Skip to content

I’m OK, you’re OK

August 3, 2010

Being in a cult-like environment can affect us in ways that may not be immediately visible.

In September 2005, I had been out of the Sea Org for five months. I had managed to get a good job working as Production Manager for a weekly magazine in Santa Barbara. I was adjusting to life outside the Sea Org and, I thought, doing pretty well at it.

Then I made a mistake.

It wasn’t even a big mistake – I put the wrong phone number on an ad. It meant we had to run a free ad for the advertiser. It was barely a blip in the weekly production of a 60-page magazine. Regrettable, yes, but not the end of the world.

But for some reason, it hit me hard. I felt waves of guilt and shame wash over me, along with a kind of angry defensiveness. I was close to tears. It was completely irrational. I knew the people at the magazine were good people. They weren’t going to shame me or make me guilty. They weren’t going to assign me Liability and insist I do an amends project. They weren’t going to scream obscenities at me, or accuse me of treason or sabotage. They weren’t going to give me hours of Security Checking to handle my “CI,” then read my overts in front of a group muster. They weren’t going to throw me into the lake, have me run around the building 50 times, or assign me to physical labor.

But I had spent years in an environment where those exact things would have happened, even for something as minor as a typo.

I was so upset that I had to go for a walk to cool off. When I got back, my boss pulled me aside. He could see I was upset – he didn’t know why of course. He reassured me that it was no big deal. “Look,” he said, “everyone makes mistakes. That’s not important. What is important is that we learn from our mistakes.”

In those few minutes, I swear he demonstrated more compassion, more wisdom, and more executive skill than 99.999% of the so-called “executives” at the Int Base. And from that day to this one, I have never made an error in a client’s phone number or address or website address.

But that one incident made me realize that the effects of life in a cult could be greater than we might realize. I’ve been doing some study on that subject, including a fascinating book called Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships by Janja Lalich and Madeline Tobias. The authors have spent many years studying former cult members and the issues they have to deal with. They discuss something called “cognitive distortions,” which is a fancy way of saying “errors in thinking.”

Here are the ten “cognitive distortions” that they have found to be common with many recovering former cult members. I present these not as Gospel, but as something to think about and discuss.

All or nothing thinking: Cults teach black and white thinking, and we were exposed to plenty of that in Scientology. “All psychs are bad.” “All critics are SP.” “David Miscavige is perfect and never makes mistakes.” “Apostates always lie.” This kind of thinking stifles your critical thinking abilities, and creates a “them against us” mindset. I find that it helps to question and challenge those black-and-white data whenever they pop up. Ask yourself things like “is it really true that all psychiatrists are evil?”

Part of the “all or nothing” thinking of a cult is the idea that the cult’s mission is “everything” and individual goals and desires are “nothing.” Coming out of Scientology, one might feel the loss of a huge, overriding planet-saving mission. In comparison, simply living one’s life and pursuing one’s own goals can seem “small” or “boring.” Well, one remedy for that is to get busy living life, setting one’s own goals and going after them. Another remedy is education. Discover for yourself how big Scientology really is and what its “planetary impact” really has been. Maybe you won’t miss that “big game” so much when you discover how minor and insignificant it really is.

Overgeneralization: Cults tend to paint a dire picture of what happens to people who leave the cult. Did you think bad things would happen to you if you left Scientology? Did you think you would become PTS, or terminally ill, or a failure? When you make mistakes or get sick, do you hear these kinds of harsh criticisms in your head? Do you feel that every slightest setback is those dire predictions coming true?

Mental filter: Cults train people to dwell on their mistakes and weaknesses. In Scientology, Security Checks, Ethics interviews, Conditions, O/W write-ups are all becoming more and more common. One is trained to constantly monitor one’s thoughts and actions for any negativity. Even the smallest transgression becomes cause for guilt, criticism and repentance. This can make it difficult to make life decisions. If you don’t trust yourself, even the smallest life decision becomes daunting. Consider this: are you too hard on yourself? Do you berate yourself unnecessarily for small errors and mistakes? Do you sometimes lose sight of the positive things going on?

Disqualifying the positive: One means of cult control is to not allow people to take personal pride in their own achievements. Anything that is good comes from the Leader or the Doctrine, not from the individual. Have you been made to feel stupid or inadequate? Have you really listed out and acknowledged your own achievements and strengths?

Jumping to conclusions: Many cults teach that mind-reading is possible. I’ve seen a version of this where Scientologists claim to have a “knowingness” about a person or situation before they really know anything. Have you ever jumped to a conclusion about a person or situation that turned out to be incorrect? Sure, you perceive what you perceive about people or situations, but don’t substitute a kind of mystic assumption for good honest communication and observation.

Magnification and minimization: Cults tend to maximize the faults and weaknesses of members while minimizing their strengths and talents. And they do the opposite for the Leader. Putting your own strengths and talents into proper perspective is vital. Have you listed out what your real personal assets and strengths are?

Emotional reasoning: Some cults place emphasis on emotions over thinking. What a person feels is paramount. The Scientology version of this, in my opinion  is “positive postulate.” We believe that if we postulate something with enough positive intention, it will happen. Conversely, if we experience any failure or misfortune, we tend to blame our own “negative postulates.”  This can lead to a sort of constant introverted analysis of the “purity” of our postulates.

“Should” statements: Any cult has a lot of should, must, have to, ought to type of statements. Even after one leaves, one can still hear these statements. Some of my own favorites are “I should be productive all of the time,” “I must never be idle,” and so on.

Labeling and mislabeling: Labels are judgmental. You may have been assigned many labels in Scientology – PTS, NCG, counter-intention (CI), SP, “ethics particle,” dilettante. Continuing to think in terms of these labels can be self-defeating. Using them on others is judgmental. Or, you may be assigning other labels to yourself for ever joining Scientology: stupid, dupe, foolish, crazy. All of these labels are self-defeating. If you must use labels, how about some positive ones, like idealistic, altruistic, hard-working? You joined Scientology to help people. Give yourself proper credit for that impulse.

Personalization: In Scientology we were always taught that we were fully responsible for everything that happens to us. Again, that can result in a lot of interiorizing worry and guilt – “what did I do to pull that in?” sort of thing. It’s important to be realistic about what you can and cannot control.

The point is, go easy on yourself. Realize that feelings of shame and guilt, failure, depression, or hopelessness could be leftovers from a cult-like lifestyle. Think about your strengths and talents, not about your weaknesses and failures, which are not as large as you may think. Don’t beat yourself up over mistakes and setbacks. And most importantly, educate yourself.

Advertisements
71 Comments
  1. Fidelio permalink
    August 3, 2010 8:02 am

    Jeff,

    you are a Godsent!

    Gee, how you permeated the subject and thus enable me time and again to detach myself from the SCN mindset!! What I experienced – compared to what you lived through – has “mickey mouse niveau” but still is able to drive me around since six months. And I mean to observe this “running around a…” with others, too. May your writing help them like it does help me.

    You are a Godsent!!! Thanks. Fidelio

  2. August 3, 2010 8:09 am

    One of the hardest things to shake off after you leave the church is the “Scientology Identity” which elevates the importance of the Third Dynamic and your post and subjugates your First Dynamic.

    One really has to do a Conditions by Dynamics action of some sort to straighten things out. A self-administered Exchange by Dynamics can work wonders if you cannot find someone to twin with.

    Those who have not addressed their assumed Scientology Identity can be recognized by their use of terms like “squirrel tech” or other thought-stoppers to describe anything new in the way of spiritual counseling and in personal and family development.

    Recognition that the CofS has been a cult for many years is a hard fact to face and come to terms with. I was out of the church for 15 years before I could confront the fact that I had helped to create one of the most destructive cults of modern times.

    • Cool Observer permalink
      August 3, 2010 7:59 pm

      …and yet you continue using the term “church”. Isn’t that strange when you think about it? Cognitive dissonance anyone?

  3. August 3, 2010 12:11 pm

    Interesting, indeed!
    Jeff, I like you for the fact that you always come up with something thought-provoking. Glad you do. I guess it’s a part of your nature, huh? 😉

    My take is this:
    Perfectionism is a very contagious malady. DM took Hubbard’s perfectionism (as to how humans should be) to extreme.
    Perfection as a standard in “Golden Age Of Tech”, Perfection of books and lectures sets as a standard in “Golden Age of Knowledge”, Perfection in the stage at the events, Perfection of his own costumes, looks, PR, Perfection of “Ideal Orgs” …
    Can you tell of anything that DM wouldn’t want to be “just Perfect and Ideal”?

    Despite I’ve never worked with the guy, I can see that for him it’s ALL about perfection.

    And DM has successfully contaminated all $cn field (starting from Int Base down to even here in Russia) with his illness of perfectionism.

    Chapter IV of “The Space of Variations” of Vadim Zeland speaks volumes as to how perfectionists, having come to power, become cult leaders.

    There is NOTHING realistic about perfections/ideals.
    Believing in possibility of existence of perfections/ideals is taking one’s life way too far from the REAL WORLD.

    Yet, someone’s Perfectionism is contagious, isn’t it?

    • freespirit permalink
      August 5, 2010 8:02 pm

      Well how about this.: Perfection is an absolute, and absolutes , per the Axioms are unattainable. Hence anyone who attempts to make you “perfect” seeks to make you lose. It messes with you in a big way. LRH describes Scientology as a “workable” system. He never stressed perfection. He stressed doing and applying the tech as exactly laid out. Standard Tech. Standard Admin. Look at the definition of the word “standard.”

      • August 6, 2010 6:12 am

        Freespirit,

        Standard 1. the level of quality of excellence attained by somebody or something. 2. a level of quality or excellence that is accepted as the norm or by which actual attainments are judged (often used in plural) – from Encarta Dict.

        What if the standards (as norm) are sky-high, and unattainable by normal humans in their usual state of just being themselves?
        RPF anyone? Mistakes anyone? O/Ws? Sec Checks? Comm Eves? MEST work for non-compliance? Stats up on Thursday before 2PM? Too gruesomes? You pulled it in? Meeting quotas in the wee hours? SRAs? – Isn’t all and any of those derivatives of those exact standards?

        Hubbard says “thetan is all-powerful”, “thetan is responsible for everything”, “thetan knows…”
        How’s that for the Standard?
        If a person can’t do it, convince him that he is “a Thetan” (In SO, that he is “OT”, no matter where on the Bridge, per “definition of the SO member is the same as definition of OT” and per “to become OT you need to be OT”). Then demand all you want.

        And, BTW, what if “Axioms” which you referred to as to “The Truth and measuring stick by which to judge” mean nothing to me?

        Oh yeah, and you speak about “doing and applying the tech as exactly laid out. Standard Tech. Standard Admin”. – that’s KSW you are talking about. Again, means nothing to me. But, being written not by Uncle Sam but by LRH, THAT is what DM at the helm of RTC has been furiously enforcing.

        So, my take is this: Standards, set by LRH as a norm and enforced by DM as the ONLY norm, are not and never been “user-friendly” for “the people off the street”. Such stretching of human beings (“you are able”, “you can do it”…) can break them (as history of violence and insanity in Co$ demonstrates. The history that started with LRH).

        “Standards” in Scientology are set WAY over anybody’s head. So, they might as well be called “Perfection” (of course not per your “Gradient Scale of Absolutes” but in normal human’s view). And seeking to achieve those and such standards is called in the world “Perfectionism”.

        How’s this standard to you: ERRARE HUMANUM EST.

        I believe that the title if this post by Jeff somewhat indicates ACCEPTABLE standard: “I’m Ok, You’re OK”. – Much better than “if you made mistake or ill, find your SP” or other crap like that screwed into one’s head as “the ONLY Standard”.

  4. Thought Provoking permalink
    August 3, 2010 2:39 pm

    Interesting post! Most of this was not applicable in my case but overgeneralization was very much in play and quite amplified.

    There was so much connected to “failure” that I didn’t want anyone to know my past innvolvement with Scientology. Just mentioning it, I’d break down in tears. But to get past it, I had to go through it. Trying to get a job was the hardest because I had all of this experience but I could not use any of it as a reference, I’d been declared. The poor people at the agencies could sense my dilema but couldn’t do anything to help me.

    I had been living in a shelter tring to destimulate and wrap up a lot of lose ends from my previous life. Things that had to be handled before I could move forward. I’d finally arrived at a point where I could commit to work and was trying to get ANY job. When I applied for this one low level position the person in charge of HR saw that my address was the shelter. She saw what my abilities were and looked at who I was and took a chance. Not only did she decide to hire me without any reference follow up but I was offered the Director position pending approval of the owner/administrator.

    I was so nervous when I interviewed with the owner. When he got around to asking about leaving my last job in Scientology, I bravely told him the truth, just the facts without drama. He had heard of Scientology but was not really familiar with it and this seemed to handle him just fine. A funny aside was that part of the reason I gave for leaving had to do with an overbearing boss who screamed at me all of the time. As I learned more about him I found out that he had a habit of blowing his top with directors although he was aware of it as a negative thing and was working on it, something DM would never do. During the 2 years I worked for him, he NEVER once raised his voice to me.

    The HR terminal’s handling of me was pivotal in my recovery and we are still friends to this day. Just being given an opportunity to be something rather than nothing completely changed my ability to create my own life. Within a day of the interview, I got a car, two days later I found a house and by the end of the week, I was out of the shelter. Although there were some definite low points during this time, I tried to maintain the viewpoint that this was all a great new adventure…and it was!

    • lunamoth permalink
      August 3, 2010 7:23 pm

      Thought Provoking,

      Your story moved me to tears. I was only a little misty eyed until I got to this :

      “Just being given an opportunity to be something rather than nothing completely changed my ability to create my own life.”

      That did it.

      At the risk of sounding patronizing (believe me, I’m not), and of telling you something you already know, I have to say it. It was a very twisted culture that used you and your considerable skills for years and still left you able to feel you were nothing. It was never true. I am so glad you’re doing well, and that you contribute to this forum today. Your experiences and your viewpoint are both valuable to us all, just as you are.

      lunamoth

      • Thought Provoking permalink
        August 3, 2010 9:30 pm

        Lunamoth,

        I learned something important those first few months out, that is relevant to this topic. I allowed my beingness to be identified with Scientology and having lost Scientology, I felt I had lost my beingness.

        When in fact, I had always had my beingness, but I was so PTS at the time that I’d invalidated it to a great extant. Being granted beingness by another rehabilitated all that I was before I got PTS. It blew the charge that disconnection in itself was unable to blow.

        You are absolutely right about both the environmental culture of the church and the lie of being a nobody. Just because someone leaves doesn’t mean they are a failure. The current suppressive environment is set up to give you a lose. Those who have tried to do the right thing and were then attacked as a result are proof that the church as we know it is dead.

      • Just Me permalink
        August 4, 2010 9:30 am

        Thought Provoking,

        What an inspiring “success story” yours is — in both of your posts above. Thank you so much for sharing your story.

        Veritas wrote a post over on Marty’s blog that included this line: “Life is a process.” And, boy, is it ever! Your and Jeff’s stories of recovery and reorientation, made possible by kind people who LOOKED, saw YOU and were willing to HELP, reminds us of the power of forgiveness, compassion and granting of beingness.

        Life offers us opportunities to need help and to give help. Help itself is the medium of love. Help can be as small as a look, a smile, a pat on the back. As free as an invitation to sit down, a willingness to listen, to not interrupt. As big as a loan, a job, a place to live.

        It would be a wonderful “yoga” to find one simple way to help someone each day, to contemplate how I can outflow help to strangers, co-workers, those I love.

        What does this person NEED? What would HELP them? It’s a whole new way of looking at: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. NOT to earn it back. Just to help.

        Thank you, Thought Provoking and Jeff, for your stories.

        Just Me

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 4, 2010 5:46 pm

        Just Me

        That was so beautiful I’m at a loss for words to express it.

        This is why I love this blogsite.

        I know that you and Thought Provoking are not conspiring to bring me to tears on a daily basis, but I find myself there, again. Call it charge coming off or whatever you want.

        These words resonate with me and give me something profoundly beautiful to take with me. The utter simplicity of it. The fundamental truth of it. Those things have such a fine wavelength. They are art.

        Thank you.

        lunamoth

      • Thought Provoking permalink
        August 4, 2010 8:44 pm

        Lunamoth and Just Me,

        Thank you for the beautiful words of acknowledgement.

        I am sitting here with mixed emotions. Part of me feeling very sappy about having such truly theta communication and the other part is overwhelmed and grateful for the very high level of duplication of me, my experience and what I have found to be the important factors in my life since leaving staff.

        I found myself saying YES, YES and again YES as I read each of your words. For me, this has been a perfect example of ARCU. And, I smile once again at the gift that we have now, in being able to communicate openly and freely without fear of consequences because of people like Jeff, Steve and Marty who opened up the lines, shared their lives and created these blogs for us all. They have become my modern day heroes!

  5. AMY'S MOM permalink
    August 3, 2010 4:26 pm

    Thanks Jeff,

    I’d read some of these before and have been working at them, but this was such a good reminder. Now I’ve got new tools to keep digging out. I kind of had the idea that I was above it all, you know, like I wasn’t that infected. Wrong! I’m waking up. Glad we could take this journey together.

  6. Freetothink permalink
    August 3, 2010 5:47 pm

    Jeff you’re such an inspiration!

    It’s like you’re in my head sometimes, knowing exactly what’s going on, what bothers me.

    You’re right I’ve had the realization that I have been in a cult & I have experienced most of what you have listed. It’s quite a process to “disinfect” myself without “trowing the baby with the bath water”. I got a lot of benefits from Scientology. It’s part of me now. Unfortunatly the “virus” is part of me too but I’m making progress in getting rid of it 🙂

    Thanks to your blog it’s actually kind of a fun process

    • Thought Provoking permalink
      August 3, 2010 9:34 pm

      It is a strange feeling indeed when you finally stop not-ising the cult aspect of the church. Though the idea can be a shocking one, it is one that also releases much charge and gives one a sense of freedom because it really does as-is.

  7. sherrymk permalink
    August 3, 2010 6:21 pm

    Jeff,

    Even though I’ve heard the story you related, it has brought tears to my eyes again. No one should have to go through what you and so many others at Int Base have.

    Your post is brilliant as usual and for me, hits right to the heart of difficulties dealing with leaving the C of S. Even after almost 2 years of being out of Scientology, I experience each of the items you listed on a regular basis. If I make a mistake, some part of me immediately goes into guilt mode and I have to stop myself from thinking “I’m PTS”, or at the least, getting very introverted.

    One of the hardest things to deal with is that point of “knowingness”. It’s one thing to have fine tuned perceptions and quite another to have an attitude that you “know” it all or you just “know” it’s this way or that. As an OT, the “Knowingness” point is drilled in over and over yet, interestingly enough, one can so easily deny that “know” when it comes to outpoints in the church. Those are the things you are not supposed to “know”. Truly a mind twist.

    And the point about thinking that bad things will happen if you leave the church. For me, that one is the least bothersome as shortly after I left, I found the exact opposite occurring. More good things have come my way since departing that suppressive environment than at any time when I was “in”. More true friendships based on nothing more than really liking the person, no hidden agendas, completely free communication about anything. The stuff that real friendships are made of. Amazing.

    Thank you my friend for continuing to open our eyes, invite critical thinking and allow free and diverse discussion.

    Sherry

    • lunamoth permalink
      August 4, 2010 6:00 pm

      Sherry, I completely agree with you! Leaving the church was the best thing I’ve done in a very long time.

      The irony of course is that the very things you fear will worsen if you leave are the areas that just
      blossom when you finally do! My family is closer than ever before (uniting for your own survival
      and that of those you love against a common “enemy” will do that – s/g I learned in the church),
      my network of friends is expanding after years of attrition, and the quality of those relationships far surpasses those I was counting as “friends” prior to leaving. In the past several months I have met and formed friendships with some wonderful, kindred spirits. Not people with whom my main shared interest is scientology, but people who share my own true values, who are intellectually curious and unsuppressed, who have integrity, individuality, intellect and talent. People who are unafraid.

      I’m telling you, if I had known this was what I was missing, I would have dumped my IAS membership long ago. It wouldn’t have taken learning about the corruption and abuses in the church to get me to dump that life. All I would have had to know was how much brighter and more beautiful life is outside all that.

      • sherrymk permalink
        August 4, 2010 7:04 pm

        Lunamouth,

        It’s interesting to ponder on some of these points of appreciation for what we now have, isn’t it?

        If we had not had the experiences we had in Scientology, if we had not gone through all the stress, all the pressures, if we had not sat through endless reg interviews, unjust ethics, drained our resources to defend the “causes” we thought we were defending in good faith, had we not had that intense feeling of purpose and driven ourselves beyond where we ever considered we could, “knowing” that we were securing our “eternity” and those of the “millions of beings on this and other planets”, would we appreciate, the way we do now, the true friendships? the family relationships? the freedom of thought? of communication?

        I ponder the above often. What I so dearly treasure now comes to a large degree, from looking, in hindsight, at what came before. I’m not sure I would give up the experience and the knowledge I gained from such an experience. Hard to say. Ya know?

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 4, 2010 9:27 pm

        I know what you mean. I wouldn’t give up my own experience, even if I could. Having
        stopped it is enough. I can reflect and cogitate on what is still of value because I’m no longer constantly in a state of stress. I’m finding that, for me, there was quite a bit of value early on, and almost nothing of value later; less duress and pressure early on (though still some), but more later on; less to no invalidation of my self and my own interests, goals, etc. earlier, but increasingly so as time passed.

        What I left doesn’t even resemble what I first became interested in. Fortunately, while I’ve also changed (and aged) a bit since then, I still resemble myself : ) Guess I got out in time!

      • August 8, 2010 2:43 pm

        @ Sherry and lunamoth – your comments have nudged me into this particular groove of thought.

        One of the numerous results of my leaving scn has been the blossoming of my relationship with ME. And I must say that I’m finding the experience to be quite fascinating. Furthermore, I find it incredibly ironic that my goal of achieving complete self-realization through the application of scn was instead a process of self-elimination. ME was continually being diminished as the Group “I” took it’s place.

        To paraphrase a good friend of mine (ex-scn), there’s a lot of good shit in scn. But, there’s also a lot of bad shit in scn. But, being that the two categories of shit are so tightly intertwined that makes scn quite dangerous. For sure (borrowing from Star Trek here), scn, in its actions, is very “Borg” like in that its orientation is to the collective not the individual. As an organization it assimilates indivualities in order to enhance and serve the collective.

        Now, back to ME. ME is so much more than I ever imagined. I am discovering that ME exists on myriad different frequencies, if you will. ME is enormously multi-faceted and multi-deminsional. And here is a particularly fascinating discovery that I’ve only recently made….ME looks after ME. In other words, ME guides, directs, protects, cares for and so on, the existence of ME.

        It was ME that got ME into scn. And it was ME that moved ME out of scn. What I have come to realize is that there is nothing that happens to ME that is not within the design and intention of ME. Consequently, I have also come to realize that there is nothing or no one to fix, nothing or no one to save and nothing or no one to persecute. My scn experience was exactly what ME needed at the time just as what I am doing now is exaclty what ME needs, wants, desires, intends…whatever. In other words, everything serves the best interests of ME.

  8. August 3, 2010 7:53 pm

    Wow ! This is soooo true !!!!!!!!
    It helps a lot !
    Thanks !

  9. Mickey permalink
    August 4, 2010 12:39 am

    Jeff, such a thorough overview in these ideas. Each subject point could in itself be a separate blog post by you as each one goes deep into our past experiences in Scn. It’s almost too much to digest in one sitting, reading each of these points! So, feel free to expound!

    I have one question of you after reading this wonderful post. As you have friends in both the “still-believing in” and non-believing camps of Scn/LRH (and points in between) and have perhaps seen how things have evolved since leaving (a’ la, the now very open and vocal “Indie” fissuring), do you think the subject and practice of, as originally written (sans alterations), will ever arrive at a level beyond the above points to a place where one could look back and see that indeed the “errors in thinking” and the cult-like culture were not there any longer? I guess I’m wondering if you feel there are systemic, built-in ideas and mechanisms that cannot help but lead to a similar, albeit less vile, outcome we have today, in any identified Scn “movement” or direction of the future?

    If you don’t care to answer, understood. Don’t mean to put you on the spot. But, I’m wondering if you’ve contemplated this as well. Thanks! (Oh, and I fudged it… that was two questions and not limited to Jeff, either! 🙂 )

    • Just Me permalink
      August 4, 2010 9:58 am

      Mickey,

      What an interesting question (or package of questions) you’ve posed. I’d like to take a crack at it, in a way that is interesting to me and perhaps will be responsive to some of what you’re getting at.

      Yes, I “believe” (if you’ll exscuse the expression) it is possible to be a rational Scientologist.

      Ever since becoming involved with Scientology in 1972 and since leaving the church in the late 1980s, I’ve always appreciated there are multiple responses to and relationships with the subject matter of Scientology. I’ve always seen the differences between “Scientology” and “the Church” and “LRH” and the nearly infinite ways in which individual Scientologists interpret and create their own version of Scientology.

      I’ve never seen everything related to Scientology (tech, policy, staff members, the people who participate, etc.) as “all good” or as “all bad.” For me, it’s never been an issue of “Scientology must be perfect” to be legitimate.

      For me, Scientology has been a way to know, a path of exploration. The responsibility for knowing is mine, not Scientology’s. The idea that Scientology has to be perfect and must guarantee my eventual progression to “native state” seems unworkable to me. I don’t care about guarantees or even absolutes. To expect that something else, even the spiritual path one is following, must be responsible for your condition would seem to guarantee disappointment.

      I think one of the reasons people choose a particular spiritual path is because they enjoy the company of others who are on that same path. The reason I left the church in the late 1980s is because I didn’t enjoy (enough) the company of the people I was “traveling with.” One of the big reasons I enjoy the Indie movement now (and that I’m now back in touch with the Scientology I originally hooked up with) is that I enjoy tremendously the company of those on this path. All indies are not alike. But most of them, in varying ways, feel like kindred souls to me. I learn from them and appreciate them.

      But I don’t agree with all of them or have to merge/mush/collapse with them. I am me and he is he and she is she. That’s so obvious I almost wonder why I said that. Another way I think of this is that by communicating, I am not agreeing to lose my identity. In fact, if I were creating a process this morning, it might be along the lines of: How is that the same? How is that different?

      What fun to think about and respond to your question — thanks for posing it.

      Just Me

      • Cool Observer permalink
        August 5, 2010 7:25 am

        Lunamoth,

        where is this coming from? I don’t know, Jeff’s answer to Mickey triggered the question. But you’re right, I should’ve put it this way: Can Scientology only be reformed by those who do not wish to reform it? It occurred to me that someone like Jeff would be just the guy to ‘make it go right this time’.

        Karen,

        I don’t make any assumptions about the ambitions of M&M, I don’t even read Marty’s blog. I just stumbled over a thread on EMSB, where the thread starter observed that Marty’s blog only allows “sycophants”, and some responses went into the direction of a looming powershift.

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 5, 2010 6:56 pm

        Cool Observer

        Regarding what is and isn’t Marty Rathbun’s agenda: I would encourage you to observe and evaluate FOR YOURSELF. This is a lesson, the importance of which
        I’ve learned lately in spades.

    • Jeff permalink*
      August 4, 2010 3:24 pm

      Mickey, I could probably write ten posts on this subject. But, to give a short answer, I think that if someone were serious about reforming or revitalizing Scientology (and I have no personal interest in that), they should do a very thorough study of what makes a cult a cult. Then, with a good understanding of that subject, review Scientology and eliminate anything that is manipulative and cult-like. It would require a brutal honesty about the subject and its results. In particular, anyone attempting to organize or reorganize Scientology as a group would have to avoid the sort of top-down authoritarianism that has plagued the subject.

      • Cool Observer permalink
        August 4, 2010 9:38 pm

        Jeff,

        do you really think that’s possible? I doubt that! Most Indies are unable to confront the fact cult-like tendencies existed before the Miscavige putsch. I can’t see anyone ditching KSW, dissemination drill, the TRs etc. It will be “Scientology as LRH intended”, and if Rinder and Rathbun take over – as some posters on ESMB predict – they’ll simply turn back the clock to ca. 1980. Ergo: Scientology can only be reformed by those who have no interest reforming it,and that doesn’t even take into account that Scientology is damaged goods in the eyes of the ‘wogs’.

        Let’s assume you’d be willing to offer some advice, do you think the reformers would consider your input?

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 4, 2010 11:37 pm

        “Ergo: Scientology can only be reformed by those who have no interest reforming it,and that doesn’t even take into account that Scientology is damaged goods in the eyes of the ‘wogs’.”

        Cool Observer – you have every right to ask this question or any other you wish, but I’m at a loss for where this comes from? Seems like you’re constructing a kind of a
        political platform here for those men and attributing it to them.

      • Marta permalink
        August 5, 2010 1:31 am

        Oh, I so agree with you here, Jeff. To the Nth!

        I like to think that anything is possible, even this, given enough dedication and time to accomplish the depth and breadth of attention and culture change it would require.

        I don’t however expect to see it in my lifetime. Maybe up the road – that’s my hope. Meanwhile, any new structure that smacks of the prior authoritarian regime, IMHO will have a very tough time holding it’s form. Too much toxic by-product to overcome to just sell a new brand name. Too many savvy, wizened people being vigilant. That too may be just my hope talking, but I’m keeping hold of it for now.

      • August 5, 2010 6:36 am

        The idea that Marty and Mike want to “take over” could not be further from the truth.

      • Fidelio permalink
        August 5, 2010 7:56 am

        Jeff, you say: “It would require a brutal honesty about the subject and its results.”

        Yes!

        I do not see anybody ready to doing that audit.

      • Fidelio permalink
        August 5, 2010 8:02 am

        …and (without that) nobody and I mean nobody on earth needs SCN in the first place. In its existing form, it is just a murderous debilitating trap.

        Fidelio

      • Just Me permalink
        August 6, 2010 12:30 am

        There’s a pretty big cottage industry out there in folks worrying about “what Mike and Marty are going to do.”

        Marty and Mike aren’t that hard to talk to. Pick up the phone, call one of them and ask your question. Get it over with. End the drama.

        So if anyone else wants to “take over” the Co$, go for it. Get your little clipboard out, write up a program, project, mission, political campaign, whatever, and go for it.

        Personally, I cannot imagine a less rewarding, less likely, less upwardly mobile position than CoB of the Co$. Ugh! Why in the world would anyone want that job?

        The Church is dead!

        Just Me

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 6, 2010 5:06 am

        Good point, Just Me.

        When others dub in motives and attribute “secret agendas” I wonder about their own agenda, anyway. Suspicious? Try communicating!

        God, I’m with you on that one: Who would want that job, indeed!

      • August 7, 2010 8:12 pm

        If anyone or group were to decide to take up the task of reforming the CoS and to put LRH and the term scientology into good repute, I do believe that Marty, MIke and the Indie movement(as a group) would be at the top of the list of likely candidates. Although, like Just Me pointed out…who would want that job!

        That said, Tom Martiniano within his blog post – Declaration of Independence – on Marty’s blog did, I think, manage to sum up the direction and purpose of the Indie Movement. At least, at this stage of the Indie Movement. Tom wrote…

        “But now Marty has given us all hope. We have a lot of people who have joined Marty’s campaign. Some who want Scientology back, some who want the demise of Scientology, some who want reforms, others who want blood. But what most everyone wants, in my opinion, is that they want Scientology.

        “When I finished OT III I realized that I was free, out of jail. My next cognition was not so simple – I realized all of my brothers and sisters were still in jail and I needed to get them out. I actually felt that I had to go back into the prison and get them out while also looking like and going through the motions of being a prisoner. Then I had to remember that I was free and could walk out any time.

        “Now it’s the same; we have escaped suppression and entrapment by DM by getting out of the Sea Org and out here in the field, but we’re not all the way out until our brethrens are out. Remember, we made oaths to LRH and we are still the cream of the crop, the ones who cannot be sold a bill of goods to. We will get Scientology back and we will clear this planet. It’s RJ 67 folks and we are all part of the new game to defeat suppression, get ethics in and then clear this mud ball.”

        …………

        Then, on the comment wall of Tom’s blog post Marty replied to “Once Upon A Time” (Michael):

        martyrathbun09 // May 11, 2010 at 9:19 pm

        “Michael, Thanks. There are some things in the works. I said from the outset function (which we have been doing naturally) will monitor structure. I’m working on some structure which I will be ready to announce soon (very carefully worked out to forward and realize our function).”

        …………

        So, as is obvious from Marty’s response to Michael, there is an agenda as well as an intended structure in the works for the Indie Movement, of which/for which Marty and Mike have become the
        OLs. Again, what that consists of might very well be encapsulated in the words of Tom Martiniano.

  10. Aurora permalink
    August 4, 2010 3:35 am

    Thanks for writing this Jeff…

    I can so relate to this. Both of the cars in my household became useless at the same time and I just kept wondering what I must have done to “pull it in”… after reading this and revisiting the same issue… I thought uhhh… what did I do? I bought two used cars that were getting up there in mileage and moved into an area that floods periodically… did I really think they were going to last forever if I made sure my postulates are good?
    But when you’re really in that mindset there’s always this weird one-up-man-ship of “who’s taking the most responsibility?!” so you wouldn’t dare blame someone else for your problems… unless of course they were SPs and of course you’re not going to name “science and probability” in a 10Aug, haha.
    I’m still battling fighting the weird judgemental shit. I find myself looking at any and all sick people with suspicion way before I get to compassion.

  11. Tony DePhillips permalink
    August 4, 2010 5:08 am

    Thanks Jeff!

    You are truly a helping social person. Thanks you so much for taking action to help people get over all the shit they have gone through operating with a dysfunctional group.

    I have encountered several of the things you write about. Especially if you try to communicate about the abuses in misscabbolgy. They continue to try to grind in these insanities. By trying to expose them you to some degree stay connected to their oddities. But I have found by taking action you can “out create” these weird ideas.

    Have a nice week Jeff!
    🙂
    Tony

  12. August 5, 2010 3:46 am

    Jeff, I liken your blog posts to you walking out from the back room (sorry, no ivory tower for you) and you’re carrying this big tray just a little above your head. You walk over to this long and wide rustic wooden table constructed of thick timbers with tree trunks for legs…you lower your tray and shove this fresh cut of meat out into the center of the table’s middle plank then, with tray in hand, you retreat into the shadows and wait. You do not have to wait for very long. Soon, people begin to flow into the space where they gather around the table (they have been drawn by the smell of fresh meat) and begin to unwrap their personalized knives and forks. Then, one by one, they begin to cut away at the fresh slab of meat laying on the table. As they do, each one describes what this particular cut of meat means to them. It’s great! No agenda being pushed. No hidden propaganda lines. Just nourishing morsels of insight to chew on and share in a safe space among friends.

    Great comments everyone!! Really got my wheels a turning. No time tonight to comment further but I will return (probably Sun).

    BTW, just finished watching another documentary by Adam Curtis. The title of this one is, The Century of Self (this is NOT conspiracy theory material). It aired in 02′. It’s really really good!! I highly recommend it. Total length is 4hrs broken up into 4 episodes each six parts. Episodes, in sequence, are: Happiness Machines, Engineering Consent, There is a Policeman Inside All Our Heads: He Must Be Destroyed and finally, Eight People Sipping Wine in Kettering. Once again, the influence of society and individuals in society on LRH and scn are hard to miss while watching these episodes. Plus, lots of data on scn’s public enemy #1 – the psyches. The info presented in this doc filled many gaps in my psychiatry, PR and Mktg. data banks that I didn’t even know I had.

    One more thought before I go (provoked first by Mickey’s comment then those following)…IMO, it seems to me that the Indie Movement has gotten itself very much caught up in what is refered to as the Karpman Triangle or Karpman Drama Triangle as it is often called. If you don’t know what this is do a search on YT. Of course, it’s also on Wikipedia. In any case, I see the folks that are involved in the Indie Movement vacillating between the three roles of the Persecutor, Rescuer and Victim – the three points of the Karpman Triangle. And if the Indies don’t manage to pull themselves out of this drama, they will never have any longterm success at restoring scn to what they believe it to be or what it should be.

    • August 8, 2010 7:02 pm

      “Thought-Stopping”…”I’m okay. You’re okay.”…”Magical Thinking”…whether true or not, my initial perception of each of these phrases is that it’s a psyche originated phrase. Or, if not, it’s definitely coming from some other offbeat practice. Perceived as such, the immediate conclusion is, “There is no need to look any further. There is no need to waste my valuable time looking at such worthless crap.” Instead, I will use my time to study LRH. This pretty much sums up a dominating aspect of my behavior as a loyal and dedicated scio up to the mid 90’s. It was in the mid 90’s that I began to gradually drift although a great deal of this behavior did persist up until just recently. Hell, what am I saying? It still shows up like a pop up on my computer screen, which I instantly close as I do with this ingrained behavorial response.

      My wife and I have been together for 15 yrs now. She is not nor ever has been a scio. When it comes her spiritual path she is pretty much a “cherry-picker” although, A Course In Miracles (ACIM) has been at the core of her path for many, many years. Anyway, there was a time in the early days of our relationship where she would bring in these psyche or other practice phrases. I usually pretented to be interested in them but, of course, had instantly rejected them. What I often did with such “investigations” is I would examine the material then translate it into scn nomenclature demonstrating that scn was a superior self-improvement/spiritual technology. One of such things that my wife introduced me to was the Karpman Triangle or, as it’s often referred to, the Drama Triangle. I promptly dismissed it as it came from Steve Karpman who was a psychologist. That noted, I find it useful now and since I have already mentioned it in an earlier post, I want to elaborate a bit. LOL!! you know what “a bit” is to me.

      As the Indie Movement emerged as a subtopic on this thread I want to put the Indies under the Karpman Triangle and see what shows up.

      The three points of the drama triangle are: Persecuter, Victim and Rescuer. Essentially, the drama triangle is nothing more than a hampster wheel, a squirrel cage that when in it or on it, no resolution can occur. It is a trap!

      In the Indie Movement the Indies appear to consider themselves as being the victims of the named Persecuter, DM. And, as the Indies also have friends and family members being continuously persecuted by DM, the Indies are on a mission to rescue these other victims. One of the approaches the Indies are taking is to persecute DM, the Persecuter. DM considers that he is the victim of his persecuters, the Indies, so he continues to persecute in order to rescue himself. You see, how nuts this is? Everyone sucked into this drama triangle just go round and round and round and round…all the while vacillating from one point of the triangle to another. Oh yeah, let’s don’t leave out that fabian unorganized Anoymous group….they’ve got there own little drama triangle going on with scn, DM, LRH et.al. Weird game. Huh?

      Let’s move the drama triangle out of the construct of scn and look at an example in politics. George W. Bush, the Rescuer leads the U.S. into war with Iraq to liberate the people of Iraq from the evil Persecuter, Sadam Hussein. Other victims that need to be rescued include the future victims i.e., the population of the world (after all, Sadam had weapons of mass destruction – everyone was at risk). So the Rescuer, GWB, becomes the Persecuter while, Sadam, the Persecuter becomes the Victim and all the rest of the people…well, they gravitate to one of the points of the drama triangle and round and round everybody goes. Now, consider what has happened since the named Persecuter, Sadam Hussein, has been taken out. In view of what you consider, what do you think will happen when DM had finally been taken out? Will the drama triangle then dissipate into the ethers? Or, will new big names move into the roles of Persecuter and Rescuer and the game, without missing a beat, just goes round and round and round…

  13. August 5, 2010 5:04 am

    Jeff wrote:
    “In Scientology we were always taught that we were fully responsible for everything that happens to us. Again, that can result in a lot of interiorizing worry and guilt – “what did I do to pull that in?” sort of thing.”

    This is an excellent example of how responsibility has been made into blame in the CofS when in reality responsibility is being cause.

    Let’s take a more positive view of our responsibility for everything that happens to us.
    If we can assume responsibility for everything that happens to us, we have certainty that we change things for the better. Remember that we can commit overts of omission as well as overts of commission.

    If we fail to take preventative action, that car we bought will fail when we need it, our teeth will fail, and our health will fail. These are simply overts of omission! If we don’t understand cars, teeth, or our body’s needs we may not be able to recognize danger signs when they appear.

    Before we flog ourselves for our failings and say, “Bad Thetan! You are toast!” let us look and use Scientology as it used to be used. Why not ask, “What about this situation did we not understand?”

    This opens the door to understanding. There is an old saying that applies here, even on the First Dynamic: “Hat, don’t hit”

    If you are “pulling in” things you do not want, find out what you are doing that is non-survival. If you are having difficulty seeing this, try reading, “The Way to Happiness”. You may be amazed at what you are overlooking.

    Fortunately, we ARE responsible for everything that happens to us. Auditing helps us discover exactly how to achieve the effects we want. I audit people to put them at cause and their responsibility level increases. Training will do the same.

    • August 5, 2010 2:58 pm

      “we ARE responsible for everything that happens to us”

      I completely disagree. This is a scary way of assessing the world around us in my view. To think that whatever bad which happens to someone is his fault is the best way to make people feel guilty about things they often have no control over. That’s one of the core noxious teachings of Scientology in my opinion. It a free pass to blame (and despise) people for their misfortune, which is not always their fault, and a free pass for one to feel “superior” because nothing bad has happened to him, and thus he is in “control.”

      Do not want.

      • August 5, 2010 7:01 pm

        You are free to consider responsibility as blame. Many church executives have that opinion and enforce it daily.

        I am merely pointing out that LRH said that “Responsibility is the ability and willingness to assume the status of full source and cause for all efforts and counter efforts on all dynamics.” (AP&A pg 57)

        You do not have to assume responsibility for your life. Nobody here is trying to enforce that on you. I am merely suggesting that understanding what responsibility is can improve ones control over life.

        There is a formula that describes how taking responsibility can improve things. Read about the KRC triangle…

        You are free to assign responsibility for your condition to anything you care to. I have not found that this leads to a resolution of difficulties. Ever.

      • Jeff permalink*
        August 5, 2010 7:51 pm

        Well, one might be willing and able to “assume” that status, but assuming a status and actually controlling physical universe events are two different things. Anyone who believes that they can actually cause or control “all efforts and counter efforts on all dynamics” is delusional. No one can. Even LRH couldn’t. You can’t control everything that happens to you, no matter what status you assume. What you can control is your reaction to what happens to you. Viktor Frankl has some interesting things to say about that in his book, Man’s Search for Meaning.

        Realizing that you don’t actually control everything in your life isn’t “being irresponsible.” It’s being real. You can control some things that happen to you. You can’t control others. What you can control, always, is your reaction to what happens to you.

      • August 5, 2010 7:54 pm

        I commented on the use of the word “everything” in your “we ARE responsible for everything that happens to us.” Sorry, but, as an example, I’m not about to see that the victims of the Chilean earthquake of 2010 are responsible for their misfortune (just to give a dramatic example). Frankly, I didn’t expect that I would have to spell out a specific example for why using “everything” doesn’t make sense. And there is no Hubbard would convince me of the opposite.

      • August 7, 2010 6:45 pm

        Jeff wrote: “You can control some things that happen to you. You can’t control others. What you can control, always, is your reaction to what happens to you.”

        Brought to mind this popular quote….

        “The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past… we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you… we are in charge of our Attitudes.” – Charles Swindoll

      • Just Me permalink
        August 7, 2010 10:47 pm

        Jeff and Monte,

        Thanks for both those quotes. They’re both great!

        Just Me

  14. Soderqvist1 permalink
    August 5, 2010 9:03 am

    The idea that ”we are totally responsible for everything that happens to us” is too absolutistic in order to have any meaningful use in life as it is. I am not a minor, but I am of age that means that I am free to do, as I want until I break the law. If you consider yourself a victim of some act, and that act is not illicit then you have no one to blame except yourself. A practical example will clarify!

    Imagine for yourself that you are in New York City as car driver, and everybody is responsible for what has happen to them, but nobody hasn’t the faintest clue about Traffic Laws, it is unnecessary to point out that it will be impossible to drive at all because it would be totally chaos. So traffic laws come to our rescue so to speak. It means that you are free to drive, as you want until you break the law, in example you bump into the car in front of you. You are responsible for it according to our laws in Sweden, because you must have brake distance to the car in front you, and it doesn’t matter if the traffic victim is calm, or “nattering”, you are totally responsible for it, for your car’s damages too, not the victim.

    So victims of Crimes are not responsible for what has happen to them, but the offender is. In order to hammer home my point it is ridiculous, even insulting or heartless to even think about “you pulled it in” or you are “responsible for your condition” when it comes to Jews in Auschwitz, they have been victimized by the Nazis, and thus unable to defend themselves against it. Every idea about they must have done something, because something bad happened to them, will only make this war crime more or less deserved. Trials in Nuremberg was/is the correct action for these war criminals.

  15. August 5, 2010 12:47 pm

    Secrets of unwanted “Beingness” (*OT Data*, lol)

    Hubbard defines “Beingness” as “the condition of being is defined as the result of having assumed an identity. It could be said to be the role in a game and an example of beingness could be one’s own name. Another example would be one’s profession. Another example would be one’s physical characteristics. Each or all of these things could be called one’s beingness. Beingness is assumed by oneself, or given to oneself or is attained. For example, in the playing of a game each player has his own beingness”.
    (taken from new “State of Man Congress” Glossary)

    This morning, if you slept well, just a few seconds before waking up, still within your dreams, you had no idea of any of your today’s “beingness-es”. Right?
    Then, some moments after waking up, you had some blessed time of *not* being “somebody” but just pure self, without any alloys. Yes?
    THEN you had an idea that you are *here*, and you *ARE* _____ (“somebody”: husband/wife/child/parent, boss/worker, Scientologist/Anti-Scientologist, OT/Clear/”wog”, friends with/unfriendly to…). And started recollecting bits and pieces of your yesterday’s “beingness-es”.

    One actually starts his every day from *putting on* his “beingness”. Why? – He needs to be “himself” to himself and for others.

    If you watched film “Tuxedo” with Jackie Chan and Jennifer Love Hewitt, you can connect with the concept of *putting on* “beingness” (per the movie’s plot, Jackie Chan inherited from his boss some magic tuxedo which, when *put on*, made him superhuman unlike he initially was).
    Jekyll and Hyde story will do, too.

    The difference is that we do it every day *habitually* and *fixedly*.

    To the subject of the Original Post. We, here, developed a habit of being one the following: Anti-Churchie, Church critic, Anti-Scio, Scn critic…. BEFORE that most of us here *wore* the “beingness” of “honest-to-LRH Scientologist” and “Anti-Critic”. It was our *habit* as well (which we broke lately and changed it to one of the former ones).

    Imagine that EVERY person EVERY day *puts on* some “beingness” to blend in well into this world as it was yesterday: be it Christian, Buddhist, Boss, Slave, SO Member, OT, Yogi, Scientist, “Best Friend”, Nice person……

    Now, it’s all good when one does it willingly. How ‘bout he does it because he feels he has no other choice. How ‘bout he *HAS TO* be it and do it, willingly or unwillingly?

    Can you see how much mental/spiritual energy everyone spends on maintaining his “beingness” (read Identity)? Can you feel how much energy do YOU spend on it?
    Sometimes it’s just too much.

    What I offer here is learn how to get over the habits of compulsive *putting on* one’s “beingness”. As an example of compulsive beingness (let’s say “Indie/Scn’st”), “I like MR/LRH, so I need to approve his words and see some truth in them”. That kinda gets one into the “Tuxedo” he “has to wear no matter what”. Not much choice there. “Tuxedo” is the set of interwoven characteristics one has to comply with and once it’s put on, it dictates one how to act.

    And very often one’s “required beingness” is triggered (turned on, keyed in,…) by words, and so we are prompted to put on “proper dress for that situation”. And I wouldn’t recommend to cure it by auditing or addressing the past.
    I believe it can be overcome by REMEMBERING oneself at the moments around waking up and breaking habits of being (in our case) “a Scientologist”, which, I see here, is a problematic “beingness” for many.

    Wouldn’t it be wonderful to willingly put on/take off, turn on/turn off, key in/key out your “beingness-es”? – Well, you CAN. 😉

    You CAN get over your unwanted, problematic or obsolete beingness-es (without sending them to Dry Cleaner’s), let them go and move on in life (maybe finding better Tuxedos for your purposes in life).

    Transurfing might help you with that. 😉

    • August 8, 2010 3:14 pm

      VaD, as always, I very much appreciate your free flowing comments. There’s a noticeable element of purity in your communication.

      VaD, I see that, without the inevitable question being asked, you are already beginning to answer it. The question, of course, is…”Where does one go when one leaves Scientology?”

      While ‘in’ scn, scn quickly nullifies every other practice on the buffet table of self-improvement and enlightenment practices and methodology and takes up every square inch of the table. But, once outside of scn, the buffet table proves to be teaming with an incredible diversity of self-improvement and spiritual practices and methodologies. Personally, I’m not currently looking for any particular practice. I’m just enjoying the hell out of circling the buffet.

  16. August 5, 2010 3:15 pm

    I was reading an old article today, dated August 5th, 1950. I think it should be interesting for those newly out still trying to sort things out. There is a very interesting passage in this article, a critical review of Dianetics:

    “The real and, to me, inexcusable danger in dianetics lies in its conception of the amoral, detached, 100 per cent efficient mechanical man — superbly free-floating, unemotional, and unrelated to anything. This is the authoritarian dream, a population of zombies, free to be manipulated by the great brains of the founder, the leader of the inner manipulative clique.” — “A cure for all ills”, The Nation, Aug. 5, 1950.

    Didn’t he, right there, just predicted David Miscavige?

    Somehow, he was able to see, even in such early writings as DMSMH the authoritarian nature of Hubbard’s teachings. If they were there, already noticeable, in 1950, how much deeply interwoven are they in all of Hubbard’s teachings which followed? And for Scientology to reform, one would have to untangle the whole thing. Is it even possible?

    • Fidelio permalink
      August 5, 2010 4:19 pm

      To the day, sixty years ago – a remarkable article, halleluja!! What a clear view.
      Thanks for the find.

      Fidelio

    • Fidelio permalink
      August 5, 2010 4:30 pm

      …and to answer the question, if the subject is even possible to reform: Not in my view, because its highly judgemental, evaluative and invalidative nature is the detrimental woof and warp of it. Just to put one example for my point: an institution like the C/S puts any client at effect – where he does NOT belong!! And there it goes on and on…

      Fidelio

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 6, 2010 1:41 pm

        Fidelio

        Are you the same Fidelo who regularly posts on Marty’s site?

        lunamoth

      • Fidelio permalink
        August 6, 2010 4:35 pm

        Yes, Luna, same.

        Why do you ask?
        Fidelio

      • August 6, 2010 6:45 pm

        Lunamoth,
        I also found that quote by R. Hill remarkable.
        And I also, like Fidelio, think that Scn is “unreformable”.
        And I also, like Fidelio, posted on Marty’s blog (mostly, in April this year).
        My views evolved and as I see now, Scn just distacts one from finding oneself and one’s true freedom.
        So it makes (at least) two of us here who evolved from “remove DM and reform Scn for good to what LRH intended”. 😉

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 6, 2010 8:51 pm

        VaD,

        Of course I know who you are, Silly!

        My question didn’t really have anything to do with R.Hill’s comments.

        lunamoth

      • lunamoth permalink
        August 6, 2010 8:54 pm

        Fidelio

        I was unsure, so I figured I’d just ask. Thanks.

        lunamoth

      • August 6, 2010 10:26 pm

        Well, Lunamoth, I took it as it was stated.

        No problem for me with me being silly.
        All I have been doing has been just this : speaking my mind.
        And, my mind has changed over time.
        And, I see it as a good thing.

        Many people reading this blog don’t want my mind (anymore). But I’ll stick to it anyway.

        Good luck to everyone in their own self-exploration.

        We”ll meet (hopefully) on the other side of Scn. 🙂

  17. John Doe permalink
    August 5, 2010 4:45 pm

    What a great conversation! First I want to thank you Jeff for providing the forum, the great articles, and the moderate tone so these conversations can occur.

    Re: reforming Scientology. I go back and forth about IF this can be done at all. Where I currently stand on this: I think Scn will reform, but not as a cohesive “new” church. By the efforts of many different people, it will fracture and settle into various strata, each employing more or less of the scientology tech.

    Indeed, I think this is, and has always been,the natural inclination of this subject, and you can see this if you notice how hard and for how long LRH tried to keep it intact under the auspices of the official church. Look at how much effort is/has been devoted to discouraging and nullifying “splinter groups” and “squirrels”. Were scientology less cult-like in the first place, there would be less interest or need to get away from the oppressive cult atmosphere and start up again with just the parts that improved people’s lives.

    Over the years, the parts of scientology that are the most workable and are delivered in the least stressful, most life-affirming way will be what scientology will evolve into. The rest of the various groups will perish outright, or dwindle down into smaller numbers and disappear.

    This genie is already out of the bottle, and a great deal of suffering is being created by those die-hards in the church trying to stuff the genie back inside. Not going to happen.

    Jeff lays out a workable approach to attempt to reform the subject–by really knowing what a cult is and then weeding out all the cult crap. Unfortunately, this cannot be done in any official capacity; it can only be done by squirrels and splinters. The reason is simply because LRH isn’t around anymore, and KSW#1 really beats it home that he is the only guy that can say what is or isn’t scientology. Therefore, who is gonna be the next LRH? DM has been attempting this to disastrous result. Plus the current crop of scientologist would never accept such a weeding out process because of the KSW indoctrination that LRH is an all or nothing thing.

    Many have voiced the idea that the scientology they started in is not the scientology of today, and I share this opinion. I also think that scientology is not just a damaged brand, it is a destroyed brand. Thus, some “squirrel group” that comes along, using most purely, those processes and techniques that truly help people, and don’t suppress them (and making sure people know that this is not the scientology that the culture currently abhors) has, in my opinion, the greatest chance of success.

    Ultimately, by the next 50 or so years, all of us are going to be gone, and what will remain of scientology will be what is carried forward by new people that came into the subject after us. How many of those people there are will be determined by how UN cult-like the subject is.

    • Marta permalink
      August 6, 2010 12:28 am

      John Doe- Yes. Very, very nicely said.

    • Aeolus permalink
      August 6, 2010 4:18 am

      Mr. Doe, I too have been pondering the future of Scientology, as a subject and as an organization. My guess is that the Church will collapse but continue as a cinder of its former self, while the subject will evolve along much the same lines as Buddhism, which runs the gamut from Aum Shinriko to Zen. There are many teachers past and present with their own groups of followers, and individual Buddhists who belong to no organization. About the only thing they all have in common is that they acknowledge Buddha as source. And some of the groups definitely qualify as cults. Now that I think about it, Christianity has followed much the same pattern, although Rome managed to hold onto its position as “The Church” for quite some time.

      For me personally, KSW was always too big a pill to swallow, and I stuck to LRH’s earlier advice to evaluate each datum and action to see if it was true for me. Some of them were, to a startling degree. Some others, not so much. The best auditing I’ve had was from a field auditor. The worst, ironically, was on the Freewinds, but that was after the little dictator started throwing sand in the gears.

      Although I’m probably done with organized religion for this lifetime, there are two things I would like to see. First, a free online searchable database of all of LRH’s writings. Second, at least one organization, preferably several, that provide trustworthy and affordable auditor training. In spite of my ridge on KSW, I do recognize that there is a right way to audit that must be learned, and I do want others, and future generations, to be able to have the gains I’ve gotten. Without the crap, of course.

      • John Doe permalink
        August 6, 2010 5:43 am

        Aeolus,

        I share your views you’ve expressed here, except…I’m not so sure the church will collapse and continue as a mere cinder, only because there is a wild card here: about a billion dollars controlled by the sociopath. Certainly, enrollment will collapse and this already seems to be occurring. But the legal entity of the C of S can go along for quite a while on a billion dollars.

        Of course, legal actions can quite quickly deplete the church’s coffers…

    • August 8, 2010 3:28 pm

      John Doe, your essay was excellent! Thank you. And, I concur with all you stated. One can easily see what you described manifesting with each passing day. There is no doubt that scn is on the metamorphosis fast track.

  18. It's me again permalink
    August 6, 2010 3:11 pm

    John Doe,

    Some smart Legal Firm would need to get proof that the IAS Funds have beenlegally misused and get a judge to put a freeze on all IAS and other misused accounts then start personal legal actions against those who have misused donations for personal gain. This way those funds could not be used for legal fees which would put off members from getting justice for years on end.

    Of course this would take money up front to get a Legal Firm to take the case, but if a Legal Firm believed there was a chance to win, their percentage would be well worth it to them.

  19. August 6, 2010 10:39 pm

    I want to acknowledge one basic major thing that every being is entitled to, since being born.

    We ARE humans (not “Super Humans”).
    We CAN make many things in the Human world for Humans.

    We Love this place called Earth and that’s the best and only reason we are here doing what we are doing and living life we are living.

    Life is Fun! It was designed to be this way.
    Having fun is OK! Being stupid cult member is NOT!

    Life is Love!

    Enjoy it.
    Don’t spoil it.

    • August 8, 2010 4:43 pm

      VaD, great comment!

      Your mention of super-humans catapulted me over onto another branch of thought. Since I’m here I figure why let a good branch go to waste so I’m gonna talk about what I’m finding to be existing on this branch.

      Both as a young kid and as an older kid (up to late teens) I was an avid reader of comic books. I had piles of comic books stacked around my room and they were considered by myself to be of great value. The primary subject matter of these comic books were the stories of superheros with super-powers overcoming super-evil villians with super-evil powers. But not all my superheros existed in comic books. Some were on TV. For example, there was this little mouse with super powers. He was called Mighty Mouse and whenever he arrived on the scene, the day was saved. Saved, of course, from the deeds of the evil villians he encountered. Then, on a show called Captain Kangaroo, there was this kid by the name of Tom Terrific and his dog Manfred. Now Tom didn’t really have super powers perse but he was incredibly smart. And, it was his being super smart that allowed him to be a superhero and solve all manner of terrible problems that were happening to people and the environment. And Popeye! Can’t forget Popeye. Just a can full of spinach was all it took for Popeye to become a superhero and save the damsel in distress – his sweetie, Olive Oil. Finally, another prominent superhero in my life (albeit, I had a ridge on the guy) who had no comic book telling his stories nor was he making any personal appearances on any TV shows, was this guy that lived a couple of thousand years ago. His name was Jesus Christ. Jesus was a superhero that had all kinds of superpowers and he fought a very evil villian known as the Devil. So here VaD is what made up my mythos and it is a mythos that has greatly influenced my direction in life.

      When the path I was travelling intercepted one of the paths (routes onto the bridge) that LRH had established and as I came to know him….he soon became my new superhero. But he was not a superhuman. He was a superthetan only posing as a human. And LRH and his super organization called The Church of Scientology were battling the evil of the planet being led by the horrible and dreaded PSYCHES. Not only was I invited to join this superhero LRH and his org in the battle for ultimate freedom from evil, I was also told that I too could become a superhero with super powers just like LRH. I too could become OT. This was better than any comic book story or TV show. It was even better than Jesus. This was a kid’s dream come true! I was going to get to be a superhero with superpowers and using my superpowers I would fight evil and save the day! You see, my mythos had totally set me up and prepared me for this. Fascinating!

      Wow! VaD, thanks so much for popping me over to this branch. I had no idea this was here!

      ……………..

      On another note…this just occurred to me. In scn the OTs are a secret society. But even more secret, is upper mgmt. After reaching the state of Clear, scn became a secret society complete with its own hierarchy. It was a secret society that one had to first be invited into, then pass through a vetting process and finally, pay large sums of money to enter and even larger sums of money to continue moving up the hierarchy. Furthermore, once “in” one was owned and controlled by the society to do the bidding of the society. Also, once ‘in’, one was not permitted to ever leave. To leave meant eternal damnation i.e., forever trapped in the illusion, the MEST Universe.

      How about a soundtrack to go with this story…..hmmm….this is the best I can do on such short notice.

  20. August 7, 2010 5:35 pm

    Jeff,

    You just gave me some good cogs for the day, week, month and perhaps the next couple of years!

    This one really hits home just like the last several powerhouses of truth and assistance you’ve written in recent months.

    I’m very glad to have you on the good side of the force, oh wise and learned Jedi Master!!!

    For I am but a mere grasshopper and ………er………..wait………that’s cult think, isn’t it!

    IO

  21. Obnosis permalink
    August 11, 2010 4:45 am

    I thought LRH was genius when he explained Infinity-Valued Logic and there is only Relative Truth (the Logics). It always bugged me how Scientologists were often so black and white in their thinking. You are so right Jeff with the thought-stopping ideas and labels. They put one right into two-valued logic. They stop one from granting any beingness.

  22. ceestr8 permalink
    August 24, 2010 11:22 pm

    Jeff, this is a great article. It really hit home.

    You know it’s weird, sometimes cognitions can be on the simplist and the most obvious of things, and eventhough one “knew it” all along, for some reason it didn’t as-is until given the right indication…

    Well, this morning, while drinking my coffee, and thinking about your article that I’d read the day before, it actually hit me with a huge cog about something I’d been carrying around in my head for at least the last decade. In fact, I think this is the first time I’ve had a charge blowing cog in a really long time.

    It’s the datum that the “real reason” I left staff, and eventually basically the whole subject, was because of my personal acts of ommission and commission; that they were the cause and nothing else. And that I have remained on the outside because these things have never been properly handled or cleaned up.

    I knew this not was not really the case for me…that I was pretty clean actually. That I’d contributed a hell of a lot to my org and Scientology in the past; that my true reasons for leaving were valid, based on the greatest good; and that there were aspects of the church I’d truly grown tired of/disagreed with. Nevertheless, the thought of unhandled overts and the subsequent feeling of guilt and that I’d “wronged the org” still remained with me.

    As you know, this datum of “resonsibility” is well drilled into Scientologists to the point where one can never assign cause to anything external; particularly any wrong doing of the church or church terminal. It’s always what “you” did and that’s that.

    I realized this morning how this thinking is such BS!

    My reasons for leaving were in fact valid!
    Those observations and choices I made based on the greatest good were actually correct!
    The overts of ommission and commission that had the effect of my leaving were not mine at all but were those committed on me by the church…and over time, I’d decided enough’s enough!

    A simple comparison would be, if you had a 2-D that had a problem with fidelity, or a drug problem, and you couldn’t fix them, you’d be well within your rights and it would be perfectly correct for you to leave them. There’s really no difference!

    Again, it’s a really obvious point and I feel a bit of an idiot for even mentioning it, but thanks Jeff, you indicated some truth for me.

    • lunamoth permalink
      September 9, 2010 11:29 am

      ceestr8

      This thread is now over two weeks old, and the chances that you’re coming back to this to find an ack are pretty slim, but I have to acknowledge this beautiful cognition!

      You are absolutely correct! Leaving was the right, and best, and most ethical thing to do! You have the right to leave a group, and don’t need anyone’s approval, permission or authorization to do so and to be completely right in doing it.

      I am so happy you have fully realized the truth of that. Pretty liberating, isn’t it?

      lunamoth

Trackbacks

  1. Tweets that mention I’m OK, you’re OK « Leaving Scientology -- Topsy.com

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: