A Respectful Hello to ESMB from JB

[JBWriter]

When I left Scn, I moved away and didn't speak to any Scns or ex's for over 20 years. The experience was locked away in a part of my brain that I didn't want to ever revisit, and didn't - until I became so mentally blocked that I knew I had to revisit it - and went on a search and found Anonymous and exscn.

Speaking in Scn terms again was painful. None of it was forgotten, but it was as if I had to reach through a small funnel to dig it all out again. For a while, speaking in Scilon gave me terrible headaches. Using the terms again brought back a flood of memories. Those memories of friends regained were good ones, most of the rest was confusing, and many painful memories and feelings returned.

What I hadn't done was incorporate and integrate my life in Scn with my life outside it. That took most of two years. How does one reconcile a culture so insane, so dominating, so abusive, so mind controlling, with its own set of morals and ethics with that of the broader culture that doesn't even know it exists?

Everyone goes about it differently. Some spend years tediously comparing every statement by Hubbard to separate the good from the bad. But since Hubbard stated an opposite for every statement he made (discovered later), that seemed silly to me and way too time-consuming. An ex I'd contacted helped out tremendously by referring me to Goedel's Incompleteness Theorems. In short, that since there were flaws within even the most basic Scn truths, then scn itself was not so basic after all and therefore, flawed - and the flaws would be more apparent and numerous further down.

Exscn was vital to sorting out the BS though - and getting through the torrent of emotions that the language and discussing my experiences brought forward.

Since some of the language represents incomplete, missing and even false ideas, it is an integral part of the brainwashing. We would recite some of the basics every morning, or in the classroom, or read them so often they were seared on one's brain. Occasionally I still find myself evaluating something through the Scn tiny tube - and have to stop to take a broader look.



JB - Hubbard was quite cruel to those on the ship. I'm not sure DM was worse. Hubbard locked up children in cages for days,
he had an adult man push a peanut across a deck with his nose until it was skinless and bloodied and kept going - in front of the whole crew and his family and children.

The 70s to mid 80s or so were better for us, but not for those who were fair gamed.

So it really depends on what time period you're looking at and where in the world, too. Scientology is a totalitarian regime based on a better-than-thou philosophy. It is bound to always have abusive personalities at the top who adore this sort of power and control over others. DM was Hubbard's choice as his successor because he had the ruthlessness. He is doing what Hubbard's policies say and his interpretation is not so different from Hubbard's. Hubbard had a nice side, too and I suspect DM does as well.

Dear Gottabrain,

Given what you wrote above, I think we can agree that the date an individual departs from this cult is not the date one's mind (intellect + emotions) departs as well. Your method -- leave, stay away from all triggers for 20 years, reintroduce CO$-related people/lingo/references with full control over a period of 2 years -- has and continues to work for you.

Others who have physically left CO$, undertake many different paths back to full autonomy. Which paths work best? I've no idea. I suspect there is a correlation between the strength of one's will to the speed/effectiveness of that painful process. This is not to say that those of strong will are immune to oppression in the first place -- too much evidence exists to debunk that assumption. Rather, after an individual's will is bent and twisted at the hands of, say, a cult, what remains of that will, I suspect, is what returns the individual back to full autonomy.

It may be impolitic to state that Hubbard holds no fascination for me, but it is true and I've no apology forthcoming. His life, such as it was, shares too many similarities to the lives of other, equally harmful 'leaders'. Whether he did more or less damage to more or fewer people concerns me far, far less, than to earnestly explore ways of minimizing the damage currently done and preventing others from harm, whether additional or initial. At present, as I see things, it is Miscavige who leads; thus, it is his efforts to cause harm which require cessation. Those who have worked and continue to do so to stop additional harm have my attention. Those who have been harmed have my full support.

JB

 

[JBWriter]

JB, a lot of info is available on the L Ron Hubbard and $cientology related video topic sections. Literally hours and hours of first hand accounts, interviews with former members, escapee's, documentaries, a whole slew of $cientology abuses and crimes exposed.

Dear FreeBeing,
You. Aren't. Kidding.

Seriously, thank you.

JB

 

[Free Being Me]

Dear FreeBeing,
You. Aren't. Kidding.

Seriously, thank you.

JB

You're very welcome JB. ESMB has so much info and informed people to talk with, it's amazing. I'm enjoying your posts, thanks for being here!

 

[Gottabrain]

Dear Gottabrain,

Given what you wrote above, I think we can agree that the date an individual departs from this cult is not the date one's mind (intellect + emotions) departs as well. Your method -- leave, stay away from all triggers for 20 years, reintroduce CO$-related people/lingo/references with full control over a period of 2 years -- has and continues to work for you.

Thanks, mate, I agree - we are all different.

Others who have physically left CO$, undertake many different paths back to full autonomy. Which paths work best? I've no idea. I suspect there is a correlation between the strength of one's will to the speed/effectiveness of that painful process. This is not to say that those of strong will are immune to oppression in the first place -- too much evidence exists to debunk that assumption. Rather, after an individual's will is bent and twisted at the hands of, say, a cult, what remains of that will, I suspect, is what returns the individual back to full autonomy.

Interesting concept! Mind if I add my bit to it?

Personal will as a concept confuses me. It's even harder to define than love. One has parental instincts (is this will?), the desire to be a contributing group member (is this will?), to help others (is this will?) and to make a personal mark or achievement (I think that IS will).

After I left COS, I was surprised to find most of the greatest philosophers and psychologists, as well as some of our greatest historical figures, derived their drive and motivation from the tragedies of their own lives.

It seems to me the negative influences in our lives are more often the cause of greatness than the positive ones. Pain can be a reliable motivator long after one's personal will is broken.

My personal will was broken on the RPF. Odd that I still say that or think that with shame, as if I could have prevented it. At the time, I thought it wasn't possible.

I was wrong.

It may be impolitic to state that Hubbard holds no fascination for me, but it is true and I've no apology forthcoming.

Whether he did more or less damage to more or fewer people concerns me far, far less, than to earnestly explore ways of minimizing the damage currently done and preventing others from harm, whether additional or initial. At present, as I see things, it is Miscavige who leads; thus, it is his efforts to cause harm which require cessation. Those who have worked and continue to do so to stop additional harm have my attention. Those who have been harmed have my full support.

JB

I'd like to see COS legally punished for the damages caused over the last 50 or so years by being legally required to furnish $1 billion to fund reparations to those individuals and their families that have been hurt (to be put into a government fund the individuals can access), and an additional 30 million per year afterward until there are no victims left or no COS, IAS or affiliates - whichever comes first.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps not. Companies have paid more for asbestos - and they didn't know it caused damage at the time. COS knew. It knows. It always did.

 

[JBWriter]

Thanks, mate, I agree - we are all different.



Interesting concept! Mind if I add my bit to it? Not at all.

Personal will as a concept confuses me. It's even harder to define than love. One has parental instincts (is this will?), the desire to be a contributing group member (is this will?), to help others (is this will?) and to make a personal mark or achievement (I think that IS will). What you've kindly shared may well be useful/apt/correct definitions, whether in whole or part or while working in concert, of will. Can you stand another? My definition isn't concise, apologies in advance, but I've never before had occasion to write it down.

Will is the source which prompts one's motion.
Will is fed by one's intellect. (One's intellect is formed by data collection as processed through one's experience. Think... experience = sifter, data = flour.)
Will is fed by one's emotions. (All of them.)

The adage: 'Food for thought' comes to mind.


After I left COS, I was surprised to find most of the greatest philosophers and psychologists, as well as some of our greatest historical figures, derived their drive and motivation from the tragedies of their own lives. Agreed.

It seems to me the negative influences in our lives are more often the cause of greatness than the positive ones. Pain can be a reliable motivator long after one's personal will is broken. Duly noted.

My personal will was broken on the RPF. Odd that I still say that or think that with shame, as if I could have prevented it. At the time, I thought it wasn't possible.

I was wrong. [FONT=&amp]And wrong, for you, was [FONT=&amp]temporary [/FONT]because your triumph is [FONT=&amp]permanent[/FONT]. [/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]

I'd like to see COS legally punished for the damages caused over the last 50 or so years by being legally required to furnish $1 billion to fund reparations to those individuals and their families that have been Such a fund as you describe has much merit and, I believe, would provide a minimum of relief to those who suffered harm.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps not. Companies have paid more for asbestos - and they didn't know it caused damage at the time. COS knew. It knows. It always did. The harm inflicted by this particularly grotesque cast of characters appears to have been SO well-documented so as to preclude any substantive claims of denial of such harmful deeds/actions from ever being proffered. Any and all claims of that ilk would, and should, be laughed at by reasonable people.

Thanks for taking the time to help me understand the issues discussed here, Gottabrain, and everyone else, too.

JB

 

[Gottabrain]

Thanks, JB - and you're welcome, too.

I particularly liked your definition of WILL.

Happy New Year 2013!

 

[JBWriter]

<snip> I'd like to see COS legally punished for the damages caused over the last 50 or so years by being legally required to furnish $1 billion to fund reparations to those individuals and their families that have been hurt (to be put into a government fund the individuals can access), and an additional 30 million per year afterward until there are no victims left or no COS, IAS or affiliates - whichever comes first.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps not. Companies have paid more for asbestos - and they didn't know it caused damage at the time. COS knew. It knows. It always did.<snip>

Forgot to include this link in my original reply... JB

http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/2003/october/15.26.html