Grown men do not need leaders.Anyone who has read much in this blog will already know that I'm no longer a True Believer of Scientology. If they have been paying attention, they would also realize that I am not, in actual fact, anti-Scientology (specifically, the belief system) either.
I think that some of Scientology can provide benefit to some people. If a person wants to practice Scientology (and if they can avoid the abuses and fraud that Scientology seems to engender), then they should be allowed to do so.
Also, readers of this blog will know that I consider the Church of Scientology, and its leaders, to be criminal and fraudulent.
But now we have the self-named "Independents" who appear to want to reconstitute the Church of Scientology in a "reformed" version. They want an organization. They want a leader.
OK, so looking at this from the viewpoint of a Scientologist, how could one go about picking a good leader for Scientology?
Scientologists have a limited but lousy record in their choice of leaders -- specifically David Miscavige. So far, they've "chosen" their leader by accepting whoever declared themselves leader. To put it bluntly: They have been sheep.
If we pretend they have a choice and they have the will and power to choose their own leader, what qualifications should they look for in their new leader?
Let's try to be serious here and list what a sane group of Scientologists would see as important qualifications for their leader, shall we? If I were a True Believer and if I were selecting a leader, I would want:
- Someone who was personally trained by L. Ron Hubbard or, if no one was available, then someone who was directly trained by such a person.
- Someone who has successfully completed all training and processing with excellent results and who has not been indoctrinated in any of Miscavige's "altered tech".
- Someone who has successfully run a mission, an org and a Scientology "Continent" (group of churches/missions in one geographic area).
- Someone who has a track record of successfully running a business in the real world.
- Someone who has always fought David Miscavige and upheld "Standard Scientology" against Miscavige's rewrites, edits and corruption.
- Someone who has never allowed or participated in any of the Church of Scientology's crimes, abuses or corruption.
- Someone who explicitly repudiates and rejects any and all Scientology policy that promotes the Scientology abuses, crimes, lies and fraud -- including disconnection, "Enemy" lists, "fair game" and all such anti-social policies.
- Someone who acknowledges the crimes, abuses, lies and fraud committed previously by Scientology -- even those ordered or condoned by L. Ron Hubbard himself.
Of course, these would be my criteria if I were a Scientologist and, before the "Independents" get their knickers in a twist, I would never tell them what to do. Besides, there is no indication that any of these are actually desirable to the "Independents".
No, this is just an exercise in logical thinking. I actually expect the "Independents" to use their previous method of choosing their leader: Don't look at a person's track record, don't look at what they've actually done, just accept whoever wants it the most and who says the correct-sounding things. After all, that worked so well in the past.