Scientologists: Can You Remove The "Cult" From Scientology?

 

 

Scientologists: Can You Remove The "Cult" From Scientology?

From Ask the Scientologist

Posted on October 30, 2010by justbill001

Scientologists keep insisting, “Scientology is not a cult!”  OK then, if that is so, then removing all the cult characteristics from Scientology should bequite simple and certainly very desirable.  After all, if you believe Scientology is not a cult, then you, of all people, would want to remove all possible doubt by eradicating as many cult characteristics as you can.

Of course, this couldn’t be done by the Church of Scientology.  David Miscavige has pushed the church too far into the cult thing to change now, but one would think that the outside Scientologists would want to avoid any and all aspects of cult behavior.

Unless, of course, you think that these cult attributes of Scientology are vital to its basic functionality.  Do you?

No?  Good.  Let’s look at how that could be done.

Most cult experts refer to Robert Lifton’s eight criteria as basic indicators of cult behavior. (Robert Lifton, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China).

Lifton details the following eight characteristics that typify a destructive group environment:

1. Dictating with whom members can communicate

Boy, Scientology really does this one!  You’ve got disconnection, “enemies” lists, suppressive declares, “lower conditions”, “sources of entheta” and many other ways to interfere with and control Scientologists’ communication.  And, yes, this attitude is very much alive in Scientologyoutside of the church.

Scientology says this kind of super-control is “for your own good“.  Oh, really?  In no other endeavor is less information considered good.  The bottom line is that the ostensible leaders of Scientology benefit from this kind of control, not the members.  They don’t trust people to get all the information and make up their own minds.  No, they say, you must be “protected” from other viewpoints and other ideas.

No legitimate philosophy, belief or religion requires this kind of super-control.

Get rid of it all: Disconnection, “enemies” lists, suppressive declares, “sources of entheta” and all other methods of restricting and controlling communication.  Scientology is supposed to be all about “communication”, so remove all the artificial and cult-like barriers to communication.

1. Convincing members they are a chosen people with a higher purpose.

The Scientology version of this is: Scientologists are Homo Novis, more advanced, superior beings who are the “only ones” who can save the universe from the “dwindling spiral”.  Part of the Scientology doctrine is that “Scientologists are better, more ethical, more causative and more intelligent.  They are the top 1% of the top 1%.”

While this may make Scientologists feel puffed up with self-importance, thereal reason for this message is that it makes it easier for the leaders to keep asking for more commitment, more money and more effort from their followers without having to explain why or account for any funds.  Scientology’s professed leaders can suppress any questions or dissent because of this “higher purpose”.

In the real world such statements of superiority are seen, quite correctly, as vain and self-serving.  In the real world, the status of being better can onlybe bestowed by others in acknowledgement of a person’s or group’s good work or high quality results or products.

You’d best shut up about how “superior” Scientologists are.  That’s obvious cult-talk, guys.  It would be an excellent improvement to Scientology’s dogma if that disappeared.

1. Creating an us-versus-them mentality, whereby everything in the group is right and everything outside is wrong.

This attitude is embodied in the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy created by L. Ron Hubbard.  Such a “conspiracy” doesn’t exist.  You are notsurrounded and opposed by the “Enemy”.  You are not engaged in a “Great Battle”.  If you keep thinking like that, you will fail — as Scientology has for so long.  This “conspiracy” exists only to isolate Scientologists from the real world.  It’s a cult thing.

Already I see “Independent Scientology” moving in the direction of more and more us-versus-them, more and more isolation and more and more fear of contact with difficult questions, disagreements and other ideas.

You will never be accepted by society at large if you keep looking at society and non-Scientologists as either the enemy or as too stupid or evil to “see the ‘truth’ of Scientology.”  If you stop fighting your imaginary “enemies”, you might just find the world is filled with some very good people doing very good things.

Drop the us-versus-them rhetoric and belief — it really screams “cult!”

1. Encouraging members to share their innermost secrets and then purge whatever hinders their merging with the group.

In Scientology, whether on course or in session, any Scientologist who “disagrees with Hubbard”, “questions Hubbard”, “has doubts” or “thinks there is a better way” must be, and is, handled until they give up any disagreements, questions, doubts and such.  Woe betide the student who says, “That doesn’t match my experience!”

If the disagreement persists, Scientology’s automatic accusation is that it is the Scientologist’s “out ethics” (meaning evil acts) that is causing the disagreement.  The Scientologist is required to confess all their transgressions to the “Ethics Officer” or auditor until they abandon their doubts and disagreements and fully agree with Hubbard’s words.

The purpose of this is to punish disagreement and doubt.  According to Scientology, the “source” of the disagreement is never Scientology, it is the person’s evil intentions.  The purpose of this bit of cult indoctrination iscontrol, not enlightenment.

Why would any legitimate philosophy, belief or religion require such suppression and punishment for disagreement?  This has got to go.

1. Convincing members that their philosophical belief system is “the absolute truth”.

While early Hubbard was known to have admitted his mistakes and the imperfections of Scientology, his later pronouncements have led true believers to assign Scientology technology a status of absolute perfection.  They now believe that every single piece of Scientology is perfect, “works 100% of the time” and solves every single problem known to man.

And the many, many times Scientology has failed?  Well Scientology has a built-in excuse for that: “It was misapplied!”

This cult attribute allows Scientology to continue to fail, when it does, while continuing to claim “absolute perfection”.  Followers must continue to believe in Scientology’s “perfection” or admit to the crime of “misapplying Scientology”.  It’s a control thing, not an honesty thing.

The Scientology belief system is not perfect.  There are significant flaws.  All you have to do is take an honest, unbiased look.  Honestly review your own experiences and the results of Scientologists in general.

Be honest, admit the failures of Scientology so that any successes might stand a chance of being believed.  Any truth in Scientology, any good results from Scientology, will be proven in the real world, not in rhetoric.

1. Creating an “in” language of buzzwords and group speak which becomes a substitute for critical thinking.

You may have noticed that, from the cult attributes list so far, one of the overreaching themes of cults is isolation.  Scientology’s insistence on its own very unique terminology, and its insistence that these strange terms havenothing to do with concepts from other philosophies and religions, works very well to isolate Scientologists’ thinking and concepts.

This is not for the benefit of members of Scientology.  In truth, Scientology’s terminology does have parallels to concepts from other philosophies and religions.  A minor amount of thought and study proves this to be true.  The more Scientology allows parallels to be drawn and the less Scientology insists on only using its very unique terminology, the better Scientologists will get along with the rest of the world and the better Scientologists will understand universal spiritual concepts.

Scientology must change to take advantage of all the richness there is in the world.  Get rid of this cult isolation technique.

1. Reinterpreting human experience and emotion in terms of the group’s doctrine.

Scientology does this in how it describes the mind.  Scientology’s “Reactive Mind” is, they say, the cause of all sickness, upset, problems and failures.   Further, all difficulties that a person might have, every single one, has its cause in something Hubbard has described and is solved by something Scientology sells.

If a Scientologist feels good or succeeds at something, it is only “because of Scientology”.  If a Scientologist feels bad or fails, it is only because they “misapplied or failed to apply Scientology”.

Nothing in this universe exists in isolation.  To believe, as Scientologists now do, that all good things are due exclusively to Scientology, is ludicrous and very, very cult-like.  Likewise, to believe that all bad emotions or failures are due only to a “failure to apply Scientology” is preposterous, extremely simplistic and, again, a cult thing.

What must be ignored by all Scientologists is that many in world outside of Scientology are happy and living quite well without Scientology.  Quite a few are even doing much better than your average Scientologist.

To take all the complexities of life, all the factors, all the conditions and to reduce it down to just one cause and only one solution is neither logical nor sane.  Cults are like that.  Get rid of this cult attribute.

1. Reinforcing the idea that life within the group is good and worthy, and life outside evil and pointless.

Scientology teaches that the only good being done in the world is being done by Scientology.  Scientology teaches that the only worthwhile activities and goals are Scientology’s activities and goals.  Scientology teaches that allother solutions in the world are worthless and pointless because Scientology has the solutions to everything.

Scientology teaches that life within Scientology is full of happiness and success, but life outside of Scientology is doomed to failure.

As with most of these attributes of a cult, this is designed to isolate members from the rest of the world.  If the rest of the world is grey, pointless and doomed, why have anything to do with it?

Since the rest of the world is not grey, pointless or doomed, and is, in fact, filled with many good people doing many good things, the only purpose of this cult attribute is to further isolate the Scientologist to make them easier to control.

Get rid of this bit of indoctrination, it doesn’t benefit Scientologists, only their purported leaders.

• Summary.

Dear Scientologist, if you are like I was when I was first looking beyond Scientology, you will be shocked and alarmed by the fact that Scientology exhibits all the attributes of a cult.  This cannot be acceptable to you.

This subject is very important to any Scientologist who wants Scientology to go forward into society.  Cults cannot do that.  You may insist that Scientology is not a cult, but unless you remove all the cult attributes from Scientology, it really doesn’t matter what you believe.  In the real world, if it talks like a cult, acts like a cult and controls its members like a cult — it is a cult.

Can you remove the “cult” from Scientology?  In truth, I’m betting Scientologists won’t even try, especially those who aspire to leadership in the “new” Scientology.

The benefits of Scientology retaining all its cult characteristics are to theleaders of the cult, not to its members.  When the supposed leaders of “new” Scientology vehemently support the retention of all these cult attributes, be aware of why they do so.

The "Not Me" Myth: Orwell and the Mind

The "Not Me" Myth: Orwell and the Mind
by Margaret Thaler Singer

Orwell, as others before him such as Defoe, Zamyatin, Huxley and Jack London, wrote about the "negative utopias." These were places in which man's most central capacities for reasoning creatively, scientifically and compassionately were gradually curbed and eventually stifled. Not only in "1984" but in his essay on Politics and the English Language, Orwell emphasized the power of words. Words represent thoughts and without the capability to express those thoughts, people lost access to them.

`Writers before Orwell prophesied centralized governments using torture, drugs and mysterious esoteric techniques as the feared methods by which man might be controlled. Orwell's genius was in sensing that combinations of social and psychological techniques are easier, more effective, and cheaper than the gun-at-the-head method of coercion. Social and psychological persuasion are also less likely to attract attention and thus are unlikely to mobilize opposition early and easily from those being manipulated. Orwell reasoned that if a government could control all media and communication, meanwhile forcing citizens to speak in a politically-controlled jargon, this would blunt independent thinking. If thought could be controlled, then rebellious actions against a regime could be prevented.

As 1984 begins, various totalitarian governments control and censor the media and squelch dissenting individuals. Perhaps more ominously and subtly here and elsewhere in the world, there are mini-versions of Orwell's Big Brother, Newspeak and Thought Police. Since the early 1970's there has been a burgeoning not of governments, but of independent entrepreneurial groups going into the mind manipulation and personality-change business. Myriads of faddist, cultists, quacks and "new age" and "new-movement" groups have emerged using Orwellian mind manipulation techniques. The groups recruit the naive, the unaffiliated, the trusting and the altruistic. They promise intellectual, spiritual and self-actualization utopias whereas the pied pipers of the past promised primarily social and political new worlds. The New Age pied pipers offer pathways to development, enlightenment and egalitarianism. Many later subject their followers to mind-numbing treatments that block thinking and subjugate free will in a context of a strictly enforced hierarchy.

Just as most soldiers believe bullets will hit only others, not themselves, most citizens like to think that their own minds and thought processes are invulnerable. " Other people can be manipulated, but not me," they declare. People like to think that their opinions, values and ideas are inviolate and totally self-regulated. They may admit grudgingly that they are influenced slightly by advertising. Beyond that, they want to preserve a myth in which other persons are weak-minded and easily influenced, but they are strong-minded. People cherish a fantasy that manipulators confront, browbeat and argue people into doing their bidding. They envision Big Brother coming in storm-trooper boots, holding guns to heads and forcing persons to change their beliefs, alter their personalities, and accept new ideologies. Orwell drew on the wisdom of the ages -- most manipulation is subtle and covert. Orwell envisioned the evolution of an insidious, but successful mind and opinion manipulator. He would appear as a smiling, seemingly beneficent Big Brother. But instead of one Big Brother, we see hordes of Big Brothers in the world today.

Orwell's predictions have not totally, and perhaps may never completely occur because of the wondrous properties of the human mind when it remains free to reason. But his ideas serve as warnings of the extent to which people's thinking can be influenced.

The myth of mind invulnerability needs to be examined over and over to prevent Orwell's 1984 world from happening. In just the past half-century, the world has seen numerous examples of the extent to which people can be influenced. A number of these have been California-based phenomena. In the 1930's we saw the Russian purge trials, in the late 1940's the world witnessed the Chinese Thought Reform programs change the beliefs and behavior of the largest nation in the world. The 1950's brought the Korean War in which North Korea's intensive indoctrination of United Nations prisoners of war showed the extent to which captors would go in an attempt to win converts to their political cause. Later in the same decade Cardinal Mindszenty, the head of the Catholic Church in Hungary, and a man of tremendous personal forcefulness, strength of convictions, and faith in God, ended up being so manipulated and processed by his Russian captors that he -- as had the purge trial victims of the 1930's-- both falsely confessed and falsely accused his colleagues. As he later looked back on the manipulation and processing done to him, he wrote in his memoirs, "Without being aware of what was happening, I had become another person." These extremes of social and psychological manipulations of thought and conduct are often disregarded by Americans because the events occurred for away and could be dismissed as merely foreign propaganda, and political acts. The reasoning was based on the "not me myth" -- not in our land could such happen. Then we had to begin looking at certain events that were occurring the California and see that extremes of influence and manipulation were possible here. Charles Manson manipulated a band of middle-class youths into believing his mad versions of "Helter Skelter" and under his influence they carried out multiple vicious murders. Later Patricia Hearst, a kidnap victim, was psychologically and otherwise abused by a rag-tag group of Bay Area revolutionaries. They used Orwellian mind manipulations as well as gun-at-the-head methods to coerce her compliance. Then in 1978, Jim Jones manipulated 912 persons into history's largest mass murder-suicide phenomenon. Since him the world has seen other cult leaders such as David Koresh in Texas, Luc Jouret with followers in Canada, France and Switzerland lead their followers to fiery deaths. Hundreds of other cult leaders have gathered far more followers than Jones by promising new psychological and spiritual utopias. They have succeeded by combining various ages-old psychological and social persuasion techniques in an atmosphere os Madison Avenue soft-sell approaches. Because most of the followers have been youthful or poor, little attention and credence has been given to reports from ex-members, families and friends who report the effects of the techniques of manipulation used by the groups. Representative Leo J. Ryan understood the manipulation phenomena people were describing to him and he lost his life in a Guyanese jungle investigating how Jim Jones "bent minds."

Were George Orwell alive, he might be intrigued with the variety of situations in which mind-bending and thought manipulation techniques are applied today. His genius centered on seeing how language, not physical force would be used to manipulate minds. In fact the growing evidence in the behavioral sciences is that a smiling Big Brother has greater power to influence thought and decision-making that a visibly threatening person. As Orwell's last words in his prophetic book stated: "He loved Big Brother."

Margaret Thaler Singer, Ph.D.

Emeritus Adjunct Professor, Dept. of Psychology
University of California, Berkeley

---

Copyright © 1996, Margaret Thaler Singer

Message To Nation Of Islam Members About Scientology

 

 

 Message to Nation of Islam Members About Scientology

From Ask the Scientologist

Posted on October 17, 2010by justbill001

This post is applicable to anyone who is looking into Dianetics or Scientology.

You are being asked to participate in Dianetics/Scientology services from the Church of Scientology.

That’s fine, nothing wrong with that if that’s your choice.

But you need to be very, very careful.  You are being asked to believe quite a number of things without proof, and there is no reason for you to accept this situation.  You should ask for, and should receive, valid proof before you give the Church of Scientology any of your money.

You may have read Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.  You may have read or heard about L. Ron Hubbard’s description of “Clear”:

A clear, for instance, has complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied. He does mental computations, such as those of chess, for example, which a normal would do in a half an hour, in ten or fifteen seconds. He does not think “vocally” but spontaneously. There are no demon circuits in his mind except those which it might amuse him to set up — and break down again — to care for various approaches to living. He is entirely self-determined. And his creative imagination is high. He can do a swift study of anything within his intellectual capacity, which is inherent, and the study would be the equivalent to him of a year or two of training when he was “normal.” His vigor, persistence and tenacity to life are very much higher than anyone has thought possible.

L. Ron Hubbard
Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health

And you might think that this definition of “Clear” is what the Church of Scientology is promising when they say they are “producing Clears”.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I urge you to check it out for yourself.  Ask to talk to one of these Church of Scientology “Clears”.  Find out what their “complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied” is like in reality.  Can they tell you the name of their second grade teacher?  Can they quote, verbatim, from a book they read last year?

Can this “Clear” do “mental computations, such as those of chess, for example, which a normal would do in a half an hour, in ten or fifteen seconds”?

Check it out for yourself before you give the Church of Scientology any of your hard-earned money.

If you look, I am sure you will find what many ex-Scientologists already know, that not one Church of Scientology “Clear” has the abilities and powers that L. Ron Hubbard promised.  In fact, you will discover that Scientology “Clears” have no special abilities or powers at all.

Look for yourself.

If you participate in any Church of Scientology “auditing” you may experience, as many have, a temporary feeling of euphoria at the end of the session.  No one knows why this happens, but it is always and onlytemporary and does not indicate any permanent “gains”.

Check it out for yourself.  Talk to “Clears” and “OTs”.  Don’t ask them about Scientology, because they will just give you the standard sales spiel.  Ask them what they do for a living.   Are they “industry leaders”?  Are they successful?  Are they still allowed to talk with their family?  Ask them difficult questions.  Press them to answer instead of evade.

Go to the Internet and search for “Scientology”.  No legitimate organization would forbid such an investigation.  The Church of Scientology will tell you that “everything you read on the Internet is a lie” but they will never, ever provide any proof of that.  They want you to trust them on this, but they don’t trust you to make up your own mind.  The Church of Scientology will tell you there is a Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy but they will never provide any proof of that either.

In fact, if you want to really upset a Scientologist, ask for proof of anything they claim — they won’t have any proof at all, but they will get very upset when you ask.  If that doesn’t ring any alarm bells for you, then nothing will.

I am not saying that Scientology does nothing.  For some people, it certainly may help — but it never, ever delivers on any of its big, miraculous promises.

Do what you want, believe what you want, but look for yourself and getactual proof before you give the Church of Scientology any of your money.
–

| Tagged Church of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, Nation of Islam | 21 Comments

Why Doesn’t Scientology Publish Good News About Itself?

Posted on October 10, 2010by justbill001

Here is a question for Church of Scientology members:  Why doesn’t thechurch publish good news about itself?

If you are a True Believer and a member of the Church of Scientology, you will, of course, believe in the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.  And this Conspiracy explains why everyone else doesn’t publish good news about the church…

But why doesn’t the Church of Scientology publish its own “Good News” for the world to admire?

You go to David Miscavige’s Big Events, and you hear about the church’s “solutions” around the world, and you hear about the church’s “expansion” and you stand and applaud, but none of these things appear outside of the church.  The Big Event DVDs are kept under strict lock and key, and the penalties for leaking any of this information are very severe.  No one but Scientologists must see these events, and even they must not record any part of it or take any notes.

Why is every bit of the Church of Scientology’s “good news” secret?  Why doesn’t this “news” get released and reported?  Not only do major media not report anything and not only are all other news outlets silent about this “news” but the Church of Scientology itself doesn’t even report it via press releases.

Don’t you find that quite odd?

We know the Church of Scientology understands press releases because youwill see their press releases appear now and then — but those only contain anecdotal stories about individual Scientologists’ personal opinions and personal experiences.

Never news.  Never facts.  (But you are not supposed to notice that.)

And Scientologists need to be asking why.  Why doesn’t the church issue press releases about all its “good news”?  If there is all that good news, why doesn’t the church tell the world?

The answer is quite obvious and quite simple.  The Chuch of Scientololgyonly issues stories about personal opinions and personal experiences because no one can fact-check those.

The church knows, from past experience, that if they publish any of the claims from Miscavige’s Big Events, people around the world will fact-check everything, and every single lie the church tells will be exposed.

This is not some idle fear, it has happened time and time again: One of Miscavige’s “amazing” claims gets leaked and people around the world visit the locations and contact the people involved — and inevitably find Miscavige has lied.  Again.

And so, knowing that everything he claims will be fact-checked, David Miscavige keeps his events very secret and the church makes no claims at all in any of their press releases.  They know that nothing they claim will withstand careful investigation.

Everything Miscavige claims is a lie.  The proof is in the Church of Scientology’s complete silence.
–

| Tagged David Miscavige, Lies | 8 Comments

Why Doesn’t Scientology Publish Good News About Itself?

 

 

 

Why Doesn’t Scientology Publish Good News About Itself?

From Ask the Scientologist

Posted on October 10, 2010by justbill001

Here is a question for Church of Scientology members:  Why doesn’t thechurch publish good news about itself?

If you are a True Believer and a member of the Church of Scientology, you will, of course, believe in the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.  And this Conspiracy explains why everyone else doesn’t publish good news about the church…

But why doesn’t the Church of Scientology publish its own “Good News” for the world to admire?

You go to David Miscavige’s Big Events, and you hear about the church’s “solutions” around the world, and you hear about the church’s “expansion” and you stand and applaud, but none of these things appear outside of the church.  The Big Event DVDs are kept under strict lock and key, and the penalties for leaking any of this information are very severe.  No one but Scientologists must see these events, and even they must not record any part of it or take any notes.

Why is every bit of the Church of Scientology’s “good news” secret?  Why doesn’t this “news” get released and reported?  Not only do major media not report anything and not only are all other news outlets silent about this “news” but the Church of Scientology itself doesn’t even report it via press releases.

Don’t you find that quite odd?

We know the Church of Scientology understands press releases because youwill see their press releases appear now and then — but those only contain anecdotal stories about individual Scientologists’ personal opinions and personal experiences.

Never news.  Never facts.  (But you are not supposed to notice that.)

And Scientologists need to be asking why.  Why doesn’t the church issue press releases about all its “good news”?  If there is all that good news, why doesn’t the church tell the world?

The answer is quite obvious and quite simple.  The Chuch of Scientololgyonly issues stories about personal opinions and personal experiences because no one can fact-check those.

The church knows, from past experience, that if they publish any of the claims from Miscavige’s Big Events, people around the world will fact-check everything, and every single lie the church tells will be exposed.

This is not some idle fear, it has happened time and time again: One of Miscavige’s “amazing” claims gets leaked and people around the world visit the locations and contact the people involved — and inevitably find Miscavige has lied.  Again.

And so, knowing that everything he claims will be fact-checked, David Miscavige keeps his events very secret and the church makes no claims at all in any of their press releases.  They know that nothing they claim will withstand careful investigation.

Everything Miscavige claims is a lie.  The proof is in the Church of Scientology’s complete silence.