Hello , I am an ex Scientologist , this blog is primarily about that but I may address other topics as the mood hits me to . I was in Scientology for 25 years and spent about 10,000 hours using the indoctrination and thought reform method "study tech " . I also spent time on staff and met hundreds of Scientologists and did hundreds of the cult practices . Many were the "ethics cycles and OW writeups " that really are an attempt to suppress or remove a person's identity and replace it with a mental pseudo clone of Ron Hubbard . To make a fanatical slave for the cult .

I looked outside the cult for answers in about January 2014 and left the cult in about March of 2014 . While in about 99% of members have no idea of the truth .

We are told we are in a mental therapy or spiritual enhancement or religion or science for helping people unlock potential . Or any of several other fronts that all pretend kind and humanitarian goals .

The truth is Scientology is a terrorist mind control cult and this blog is my attempt to understand and expose that . And try to state as clearly as possible the tools that I have found helpful in dealing with this .

Friday, September 1, 2017

Scientology - Enlightened Gurus And Gullible Dupes

In Scientology watching and criticism there are various people that come and go. Most people that encounter Scientology as adults reject it. Probably over ninety five percent never buy any Scientology books or services despite seeing advertisements or hearing about it. Of those people that try Scientology as adults probably a similar percentage reject it after one purchase and of the ever shrinking sliver of people that stick with Scientology a similar percentage of the remainder reject Scientology within the first few months and then first couple years most similarly reject Scientology.

So, to sum it up less than one it twenty people offered Scientology as adults try it, of that group less than one in twenty get another book, course or auditing service, then of those less than one in twenty stick around in Scientology for six months and of those less than one in twenty stay two years or longer. At some point the hardcore, long-term cult members emerge and take longer to leave or stay until death. Very, very, very few Scientologists stay all the way until death, much fewer than one percent in my opinion.

Now, a particularly unusual tiny subgroup exists. Of the people that spend years in Scientology a tiny sliver emerge and go on to assume a guru status. There have been some who founded or were leaders of different cults or groups in history. I don't know every one or all the groups that had ideas from Dianetics and Scientology.

If you are extremely interested in them it takes a lot of time to find them online. There are plenty.

I am not especially interested in the entire history of that personally. I point it out to reference one more similar type of individual that just keeps popping up, no matter how much anymore may rue the day they encountered them.

Lots of Scientologists have years in which they are hard working and dedicated to Scientology and sincerely believe it can help them and others.

Many of them then at some point become disaffected and reject Scientology and see Hubbard as a dishonorable and dishonest fraud and liar and Scientology technology as less than honest and incorporating covert persuasion, possibly hypnosis and various psychological and rhetorical techniques, depending on what they study and believe and their experiences in Scientology.

They vary greatly from seeing Hubbard's technology as entirely plagiarized and failed ideas on helping people combined with attempts to hypnotize, brainwash or mentally enslave people (like myself) to seeing Scientology as partly helpful but flawed or seeing it as a combination of good and bad methods to seeing it in other terms.

There are a few that are in for years, embrace Scientology wholeheartedly and then leave, reject it and do something very rare and odd. They defend Scientology after saying the technology is a fraud and dishonest effort to control people. They downplay or outright deny the past crimes and abuses by the cult and criticize the critics of Scientology.

A couple have emerged that are at the tip of the spear of this effort. Marty Rathbun and Alanzo lead the way. They both have written a lot of scorching criticism of Scientology as an organization and Ron Hubbard and the technology of Scientology at various times.

They both have reverted to defending Scientology and acting like people have benefited from Scientology and the abuses and crimes are overstated and exaggerated. They both have intentionally or not functioned as defenders of and apologists for the Scientology cult, David Miscavige and Ron Hubbard and the methods of Scientology as well.

They both have a similar enough approach it's worth addressing. They both write in a way that uses passing comments on ideas from authorities on various topics that they don't go into in great depth or explore for extended periods. They both try to point out hypocrisy, character flaws and fallacies used by critics.

They are trying to appear to be experts and supported in their views by authorities. That's a dangerous appeal to authority and also called ethos in classical rhetoric. It just means "I think the same thing as the legitimate authorities in subjects, so both they and I are right and smart, likely to be right about other things too." If you understand that is the impression they want you to get and you don't get it then you understand what they are doing.

In pointing out hypocrisy they are just in my opinion pivoting off the relevant information about the actual crimes and abuses from Scientology and jumping to irrelevant information.

Critics aren't perfect people, and never should claim to be. But if you need perfect character to be allowed to criticize another then no one could ever. It's irrational.

Alanzo and Marty Rathbun try to attain a status as intellectually and morally superior to Scientology critics. But it's fake and a put on on both accounts.

They champion false ideas to defang critics and pretend criticism of Scientology but it is all sophistry to quote Marty Rathbun. Sophistry is logical sounding claims that are dishonest attempts to persuade people. They are crafted to influence but not honest or backed by good reason or sound arguments.

They both act like there is some series of stages in Scientology. They both act like there is a Scientology stage of years then a critic stage then a higher stage where someone is less antagonistic and angry with Scientology that they of course have achieved. They act like they are especially enlightened and wise to be there and others who aren't there are wrong.

It's a sad situation. I was in Scientology for my twenty five years. I am out. I can tell you that Marty Rathbun has asked how gullible someone can be. It's simple: you can be as gullible and stupid as I was to fall for Scientology and to believe it for years and years.

So, when Marty Rathbun or Alanzo or anyone else through quoting academics or philosophers or definitions of esoteric terms tries to pass themselves off as a guru and carry on their  enlightened master act, you can remind them quoting experts or smart sounding people doesn't make you smart or right. You can tell them that no matter where they go or what they do if they were gullible enough to fall for Scientology and to keep believing in Scientology for years and years you are capable of still being wrong and have no claim on being less gullible or foolish than anybody. I did it and I know it.

I certainly hope the critical information I share regarding Scientology is more accurate than the ideas Alanzo and Marty Rathbun share, but I know I am still the same guy that was fooled by Scientology for twenty five years and can still be wrong.

On any survey on how gullible a person can be I always have to answer I am as gullible as possible for a human being, and don't see it as something that will change.

Anyone that reads anything I write is welcome to know I accept any labels regarding gullibility, stupidity or anything regarding this. I also admit barely having a high school level education and the experience of my time in Scientology and then trying to reframe my experience in a more true light through examining the works on cults, psychology, social psychology, rhetoric, logic and related subjects. I can always be wrong and any sources I consult or quote can be wrong too. I admit all that.

I am perfectly capable of accepting the title of gullible dupe and saying yep, that's me. I ain't no wise or enlightened anything, and certainty not outstanding in nobility.

Look at my claims as from a flawed source but as ones you can check on, usually read up about to form your own educated opinion and then reject or accept. Think of me as no smarter or more savvy than you. At best I might have been referred to some relevant books and recall some experiences from Scientology to compare to those references, that might be my only worthwhile information to bring to the conversation, and I can always still be wrong.

 I just wish the same could be said about and especially admitted by the Scientology gurus emerging today. Because in that light I think they fall flat.

Here are some of my own posts on Marty Rathbun from Mockingbird's Nest.
Marty Rathbun Scientology Beliefs
Chris Shelton and Marty Rathbun - Critical Thinkers ?
Marty Rathbun -Later Day Ron Hubbard ?
Jon Atack and Marty Rathbun - the Critical Difference
Marty Rathbun's Mission - Scientology's Useful Idiot

Mockingbird's Greatest Hits
I have reached nearly two hundred posts online and thousands of comments as well. In looking back at all that I realized a very small number of posts have been consistently the most viewed and likely most helpful for people seeking to understand Scientology.

I certainly hope they are helping people. Here I will try to present the short list of the posts that best explain my ideas and can introduce you to information that I hope will help begin beneficial examination of Scientology.

1)Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology

2)Basic Introduction To Hypnosis in Scientology

3)Pissed It's Not Your Fault !!!

4)The Secret Of Scientology Part 1 Control Via Contradiction

5)Burning Down Hell - How Commands Are Hidden, Varied And Repeated To Control You As Hypnotic Implants

6)Why Hubbard Never Claimed OT Feats And The Rock Bottom Basis Of Scientology

7)A Million Years In Hell

8-10)OT III And Beyond: Sources Plagiarized From Part 1, 2 and 3
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

11)Propaganda By Reversal Of Meaning In Scientology

12)Scientology's Parallel In Nature - Malignant Narcissism

13)OT VIII Delusion Fulfilled

14)There Is No Irony In Scientology

15 - 16)Why Lying And Murder Are Justified In Scientology part 1 and 2

Part 1

Part 2

17)Unraveling Scientology - A Missing Vital Ingredient

18)Loving A Lie

19)Two Roads

20)Orders Of Magnitude Part 1

These twenty posts have been both popular and give a very good grounding in many of my ideas on Scientology.

Obviously series on particular issues like the Building The Prison Of The Mind series as an example address specific topics in depth. That serves to equal a book in length over several posts. That example takes on Leon Festinger's essential book A Theory Of Cognitive Dissonance and takes on Scientology in reference to that book. Another series as an example is Pulling Back The Curtain which took on the excellent social psychology text Age Of Propaganda and Scientology.

For fans of social psychology and cognitive dissonance theory I sincerely hope those series are helpful and do justice to the books I consulted. I really recommend those books for education on Scientology and cults.

But this top twenty is meant to give the most essential posts to know what I have to say and who I am. It has my past, detailed information on my observations and hypotheses regarding Scientology and what it is, attempts to dissect it and identify the methods Ron Hubbard used, and ideas on recovery from Scientology.

Monday, July 24, 2017

As The Rathbun Turns

Now that Marty Rathbun has reportedly been sought for a deposition on his finances and relationships regarding Scientology I think it's a good time to gather all my posts on Marty Rathbun in one place.

Tony Ortega reported on Marty Rathbun's latest legal escapades in his blog post


Here's a handy list of links to blog posts from Tony Ortega at the Underground Bunker on Marty Rathbun

He may not be able to lie and con his way out of his current legal troubles. We shall see.

Here are some of my own posts on Marty Rathbun from Mockingbird's Nest.
Marty Rathbun Scientology Beliefs
Chris Shelton and Marty Rathbun - Critical Thinkers ?
Marty Rathbun -Later Day Ron Hubbard ?
Jon Atack and Marty Rathbun - the Critical Difference
Marty Rathbun's Mission - Scientology's Useful Idiot

Monday, July 17, 2017

Getting Into And Out Of Scientology part 1

There's a long list of things that get someone into a cult mindset and often what needs to be addressed is dependent to a large degree on two classes of things at least. You have what has persuaded them and how it persuaded them as one and the other is their individual psychology.

For me as an easy example I made certain assumptions and decisions going into the cult that made me a true believer and a series of actions and decisions that countered or neutralized much of that in coming out. I also discovered the Scientology indoctrination methods weren't at all what I thought they were and could examine the  general categories of thought reform used and the specific techniques on Scientology that fit those categories.

Scientology persuaded me of its effectiveness with the observable phenomena of using study technology to create a series of physiological and mental and emotional reactions which it described and the methods to change or reduce those reactions which it also described, thus framing them as proof the barriers to study existed and the procedures presented alleviated the barriers.

I spent hundreds and hundreds of hours on course so that was the bulk of my conversion process.

The extensive loaded language in Scientology acted as a way to continually give new and more strength to the persuasion of the indoctrination. By thinking in terms that I thought defined reality accurately I in effect validated those terms and strengthened anew the neural networks that held those terms and because Hubbard used Orwellian reversals for Double Think it also involved denial of the truth about the terms and reality of Scientology each time they were thought of thus acting to strengthen habitual unconscious rejection of the truth and acceptance of the lie.

Additionally Hubbard interwove definitions of his terms to overlap endlessly creating the effect that thinking of the tone scale triggers thinking the tone levels are real and that auditing is genuine and present time and the reactive mind and thousands of other things because they all are defined by one another in endless loops.

I at one point got a job requiring rapid communication. I realized thinking in Scientology terms slowed down my communication as I translated everything into Scientology terms before accepting it or if my thoughts into English before saying it. I thought it would not matter if I thought and spoke in English.

By thinking in English and leaving Scientology out of it the persuasion weakened. Over months and years independent and critical thinking began to creep back into existence.

I had in going into Scientology decided that Hubbard could not be influencing people via his words. I twenty five years later saw a show about two people trapped in the mind of a person. Obviously an impossible situation, but it made me realize if a person has enough opportunity for repetition they could possibly by persistence and possibly variation eventually persuade someone. That countered a lowering of my guard from years before.

I also in examining the behavior of others saw the need for individuals to see themselves as responsible for the decisions and actions they make no matter what leaders or beliefs they have as the leader could be wrong or beliefs mistaken. That decision that authority isn't ever to be treated as the ultimate lone decider shook me in a way I didn't understand.

I got a series of nagging doubts that something wasn't right in mu life but I couldn't figure out how. I didn't understand that I was gradually throwing off my habits and thoughts that held the Scientology persuasion in force, so it diminished.

I thought I should examine everything in my life carefully and see if I was doing something wrong or missing something. I knew I had a good job, was married to the woman I wanted to be married to and loved, loved my kids and everything was good with them and I was in good health with conditions generally improving.

But something didn't feel right. I set out to check everything in my life and automatically thought of Scientology and at first thought that could only make things better and then stopped myself. I realized I was not really carefully examining it at all and out of habit assumed it was fine.

I got extremely anxious and didn't like the feeling. I decided to examine it. In the past I had always looked for all the answers regarding Scientology in Scientology. I knew that would not give me anything different. I thought of reading Hubbard's books again but knew that would take me to where I had already been.

I stopped myself and thought of looking outside Scientology and that if it was genuine I could always go back. It wasn't going anywhere.

I looked at several sites and couldn't understand the jokes or even language at ESMB. I ended up reading the posse of lunatics story at Freedom magazine. I realized something had to be terribly wrong in the Sea Org. That led to seeing the Sea Org as a fraud.

I didn't understand how I had the mental, physical and emotional reactions in Scientology. I ended up at the Underground Bunker reading the Scientology Mythbusting series of articles and Never Believe A Hypnotist.

I also read a little about psychology influence and  cognitive dissonance theory and hypnosis.

I figured out that Hubbard's study technology is a fraud and the phenomena described do occur but the barriers don't exist and the phenomena have been reported to be due to study factors when they really correspond to trance phenomena and cognitive dissonance manifestations.

Hubbard used ideas he long knew from hypnosis like the induction methods of contradiction (aka confusion aka paradox), mimicry, repetition-with-variation, vivid imagery, guided imagery, attention fixation and division and age regression. Anything to get the transference aka altitude aka prestige or authority he desired.

I absolutely needed to understand the dope off he described was a hypnotic phenomena as was the feeling of overwhelm and the blank feeling, the washed out feeling, the not there feeling and much more. I had to understand the confusion, reelingness and exasperation he described as well as nervous hysteria are results of cognitive dissonance and the blank is actually the moment of indecision cognitive dissonance inspires- into which Hubbard inserts an idea as a command to be grasped in desperation to resolve the confusion and make a decision.

That's a key element in certain forms of persuasion and hypnosis. The hypnotist decides for the person. A decision, any decision that gets attention off the confusion removes the unpleasant emotions like anxiety aka nervous hysteria that the confusion created.

In Scientology indoctrination lots of confusion occurs as Hubbard contradicts himself and reality and accepted facts very often. So a Scientologist gets confused and believes he has an MU and tries to accept Hubbard's direction to look elsewhere for a word to clear then accepts Hubbard's ideas that the doctrine is correct and the definitions he provides are true.

So by learning that Hubbard framed the indoctrination as study technology when in fact it is cognitive restructuring I undid the mystical manipulation he used. Lifton described mystical manipulation as using predictable and explainable normal phenomena that are falsely presented as miraculous or magical and using the definitions of them to reframe reality and the existence of them and manipulation of them as proof the definitions are genuine. So a cult member thinks that the barriers to study for example exist when they actually don't.

Hubbard's loaded language and mystical manipulation each feed each other. His persuasion triggered what is called trance logic. That's a highly suggestible state in which contradictions are ignored by the conscious mind and denied. It's an age regressed state that is open to magical thinking. It's similar to being a young child and knowing your parents are to be obeyed without question because if you don't understand why they want something you know they are capable of making the best decisions and so obey their authority automatically.

I realized the study technology had created a specific effect: while trying to memorize twenty plus departments in order with their corresponding awareness characteristics on the staff status II course I had stopped doing something. Previously I had some reservations about Scientology.

I had joined staff naively thinking I would find out if Scientology really was what it claimed and if not I would tell the world. I had kept three categories of information. I had my beliefs from before Scientology, I had the thousands of English word definitions I had to clear in Scientology study technology and be prepared to instantly rattle off without hesitation or comm lag to pass a spot check and the hundreds of Scientology terms I had to likewise clear and hundreds of Scientology phrases and mottos as well. It was a lot of work to keep all three categories separate and constantly growing.

It was too much work. So I stopped and let the three groups all merge. I didn't worry about what ideas were mine or English or Hubbard's. I just accepted everything he said and my anxiety and confusion disappeared as I used trance logic and took it all in on his authority.

I had no conscious awareness of contradiction but it was of course present as subconscious content denied by me.

I had to understand all these things and more to throw off the influence of Scientology.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Marty Rathbun's Mission - Scientology's Useful Idiot

Marty Rathbun's betrayal of the people that took him in as one of their own despite his decades of crimes, often against them both as a class and personally, was of course disappointing.

Some truly trusted him and set aside a long and public history of harm and abuse he carried out as a top executive in Scientology. He was given the benefit of every doubt, the second chance he needed by many people without a moment's hesitation.

Hundreds of ex Scientologists had adopted a rule that has even been written and encouraged at ESMB - don't put down ANYONE on a deeply personal basis except for Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige.

Just about any insult or criticism of those two is acceptable, but everyone else is off limits.

Some people were extremely bitter about Marty Rathbun and doubtful but the majority agreed and so in general criticism of Marty Rathbun's conduct was discouraged.

He turned and - as Tony Ortega pointed out in great detail ahead of virtually everyone else - Marty Rathbun defended David Miscavige and attacked Ron Miscavige Sr, David's father.

That coupled with the dropping of the lawsuit by Marty Rathbun's wife against Scientology set speculation wild.

I now believe that Marty Rathbun's mission for Miscavige is at least in part one thing: he is meant to attract as much attention as possible to himself.

David Miscavige somehow has Marty Rathbun acting for his benefit now. How or why I don't precisely know. I have heard rumors like everyone else.

It could be for money or to get the Scientology cult to promise to leave his family alone or Marty Rathbun's desire for attention. Or refusal to accept playing a bit part temporarily in the history of Scientology.

Regardless of his reasons his effect is similar to that of Trump on major media news in the U.S. Trump now gets ninety percent of all that media. All day every day is Trump, Trump, Trump.

Whether Trump is good or bad, smart or stupid every story with few exceptions is about Trump and usually his personality and not new information on his psychology or past or present. Lots of the same thing over and over.

I think an obvious problem whether you love or hate or don't care about Trump is that the news should have a lot of other important stories. Things are certainly happening.

Wars are being fought. I routinely talk to American adults that don't even know the US is at war or bombing seven countries routinely. Or that we dropped over twenty six thousand bombs on those countries last year.

I think the people should know that, and much more. For David Miscavige the example of a polarizing lightning rod that takes all attention off everything else must be a dream come true.
By having Marty Rathbun deliver his dozens of videos over many, many segments and promise to reveal mysteries in later installments I am sure David Miscavige thought this would attract all our attention in the Scientology watching and critical and under the radar communities.

Together there are thousands of us who routinely read the Underground Bunker, watch videos by Chris Shelton and Jeffrey Augustine and read Mike Rinder's blog and read books on Scientology and watch Leah Remini's show.

It's a dedicated and diverse group. David Miscavige wants us neutralized. He doesn't want us comparing and combining notes and stories on the abuses of Scientology, the crimes of Scientology, the lies by Scientology and especially the organization as it operates.

Scientology is compartmentalized. Pieces don't know or understand what other portions know or do. That's ultimately a reflection of the fractured or split mind of its founder Hubbard himself.

It's a practical function too. He wanted a criminal enterprise with the fraud, financial irregularities and criminal activities like espionage and fair game stalking, harassment and terror campaigns hidden from almost everyone in Scientology and certainly from the outside world.

Hubbard's greed led him to try and horde money and power in a way that would be disapproved of by almost everyone and certainly legal authorities in most countries. He set up Scientology to hide it and used a Byzantine labyrinth of Scientology corporate structure to achieve that.

I firmly believe David Miscavige absolutely doesn't want that investigated or discussed or information put out broadly on it.

The US tax exemption is one of the most vulnerable points of Scientology. If it could be threatened by any means that could undo the entire organization.

It relies on the extremely powerful protection it provides from prosecution and numerous lawsuits and the free pass it gives for hundreds of human rights abuses.

I think it's appropriate for Marty Rathbun's statements to be refuted and people that feel betrayed or offended to speak out. Just understand David Miscavige counts that as a win now. If he can stop justice and distract and redirect the efforts of his critics he will rest easy. He will see that as a win.

I don't want Scientology to continue committing crimes, to continue to hurt its critics and own members and to continue to  operate with impunity.

I don't have any authority to tell people who or what to talk about. I don't deserve or even know enough to warrant it. I just want people to consider that if Marty Rathbun is meant to be a distraction or useful idiot for David Miscavige that we don't let him use us too.

We can turn the conversation back to the crimes and secrets of Scientology. And perhaps defeat the idiot and his master some day. Or at least not be fooled into stopping.

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Jon Atack and Marty Rathbun - The Critical Difference

I just finished the Jeffrey Augustine interview of Jon Atack.
Jon Atack has an incredible memory and the ability to coordinate vast amounts of information in a way in which he can pick out connections of which details are relevant and to be precise and thorough.
I want to emphasize something I realized regarding Jon Atack's work and contrast it against his opposite in many respects - Marty Rathbun.
I criticized Marty Rathbun's writing as lacking logical cohesiveness and frankly truthful accuracy a couple years ago and his followers for not being able to be unbiased in their gleeful acceptance of his ideas. Several were more independent and rational in regards to statements on Scientology from others, but threw away objectivity and standards of judgment for Marty Rathbun for some reason.
In sharp contrast we have Jon Atack. I think he is the top expert on the subject I have encountered from both a historical perspective and an understanding of how the technology functions perspective also.
Jon Atack has been incredibly accurate regarding details and to my knowledge not embellished at all.
I realized in looking at the video of Jon Atack's interview in contrast to the unending series by Marty Rathbun that the difference is that Jon Atack uses and encourages critical thinking. I don't mean a vague idea of being cautious.
Sometimes I discuss critical thinking with Scientologists and a few ex Scientologists that defensively proclaim themselves critical thinkers and display no understanding what it is or in their behavior that they practice it.
I am going to put up a small quote to show how it applies and the difference between Marty Rathbun and Jon Atack's work is obvious.
Universal Intellectual Standards
The intellectual standards that are to these elements are used to determine the quality of reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The intellectual standards include:
Could you elaborate?
Could you illustrate what you mean?
Could you give me an example?
How could we check on that?
How could we find out if that is true?
How could we verify or test that?
Could you be more specific?
Could you give me more details?
Could you be more exact?
How does that relate to the problem?
How does that bear on the question?
How does that help us with the issue?
What factors make this difficult?
What are some of the complexities of this question?
What are some of the difficulties we need to deal with?
Do we need to look at this from another perspective?
Do we need to consider another point of view?
Do we need to look at this in other ways?
Does all of this make sense together?
Does your first paragraph fit in with your last one?
Does what you say follow from the evidence?
Is this the most important problem to consider?
Is this the central idea to focus on?
Which of these facts are most important?
Is my thinking justifiable in context?
Am I taking into account the thinking of others?
Is my purpose fair given the situation?
Am I using my concepts in keeping with educated usage, or am I distorting them to get what I want? From
You can see Jon Atack's work has all these standards. Marty Rathbun's work , like Hubbard's before him, is sadly lacking in every one.
I feel many ex Scientologists develop or recover excellent critical thinking skills as part of recovery from Scientology.
I certainly believe Chris Shelton is a superb example of this. Jefferson Hawkins, the Headleys and many others have done this as well.
No one is infallible or perfect but within human limitations is a vast spectrum of competence with Jon Atack at one end and Marty Rathbun way down at the other.
The criticism of Marty Rathbun's latest videos is often that he lacks the intellectual standards of a good critical thinker. And in contrast Jon Atack epitomizes them.
For people trying to understand or especially recover from Scientology the difference is between being helped by Jon or being buried under more bullshit by Marty. And to me it's all the difference in the world.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Scientology a Cult by Design

One of the hardest things to get people to understand is what makes a cult a cult isn't esoteric beliefs about disembodied seventy five million year old ghosts or a fake navy or even the E Meter. What makes a cult is a group that tries to control all or nearly all the decision making of its members. By having such absolute control the cult denies the individuality, value, boundaries, independence and judgment of its members.
Doing this requires violating human rights and setting up an abuser/master and victim/slave relationship between the cult leader and the member. You have to be willing to deny the humanity of another and disregard their value and human rights to have a cult. You have to be willing to falsely pretend infallible authority and unquestionable superior perfection to lead others to get a cult. It requires idealization of a leader and absolute acceptance of the decisions and doctrine set forth.
It does not matter what the doctrine is about, it could be religious, political, business related or just about anything. I have read about political, religious and other cults. Carpet cleaning, exercise, and horse grooming cults. The control and elevated leaders and abuse make the cult. Always the abuse.
Scientology gets high marks in the control and abuse categories. The trail of people utterly ruined is Hubbard's legacy.

Scientology's Secrets - 1 The Self Is Not The Other

 A small percentage of people, some estimates are between one and perhaps four to eight percent depending on the source, are considered to have no empathy and no real love for anyone besides themselves at all.

It's hard to get normal people to understand some people don't care for their parents, spouses, friends or children in any way resembling love or compassion. That's alien to their thinking and their deepest feelings.

If Scientology has taught me anything it is this: everyone is not identical in disposition. Some people are extremely different. When I first encountered Scientology I thought of it in terms of how I would have created it. I thought if I was running a fraud I would have made a good fortune and fled to a nice country that would let me stay there and enjoyed a nice retirement. Or that if I made Scientology and believed sincerely in the technology and claims of results I would have stuck with Scientology and worked on it for life.

I didn't realize other options were available. I didn't realize other kinds of personality existed. I didn't realize the methods to persuade and shape a group that has faith in Scientology persist despite a lack of results due to psychological and social factors.

You can get people in certain environments and circumstances to believe things that aren't true. You can get only one in a few thousand potential recruits to join and if your group is isolated and controls the information the members receive make it look larger and more successful than it really is.

I didn't realize that some people that fool people don't just want money, but they also want to control others as fully as possible for as long as possible and feel powerful from fooling many people. The more people they fool the more they want. It's a ravening hunger for some.

Some people are not sane and also are dishonest within the information they do hold. In other words some are both conmen and mad. I didn't know some people have denial, dissociation and projection as permanent aspects of their identities. I didn't know some people hold such fully developed separate aspects of their fragmented or split minds they make actual identities of complex deception that seem genuine to even them but mask deep hidden identities of opposite character.

I didn't understand that certain people hold contradictory qualities in conflicting selves within one mind. I didn't understand that the required efforts and knowledge to hide fraud, crimes, pathological lying, plagiarism and false research and results could be carried out for decades by a mind that via continuous double think also simultaneously denies these things and presents itself as infallible, successful, honest and moral and fully believes it.

The split mind of the guru was something I wasn't prepared for. It explains the compulsion of Hubbard to keep Scientology going and keep plagiarizing long after any desire to become wealthy enough to retire was achieved. He was addicted to fooling himself and pretending to be a god and messiah and the more people he defrauded and enslaved, the longer he escaped justice and the longer he felt victorious against law enforcement agencies and even governments the more he felt proven better than others, despite a deep, deep feeling of worthlessness and inadequacy. The emptiness inside him could never be filled.

Scientology taught me that people can be fooled because we aren't prepared for certain actions and attitudes we ourselves don't hold. Psychologists sometimes call it reverse projection - a normal person thinking everyone is of similar character and thinking everyone has a conscience, everyone has humility and shame, everyone has consistent character and if they lie knowingly to others they don't deny it to themselves, everyone has self reflection and admits errors and limitations within themselves, everyone has love, compassion and standards of basic human decency. Believing these things in relationships with narcissists and other predators is a fatal error.
The fundamental expression of this error is with Hubbard himself and his cult. He wasn't a normal person and through his cult his predatory instincts are expressed and his contradiction filled mind. Scientology claims to be ethical but is in fact criminal and abusive.

He got individual cult members to mirror his confidence without results, ruthlessness without self reflection and his fanaticism for him without benefit to others. By getting people to one by one embrace blind devotion to him Hubbard built a bandwagon fallacy. It seemed like so many people wouldn't form a consensus without real results, but as they say you can fool some of the people some of the time.

Scientology taught me that when it comes to predators and their deceived followers that become zealots and fanatics the self is not the other.

Sunday, July 2, 2017

Scientology's "Acceptable Truth" on "Messiah" Ron Hubbard

A funny thing is the extreme contrast between the information available outside Scientology and the version of "acceptable truth" (aka lie) you get while IN Scientology.
I was told Heber Jentzsch was in prison in another country due to "religious discrimination" - which is what Scientology calls actual crimes when they are caught. Interesting interpretation.
Of course, even then I could say "when something bad happens to ME I get no compassion and told I had to go effect of my overts and witholds and be out ethics to go PTS to my unhandled PT OWs." So, if he is in prison, why aren't you asking about HIS ethics ?
I discovered something important about Scientology - some Scientologists are more revered than others. Similarly the standards Hubbard set for everyone else didn't apply to him EVEN in Scientology's version of events. Everyone knows he was injured in 1967 and he said it was due to his bravely overcoming the whole track implantation of seventy five million year old dead alien spirits in pioneering OT III .
I foolishly on several occasions asked if he was PTS to be injured and was treated like the lowest scum in the universe for daring to consider that Hubbard could have ever been wrong or less than absolutely perfect in any way. This happened several times when dealing with Sea Org members and other Scientologists.
They really acted like Hubbard was absolutely perfect and all the rules he established for humans and ethics and needs for improvement, overts, etc, didn't apply to him and that unlike everyone else he never had overts or witholds or evil purposes to overcome or even any errors in making decisions ever.
That's why I tell people he was treated like a messiah. He was treated as superior to God by several Scientologists openly. Several expressed a personal belief that long ago either one big thetan or several together created a physical universe or predecessor to it. The big one or group eventually saw it turn into a giant mess with degraded beings and old postulates piled up and like an absentee slumlord the old thetan or thetans abandoned the sum of creation and gave up.
Then as the story goes Hubbard came along and was so pure, so good, so free from evil purposes and acts that he couldn't be degraded down like everyone else and he easily and rapidly overcame the reactive mind and whole track implants everyone else is held back by. In Scientology there is the idea that one goes the effect of overts they commit in this universe. Since Scientologists see Hubbard as overt free they saw him as much better at overcoming the overts others tried to commit against him as implants and that is supposed to be why he was capable of doing what no other being could.
He was seen as a unique savior far superior to even God or gods. That's why I sometimes tell people he was treated as a messiah. It's no exaggeration.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Scientology's Persistent Myths 3 - Sarge's E meter Story

In Scientology history one anecdote has taken on epic proportions of influence. The story Steve "Sarge" Pfauth (who was a caretaker for Hubbard in his final days) reportedly told Lawrence Wright which was described in his book Going Clear of Hubbard allegedly asking him to design a super strong E meter to rid him of his body thetans.

Tony Ortega has an excellent short article posted on this story dated July 11 2016 on his blog The Underground Bunker.

The incident described might have occurred as reported. It's possible.

I am not certain one way or the other. So, as a first point I want to say it is just one story told by one man.

That can be given too much weight in evaluating the meaning of this information. It is not to my satisfaction a well confirmed account.

Second, it is often used to fill in the blanks to complete or prove ideas on Hubbard's mental health and certain ideas on Hubbard's history.

Some people have the idea that Hubbard was more or less relatively sane when he started Dianetics in the late 40s and eventually went completely insane by the 80s or perhaps even earlier over a long slow decline.

That might be true or not. I don't know for sure either way. But it is in my opinion giving far too much value to this one anecdote, unless someone has a lot of other relevant information to support this idea and I have not seen that presented myself.

There are alternative theories on his sanity or deterioration. Some include insanity throughout his adult life, various illnesses like schizophrenia, narcissism, malignant narcissism, paranoia and a variety of others.

I personally like the malignant narcissism idea and the traumatic narcissist model Daniel Shaw created with aspects of Robert Jay Lifton's guru model.

But I just wanted to emphasize that the use of a single anecdote from a single source to make such an important evaluation is problematic in my opinion.

I think a very thorough examination of cult leaders in general and the types of personalities they may have is in order and no quick simple idea will be sufficient for that.

I would recommend watching the available YouTube videos on cults by Margaret Singer and Robert Jay Lifton and Daniel Shaw. Also reading the eight criteria for thought reform by Robert Jay Lifton (from his book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, the eight criteria for thought reform are available free online), True Believer by Eric Hoffer, Traumatic Narcissism by Daniel Shaw, Cults In Our Midst by Margaret Singer and all the Scientology Mythbusting articles at the Underground Bunker by Jon Atack as well as his book Let's Sell These People A Piece Of Blue Sky.

For a more comprehensive examination of cults I would give my highest recommendation to Rick Alan Ross's masterpiece of cult curriculum Cults Inside Out. Also, Take Back Your Life by Janja Lalich and Recovery From Cults and Steve Hassan's Freedom of Mind.

I have to emphasize that in my opinion in looking at cult leaders and their relationships with cult members one is dealing with abnormal psychology, the psychology of very unusual people with extremely unusual and unhealthy relationships with others. Thinking they think, believe, feel and behave as you and I do is in my opinion a fatal error. They don't and as a result their relationships aren't like ours.

To look at the psychology a lot of work can be done and can include the essential book A Theory Of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger, Age of Propaganda and The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout. Certainly a serious look at narcissism and malignant narcissism should be included too.

Scientology's Persistent Myths 2 - Scientology Can't Be Regulated

One thing that is really odd is the fact that a lot of Scientology critics and journalists say "I know everything in Scientology is fake and a fraud, and that it has harmed and deluded a lot of people, but it since it can't possibly be regulated, because people can believe whatever they want and will act on those beliefs. So if David Miscavige is stopped from disconnecting families, I don't care if people get auditing."

That's ridiculous to me in a few ways. It combines several false ideas. Just because people believe in something doesn't mean a behavior has to be legally allowed. There are millions of people that believe slavery is a good idea. In many countries their ideas are illegal as practices. Unfortunately there are probably millions of people that believe sex between adults and children is acceptable or desirable. Just because they believe and desire that doesn't make it legal. I am glad that practice is illegal in many situations and countries, and wish it was illegal in more situations and countries than it already is.

There are other practices like treating women and members of different races or religions as inferior beings that are unfortunately legal in some places but not everywhere that anyone desires.

There are several other beliefs that are regulated in practice and sometimes even outright denied under the law. It happens, people outlaw some behaviors.

With Scientology it would be difficult to enforce but it could be and importantly if say auditing and Scientology indoctrination were outlawed then actions taken with Scientology would be crimes and not able to hide behind the first amendment or legal protection reserved for legitimate business.

That would make a huge difference. Scientology could not require any contracts that support a criminal activity to be honored as such contracts are themselves illegal.

Furthermore a tremendous amount of evidence that auditing and Scientology indoctrination actually can be harmful to mental health while claiming to be a legitimate and scientifically validated therapy exists. There's tremendous evidence the alleged validation of Scientology never occurred and was all lies. That's a fraudulent claim. So, presenting this is false advertising.

Additionally, there have been numerous studies like the Anderson Report that consulted actual experts who time and again found Dianetics and Scientology indoctrination and auditing as dangerous, fraudulent and harmful.

In my opinion the presence of demonstrably false ideas like engrams, reactive mind, basic basic, locks, secondaries, overts, witholds, MUs, and hundreds of other ideas as the foundation of Dianetics and Scientology makes the use of it an activity in which a practitioner is doing things they don't understand in a framework that can't truly exist and is entirely fraudulent. This leads to beliefs that are delusional and the requirement of informed consent is to me impossible to satisfy.

How can an activity that is entirely framed by lies and represented with fraudulent claims be undertaken with informed consent ?

I don't think anyone understands all the harm such an activity can cause, but it has on occasion been significant. And is often noticeable. That's relevant and to me something journalists and Scientology critics should not ignore.

At the very least they should report the strong criticism actual psychologists and psychiatrists have given time and again. Both individual cult experts like Margaret Singer and Robert Jay Lifton and Jolly West, all of whom are experts on psychology or psychiatry, and panels and commissions of inquiry like the Anderson Commission have been extremely critical of Scientology auditing and indoctrination.

That's worth telling people as a fair warning.