issue was abundant and arguably excessive. Local and even international magazines such as the (now dissolved) Frying Pan Magazine and German-based magazine Stern dedicated pages and articles to the neo-sannyasins in Oregon (Wild Wild Country 2018; OSHO Life and Vision n.d.). Commentaries were provided on radio and promoted in newspapers (The Oregonian 1982e), documentaries such as Ashram in Poona (1978) were shown to audiences all over Oregon (and also promoted widely in the newspaper).
Comedy shows were made about the Guru (The Oregonian 1982d) and newspapers wrote plenty about the situation in the Antelope region. In The Oregonian’s archives, 2657 articles mentioned “Rajneesh” in the period of 1981-1985. That comes to 551 articles per year, which is around two articles a day when it is considered that the first article that mentioned Bhagwan was published in July 1981. Concluding; when conceptualizing moral panics through the four criteria of Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994), one can speak of a moral panic among the Antelopians as a response to the Rajneeshees arriving in Central Oregon.
8.1 Identity and convergence
The deviance from the norm also puts additional attention on the norm itself. In the articles analyzed for the CDA, this was noticeable. American identity was often referenced, be it very subtly. After coding, a discourse referring to ‘Americanism’ emerged. Americanism is an ideology based on the rights and liberties as discussed in the constitution, such as free speech, right to assembly and freedom of religion. Americanism encapsulates “liberty,
egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez faire” (idem: 20). The concept of Americanism has been around since the founding documents and has had an enormous impact on the nation’s national identity.
Different freedoms and rights such as freedom of religion and intimidation were referenced sixteen times. They were mentioned by locals often when the boundaries of these freedoms were being tested by the Rajneeshees (an anti-Rajneesh protest group was formed and named themselves the “Citizens for Constitutional Cities” [Hortsch 1982]), as well as by locals in letters to the editor in support of the Rajneeshees (“[another letter to the editor in support of Rajneeshees] pointed out things some people seem to have forgotten – things basic to our freedoms and the American way of life” (Murphy 1983)). The conflict between Antelopians and Rajneeshees was one of contrasting rights under the constitution, and the locals seemed aware of these ‘inalienable’ rights that every American citizen had. There were many mentions of what it means to be American and what the Founding Fathers' vision for this country was. For example, as a response to the initiative petition to kick the Rajneeshees out of the state, an editorial read: “If laws are passed restricting the Rajneesh or any other special group, citizens must be willing to live under the same restrictions. That is the way this nation was designed to work, by persons who fled persecution by tyrannical governments, churches, and yes, majorities'' (The Oregonian 1983c).
Wright’s chapter on moral panic and satanic cults (2005) also holds true when applied to the case of Antelope v. Rajneeshpuram. Wright states, just like Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994), that interest groups attempt to get the attention of mass media and authorities. This may not happen when the deviant group does not rise to the level of illegality, as is demonstrated above. The authorities refused to pursue the case and even told the public to
‘call them if anything changed’. The secret documents seemed to be the turning point for the authorities to get involved. Up until the moment that the authorities get involved, interest groups attempt to amplify the groups deviant status through convergence; the linking of relatively harmless activities to incredibly harmful ones (Hall et al. 1978). We saw that in 1981 when the documentary Ashram in Poona (1978) gave locals the tools to give meaning to what was going on ‘behind closed doors’; locals explained that no one knew what was going on at the ranch because they weren’t allowed in (Wild Wild Country 2018b). The documentary allowed for convergence: while the encounter groups weren’t practiced anymore upon arrival in the United States due to outrage (Stork 2021), the daily meditations were still claimed to be
“brutal indoctrination sessions” (Maxa 1982). Rumors are also a form of convergence which fuel moral panics. As described by a local store owner: “there’s a lot of gossip going around.
[...] Anybody who walks down the street wearing a red shirt throws the town into a panic” (The Oregonian 1983).
8.2 Media and moral panic
Stan Cohen’s work (1972) was the first that introduced the concept of moral panic. In his research, he focused on the way that media reporting can create a moral panic. From the CDA conducted on the 75 newspaper articles, it becomes clear that around the ‘takeover’ of Antelope, the media used a lot of war and fear inspiring rhetoric, fueling the panic and general anxiety towards Rajneeshees. Instead of reporting objectively, journalistic and stylistic choices appear to have been made to frame the events that were happening in terms of war. Words and sentences such as “battle of Antelope” and “invasion” (Senior 1982c), “the opening salvo”
and “yet another battle” (Senior 1982l), “For Antelope” (Callister 1982), “the life and death battle of the tiny town of Antelope [...] will be fought” (Senior 1982k), “kill city” (The Oregonian 1982) do not de-escalate a tense situation, but only inspire fear. As Brader (2005:
398) showed in his research, fear appeals stimulate vigilance. Fear appeals furthermore stimulate respondents to favor the ‘sponsor’ of a negative news frame; in this case that would suggest that the negative framing of Rajneeshees, paired with fear appeals, would stimulate readers of the Oregonian to rally for Antelope. Brader furthermore says that fear appeals stimulate participation in elections, which was shown to be true for Antelope: the disincorporation election had a 100% voter turnout.
Realistically speaking, what happened was that the commune bought empty property that had been for sale for years. Almost half of the property in Antelope had been for sale, and the commune simply chose to buy it. This created discomfort among locals who felt like Rajneeshees were invading. However, the media dubbed it the ‘takeover of Antelope’, and used
‘us vs. them’ frames which heightened the tensions and increased anxiety. In an article titled
“Antelope residents circle wagons against Rajneesh invasion” (Senior 1982c) the dramatic and rhetorical question “can the tiny town survive the invasion unscathed?” was posed. “Tiny town vs. [Rajneesh] invasion” is a clear example of the ‘us vs. them’ frame. It demonizes the Rajneeshees while simultaneously painting the tiny town of Antelope as helpless and defenceless against a war-like invasion. As Gamson and Modigliani (1987) explain, the media influence the way the public perceives an issue since they suggest “what the controversy is about” and what the essence of the issue is (idem: 143). By framing the buying of property as a ‘takeover’ and an ‘invasion’, the Oregonian fueled fear and anxiety among locals which consequently heightened tensions between Antelopians and Rajneeshees.
The entire article is an example of the media feeding the moral panic and inflaming the conflict. It opens with a movie analogy: “if it were a Western movie, the battle of Antelope might make a modern day sequel to “Custer’s Last Stand”. Like Custer, the residents of Antelope suddenly find themselves surrounded and partially invaded” (ibid.). Calling the situation a “real life drama on the plains of Central Oregon”, Senior reports that Mayor Margaret Hill said that “this used to be our home before they came here” (as cited in Senior
1982c) and State Governor Victor Atiyeh said that “he personally believes” that Rajneeshees should leave if they are not wanted (Senior 1982c). Sheela is reported mentioning “obvious religious prejudice”, which is put in quotation marks (as opposed to Atiyeh’s comments about Rajneeshees). Antelope resident Bill Dixon is quoted as saying “there is a different feeling in town. These people don’t speak the language that we do. They have no interest in us” (as cited in Senior 1982c). This is literally false, since the commune members all spoke English. When describing Rajneeshees buying property in Antelope, Senior wrote: “already, the Rajneesh has bought up a sizable share of the property in town [...]” (Senior 1982c). Word choices such as
“already” have an ominous connotation and inspire anxiety and fear about the future. If the commune has “already” bought up a sizable part of town, what is next?
Furthermore, the media played an active role in othering the Rajneeshees and showing them as deviant and devilish. Stork recalled an article being published in which the Rajneeshees were accused of eating their babies (Stork 2021), a common trope that has historically been applied to other minority groups (i.e. Jewish people and witches) as a tactic to dehumanize and demonize opponents (Vyrgioti 2019: 5). The othering of the opponent and labeling them as a ‘folk devil’ is crucial to moral panics, which essentially is a debate about
“evil versus good” (Cohen 1972: 11-12 as cited in Goode and Ben-Yehuda 1994: 157). An interview with a longtime resident of Antelope shows how this othering leads to the creation of a ‘devilish deviance’: “I believe there’s one God and there’s only one God. And you start bowing down to a man, why, you’re just letting Satan push you. They’re run by Satanic power”
(Wild Wild Country 2018b).
The discomfort created by deviance from the norm is one that can be recognized in the relationship between locals and Rajneeshees on different levels. Rajneeshee ‘culture’ deviated from the American way of life in many ways. Racially, Asian Americans are seen as a ‘model minority’ (Ancheta 2006). The stereotype of the “model minority” group comes from the idea that Asian Americans’ values correspond more with whites’ values: hard work, family and educational achievement (idem: 3). This correlation to whites is strengthened by the idea that Asian Americans have a higher IQ. White Americans tend to feel relatively comfortable with Asian American immigrants due to this likening to white people. When people deviate from this norm, it is cause for moral discomfort. Sheela threatened the stereotype of the
‘assimilating Asian American’, because she refused to assimilate to whiteness. She was feisty and provocative, and publicly distanced herself from the white locals in many ways. Similarly, Sheela also deviated from the norm of the 1980s American ‘woman’. As Sheela herself put it:
“[the] 80s were not big on women management” (Sheela 2021). Sheela also did not conform to the more submissive role that women fulfilled in the conservative town of Antelope in the 1980s. She identified herself as “a woman who is feisty, a woman who is ready to say her mind, something they don’t normally come across” (ibid.). The deviance from the gender norms and
gender roles of the time was cause for moral panic because it threatened the norms and values of the locals. One woman living in Antelope even said: “this town is so conservative, the women stand in one group and the men in another. That’s the type of community it is, and we like it”
(Reynolds as cited in Callister 1981). Sheela emphasized the difference between life in Oregon and life on the ranch: “my situation was not Central Oregon” (Sheela 2021). Life in the commune was generally experienced as gender equal9 and women and men were allowed to perform the same jobs and hold the same positions of power. Sheela’s gender deviance paired with her racial deviance made her a very deviant Person of Color.
Bhagwan’s vision on sex and the communes’ practices following his teachings also deviated from the sexual norms at the time, and especially in conservative, religious Antelope.
Open marriages, multiple sex partners (sometimes same-sex), oral sex with multiple people (sometimes simultaneously), exhibitionism and sex in public spaces, as well as nudism were common practice within the commune, but deviated strongly from the Christian norms of the locals. As Gagnon and Simon (1969) as well as Levy (1980) showed in their research, many of these practices were deviant, and therefore cause for moral panic. The footage of a distressed local exclaiming that “they [Rajneeshees] are invading with immoral sex” (Wild Wild Country 2018b) substantiates this claim. Gayle Rubin, cultural anthropologist, said about deviating sexual practices: “disputes over sexual behavior often become the vehicles for displacing social anxieties, and discharging their attendant emotional intensity. Consequently, sexuality should be treated with special respect in times of great social stress” (Rubin 1984 as quoted in Fahs, Dudy and Stage 2013: 1). The sexual moral panic was closely related to religious moral panic, seeing as the moral judgements underlying sexual ‘normalcy’ are often prescribed in the bible.
Religion-wise, the Rajneeshees originally held strong anti-established religion views. Bhagwan had preached against established religion since the beginning of his lectures. This, of course, is already a deviance from religious values held by religious people. Later in 1983, when it was necessary to precure a visa for Bhagwan, the religion of Rajneeshism was created. Naturally, Rajneeshism reflected Bhagwan’s teachings, which inherently deviated from Christianity. In a letter to the editor, a local resident proclaimed: "if that group is a religious group, it certainly differs from any accepted ideas of religion I have ever studied" (Ayers 1983).
While moral panics are usually not based in an accurate reading of the threat posed by the group that is feared, the fact that the Rajneeshees ended up being indicted for the (then) largest bioterror-attack on U.S. soil, two attempted murders, as well as being held responsible for the nonconsensual drugging of thousands of houseless people, makes this moral panic a little different from others. However, in this thesis a distinction has been made between the nonviolent part (from the arrival to the bombing of Hotel Rajneesh) and the violent part (from
9 See Kamer (2020a) for a more in depth analysis of gender equality within the commune in Oregon.
the bombing to the indictments) of the conflict. During the nonviolent part of the conflict, a moral panic can be identified. This is also in line with Fiske’s (2002) analysis of intergroup conflict. She says: “if out-groups deviate and threaten traditional values, they become legitimate targets of aggression” (idem: 127, emphasis added).
8.3 Cults, sects and moral panic
As discussed in the theoretical framework, structures of association trigger concepts that are often mentioned simultaneously (Collins and Quillian 1969; Hebb 1949). This is done by association on the basis of affective valence; either good or bad. This means that associations trigger other concepts, and then specifically concepts that are also positive or also negative; also known as the ‘affect-congruence effect’ (Cassino et al. 2017). Furthermore, certain stimuli trigger potential outcomes: desirable, undesirable or downright dangerous (Damasio 1994). These processes are crucial to understand the impact of framing and word choice in this conflict. The associations that people had with sects and cults in the 1980s, and the moral panics they created, were strong (see Jenkins and Maier-Katkin 1992; Introvigne 2000; Victor 2017). After Jonestown and the Mason Family, sects and cults were associated with death, fear and danger. Associations also stretched to the members of sects and cults, associating them with deviant, mentally disturbed, being dangerously devoted, willing to go to extreme lengths to please the leader and many more negative traits. Based on the experience with past cults, the triggered potential outcome that is associated with groups like this would be downright dangerous. William Gary of the Department of Justice, then-Deputy Attorney General, said: “you know, Jonestown had happened not that long ago, and we openly worried about whether a Jonestown-type event was possible because when people completely surrender their free will to some leader like the Bhagwan, it opens the prospect that they can do things that seem completely inexplicable. We were worried about that” (WWC 2018b).
In the very first article ever published by The Oregonian about the commune, it is said that the group is realizing an “involved agricultural development plan” (Callister 1981). This
“agricultural development plan” sounds similar to Jim Jones’ “People’s Temple Agricultural project”. Furthermore, in the same article, any similarity to Jim Jones’s cult is denied by Shannon Ryan, the daughter of Leo Ryan. Leo Ryan was the congressman that was assassinated in Guyana and set off the mass-suicide in Jonestown. Shannon, as well as Bhagwan, can be read denying that the group is a cult (ibid.). Later, Sheela said in an interview when asked about Jonestown: “it’s a ridiculous comparison. Our way is of living, not of suicide.
We are life affirmative, not life negative” (Sheela as quoted in Wild Wild Country 2018b).
Not long after the arrival, the documentary Ashram in Poona was shown in local theatres across Oregon. It is unclear if Dobrowolny’s movie was intended to paint the Rajneeshees in a negative light. Sheela and Stork both said that they were unsure if Dobrowolny’s footage was shot with consent from the people participating in the encounter-group therapy (Sheela 2021; Stork 2021). However, the way the movie was marketed in the United States can be seen as intentionally stirring. While it may not have been created as atrocity propaganda, it was certainly promoted and used this way, intended to shock local audiences. The documentary would show the “true story behind ‘Muddy Ranch’” (5th Avenue Cinema 1981b), which implies that what Sheela has been communicating to the press was not the truth – and that what was shown in the documentary is the only thing that went on at the commune. The rhetorical question “why did they try to stop this film?” implies that it is incriminating (ibid.) and sensationalizes a documentary which shows a lot of sexual acts that very likely were also sexual violence. It is also promoted as a film that could be “a long, long satirical skit on Saturday Night Live” (The
Oregonian 1981b). It is made clear in all five articles about the documentary that Ashram leaders do not want this footage spread, which is almost clickbait avant la lettre (see figure 3 for an example of the promotion).
While Dobrowolny may not have planned to use his documentary as atrocity propaganda, the movie theatres attempted to profit off the movie by marketing it as shocking and incriminating.
The showing of the documentary Ashram in Poona (1978) influenced the relationship between locals and Rajneeshees immensely. As Stork explained: “there’s no way you can explain to most people what that was about. You see that and you think ‘oh my god, that’s how they live. That’s what they do all the time, throw their clothes off and beat up on each other’”
(Stork 2021). Since Sheela did not invite locals to come visit the ranch, this documentary was the first introduction for the locals to what was going on 20 miles away from their homes.
Dobrowolny was very selective in his footage. The documentary is not narrated, which means that no additional context was provided to the footage except for some small excerpts from interviews with sannyasins who give some broad, general explanation about different practices. The first time Bhagwan is featured is during one of his lectures. This lecture is about truth, in which Bhagwan says that “truth cannot be transferred [since] it is not a thing”, and that the “claim of tradition is basically anti-truth” (Rajneesh as quoted in Ashram in Poona 1978). Many Americans value truth and see it as part of their American identity (PBS 2017). It
Fig. 3: advertisement for Ashram in Poona.
The Oregonian (1981). November 21st: F7.
is even ingrained in the Declaration of Independence, which underlies Americanism; “we hold these truths to be self-evident” (Jefferson 1776). Seeing a leader of a group of people talk about how there is no such thing as truth, can create deep discomfort. How can you communicate and live with people that don’t have the same definition of truth? This creates uncertainty and fear about the future, as well as a feeling of difference between “us” and “them”. The impact of this documentary emerged from the CDA: locals exclaim for example that Rajneeshees “don’t know what the truth means” (Smith as cited in Senior 1982d).
As shown in the theoretical framework, images and footage trigger a gut reaction (Brader 2005: 390) and new stimuli are known to prompt feelings of fear (Marcus et al. 2000).
While the entire documentary could be seen as new stimuli, there was a specific part that would have inspired at least deep discomfort and fear in almost anyone: the footage of the encounter group therapy. Out of the 91 minutes, more than 35 were of encounter group therapy. These images were violent in many ways: people could be seen fighting, shouting in each other’s faces, pushing one another and even holding other people down while they were screaming or trying to escape. The way that his documentary was edited added to the shock:
for example, images of children playing at the school in the Ashram were followed by a naked woman screaming, crying and convulsing. Without any commentary and supplied with ominous music, this documentary was uncomfortable to watch. The footage of the encounter group therapy was spread throughout the documentary and alternated with footage of people working, dancing and singing or cooking, and by interviews with sannyasins. The footage of the encounter group was shown for long periods at a time: the longest part was eight minutes of uninterrupted, unnarrated footage of naked people fighting, convulsing, screaming and crying. A brief explanation of a psychologist took less than two minutes, which was followed by another four minutes of uninterrupted footage of the encounter group therapy.
The encounter group therapy was not the sole focus of the documentary. Lakshmi, Bhagwan’s secretary before Sheela, could be seen proclaiming proudly that the number of followers that lived in the ashram grew from only seven to hundreds within months, and into the thousands within years. This, naturally, must have given locals anxiety about the number of sannyasins that would be streaming into the ranch. There was also attention for group meditations led by Bhagwan, which showed happy sannyasins chanting, dancing, clapping rhythmically and laughing loudly. Often, laughter could be heard without any provocation, breaking a long silence. The documentary had a very strong dichotomy when it came to editing style. One moment, sannyasins were shown standing still and meditating, a split-second later people were shown convulsing on the floor. The only music that was used in this footage was rhythmic drumming, chanting music and the occasional pop song played during dynamic meditations. The drumming and chanting songs were paired with footage of people looking like they were experiencing an out-of-body experience: they had their eyes closed, mouths
open with their heads tilted upwards as far as possible. Together, this created a very ominous film.
The documentary showed many rituals that were being conducted without any (shown) instruction, difficulty or planning. It gave the impression that this was a completely different world in which members were fully emerged and completely devoted to their charismatic leader – the selective footage made it incredibly easy to label this group as a cult and helped fuel the ongoing moral panic. The effects can be found in the CDA. While Sheela actively denies that Rajneeshpuram is a cult (Callister 1981a), Bhagwan’s following is still explicitly referred to as a destructive and religious cult multiple times (The Oregonian 1981;
Senior 1982k; Callister 1982b). Furthermore, cults are characterized by a strong hierarchy with a single, charismatic leader at the top. The Oregonian published an interview in which an ex-sannyasin claims that the Ashram hierarchy was the reason he left (Maxa 1982). Bhagwan is mentioned as being a “charismatic leader” (The Oregonian 1981b) and his followers are called devotees (The Oregonian 1981a).
As Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) explain, deviant groups that cause moral panics are often countered by “morally right-thinking people”, such as bishops. An example of this was shown in the documentary Wild Wild Country. Around the 1984 election, anti-Rajneesh protest really swelled. The “anti-Rajneesh group” planned a march on Salem to ask Governor Atiyeh to declare a state of emergency because of “Rajneesh activities” (Wild Wild Country 2018c). During this protest, signs such as “For There Is One God And One Mediator Between God And Men. The Man Christ Jesus” could be seen. A priest (who is later seen leading the march) is rallying the crowd while the American flag is waved behind him: “our American is being destructed, is being sold by people who do not fear god, and who care only about money!
But I want to tell you. The freedom that we have, was not paved with money. It was the blood of the pioneers” (Wild Wild Country 2018c). The use of American identities and reference to American freedoms and historical events by this priest makes this an example of civil religion.
This is in line with Marty’s claims about civil religion being periodic and paired with patriotism, as a response to a (perceived or real) threat to American values or safety (Marty 1974: 143).
Interestingly enough, Bhagwan and his followers are also often defined as a sect – cults and sects are closely related and both fall under the definition of New Religious Movement.
The heretical nature of sects makes this label an example of deviance: sects literally deviate from established religions. The label of ‘cult’ would follow Rajneeshees for the entire duration of their time in Oregon. Even Oprah fueled these fears in her show: “If Rajneesh wanted to have a Jonestown, essentially, he does have a Jonestown out in Oregon, and if he commanded his followers to drink poisoned Kool-Aid, do you think they would, or…?” (Winfrey as quoted in Wild Wild Country 2018b).
8.4 The documentary as critical mass
To help contextualize the ‘timeline’ of a moral panic, Jaap van Ginneken’s theory on thresholds in fear and panic (2003: 171-193) proves useful. Using the concept of critical mass, Van Ginneken describes how latent conflict can build underneath the surface until a trigger can result in a “social explosion” (idem: 192). The trigger must take place in a specific window of opportunity; tensions need to be high enough to erupt (idem: 188). As soon as the tension has passed the critical threshold, the resulting social explosion can take on a life of its own and spin out of control. The trigger is the catalyst which speeds up the reaction to the trigger itself.
If in turn the reaction further spurs on additional reactions, increasing the reaction by independently, it is called an autocatalysis (ibid.).
In the moral panic among Antelopians, the documentary Ashram in Poona can be seen as the trigger which helped the latent conflict turn into a moral panic. It can also be seen as an autocatalysis: the response of the locals was hostile, which created an upwards spiral of heightening tensions caused by both parties’ behavior in response to the other. Before the documentary was shown, tensions were already increasing for reasons such as land-use laws and use of Antelope services. However, locals experienced an additional layer of anxiety because they were intentionally kept in the dark about what was going in at the ranch. An article was published when Bhagwan arrived at the ranch (Callister 1981d), which was a defining moment for the locals. For weeks they had been forced to come to terms with the fact that they had new neighbors, and in September the sannyasin leader finally arrived at the ranch. In the article discussing this pivotal moment, Sheela refused to disclose how long Bhagwan would remain at the ranch, how he would arrive (and if he already had) and said that Bhagwan would not be making any media appearances or grant any interviews. The ranch was also not publicly accessible, so locals could only speculate what was really going on at the ranch. The lack of transparency made the impact of the documentary that much bigger: it was the long-desired peek into what was going on a few miles down the road. Summarizing, it appears that “only little was needed to cross the threshold and create a panic” and the documentary Ashram in Poona (1978) did the trick.