Justice Committee, Constitution & Membership of IS Not-For-Profit Membership Org

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

i think this is being hypercritical

i was not one to use the word wog at all when i was in but there's little to bitch about in it's benign usage. point of fact it ain't "elitist" to want to step up in class one way or another. i recall very little derogatory sense to "wog" unlike nigger or kike or spic, it was just a prodding to wake the fuck up and be something more than a somnambulist plodding and fumbling through life

In today's world, people are called "infidels" prior to being blown up or shot.

Previously, "heathens" had their land stolen, as well as their children taken away and forbidden to speak their native language in school.

I don't understand your point about irony. Is it that the insulting behavior and speech of Scientologists (corporate and Indie), albeit intentional, are somehow excused because their belief in their own superiority is so pathetically delusional? That if someone refers to me, or my loved ones, in an insulting way, and does so intentionally, I am bound to give him a pass because I know he is wrong?

I don't think so.

EDITED TO ADD:

Historically, people have been labeled with and called such pejorative terms -- infidel, heathen, wog -- as a means of differentiating them as "other" and "lesser," therefore justifying treating them as "other and lesser" and/or taking away their rights.

Not that Scientology would ever do that.

Hmmmm, could somebody help me? What is supposed to happen to people who are below 2.0 on the Tone Scale?

I don't give them a pass. It's just that when the deluded devotees of a crackpot religion go around declaiming their uniquely superior status, their behavior becomes more properly an object of ridicule than of indignation. It's ironic because they have so obviously mistaken their hubris and weakness for virtue.

As for people below 2.0 on Hubbard's ludicrous Tone Scale, one might consider loving them.

"Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Matthew 25:37-40
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

I think the term 'wog' may have seemed more or less benign according to which culture you grew up in, and whether or not you were the user or the referent for the term. A also think that the use of the term 'wog' would have become less and less benign to those who did not grow up in a culture where it was often used, if scientology had become as widespread as scientologists hoped it would.

EDIT: But why should I bother explaining that to a cult whitewasher?

if you please DB, the quoted statement is as close as i ever come to applying any whitewash

i do speak in favor of auditing and auditor training and i as well apply paint remover to the more egregious examples of blackwashing

part of the appeal of scientology is that the usual forms of bigotry are not usually in evidence. i did hear the word "nigger" a couple times from a couple people

i only rarely heard anything approaching venom in the use of "wog". again it was mostly used to prompt a rising from the mundane

but...
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

I didn't mention the word "wog" in my post at all. But since you did . . . .

What I was referring to was the way SO MANY Scientologists assumed an air of superiority while denigrating "wog justice", "wog education", "wog ethics", "wog governments", "wog administration", "wog religions", and on and on. Hubbard pretty much pisses on every aspect of modern society, always implying that HIS brilliant spewing were better, more accurate, and just RIGHT. Simply, to me, Hubbard was a pompous ass, and many of his followers manifested (mimicked, dramatized) the same lame character traits.

I don't think what I said was hypercritical at all. I saw the elitist attitude all around me with Scientologists - frequently. It was common and not at all restrained or hidden (at least not among the usual gung-ho true believers).

For example, I would hear Scientologists who had NO education in science (which I did) talk as if they knew more than REAL scientists because LRH claimed that he figured out the very BASIS of what lies behind the very laws of Nature. Or, to hear some semi-educated Scientologist rail on about the flaws of philosophy, simply parroting what Hubbard said about "those who never get out and live life, and only study ideas in closed ivory towers".

yes, i certainly did find ron's usage of the term to be excessive and opprobrious
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

Your recollection is very different than mine. Indeed, I don't recall any use of the word "wog" that was not derogatory, or that was "benign."

Let's consider the Reference.com definition:
Let's consider the Merriam-Webster definition:
Yes, I'm sure Ron chose the racist word "wog" to label non-Scientologists because the word was so benign and clearly in-offensive.

And I'm sure, given the above, that Scientologists didn't and don't use the word to denote and imply the inferiority of non-Scientologists.

Then again, let's consider the OP I responded to on the iScientology blog:
Nope, no implication of "wog" inferiority there.

i didn't discover the origin of "wog" until after i was in. it is an acronym of "worthy oriental gentleman" by the way which requires irony to be disparaging

and the cited quote is a good example of benign usage. here's a person who left CoS who is clearly disappointed with the bland mundane tepid WOGGYASSED WOGGILY FUKKIN' WOGS and their bland insipid lifeless nadaville somnambulism but doesn't have the balls to drop a hundred and fifty mikes of LSD and get themselves a real 12 and a 1/2 hour OT intensive for a decent price

(if any children are passing through, LSD is DANGEROUS! don't use it)
 

Aiki

Patron with Honors

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
"There are too many hate sites."

http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/468-milestone-two-disclaimer#comment-1930
# Richard Lloyd-Robert 2013-06-20 07:01

I agree with you KFrancis. There are many discussions out there about Milestone 2 that feature distrust and negativity about the group. Scattered amongst them are us supporting the group that keep injecting positive theta comm and support. That's the right action. As long as the group keeps away from the old politics and just provides support and tech help it will flourish. It should not attack Scientology or Scientologists in any way. It has to be a safe haven that gets people up the bridge somehow. There are too many hate sites. Keep this uptone and on source.
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

if you please DB, the quoted statement is as close as i ever come to applying any whitewash

i do speak in favor of auditing and auditor training and i as well apply paint remover to the more egregious examples of blackwashing

part of the appeal of scientology is that the usual forms of bigotry are not usually in evidence. i did hear the word "nigger" a couple times from a couple people

i only rarely heard anything approaching venom in the use of "wog". again it was mostly used to prompt a rising from the mundane

but...

Well take a trip to London and in various social situations refer to the "wogs" in the country and see what happens, (take bandages).

You said, "...part of the appeal of scientology is that the usual forms of bigotry are not usually in evidence....."

True: not the usual forms. Except for Hubbards usual forms of bigotry about blacks, asians etc, which we all know about. Then there are the unusual forms. SPs, 'wogs' etc. I have already pointed out that 'wogs' was on the boiler and I suggested (perhaps not explicitly enough) that 'wogs' would become a more and more contemptuous term as time progressed. The term SP really marks the referent as someone who is very dangerous. Marking someone as dangerous is a special function of some derogatory terms. In the case of 'SP', those so marked can be pointed to as targets by OSA as they set up their volunteers to fairgame/ruin/destroy them. I guess my main point about 'wogs' is that it did seem benign, but leaving it there and assuming it is benign for everyone in all places and times is not very smart. Actually, I would love to hear how often the term 'wogs' is used casually amongst scientologists having a chat, when they are in Britain, with people of African, Asian, Middle Eastern descent present....compared to a similar group in another place. Even with such people present, in a similar group in the USA, the word 'wog' could probably be used with less bother because of less, or no, negative social history attached.
However, even there, a white American using the term should not assume that others are as ignorant as they are about it's connotations for other people present.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

part of the appeal of scientology is that the usual forms of bigotry are not usually in evidence. i did hear the word "nigger" a couple times from a couple people
What, Hubbard and Scientology get credit for creating new forms of bigotry? SP? PTS? DB? NCG case? Implanter? "Psychs" as a pejorative for those evil "implanters" who are, and always have been, the source of all evil in the world?

Oh, and another thing, Scientology is supposed to be a religion (when it is not supposed to be a science, or a dessert topping). You might be shocked, but I don't hear the "N word" or any of the "usual usual forms of bigotry" when I attend my Christian church. So Hubbard and Scientology are supposed to get credit because, in this one respect, they might have satisfied the minimal expectations of a religion or church in the modern world... had they not gone to the extra effort to invent new forms of bigotry?
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
New IS Not-For-Profit Membership Community REJECTS use of the word "wog"

Interesting development, and to give credit where credit is due:

Most recent comment by Steve "Thoughtful" Hall is in red.

http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/468-milestone-two-disclaimer#comment-1920
# Paul M. Foster 2013-06-19 11:07

Indeed. The very existence of this group indicates OT action. It's been needed for some time and Lana and the others actually stepped up and did it. VWD for that.

My experience with founding and running groups is that there will be a few working on the objectives of the group, and a great many who are silent members. Of course, these were wog groups. Let's postulate that a group of Scientologists will do better.

# CommunicatorIC 2013-06-19 19:45

Quoting Paul M. Foster:
Of course, these were wog groups.
Paul,

Are you sure you want to start your new Independent Scientology Membership Community by condescendingly denigrating, disparaging and disrespecting "wogs?"

Is it really the best way to maintain a friendly environment to post such denigration, disparagement and disrespect of "wogs" on a public forum on the Internet?

I could go to the corporate Church of Scientology if I wanted my non-Scientologist friends disrespected as "wogs."

Normally, I would not attempt to post such contentious and disagreeable content here. I thought, however, that I should have the confront to post here what I would say (and indeed have said) elsewhere.

I also think your community may want to give some thought to your group's use of the term "wog," particularly in the context where the clear implication is that wogs (and "wog groups") are inferior.

-- CommunicatorIC
# Thoughtful 2013-06-20 18:42

Yes, you are totally right. The word should not have been used because it has been used consistently by many as a pejorative term. And the fact is, we don't need it. I never use the term myself. Times have changed. Thanks for speaking up. I edited it out of the original comment.

Condescending attitudes, pejorative terms and arrogance have no part in any philosophy. Why? Because it defeats the very idea of "philosophy" which means love of wisdom. When we use terms that marginalize well-meaning people it defeats the purpose. Thanks to Communicator I/C and to Sandy for bringing it to my attention.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Re: New IS Not-For-Profit Membership Community REJECTS use of the word "wog"

Interesting development, and to give credit where credit is due:

Most recent comment by Steve "Thoughtful" Hall is in red.

http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/468-milestone-two-disclaimer#comment-1920

# Thoughtful 2013-06-20 18:42

Yes, you are totally right. The word should not have been used because it has been used consistently by many as a pejorative term. And the fact is, we don't need it. I never use the term myself. Times have changed. Thanks for speaking up. I edited it out of the original comment.

Condescending attitudes, pejorative terms and arrogance have no part in any philosophy. Why? Because it defeats the very idea of "philosophy" which means love of wisdom. When we use terms that marginalize well-meaning people it defeats the purpose. Thanks to Communicator I/C and to Sandy for bringing it to my attention.


Perhaps hubbards old PR statements were genuine too? Marginalizing 'well meaning people' was never going to work out for the cult in the long run ... (especially after the internet arrived!).

Yes, get those emotive words tidied up Steve ... and do it fast.


:roflmao:



 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

What, Hubbard and Scientology get credit for creating new forms of bigotry? SP? PTS? DB? NCG case? Implanter? "Psychs" as a pejorative for those evil "implanters" who are, and always have been, the source of all evil in the world?

Oh, and another thing, Scientology is supposed to be a religion (when it is not supposed to be a science, or a dessert topping). You might be shocked, but I don't hear the "N word" or any of the "usual usual forms of bigotry" when I attend my Christian church. So Hubbard and Scientology are supposed to get credit because, in this one respect, they might have satisfied the minimal expectations of a religion or church in the modern world... had they not gone to the extra effort to invent new forms of bigotry?

i don't know as they should get any credit for it but they have produced not very new forms of bigotry which are mostly familiar adaptations

jesus! ya know i don't hear the "N" word at the church i hang out with in bahhstin. i don't see many spades there either. and our churches seem to be our most segregated institution; race, ethnicity, wealth; the country's church get at best a D+ as a group and few do better than a B-.

the psychs are pretty bad, not as bad as they were but they're still pretty bad. CoS tends toward a demonization of them which can be unsightly. no. they aren't the primary engine of evil in this world.

but...

they ARE the weak link in the general chain of oppression. pledged to the hippocratic oath they can be nailed on the worst of what they do
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

In today's world, people are called "infidels" prior to being blown up or shot.

Previously, "heathens" had their land stolen, as well as their children taken away and forbidden to speak their native language in school.

I don't understand your point about irony. Is it that the insulting behavior and speech of Scientologists (corporate and Indie), albeit intentional, are somehow excused because their belief in their own superiority is so pathetically delusional? That if someone refers to me, or my loved ones, in an insulting way, and does so intentionally, I am bound to give him a pass because I know he is wrong?

I don't think so.

EDITED TO ADD:

Historically, people have been labeled with and called such pejorative terms -- infidel, heathen, wog -- as a means of differentiating them as "other" and "lesser," therefore justifying treating them as "other and lesser" and/or taking away their rights.

Not that Scientology would ever do that.

Hmmmm, could somebody help me? What is supposed to happen to people who are below 2.0 on the Tone Scale?



per SOS they are to be raised on the tone scale

SOS also proposes an alternative which is quite unlawful
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
"the usual forms of bigotry"

jesus! ya know i don't hear the "N" word at the church i hang out with in bahhstin. i don't see many spades there either. and our churches seem to be our most segregated institution; race, ethnicity, wealth; the country's church get at best a D+ as a group and few do better than a B-.
WTF? Seriously? What. The. Fuck?

I suspect I now know why you think that:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ofit-Membership-Org/page7&p=815539#post815539
part of the appeal of scientology is that the usual forms of bigotry are not usually in evidence.

You didn't see evidence of the "usual forms of bigotry" in Scientology. Geez, I wonder why?
 
Chill out, CIC.

Commander Birdsong is black.

TG1

well actually i'm just another jiveass honkie muthuhfukkah

but i was tenth cavalry in the army; BUFFALO SOLDIER!!!

so i have been known to say "don't nigga me nigga 'cause i'm a nigga myself"

and get away with it...
 

TG1

Angelic Poster
CIC,

Yes, it's true -- I was jivin' you when I said Birdsong is black. He's not. He's whitey.

However, it's important also to note that Birdsong is of a beatnik / hippie / Berkeley Free Speech culture in which "spade" isn't an epithet, but descriptive.

Sometimes I mourn for those Free Speech days. I get very tired of today's political correctness. And no, I don't mean I condone "hate speech." I just mean I like calling a spade a spade. So to speak.

:roflmao:

TG1

P.S. And yes, I am black.
 
Re: "the usual forms of bigotry"

WTF? Seriously? What. The. Fuck?

I suspect I now know why you think that:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ofit-Membership-Org/page7&p=815539#post815539


You didn't see evidence of the "usual forms of bigotry" in Scientology. Geez, I wonder why?

it was largely caucasian but there were some spades and they were in no way "toms" or "oreos"

and women especially were in every and any post

the general ambience in terms of our usual prejudices was refreshingly righteous

the attitudes toward that which was not scientology was often uncomfortably zealous but not utterly
 
Re: CommunicatorIC addresses the new IS group on the "wog" issue.

I don't give them a pass. It's just that when the deluded devotees of a crackpot religion go around declaiming their uniquely superior status, their behavior becomes more properly an object of ridicule than of indignation. It's ironic because they have so obviously mistaken their hubris and weakness for virtue.

As for people below 2.0 on Hubbard's ludicrous Tone Scale, one might consider loving them.

"Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Matthew 25:37-40

i like the quote from matthew very much of course

i certainly do not find the COHE to be ludicrous. SOS does have it's one big often cited clunker and few smaller ones as well but that is one hell of a damn fine treatise on human psychology. a person can derive huge personal case gain from an honest study of that book...
 
Top