One of our Special Correspondents sent this in and I felt it worthy of a separate post.
I am interested in your comments. I don’t agree with some of the sentiments expressed here but I believe it is food for thought and perhaps from the responses we might gain some insight into what is considered valuable, important or unwanted.
Fire away!
Mike
A Vision of What Scientology Could Be…
A vital part of evaluating any situation, good or bad, is to envision the Ideal Scene for that activity. How this is done is laid out in detail in Data Series 12, HCO PL 5 July 1979, HOW TO FIND AND ESTABLISH AN IDEAL SCENE. It is an exercise that I encourage any and all Scientologists to do using this policy. Here is how we envision the Ideal Scene for the Scientology religion:
* Scientology Orgs and Missions would be buzzing and full of people who were receiving affordable services, making real progress up the Bridge on average wages, training as auditors, attending intro lectures, forming groups or just hanging out with friends. Missions and Orgs would be making a high volume of Grade Chart completions, Orgs would be making Clears and AOs would be making OTs in ever increasing volume. Constant regging and harassment to donate to this or that or buy the latest release would be non-existent. The real spirit of Scientology would be truly apparent.
* Class VIIIs and highly trained auditors, active field auditors and big disseminators would be the elite of Scientology, not those who donated large sums.
* Tech would be recovered in full back to LRH original writings and any perversions removed.
* Ethnic surveys would be done around the world – in every country, every state, every major city. Using that information programs would be laid out for Orgs, Missions and Scientolgists forming as Gung Ho Groups to that use tech to address the ruins and needs and wants of the populace of each area.
* A real Volunteer Ministers Program would be running where Scientologists and non-Scientologists alike learned to help their family member, neighbors and friends with simple tech to address and handle common problems that plague nearly every household.
* The Church of Scientology and Scientologists alike would emulate “What is Greatness”, ridding ourselves of arrogance and harshness and rekindling the care and real help Scientology was always intended to be.
* Personal Integrity would no longer be crushed by threat of ethics actions or by being blocked from attaining full OT. Scientologists would be truly free to think for themselves and to see what they see and have the courage and integrity to say so and act accordingly .
* Scientology would stand for Human Rights and not only practice these rights amongst ourselves but crusade worldwide to make these rights broadly known and upheld.
* OTs in the field would be active in helping others up the Bridge and in spearheading expansion activities such as opening new Missions, forming Field Auditing Groups and dissemination programs, rather than fundraising.
*Scientology celebrities and Scientologists alike would be involved in charitable activities and would become renown for their good works, gaining respect and admiration from the good they do with their popularity and wealth.
* The internet and news around the world would be filled with reports and information about the good works of Scientology organizations, Scientologists at large and its celebrities instead of its current horrific PR scene.
* The IAS would be a true Membership Program based on the policies of L. Ron Hubbard, not a fund-raising hell on wheels machine driving Scientologists into debt and creating hardship and upset.
* Of course an International Amnesty would be issued that ended the bitter mishandlings of thousands of Scientologists around the world who had been wrongly declared, booted out or handled unjustly and thereby recovering thousands of Scientologists including past executives and staff of orgs and the Sea Org.
* Enforced disconnection of family and friends would be a thing of the past and the right to communicate to whom you choose would be fully restored.
* Groups “attacking” Scientology would be reckoned with using communication, tech and policy to bring things to a full resolution and the end of any further dissension.
* A Board of Review would be established to fully resolve injustices and for matters of mercy.
* Scientologists would be flourishing and prospering and allowed freedom over their lives and livelihood.
* Superpower would be delivered to the dedicated staff of the SO and Scientology organizations first, as LRH specifically directed, and then to Scientologists – and not just at Flag but delivered in all orgs to Scientologists across the globe.
* it wouldn’t cost a fortune to make it to OT. OT would be attainable for the many, not just the wealthy. And OT would be everything you dreamed it would be.
* LRH’s good repute as a humanitarian would be known around the world and the admiration and respect for him would come naturally as a result of the miracles and wins from his technology being applied correctly and thus would abound.
* The Code of Honor and the Code of a Scientologist are the basic codes that Scientologists would be expected to follow and would gladly work to emulate.
* Scientology would be expanding in earnest and that expansion would be obvious – thriving Orgs producing Grade Chart completions, Clears, OTs and Auditors in abundance. Big, booming Missions and field groups everywhere and an excellent repute worldwide. Orgs would be expanding up to and beyond the size of old Saint Hill.
* Scientologists would be a free people and would be truly contributing to improved conditions and honest help to the peoples of Earth.
Scientology could be everything you got into Scientology to achieve, but only if you stop explaining away the outpoints. It’s not just for you, it’s for the entire human race. The real spirit of Scientology lives and can be recovered. It is up to you.
Add to or modify this and pass it around, because the more people that have their eyes on the ball, the more likely we are to achieve our goals!
The Evaluator
I support the writers vision and postulate, that the very best of Scn. is possible. This scene was expressed as ideal and i don’t like this person invalidated for expressing this. Several large issues have been touched upon, which could handle articles of their own but i need to respond. To me, it’s a contrary fact that the tech produces spiritual, meaningful gains to the individual, but labeling it religion is wrong. Scn. is a very unique, applied, spiritual science. I’m comfortable calling it my religion, because it is what I choose to use for my spiritual growth. I was well studied in world religions prior to Scn. I also have no problem with KSW 1. I understand what Ron meant when he said, I have the tech here, just do it as is. It’s not a suspension of all your brain cells, just to not allow the auditing processes to be altered. Ron promoted freedom of thought, not the opposite. The biggest violator, of KSW 1 is DM, that’s THE reason why he’s a failure. We see the results of altered tech and many of us are out of the church because of this. There is a difference between insisting the processes are done correctly and some ignorant person, that demands compliance of random orders without thinking. Who in their right mind would comply to this? This is not what Ron wrote KSW1 for. The senior datum I have always held, when reading any LRH, is that we are all unique spiritual beings, that we have our own point of view, our own track, our own priorities and our own code of honor relating to those things. What’s true for me is of paramount importance. One has to consider senior datums like “do no harm” for doctors. In my personal experience, of 10,000 hours in the chair, it is clear as a bell for me, that LRH wanted to free beings first and foremost…….of their suffering, their confusions, their guilt, their conflicts, and their false identities. He wanted to help us be ourselves and only ourselves. It is our primary duty to take personal responsibility for our unique perspectives, in whatever we’re doing with Scn. and in life, because we are the only ones who can. I know an OT VIII who is extremely bitter about the hundreds of times that she went out code of honor at Flag. It’s the betrayal of ourselves that hurts the most. This in no way justifies the culture of coercion, disrespect and pressure that would create such a problem for an OT. This culture is in fact antipathetic to the making of an OT and the nurturing and promoting of OT abilities. The current church is out integrity with itself, and is also in abject neglect of their duty, to free beings by promoting the strength and integrity of personal perspectives and decisions. I apologize to any helpful, kind, hard working SO but, IMO, (I was 10 years non SO staff) based on my personal experience, the SO has been the source of the most militant, crazy, life crushing pressure to abandon everything except the 3D. Somewhere along the line, the personal choice of dedication to the SO, morphed into, “everyone who’s not killing themselves for the cause is an out ethics asshole”. I deeply resent and reject that point of view. I considered singing my children to sleep each night to be excellent production. Learning about all the stories of exSO on the various blogs only validates what I observed myself. The more cut off the individual was, the more shocking it is to come out and adjust, but the degree will still be different for everyone. I applaud the courage of anyone honestly working on getting more real. They are grabbing back their point of view and deserve respect and support. I just don’t think it’s psychologically healthy to have no kids, pets, grocery shopping and car repairs. There’s something very balancing and reality building about having all the dynamics in play. I used to work grave yard on the weekends at an all night restaurant, when I was on staff for food and rent. As hard as it was it certainly kept me real. And some of these militant people are still, the most militant in insisting that everyone had their head in a bag the entire time they were in the church. Well I did not. I was and am not blind. I never led anyone that was blind. I didn’t cut myself off from the general world or culture. I was politically active even on staff. My decisions were and are mine, and I’ll deal with them how I please, when I please. I’ll continue to decide the greatest good, for the greatest number of MY dynamics, from MY point of view, from MY priorities and when I damn well please. I’ve had immense success helping people with their ethics with these datums in play, from THEIR point of view. That’s my idea of a free, sentient, in ethics being. This is what Scn is and represents to me, FREEDOM. And I believe this is what LRH intended for us. Thetans……operating.
I like how you roll.
Thank you! One of the best essays I’ve ever read. Wow.
I think there could be a central organization that held all of the original LRH references and monies accumulated over the years. I think it would be ideal for all the external delivery to be done by autonomous delivery. There would have to be some agreements that the central org could not interfere with the external delivery. The central Org would be trying to remedy the bad PR that has been created over the years. I also feel that the central org could deliver the tech. They would be ran by a council and that council would be voted every couple of years by membership. I don’t see any way of NOT having some central org. Every church that I know of and even non religious deliveries have some central control point.
Only people interested in keeping the tech alive would have a say so in the way the central organizations would be ran. The governing council would make reparations to those injured by the past suppression. The governing body would hold meetings to determine the policies that should be focused on.
I feel there is a lot of valuable things in the Scientology philosophy that should be preserved.
Any autonomous delivery unit could interpret and deliver the tech the way they see fit.
Any “organized” central church would just eventually turn into another overbearing dictatorship. It’s inevitable. Yes…it’s also inevitable that there are those who would interpret and deliver the tech the way they see fit. That even happens inside the current dictatorship…LOL…under the direction of the Dinky Man.
Those who learn and apply the tech as written will get results and will be VERY busy auditing people up the Bridge. Those who alter things, do it their own way and get poor or no results will soon fall by the wayside. It’s survival of the fittest.
Plus…any auditing is better than no auditing :O)
Seeing what happened with the attempt at forming a new group just recently and other efforts in this regard it my considered view that attempting to form an “ideal” or a recreation of an earlier group or a better version of this group is not productive.
When leaving the church there is the loss of belonging to a group and many try fill this vacuum by trying to join another or create a new one. There is too much baggage, too much betrayal for this to be successful.
My reality is that instead of trying to find a new home, create one for yourself. If Scientology is your thing then DO Scientology. If it’s any good a 3D will build around what you create, if that’s what you want.
This has happened with Les Warren, Marty and, I’m sure, many others. The days of centralised Scientology are done, never to be seen again.
The ideal above is lovely but getting agreement on it is, again, unproductive. Go create it. Not with membership rules and constitutions but with simple, caring and honest DOING of Scientology.
Haven’t read all of the comments, so perhaps this has been covered, but there is a huge omitted item from this Ideal Scene, and it’s typical of the thinking of many if not most Scientologists. From the very beginnings of Dianetics until LRH went into seclusion some 30 years later, he continued to constantly refine the tech, and if Miscavige had actually produced an “all clear”, I’m sure Ron would have gotten back on the lines and continued to evolve it. And yet in the scenario above, this author would take the tech back to that point where LRH dropped it, and keep it frozen there forever.
Well, the tech itself tells you that is impossible. Anything that doesn’t improve will deteriorate. The biggest missing element of this ideal scene, and from Scientology itself, is this function of continuing to evolve the tech. If Ron’s not still wearing that hat then nobody gets to wear it, and in the long run that just ain’t gonna work.
The “Ideal Scene” sounds unreal and more like a “Delusional Scene”.
* Groups “attacking” Scientology would be reckoned with using communication, tech and policy to bring things to a full resolution and the end of any further dissension.
The problem is that LRH Policy demands that those groups be attacked by any means necessary.
*A Board of Review would be established to fully resolve injustices and for matters of mercy.
The Church of Scientology has no rights or business being merciful or to dispense forgiveness to anyone.
* Scientologists would be flourishing and prospering and allowed freedom over their lives and livelihood.
The Church of Scientology has no rights over anybody to allow people freedoms they already have.
The proposed vision suggests that we should go back to a benign Mother Church with more amenable inquisitorial powers?
I think that Evaluator needs to read Marty’s latest book, before completing his evaluation.
This is actually what most current corporate scientologists believe and some indies are hoping for.
One of my pcs told me ones that he senses scientology will be so wildly recognized and appreciated
by every government of the world for their great spiritual and cultural contributions so very soon – anyone with scientology passport (remember those?) will be allowed to travel anywhere like a royalty.
Also, cheaper OT levels will help more people realize what a fraud the upper Bridge is, imo.
You said – fire away, so here. I won’t hold it against you for not letting this be seen by others.
Your PC who senses “scientology will be so wildly recognized and appreciated by every government of the world for their great spiritual and cultural contributions” is in urgent need of some education re politics and governments. Many have their secrets ( e.g. the current NSA eavesdroppping scandal ), hidden agendas ( e.g. Iran-Contra affair ), pay-offs to politicians ( e.g. Goldman-Sachs donating 6-figure sums to congress men ) etc. etc. If Scientology would be thriving as outlined in the above ideal scene then it would miss witholds, planned overts and hidden evil plans by the thousands … and bring about the typical missed-withhold-phenomena !
IAS is not LRH, the HASI is/was, and a lifetime membership was $150 a year in 1984.
Cross out “a year”.
Personally I was quite content the way things were until about end of 1984 from the perspective as a public. With the debut of the money machines, tech alterations and resultant retraining requirements, long & costly merry-go-around runways to OT, one really didn’t really have much of any choice but to get off the newly created treadmills to bankruptcy. Not saying things were perfect, but quite acceptable to me.
I agree.
Actually for me it was 1986. The year the Ol’man passed away.
After that I made no further progress on either side of the Grade Chart until I progressed toward the door 🙂
70’s & early 80’s were pretty acceptable to me.
I guess depending where one was getting services, but some smaller Class IV orgs were still tolerable until GAT reared it’s ugly face in ’96. It was still easy up to that time to avoid the Pomerantz/Roberts roadshow, but the orgs had gradually become quite militant by that time, and the first “You are not Clear” indications started to surface. One poor SOB was made to redo his “Solo I” for the third time just when he had completed the pre-GAT Certainty one. Another dude was C/Sed and forced to buy FPRD because he didn’t have money to do his OT levels, and blew the scene for good. At that point virtually all actions were directed from the top down. This was also when the first unannounced IAS house visits started, when the car had to be parked 2 blocks away for 10 days and lights off as soon as you got home. This was also the time when many Scientologists got cel phones and wouldn’t give out numbers. Answering machines became the IAS’ best friends.
Usually the course room got half-empty when IAS and SO missions came into town as many people were lying low until those Mofos left Dodge … lol. Even the Crs Sups wouldn’t send one to ethics subsequently and would heartily accept any half-a$$ed CSWs they wouldn’t hold you to. (Widespread stat falsifications became the norm to deal with these unwanted visits) One ED was laughing about his predictions when he was going to get declared because he kept throwing upline orders into the trash … and he blew the scene when a B of I came down. 3 other FDN EDs in the following year got the same end of the shaft too … and the org just contracted down to less then 10 students and 2 pcs. Yet another reg would withhold lists of names from the IAS/Missions and she got toasted as well. They made sure no auditor was available when upline sec checks were ordered. It was just one big F.U. operation against an overwhelming unabated stream of orders coming down every week. Treated the same way as if Al Capone’s henchmen came into the shop.
So, there were still some safe spots left till ’96. I’m glad I still got the KTL and CTP for Pro TRs in, as those courses were real sweet. No regrets. But when GAT hit, that was it, completely cleaning out the course rooms. For some folks it would have been the third time to retrain for the very same thing. Very few longtimers I knew 20 years ago are still there.
Well, this is not the Ideal Scene. It sounds like one, but there are a LOT of assumptions here that need to be addressed in order to be a real ideal scene.
The way through this mire is for each of us to own Scientology and run with what we know works.
The biggest problem Scientology has at this moment is that in order to learn Scientology – auditing, etc. – you need to play nice with people and do it in a group. Scientology cannot be learned using self-study. It is impossible. Therefore, while it is true you need to own and decide what works and doesn’t work about Scientology, in order to learn it, you need to find someone who has a similar mind-set to yours. This will be a challenge going forward. We have Class VI’s and VIII’s who are independent, but we cannot create VI’s and VIII’s in the field as far as I know.
To learn, therefore, you must allow yourself to take some things on faith as you learn them, and then decide with practice how much should be kept or discarded.
But before that, there needs to be someone with the nuts to say “Here. I am putting together a training program to cover the Comm Course through Class VIII” and then weather the inevitable storm that will come when people challenge the person and say “Oh yeah? So who says you can train anybody on anything, bub! Who decides what I’m gonna get crammed on, huh? How do I know you’re not just trying to push your perverted version of Hubbardian BS, eh?”
But by God, training must exist – and you know what, if we just trust each other a bit, we may be able to get through that.
Mark
I tend to disagree with the concept that Scientology can’t be self learned or is not autodidactic.
This is how it started in the beginning.
People picked up a copy of DMSMH from the local Bookstore and started auditing each other.
Even when the Ol’man moved on to Scientology.
Most auditors learned to audit by reading the PABs (Professional Auditor Bulletins) and from other books written at the time.
Waiting for someone to magically come along and open up an Academy is a waste of time in my opinion.
There is nothing stopping anyone from getting all the original texts on the subject and learning how to audit on their own.
They’d probably be better off doing it that way than going to the Scientology Squirrel Base as far as I’m concerned.
The only reason Orgs exist is to ensure that the results of Scientology and Dianetics are achieved and at that they are currently failing miserably.
So who needs ’em?
Right now anyone can pick up a copy of DMSMH,SOS, FOT, APA, HBPC, SA, Intro Demo and Assist Pack, etc and probably get better results on their friends and family than they would at any “Org” these days.
You don’t even have to learn how to use a meter to run those processes.
Besides what’s so difficult about learning how to use a meter?
Anyone who can turn on a computer, find this Blog and tap out a comment to it can learn how to operate an e-meter.
They aren’t all that complicated. Good ol’ Volly got the design from a basic wheatstone bridge.
Like a voltameter they are pretty simple gadgets.
A current passes through a mass and any change in resistance is recorded by the tone arm which is basically a potentiometer or POT.
The dial shows minute changes in this resistance.
Simple!
You don’t need to be a rocket scientist or even an electrical engineer to figure out how to read one.
All you have to do is find someone else who is interested in learning this device as well and do the Book of Emeter drills with ’em.
Love this Mark. Lets get the vias and complexity out of the subject.
ooops! Just realized I was answering Robin. Sorry!
Mike,
I’ll submit this post should be re-titled WHAT SCIENTOLOGY COULD HAVE BEEN. Strike the ‘could be’.
Now it’s up to the freed up market to determine what works, helps and is valuable. That’s the ‘Evolution of a Science’, isn’t it? (Pun intended)
We’ll find out and sort out what of Hubbard’s works will continue and what will end up in the dust bin.
Enough of the “could have, should have, would have”………
One thing I just thought of: During LRH’s life as he was building up the Church and creating all the Admin Tech and everything- it wasnt a fixed thing. In other words, there was a structure, but it adapted and changed with the times with new policies, cancellation of outdated policies etc. So to expect 30+ years later to repair this big old machine is unrealistic and probably impossible. A new organizational approach taken with a good understanding of the admin tech is probably what is needed. Maybe a going back to the good old days, but with a modern twist. For example- no matter how many hip young models the Church puts in it’s promo it is really terribly out of touch with young people or even average humans for that matter. Scientology in the future would have to be real and fresh, and relevant to life. It has to be something thats going to help me and that I need. Nobody needs the Church or it’s “products”.
I think there is a lot in Scientology that is potentially very valuable to people. Everyone is glued to the computer screen now days. How much of kick would they get from doing doing stuff like TR’s and co/auditing?. I think if presented correctly and done right it would blow people away and you could create some viable activity.
If the intended Command Structure of Scientoloy had been implemented and held in place the Church would be a lot closer to this now I think.
Guys- this is an “Ideal Scene” as postulated by the author. I think as stated it postulates a group that should be supported and would be by me.
My views have already been expressed in the comments. Just Me was pretty on point. Whoever wrote this is still pretty brainwashed into what LRH dictates Scientology should, could, does, achieves, etc.. Truth is LRH was a big stretcher (witness his definition of a Clear and the abilities of an OT). Scientology would never be what’s written here. It can’t. Witness any other religion or government now or ever in the past – where there is an author claiming ultimate cosmic power, I don’t believe you can ever have a sane group. You get instead a group of sycophantic psychobabblers who cannot view other ideas. I think Marty had the best post I’ve seen in a long while today. We really do need to work on looking at the world as it is, and go from there; not just get all hyped up on what LRH says and go on a mission of martyrdom. That mission is what created the Church in all its shitty glory. Btw, this post is already against LRH as he himself penned the policy on Disconnection. Best of luck to the author of this post and getting on with their life. Use Scientology as a tool, don’t snap terminals with it and blindly accepts all tenants penned in the tech volumes.
The problem with putting an “Ideal Scene” up here is that obviously not everyone is going to agree on it as shown here by the various responses.
Probably because each and every one of us here has a different POV on what an ideal scene should be.
For instance those who actually hate Scientology and what it represents would be happy to see the organization and the subject vanish from the face of the earth.
In other words their ideal scene would be zero Scientology.
Others are more reform minded.
That the Church should get rid of certain practices like disconnection, continually sec checking their public and staff into oblivion, eliminating harsh ethics practices, etc.
Actually the fact is that there was a reform code written back in the late ’60’s released as part of RJ 68 which from what I understand and observed personally was quite successful.
Yet it seems that after the coup ,as I call them, took over that the Church did a gradual and in the case of the whole Franchise Fiasco, a not so gradual volt vis back to the dark ages before the reform.
That said.
And this is my own personal view, an opinion, so you can agree or disagree with it.
And that is like the GO the SO became a elitist bunch of secretive paranoid fanatics. In other words a cult within what many consider a cult.
Do I propose getting rid of them like the SO did when they took over got rid of the GO.
No.
Because that is simply a not-is which obviously didn’t work the last time since it seems that the SO pretty much dramatizes the worst excesses of the GO these days, only on a broader scale.
So.
What to do?
Again this is my opinion.
In order to fix the problem. One would have to approach the scene (Notice I wrote scene and not situation since we or at least many of us don’t know what the ideal scene is we only know that what is occurring right now isn’t so how can you determine what the grossest departure is?) you’d have to approach it from the viewpoint of a Review Auditor or even an Auto mechanic would be good analogy by first finding out what’s wrong and then using the proper procedure or tools to fix it.
In other words don’t be pulling withholds continually or fixing the radiator when the problem is out int or in the case of a mechanic clogged fuel injectors.
That pretty much sums up what I have to say.
Reform Code?
The Reform Code was a PR handling.
Do you really believe that Fair Game was cancelled in 1968?
Do you even know what the label “fair game” means?
Hmm, not sure what this response is intended to elicit? I thought he asked a pretty fair question of you?
I DO know what the label “fair game” means and I do know it didnt end in 1968….
“Fair Game” was a label that was placed on EOs prior to the Reform Codes.
It says right in the policy that the practice of labeling someone “Fair Game” will cease.
We all know that the practice never did and that overly zealous Scientologists encouraged by members of the GO and later by OSA would continue to covertly *label* anyone they saw as a threat as “Fair Game”.
However this does not change the fact that declaring someone “Fair Game” is labeling them.
Just as certain game labeled fair to be hunted and were no longer protected by certain rules of the sport.
See following definition particularly the archaic one
World English Dictionary
fair game
— n
1. a legitimate object for ridicule or attack
2. archaic hunting quarry that may legitimately be pursued according to the rules of a particular sport.
Robin — this is a silly semantics argument that is meaningless. Believe me, Tory Christman and Chuck Beatty were considered Fair Game in 2006. Read the programs that were published on Marty’s blog. There was no ethics order with that label on it, but its what they were. They could be lied to, tricked, sued or caused to lose their jobs. It’s not the WORDS “fair” and “game” that were ever the issue. It’s the actions.
It is not “silly semantics” Mike.
First there was no policy that I’m aware of that supported these actions since not only was the label cancelled but the policies regarding Fair Game were as well.
No matter Fair Game is a label like SP is a label.
In this case they were arbitrarily placed on both Chuck and Tory without any sanction of policy because someone knew best how to “handle” pesky critics.
Just as the Bush administration FOD knew how to “handle” Valerie Plame for proving that the Yellow Cake docs were nothing but fakes:
http://www.amazon.com/Fair-Game-Agent-Betrayed-Government/dp/1451624042
You have to label someone “Fair Game” first before they can lie, trick, steal, blow a spy’s cover etc.
If there is no label to support it then the action following is illegitimate as in illegal or in the case of Scientology off policy.
Robin — I am afraid you are living in a hypothetical world where reality is determined by labels and policy quotes, not the real world. Illegitimate actions that are violations of human rights are taking place in Scientology and they don’t go away because they don’t have the right label. But I am not going to spend time arguing about this, readers here can make up their own minds.
Robin, It’s somewhat disconcerting to see you making an argument that is not dissimilar to that which has been made by Scientology Inc., essentially, that Fair Game was cancelled because the public use of the LABEL was cancelled.
The *practice* (and also the mind set) of Fair Game can be traced to Hubbard’s writings on those “below 2.0 on the Tone Scale” in the book ‘Science of Survival’, then to his 1955 ‘Manual on Dissemination of Material’, then to his 1959 ‘HCO Manual on Justice’, and onward, in numerous other writings, by him, through the 1960s and the 1970s, including confidential writings of his which were revealed as a result of the 1977 FBI raids.
Even your assertion that the problem was some “over zealous Scientologists,” etc., is an old public relations (attempted) handling.
The reason that the *practice* of Fair Game continued was that L. Ron Hubbard continued it.
If you’re serious about salvaging what there is that is good in Scientology, then you’re going to have to face the reality of its past – that is if you want to be taken seriously.
The point I’m making is that Fair Game is a label not a practice.
It is a noun not a verb as you can see from the above definition.
You have no proof that it was personally condoned by Hubbard since it was cancelled except that others continued to use the label covertly when dealing with critics.
As the Church continues to do.
As many of its critics do as well.
In fact back when I posted on ARS it was a popular past time to attack anyone who wasn’t critical enough about Scientology.
Robin — I suggest you read Guardian Orders Intelligence Principles and Counter Attack Tactics. They were never canceled. They were written after Fair Game was cancelled for PR reasons. They are the basis upon which those programs to cost Tori and Chuck Beatty their jobs were based. Those programs do exactly what is called for in those issues. Anything is justified when dealing with an SP who is seeking to “destroy the church.” Connecting them to child pornography or running campaigns to spread false information to their employers to get them fired is EXACTLY what is called for in those issues. But you are right, those issues do not call for anyone to be labeled “Fair Game.”
Robin,
There is plenty pf proof that the *practice* of Fair Game was not only condoned, but ordered, by Hubbard, and well into the 1970s.
In fact, Hubbard developed an an entire tech for Fair Game. A big part of it can be found in what he called “Scientology Intelligence tech.”
Only the LABEL ‘Fair Game was cancelled, not the PRACTICE.
I’m a truly sorry that you seem unable to understand.
Oh and I forgot to add.
And “shudder them into silence” 😉
BTW Mike who wrote the GOD Intelligence Principles and Counter Attack Tactics.?
Was it the Ol’man or Jane Kember signing on his behalf?
As you know the GO under Kember was not exactly the most on source area of the Org.
I suggest someone publish all GODs which later became OSA NWOs and verify their provenance.
OK, this is the last response on this subject. Those Guardian Orders were written by L. Ron Hubbard.
If I would be still in the church, I would think, great. But my view on things is different now.
You will have as many Ideal Scenes as you will find People.
What Scientology is for me it is not for others.
I somehow like the basic idea of training in Scientology, that the student should study for himself and make his own conclusions.
Scientology is more than just a psychotherapy and more than just a religion. I never considered Scientology to be my religion at all. If I have a religion at all, then it is my unique view of the universe based on my insights, my study and interaction with other people and life in general.
So what is the Ideal Scene for Scientology?
It depends on your purposes, your goals and ambitions.
Some want to use it to help individuals, others want to use it to help whole groups.
It depends on the Gung-Ho project you yourself envision.
I like the idea to have all the original materials of LRH. And translations.
I hope many people will engage in training and many will set up delivery of the workable technologies.
Of course I think group activities are good and important. But at the same time I think we shouldn’t try to enforce some kind of “Scientology Tradition” or start to tell people what a Scientologist should or should not to be like (it is moral and I am not a friend of telling people what they should do to meet my “standards”).
Any single person has his own goals.
Some want to use Scientology to help others. Some want to use it for themselves (i.e. get auditing) only.
Finally I say this:
Scientology, your practice of it, if well applied, will have good results. People will be more natural and thus more ethical (without any outside impingement on them). And you will have dissemination, a steady growth.
Groups and even some organized efforts to make things possible? Yes. Tradition and blind obedience? No!
If your concept is good, start the activity with what you’ve got and see how far you’ll come. People will connect with you when they see it is going into the right direction.
Go exterior to Scientology’s track and review Policy in regard to your own purposes in a new unit of time.
I guess my major reservation about your correspondent’s vision is that it seems to represent a kind of looking backwards, a call for reform through restoration. I personally don’t think that works in this case, because I think the original Hubbardian doctrine (if you will) needs drastic rethinking. I’m no expert, god knows. But my understanding is that many of the organization’s current problems — including the attitude of many of its adherents — can be traced right back to the Commodore himself.
I think that is an astute observation — reverting to the past isnt usually a good way forward.
I believe this listing of the “Ideal Scene” would probably be better received by current members of the church. It might open their eyes or give them a perspective that they may have lost sight of. Those who are no longer in the church, drinking the KoolAid, dont seem to be too enamored with some of these “Ideal Scenes” (self included), but it is an interesting conversation….
The evaluator.,I do not want anyone evalueting for me ever again thank you. I can no longer get into ” if it isnt written, it isnt true” The tech has given me wins, but there are too many outpoints for me with scientology and Lrh.to want to reserect things. I am with you Mike and Marty doing what you can, using what works and leaving the rest behind.
This would have been my view thirty years ago. But since then I have seen the conflicts inherent in Scientology: The Creed vs The Justice Code, The Auditor Code vs Sec Checks, etc. Any Scientology organization is doomed to never reach an ideal scene because of the conflicts in it.
My ideal scene is a world without a greedy – fascistic Church of Scientology, without KSW. Just read LRH nad apply what is true for you, and read others and apply them without being told you are a squirrel.
Just read LRH and apply what is true for you, and read others and apply them without being told you are a squirrel.
I think that is a pretty good summation ST.
Nice piece of fantasy fiction writing. Right up there with J.R.R. Tolkien and J.K. Rowling –
The author might even want to enter The Writers of the Future Contest. This piece IS border line Science Fiction.
>> Tech would be recovered in full back to LRH original writings ….
If your picture of “Scientology new” is as a cult praising a self-proclaimed guru, then go on with KSW #1.
As long as you can´t dump the egocentric content of KSW #1 from the minds there will not be ANY progress and Scn will be stuck on the timetrack. Every REAL science contains contributions from other brilliant minds and therefore is further developed.
And this is the main “Why ?” about Co$. Co$ is stuck in the 70´s, but society went on – and there is little to no interest of todays society to move backwards. Hubbard´s ideas are simply outdated.
LRH researched and developed auditing processes that he didn’t want altered which I feel is the focus of KSW and Technical Degrades. The admin tech is there to run orgs and missions and having been in the Sea Org I can tell you that it is very rarely applied in either. Maybe a watered down version of it. I think that if the public got good auditing and results and the admin tech was used to the good of the public in getting better service we would not see this backlash and hatred of the church and its operations.
We are not going to start the “KSW debate” here that turned into nuttiness on Marty’s blog. Anyone who doesnt think SO members and staff treat policy as something to be applied literally and to the letter has been involved in a different subject than I was involved in. To keep it out of the touchy/emotional subjects all you have to do is observe that the church STILL does not accept Registered Mail as there is a policy that forbids it. But they DO accept FedEx tracked and signed for packages….
🙂
Mike, point well made and received about the literalness with which KSW is applied by SO and staff. Enough said. Gives me the shudders..
Brings tears to my eyes.
If I could flap my arms and fly to the Moon there would be no Space program.
There is the Tech and a Planet to Clear
Of 7 billion inhabitants of Earth 2 billion live in crushing poverty
Something can be done about it.
I don’t see this ideal scene happening but I would add that the billion dollars held by the church would somehow be proportionately returned to those who donated it; that staff would be paid living wages, work 40 hrs/wk or get overtime, and actually get training and auditing; and the SO would fundamentally change the way it is run, getting the same working conditions as staff, with freeloader debts forgiven for every 5 years of service. Now I’m really dreaming ha ha.
After participating or observing for over 40 years, I’ll say this is a “business plan” or form that’s got no chance of succeeding, to wit:
* create a grass roots, do-it-yourself, neighbor-helping-neighbor mental therapy tool
* call it a “science” without allowing long-term third-party testing or observation
* wrap it in a religious cloak for protection
* create a para-military organization to run it with an iron fist
* append an enormous intelligence and legal apparatus to it
* copyright the laws / structure of the mind and secrets of the universe
* commercialize as a hard-core business the fields of philosophy, religion, and the spirit or soul
* make the birthright of knowing one’s mind and mental relief affordable only to the wealthy
* enforce enormous religious contributions and tithing
* allow it to be lorded over by a lifetime-appointed dictator
This is not a set-up that’s got any chance. Failure was baked into its DNA by its creator, I hate to say.
Yes, I’ve had plenty of case gain over the years. Glad to have gotten it. But I’m older and wiser now and can see the Achilles heel(s) clearly now.
Though I do believe in live and let live, I believe this posting misses the most fundamental evaluation of all. That being that Scientology is not a faith, has no role as a faith and it is not a religion. It is simply a technology that helps people be a better whatever they want to be. If Scientology becomes an end in itself and a belief system instead of what it really is, a huge spiritual assist for life, it becomes toxic.That is the story of the so-called Church of Scientology. Once it became a “be and end all” it was game over because it then made decisions and took actions that made its failure assured. Don’t get me wrong, I think Scientology tech is wonderful and LRH a genius despite his obvious faults. I also think everything that is workable about the tech should be preserved. But some serious re-thinking and re-evaluation is required for the modern age.
Thank you Hayden!
I think that taking Scientology to the “religion angle” had some very destructive results. In this modern/technical/scientific age religion is looked at very suspiciously. Especially here in the Middle East with such a long history of religious wars. For me Scientology is a science and that was the reason I was appealed to it. I guess the reason there are all these “charitable” programs like VM, TWTH etc. is to justify Scientology as a religion. The society looks at these charitable activities as a secret way Scientology recruits people. That is because scientologists who participate in such activities are directed to say it is not Scientology, but a secular activity by LRH. Well, let’s admit – it is not true and people don’t buy this. If Scientology could have been accepted as a science it would need no justifications and could be used as technology by many existing charity activities. There are many wealthy charitable activities that could use study tech/drug rehab/assists if it wasn’t associated to a religion, especially a religion with such a bad reputation.
Well, in that sense, much of Hinduism (to take one example) is not a religion, either. The Bhagavad Gita is essentially a tech manual if you look at it from this perspective. It lays out the 12 “limbs” of Yoga and says basically, Pick one and follow it diligently, and you’ll get this result. It’s old tech, but it’s demonstrated a lot of staying power, which may be taken as a kind of validation.
Hayden,
I agree. Back in the early 1980s Apple Computer had a huge jump on the personal computer market. Their product worked! It was flexible. It was doing what other systems only wished they could do. Somewhere along the line though, they decided to limit software access to these system. To overly control who could and could not add to their technology. They gained a cult following and lost out to IBM and other systems within a few years, because these people, opened their system up to other programmers. Gave others an opportunity to add their own create.
Years later Steve Jobs got a second chance. He created some great technology again, iPhone, iPod, iPad, and opened these up to lot of create from other sources. Now Apple is, in many ways, leagues ahead of the competition.
I believe Apple’s history is analogous to Scientology’s. We made ourselves a church. Maybe there were good security reasons for doing this, but it was and is a barrier to marketing the technology. We isolated ourselves and our technology and prohibited anyone from adding to it, in any way. I don’t mean changing it willy nilly, but adding our own viewpoint and identity to it. Making it our own, and using it in ways that made sense to us. We stifled creativity and expansion and made it almost impossible to market it successfully.
We need to rethink structure. What was, didn’t work. It was rigid and stultifying. People have to be the driving force behind expansion, their desires and needs out front, creating the space into which we can expand. Otherwise we just “rebuilding” using the same old blueprints.
And Samsung as well as HTC is beating the crap out of apple as we speak 🙂
I totally agree with Hayden on Scientology being an applied religious philosphy and not a religion.
I like this Ideal Scene but I would like for Scientology to not be a religion but merely a practice. Also I think that the name “Scientology” should be jettisoned as it has too many bad associations. Nomenclature of itself is not important. People put far too much significance on words, which are only symbols. KSW, for example, seems to set many teeth on edge. Why? Probably because it is associated with some experienced abuse or injustice. “Out KSW”….Grrrr…bad reaction. But what if you look at KSW as just the workable way to apply certain techniques? What if you’re trying to talk to someone who keeps chopping your comm, misduplicating what you said, etc? That’s out-KSW for a 2-way comm cycle, right? So, if KSW raises the hackles, call something else, call it peanut butter and jelly if you want, but just do what works! Does knowledge of the ARC triangle work in relationships? Do people respond well and improve when you truly grant them beingness? These things are ancient techniques. Scientology, the name, is new, but its techniques are ancient and have been called many things. I say, call workable techniques for improving conditions in life whatever the hell you want to call them, but do what works, because if you do what works with people you know then “something can be done about it” will flow to others in a natural way, they will feel it, they will like it, they will be interested in spite of themselves. This has nothing to do with force. Well, anyway, I’m rambling rather incoherently but I’ll say again that the Scientology Ideal Scene as I envision it would not be enforced and indeed could never be enforced, and it wouldn’t matter what names would be used for workable techniques to help oneself and one’s fellow man.
Aquamarine,
I don’t think you’re rambling or are incoherent. I agree with your take on things. Let’s put this into perspective. KSW was issued in 1965, 48 years ago! The purpose of KSW as I understood it, was simply keep the tech standard. Do it, as written. That was it. It became more complicated when people kept adding things to it, or taking things away, and there were problems. The results started to suffer.
You want to see an overly controlled environment, go work at McDonald’s. The same recipes have been followed for 60+ years and for one effing good reason – it sells. They have their own version of KSW. So does Apple, Marie Callenders, Starbucks and others. It’s all about maintaining what works and not altering it.
People, over time added a 100 other things to KSW which didn’t apply. This generated a lot of BPC and now KSW itself has a bad taste in many people’s mouths. It’s unfortuante but there you have it.
Good comment Haydn.
Find the courage to face the truth Mike, as many other ex-Scientologists have done: Scientology was a bad (stolen) idea from the start, and will never give anything good to the world.
It is much better for the world that David Miscaviage is running Scientology into the ground than the anyone is making the snake oil look semi-palatable.
This is the sort of arrogant “I know better than you about what you should think and feel” that is so abhorrent in fundamentalist Scientologists, just as it is in fundamentalist Christians/Muslims/Mormons or any other group or religion. It is equally abhorrent in fundamentalist “critics” as you appear to be.
Bravo, well said, Mike. A black or white subject it is not.
Agreed, Mike.
This sounds like doing the same again and awaiting another result !
It postulates a monopoly again and a straight Jacket of who are the elites and what is the right behaviour.
” Scientologists would be flourishing and prospering and allowed freedom over their lives and livelihood”
My God, how arrogant, the COS would allow my Freedoms over my live and livehood. No thanks, I already have those freedoms given to me as being a human being !
I wouldn’t apply for any amnesty. Why should I apply ?
* Class VIIIs and highly trained auditors, active field auditors and big disseminators would be the elite of Scientology, not those who donated large sums.
Not well defined. Fanatics will then disreguard people that would like to donate as they want to exchange. This isn’t bad at all. It’s bad when it’s enforced !
” * Tech would be recovered in full back to LRH original writings and any perversions removed.”
Why again ? The Tech exists in it’s original writing. It hasn’t to be recovered but must be put in full onto the Internet so that anybody can use it, without any control of anybody ! Just the original ! this alone would create a fantastic boom of people applying it without going to church ! Any other Science or Religion have their texts on the internet !
* A Board of Review would be established to fully resolve injustices and for matters of mercy.
neither would I be interested in this as the pendulum would be than on the opposite and everybody nice and friendly and…Don’t want to waste my time talking about all that ! Why should I let myself and my past , my deeds etc…be judged and evaluated by any people ? There is no need for that anymore. If the church would like to do amends on their overts it would cost billions and billions for all the destroyed lifes of young people working for 30 years and being promised paradise ! The COS doesn’t have that much money. So why waste time on that ? This would be a gargantuan task to handle all the ARCxs of the last 50 years !
Those are my critics and on the rest I can agree !
My dream is rather that Dianetics integrates as a Science. I think, this is the time now that all Scientologists work together and apply Scientific standards to it. As it’s a Science and it wouldn’t be any problem per my opinion and boom, the whole world would teach it at universities, as it is a Science and nobobody has then a monopoly !
The work was free, keep it so !
” * Tech would be recovered in full back to LRH original writings and any perversions removed.”
Why again ? The Tech exists in it’s original writing. It hasn’t to be recovered but must be put in full onto the Internet so that anybody can use it, without any control of anybody ! Just the original ! this alone would create a fantastic boom of people applying it without going to church ! Any other Science or Religion have their texts on the internet !
This should be done and could so easily could be. Question is why isn’t it?
The problem isn’t that the tech is undiscovered, it is contradictory. To sort that out it must be recognized as such and exposed for correction. I know this is unlikely but within the fantasy maybe?
Reasons why that’s not done:
– Scientologist could then easely google any LRH references about any Subject and compare it to anything LRH ever said about it, and very fast sort out the different aspects and contradictions and find out for themselves and be sure they know it what LRH said = no hidden data Line, no need to consult a super Class 8 or OT or whatever about Scientology. You can find it out for yourself ! “PURE KNOWLEDGE”
KSW people, indies or in the church wouldn’t like that. They want to be the the experts and know the right quotes (and don’t mention those which says the contrary or something different) in their effort to be the authorities about what is right or wrong = They will be against such a project and want to keep their higher status !
People running blogs, will probably neither endorse such a project as they would loose their audience, as the public would switch over to Scientology Tech and discuss it . Would be for many a great discovery of things they never heard or read from LRH. Just the subject of to run Dianetics before of after the grades would be a very long discussion, as there are different opinions from LRH about it != no real endorsement for such a project by the authorities running blogs or some fear of legal harassment (this doesn’t mean the blogs aren’t worthwhile).
To put all all the Original LRH Books,lectures, Bulletins etc.. onto the Internet, professionally presented and indexed is the ” ULTIMATE SOLUTION” to resolve all current discussions as anybody could find out for himself and google it, and my experience is that people like mostly what LRH has to say techwise !
BUT, if we would form a group with just that purpose we would loose all of our problems instantly !
And who wants to get rid of all his huge problems in an Instant ? This is a horrible situation. No more problems, just huge demands for delivery. My God who wants such a thing ? then we would have to audit all the people asking for it ! No, no I rather choose to continue discussing and thinking !
Did I answer your question ?
I hope Mike will excuse my sarcasm !
It wouldn’t work anyway. The complete works (and even more) of other religions are available in complete cross-indexed format and have been freely available for years. The result: arguments and concordances discussing interpretations of every line with entire religions based on the different sides of the arguments.
I grew up in a fundamentalist church that was “right” and every other church was “wrong” based on the interpretation of a few phrases.
The same thing happened with Christianity as is happening right here and now in Scientology.
It started as a simple grass roots movement and grew…then churches were organized…then the roman catholic church became the RTC of Christianity.
The more control was exerted by the Vatican, the more people pulled back and either began their own protestant church or just simply worshiped God or practiced the workable tenants of Christianity in their own way at home.
I know many people who practice Christianity but who never go to church the same way as us independents practice Scientology but never go to church. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact, I find it easier to get along with people who aren’t under the control of any type of organized religion. They are more real, more laid back, less antagonistic, and more forgiving.
The same goes for the independent field of Scientology. If Dinky Man and the “church” would just stop wasting its time pursuing and worrying about those of us who choose to practice on our own life would be so much more sane and productive for everyone involved.
The Catholic Church doesn’t waste it’s time suing people or chasing them down anymore just because they choose to read the bible at home or just because they hold their own private religious services outside the church. They used to, but it didn’t work out for them after the dark ages.
Scientology has entered its own dark ages complete with witch hunts and everything. But this too shall come to pass :O)
I am pretty sure that even when DM eventually goes down (which he will, probably fairly soon), a new sadist will step up to take his place and continue to run the Sea Org and Scientology as his own personal cult of personal worship. So this article is very unrealistic in that sense. However if by some bizarre twist of fate an intelligent, well meaning and mild mannered person (such as Diana Hubbard) were to find themselves in charge of the whole show, then probably Scientology would slowly wend its way out the darkness towards these goals. Perhaps Scientology will never be broadly accepted but if you were to examine the Scientology religion and find all the good (grades auditing, basic training) and throw away all the bad (harsh ethics, disconnection, lying) then you would have something pretty cool, pretty valuable. In theory it could be done. My ideal scene is DM living in a Bolivian gutter and the new “pope” of Scientology shaking in his boots everytime the name Rathbun or Rinder comes up and wheeling and dealing to avoid following DM into oblivion. Maybe the worst of the abuses could be curbed.
I think any form of hierarchical “church” or organization is doomed to failure. I believe ideas/philosophy/religion must live or die based on their workability and merit in the marketplace of free ideas. I do not believe that the model of rigid organization and “KSW control” will EVER work.
The Missions were the high point of Scn expansion and societal acceptance.
They avoided much/most of the rigid organisation. Never was involved with one
but I gather they couldn’t train people on the levels. So I guess avoided some
“KSW control” [whatever that is exactly and I don’t like the sound of it.] This would
be the place to look for successful actions.
This essay though misses the most important step; looked at here but not
anything near solved.
“* The internet and news around the world would be filled with reports and information about the good works of Scientology organizations, Scientologists at large and its celebrities instead of its current horrific PR scene.[snip]
* Groups “attacking” Scientology would be reckoned with using communication, tech and policy to bring things to a full resolution and the end of any further dissension”
The most important question IMO is how does one get the public to ever look at Scn
again with a halfway open mind? Why expect them to believe anything good said by
anyone about scn? I don’t have a solution, and if there is one it won’t be quick and it won’t be easy.
The Mission Myth is a myth. The big mission holders were by and large a bunch of incredibly self-serving and yet terrific businessmen who were able to get others to work for peanuts for the good of all.
Because they recognized they needed people in the shop in order to make money — in some cases rather substantial money that funded their personal trips to Flag, where they stayed for months at a time, living large, playing bridge all day in between sessions — they made sure the doors were wide open to coming into the mission.
BUT – they weren’t responsible in my opinion for the “golden days” of scientology — they early 70’s. Nor did scientology start to fail because of the Mission Massacre.
I concur with Mike — Marty’s explanation is much more real.
It is my impression that LRH would agree, and had 99% autonomous organizations in mind. Is it not a general consensus that the death knell for the church was sounded by the Mission Massacre?
Carcha — it may be a general consensus, but I am not sure it is true. I think Marty’s have a better take on where the rot came from….
I would have to totally agree on this point. The murder and theft of the missions, along with the desecration of the many experienced and active mission holders, spelled the long term death knell and made it possible for all controls to be brought under one thumb. As well, Missions HAD to produce great results, or go under.
Among other tech changes I would make would be to totally revamp the Comm Course. Such a course, taught as it is now in about 15-16 hours, has as it’s only real purpose the moving on to another course. The wins are too few and too little to really get someone going. In one mission of my experience, Day courses would last a minimum of 2-3 weeks, the Fnd courses up to 6 weeks. The basic system was to create GREAT BULLBAITERS. To do that, the BBs had to be bullbaiting with the purpose of their “pc” getting better, the beginning of the BB’s desire to become a trained auditor. I watched that happen.
I also believe that auditors MUST be paid more than a susttience wage. They are the very foundation of an expanding mission or org. They must also have time off, vacations and all the things which make up an expanding life. If they have children, time to be with those children MUST be a basic.
And getting back to basics, the concept that LRH is the only human being who ever had a solid idea MUST be quashed. He made a LOT of errors. Other people had great ideas, but they got buried because the idea grew that if you didn’t do it exactly as LRH said, even if you got better results, you must be a “squirrel”. Making anyone omniscient will guarantee just what we’ve got now. [As an aside, I remember reading a green on white stating that LRH could no longer be chitted. And I recall thinking “that’s the beginning of the end”. Soon MSH joined those ranks, then Jane Kember, then the whole GO system….etc. Deadly.] NOBODY is right all the time. Operating as if they are just leads downwards. And leaders should have the humbleness to know that they DO make mistakes and welcome correction.
End of rant. Though I have much, much more.
Peter – Thanks for the additional info – I would like to hear more of your take on things. – Carcha.
Well, Windhorse,
I’d agree that Terril has an unrealistic picture of the Missions. The Mission holders were cultists just like the other professional Scientologists – in other words, fanatics for LRH. However, they were LRH fanatics who enjoyed the perks and pleasures of running the primary feeder groups for “up lines” Scientology.
Your comments reminded me of the attitude of Sea Org Orgs and Class 4 Orgs (now called Class 5) back in the early 1970s. The further “up lines” one went, the greater was the hostility for Missions. This hostility finally exploded in 1982/83 when LRH decided to loot and pillage the Missions.
It’s interesting that Miscavige is still the scapegoat for that decision, just as Mary Sue was the scapegoat for the G.O. abuses.
Your comments
Mike, very well said re: hierarchal church/organization. I could not agree with you more. By its very nature, a rigid church which demands full agreement on all its scripture, cannot allow free thought or dissenting points of view, and so enforces thought and behavior with punishment and threats.
LOL !
I think idea of DM as “pope” shouldn’t be used any more considering that the new Pope Francis is highly respectable and what a real Pope and a leader of Scientology or any religion should be like: completely non-materialistic with his sole focus on compassion for the regular people.
Dinky Man is NOT the Pope….neither was Hitler, or Stalin, or Saddam Husein. They were just oppressive dictators. He is more of a dark wizard spreading fear to control Scientology….sort of how Voldemort controlled people in Hogwarts through fear and intimidation.
So why don’t we start referring to him as the Dark Wizard of Scientology from now on. He’ll love it :O)
Personally, I agree with Mike. You can’t have real freedom unless people can be allowed and trusted to think for themselves. Organized religion has always put up walls to keep people in through fear and intimidation. Those same walls work even more effectively in keeping the majority of people out. Just look at any religion today. Most organized religions follow the cycle of action of start, change, stop. Scientology is no different.
It started with an idea that worked and attracted people because it worked…simple.
It changed through constant policy creation to “protect” it from intruders and squirrels.
It is quickly reaching it’s stop due to building those walls (policy) too thick.
Each auditor in the independent field has the ability to run his or her own auditing practice. Each is a separate entity responsible for its own results.
People will flock in droves to the ones who are getting the best results and run from the ones who aren’t delivering standard results.
By creating an “organized” religion, you’ll always have the upper orgs in the hierarchy creating policy to protect themselves from competition from the field auditors, missions and orgs. This is what happened in the corporate “church”. It is obvious that everything the Dinky Man says and does is geared towards pushing more business to FSO and taking business from the orgs and missions.
Field Auditors, Orgs and Missions are the enemy to him because they are taking money out of HIS pocket or at least delaying its arrival into his greedy pointed little fingers. That’s why they are constantly under attack via musical chairs, training, retraining, building, rebuilding, changing locations, fund raising,…etc. All those things slow them down and make expansion nearly impossible. It makes them look inferior to FSO in the eyes of their public, who either wind up doing services at FSO or just blowing off the line altogether.
In other words…let’s keep it independent.
I would visualize the ideal scene more as follows:
Thousands of independent auditors auditing a never ending stream of people up the Bridge unhindered by anything other than their own ability or lack of to apply the tech standardly and get results.
PCs would want to learn how to audit so as to be able to audit their own friends and loved ones up the Bridge.
They would be trained either at an independently owned academy or by read it – drill it – do it and their skills would be honed by the CS working their folders.
There would be a community website where PCs could find independent auditors, CSs, and academies. The site would work similarly to and Angies List for auditors. If an auditor is turning out great results there will be a lot of great PR. If an auditor is getting valid complaints…well it will be tough to screw up cases of people who don’t arrive because of the complaints. Each auditor is responsible for his or her own PR good or bad. If an auditor felt a complaint was undeserved a volunteer review board could gather evidence and decide if the complaint should stand or be removed.
However, none of this should be “governed” by a hierarchical organization.
To me it seams that the entire idea of the Sea Org was the starting point of disaster. Any time you elevate a person or group to higher status than others, make them think they are better than mere mortals and give them ultimate power, disaster lurks.
Prior to the Sea Org, the Scientology movement kind of grew on its own due to results, people having fun, and the pure theta that was generated by all that. The boom in the 70s in my humble opinion was created by the earlier boom in the 50s and 60s. It just never slowed down until the Sea Organization was given ultimate power. That environment breeds the type of filth we see in the Dinky Man….or Dark Wizard or whatever we call the one who shall not be named ;o)
My initial reaction is that it was written by someone who has a very narrow, very Scientological, very non “real world” view of life. I think the author and his/her viewpoint is influenced by living in a community where his/her view of Scientology is never seriously challenged or, if it is, s/he simply leaves the conversation and refuse to listen to the “natter” or bullies others into ending that conversation.
I think the author’s view of a possible Scientological future is uninfluenced by the societal megatrends and technologies that I’m aware of. I think this person wants to “go back to the future” — not make a new future.
I think the author illustrates everything that is wrong with the current fantasy of Scientology and has few clues about what the majority of people who would might consider including Scientology in their future lives would find acceptable or appealing. Even the language they use makes me think they live in a fantasy world. The only things missing are fairies and unicorns.
Just Me
JM — I suspect you are not alone in this view. As I just commented to Roy Macgregor — I think efforts to try to re-create “orgs” are a waste of time. Get the subject as broadly available as possible and let people decide based on applicability and workability. One thing I DO feel is a pervasive problem in the “church” ironically, is “Group Bank Agreement”. That phenomenon is widely apparent within the “group” — do not DARE to ever question the status quo.
Mike, thanks for your response. I certainly see much evidence of Group Bank Agreement alive and well in online communities where Scientologists gather to discuss the subject. It’s amusing, but sad, to watch tacit rules of “acceptable behavior” developing, without anyone ever bothering to take a straw vote on whether the group would be in favor of that “rule.” The rest of the world calls these little power grabs intimidation and bullying. I think I’ll pass on supporting any more Scientology banana republics. Thanks very much for posting and hosting this topic’s discussion.
Always enjoy your intelligent comments JM.
What is the pro-terminal, or the good converse, of the bad bank agreement? (The “antithesis” to bank agreement isn’t correct, but “thesis to which bank agreement is the antithesis” is a bit awkward.) Scientology depends on auditing which depends on about three to four years of study to Class VIII, not dissimilar to a university education, and that in turn depends on a location, and some organization to support internships and later technical support. That is the principal purpose of an organization, as distinguished from an auditor alone. An organization is not about promotion (vis the recent article on PR), but production (of results). In light of the current state of affairs, talk about world-wide promotion and expansion is just a large pile of not-is-ness.
Thank You !
You were able to express my thought that I couldn’t !
This is stated as what the author considers to be the “Ideal Scene”. It’s ok for an ideal scene to sound like a fairy tale. It’s something you gradually work towards. You maybe never reach it, but working towards it would constantly improve the existing scene.
Now if this was being stated as the scene in PT I would be throwing up, out, down, and sideways…LOL.
And…conditions in the corporate church are deteriorating. Nothing is moving even in the direction of an ideal scene the way LRH or any real Scientologist would want it to be. This is proof that the Dinky One isn’t working toward or even trying to achieve any acceptable ideal scene.
Good in theory isn’t it. Of course that kind of ideal scene is desirable. If you have ever had a good solid win with auditing its hard not to want Scientology to succeed and for others to get wins too. This is going to sound negative but I don’t ever see it happening. Scientology wasn’t ever fully accepted even when LRH was here. What will change to provide acceptance?