In defence of Hubbard

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by Balthasar, Sep 4, 2013.

View Users: View Users
  1. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    You may consider it to be "stirring the pot" but that's your dealio.

    I felt XB was posting a sort of psychoanalysis- or maybe that's too loaded a term, connotatively speaking. Let's say that I thought he was posting a comment about another contributor that was negative and that was analyzing that person, and that I felt it just happens too often. So I said so.

    I notice that you're saying things to me, too. See? That happens here. You're posting about somebody getting pushback. See? That happens here.

    As far as what's allowed, I did not say that it was forbidden. I pointed out that it was not forbidden. I question your use of the second person in sentence #1.

    And, no, nobody should be giving anyone a bucket of crap on the internet. Countering a posted opinion, sure. Throwing crap at someone is a different thing. Interesting that you felt that somebody was tossing crap. Your words, not mine.

    I'm for equal speech but I don't condone giving people crap or posting ad homs, including telling people that they've got stuff wrong with them. That ain't cool and nobody's gonna tell me it is. If you have a problem with my defending people and then you follow suit, well...

    I see a lot of posts about how it's not ok to post pro Scn stuff on this board. I've been seeing it for years. Here's what I think:

    It isn't right to post pro Scn stuff here
    It isn't wrong to post pro Scn stuff here
    It isn't right to post anti Scn stuff here
    It isn't wrong to post anti Scn stuff here

    The forum owner decides what is allowed here. There are boards that do not allow pro Scn stuff on their boards, or there have been. Know what? I think it's great.
    There are boards that don't allow anti Scn stuff on their boards. Know what? I think it's great.

    The only things I don't think are great are people (who are not forum owners) who have a problem with opposing/unusual/minority views on a board wherein such views are not prohibited; and writing stuff about what kinds of people other contributors are and other hostile ad hom stuff.

    Honestly, why not throw a total whoppin' can o' whuppass totally rebutting pro Scn viewpoints without throwing crap at people or saying that they shouldn't say those things?

    I have defended people on this thread. And I also - if you saw it- expressed great disagreement with the thread op about his thoughts re Paulette Cooper. What's more, I did so more than once. That would have, perhaps, been a far more relevant and worthy thing for you to comment upon, if you and I actually had to interact on this thread...
     
  2. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter



    I just ain't so down with the analysis of other people that happens so often on da interwebz. I've stated why, and that's that.


    And since you're not thinking of me, then, good. I will therefore expect to not hear again about the posts I wrote when you first came and how evil they wuz. That's really awesome and I'm thrilled to hear it. Good on ya! :biggrin:
     
  3. Xenu's Boyfriend

    Xenu's Boyfriend Silver Meritorious Patron


    Claire, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and try to assume that your use of, I'm not even sure what to call it, Ebonics, rap, black street talk, or whatever the hell it is, has nothing to with the fact that you know I'm African-American.

    But to be honest, given the way you operate, this could be another one of your passive-aggressive attempts to humiliate me and drive me underground. Just for further reference: if you are addressing me personally, pro-Scientology, anti or whatever, please refrain from using dis, da and dat, "I ain't down", waz, and z's at the end of words, in general, like interwebz. You're never heard me talk that here, and I've never heard you talk like that before, so I'm not sure what that is, or why it is coming up now.

    And not thinking of you in the present, doesn't mean that I won't refer to the past, because I think what happened here now was indicative of a dynamic that takes place from time to time. I preferred not to bring it up, actually, but when you mentioned me "psychoanalyzing" people, that was a direct reference to what I did to you and Mark in order to explore your motivation. You are the one bringing up the past.

    Finally, I have learned to appreciate the discourse here and to listen if someone genuinely says, as Tori Magoo will sometimes say in lectures, "I got something out of the communication course. I actually liked it." Or, as someone else said in an interview, "The woman was auditing me was one of the best auditors I've ever had. She was really wonderful." Or someone like Geir who says he also got something from several OT levels. I'm not running around saying these people should be burned at the stake. I, too, want a nuanced discussion, and I am learning.

    But this thread became a discussion where some were suggesting that LRH putting a child in a chain locker by himself as a punishment - not his room, but a chain locker which is extremely dangerous - was not abusive behavior to a child. That just doesn't make sense, whoever the hell does it, whether it is Hubbard or not. Again, there are people who are just shit stirrers for no reason, and i feel manipulated by that. That's what I was trying to deconstruct.

    But I guess you win, again, Claire. because, as usual, the conversation gets diverted to a personal relationship, instead of the issue I was confronting - created by the people you feel the need to protect. So I guess we are back where we started.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2013
  4. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    (not being sarcastic)

    XB, I do appreciate your giving me benefit of the doubt. Honestly.

    Thank you and I hope you have a great rest of the weekend.

    If you ever want to chat about stuff, please feel free to ask me anything at all, if the fancy strikes you. If not, then, let's just proceed on the idea that we are cyberfriends who sometimes talk to each other here and that it's ok.

    If I get the impression that you're doing this or that with somebody, I'll let it be. Not like I don't have my own quirks, goddess knows.

    By the way- It's been 8 months since I had a Diet Cola or any Diet pop (with aspartame). Though I occasionally use Splenda (a different chemical) in my ice tea- but even there, reduced that greatly. Remember when we were talking about that?

    Warmly,

    Claire Swazey
     
  5. Xenu's Boyfriend

    Xenu's Boyfriend Silver Meritorious Patron

    Claire, we're good. And I really don't mind that we disagree sometimes - I respect you and your experience and I'm not saying that I'm perfect or that I can't learn. Whatever the differences, I think we both agree that what is happening in the "church" right now doesn't serve anyone and needs to be changed. And on that, I'm glad we are on the same side.

    Congratulations on the soda. That is a big deal - I stopped this summer, picked one up in an airport, and have had trouble cutting back. Your post about this is timely as I was thinking again about giving up today.

    Keep up the good work and hope you've had a good weekend,

    XB
     
  6. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    In Defense of Cola- just kidding

    Actually had a dream the other night that I went off the wagon and had a diet pop.

    What I do for a substitute is drink "Talking Rain" and other flavored non sweetened seltzers. For some reason, I just gotta have my bubbles. And every now and again, I treat myself to a sugar-filled cola, but not too often. 150-160 calories a pop!

    So yes, weekend good and nice to talk to you, XB.
     
  7. MrNobody

    MrNobody Who needs merits?

    Honestly, I've never seen a real "ad hom" on this board. I'm not saying that there never was one, just that I've never seen one.

    I don't know what you (and the few others who frequently try to use this method) are trying to achieve with this constantly failing little rethoric trick, but frankly, those who do it, automatically invalidate their argument - at least for me.

    A real ad hom would be , if I e.g. said "You're wrong and your argument doesn't count because you haven't washed your hair for at least a month" in a discussion which was explicitly not about your or anybody's hair.

    You can either stop using this bullshit "ad hom" argument when it's not appropriate (which would be at least 99% of the times) or you can continue invalidating your own arguments and make yourself look ridiculous.

    It's your choice.
     
  8. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    http://www.solitarytrees.net/racism/bolivar.htm

     
  9. Ogsonofgroo

    Ogsonofgroo Crusader

    Thanks for that, an interesting read *shudderz*
    Ol' Tubs would have loved to rule the world, or run his own nation, or some-such, so it makes sense to target a newly emerging democracy in a struggling country like Albania, or schmooze one that already had some form of control over the masses (take his failed exploits in South Africa for example).

    Edit> Sheesh, I had a much longer observation, wtf 'auto-save'? Where is that? Cannot find, grrr.
     
  10. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    I've seen some over the years. I know the difference.

    In any event, I haz nuttin' bout warm and fuzzy feelings for XB at this point and if XB ever has anything he'd like to discuss with me or ever feels uncomfortable or saddened by anything I've posted, he is always welcome to reach out to me and talk it out. At this point, all systems are go, it's all fine and I consider all fences mended.

    There are things that have been said over the years by various people on other threads that were obviously quite personal and I've seen people get banned or suspended because of them. But it doesn't matter for this thread and should not really be discussed on this thread. I see no reason for me to discuss your last referenced post further. It would not be good for this thread or for the board.
     
  11. In present time

    In present time Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: In Defense of Cola- just kidding

    I also have to have my bubbles. I have a home carbonator, and it has saved me a fortune on Perrier.
    Did you ever get one? Oh they are wonderful.
     
  12. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    Re: In Defense of Cola- just kidding

    I was toying with the idea but I was worried about the flavorings. I didn't want anything with aspartame, I didn't want anything with a kajillion calories- I am just full of worry!

    Do you think I could make a sort of Talking Rain kind of drink with one- where it's got a flavoring or infusion of some sort minus any sweetening agents?
     
  13. In present time

    In present time Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: In Defense of Cola- just kidding

    yes, because...BUBBLES;)
    maybe i imagine it but it seems the fresh bubble i make at home are better than something that has been bottled or stored in plastic.
    and natural flavours have their own downside, with the "natural" word being a little misleading.

    i got my carbonator as a gift and it came with packets of flavours, but i soon came to love the water plain, without anything added.

    sometimes it is just a case of giving up those flavours cold turkey and developing a taste for just the pure water. this is a LOT easier than giving up aspartame, so you are halfway there already.
    perhaps you could play around with adding squeezed lemons and real sugar at the start.
    are you able to have real sugar or is it a health issue for you?
    i don't want to derail the thread, but i remember way back when you were giving up the aspartame and i lost track of that thread.
     
  14. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    Re: In Defense of Cola- just kidding

    I see. Makes sense.

    I'm healthy but I was wigging out over the many articles I was reading about Aspartame. The capper was reading yet another damning study last winter that said nutrasweet still elevates blood sugar and you don't even get the fun of having real actual sugar (which I dearly love).! That was the last straw for me. And my husband- who's had some nursing training- was like, OMG, can't you stop drinking that crap? And, of course, since I can easily put away at least 3 or so pops a day, am trying to watch the calories- if they have sugar cuz three sugary sodeas would be 450-480 calories a day.

    I think I may get one of those thingies. It sounds cool.
     
  15. David C Gibbons

    David C Gibbons Ex-Scientology Peon

    L. Ron Hubbard presided over the development of a culture that encourages people to treat other people very poorly. He wrote many things about how wonderful Dianetics and Scientology were, but many of us found that the reality of life as a Scientologist fell far, far short of Mr. Hubbard's representations. Further, we saw others suffer and fail, as the burden of being associated with Scientology, or related organizations dragged them down.

    Mr. Hubbard took great pains to carefully document in his writings his overall responsibility as 'Source' for Scientology. I take him at his word. I blame him for the overall thrust of Scientology's culture and behavior. I blame him for initiating an ethos (not a new one) of 'the end justifies the means'. I blame him for creating an organizational structure where no real checks and balances exist to keep his successors from a continual abuse of power.

    Certainly others have taken control of Scientology since Hubbard's passing, but their reported bad behavior doesn't absolve him in my mind of his responsibility for getting the ball rolling.

    "By their works ye shall know them"
     
  16. Sidney18511

    Sidney18511 Patron with Honors

    Re: In Defense of Cola- just kidding


    IPT.....you and I are kindred spirits. I got a soda stream last year for by Bday JUST for the purpose of making bubble water! I love it! We must make 4 a day. I get the refills at Bed Bath & Beyond, and if you use their 20% off coupons a refill costs $12. And lasts me for a month when I only give it 2 good squirts. It is still my favorite toy!
     
  17. MrNobody

    MrNobody Who needs merits?

    As long as there is any chance that my previous post in this thread keeps just one person from fraudulently abusing the "ad hom" argument, it will do A LOT of good for any honest discussion here on ESMB. That's why I made that post in the 1st place.

    In fact, I couldn't care less about your fraudulent, dishonest and malicious abuse of the "ad hom" deadbeat argument, weren't it for the other fine writers and readers here on ESMB.
     
  18. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    See previous post,

    Thx,
    C
     
  19. MrNobody

    MrNobody Who needs merits?

    LOL, I don't need to, I've already read it - and you've been abusing the "ad hom" argument fallaciously to invalidate some honest points made by another poster.
     
  20. Claire Swazey

    Claire Swazey Spokeshole, fence sitter

    There's a lot of truth in what you're saying. The toxic policies and tougher HCOBs and the corporate structure were all of Hubbard's devising.

    Thing is, I think one can possibly find some good in the mess. But to discuss that without detracting from the very real abuses is problematic. Doing so tends to give the impression one is condoning the bad stuff, even if that is not the impression one wants to give.

    But doesn't it make you wonder, perhaps, what it would have been like if it would have just been quirky, kooky, self helpish, without the RPFing and staff contracts and stuff?