Scientology Building The Prison Of The Mind Part 1 Cognitive Dissonance

In many posts in the year and a half since I left the Scientology cult after twenty five years in I have explored in entries at this blog- hypnosis (Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology, Basic Introduction to Hypnosis in Scientology, The Secret of Scientology part 1 Control via Contradiction,  Burning Down Hell - How commands are hidden , varied and repeated in Scientology to control you as hypnotic implants), the language Hubbard used to influence Scientologists (Propaganda by Reversal of Meaning in Scientology) and Hubbard's twisted mind as the foundation of Scientology even down to the current ideal org program 

(Scientology's parallel in nature - malignant narcissism).

In exploring the subject of social psychology I read the books True Believer by Eric Hoffer, Social Psychology for Dummies, Age of Propaganda (Pulling Back The Curtain part 1-7), and Robert Cialdini's Influence.

But I knew eventually I would have to read certain books to seriously research aspects of Scientology. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger is one of those books. In social psychology you can't run with the big dogs without reading this book. 

In social psychology the idea of cognitive dissonance is perhaps the most researched and influential idea in the entire field.  It might honestly be a hypothesis that needs greater scientific research, but is well worth examining in my opinion.

So now I am reading that book and writing this very post and series of posts on that. I will quote from the book and try to interpret my experience through that information to see if it makes the Scientology experience more understandable.

I will start with some quotes from chapter one An Introduction to the Theory of Dissonance.

First I will replace the word"inconsistency" with a term which has less of a logical connotation, namely, dissonance. I will likewise replace the word "consistency" with a more neutral term, namely, consonance. (Page 2)

The basic hypothesis I wish to state are as follows:

1. The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance.

2. When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person will likely avoid situations and information which would likely increase the dissonance.  (Page 3)

Festinger here explained that he considered inconsistencies ( dissonance ) in beliefs, behaviors or knowledge within a person to be a motivating factor in its own right.

He uses the term cognition to mean any knowledge, opinion, or belief about the environment, about oneself or one's behavior. The fact that Hubbard used the term is interesting and worth comparing to see if he stole it from Festinger or psychology in my opinion. 

Festinger goes on to describe dissonance as being caused by experiencing new events or gaining new information that creates a particular phenomena.

He describes "dissonance" and "consonance" as being relations between pairs of "elements". His use of elements means just pieces of information or knowledge. He describes elements as irrelevant to each other if they don't affect each other. Like if you like ice cream and think Scooby Doo is cool. Neither supports or contradicts the other. 

Now based on other ideas two ideas can be or become relevant. If you had the two irrelevant ideas I just listed and then discovered Scooby Doo fans aren't supposed to like ice cream, that could become a dissonance. 

Relevant elements can support or contradict each other. If they are inconsistent or contradictory, or culture or group standards dictate they don't fit then dissonance occurs. 

This is particularly relevant considering Scientology's value that Hubbard is both always to be taken literally and he is considered to be always correct. Any disagreement with that, no matter how slight, is seen as wrong, always wrapped in Scientology. 

There is a quote that is very notable for its striking similarity to Hubbard's own choice of words.

The reality which impinges on a person will exert pressures in the direction of bringing the appropriate cognitive elements into correspondence with that reality. (Page 11)

Hubbard used "impinge" and "reality" in his methods and may have borrowed ideas from this book in forming his own regarding ARC.

Hubbard may have plagiarized ideas from this very book or earlier studies or papers on cognitive dissonance and altered them significantly to fit his intentions. The terms and some ideas are so similar it seems like it cannot be a coincidence. I now think he discouraged people going to psychs not because they were competition but instead because he plagiarized and warped their ideas. He didn't want his con exposed. 

I am going to use a series of excerpts to show how dissonance can be created. 

1. Dissonance could arise from logical inconsistency...because of cultural mores...because one specific opinion is sometimes included, by definition, in a more general opinion...because of past experience. (Page 14)

All these ideas bear extensive examination in Scientology.

Obviously in Hubbard's doctrine logical inconsistency occurs, he defined terms at different times with contradictory definitions and contradicted his own methods numerous times. His cultural mores strongly contradict mainstream society quite often, particularly for staff and Sea Org members. Certainly the GO and OSA criminal wings qualify.

He included opinions in other statements constantly. He used phrases repetitively which within them have his terms. Those terms contain and link numerous ideas which can contradict mainstream beliefs and accepted science. They also contradict observable evidence quite often.

This particular reoccurring phenomena leads to increasing separation from mainstream beliefs. He intentionally did this to combine the habit of thinking in his ideas via the terms without critical examination and to by repetition have this thinking become conditioned to be habitual and routine. Then through his phrases only agreeing with his statements is left to his victims, with the simulation of free will and choice being provided by having many of his doctrine to "choose" from. But no matter which a victim chooses all demand obedience to Hubbard's unquestionable authority. 

And past experience comes up as experiences from outside the cult environment often contradict the cult ideology while direct observations contradict cult doctrine. Opportunities abound for dissonance.

But quite relevant is another idea:

Remember also that two cognitive elements may be dissonant for a person living in one culture and not for a person living in another, or for a person with one set of experiences and not for a person with another. (Page 15)

That in plain English means two ideas, behaviors, opinions or beliefs can be in contradiction for a person in one group or having a set of life experiences but not for a different person. 

That is crucial to examining Scientology. In Scientology a relationship with Hubbard wherein his authority and wisdom is seen as far superior to all other ideas is a core belief. It is quite similar to the mindset of a young child who unconditionally trusts their parents and knows that even if they don't understand what their parents reasons are for doing or asking for something, the important thing is to obey. Certainly the image of a confused little child endlessly asking "why" and being pleaded with to just listen comes to mind. The child is encouraged to brush aside confusion and dissonance and just obey authority. That is exactly the state of mind Hubbard desired. 

Trolls Are Fucking Assholes

 

 





I may seem very late to the game on this, so bear with me.

I recently saw an excellent YouTube video in which a young woman made several comments on criticisms women routinely receive. I will paraphrase and say she pointed out how if a woman has a child while young she is criticized for not being able to support it, if she waits til she is old she is criticized for waiting, if she has sex she is called a slut, if she doesn't she is called stuck up, if she has a career she is told she should have a baby.


No matter what she does she is fair game for ruthless, hateful criticism. I got what she was saying and articles I have seen on the double bind women experience in certain cults resonated. Women in some cults and religions unfortunately are treated as impure and blamed for having sex and if they don't have sex blamed for failing to do their duty to God. They have no morally acceptable options.

When I was a kid one day I cleared the dishes from the table and put them in the kitchen sink. I was scolded for failing to put the dishes on the floor for the dog to lick clean. So the next day I put the dishes on the floor and someone stepped on and broke a dish. Naturally I was scolded. I said "It doesn't matter what I do, I am automatically wrong and that's the game."

I have written posts with no quotes or sources referred to. And been told that without sources I shouldn't make claims. I have written articles with extensive quotes and supporting information, and been accused of cut and pasting. I have written brief articles and been accused of not supporting my claims. I have written long articles with lots of supporting evidence and been accused of being verbose.

Okay, I have read and could quote several articles on internet trolls. I have repeatedly told people who complain bitterly repeatedly that they choose what to read and choose to read posts by an author they know they don't like, but put all the responsibility for their choices on someone else.

Several authors have written extensive articles calling trolls sociopaths and narcissists. I won't go so as far as to say every troll is a bona fide narcissist or sociopath every second of their lives from birth until death.

But I will say the double bind the woman pointed out and the issue with trolls comes down to the same thing: one person thinks they are superior to another. In the cults it is in the doctrine and subjugates a gender. By any individual who follows the doctrine.

Trolls while they are trolling are exhibiting narcissistic and/or sociopathic behavior. They are over long distance acting as gutless cowards, asserting a false superiority entirely to deny their own feelings of inadequacy, impotence and worthlessness, if narcissistic. If sociopathic they are without compassion and see infuriating others as a game, since they have no interest or success at forming bonds of attachment through empathy. The sociopath has no consideration for fairness, human decency or compassion.

An interesting phenomena is observable online. I will give an example from my own limited experience. About a year and a half ago I left the Scientology cult in about March 2014 and was posting at ESMB ( the Ex Scientologist Message Board ), a site for ex Scientologists.

At first a large very friendly welcome occurred. For about a month or two the general tone was very friendly. Great.

Then I started writing extensive posts describing Hubbard's methods in fine details. Particularly Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology, Propaganda by Reversal of Meaning in Scientology, Basic Introduction to Hypnosis in Scientology, The secret of Scientology part 1 control via contradiction, Burning Down Hell - How commands are hidden , varied and repeated in Scientology to control you as hypnotic implants, Why Hubbard never claimed OT feats and the rock bottom basis of Scientology, OT III and beyond sources plagiarized from parts 1, 2, and 3,  Scientology's parallel in nature - malignant narcissism, There is no irony in Scientology,  and the Pulling Back The Curtain series.

For anyone who wants to know my positions regarding Scientology the above posts would be a good starting point.

So, I started posting many of the above and getting various reactions. Among them were undoubtedly at least several dozen people thanking me through either ESMB or the Underground Bunker or Facebook or my blog.

Now I have no delusion of immense fame or importance. I know perhaps a few hundred people have heard of Mockingbird or Mockingbird's Nest. I know several critics of Scientology I credit both with helping me to escape Scientology and to help thousands of others to either escape, recover or avoid the cult's influence. I include Arnie Lerma, Jon Atack, Tory "Magoo" Christman, Gerry Armstrong, and Tony Ortega in this group. 

But many people at ESMB have borne witness to others stating gratitude for my work. So the very same people who claimed to want people to recover from Scientology  and who saw others claim my posts helped them have sometimes acted oddly. Certainly only a very, very small few but worth addressing.

They first welcome me and act like recovery is important. Okay. Second they see me writing posts to dissect Scientology. All right. Then they see exes thank me, and some express extreme gratitude and claim the posts really help their recovery.  All fine.

Then if they don't like me or some of my posts or writing style the same people ruthlessly criticize me and my posts,  necessitating denial of the awareness of claims by others that my posts helped them. Since those claims don't support criticizing me and pretending to support recovery from Scientology. They have to not just deny my ideas, but also deny the dozens of claims, at this point perhaps hundreds of thanks and likes for my posts and tens of thousands of views my posts have garnered from others. 

They have to use strawman arguments, distort and misrepresent my claims , say I said statements I never actually did, and grossly use false equivalencies. Particularly ones that have a conclusion that cannot be proven nor disproven.

Among my favorites is the claim that OSA has paid attention to me and may now means I think I am important enough to warrant OSA attention. I didn't claim to be important, I know OSA has in the past run an operation against me, my importance is irrelevant. It was their choice, not mine. 

But the bottom line comes down to this: trolls are a special kind of gutless coward and hypocrite. They deny the fundamental equality of those they victimize over long distances. Safely hidden far away behind a computer, sometimes in a different country and certain they will never have to even stand before their victims. If they claim with no provocation or justification that their victim "thinks he's so"  important or smart they are projecting their own inadequacies, their own frustrations at their impotent rage if narcissistic or merely trying to tear someone down callously for twisted kicks if sociopathic, or perhaps a combination. 

Martha Stout studied sociopaths for decades and wrote the excellent book I recommend to all exes, The Sociopath Next Door. She claimed we have a sixth sense of intuition and a seventh of a conscience. And that Sociopaths either lack or neglect empathy, the heart of conscience. To her sociopaths are a sort of lower level of human. They are defective and inferior. I don't know if I would quite put it that way, but lacking a conscience and empathy is a profound deficiency. It is not an improvement.

I don't really get bothered knowing these wretched souls waste their lives bothering me, I am fortunate enough that many people have been and are now very kind and loving in my life to bolster me against such hollow efforts. I am a very lucky man. Additionally I have had so many kind and encouraging words from many people online and so will not cease writing and am comforted by knowing my meager talents have provided some real help to some very worthwhile people. 

I am just perturbed at times in knowing the trolls can confuse and discourage others I seek to reach. But the trolls in their hypocritical cowardice entirely deny their culpability in disrupting threads. That's why I consider them contemptible fucking assholes. And will treat them as such. 

What Is Scientology ?

What Is Scientology?
 Posted by Bobby online

In the late 1940s, pulp writer L. Ron Hubbard declared: "Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion" Reader's Digest reprint, May 1980, p.1 Hubbard later created the Church of Scientology...

---

Based on a text by ex-Scientologist Roland Rashleigh-Berry. Roland wrote:"This is my personal opinion. I grant permission to anyone to reproduce this material. This description has been tailored to people who have never been Scientologists and seek a simple and short explanation as to what it is and why it is surrounded by controversy."

---

In a Nutshell

The Church of Scientology is a vicious and dangerous cult that masquerades as a religion. Its purpose is to make money. It practices a variety of mind-control techniques on people lured into its midst to gain control over their money and their lives. Its aim is to take from them every penny that they have and can ever borrow and to also enslave them to further its wicked ends.It was started in the 1950s by a science fiction writer named L. Ron Hubbard in fulfilment to his declared aim to start a religion to make money. It is an offshoot to a method of psychotherapy he concocted from various sources which he named "Dianetics". Dianetics is a form of regression therapy. It was then further expanded to appear more like a religion in order to enjoy tax benefits. He called it "Scientology".
Scientology is a confused concoction of crackpot, dangerously applied psychotherapy, oversimplified, idiotic and inapplicable rules and ideas and science-fiction drivel that is presented to its members (at the "advanced" levels) as profound spiritual truth.

The Harm it Does to a Person

The results of applying their crackpot psychotherapy (called "auditing") is to weaken the mind. The mind goes from a rational state to an irrational one as the delusional contents of the subconscious mind are brought to the surface and are assumed to be valid. It also makes a person more susceptible to suggestion since it submerges the critical thinking faculties of the mind into a partial subconscious state. It results in a permanent light hypnotic trance and so from thenceforth that person can be more easily controlled. The person will, to a much greater extent, believe and do whatever they are told. And of course this is used to the full in persuading them to hand over further money and dedicating themselves further to the cult.The results of applying their oversimplified and inapplicable rules in life is to lose the ability to think rationally and logically. A person loses the ability to think for themselves and so they lose the ability to challenge incorrect ideas. This makes them easier to control. It also isolates and alienates the person from society so that they withdraw from normal society and into their "Scientology" society. This further increases their susceptibility to the influence of their group. They end up being afraid of society, believing all society to be controlled by a group of drug companies, psychiatrists and financiers all of whom report to more remote masters. In other words they are in a state of mass paranoia. They therefore avoid reading newspapers and the like since they fear it will disturb their safe Scientology world. It is a downward spiral into madness.
The science fiction content of Scientology is revealed to them after they have reached the state they call "Clear", meaning freed from the aberrations of the mind. However, perhaps "brainwashed" would be a more applicable word to describe the mental state of someone who has survived the near entire delusional contents of their subconscious mind brought to the surface and presented to them as "truth". On the "advanced" levels (called OT levels) above the state of "Clear" they encounter the story of Xenu. Xenu was supposed to have gathered up all the overpopulation in this sector of the galaxy, brought them to Earth and then exterminated them using hydrogen bombs. The souls of these murdered people are then supposed to infest the body of everyone. They are called "body thetans". On the advanced levels of Scientology a person "audits out" these body thetans telepathically by getting them to re-experience their being exterminated by hydrogen bombs. So people on these levels assume all their bad thoughts and faulty memories are due to these body thetans infesting every part of their body and influencing them mentally. Many Scientologists go raving mad at this point if they have not done so already.

The "Ethics" Trap

On the surface the Church of Scientology seems reasonable. The insane content of it is only revealed to a person when the early stuff has done its work and made them more susceptible. After a short while a person "believes" that Scientology is doing them good. They are then persuaded to help their new-found group further by donating money and/or working for the organisation for almost no money. Many people do exactly that."Ethics" is used to good effect to trap a person. A person’s natural tendency to do good is worked upon. Yes - they want to be more ethical, but what is ethical? This is where a clever trick is pulled! "Ethics" is redefined by Scientology in such a way that to be ethical is to be a better Scientologist and obey the "church". Young people, not yet made cynical through the machinations of life and politics, are very keen to contribute to the world and to be ethical. So the "ethics" trick works easily into persuading them to join the "church". Many of them join an elite group called the "Sea Org" where they become brainwashed slaves. There they work a hundred hour week for almost no pay. There they are subject to every cruel whim of their masters. It is a living hell that they endure because of the conditioning they have received and this now perverted sense of ethics that they have accepted. The "Sea Org" is the ultimate in brainwashed slavery. They are expected to work harder and harder to achieve ever higher targets of production. If they fail to meet their targets there are various penalties. One of them is to be put onto a diet of beans and rice and to miss sleep. Another is to be sentenced to a period on the RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force). This is the equivalent to "hard labour". Such is the extent of their brainwashing that they actually write "success stories" when they complete their sentences.

Brainwashing Bites Back

There is no doubt at all that L. Ron Hubbard incorporated brainwashing techniques into Scientology to put people under his control. He even wrote a "brainwashing manual" which is still in existence today. However there was a cruel twist in his scheme. He fell victim of it himself. In creating his devoted slaves, the Sea Org, he created an audience that believed every word he said. Now L. Ron Hubbard had an over-active imagination plus delusions of grandeur. The negative feedback he would obtain by being part of normal society was replaced by the positive feedback from his devoted followers. Through this his imagination got the better of him and combined with his delusions of grandeur, his thinking became increasingly bizarre which, on acceptance, led on to more bizarre thinking and the idea that he and Scientology had the job of saving the entire universe He wanted to take over the world in order to further Scientology’s aims to save the universe and so branches of Scientology were set up to try to influence governments and gain positions where they could influence to world to a high degree. So what started out as a mass confidence trick backed up with brainwashing became a monstrous and insane organisation with fantastic, fanatical ideals. Because of this change, the Church of Scientology survived the death of their founder. It is like a runaway monster machine that tramples on society and peoples lives that is very difficult to stop.

Stop the Monster

The whole machinery called the "Church of Scientology" needs to be jammed somehow so that more people do not get sucked in and the people already in it have a chance to get out. We must not forget the people already in this "church". Although they are the ones perpetrating this crime they are also the victims. They need our help as well.And here we come to the "War on the Internet".

The War on the Internet

The "War on the Internet" is the war between the Church of Scientology and Internet users who copy their documents and post them on the Internet.The people who are copying their material and webbing it are using the huge accessibility of the world-wide web to get information out to people to warn them of the insanity and danger of this cult. They are doing it for the public good. The hope is that if they can get this information out to the public and make it broadly known then people will be forewarned and will not join the cult. If they can starve the cult of new members in this way then the whole organisation may collapse and then the existing members can be helped to return to society. But of course the people within the cult believe only their own founders interpretation of things so they use every means they can to stop this. Usually the method they use is harassment through lengthy and expensive legal processes. Sometimes it is physical harassment. Sometimes worse!
The people who post and host the copyrighted and confidential works of Scientology are risking themselves to help warn the public about the dangers of Scientology. They have a strong sense of public duty and care for their fellow men. They are breaking copyright laws it is true but they are acting out of conscience and out of high human ideals. As they get broken down by legal or physical harassment more rise to take their place.
I hope this short piece of mine is a befitting and deserving introduction to these people, the "Warriors of the Internet".

In an article to alt.religion.scientology 6. September 1998, parkerbp@webtv.net wrote: Here's a short summary of my experience with $cientology. Staff was very friendly with me as a student and pc, as long as I kept forking over the dough for services and "fund raisers." I joined staff at an org and the attitude of other staff toward me got a little less than friendly. I joined the Sea Org and put up with alot of crap from staff and LRH's policy because I thought I was helping myself and my fellow man. I found out I was helping no one and hurting myself. I got out I began surfing the net and found many of my doubts and suspicions about the CO$ were very well founded. I had been lied to and deceived by the CO$ in order to gain my trust, my money, my loyalty, and dedication to a lost and evil cause. Now I am dedicated to voice my experiences and opinions of the cult of $cientology. Bobby

Enduring The Unendurable

At the end of World War II Japanese Emperor Hirohito used the phrase "enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable" to describe the sacrifice of honor the Japanese people had to face in surrendering to the Allies. Certainly not an easy idea to sell, but he had a very good argument to persuade his subjects. 
"Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization." He gave both quotes in his first and only radio address of the Japanese people. They were in danger of extermination in his estimation unless they did something entirely unacceptable.

They surrendered and have lived on. Today they have a country likely to endure as long as the current balance of power persists. China would love to acquire Japan but the United States has devoted billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars in resources to preventing just that. Supercarriers with enough bombing capabilities to kill millions have been created expressly for that purpose. But the point isn't an in depth analysis of the minutiae of Japan's vulnerability as a sovereign state. Hirohito knew Japan couldn't win the war and millions more would die horribly if the war continued.

He had to make Japan face the perceived dishonor accompanying failure and surrender despite that act being considered entirely unacceptable.

Many Japanese reportedly were taught their destiny was to win and their superiority would be proven out by defeating their inferior opponents. Losing the war meant the whole basis of their justification for the war was exposed as a lie.  

This brings up an issue some Scientologists and ex Scientologists must face. In cognitive dissonance theory the
situation of having two contradictory pieces of information that are equally trusted but in direct conflict as being mutually exclusive is seen as creating mental discomfort. It is confusion, exasperation, anxiety, reelingness, mental blankness, and hesitation. It is very uncomfortable and people usually avoid dissonance as much as possible. 

Usually if they have no other way to resolve the dissonance a person will pick whichever choice is least threatening to their ego or supports their ego the most. So for the Japanese people the idea that they were superior and honorable and that demanded victory to show it as true . But they had to surrender, but had to somehow still have honor despite losing their claim of honor. Tough situation. 

I don't know how the Japanese people of the forties and fifties dealt with this. If they had a choice that somehow defended their individual egos I assume they chose that. 

When an individual Scientologist leaves or considers leaving Scientology they have often a terrible dilemma. They believe they are a good person. Most people want to be good. Many estimates from psychologists claim between ninety and ninety nine percent of people are good, or at least not naturally evil. Conservative estimates place about two to four percent of people as lacking conscience. That leaves ninety six to ninety eight percent of people as seeking to be good. 

So naturally a Scientologist sees themself as good and all the actions they do for Scientology as justified. Doubting Scientology and Hubbard and the authenticity of the technology bears a terrible burden: if Scientology is false and of no benefit and actually harmful then a person's entire identity can be flipped from good to harmful. A long term Scientologist who ruthlessly pursued Scientology and sacrificed their values to forward Scientology or join staff or the Sea Org routinely puts down other people and has entirely warped values with misplaced priorities.

Like the Japanese in world war 2 a Scientologist leaving or doubting when they get contradictory evidence follows the pattern usually of choosing the option that protects their ego. Often that means ignoring the information to protect your identity as an elite, good, Scientologist.

Sometimes, a person doesn't ignore the uncomfortable dissonance inspiring information and makes themself look closely at it and makes themself actually examine it. Scientologists after years of indoctrination have received thousands of suggestions for automatically counterarguing ( internally mentally brushing aside the information that contradicts Scientology ) and have hundreds of triggers set to activate counterarguing in the form of loaded language and thought stopping cliches. 

If the Scientologist overcomes the suggestions, loaded language and phrases set to trigger automatic responses and examines evidence against Scientology and doesn't automatically counterargue they have another enormous hurdle to overcome, especially if they were in the cult for many years. They can realize Scientology is a thought reform cult that abuses, harms and mentally enslaves people.

But facing that can carry the uncomfortable reality in one's own opinion ( whether it is true or not ) that a person has done far more evil than good. In fact they can get the impression that they have done so much harm, inflicted so much trauma, been cruel and narcissistic and abusive to such a great degree that it cannot be undone or made amends for. 

It could be seen as having lost honor or accepted having done irredeemable evil in some belief systems. A person, wanting to be good and feeling good is who they yearn to be can feel like they will try to learn how to be and strive toward being a decent person with their remaining life, despite being unable to overcome the immensity of the evil they have done. It is like having a ledger that measures good and evil in one's life and knowing no matter what you do going forward you will die with a deficit. If you live another fifty years and are an exemplary citizen and kind and caring it won't overcome having committed the evil you have done, overcoming it is an impossible task. 

That opinion, which I can neither confirm nor deny as proper for anyone else, is one a Scientologist can be willing to do anything to avoid. That can be staying in Scientology, or becoming an independent Scientologist or freezoner. Anything other than letting their guard and accepting the unacceptable. 

I really am the person I am. Any harm I have done or evil or trauma I have inflicted is real and not going to be justified by Scientology. In examining hypnotism and social psychology I have gotten the distinct impression that harmful mental, emotional and physical acts can have lasting impact through trauma throughout a person's entire life. That unfortunately is something inflicted on people all too often . I certainly have done so before and after entering the Scientology cult. 

There may be no way that wrongs can be righted, some burdens must be uncomfortably borne, some obligations unpaid. Honestly, with regret if unfulfilled. If that diminishes honor it is at least honest if unbearable. 

I accept regretting evil, even being seen as abhorrently irredeemable if that means being truthful and trying to strive for humility and decency with the life I have left, even if they are unattainable goals. 

Ambassadors Of Misinformation

I wanted to expose an unfortunate and unintended group of people that I have seen quite often give incorrect, incomplete and sometimes outright false information about Dianetics, Scientology and Ron Hubbard: ex Scientologists and critics.

I know your first impulse if you are an ex or critic may be to be defensive and start counterarguing ( thinking internally of reasons to not listen to me ). That is a natural reaction, but cuts off any ability to critically analyze what I am about to say. So please hear me out, and don't just look for reasons to not listen.

The Scientology cult despite claiming tens of millions of members has perhaps tens of thousands worldwide. And perhaps seven thousand or so are largely isolated from mainstream society as staff and Sea Org members.

So if you are a critic or ex you are often to the world an ambassador or expert on Scientology, whether qualified or not. Like it or not.

Now, I have found most people try to honestly explain Scientology, but often unknowingly are forwarding inaccuracies, even the information Hubbard himself had put out. So they serve unintentionally to forward the cult even while opposing it.

I recently saw an excellent interview with an ex who described touch assists as faith healing. It would have been more accurate in my opinion if he had studied the actual origins of Scientology and known Hubbard read and recommended the book Hypnotism Comes of Age which described Mesmer's research on hypnotism and the exact same actions and commands in the assists are Mesmer's hypnotic commands. So the truth that Hubbard plagiarized and incorporated thousands of hypnotic techniques is not expressed.

So there two fundamental lies are repeated. The lie that Dianetics and Scientology are not hypnotic. They most certainly are. And the lie that Hubbard didn't plagiarize Dianetics and Scientology. He certainly did. The work of Arnie Lerma and Jon Atack exposes this and I myself believe Hubbard used a foundation with Crowley's occult practices and Hitler's Nazism along with hundreds of hypnotic practices and a foundation of projecting Hubbard's crimes onto anyone who does or could expose his crimes, with an accompanying facade of pathological lying claiming Hubbard was infallible and Godlike, really uniquely superior, even above God. When in fact he always knew he was running a con.

Additionally Hubbard loved the propaganda techniques of reversals of meaning and loaded language. He used new false terms to constrict thinking and allow only his false reality. He called his mentally enslaving indoctrination that through cognitive restructuring (reshaping what and how people think) obliterates the capacity for independent, critical, linear, rational and analytical thinking study technology - when it destroys your actual ability to study. He calls adding hypnotic commands auditing and adding a hypnotic identity clearing, acting like it removes content when in fact it adds it. He has a poisoning program he calls purification. It goes on and on , he calls permanent slavery total freedom. He habitually did this knowing it confused his victims, making them more suggestible in a very difficult to detect manner. Many are rendered utterly confused by this, even decades after leaving the cult.

Frequently  after leaving exes and critics say "Hubbard believed" when "Hubbard said" would be far more accurate. Hubbard pathologically lied, so saying he believed what he said is problematic at best. Don't assume he believed any of Dianetics or Scientology, that's what got Scientologists in trouble in the first place. That is a very frequent error in my opinion.

Another error in my opinion is claiming Hubbard found a basic helpful therapy, but the organization is cultic in other areas. Well, it misleads people and doesn't critically analyze who Hubbard was, what he did and why he chose to plagiarize the methods he did. Starting with Dianetics he plagiarized failed abreactive therapy aka catharsis therapy which Freud and others researched. They found it didn't help patients but did create tremendous dependence on the therapist through a hypnotic method. It made the patients highly suggestible and vulnerable to manipulation by the therapist.

So Hubbard had practiced hypnotism for over a decade before plagiarizing Dianetics from earlier abandoned harmful practices. Some already had the term engram, the concepts of earlier similar incidents, chains of incidents and so on. It was all old hat, and selected to seem like a scientific therapy, while really being a delivery mechanism for hypnosis and covertly repackaged Nazism, or at least a Nazism knock off.

Sometimes people say the therapy works, without understanding a couple of  important ideas. First off hypnotic trances can feel pleasant, so Scientologists think they got gains, but a temporary trance isn't real improvement in my opinion. Second, a false relationship can feel authentic if you don't understand you are being lied to and exploited. In abusive relationships there is often a seduction phase in which an abuser lies about themself and promises a false future, they cannot and do not intend to deliver.

Cults are abusive relationships spread out over groups and mirror them perfectly. Sadly in an abusive relationship you can feel great and fall in love with a lie. It can feel great, and if you discover the truth and the true nature of an abuser you can realize all those feelings were for a person who never was. Similarly in a cult you can feel great chasing rainbows with no chance of ever catching them.

There has never been any scientific validation of any Dianetics or Scientology method, and furthermore to my knowledge no scientific validation of the plagiarized methods in their earlier forms ! They were failed hypnotic techniques ! Tried and failed. Sometimes Hubbard dishonestly combined and repackaged them but zero percent were proven.

That is a big misconception. And people don't understand any beneficial therapy is worth pursuing, as they are so hard to find. So claiming any beneficial therapy in Scientology is too much, by far. There simply isn't any.

Thinking " Well, there had to be some good in Scientology, since we did so much for so long". Anecdotes and personal incredulity don't mean you should take the middle ground between the "Scientology works" claim and the counterclaim "Scientology isn't beneficial".

It's as logical as saying "well some people pray to a blue jellybean and believe it can work miracles" but others say "the blue jellybean isn't real". I guess the logical answer is "SOMETIMES the blue jellybean works miracles".

That's not really a great way to reason.

But if Scientology can get the ex or critic to forward ANY of their lies unchallenged they clamp down on it.

Scientology is a cult and in my opinion should always be described as such. Calling it a church confuses people and helps to hide a fraud, an intentionally designed fraud and thought reform program, as a religion.

There are many times in watching interviews where critics are doing great and just forward a lie from Hubbard and I kind of wince. Because I know the information may be spread and carried out. Sometimes this happens on TV interviews seen by millions of people. And I of course am powerless to correct it.

Just ask yourself if you are saying something online or on a YouTube video or documentary "Am I sure this is right" or "Is this something I know, or held onto from when I was a Scientologist ?".

None of us are perfect ( me included ) , but we can try to be accurate and honest as ambassadors of Scientology. Hubbard and the cult certainly won't do it.