Well, here is some more brilliant advice from the “non-religious” part of scientology, the “World Institute of Scientology Enterprises (WISE).”
Touting the words of Hubbard concerning goodwill and how important it is.
Obviously, goodwill IS important.
It is also something that scientology has none of. How is that possible if they are so in Source? Ron has laid out exactly how to attain this cherished goal. Why are they failing so badly?
Maybe scientology should hire some experts from WISE to help them out…
All these posts about Scientology not providing any good will, what about the ones that go to disaster sites and help the most vulnerable and ones needing assistance the more than all others ? Providing food, water, moving them out of harms way – thats all got to be a sign of good will is it not ?
If they actually did anything other than set up photo opportunities. There is some small measure of assistance provided, but they collect literally hundreds of millions of dollars to do this sort of “charitable work” and spend tens of thousands actually helping.
Gday Mike, thanks for your reply. Ive become a massive fan of yours and Leah ever since developing a minor obsession on this topic a few months back. Im not sure why scientoliegy and cults in general interest me but this topic definetely draws me in. Ill use this opportunity to tell you a small story, being a Australian you may be interested but not suprised by the following. I did some work at one of the Australian orgs, was there for a while and a couple of times. I was suprised that even though i asked many questions to the person escorting me he didnt encourage or try and get me involved – i found that honorouble. The part which suprised me more was the part which proved to me how brainwashed this young worker was (who seemed like a great guy but just a tad naive). When i asked about Scientology numbers he claimed millions of Australian members. I said millions in plural means around 10% or more hinting that his claim is erroneuos – he repeated the claim with conviction. In hindsight i should have told him millions means that it would be Australia’s biggest religion. I was suprised at how a man of sound mind who seemed to be rational could be so brainwashed to believe the magnitude of his religion was in the millions when in reality only around 20k of the whole nation declare Scientoliegy in the latest census, another sad example of mind control on a young life, a life which should be lived and not wasted on a lie.
Al Capone, Los Zetas, Pablo Escobar, the KKK…there is a long list of decidedly “questionable” individuals and groups who have sponsored “good works.” Both Hamas and Hezbollah engage in a huge amount of charitable activity and yet it is arguably nothing compared to the harm they have inflicted.
The CoS is a multi-billion dollar organisation. If you follow any Volunteer Ministers (those scientologists who go to disaster sites) on social media you would learn that any funds actually provided to them by the church are miniscule and perfunctory – only enough to allow for a quick photo op and a hasty departure. It is usually down to individual VMs to raise their own cash (with zero support from the church) should they hope to stay on and do something beyond the superficial. These individual parishioner fundraisers typically fail due to lack of interest. The church doesn’t care as it already has the photos for its leader to showcase at the next glitzy event scientologists are pressured into attending.
Mwestern thanks for your input. As you know more about this than me could you tell me more specifics? How long do they stay at the sites ? Is it literally only a hour or two and they leave ? Are their hand outs generous or is it just ok here have a water ?
Ive seen videos of (assumed) non scientologists saying they make a difference – ie frim 1st responders, fire fighters etc etc.
Wow. Just wow. This one is still about being selfish instead of selfless.
Abrahamic religions that I have started to study teach about giving Alms. Specifically, giving Alms to the poorest or most incapable of helping themselves. It is about personally going out and helping those in need. It is to be done anonymously if possible, simply to help. There is no expectation of reward. #selfless
Even when Hubbard is at his most benign, it is about twisting the minds of others to enable him. Goodwill in Scientology is about building reputation. There is an expectation of reward (ergo, Goodwill). It is not to be done anonymously, otherwise you can’t get the reward. #selfish
OMG! I can’t believe this. But I was just in the middle of writing a post when my screen went blank and the post was lost. That makes twice in the same day.
I’m guessing this might have happened because Mike updated his site at exactly the same time that I was in the middle of writing my post? It happened at 8:45 AM (EST) Monday morning Oct. 5, 2020.
And so, just like Elvis said, “I’m all shook up!” now. TTYL.
Why does no one refer to L. Ron Hubbard as the “Late” LRh? He has been dead since 1986.
The answer just may be that he ain’t worth the spit contained in a loogie that one hawks up on a Summer’s day. Does that sound familiar?
I’m sure there are several well known variations that people might find equally accurate. How’s about …
He ain’t worth the effort it takes a fat man to expel a fart. That one may be better.
Alternatively, some people might say, “he ain’t worth the energy it takes to land a big dump in the toilet. I think that one would be my own personal favorite because so many people seem to recognize him a a portion of a turd. Alternatively, they may recognize him as the turd itself. Oh well.
There still hasn’t been a deep dive into ALL of Hubbard’s writings, the entire corpus hasn’t been entirely digested, categorized, and graded.
Big chunks have, but the “series” of policy and the “series” of tech (quackery part) are neatly laid out by Hubbard, and there’s a whole intertwining of the staff roles, and public Scientologist roles, matching their scripted rules Hubbard laid out.
There are rules for the echelons of staffs, Sea Org rules, and regular staff rules, and mission staff rules, and then various sub groups of public Scientologists’ rules, and celebrity Scientologists who wish to “wear their celebrity hats” as disseminators, to the various degrees they wish, are all given levels of Hubbard guidelines to follow.
There simply hasn’t been an overview serious paper even, other than broad generalizations and media statements, which are mostly accurate, I wouldn’t disagree with the media and major authors and journalists’ conclusions about Scientology.
The harshest media and professional criticisms of Scientology I think are correct.
But despite all this, Hubbard did write a massive system that is self enforcing what Hubbard gave them as guidelines to continue to carry forward as a movement.
It’s a big self running setup, and Hubbard’s many many compartmented “series” in particular, which line up with the staff jobs in the echelons of the bureaucracy, all keep it going.
There ought to be some deep dive into Hubbard’s bureaucracy writings, and how it all interwines.
But for what audience is even interested, other than possibly the apologist new religion academics who see remarkable positives in Scientology’s continued “successful” but admittedly controversial existence.
Some one of those milder academics who take interest in new religions have ample Hubbard writings to scour and take note of how well the Hubbard bureaucracy keeps working.
It all goes back to Hubbard’s massive output of writings, and the lectures for the “tech” (the quackery) and then the “policy” (the bureaucracy upkeeping writings).
It’d be a laborious project, and any academic doing this job in depth would unfortunately end up giving unmerited praise to Hubbard for the whole big setup, and somewhere along the line when that future academic does do the job, they will have doubts and wonder if they are just giving Scientology way too much undeserved credit for their continued existence.
It’s all back to Hubbard’s massive written output for the movement.
What to say, I kind of think the task of outlining Hubbard’s Scientology writings and lectures, is a backhanded boomeranging kind of no win endeavor, but it likely will be done someday.
Maybe not.
The biggest problem though, is the bureaucracy writings seem to have a heavy accumulating effect on the membership, keeping them in line, with the whole quackery practice.
It’s like the bureaucracy to me in hindsight has an overall overwhelming negative effect enforcing the quackery and the placebo/psychosomatic benefits of Sceintology.
Hubbard propped up his operation with a massive bureaucratic system. And that bureaucratic echelon system has a weight and strength all it’s own, despite the ludicrousness of the quackery.
Chuck Beatty
ex Sea Org 1975-2003
Chuck, I don’t know of anyone who would want to spend that many hours of their life to catalogue Hubbard.
Why??
There are lots of courses (used to be the Briefing Course) like the Basics, tape series, on and on, whose main thrust seems to be “it’s got to be great because it’s so fucking long!”
There’s no there there.
When I first left, I felt it important that somebody weed out the good stuff from the bullshit in Hubbard’s “Tech.”
After a while, I realized that Hubbard’s output was like a piece of Swiss cheese—and that there were far more holes than cheese.
Or to put it in a Demented Minimonster way when he discovered that $camology was a great racket, “Good, will get money whether they want to hand it over or not.”
Mike, I recently listened to your Fair Game podcast with Ray Jeffries. You talked about your experience of Marty Rathbun’s total betrayal of you and your friendship (and of the truth, justice, the movement, and so many of his former friends). I appreciated your sharing on that level. Marty’s betrayal is something that has always rankled with me, even though it technically had nothing to do with me. On the other hand, if my questions had something to do with your going there, and if going there was re-traumatizing, I feel sorry about that. I do believe that revisiting our trauma can be very healing, but as Scientology “tech” proves, it can also be done in ways that cause more harm. I don’t think that podcast constituted more harm, yet I still felt sorry about how hard it seemed to be on you.
Thanks again, and good luck in your continuing healing process.
I watched the entire series of Scientology and the Aftermath and now I listen to the Scientology Fair Game podcast.From all the interviews I have seen and heard,I do not detect much goodwill on the part of Scientology.They should practice what they preach,not the opposite.
scientology, practice what they preach!? What a NOVEL idea.
I’m sure the OSA folks reading this blog will forward the idea up-lines to the Tiny tyrant™, who will take it to heart and implement the various needed changes immediately. (not!). From the beginning, Book 1, the promises and aspirations of Dn/Scn have diametrically opposed to the actual aims and results of the organization. NEVER has a “Book 1 Clear” been produced, not by Ron, not via Book 1 auditing, not on the Apollo, not at Flag nor the “freewinds”.
AFAICT, there will NEVER be one produced. There’s no indication anywhere that the human brain is even theoretically capable of such abilities.
It seems to me that many if not most WISE businesses operate largely on “hard sell,” and financial tricks like advanced payments and recurring billings – which demonstrate that neither monopoly nor good will is actually necessary, but rather that customers can be fooled or manipulated. Particularly for scientologists pressed to pay for going up the bridge and to donate towards supporting planetary clearing, especially when many of them are short on education and skills, worrying about “goodwill” might only get in the way of quickly generating the large amounts of cash necessary for Scientology.
The author of this piece is getting dangerously into scientologically forbidden “theetie-weetie” territory. The orgs themselves don’t operate on that basis, do they?
The irony in this advertisement is so great that I, a writer with 30+ years’ experience, have no words to adequately express how big it is.
Kimo offered:
“The irony in this advertisement is so great that I, a writer with 30+ years’ experience, have no words to adequately express how big it is.”
THAT was a pretty good start. Only someone with the Shermanator’s experience and plethora of thesaruses (thesauri?) could give it a proper shoot-down, I suspect. Tubby certainly knew and cared little about the goodwill of his inner circles: St. Hell and the Apollo, and the Dn “Research centers” before scn ALL had AWFUL “goodwill” due to his activities and policies. The guy even aligned himself with the LOSING side of a coup. Rhodesia was too ridiculous to be called a comedy of errors
As I am Italian I went to see the word Goodwill in the dictionary to have an overall idea of what it means.
Honestly none fits to scn.
Kindness, gentleness, charity, amity etc, are so far away from what scn really is that this sounds really funny.
It remains ‘willingness’. But the question is – willing to do what exactly?
LMR is Italian. You might think that might make it more difficult for him/her (never been established) to understand the meaning of “goodwill”.
I am Canadian. You might think that would make it easier for me. After all, our language is almost identical to yours except we put the letter “u” in strange places after the letter “o” and we end most questions with the word, “eh?”. By the way for any of you that ever wondered why we do that, it’s just my opinion but I think it’s our way to add some “extra politeness” to our questions. After all, questions can often lead to misunderstandings and Canadians like to be extra polite. Why is that?
When we enter kindergarten, all Canadian kiddies are taught a little story and told to always remember it. It goes like this, “When a small person sleeps next to an elephant and the elephant wakes up with a cold, the person oft times wakes up with the flu. (just kidding about kindergarten, btw).
Something else we do (but only rarely) is to say “oft times” instead of “often”. But you get the idea. The USA is the elephant in this story.
OK. That is the end of my polite preamble. As far as the scam and “Goodwill” goes, if you want to get the true lowdown of what this scam really has to do with “goodwill”, just ask Claire & Mark Headley or Mary Kahn or Valerie Haney or any of the other people who appeared on, “Leah Remini: Scamatology and the Aftermath”. They will give you the true lowdown on how much goodwill is left with members when they escape from this cult. Also, all the young people who seem to talk about all their suicide attempts and their intense desire to die while they were victims of this scam.
You can’t get a better idea of how much goodwill this vile criminal cult leaves with its former members.
P.S. LMR? Is it Signore LMR or Signora LMR? I don’t think you ever made that clear. It’s none of my business but when I take my trip to Italy after COVID is ended and the scam is only a memory, I need to know who to look for.
Ciao, baby!
Dear Skyler please forgive me for answering late,
I know what is their goodwill after 15 years in the SO trying to clear the planet with holes in the shoes and with that permanent feeling to be always walking on a razor edge.
When I will go to Canada then I have some more instruction on how to speak. Lol.
By the way I am a signore (Mr). I thought was clear. Laughing.
Do well.
Grazie Signore LMR. Always a pleasure to hear from you.
Since Scientology is fascistic, the only good will it can get is through lies. Hubbard took old occult ideas and covered them up; changed them a little and charged money for them. When I hit OT V, I could not believe that I was in the realm of talking to entities and doing exorcism. I would have quit except there were so many people around me looking at the 15% sales commission. So up the bridge I went until the death of my two FSM’s proved to me that Hubbard was insane. No more FSM pressure.
I look back over fifty years and clearly see what I missed all along the way. Hubbard had a below average mind and he was always claiming that he was “researching” upper limits. That only lasts so long and it ends quickly. OT VIII on the Freewinds in 1988 was a complete and total disaster. Hubbard started by thinking that he controlled entities and that they were responsible for the lack of fascism in people. He naturally came to the final conclusion that Christianity was “implanted” by space aliens.
If it was implanted, I guarantee you I ran it out on OT VIII. But since Christianity is still around, Scientology has failed.
George in my opinion he dramatically confused ‘entities’ with ‘identities’.
You as Buddhist knows it, Life is one and hasn’t opponents. We are just consciousness and a momentary intermediary for Life (us) to gain experience. Everybody is just a viewpoint, but a wave of the same sea.
Mind and ego creates most of entities that haunt one’s life (and this becomes an endless abyss).
Ron’s ego was too big. He didn’t got anything about true spirituality.
He was fishing straight into the abyss.
Very well stated and I agree. There is an ancient Buddhist text that I do not have a copy of but it goes like this. In ancient India, there were vey few roads and spiritual “seekers” wandered the paths in the forest. When two ascetics met, it was customary to exchange the greeting – “anatta?”. Of course anatta translates as “no ownership”, no soul involved or no spirit. It was a way of quickly telling which group a monk belonged to. One group saw the immortal spirit; the other group saw only moments of consciousness. So Hubbard never ever even got to step one in understanding religion.
George sorry for answering late. Nice story. Yes the concept of religion was build by hubbard merging few churches and keeping the cross to confuse Christians. Additionally in 1953/54 he WASN’T owning the Dianetics copyright so he had to cope somehow and invented a religion.
Ananta.
George, LRH wasn’t researching the Upper limits, it was the OUTER limits, which others had mapped already. Nothing new and improved in his pronouncements; in fact, I suspect his alterations made some good things very bad, destructive instead of helpful.
If “goodwill” is so important, then why is it that Scientology is so good at making enemies?
It looks like that “making enemies” is one of their main stats, next to raking in money no matter what the cost is (and thus making plenty of enemies).
To compensate they put up the ‘humanitarian’ facade with the VMs etc. and have statuses for their ‘Humanitarians’ who get their statuses by getting fleeced of their money.
Hopefully their current enemy-lists get leaked one day. The last ones which got leaked in 1992:
Scientology enemies list of persons (‘SPs’): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imuEhZ7-qSU
Scientology enemies list of groups: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6vcmkgiIC4
Mike, do you have any idea about the aproximate numbers of it before you left?
Pluvo, Hubbard was always the “Do as I say, not as I do.” sort of guy.
Do the executives at the Church of Scientology know about this course?
Just askin’ …
If I have a suggestion for anyone (especially the OSA people reading this) it’s to mentally step back and look at what you actually believe. You may not like what you find.
otherles, there’s only one problem with that idea: They’re carefully trained NOT to take an honest look around them. Doing so is what eventually led to my being kicked to the curb as totally useless for their purposes. I am certain it was the reason MANY became exes. Seems ElCon realized it would be the case, so he started making us put the blinders on pretty early, with (at a minimum) KSW appearing in the first couple hours of coursework.