The Analysis Point for the CoS| The Analysis Point for the CoS | | Print | |
| Wednesday, 24 February 2010 17:12 |
|
I really want to thank everyone that responded to the articles entitled YOUR OPINION PLEASE. I mused over them for a while and here is my take. This may not be in agreement with everyone's views on the matter, but as this is a free forum, then I will say it anyhow. Most people I have talked to, Independents included, have the same viewpoint - KSW. We want to see Scientology make it. We want to see the Church of Scientology survive these times and come out a winner and perpetuated into the future. It occurred to me, and maybe I'm just a bit slow here, that my 34 years in Scientology, most of it in the Sea Org, was not for naught. Factually, any of us that contributed to this motion contributed to the future track of Scientology, we helped to put a philosophical movement into motion, put our shoulders to that wheel, and we put it into momentum. It has been a learning curve for all of us. We learned that in spite of the policies and protocols set down by LRH, that the organization was not without error and that it was corruptable. We found out what we didn't know, what we couldn't deal with within the framework of existing policy and protocols and what we failed to handle. It has been an education in how to free a people. No one else has possibly ever attempted what we tried to do in just ONE lifetime - to free an entire population of a reactive mind and to put them back on track again as free beings. It's NEVER been done before, never been attempted - in fact - as far as we know - the entire process has been the reverse. We are the first people to have come along who dedicated themselves entirely and completely to saving mankind on a spiritual (not a religious) level. Keep the religious aspect of Scientology out of this because that is just a significance that has to do with tax brackets and survival on a planet that would otherwise defeat it if it wasn't labelled as such. But we learned from this experience. We found out where we were weak, where we were vulnerable, and where we could be victimized. These are important lessons for the future. In truth, this has been at best just Round One. With that said, this is my analysis of the broader picture, and my take on what MUST be done. 1. Scientology and the Church of Scientology is NOT the issue, never will be. THE issue is CORRUPT LEADERSHIP. Nothing more - nothing less. That leadership has in itself corrupted and prevented REAL justice from happening. Through its abuses and perversions of "ethics" and "justice" it has effectively eliminated the concept of security in the Sea Org and now in Scientology. Most of us have correctly labelled that as a dictatorship - tyranny or any number of other modifiers. The exact analysis point is therefore that: THE PROBLEM WITH THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY IS ITS CORRUPT LEADERSHIP - DAVID MISCAVIGE. That is the message that must be repeated over and over again in articles, the media and throughout the web until everyone starts resonating that TRUTH. Scientology is not to blame, nor the Church - it is ONLY the corruption introduced by ONE man who has manipulated the organization and is molding it HIS way. 2. Those of us on the outside, Independents, Scientologists, former Sea Org members are unfortunately left without a voice, or it seems so, because we are off the Scientology org board. Department 21, SOURCE, has been infiltrated by a tyrannt who pretends to emulate LRH, but is nothing more than a traitor. We are also cut off from other channels of recourse as the justice system has been usurped and perverted - there is no unbiased justice at this time in the Church. There is no ED International SO #1 line anymore which LRH himself set up. There is no Exec Strata in existence to write to. RTC Reports Officer, supposedly the last port of call for KSW, is nothing more than a cheap groupie to David Miscavige now. We are off the Scientology org board, which of course is a frustrating thing since we have every right to be heard, but those channels have been denied to us. The Independent movement has opened the door for people to voice themselves and to make a stand. It is inevitable that the Church of Scientology under its current circumstances will fracture into other groups - it is a repeat of history and there is little that can be done to stop that as people are going to take a stand. 3. We must resonate the message on every line possible that THE PROBLEM WITH THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY IS ITS CORRUPT LEADERSHIP - DAVID MISCAVIGE. This message needs to go out everywhere with these supporting facts, because: a. It will fill the void with the right message. b. It will start to chip away at the false public image that David Miscavige is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build through lavish events, promotion (about him) and purchasing properties and renovating buildings (also about him). We need to correctly position him as corrupt on the simple basis of these facts: - that since 1990 Scientology has been on a decline. If GM or TOYOTA or any corporation released those figures to the world, how long do you think its CEO would last - whether people demanded it or not - the press would tear him to pieces. We need to do the same thing with David Miscavige. The word needs to go out in such a way that the world sees him for what he actually is - an inept and corrupt leader. And in so doing, the attention comes off Scientology or the Church. - that he has spent hundreds of millions of parishioners donations on expensive and lavish buildings at the International headquarters of Scientology and around the world for properties and buildings that are not necessary and which are beyond the capability of being sustained. - that he has morphed the Church of Scientology from a philosophical and spiritual movement to a money making machine to sell materials and obtain donations, using force, coercion and threats to do so, in order to support his extravagant schemes. - that he has raked off a nice portion of Scientology funds for himself and for his personal staff, substantially in excess of any "allowance" that other Sea Org members are conferred. - that he has engaged in physical acts of violence and abuse against its members in violation of the laws of the land. None of this includes his perversions of policy or tech because factually that means NOTHING to the general public outside of the walls of Scientology. His corruption needs to be presented in terms of MONEY and ABUSE. That is what the media listens to and what they will resonate. The rest is just fluff to them. It is not just the Scientology public that we must say this message to. We need to tell the WHOLE world because Scientology is not proprietary material just for Scientologists. It was meant for everyone, and like any body of knowledge, it should be free to be viewed and used by people to make a better world. By resonating that message, we ARE Keeping Scientology Working. We are not the enemy - but by virtue of the fact that David Miscavige has aliented us from our group, prevented our voices from being heard, has forced us to do the only thing we can do which is to go after him as covered in HCO PL RESPONSIBILITY OF LEADERS. People eventually catch on to corruption, but it is up to us to FILL the void with the right message. We all worked too hard, gave of ourselves too much, to let it be nullified or made nothing of by ONE corrupt and suppressive person. We also all agreed to KSW - and I believe that what we must do is to focus our attack on DAVID MISCAVIGE with the analysis as above so that he goes down and the Church goes UP. Outside the Box |
"Scientology has been taken over by a self-appointed dictator, David Miscavige, who has turned the Creed of the Church of Scientology, the Code of a Scientologist, and the Credo of a True Group Member on their heads and instituted the virtual practice of Reverse (Black) Dianetics..." 
Comments
There needs to be a well coordinated effort to channel the energy. It should be multi faceted as well giving everyone the opportunity to be more involved in what will affect their future.
I've read the blogs the last few months and people want to be involved but there is no obvious way to work together and I am concerned that some energy just dies.
Without something active to do more people may continue to sit on the sidelines and wait to see what happens.
Yes, DM is the SP I/C in PT. He must certainly go. However, and you may not like this, DM is not basic on the chain. The problem goes to the core of the subject itself--the GO/OSA, the RPF, Fair Game, and many other such constructs came from the Founder himself.
Elsewhere on this site, Ron is characterized as flawed. This cannot be glossed over. He and the religion are a complex fabric, a warp and woof of good and evil. Getting rid of DM will be easy compared to sorting out the rest. Who among us, for example, is going to confront the outpoints of KSW?
The church cannot be corrected because LRH cannot be corrected. Unless that changes, something new--without the paranoia, without the secrets, without the fronts, without the abuses--needs to be born. I have mixed feelings about watching the church go down in flames, but I see an awakening field and a brighter future there.
Target #1 has to be cutting out the cancer that is killing the church. That would usher in a new era for Scientology. Let's call it a Golden Age of Ethics just for laughs.
But no one should worry about the scene becoming worse than it is already once Management changes. It's going to be so much better than what is going on right now.
Golden Age of Ethics!
I love the irony.
Anyway, I never viewed Miscavige as a legitimate "leader" anyway. Whether he's the only one involved in the corruption of the Church of Scientology will be determined by standard RB and probably a proper B Of I. Something which should have been done but never was when the GO hit the skids.
However, the fact is anyone who is worried that Miscavige being removed from his self created post of self appointed leader will cause turmoil and confusion.
Well yes this may happen, but it is up to us to put order back in after Mr. Confusion blows off.
He was just a false stable datum any way. A group Ser Fac and nothing more. Yeah I'm as willing to keep him around as much as I'd be willing to keep any insane computation.
Time for some group R3SC!
I agree that the point we need to stress now is that THE PROBLEM WITH THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY IS ITS CORRUPT LEADERSHIP - DAVID MISCAVIGE.
It can be efficiently pursued until DM is removed and the church put into some sort of receivership.
On a longer term basis, the deficiencies in the technology and the introduction of destructive policy must be reversed if the church is to survive as a viable entity.
If the church responds only by changing the people involved, the brand name of Scientology will continue to decline and the church will be history in a few years.
The independent field will not go away but will not generate significant revenue for practitioners until a coalition of groups and individuals develop effective PR campaigns and training facilities for the advancement of scientology in the field.
The Internet makes distance learning and even auditing a distinct possibility. Networked auditors and Case Supervisors can handle many of the functions that used to require large facilities.
The future will be a network of practicing scientologists with a representative form of organization. Top down management will not be a welcome development.
The biggest change I see is that Scientology will become an open source model where research is done by many and tested by networks of researchers and practitioners.
LRH did not develop all of the tech that is in use today and did not credit those who did the contributions. The open source model mirrors the actual process of discovery and ensure that credit and responsibility are correctly assigned.
The open source model allows for faster evolution and correction of problems. It offers an overwhelming advantage over traditional closed shop development efforts.
I love the idea of Scientology as a dynamic force rather than deteriorating into an ossified and dead technology.
It makes sense to me even though I can see this viewpoint as being "radical" to others. There is clearly a chasm here that must be bridged.
I leave you with a quote from Mark Twain:
“The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out, the conservative adopts them.”
The people I dealt with on a daily basis were wonderful, but it was evident from the beginning that there were arbitrary rules imposed from above that could not be questioned.
There are nuggets of pure gold in scientology technology, but there are areas of pure insanity and it is hard to separate one from the other.
Top down management has turned the original concept of an Ideal Org that frees people into a fearsome machine that enslaves them. See http://possiblyhelpfuladvice.com/?p=168 for a more complete description of this.
I see Open Source Scientology as the ultimate solution to providing a stable and sane source of Scientology tech to the world.
Scientology is a fully developed spiritual technology while computer technology isn't.
They are not the same thing.
Also the internet has always been a group effort.
A group "electronic bank" (which is what computers where originally called).
Personally I think most people the medium confused with the act of communicating. What is now called *quote* content *unquote*.
Yet miss the importance of it.
We've already been there and done that with "open source" Scientology. Only its called something else.
Squirreling.
Which is basically what RTC has done with the technology.
So are you saying we should contribute to this motion?
Thanks but no thanks.
The reason I left the Church was to get away from squirrels, like Miscavige for example.
Respectfully, I believe your analysis is too narrowly focused. Assigning blame to only “one evil man” may be a salable, sound-bite story for the media and non-Scientologistsis but it is not an analysis to base an actual reform of the Church on.
Your “one evil man” analysis suggests that the whole problem can be solved by simply replacing that man. Such a scenario has never been true in history. No evil man acts alone nor without the consent if not full support of those around him.
If the “one evil man” myth is perpetuated and becomes the only basis for reform, any future form of the Church will be in jeopardy of repeating the mistakes of the Miscavige era.
A clear, in-depth analysis needs to be made of scene, and the culture in which this situation arose so that an appropriate and effective response can be planned.
The first step is to acknowledge that Miscavige did not rise in a vacuum. Just as a plant will not grow without the proper conditions of soil, air and water, the conditions for Miscavige’s rise must have been present in the Church, and more succinctly, the SO, for him to take advantage of.
I am not versed enough in the SO culture to do such an analysis but looking in from the outside, I’d have to ask a few questions.
What spiritual or religious value is there in the RPF? In overboarding? In face-ripping? In the “better than thou” caste system of Scientology, where Staff are better than public and SO are superior to all. These ideas and practices did not originate under DM.
Why the hidden data line? Why does the SO have one set of secret policies upon which they operate and staff and public have only the philosophical and religious texts of Scientology?
These are just a few of the many questions that require review. The Scientology philosophy has much to recommend it. The Scientology Church, its regulations and practices, particularly those of its ruling echelon, the SO, will need a thorough reevaluation before any meaningful reform will occur and certainly before any Scientologist or non-Scientologist will give their trust to the Church.
The opportunity will arise for Scientologists to evaluate the management structure of their religion. They can do this without, in any way, invalidating the religious technology of Scientology. Green on white was only ever intended to service the red on white, and where it does not do that, it has no value.
When this great sort out begins, Scientologists will need to decide if the Sea Org should have any role in the Church or not. Unless they are willing to look at that option, and to look beyond the “one evil man” solution to the culture that gave him rise, then I’m afraid the ground could be set for a new incarnation at some point in the future.
Beautifully expressed and I agree 100%. Nothing less than complete transparency should be accepted from any replacement to current management, and that includes a full review of s.o. management policy.
There is no longer any room for "do as I say, not as I do" on the part of the church.
The fundamental problem I see is that a hierarchical organization, which can be controlled from a single post at the top, is a magnet for anti-social types who need to dominate others. It was OK for LRH because he was a social being, but even then if you look at when Scientology was doing best, it was when a network of independent franchise Missions were the front line of Scientology.
One of the first power-plays by the mad midget was to trick and bully the Mission holders out of their independence, and that was the beginning of the long slide that continues today. If Scientology is to rise from the ashes and persist on any meaningful scale, the basic structure of the Church must be re-done.
This analysis nailed this. Brilliant. Thank you!
One question I have. When DM is exposed and removed I can see a mass of confusion happening within the Church, worse in the SO and then less worse in the Orgs down on through to the Public. How can the Church possibly rebuild with all of this and put a system in that ensures that something like this will never happen again.
The way I see it is that most of the good competent guys are out here not inside. Would you ex-SO guys go back to take up the needed Posts.
While I never wanted to join the SO, my dedication was SO-like at the Class V Org...but I don't know if I could go back to the no money and long hours conditions that would be necessary to endure while the Church rebuilds and if many others feel the same way, then how can the Church actually go back up.
Thanks OTB
so proud to be associated with the organization
at all times though. This is ironic since i've been off-lines for so long. Yet, when I 'reveal' my beingness as a Scientologist to those that have only heard the cult stories i'm often put in a category that's unfavorable.
Scientology just plain works. Organizations, at least the ones that i'm aware of, tend to fall 'prey' to certain reactive tendencies.
Perhaps it's merely because the power positions attract some who want to do harm or merely become drunk with power and forget their morals ethics. And, forget that ethics and morals require continual action.
Thanks for providing me the opportunity to say
this. It feels good to know there are others out there :-)
Miscavige needs to go and the Broekers needs to take the posts assigned to them. This is the stable datum and this will work better than any new ideas, no matter how much we agree on them.
If the Broekers doesn't want the job then they need to pick someone for it.
1. Just because an organization puts you off their org board doesn't mean you've been placed off the actual org board. Purpose and product are the keys to any org board, not titles and positions assigned by an organization that might or might not be producing the products relevant to the org's purpose.
2. Any organization is actually two organizations: a theoretical one as described in policy and documents, and the actual one as lived by the participants.
3. Significance has great power to a thetan and should never be overlooked. A thetan is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions--each of which operates at Cause through significance. Significance establishes reality, thus ARC and understanding. Significance sets meaning, intention, decision, tone, direction, purpose, goals, and on and on.
3a. All policy and tech is conveyed via significance as presented in lectures, bulletins and policies (did I leave anything out? How about COB advices? Oh, that's a different org board.) It's up to the participant to provide the mass, energy, space, time, form and application.
4. Religion is faith, and when a person loses faith he loses everything of value. Integrity is faith. Confidence is faith. Love is based in faith. And perhaps LRH did make Scientology a religion for tax and social reasons, but the success of Scientology will depend utterly on the faith of its members. And that means that for Scientology to succeed, its members must really hold their faith at the highest level and stop winking at one another whenever "religion" is mentioned in the same breath as "Scientology." Doing such (mentally winking) makes us party to a scam. Doing such makes us disingenuous. Faith will precede technology. You have to get ethics in before the tech will work. And when your ethics is in you will have faith.
5. My faith has nothing to do with the church. Nor should your faith. (An organization exists to further a significance and establish a reality and produce products that establish that reality. All of that is based in significance which establishes space, energy, form, direction, product.) You do not need an organization to have faith. And dependence on an organization for faith puts your faith at effect rather than cause.
6. Implants are full of religion and religious ideology. Nearly every religious organization exists to control thetans and keep them benighted. From the beginning, religions were designed to control. And how better to control a thetan than to control or destroy his faith? It's one of the reasons we hate religions sometimes--all the betrayals.
7. Perhaps this is not the first attempt at freeing beings and returning them to native state. I can remember quite a few. It's a formidable task, met with varying degrees of success on this planet and before. Reactive minds are not accidental but planned. How a reactive mind operates has been known in this universe for quite some time. And every thetan inherently knows how to operate as a thetan as opposed to as a body. A thetan descends the Know-to-mystery scale but his knowingness and ability are all that keep the lower portions of the scale intact.
8. Apologies for the abstruse comments. Just thought some of you might like another view. Such as Lake Tahoo. Now there's a view.
Dynamically correct.
In the beginning there was LRH and his dynamics.
Now it's me, and my dynamics.
There is no "Mystery" of that.
I'm one who no longer finds much value in institutionalized spirituality. I understand many still DO, and this doesn't present any conflicts for me. I also think the tech of scientology is valuable and should be preserved.
Some people care very passionately that the church should be rebuilt after dm is done away with. I support their right to the expression and practice of their own spirituality, and if they want and need a church for that purpose, they should have one. But it's in the interests of all of us that any such organization is rebuilt with the least possibility that something like dm will ever happen again.
I think it's a big mistake to assume - and you are assuming - that dm is the only problem and not a symptom of yet "another problem. You don't find the correct "why by polling the public. If the correct for it. You do an investigation and you continue to pull strings until you find no more outpoints, and then you look at where the majority of the strings lead. Naming dm as the ONLY outpoint in the church leaves too many questions unanswered: HOW could dm have succeed to this degree within the organization? What fail-safes were not in place to stop this from happening? What policies could have contributed to the current scene?
If those factors are not addressed you will have rebuilt an organization(if such rebuilding even succeeds)with all the same flaws and inherent dangers that the current one has.
The most basic barrier to learning something is thinking you already know all about it. If we truly want to learn why and how such a disaster as david miscavige could have happened, we have to really look at the whole picture for what we can learn about it, and not assume we already know.
Consider: Long before DM hit the stage, I could see the potential for this scene. First Sea Org member I met back in 1970 was a pompous ass full of herself and her sense of "importance and power." (Eye roll.) Course I met a lot of wonderful SO members later, and quite a few like the first. I saw so much that reminded me of Nazi Germany (been there, done that--actually vs educationally.) and had trouble weighing the potential for great social harm against the potential of the tech for great social good.
So, a DM rising to power was never a surprise.
Notice the string?
When you have several scenes that overlap, you have to be careful not to assign the why for one scene as the why for all the overlapping scenes. You have to differentiate. DM is both a why for some scenes and a symptom for others.
Michael
ps. Luna moths are one of the most beautiful creatures ever designed on this planet. Used to see them while out playing in the evening when I was a kid. Also Imperial moths. Ever see one of those? Yellow and purple and almost as big.
We have all weighed those two things you mentioned, the potential of the organization for great social harm and the potential of the tech for great social good. I guess it's a measure of how valuable we have perceived the tech to be, that we have only now, when dm brutalizes loyal sea org members and threatens to "revoke the eternity" of each and every member who steps out of line, decided the harm to society is no longer potential but real.
(I would like to point out, as well, that dm has no power to destroy anybody's anything.
He is a parasite).
You make a very good point that several scenes overlap here, and that dm is the cause of some, but a symptom of others. The bottom line is, we must be willing to LOOK, willing to confont, and willing to discover we have been wrong about past
consideration, actions and failures to act. Otherwise, we will remain unaware of exact time, place, form and event; in other words, stupid.
lunamoth
P.S. I've never seen Imperial moths, but lunamoths seem like beautiful ghosts to me; weightless, pale, floating through the moonlight...
I can also foresee a problem with the coming reform unless it is THOROUGH and DEEP. That must include ALL staff and public being given the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the last 60 years, wherever that truth leads. It won't be enough for Starkey, Mithoff and Lesevre to give a 2 hour "briefing" to say "We got the SP; Miscavige is gone! Everything's all right now - we're in charge and we're getting back on Source!" (Rapturous applause from the SO ranks...). It must include and recognise the Independent field and its contributions. A think-tank of Geir, Marty, Dan and Steve for example is more likely to usefully contribute about 5.4X practically than any amount of current SO execs, who, let's face it, just by being there are continuing the problem rather than being part of the solution.
That DM must go has been the glue holding the Independent Scn movement together thus far. No problem with getting agreement on that point.
But Craig Houchin brings up some good points. I agree with him that this analysis is too narrow.
A few people have dipped a toe in the water of gasp, Changing Policies or the Tech in Scientology. Such is a courageous act, considering we as scientologists have been admonished against even thinking this thought, let alone possibly being labeled squirrel, etc.
If we are willing to denounce the leadership of Scn as corrupt, well, what are we to replace it with? A correct "on source" leader? What mechanism should we put in place to remove him from post, should he become corrupt?
LRH emphasized repeatedly that he was the sole source of Scientology, and while this protected the subject from destructive changes for the most part, a mindset was ingrained in scientologists to respect and hold inviolate a Single Authority Figure who dictates what the subject is, and the policies to be followed, etc.
Well, this is now a large part of the problem with the structure itself. Unless the entire subject is teased apart and the technology separated from the man LRH, in the same way as the technology has now been separated from the church by the Independents movement, scientology becomes vulnerable to becoming subverted by the next Single Authority Figure over and over again.
This is such a fine line to walk. Where do you draw the line to ensure that the subject and technology remain effective and yet add to or change policies to prevent bad things from happening?
There are those that will rail out against this suggestion, saying we only need to get on-source and apply what we have. I'm sorry, actual evidence has shown that this is not enough.
Not all the HCOBs, HCOPLs, hard-working and good-intentioned staff stopped DM from coming into power and remaining there, wreaking havoc for over two decades. This is a Massive Fail.
As long as the "sourceness" of Source is senior in the hearts and minds of scientologists to the actual application of the technology itself, they will be prone to accept another single authority figure dictating to them what scientology is or isn't.
Let the hosannas ring out on the birthdays of everyone applying the tech, not just on the birthday of the guy that came up with it.
For instance you have this misconception that Scientology is supposed to have a "leader".
There isn't a single policy ever written that backs up this contention!
Sure there are policies on leadership and what that is.
But there is no policy that says there is only one single leader that all organizational decisions are deferred too!
So to begin with you are trying to "correct" an organizational "flaw" that does not in fact exist!
Like polishing the chrome on a Harley when the engine needs a tune up.
Yeah you can polish that chrome forever but it's not going to fix the problem.
Or to put it in Scientology terms you can continue to pull false withholds and overts but the case ain't going to improve!
In other words, dicking around with the policies isn't going to "fix" the problem when the problem doesn't exist in the policy itself!
I mean here in a America it says right in the Constitution that only Congress has the power to declare war. Yet ever since the Korean War it has been the president who has declared war and the stupid congress who has gone along with this idiocy!
Trust me amending the Constitution or passing a war powers act is not going to fix this problem.
What's going to fix is Congress to actually perform the duties it was assigned under the Constitution.
Not write a bunch of idiotic laws to obfuscate the issue!
Yet these are the type of proposals I see!
Let's try something new!
Like follow the idiotic orders of an ignorant, high school drop out probably financed and supported by our enemies who has absolutely no knowledge of tech and policy because he calls himself the COB!
Wow!
What a kewl idea!!!
Nuff said!
Which is exactly how we got into this mess to begin with!
Much of your response is completely true. Policies were not applied and had they been applied, the church would would not be in this mess. Complete agreement from me on that.
But I don't agree that all we need to do is apply policy is the solution to this. What if, for instance, someone just decides not to apply policy. Then a lot of policies. Sort of like the exact situation we have now.
RJ, you made the following statement that actually supports my argument:
"In other words, dicking around with the policies isn't going to 'fix' the problem when the problem doesn't exist in the policy itself!"
Exactly. The post of COB doesn't exist in policy. The IAS doesn't exist in policy. The Ideal Orgs program doesn't exist in policy. Ad Nauseum. Yet it is a fact that these things nevertheless do exist, and that they are problems.Something a little more than just dicking around with some policies is what is needed here.
RJ, your response did not adequately address one of my main points:
"Not all the HCOBs, HCOPLs, hard-working and good-intentioned staff stopped DM from coming into power and remaining there, wreaking havoc for over two decades."
To just tell everyone to apply policy was not enough, just in our first few years after LRH passed. What about in a hundred years? A thousand?
So look, it is perfectly all right to come up with some sort of mechanism that is strong enough to prevent this situation from happening again. Consider:
Step 6 of 3D Danger: "Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent the condition from recurring."
Step 6 of 1D Danger says it even stronger: "Formulate and adopt firm policy that will hereafter detect and prevent the same situation form continuing to occur." (Italics mine)
PS: I got my "exclamation point shield" up. Only one of the 16 ya threw at me got through...
Isn't the Goal of Scientology still what it was? I seem to recall it said nothing about the Church, the SO, etc., just society and the 4th Dynamic.
Didn't LRH himself talk about how much movement towards such a world could be made with the simplest aspects of Scientology. Of course, he did, as I'm sure almost all of you recall.
Our question should be how best to move Planet Earth and human society towards the Ideal Scene envisioned in the Goal. It looks like to me that basic Scientology is in a condition of NE at this point. The Church of Scientology (Church of DM) is a bit lower on the scale.
If what I'm saying is true, then we should apply the NE Formula as regard basic Scientology. This will include the end of the Church of DM (and maybe the end of the Church of Scientology itself if the public cannot be made to separate out the two) at the Church itself will counter-effort any application of the NE Formula for basic Scn.
What comm line? The Internet, of course.
What basic Scn? When I worked at LA Org in the early 80's, I was "encouraged" to sell DMSMH. I resisted and pushed POW as a better and more easily used basic book. WTH is also great. Basic PTS/SP tech. VM stuff. Improving comm cycles. All done without any reference to any therapy, counseling, etc., just self-help stuff, which is very acceptable to others in our society. Who cares if Scn gets the credit? Are we trying to change a civilization or build a church?
Not that I want to censor anyone, just wanted you to take note of this phenomenon.
This org, like so many, had delivered all the services it could to its public and then sent them up lines to the AO, ASHO, Flag, etc. Now the org was empty as no new public came in. Why?
It occurred to me that there are two basic approaches you can use to market:
1. Sell very expensive stuff to a few rich people, or
2. Sell lots of cheap stuff to many, many people.
Guess which one DM prefers.
Guess which one will help change the 4th Dynamic.
My solution is thus this: Despite much deserved black PR, interest in workable Scn tech is quite high. Provide it very cheaply via Internet and every other source possible to the ordinary Joe and Jane and watch them stream into orgs. Let go of the Missions and revert to original Mission policy by LRH.
If the focus had remained on getting basics into the society, we would have a different society by now. Those who were in LA during the "Op 4 D" period of the early, early 80's saw this happening. Then DM and his fools ruined it all, the theta PR collapsed, and things got blacker and blacker.
It can be reverted, however, and must be.
this is one of the best threads that i have ever read... I am a liberty activist and have read many threads on 911 truth, the Ron Paul meetup groups, sites like prisonplanet.com's forums and such and this is BY FAR the most civil, enlightened, enlightening and inspiring threads that i have read!
i found out about all this about three weeks ago. at first i didnt have an emotional reaction... then a few days ago i shed some tears...the thing that got to me was not my own story so much as the realization of how many lives had been adversely affected by something that they got into to make their lives better and other's lives better and which had the power to make their lives better but for one evil man and the degradation he wreaked upon a beautiful spiritual technology.
but NOW... i am exhilarated... every day i am feeling more and more of the mass from the Church of Miscarriage's oppression dissipating and I am seeing the incredible potential of this movement for all of mankind and every individual associated with it and and and...
and i am so impressed with the people and their stories.
we will win because we are doing something righteous and beautiful and powerful!
"TO MAN!"
Garko
”Scientology IS the issue.”
No opposing comment was issued
”The problem goes to the core of the subject itself—the GO/OSA, the RPF, Fair Game, and many other such constructs came from the Founder himself.”
No opposing comment was issued
”The church cannot be corrected because LRH cannot be corrected.”
No opposing comment was issued
”...but if nothing else is changed, another dictator will sooner or later step into those same shoes.”
No opposing comment was issued
”The fundamental problem I see is that a hierarchical organization, which can be controlled from a single post at the top is a magnet for anti-social types who need to dominate others.”
No opposing comment was issued
”LRH did not develop all of the tech that is in use today and did not credit those who did the contributions. The open source model mirrors the actual process of discovery and ensures that credit and responsibility are correctly assigned.”
No opposing comment was issued
”Where do you draw the line to ensure that the subject and technology remain effective and yet add to or change policies to prevent bad things from happening?”
No opposing comment was issued
”There are those that will rail out against this suggestion, saying we only need to get on source and apply what we have. I'm sorry, actual evidence has shown that this is not enough.”
No opposing comment was issued
”LRH emphasized repeatedly that he was the sole source of Scientology, and while this protected the subject from destructive changes for the most part, a mindset was ingrained in scientologists to respect and hold inviolate a Single Authority Figure who dictates what the subject is, and the policies to be followed, etc”
No opposing comment was issued
”Unless the entire subject is teased apart and the technology separated from the man LRH, ...”
No opposing comment was issued
”For instance you have this misconception that Scientology is supposed to have a ”leader”. There isn't a single policy ever written that backs up this contention!”
No opposing comment was issued
By selecting certain quotes and responding with only"No opposing comment was issued", it's like you're spanking the whole of the other blog commentators for not taking issue with these comments you seem to find self-evidently objectionable. Yet you offer no actual statement or rational argument to counter any of those arguments you quote.
You have selected a few negative comments out of this thread, and tried to elevate them in importance for unknown reasons. Are you daring to imply your nitpicked comments are representative of the entire website? If so, that is total bullshit.
Those few negative comments that you have selected represent only the viewpoint of those specific people and no one else.
You seem to be the one operating on group bank principles. One blog item and a handful of comments does not equate to a "group evolving truth." The very idea is absurd.
I'm starting to question who YOU are. You seem to have another agenda, which is to "find fault with the website and criticize it to shut it down." You are acting as a third party, not a participant.
You are over-generalizing and reading WAY more into this than the facts merit. You act like this is an "Official Committee to Reorganize Scientology" -- it's nothing of the sort. It's a blog. Have you never seen one before? Are you smoking crack?
Furthermore, I don't understand why you are taking a spectator viewpoint here. If you think it is wrong that no one has issued an opposing viewpoint, go tell it to the mirror.
Just click on "Reply" and you can issue all the opposing viewpoints you want. It seems strange and irresponsible or maybe just lazy and stupid that you are pointing a bony finger at people, while you yourself sit on the sidelines in judgment.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it is neither strange, irresponsible, lazy nor stupid. Maybe you are a hired plant. You sure sound like one.
Who is supposed to "issue" these opposing comments? You act like it is a fault as if someone somewhere is expected to "issue" opposing comment. A blog simply gives people the opportunity to contribute to the communication.
You are not getting involved with the message. Instead you are railing against and you are criticizing the medium.
It sounds like you don't like this website and don't want it to exist.
I was reminded of it by Archer's comment that Stefan Tunedal had picked only negative comments for his last post.
I saw those selected comments as positive and encouraging. Completely the opposite of what Archer perceived, and perhaps even the complete opposite of what Stefan intended.
Every individual will see or experience an event, not only from his specific point of view but will then process the event in his own unique way. It is only our desire for agreement that brings about the compromise we all call reality. When seeking Truth, compromise is the last thing I think anyone would like to admit to.
Nevertheless, KSW shut the door and walled-in the path and we all agreed to compromise so we could follow that particular road.
I think it is apparent to most on these blogs now that LRH did not create/discover (choose your preferred verb) the tech all alone. Many others contributed. So you could say that a group did evolve what we all think of as Scientology tech.
So, I agree with Stefan that a group will never evolve Truth, since Truth is individual and personal. However, a group can evolve tools or workable technology of various kinds, be it for building dams or seeking spiritual awareness.
Truth is a personal awareness that each individual experiences on his/her own personal journey and cannot be given, imparted, or shared by or with another. However, tools or a workable technology to help that person along his/her path can be shared, can be co-experienced and can be co-evolved.
But there also needs to be the freedom to drop the hammer and pick up a saw, or to create a whole new tool when the need arises.
There is a great article written by Joe Howard called Inside Scientology Compilations http://www.scientology-cult.com/inside-tech.html that gives an insiders view on the compilation of the tech. He says,
Quote:I think it is a matter of taking responsibility. Relying on a group to sort everything out for us is irresponsible. This thread however is simply people venting and supplying suggestions. Some of those ideas may be good and some may be bad. But Scientology is "knowing how to know" so it is not hard to sort out the good from the bad if one has any responsibility.
I got that Stefan was simply trying to stop anyone from even having a say. That seems like censorship. Maybe that's not what he's trying to say.
I don't agree with all the posts. I absolutely do agree with some. But I will fight for everyone's right to have a say -- it's right in the Creed of the Church of Scientology.
LRH always said that MORE communication, not less, is the solution. And in that regard, this website, open as it is, is a breath of fresh air and must be protected.
What you so effectively point out is certainly interesting, isn't it?
RSS feed for comments to this post