Recently, I've just been watching. Scientology watching has become one of my entertainments. There's David Miscavige and the Church of Scientology, there's all the secrets, lies, crimes, abuses and fraud getting almost daily exposure and then there is the "Independent Scientology movement".
I find the Independent Scientologists to be the most fascinating. Here we have a perfect test of Scientology's workability unfolding right before our eyes. How can Scientology exist outside of the tightly controlled environment of the cult?
Enough time has passed for us to be able to see what Scientology is going to be like in a free and open environment.
Inside the Church of Scientology, the environment is very, very tightly controlled -- exactly as L. Ron Hubbard designed it to be. Anything negative about Hubbard or Scientology is condemned as "entheta" and is off limits. As a "good Scientologist", one cannot and will not talk to people who speak entheta. One cannot read entheta articles or listen to any entheta. That is thought control and is one of the cult's mechanisms for keeping the True Believers from straying from the approved path.
But now we have the Independent Scientology movement. They have much, much less control. If you talk to the "wrong people" according to one Scientology practitioner -- who then refuses to audit you (because you are a "bad person") -- why you can just go elsewhere.
The leaders of the Independent movement do not have enough control to stop a Scientologist from talking to anyone or reading anything.
And now we can see what happens to Scientology when the cultic thought control has been removed and when the standard threats have no weight. Can Scientology survive in a free environment?
Well, what is happening?
If you've perused the various Independent Scientology blogs, you will see Scientologists desperately attempting to enforce the old thought control. Any disagreement or entheta posted on one of their blogs gets shouted down or simply blocked. Many posts and comments on ESMB and Censored by Marty attest to the censoring that goes on at that blog.
The people running the blogs try to keep the movement clean of such entheta but, as I said earlier, they simply don't have the power to enforce it.
Scientologists outside of the church can read and can talk without fear of any meaningful punishment. Any normal person will absolutely hate and rebel against the kind of totalitarian thought-control as practiced by Scientology. You can't stop people from wanting to know more, to know the truth. And so people will look.
The more the leading voices of the Independent Scientology movement try to suppress other voices and dissenting opinions, the more people will resist. And rebel. And look.
That is happening more and more.
What has happened as a result of all this? How is the Independent Scientology movement doing without the ability to control believer's thoughts, communication and actions?
As near as I can tell, back in very early 2010, Marty Rathbun and Steve Hall had this "bright idea". They called it the "Indie 500". The idea was to get 500 Independent Scientologists to "come out" and declare their independence from the Church of Scientology. The website's definition of exactly who was an "Independent Scientologist" was extremely broad: "Anyone who uses any part of Scientology Tech, even if other parts are not true for you."
Now, over two years later, the list stands at a little over 300. It is obvious to me that someone created the original few hundred entries without getting approval from the people they were listing: In reading through the list, I see a number who do not now consider themselves "Scientologists" in any way. In addition, I know of more who's names appeared on the list and asked them to be removed.
After two years, even with those false entries, the Independent Scientology movement can't find 500 people who use "any part of Scientology Tech" who want to be associated with the movement. Why? Certainly many, many more than 500 people have left the Church of Scientology.
The reason that Scientology outside of the totalitarian control of the Church of Scientology cannot and will never thrive is because Scientology cannot coexist with open communication. Scientology cannot coexist with full access to all the information. Scientology cannot exist without its cultic thought-control.
My only question is: Can any part of Scientology exist in an open and free environment? I certainly don't know, only time will tell.
What do you think? If you are out of the church, what is your experience with the Independent Movement?
-
Showing posts with label Independent Scientology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independent Scientology. Show all posts
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Is It Over Yet?
Sometimes, when I am reading a novel or watching a movie, I realize that I simply don't care about any of the characters. Are they going to succeed? Are they going to fail? Who cares?
If I find I don't care, I'll put that book down or walk out of that movie. Why waste my time? There are too many excellent books and excellent movies for me to waste my time trudging through a boring one.
And so we get to the Glorious Battle between the mighty Church of Scientology and the bold rebels of the Independent Movement -- with the fate of "every man, woman and child for the next endless trillions of years" at stake.
Boring.
Really boring.
Really, really boring.
It appears that all the characters in this badly written drama are very excited, worried, angry and whatnot but I don't care -- and I don't see how anyone not directly involved cares one tiniest bit.
Certainly I care about all the victims of the Church of Scientology, but that isn't what they are fighting about. They are fighting over control of Scientology.
Is it important to "every man, woman and child" on this planet? No, of course not.
Is the fate of the Church of Scientology hanging in the balance? Nope. The church has been destroyed and all you see is the after-image after the implosion. The old image of the powerful and dangerous Church of Scientology has been shattered by David Miscavige's recent stupid, immature and idiotic orders to his mindless followers. It's a bad joke.
Is the fate of Scientology itself, hanging in the balance? Again, nope. All the facts and all the failures of Hubbard and Scientology are well known. Scientology doesn't produce "homo novis", it doesn't solve any of the world's problems and it isn't a miraculous solution to anything. People may still use Scientology but, since Scientology doesn't produce anything significant, its continued existence is of no importance.
So we have people of no particular importance battling over an insignificant "church" and an ineffective "tech" with nothing of any significance hanging in the balance.
I've walked out of better movies than this.
-
If I find I don't care, I'll put that book down or walk out of that movie. Why waste my time? There are too many excellent books and excellent movies for me to waste my time trudging through a boring one.
And so we get to the Glorious Battle between the mighty Church of Scientology and the bold rebels of the Independent Movement -- with the fate of "every man, woman and child for the next endless trillions of years" at stake.
Boring.
Really boring.
Really, really boring.
It appears that all the characters in this badly written drama are very excited, worried, angry and whatnot but I don't care -- and I don't see how anyone not directly involved cares one tiniest bit.
Certainly I care about all the victims of the Church of Scientology, but that isn't what they are fighting about. They are fighting over control of Scientology.
Is it important to "every man, woman and child" on this planet? No, of course not.
Is the fate of the Church of Scientology hanging in the balance? Nope. The church has been destroyed and all you see is the after-image after the implosion. The old image of the powerful and dangerous Church of Scientology has been shattered by David Miscavige's recent stupid, immature and idiotic orders to his mindless followers. It's a bad joke.
Is the fate of Scientology itself, hanging in the balance? Again, nope. All the facts and all the failures of Hubbard and Scientology are well known. Scientology doesn't produce "homo novis", it doesn't solve any of the world's problems and it isn't a miraculous solution to anything. People may still use Scientology but, since Scientology doesn't produce anything significant, its continued existence is of no importance.
So we have people of no particular importance battling over an insignificant "church" and an ineffective "tech" with nothing of any significance hanging in the balance.
I've walked out of better movies than this.
-
Saturday, May 7, 2011
The Scientology "Soft Landing Place"
Prior to 1800, there was a problem with opium addiction. In December of 1804, Friedrich Sertürner extracted a highly potent analgesic from opium, which he called morphine.
It was soon to be touted as a solution to opium addiction. Unfortunately, soon many people were addicted to morphine.
In 1895, a German drug company marketed diacetylmorphine as an over-the-counter drug under the trademark name Heroin. It was chiefly developed as a morphine substitute that "did not have morphine's addictive side-effects".
It was touted as a solution to morphine addiction.
However, contrary to the company's advertising as a "non-addictive morphine substitute," heroin would soon have one of the highest rates of dependence amongst its users.
In 1937, another lab developed methadone, a "safe" alternative to heroin. So the poor addicts could have yet another drug to be addicted to.
The problem with all of this is obvious. If you substitute one "solution" to addiction with another "solution" that works exactly like the original, you really haven't solved the addiction, have you? You've just substituted one addiction for another.
And so we get to "Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology".
While I'm not specifically comparing Scientology to a physically addictive drug, I will contend that Scientology, and specifically the temporary euphoria induced at the end of most auditing sessions, can be quite addictive in its own way.
While in this temporary state of euphoria, Scientologists will feel capable of almost anything. They will actually attest to "having gained" the most amazing abilities, knowledge and powers which, when the euphoria fades in an hour, a day or so, completely fail to materialize.
And most Scientologists crave that wonderful sense of power and ability more than anything else. They live to go back into session. They pay tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of dollars to get back into session.
The more consecutive sessions you have, the better it gets. Up to a point, the more consecutive sessions you have, the longer the subsequent euphoria lasts -- sometimes it can last for days -- but it always fades, leaving the Scientologist without any new abilities or powers, but with a craving for more.
While continuing to get these feelings of euphoria, Scientologists feel that they are "making progress up the Bridge" to OT. They have hope. They think it all "works" -- that all the time and money they have spent was worthwhile.
Yes, for many, Scientology is psychologically addictive.
And, despite the assurances of the original manufacturers and distributors of morphine, heroin and methadone, the solution to addiction is not "more of the same".
There are those who laud the providers of Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology because they provide a "soft landing place" for Scientologists who have just left the church. They provide a version of Scientology that "isn't as abusive" and "isn't quite so strict" -- and, therefore, "isn't as bad".
I do understand that concept, but I do not agree.
They are still delivering the same "drug". They are still promising the same false promises of "miraculous powers and abilities" but are only delivering the same, addictive, temporary euphoria.
They are still rushing their clients through to write their glowing "Success Stories" about how wonderful it all is -- quickly before the euphoria fades. They are still publishing these euphoric "Success Stories" as if these were talking about actual, permanent gains.
They are still pushing the same "drug" -- and more of the same is not a solution to that addiction.
My advice to Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology is that they give it a rest.
There is no hurry. Scientology outside of the church will still be around in six months or a year.
Take your time. There is a ton of information that you have not been permitted to see and that you really do need to know. Don't rush into the arms of another group that dictates which information is acceptable and which is not. Take your time and read all that "forbidden" information. It may be upsetting at first -- the truth often is.
Let some time pass and take a look at what actually happened to you in Scientology. Without the temporary euphoria and without the relentless church propaganda about how "wonderful" and "successful" Scientology is, take an honest look at yourself and your friends. What were the actual results?
Stop using Scientology terms and concepts for a while and see what happens. Reframe your thoughts and questions into standard English (or whatever your native language is) and see all the ideas and solutions that have already been developed around those concepts outside of Scientology.
Look around at the world you have been cut off from. There are many, many people who are living great lives and doing wonderful things outside of Scientology's tiny world. You can learn a lot from just looking at the real world.
Get in touch with all those old friends and family that you disconnected from (officially or unofficially). Catch up on the news.
Then, in six months or a year, if you still think you need Scientology, go ahead and find a Scientology practitioner who you can trust -- who is honest and doesn't implement the abusive parts of Scientology -- if you can find one.
I'm betting that, by then, you will enjoy being free too much to exchange it for empty promises and temporary euphoria.
-
It was soon to be touted as a solution to opium addiction. Unfortunately, soon many people were addicted to morphine.
In 1895, a German drug company marketed diacetylmorphine as an over-the-counter drug under the trademark name Heroin. It was chiefly developed as a morphine substitute that "did not have morphine's addictive side-effects".
It was touted as a solution to morphine addiction.
However, contrary to the company's advertising as a "non-addictive morphine substitute," heroin would soon have one of the highest rates of dependence amongst its users.
In 1937, another lab developed methadone, a "safe" alternative to heroin. So the poor addicts could have yet another drug to be addicted to.
The problem with all of this is obvious. If you substitute one "solution" to addiction with another "solution" that works exactly like the original, you really haven't solved the addiction, have you? You've just substituted one addiction for another.
And so we get to "Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology".
While I'm not specifically comparing Scientology to a physically addictive drug, I will contend that Scientology, and specifically the temporary euphoria induced at the end of most auditing sessions, can be quite addictive in its own way.
While in this temporary state of euphoria, Scientologists will feel capable of almost anything. They will actually attest to "having gained" the most amazing abilities, knowledge and powers which, when the euphoria fades in an hour, a day or so, completely fail to materialize.
And most Scientologists crave that wonderful sense of power and ability more than anything else. They live to go back into session. They pay tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of dollars to get back into session.
The more consecutive sessions you have, the better it gets. Up to a point, the more consecutive sessions you have, the longer the subsequent euphoria lasts -- sometimes it can last for days -- but it always fades, leaving the Scientologist without any new abilities or powers, but with a craving for more.
While continuing to get these feelings of euphoria, Scientologists feel that they are "making progress up the Bridge" to OT. They have hope. They think it all "works" -- that all the time and money they have spent was worthwhile.
Yes, for many, Scientology is psychologically addictive.
And, despite the assurances of the original manufacturers and distributors of morphine, heroin and methadone, the solution to addiction is not "more of the same".
There are those who laud the providers of Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology because they provide a "soft landing place" for Scientologists who have just left the church. They provide a version of Scientology that "isn't as abusive" and "isn't quite so strict" -- and, therefore, "isn't as bad".
I do understand that concept, but I do not agree.
They are still delivering the same "drug". They are still promising the same false promises of "miraculous powers and abilities" but are only delivering the same, addictive, temporary euphoria.
They are still rushing their clients through to write their glowing "Success Stories" about how wonderful it all is -- quickly before the euphoria fades. They are still publishing these euphoric "Success Stories" as if these were talking about actual, permanent gains.
They are still pushing the same "drug" -- and more of the same is not a solution to that addiction.
My advice to Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology is that they give it a rest.
There is no hurry. Scientology outside of the church will still be around in six months or a year.
Take your time. There is a ton of information that you have not been permitted to see and that you really do need to know. Don't rush into the arms of another group that dictates which information is acceptable and which is not. Take your time and read all that "forbidden" information. It may be upsetting at first -- the truth often is.
Let some time pass and take a look at what actually happened to you in Scientology. Without the temporary euphoria and without the relentless church propaganda about how "wonderful" and "successful" Scientology is, take an honest look at yourself and your friends. What were the actual results?
Stop using Scientology terms and concepts for a while and see what happens. Reframe your thoughts and questions into standard English (or whatever your native language is) and see all the ideas and solutions that have already been developed around those concepts outside of Scientology.
Look around at the world you have been cut off from. There are many, many people who are living great lives and doing wonderful things outside of Scientology's tiny world. You can learn a lot from just looking at the real world.
Get in touch with all those old friends and family that you disconnected from (officially or unofficially). Catch up on the news.
Then, in six months or a year, if you still think you need Scientology, go ahead and find a Scientology practitioner who you can trust -- who is honest and doesn't implement the abusive parts of Scientology -- if you can find one.
I'm betting that, by then, you will enjoy being free too much to exchange it for empty promises and temporary euphoria.
-
Sunday, March 20, 2011
The Redefinitions of Scientology
A while ago, I wrote about the false claims of Scientology, especially outside of the Church of Scientology. One practitioner claimed he was producing "Real live OTs!" I object to fraud and deception, and this claim certainly lands squarely in that category.
At least, within the Church of Scientology, they've stopped promising the "Clear" as Hubbard described and stopped promising the "OT" that Hubbard defined. See The Disappearing States of Clear and OT.
In that "Real live OTs!" article I urged Scientology practitioners to stop promising results they could not deliver. But Scientology practitioners still promise the Grade Chart results that they can't and won't deliver.
Recent discussions amongst Scientologists make me think that this fraud and deception may change and the promises will follow the current trend in Scientology of redefining the expected results until they don't promise anything at all.
We may soon see Scientology practitioners changing the Ability Gained of Grade 0 from "Ability to communicate freely with anyone on any subject" to "A person who feels better about communication."
Grade 1 will change from "Ability to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish" to "A person who feels better about problems."
And so forth.
Why do I think this? I've been following the raging debates on Leaving Scientology, Marty's blog and Scientology-Cult and I have seen Scientology True Believers come to an interesting consensus.
Scientologists seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of changing the definition of OT from Hubbard's:
What is the difference, then, between a "wog" starting a business and a Scientology OT starting a business? The Scientology OT is aware that they are being OT! And they are "being OT" because of Scientology.
They don't do anything particularly exceptional, but they are doing it as an OT! That makes all the difference -- to a Scientologist.
And there you have it! That totally solves the problem of Scientology never producing an OT as Hubbard defined it. It solves the problem of Hubbard's last years, where he was sick, in pain, hiding from the law and betrayed by those he trusted. It solves the problem for all those OTs that didn't get the powers and abilities promised.
Just redefine "OT" and you're good to go.
Well, I have to admit that does come under the heading of "don't promise what you can't deliver". If you promise nothing, you're totally covered.
-
At least, within the Church of Scientology, they've stopped promising the "Clear" as Hubbard described and stopped promising the "OT" that Hubbard defined. See The Disappearing States of Clear and OT.
In that "Real live OTs!" article I urged Scientology practitioners to stop promising results they could not deliver. But Scientology practitioners still promise the Grade Chart results that they can't and won't deliver.
Recent discussions amongst Scientologists make me think that this fraud and deception may change and the promises will follow the current trend in Scientology of redefining the expected results until they don't promise anything at all.
We may soon see Scientology practitioners changing the Ability Gained of Grade 0 from "Ability to communicate freely with anyone on any subject" to "A person who feels better about communication."
Grade 1 will change from "Ability to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish" to "A person who feels better about problems."
And so forth.
Why do I think this? I've been following the raging debates on Leaving Scientology, Marty's blog and Scientology-Cult and I have seen Scientology True Believers come to an interesting consensus.
Scientologists seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of changing the definition of OT from Hubbard's:
A being who is cause over matter, energy, space, time, life, form and thought, subjectively and objectivelyto:
A being who does things!In the discussions and articles, this is the new definition of OT. You start a new business? You're an "OT"! You volunteer down at the local shelter? You're an "OT"! It was even mentioned that moving your hand is the act of an "OT"!
What is the difference, then, between a "wog" starting a business and a Scientology OT starting a business? The Scientology OT is aware that they are being OT! And they are "being OT" because of Scientology.
They don't do anything particularly exceptional, but they are doing it as an OT! That makes all the difference -- to a Scientologist.
And there you have it! That totally solves the problem of Scientology never producing an OT as Hubbard defined it. It solves the problem of Hubbard's last years, where he was sick, in pain, hiding from the law and betrayed by those he trusted. It solves the problem for all those OTs that didn't get the powers and abilities promised.
Just redefine "OT" and you're good to go.
Well, I have to admit that does come under the heading of "don't promise what you can't deliver". If you promise nothing, you're totally covered.
-
Monday, March 7, 2011
What Annoys Me Most About Scientologists
I do not and will never hate Scientologists. I was one. I think that most Scientologists are good people who have been trapped by their own desire to do good work and help others.
I will not attack Scientologists for practicing Scientology. That is their right. What a person believes is their business and no one else's. Scientology, the belief system, should not be banned. Ideas cannot be erased and to try to do so only gives them more importance.
I just want to point out where Scientologists' behavior varies significantly from what they say they advocate, especially Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology.
First up, responsibility. Or, to be more precise, Scientologists' universal refusal to take responsibility for what they have done.
Scientologists simply don't take responsibility for their actions, or non-actions, in relation to Scientology. Ex-churchies inevitably blame David Miscavige for everything. It is his, and only his, fault that things are bad in the church.
Did they applaud when Miscavige changed everything? Yes they did. Did they hop right up and take the now-"corrupted" courses and buy the now-"corrupted" books? Yes they did. Did they pay lip-service to the "Keeping Scientology Working" policy while applauding every little thing that Miscavige did to subvert and violate that policy? Yes they did. Did they do anything to stop David Miscavige from taking over and destroying their church? Why, no, they didn't.
I know that some Scientologists did refuse to go along with Miscavige's crimes, lies and abuse but they were kicked out. And a vast majority of Scientologists whole-heartedly condemned the very people who were taking responsibility.
And now Scientologists blame Miscavige and only Miscavige for everything that they allowed to happen and even applauded.
No responsibility. None.
But wait, there's more! We have, in the Independent Scientology community, certain executives who worked directly with and for David Miscavige. While they were "in favor" they supported, forwarded and emulated Miscavige's corruption, crimes, lies and abuse. They were part of the machinery that corrupted the Scientology technology. They were part of the gang that beat up and mentally abused staff. They were part of the evil.
And, now, they are the biggest supporters of the "It's all Miscavige, it's only Miscavige, I'm not responsible at all!" propaganda.
In other words, those most responsible for supporting Miscavige, those most responsible for forwarding his corruption and his lies, those most responsible for the evil that they now condemn, are saying that, no, they "were not responsible at all!" Perhaps that's no surprise, but it is very disappointing. I'd much rather hear, in detail, how they are taking full responsibility for their crimes, their abuse and their lies.
Yes, I know that some of these top executives have "admitted" to some bad acts but they still blame Miscavige for "making them do it". It's still no responsibility. They were in positions of power in Scientology and they used their power to help Miscavige do his evil deeds and they used their power to destroy those who tried to stop Miscavige -- for years. They have much to answer for but, no, it's "not their fault".
It really annoys me that Scientologists emphatically will not take responsibility for what they have done or should have done. Truly, the dirtiest word in Scientology is "responsibility".
Next up is confront. Scientologists cannot confront.
And this is also very annoying to me. Scientologists will brag about their confront. They have done the TRs Course and, boy, can they now confront!
But they can't and they won't.
If you try to discuss simple facts with a Scientologist, they plug their ears and go "La-la-la-la-la-la", they delete your comments, they compile lists of websites they can't look at, books they can't read, newspapers they must not see, people they must never talk to and they generally run away.
They do not confront.
If you mention the simple fact that Scientology has never produced a single OT, they cannot hear you. They actually are aware that there are no OTs but they cannot confront that fact. The same goes for the non-existent abilities of Clear and the promised-but-missing abilities from the Grades.
The same goes for all their world-saving "solutions". Their "solutions" have all failed in the real world, but those facts cannot, will not, be confronted.
These are simple facts. Every Scientologist knows these facts are true but they cannot confront them. Whenever I've mentioned some of these facts to a Scientologist, there is a deafening silence. No debate, no argument, just run-run away and never confront it.
And finally, justifications. In Scientology dogma, justifications are Bad. According to L. Ron Hubbard, when you have done something wrong, you will inevitably try to justify it in some way. Scientologists are supposed to recognize that, when you hear justifications, look for the harmful actions or neglect that preceeded it.
But all I hear from Scientologists are justifications. Scientologists are well-equipt with many "reasons why" things didn't work out as promised. They can give you all the justificatons why those processes didn't work, why these "solutions" never solved things, why those exhalted Scientologists were found to have committed massive fraud and why they ended up with their church destroyed.
And none of their justifications match reality or lead to any resolution. Here is where Scientologists' refusal to take responsibility and their lack of confront come together to create the justifications why it isn't their fault, it isn't Scientology's fault and it isn't Hubbard's fault. It is always someone else's fault, someone else's error or someone else's "evil intentions".
Scientologists' solution to Scientology's failings and broken promises is to justify, prevaricate and make up "reasons why" -- but never to simply confront the facts, take responsibility and live with the truth. It's hard work being a Scientologist.
I have no problem with Scientologists practicing Scientology and getting whatever gains they get from it. But they pretend to a reality that doesn't exist because they cannot confront the reality that is. Yes, they can feel better. No, they cannot "go OT".
Scientologists' universal lack of responsibility and inability to confront annoys me a lot. You see, these are things that Scientologists are proud of: their superior responsibility and their powerful confront -- and yet they have none. They don't even try.
This is Scientology. Scientology isn't what they say, it's what Scientologists do. And the above is what Scientologists do.
If I were still a Scientologist, I'd be so ashamed.
-
I will not attack Scientologists for practicing Scientology. That is their right. What a person believes is their business and no one else's. Scientology, the belief system, should not be banned. Ideas cannot be erased and to try to do so only gives them more importance.
I just want to point out where Scientologists' behavior varies significantly from what they say they advocate, especially Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology.
First up, responsibility. Or, to be more precise, Scientologists' universal refusal to take responsibility for what they have done.
Scientologists simply don't take responsibility for their actions, or non-actions, in relation to Scientology. Ex-churchies inevitably blame David Miscavige for everything. It is his, and only his, fault that things are bad in the church.
Did they applaud when Miscavige changed everything? Yes they did. Did they hop right up and take the now-"corrupted" courses and buy the now-"corrupted" books? Yes they did. Did they pay lip-service to the "Keeping Scientology Working" policy while applauding every little thing that Miscavige did to subvert and violate that policy? Yes they did. Did they do anything to stop David Miscavige from taking over and destroying their church? Why, no, they didn't.
I know that some Scientologists did refuse to go along with Miscavige's crimes, lies and abuse but they were kicked out. And a vast majority of Scientologists whole-heartedly condemned the very people who were taking responsibility.
And now Scientologists blame Miscavige and only Miscavige for everything that they allowed to happen and even applauded.
No responsibility. None.
But wait, there's more! We have, in the Independent Scientology community, certain executives who worked directly with and for David Miscavige. While they were "in favor" they supported, forwarded and emulated Miscavige's corruption, crimes, lies and abuse. They were part of the machinery that corrupted the Scientology technology. They were part of the gang that beat up and mentally abused staff. They were part of the evil.
And, now, they are the biggest supporters of the "It's all Miscavige, it's only Miscavige, I'm not responsible at all!" propaganda.
In other words, those most responsible for supporting Miscavige, those most responsible for forwarding his corruption and his lies, those most responsible for the evil that they now condemn, are saying that, no, they "were not responsible at all!" Perhaps that's no surprise, but it is very disappointing. I'd much rather hear, in detail, how they are taking full responsibility for their crimes, their abuse and their lies.
Yes, I know that some of these top executives have "admitted" to some bad acts but they still blame Miscavige for "making them do it". It's still no responsibility. They were in positions of power in Scientology and they used their power to help Miscavige do his evil deeds and they used their power to destroy those who tried to stop Miscavige -- for years. They have much to answer for but, no, it's "not their fault".
It really annoys me that Scientologists emphatically will not take responsibility for what they have done or should have done. Truly, the dirtiest word in Scientology is "responsibility".
Next up is confront. Scientologists cannot confront.
And this is also very annoying to me. Scientologists will brag about their confront. They have done the TRs Course and, boy, can they now confront!
But they can't and they won't.
If you try to discuss simple facts with a Scientologist, they plug their ears and go "La-la-la-la-la-la", they delete your comments, they compile lists of websites they can't look at, books they can't read, newspapers they must not see, people they must never talk to and they generally run away.
They do not confront.
If you mention the simple fact that Scientology has never produced a single OT, they cannot hear you. They actually are aware that there are no OTs but they cannot confront that fact. The same goes for the non-existent abilities of Clear and the promised-but-missing abilities from the Grades.
The same goes for all their world-saving "solutions". Their "solutions" have all failed in the real world, but those facts cannot, will not, be confronted.
These are simple facts. Every Scientologist knows these facts are true but they cannot confront them. Whenever I've mentioned some of these facts to a Scientologist, there is a deafening silence. No debate, no argument, just run-run away and never confront it.
And finally, justifications. In Scientology dogma, justifications are Bad. According to L. Ron Hubbard, when you have done something wrong, you will inevitably try to justify it in some way. Scientologists are supposed to recognize that, when you hear justifications, look for the harmful actions or neglect that preceeded it.
But all I hear from Scientologists are justifications. Scientologists are well-equipt with many "reasons why" things didn't work out as promised. They can give you all the justificatons why those processes didn't work, why these "solutions" never solved things, why those exhalted Scientologists were found to have committed massive fraud and why they ended up with their church destroyed.
And none of their justifications match reality or lead to any resolution. Here is where Scientologists' refusal to take responsibility and their lack of confront come together to create the justifications why it isn't their fault, it isn't Scientology's fault and it isn't Hubbard's fault. It is always someone else's fault, someone else's error or someone else's "evil intentions".
Scientologists' solution to Scientology's failings and broken promises is to justify, prevaricate and make up "reasons why" -- but never to simply confront the facts, take responsibility and live with the truth. It's hard work being a Scientologist.
I have no problem with Scientologists practicing Scientology and getting whatever gains they get from it. But they pretend to a reality that doesn't exist because they cannot confront the reality that is. Yes, they can feel better. No, they cannot "go OT".
Scientologists' universal lack of responsibility and inability to confront annoys me a lot. You see, these are things that Scientologists are proud of: their superior responsibility and their powerful confront -- and yet they have none. They don't even try.
This is Scientology. Scientology isn't what they say, it's what Scientologists do. And the above is what Scientologists do.
If I were still a Scientologist, I'd be so ashamed.
-
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Why Scientology Isn't a Future Danger
"Scientology" as practiced within the Church of Scientology is 100% pure cult-control. This "church" is a greedy, dishonest, fraudulent and criminal organization. However, it is no longer dangerous in a broad sense because it is extremely small and currently in the last throes of collapsing. It has no future and its danger is primarily to those still trapped inside the cult.
But what about Scientology outside of and disassociated from the Church of Scientology?
Anyone who has read this blog knows I am not an apologist for Scientology and its cultish thought-control, but I do contend that it isn't, and will never again be, as dangerous as some people seem to think it is or could be.
Now, it is true that L. Ron Hubbard created and institutionalized the abuses of the Church of Scientology -- things like the RPF, disconnection, fair game, "enemy" lists and declares and all such abuses. These abuses are built into the core of Scientology. Couldn't that happen again?
Certainly, but I believe that any attempt to implement such abuses outside of the church would result in the automatic destruction of any group that attempted it.
You see, the huge difference between Scientology within the Church of Scientology, and Scientology outside of the church is summed up in one word, "monopoly". The Church of Scientology contends that it and it alone is the proper and only purveyor of "Standard Scientology". According to the church, there is no "real Scientology" available outside of the church. If you are expelled from the church, you are doomed -- any "Scientology" you might get outside of the church is so terribly flawed that it would destroy you.
And so, according to the church, you must remain in the church and you must toe the line and you must do everything they tell you to do or you will be condemned to destruction forever.
And this dogma keeps the True Believers trapped inside the church's draconian control. Or, at least, it used to.
But now, more and more Scientologists are leaving the Church of Scientology and, if they still believe, they are finding Scientology practitioners outside who also claim to deliver "Standard Scientology". Suddenly, Scientology is available from hundreds (maybe even thousands) of groups and individuals. Once someone has left the church, they understand that there is no such monopoly.
And this is why outside Scientology cannot institute the exact same abuses as the church.
Imagine some True Believer, part of some independent Scientology Group A, runs afoul with Group A's leader and "gets declared". Well, so what? He or she just goes somewhere else. If Scientology Group A becomes known for their abuse, they will cease to exist. If Scientology Group A becomes greedy, they won't get any business.
You will, inevitably, see the following comedy played out in the independent Scientology field: "You're a suppressive! You're declared!", "No, you're the suppressive, you're declared!", "No, you are!", "No, you are!". Any attempts by one group to implement the abusive parts of Scientology will just become comedy.
In addition, without the million-dollar lawyers of the church, any Scientology group will be held responsible for any and all abuse, fraud and criminal behavior. These parts of Hubbard's technology cannot be implemented if the group wants to survive. Any attempt to implement Hubbard's more abusive practices will only lose them customers and, possibly, get them into legal trouble.
One of the most powerful tools against Scientology's abuses is all of you on the Internet. With all of Scientology's "secrets" and all of Scientology's abuses and failures exposed for all to see, any Scientology group is going to be hard-pressed to sell its "solutions" and its "miraculous results". The watchful eye of the Internet is not going to go away.
But there's even more. Outside Scientology is not just in competition with other Scientology practitioners -- it is in competition with every other self-help group, every other philosophy, every motivational speaker, every religion -- in short, they are in competition with every other person and group that claims to make you feel better and improve your life.
And, unlike Scientology, some of those other improvement techniques can actually prove their claims. This is a completely different world from Scientology's "monopoly" of the past.
I'm not saying those practicing Scientology understand this, I don't think they do. From what I see, they are still attempting to impose the same cult-thought-control on their membership. While they don't have the power to impose disconnection, they are still designating a lot of people and many websites as "unacceptable to associate with". They show signs of withdrawing into private, carefully censored, forums where any dissent is quickly shouted down and quashed.
But, without the monopoly, this kind of cult behavior will only repel potential new members and eventually disgust any intelligent, current members. Scientologists escaping from the Church of Scientology, and seeing just more of the same abuse and attempted thought control occurring in the "Independent" movement will, for the most part, stay far, far away.
No, any group "promising" Scientology's false claims and exhibiting cult behavior simply cannot expand. If they are any danger at all, it will only be to their small (and inevitably shrinking) group of "faithful followers".
Scientology's fangs have been drawn. If it wants to continue at all, it will have to become open and honest.
-
But what about Scientology outside of and disassociated from the Church of Scientology?
Anyone who has read this blog knows I am not an apologist for Scientology and its cultish thought-control, but I do contend that it isn't, and will never again be, as dangerous as some people seem to think it is or could be.
Now, it is true that L. Ron Hubbard created and institutionalized the abuses of the Church of Scientology -- things like the RPF, disconnection, fair game, "enemy" lists and declares and all such abuses. These abuses are built into the core of Scientology. Couldn't that happen again?
Certainly, but I believe that any attempt to implement such abuses outside of the church would result in the automatic destruction of any group that attempted it.
You see, the huge difference between Scientology within the Church of Scientology, and Scientology outside of the church is summed up in one word, "monopoly". The Church of Scientology contends that it and it alone is the proper and only purveyor of "Standard Scientology". According to the church, there is no "real Scientology" available outside of the church. If you are expelled from the church, you are doomed -- any "Scientology" you might get outside of the church is so terribly flawed that it would destroy you.
And so, according to the church, you must remain in the church and you must toe the line and you must do everything they tell you to do or you will be condemned to destruction forever.
And this dogma keeps the True Believers trapped inside the church's draconian control. Or, at least, it used to.
But now, more and more Scientologists are leaving the Church of Scientology and, if they still believe, they are finding Scientology practitioners outside who also claim to deliver "Standard Scientology". Suddenly, Scientology is available from hundreds (maybe even thousands) of groups and individuals. Once someone has left the church, they understand that there is no such monopoly.
And this is why outside Scientology cannot institute the exact same abuses as the church.
Imagine some True Believer, part of some independent Scientology Group A, runs afoul with Group A's leader and "gets declared". Well, so what? He or she just goes somewhere else. If Scientology Group A becomes known for their abuse, they will cease to exist. If Scientology Group A becomes greedy, they won't get any business.
You will, inevitably, see the following comedy played out in the independent Scientology field: "You're a suppressive! You're declared!", "No, you're the suppressive, you're declared!", "No, you are!", "No, you are!". Any attempts by one group to implement the abusive parts of Scientology will just become comedy.
In addition, without the million-dollar lawyers of the church, any Scientology group will be held responsible for any and all abuse, fraud and criminal behavior. These parts of Hubbard's technology cannot be implemented if the group wants to survive. Any attempt to implement Hubbard's more abusive practices will only lose them customers and, possibly, get them into legal trouble.
One of the most powerful tools against Scientology's abuses is all of you on the Internet. With all of Scientology's "secrets" and all of Scientology's abuses and failures exposed for all to see, any Scientology group is going to be hard-pressed to sell its "solutions" and its "miraculous results". The watchful eye of the Internet is not going to go away.
But there's even more. Outside Scientology is not just in competition with other Scientology practitioners -- it is in competition with every other self-help group, every other philosophy, every motivational speaker, every religion -- in short, they are in competition with every other person and group that claims to make you feel better and improve your life.
And, unlike Scientology, some of those other improvement techniques can actually prove their claims. This is a completely different world from Scientology's "monopoly" of the past.
I'm not saying those practicing Scientology understand this, I don't think they do. From what I see, they are still attempting to impose the same cult-thought-control on their membership. While they don't have the power to impose disconnection, they are still designating a lot of people and many websites as "unacceptable to associate with". They show signs of withdrawing into private, carefully censored, forums where any dissent is quickly shouted down and quashed.
But, without the monopoly, this kind of cult behavior will only repel potential new members and eventually disgust any intelligent, current members. Scientologists escaping from the Church of Scientology, and seeing just more of the same abuse and attempted thought control occurring in the "Independent" movement will, for the most part, stay far, far away.
No, any group "promising" Scientology's false claims and exhibiting cult behavior simply cannot expand. If they are any danger at all, it will only be to their small (and inevitably shrinking) group of "faithful followers".
Scientology's fangs have been drawn. If it wants to continue at all, it will have to become open and honest.
-
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Scientology and the Wrong "Why" Part 2
We have a wonderful opportunity to actually test our various hypotheses, which we discussed on Scientology and the Wrong "Why".
[EDIT: I have been corrected. When I am referring here to "Independent Scientology", I am specifically referring to the group calling itself that, led by Marty Rathbun and associates. I do not know about the intentions, activities and plans of any other independent Scientology people or groups.]
With the "Independent Scientology" movement getting themselves all organized and sorting out who are real Scientologists and who aren't, we have an actual, real life test bed for "pure" Scientology and dedicated True Believers.
This will answer the question, quite conclusively, "Is it David Miscavige? Was it a one-time fluke? Or are the problems displayed by the Church of Scientology actually built into Scientology itself?"
Now, most of us figure we already know the answer to those questions, but it is quite fascinating to see this play out in the real world with real True Believers trying to make it all work.
And, yes, they are doing a bang-up job aren't they?
No, they haven't actually made it to full cult status, but they are making progress.
If you check out their various communications, you will see some very strong indicators of where they are heading. Disagreements are not tolerated. If you want to be considered a group member in good standing, you cannot criticize L. Ron Hubbard in any way or find any fault with any bit of Scientology.
The word "hater" is now being used to describe anyone who offers an unacceptable opinion. And people are being banned for such crimes.
The "Independents" are noting their "enemies" -- those who disagree with them. Good, upstanding members of the "Independents" must not associate with those "enemies".
There are more and more such indications happening, feel free to add your own observations in the comments.
The "Independent" movement is quite small and it will never grow much, so nothing big will ever happen. However, it is a fascinating look at how True Believers will implement "pure" Scientology -- even though they have such a clear and immediate example of what will happen if they do not recognize, admit and fix the problems of Scientology.
Scientology is, intrinsically, a cult. It cannot exist in its "pure" form in a free and open society. Freedom of speech, freedom of opinion and freedom of thought cannot be tolerated. Disagreement, dissent, creative ideas, investigation, testing, questions, proof, doubts -- none of that can coexist with "pure" Scientology.
And, because of that, the "Independent Scientology" movement must, inevitably, withdraw from free society and protect itself in its little cave-of-enforced-agreement.
And so we get to watch this drama unfold. Will this descent into cult-hood continue? Will some of the members of this "Independent" movement see it and try to stop the descent? If they try, will anything good happen, or will they just be banned for their "suppressive acts"? How far will this go before it implodes?
Here is a wonderful example of how "pure" Scientology, applied carefully and rigorously by True Believers, affects an organization -- played out in real time in front of us all.
Who's got the popcorn?
-
[EDIT: I have been corrected. When I am referring here to "Independent Scientology", I am specifically referring to the group calling itself that, led by Marty Rathbun and associates. I do not know about the intentions, activities and plans of any other independent Scientology people or groups.]
With the "Independent Scientology" movement getting themselves all organized and sorting out who are real Scientologists and who aren't, we have an actual, real life test bed for "pure" Scientology and dedicated True Believers.
This will answer the question, quite conclusively, "Is it David Miscavige? Was it a one-time fluke? Or are the problems displayed by the Church of Scientology actually built into Scientology itself?"
Now, most of us figure we already know the answer to those questions, but it is quite fascinating to see this play out in the real world with real True Believers trying to make it all work.
And, yes, they are doing a bang-up job aren't they?
No, they haven't actually made it to full cult status, but they are making progress.
If you check out their various communications, you will see some very strong indicators of where they are heading. Disagreements are not tolerated. If you want to be considered a group member in good standing, you cannot criticize L. Ron Hubbard in any way or find any fault with any bit of Scientology.
The word "hater" is now being used to describe anyone who offers an unacceptable opinion. And people are being banned for such crimes.
The "Independents" are noting their "enemies" -- those who disagree with them. Good, upstanding members of the "Independents" must not associate with those "enemies".
There are more and more such indications happening, feel free to add your own observations in the comments.
The "Independent" movement is quite small and it will never grow much, so nothing big will ever happen. However, it is a fascinating look at how True Believers will implement "pure" Scientology -- even though they have such a clear and immediate example of what will happen if they do not recognize, admit and fix the problems of Scientology.
Scientology is, intrinsically, a cult. It cannot exist in its "pure" form in a free and open society. Freedom of speech, freedom of opinion and freedom of thought cannot be tolerated. Disagreement, dissent, creative ideas, investigation, testing, questions, proof, doubts -- none of that can coexist with "pure" Scientology.
And, because of that, the "Independent Scientology" movement must, inevitably, withdraw from free society and protect itself in its little cave-of-enforced-agreement.
And so we get to watch this drama unfold. Will this descent into cult-hood continue? Will some of the members of this "Independent" movement see it and try to stop the descent? If they try, will anything good happen, or will they just be banned for their "suppressive acts"? How far will this go before it implodes?
Here is a wonderful example of how "pure" Scientology, applied carefully and rigorously by True Believers, affects an organization -- played out in real time in front of us all.
Who's got the popcorn?
-
Friday, June 4, 2010
To Scientologists Newly Out of the Church
To you, dear Scientologist, who have finally decided to leave the Church of Scientology:
Congratulations! You have made that important, first step to a new life.
Perhaps you haven't yet understood the magnitude of what you have done.
You have disagreed.
All Scientologists know that you may not disagree and remain in Scientology. Oh, sure, you "can disagree", but only if you agree to get your disagreements "handled" by the church. And that, we all learned, meant they would "handle" you until you realized "how wrong you were" and how right Scientology, the church and its leaders were. There is no other "handling" -- you were wrong and Scientology, whatever they said and whatever they did, was right.
And, even though Ron said that agreement is effect and disagreement is cause, Scientology only tolerates agreement.
And you have disagreed. What's more, you refused to agree that you were wrong so you could be "handled" by the church. You disagreed and you said, "I am right!"
This first disagreement after so much agree-agree-agree is a major step toward sanity. If you are like I was, it is a great relief.
However, if you are like many Scientologists who have finally had enough and have stepped away from the Church of Scientology, you may still be wrapped up in the culture of agreement that is Scientology.
You might be tempted to return to that warm, welcoming culture of agreement with Scientologists outside of the church, like the "Independent Scientology" movement. There, your disagreement about David Miscavige will become agreement, they all agree that "Miscavige is bad", and you could safely drop back with them into that safe world of complete agreement in Scientology.
You became a Scientologist because you found some of the things in Scientology to be worthwhile and workable. But one of the characteristics of Scientology that is quite attractive to many Scientologists is that it is a pre-packaged set of beliefs where "all of that is bad" and "all of this is good", you don't have to think, you don't have to worry, all you have to do is agree. And once a person becomes a Scientologist, they are required to agree that everything in Scientology is good and workable -- no matter what their actual opinions or experiences are.
Hopefully, that's over for you. Now you can make up your own mind about each and every thing in your life. You can choose a life where you make the decisions about what you are going to think and believe.
You have taken the first step towards sanity and taking back your own life, don't stop now. You can disagree if you want to. You can disagree as much as you want, even with parts of Scientology.
And that is a road to greater truth.
-
Congratulations! You have made that important, first step to a new life.
Perhaps you haven't yet understood the magnitude of what you have done.
You have disagreed.
All Scientologists know that you may not disagree and remain in Scientology. Oh, sure, you "can disagree", but only if you agree to get your disagreements "handled" by the church. And that, we all learned, meant they would "handle" you until you realized "how wrong you were" and how right Scientology, the church and its leaders were. There is no other "handling" -- you were wrong and Scientology, whatever they said and whatever they did, was right.
And, even though Ron said that agreement is effect and disagreement is cause, Scientology only tolerates agreement.
And you have disagreed. What's more, you refused to agree that you were wrong so you could be "handled" by the church. You disagreed and you said, "I am right!"
This first disagreement after so much agree-agree-agree is a major step toward sanity. If you are like I was, it is a great relief.
However, if you are like many Scientologists who have finally had enough and have stepped away from the Church of Scientology, you may still be wrapped up in the culture of agreement that is Scientology.
You might be tempted to return to that warm, welcoming culture of agreement with Scientologists outside of the church, like the "Independent Scientology" movement. There, your disagreement about David Miscavige will become agreement, they all agree that "Miscavige is bad", and you could safely drop back with them into that safe world of complete agreement in Scientology.
You became a Scientologist because you found some of the things in Scientology to be worthwhile and workable. But one of the characteristics of Scientology that is quite attractive to many Scientologists is that it is a pre-packaged set of beliefs where "all of that is bad" and "all of this is good", you don't have to think, you don't have to worry, all you have to do is agree. And once a person becomes a Scientologist, they are required to agree that everything in Scientology is good and workable -- no matter what their actual opinions or experiences are.
Hopefully, that's over for you. Now you can make up your own mind about each and every thing in your life. You can choose a life where you make the decisions about what you are going to think and believe.
You have taken the first step towards sanity and taking back your own life, don't stop now. You can disagree if you want to. You can disagree as much as you want, even with parts of Scientology.
And that is a road to greater truth.
-
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Conversation with a Scientologist
The following is pure fiction, and is not intended to insult anyone. It comes from my frustration with attempting to have a rational discussion about the pros and cons of the subject with some hard-line Scientologists.
Non-Scientologist: So, tell me about Scientology.
Scientologist: Well, it’s a religious philosophy which contains tools that anyone can use to improve their life. These are workable tools that have been proven to be uniformly successful if they are applied correctly.
Non-Scientologist: OK, but forgive me if I question your statement about being uniformly successful. I’ve seen some disturbing things online. Apparently the head of Scientology is physically and verbally abusive to his staff, people are forced to disconnect from their families, the Scientology organizations are emptying out, and there are a lot of defections, including top level OTs. That doesn’t seem to indicate uniform success.
Scientologist: Well, people in the Church are not correctly applying Scientology. They’ve altered the technology. What they are doing is not Scientology.
Non-Scientologist: I see. Well, if alteration of the technology is such a major problem, maybe Hubbard should have warned people about it. Maybe he should have written an issue alerting them to the dangers of altering the technology, and had every Scientologist read it at the beginning of every course.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that.
Non-Scientologist: Oh. Well, then, why didn’t that work?
Scientologist: Well, that’s because people have misunderstood. They can’t duplicate what they are reading.
Non-Scientologist: I see. That sounds like a serious block. Maybe Hubbard should have written something warning people about the importance of understanding words. Maybe he should have developed a technology of how to study.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. It’s called Study Tech.
Non-Scientologist: OK. Well, why didn’t that work?
Scientologist: It’s because people are out-ethics! They are just blinded by their own overts –transgressions – and they have withholds.
Non-Scientologist: Well, I can understand that could be a problem. Hubbard should have invented a technology of ethics to help people be more ethical and disciplined.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. There’s a whole book on it.
Non-Scientologist: OK, well, why don’t people apply that?
Scientologist: You don’t understand. Technology doesn’t get applied because the Orgs are a mess! They are off-purpose, more interested in income than really helping people. They are understaffed and desperate, and it’s hard to get anything standard done!
Non-Scientologist: Sure, I can see how that would be. Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of organization; how to keep organizations on-purpose and functioning properly. Maybe he should have written up all of their duties in detail so they know exactly what they should be doing.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did do that. It’s been published in ten big volumes.
Non-Scientologist: Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?
Scientologist: Staff don’t have time to study it. There’s too few of them and they are desperate. There are just not enough people in the orgs!
Non-Scientologist: Oh, I see. Well, then, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of how to promote and market Scientology. Maybe he should have provided drills telling people how to effectively disseminate Scientology.
Scientologist: Well, actually he did do that.
Non-Scientologist: Ok, why isn’t that correctly applied?
Scientologist: You don’t understand! The whole of the Church of Scientology has been taken over by Suppressive Persons. They are perverting the tech! They are destroying the Church! Everyone is PTS to them!
Non-Scientologist: Goodness, that sounds serious! Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to show people how to spot Suppressive Persons, and how to handle them once you’ve spotted them, so you don’t go PTS.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that too.
Non-Scientologist: Oh! Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?
Scientologist: There are so many other factors I haven’t even mentioned! People have something called GPMs, they have whole track implants, they have evil purposes in restimulation, they have…
Non-Scientologist: Well, why didn’t Hubbard develop technologies to…
Scientologist: He did! He did! But you don’t understand! You can’t get technology correctly applied when you have people who are not rational, who are not sane, who are low on the Tone Scale, who are aberrated…
Non-Scientologist: Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to make people rational and sane, to raise them on the Tone Scale, to get rid of aberration.
Oh wait. Isn’t that what Scientology is supposed to do?
- Arthur
Non-Scientologist: So, tell me about Scientology.
Scientologist: Well, it’s a religious philosophy which contains tools that anyone can use to improve their life. These are workable tools that have been proven to be uniformly successful if they are applied correctly.
Non-Scientologist: OK, but forgive me if I question your statement about being uniformly successful. I’ve seen some disturbing things online. Apparently the head of Scientology is physically and verbally abusive to his staff, people are forced to disconnect from their families, the Scientology organizations are emptying out, and there are a lot of defections, including top level OTs. That doesn’t seem to indicate uniform success.
Scientologist: Well, people in the Church are not correctly applying Scientology. They’ve altered the technology. What they are doing is not Scientology.
Non-Scientologist: I see. Well, if alteration of the technology is such a major problem, maybe Hubbard should have warned people about it. Maybe he should have written an issue alerting them to the dangers of altering the technology, and had every Scientologist read it at the beginning of every course.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that.
Non-Scientologist: Oh. Well, then, why didn’t that work?
Scientologist: Well, that’s because people have misunderstood. They can’t duplicate what they are reading.
Non-Scientologist: I see. That sounds like a serious block. Maybe Hubbard should have written something warning people about the importance of understanding words. Maybe he should have developed a technology of how to study.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. It’s called Study Tech.
Non-Scientologist: OK. Well, why didn’t that work?
Scientologist: It’s because people are out-ethics! They are just blinded by their own overts –transgressions – and they have withholds.
Non-Scientologist: Well, I can understand that could be a problem. Hubbard should have invented a technology of ethics to help people be more ethical and disciplined.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. There’s a whole book on it.
Non-Scientologist: OK, well, why don’t people apply that?
Scientologist: You don’t understand. Technology doesn’t get applied because the Orgs are a mess! They are off-purpose, more interested in income than really helping people. They are understaffed and desperate, and it’s hard to get anything standard done!
Non-Scientologist: Sure, I can see how that would be. Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of organization; how to keep organizations on-purpose and functioning properly. Maybe he should have written up all of their duties in detail so they know exactly what they should be doing.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did do that. It’s been published in ten big volumes.
Non-Scientologist: Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?
Scientologist: Staff don’t have time to study it. There’s too few of them and they are desperate. There are just not enough people in the orgs!
Non-Scientologist: Oh, I see. Well, then, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of how to promote and market Scientology. Maybe he should have provided drills telling people how to effectively disseminate Scientology.
Scientologist: Well, actually he did do that.
Non-Scientologist: Ok, why isn’t that correctly applied?
Scientologist: You don’t understand! The whole of the Church of Scientology has been taken over by Suppressive Persons. They are perverting the tech! They are destroying the Church! Everyone is PTS to them!
Non-Scientologist: Goodness, that sounds serious! Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to show people how to spot Suppressive Persons, and how to handle them once you’ve spotted them, so you don’t go PTS.
Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that too.
Non-Scientologist: Oh! Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?
Scientologist: There are so many other factors I haven’t even mentioned! People have something called GPMs, they have whole track implants, they have evil purposes in restimulation, they have…
Non-Scientologist: Well, why didn’t Hubbard develop technologies to…
Scientologist: He did! He did! But you don’t understand! You can’t get technology correctly applied when you have people who are not rational, who are not sane, who are low on the Tone Scale, who are aberrated…
Non-Scientologist: Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to make people rational and sane, to raise them on the Tone Scale, to get rid of aberration.
Oh wait. Isn’t that what Scientology is supposed to do?
- Arthur
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
