It's time to get off the fence

[Voltaire's Child]

I just found a fresco from pompeii which shows me demonizing Terril with a rendition of 'The Final Countdown' back in CE 127


Zinj

LOL!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

deleted

duplicate post

 

[Voltaire's Child]

I believe the only people that would consider lrh cult tech "valuable" would be people that desire to control others, and then steal from them. lrh cult tech has no other value, or purpose.

While this board may not have been designed as an activist board, it appears, at least to me, to be the only logical place for one to exist, or at least begin.

OCMB is closed to new members, WWP is WWP and most exes won't get it.

That leaves ESMB.

This is the only place on the web we as cult victims can gather and be understood and perhaps even begin to plan on a way to make this nasty fucking cult pay for what they have done.

Well, that's a crock. People like the tech for all sorts of reasons. Good reasons, bad reasons, in between reasons. For many, it's a matter of personal philosophy.

And, no, there's also alt.religion.scientology, topix, and a few other forums.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

I have heard this before. What then is ESMB? Is activism permitted, is an anti-tech stance permitted? I have noticed this board evolve a lot since I first got here. Or maybe I have. Still I think ESMB should be an activist board. To the same degree that it is also a Freezone board. And it is a Freezone board.

Why do the activist voices get shouted down more than the Freezone voices? The truth about Scientology is that it is a dangerous cult, and it uses a dangerous technology. The same technology that the Freezone uses. I for one am glad that WTS has a strong opinion on this matter and is willing to continually voice it.

My personal opinion - if you love the tech so much, go back to the cult.

Neo

Well, ESMB has a subforum- more than one, in fact- for FZ. I believe the idea is that all are welcome and that there can be more than one point of view.

And activist voices obviously don't get shouted down more than the FZ voices.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, I haven't been banned yet.. I'm very much 'anti'tech'.. Occasionally I'm being quite forthright about it.

Maybe there's folks gnashing their teeth about me?

The 'tech' is dreck! - It is an integral part of a very complicated and impressive scam, the purpose of which is to suck you dry of all the money you can earn, loan and steal. That done, leaving you incabable of complaining about it.

I never, ever had any 'wins' personally from the alleged 'tech'! - I heard PR hype.. I listened to people rave..

I was strangely not 'experincing' anything out of the ordinary. No exterioriztion.. No epiphanies.. No great leaps spiritually or fantastic case gains.

I kept quiet because you don't invalidate someones 'win'..

I wrote 'success stories' because I could not afford not to! - Literally! - To refuse to write 'em or to be 'incomplete' on some 'service' you would be CS'ed to a retread. Subject to ethichs trouble, SP declare included, if refused and payed in full before starting.

The 'tech' works! - The only reason it doesn't is that the customer is a damned SP!

I expected that I'd 'experience' something in some future session when my 'problem' was found. Meanwhile I had 'no case on post'..

Until my BT's convinced me that it was all a scam..

Indie and FZ Scn'ists don't gnash their teeth or get upset about anti tech stances. However, some anti tech types definitely gnash their teeth or get upset about others espousing opposite viewpoints.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Well it is an error that is keeping me alive. Thank you for your concern.

So if the tech outside the cult, the tech in the Freezone, is the correct tech, or the more pure tech, are you guys clearing the planet? Are you making clears? What is the goal? Is there one? How does it relate to what Hubbard said the tech was capable of achieving? Does Hubbard factor into any of this? Or is all of this just about ones own personal addiction to that floating needle, and the feeling that this generates?

Neo

The goal is to pursue a methodology and philosophy of those individual's choosing. Period.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

2 years on and people still want ESMB to "be" something.

Its only purpose it to allow communication for those who wish to talk about Scientology and their experiences in Scientology.

There is no other agenda.

FZ boards are FZ boards. Activist boards are activist boards. Anon boards are anon boards. Cooking boards are cooking boards.

The primary subject of discussion on this board is Scientology and being an ex scientologist - not HOW to be an ex scientologist.

Over time people change and they seem to want the board to change too. I will grant you that the board seems to have "phases", depending upon who joins, who stays, who posts often, how well they write and what viewpoints are. At times I've felt the board was becoming more activist, then more pacifist, then more zoney, then more compassionate, then more angry etc. It does change and it changes often. But these are just phases. Ultimately (if I retain my say) the board will always be agendaless.

It's just like it says at the top of every page:

Meet other ex's. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends.

That's all it is really.

One size doesn't fit all, however. Some ex members are activists AND are still interested in Scn outside CofS. And, of course, many aren't. Some Freezoners are activists. Life isn't an either/or proposition.

I agree that ESMB is and should remain agendaless.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

While I agree with you on the Church and the Tech, I don't think that those who hold it dear must be out to control others. If this was the case, in the years you and I were in it would mean that we wanted to control others. Speaking for myself, I did not.
I think we can deconstruct Sceintology better if we don't assume or attribute bad motives to others. After all, that is what Hubbard did and that is an essential part of the Tech and premise of Scientology. If you are assigning bad motives to users of the tech, you are implying that the bad results are not the cause of the tech but rather the bad motives of the people involved.

The Anabpatist Jacques

You may not want to control others- but the same cannot be said for all other exes.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

A significant test of this could be done, where a person was prescreened for chemical imbalance, for instance, if they had depression (I'm sure that those claiming depression is caused by chemical imbalance wouldn't mind actually testing to see if this was the case), and then those that didn't have a chemical imbalance were put through a program as put forward by a trained C/S and a trained Auditor, and then retested afterwards. That would be an interesting test.

I completely agree that the Church of Scientology is a dangerous cult. I just think that the reason they are dangerous is because they have something of value to offer, which they use to control and manipulate their membership, along with their external operation of intimidation and harassment.

Well U, I'm bipolar. It's genetic. It developed as a teen although I wasn't diagnosed until 40 or so.

Had my lower bridge in my late '20s. Things have been much easier for me to handle since that time, even though the disorder has continued to progress. It's much easier to distinguish between what is "me" and what isn't and to deal with it accordingly.

Without scientology I guarantee I wouldn't have made it this far.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

2 years on and people still want ESMB to "be" something.

Its only purpose it to allow communication for those who wish to talk about Scientology and their experiences in Scientology.

There is no other agenda.
....

It's just like it says at the top of every page:

Meet other ex's. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends.

That's all it is really.

For which many of us thank you, Emma.


Mark A. Baker

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Well U, I'm bipolar. It's genetic. It developed as a teen although I wasn't diagnosed until 40 or so.

Had my lower bridge in my late '20s. Things have been much easier for me to handle since that time, even though the disorder has continued to progress. It's much easier to distinguish between what is "me" and what isn't and to deal with it accordingly.

Without scientology I guarantee I wouldn't have made it this far.


Mark A. Baker

Mark,
I appreciate and respect your view, and I don't doubt your sincerety. But to understand where I'm coming from, to me your story is anecdotal. If someone was to find the objective value of Scientology they would have to find many of the people who claimed Scientology has helped them, and they would also have to find many of the people who Scinetology did not help, or even hurt. To find Scientology's true worth all the data would have to be looked at and see where the balance lies. I think it would not be in favor of Scientology.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Mark,
I appreciate and respect your view, and I don't doubt your sincerety. But to understand where I'm coming from, to me your story is anecdotal. If someone was to find the objective value of Scientology they would have to find many of the people who claimed Scientology has helped them, and they would also have to find many of the people who Scinetology did not help, or even hurt. To find Scientology's true worth all the data would have to be looked at and see where the balance lies. I think it would not be in favor of Scientology.

The Anabaptist Jacques

I don't offer my story as anything as other than anecdotal. Anecdotes can also serve as "evidence", although due to the lack of available controls such evidence is faulty and easily misinterpreted.

I too would like to see formal clinical studies on the effectiveness of auditing techniques. I tend to think most critics mistake what would constitute good methodical testing practices given the fundamental distinctions between the goals of auditing and what can be readily measured clinically.


Mark A. Baker

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

I don't offer my story as anything as other than anecdotal. Anecdotes can also serve as "evidence", although due to the lack of available controls such evidence is faulty and easily misinterpreted.

I too would like to see formal clinical studies on the effectiveness of auditing techniques. I tend to think most critics mistake what would constitute good methodical testing practices given the fundamental distinctions between the goals of auditing and what can be readily measured clinically.


Mark A. Baker

That would be tough. It would have to be a well thought out series of experiments that build on previous results. It would make a great dissertation!

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Mark A. Baker]

That would be tough. It would have to be a well thought out series of experiments that build on previous results. It would make a great dissertation!

The Anabaptist Jacques

Yowsa!

Now, if we could only arrange funding.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Terril park]

2 years on and people still want ESMB to "be" something.

Its only purpose it to allow communication for those who wish to talk about Scientology and their experiences in Scientology.

There is no other agenda.

FZ boards are FZ boards. Activist boards are activist boards. Anon boards are anon boards. Cooking boards are cooking boards.

The primary subject of discussion on this board is Scientology and being an ex scientologist - not HOW to be an ex scientologist.

Over time people change and they seem to want the board to change too. I will grant you that the board seems to have "phases", depending upon who joins, who stays, who posts often, how well they write and what viewpoints are. At times I've felt the board was becoming more activist, then more pacifist, then more zoney, then more compassionate, then more angry etc. It does change and it changes often. But these are just phases. Ultimately (if I retain my say) the board will always be agendaless.

It's just like it says at the top of every page:

Meet other ex's. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends.

That's all it is really.

Kudos Em for your sanity.

 

[Neo]

There has never been a time like this.

From early January until present time, there has never been this much pressure on Scientology. Things are coming to a head. You can see it and feel it. It's tangible.

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

The CoS is being attacked. Let's not make light of it. It IS being attacked legally, peacefully and legitimately. And it is being attacked HARD.

So where do you stand?

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be a "you're either for us or against us" proposition, but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position, not only for others, but mainly for themselves.

2 years on and people still want ESMB to "be" something.

Its only purpose it to allow communication for those who wish to talk about Scientology and their experiences in Scientology.

There is no other agenda.

FZ boards are FZ boards. Activist boards are activist boards. Anon boards are anon boards. Cooking boards are cooking boards.

The primary subject of discussion on this board is Scientology and being an ex scientologist - not HOW to be an ex scientologist.

Over time people change and they seem to want the board to change too. I will grant you that the board seems to have "phases", depending upon who joins, who stays, who posts often, how well they write and what viewpoints are. At times I've felt the board was becoming more activist, then more pacifist, then more zoney, then more compassionate, then more angry etc. It does change and it changes often. But these are just phases. Ultimately (if I retain my say) the board will always be agendaless.

It's just like it says at the top of every page:

Meet other ex's. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends.

That's all it is really.

I'm confused. Are you now saying it is time to get back on the fence? Surely you, and therefore the board (as your creation) had an agenda when you wrote the first post? And now it doesn't? What's changed? Personally I think everyone has an agenda. Its human nature. We do things for a reason. I have an agenda. Currently its to be contrarian (in case you didn't notice). Perhaps you meant that the board doesn't have any affiliations. Perhaps not. I'm not that fussed, but I am confused as to the change between the two quoted posts.

Neo

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

I'm confused. Are you now saying it is time to get back on the fence? Surely you, and therefore the board (as your creation) had an agenda when you wrote the first post? And now it doesn't? What's changed? Personally I think everyone has an agenda. Its human nature. We do things for a reason. I have an agenda. Currently its to be contrarian (in case you didn't notice). Perhaps you meant that the board doesn't have any affiliations. Perhaps not. I'm not that fussed, but I am confused as to the change between the two quoted posts.

Neo

You may want to look at the difference between the purpose of the board and a one's personal opinion about something discussed on the board. They can vary. For example, I believe in democracy but I din't like George W. Bush. Not liking a particular president doesn't contradict preferring a democracy. Likewise, having an opinion about something doesn't contradict one's plan to have a spot where others can express their opinions too.
There is nothing wrong in being a contrarian, if you make valid points and not base an argument on imprecise comparisons. Otherwise you are comparing apples to oranges and then it looks like you are trying to make something out of nothing.

The Anabpatist Jacques

 

[Hatshepsut]

Emma wrote:

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

This reminds me of the deceased, Ken Ogger (The Pilot)
He wanted to reform the church from within while doing this kind of juggling act. He was an activist ... voicing where he felt the tech was faulty. Offering ideas that seemed to be more accurate. It can become dangerous to do this kind of 'fence sitting.'

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Indie and FZ Scn'ists don't gnash their teeth or get upset about anti tech stances. However, some anti tech types definitely gnash their teeth or get upset about others espousing opposite viewpoints.

WUT!!? They ain't gnashing their teeth over me? - Are you telling me I'm a failure!!??

Ok, joking aside.. I'd expect feezoners and indies to use 'nice' scientology.. ARC an all that.. A litlle flattery.. Affinity.. Responding to posts at .5 above my tone level. Shifting topic to my perceived interests..

It's still a 'valiant' attempt at control!

I don't mind.. Usually.. It's heaps better than the Sinister Scam Cult of Scientology.

Sometimes I ignore the ARC handling.. When I think the point of debate is more important... Or I'm just in a foul mood..

 

[lionheart]

I'm confused. Are you now saying it is time to get back on the fence? Surely you, and therefore the board (as your creation) had an agenda when you wrote the first post? And now it doesn't? What's changed? Personally I think everyone has an agenda. Its human nature. We do things for a reason. I have an agenda. Currently its to be contrarian (in case you didn't notice). Perhaps you meant that the board doesn't have any affiliations. Perhaps not. I'm not that fussed, but I am confused as to the change between the two quoted posts.

Neo

It's good to see you posting on ESMB again Neo! Even if it is a somewhat confused Neo.

I must admit to being somewhat confused myself, whenever I see the opening post on this thread.

Personally I believe it is a mainly good thing for the FreeZone to post on ESMB, mainly because it offers the opportunity to see examples of the double-think that Scn can tend to produce. I think this is probably useful for people leaving scn.

However I do also think there is a danger of appearing to allow the abuse generated by the cult to be perpetuated on it's recently left victims. The purpose of the tech, even the lower levels, is a trap to ensare people's thinking and actions. Hubbard did this to make men his slaves and for material gain, per his admissions.

When a slave escapes and is examining the abuse they were subjected to, it is not always beneficial to recommend more slave-tech to help them.

I agree with Emma that the atmosphere on ESMB changes and goes through phases. Recently there has been a strong Hubbard criticism atmosphere combined with strong pro-tech postings.

The many recent posts about gains to be had from Scn and its variations are ok so long as they are challenged as to their assumptions.

So long as a wide variety of points of view are allowed, then the escaped slaves can evaluate things for themselves, something scn doesn't allow in the CofS and also restricts even in the Indie and FZ versions of Scn.

As an example: I used the word "slave" deliberately provocatively on this post. How does that description make you feel? How much do you think you were a slave while "in"? How much do you still feel enslaved by the tech now that you are "out"?

If you don't think you were a "slave" while in, how free were you to think and do what you wanted? How free are you now in your thinking and actions?

Here's to freedom! Here's to no-fence!

PS, for those who are new and don't know Neo - it might be worth pointing out that he almost single-handedly has done more than most to destroy the Scn-constructed fence.