My talk at the 2010 Freezone Convention

[AlphOhm]

It's quite fine to discuss the issues you may find in any topic, but there is no reason to cast aspersions, or to get personal.

This has descended into a grudge-match. That's where I think it should go, at this point.

Discussion of ARC as being manipulative is interesting, and certainly it can be used as "love-bombing" (this would be strictly affinity), but that is really artificial.

It's not disingenuous to discuss something with someone that they are interested in, show whatever interest you have in it, and build common understanding. Doing this in service to an agenda to dominate them or herd them is abhorrent, to me, and always felt like a fast one to me when I was being coached on the dissem drill. But using ARC to build a relationship is not, by itself, a problem or an evil act. I don't use the term anymore, I prefer a word like "engagement" or "rapport".

Your Scientology joke for the day:

What is the difference between rape and consensual sex?











good regging

 

[degraded being]

It's quite fine to discuss the issues you may find in any topic, but there is no reason to cast aspersions, or to get personal.

This has descended into a grudge-match. That's where I think it should go, at this point.

Discussion of ARC as being manipulative is interesting, and certainly it can be used as "love-bombing" (this would be strictly affinity), but that is really artificial.

It's not disingenuous to discuss something with someone that they are interested in, show whatever interest you have in it, and build common understanding. Doing this in service to an agenda to dominate them or herd them is abhorrent, to me, and always felt like a fast one to me when I was being coached on the dissem drill. But using ARC to build a relationship is not, by itself, a problem or an evil act. I don't use the term anymore, I prefer a word like "engagement" or "rapport".

Good points, I think.
The grudge match thing? Well, I'm happy that you can see beyond and through the grudge match as well. I think the grudge match thing in this thread is interesting and is not *just* a grduge match which should be halted. This thread is not the same as the FZ venue where the ARC speech took place. Guess what? A very well-intentioned person (which I have no doubts about) *gets up* on ESMB and talks about a topic which is very positive - understanding between people etc etc, it all should be good........but the wheels fall off rons ARC-mobile and the drive shaft break and it not go no more. Hint. It works best on those who are being doctrinated and those already indoctrinated. On wogs and exes it doesn't. Not surprising since its part of the cool aid mixture.

I am interested in the difficulties in dealing with very nice well intentioned people, who I *think* are trying to get me to fall in line to their way of thinking. Sometimes the niceness itself can be a barrier to drawing the lines when an agenda is in the background. That has been a big stumbling block to get around for exes. The fact that many nice people were tangled up in getting the cool aid delivered.
And really why do any FZers want to be here.? It is not relevant whether or not Emma does not exclude them.

 

[uniquemand]

When I was a freezoner, I liked to talk with people who had been in the Church of Scientology because we shared a common background. The people who were interested in Scientology often shared the same reasons for entering Scientology as I did, and therefore, despite our different conclusions regarding the subject, I could respect their principles.

 

[degraded being]

When I was a freezoner, I liked to talk with people who had been in the Church of Scientology because we shared a common background. The people who were interested in Scientology often shared the same reasons for entering Scientology as I did, and therefore, despite our different conclusions regarding the subject, I could respect their principles.

Yeah. Fair enough. I think their are enough active FZers here that have a sort of refrigerator full of alcohol over in the corner of the AA meeting room. And I think that if they come here they will not get polite smiles every time they open a thread peddling cool aid. Let them suk it up.

 

[Moderator 2]

Enough.

Because I lack the will to cull this thread and grudge match the appropriate posts I'm going to ask that the detractors and critics be satisfied now that they've made their points and leave this FZ thread to the FZers.

Otherwise I'm going to have to actually read this and sort it out.

M2

 

[Hatshepsut]

From what I understand of the New Jersey sub-dialect of american english (admittedly limited), the commonly heard phrase "go f@ck yourself" performs something of the same linguistic function as a term of endearment or casual pleasantry such as "yes, dear" or "hey, how's it going?".


Mark A. Baker

That's true in Boston too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTaVxTmB5k4

*
o New York Times Interview, 2010

* Some guy hit my car fender the other day, and I said unto him, "Be fruitful and multiply." But not in those words.
o The Woody Allen Companion

 

[dexter gelfand]

When a Scientologist uses ARC with a wog, they are doing so to generate agreement about Scientology being positive - true or false?

I can understand the use of ARC in an auditing session. Strip away the Scientologese and you're right, it is basically engagement and rapport. Nothing wrong with that - PROVIDED the PC knows BEFORE HAND that they are participating in a religious activity. Out in the "wild", though, I find the application of the ARC model to be manipulative in that the user has a pre-determined end-goal in mind.

Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps Dexter and I can have ARC on any number of subjects other than Scientology. His advertising in a food co-op newsletter is an interesting avenue we could probably explore. I'm involved with a food co-op myself. But, given the application of ARC, can I expect our possible shared reality in the need for alternative means of food production and distribution going forward will mean the discussion will, eventually, become coloured with references to Scientology beliefs as part of a gradual selling process?

Do you get what I'm saying? Its a bit like dealing with staunch Christians: sure, I can maintain friendly relations but there will always be a "hands off" distance in their dialogue with me. There won't be any genuine "affinity" as such, just the exercising of the common manners required for everyone to get along sufficiently well that we can all exercise our rights without impinging on the other. Perhaps that's all Dexter is talking about.

Hi Blip, some thoughtful and well-expressed points, thanks. I didn't realize you pulled that ad from the food co-op newsletter, or that it was even on the internet! I'm a native New Jerseyan who grew up thinking that Burger King and White Castle food was OK as long as I also ate salads and took vitamins, but since moving to California, Marina has shown me the error of my ways (But I still sometimes miss the junk food and my Dunkin Donuts Coffee Coolattas). I did grow my own organic garden in the back yard as a teenager. I've learned about the evils of national brands from Marina and Dr Mercola's reports.

I would like you and others to understand that I have no compulsion to persuade everyone else to be a Scientologist, but I'm happy to help those who are interested. I don't believe it is the source of all wisdom, or the only valid therapy or method of spiritual growth, I don't think that people involved in Scientology are better than everyone else, I don't know that it is the best way, only that for me it has proven to be a great thing when practiced well. I eagerly learn from non-Scientologists, and I don't close myself off to other ideas, not at all. And I know I'm not the only independent Scientologist who feels this way. That might mean that I don't fit the description of what many ESMB'ers consider a Scientologist is. I consider myself a real Scientologist, capable of seeing and evaluating things for myself, not robotically accepting things that I can't think with.

I think, regarding my freezone talk, that anyone who either accepts or rejects what I am saying because they consider it Scientology, rather than considering my words at face value, does themselves a disservice in their way of thinking.

Love, Dex

 

[Infinite]

Hi Blip, some thoughtful and well-expressed points, thanks. I didn't realize you pulled that ad from the food co-op newsletter, or that it was even on the internet! I'm a native New Jerseyan who grew up thinking that Burger King and White Castle food was OK as long as I also ate salads and took vitamins, but since moving to California, Marina has shown me the error of my ways (But I still sometimes miss the junk food and my Dunkin Donuts Coffee Coolattas). I did grow my own organic garden in the back yard as a teenager. I've learned about the evils of national brands from Marina and Dr Mercola's reports.[/colour]

I too have had more than my fair share of vitamin-enhanced, soy-supplemented, mass-produced pap. I have always been kinda interested in food after growing up on an organic / bio-dynamic farm. Those were the days when such initiatives were considered the realm of beat-nik barefoot hippies. I guess not much has changed. My 63-year-old mum still has a couple of "special" plants secreted in the tomato hothouse. Like most teenagers, I guess, I eventually railed against my parents before, after exploring many by-ways, returning to my "roots". These days, I am a bit of a food activist, spurred into action after our government rammed through legislation permitting unlabeled genetically engineered food on the market. These days, a group of us keep an eye on empty sections ( "lots" I think they're called in the States) and, if there's been no development in, say, six months, we organise a night time raid. We dig out a nice big piece of the section and put down a veggie garden. Surprisingly, about half of them are left alone and the veggies grow to maturation, at which stage we distribute them free-of-charge and with leaflets explain how easy it is to grow veggies to the nearest houses, and/or sell them through the co-op.

I would like you and others to understand that I have no compulsion to persuade everyone else to be a Scientologist, but I'm happy to help those who are interested. I don't believe it is the source of all wisdom, or the only valid therapy or method of spiritual growth, I don't think that people involved in Scientology are better than everyone else, I don't know that it is the best way, only that for me it has proven to be a great thing when practiced well. I eagerly learn from non-Scientologists, and I don't close myself off to other ideas, not at all. And I know I'm not the only independent Scientologist who feels this way. That might mean that I don't fit the description of what many ESMB'ers consider a Scientologist is. I consider myself a real Scientologist, capable of seeing and evaluating things for myself, not robotically accepting things that I can't think with.

I think, regarding my freezone talk, that anyone who either accepts or rejects what I am saying because they consider it Scientology, rather than considering my words at face value, does themselves a disservice in their way of thinking.

Love, Dex

The mod has spoken so this shall be my last statement in regard to Scientology itself on this thread. In short, I have three main objections, specifically: applying the tech to children, the religion/therapy divide, and the efficacy issue.

In regard to the second, I don't doubt for a moment that you are being honest to yourselves but I would far rather that you were honest to everyone. Especially when it comes to children. As to the latter, there is nothing unique in the Auditing aspect of Scientology. The original sources have all either been vastly improved upon over the past 60 years, or have been discarded. I genuinely feel that whatever benefits you are able to bring to your PCs can be significantly improved upon and many of the real dangers can be negated.

TL/DR: You seem like a good chap. We have at least something in common. I wish you would explore other avenues for your therapy work. Please don't apply Hubbard tech to children.

 

[Infinite]

Something out of left field and, talking about food supply and the need for new models, here's the first of nine parts to an amazing documentary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-WOThJsBCM

 

[Mark A. Baker]

In regard to the second, I don't doubt for a moment that you are being honest to yourselves but I would far rather that you were honest to everyone. Especially when it comes to children. As to the latter, there is nothing unique in the Auditing aspect of Scientology. The original sources have all either been vastly improved upon over the past 60 years, or have been discarded. I genuinely feel that whatever benefits you are able to bring to your PCs can be significantly improved upon and many of the real dangers can be negated.

TL/DR: You seem like a good chap. We have at least something in common. I wish you would explore other avenues for your therapy work. Please don't apply Hubbard tech to children.

All of which goes to say that you don't actually know what Dex does or thinks.

Careful about leaping to assumptions about freezoners simply because they continue to advocate aspects of scientology tech. Not only is the freezone not the church, many freezoners were among the original protesters as to abuses of both LRH & the church.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Veda]

-snip-

Careful about leaping to assumptions about freezoners simply because they continue to advocate aspects of scientology tech. Not only is the freezone not the church, many freezoners were among the original protesters as to abuses of both LRH & the church.

-snip-

For the sake of accuracy...

"Aspects of Scientology tech"? No. "Scientology tech." Period. Advocated by the vast majority of "freezoners" is Scientology tech, and in the form of the Grade Chart. Why is this so difficult to admit? Is it because you're posting on ESMB, and the ESMB "public" is more agreeable to "aspects of Scientology tech" than to "Scientology tech"?

It's not true that "freezoners" were amongst the original protesters to the Church, and certainly not to LRH, whom they revered.

In 1984, I was associated with a break-away mission - where I audited - and only one person there identified herself with the term, "Free Zone," and that was a Captain Bill person. This is the same person who showed me a loose leaf notebook containing Free Zone SP Declares, amongst them an SP Declare for L. Ron Hubbard Jr., who was, according the the Free Zone, being "monitored by Xenu."

Other than this one person, the term Free Zone/FreeZone/Freezone was never heard or used, except in reference to Captain Bill and his group, who were pretty much regarded as being kooky.

Still, many people, then, were naive. Many had only recently left Scientology, and much information was still becoming known.

An important pre-Internet publication, which began in 1983, was the magazine, 'The Free Spirit'. It didn't use the term, Freezone, in any of its variations.

And by 1990, most of those originally involved had moved beyond even vaguely thinking of themselves as Scientologists. Too much information had been circulated and examined. People were evolving.

In the early/mid 1980s, who was a "freezoner"? Was David Mayo a "Freezoner"? No. Was Martin Samuels a Freezoner? No. Was Gerry Armstrong a "Freezoner"? No. Who was a Freezoner? Captain Bill was a Free Zoner, and he was the only prominent person using the term "Free Zone" - until the late 1990s, when someone began using "Freezone" to include others not in Captain Bill's group.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

"Aspects" of Scientology tech? No. Scientology tech.

Aspects. There's a whole lot of pickin' 'n choosin' going on. Not that you are willing to admit it, as that would spoil your "sales pitch".

It's not true that "freezoners" were amongst the original protesters to the Church, and certainly not to LRH, whom they revered.

[

Yes, it is true. Nor do all freezoners revere LRH. Frankly, most of those I know don't.

In 1984, I was associated with a break-away mission - where I audited - and only one person there identified herself with the term, "Free Zone," and that was a Captain Bill person.

That was 1984, This is 2010. Come up to present time, Veda. You seem to be a bit "stuck on the track".


Mark A. Baker

 

[Veda]

-snip-

many freezoners were among the original protesters as to abuses of both LRH & the church.


Mark A. Baker

I am in present time, thank you very much.

Your comment was in reference to the "original protesters," and the original protesters were from 1983 and 1984.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I am in present time, thank you very much.

Your comment was in reference to the "original protesters," and the original protesters were from 1983 and 1984.

That's right. I was among them.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Veda]

That's right. I was among them.


Mark A. Baker

And, unlike so many others who evolved, you're still a Scientologist.

Congratulations.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Ok, ITYIWT gets an extra hug. Sorry, guys, but that's just how we roll.

Lol, it is.

 

[dexter gelfand]

Freezone

I would love to hear your stories of those days in the 80's, I'm very curious about what was going on while I was an oblivious staff member in New York, merely scratching my head about those odd group SP declares around 1982 and 1983.

As to the term "Freezone", I've seen LRH, "Captain" Bill Robertson and a 3rd person whose name escapes me, each credited with coining the term. I think we can all agree that Robertson popularized it.

There have always been defectors from the CoS, individually, but as far as I know, it only began to occur in waves of people when the mission holder conferences occurred in 1982, and that was approximately the time of Bill Robertson's "Freezone" group.

Now, in 2010, "Freezone" has become a generic term for independent Scientologists. The "freezone" has come to mean any practice of any version, from any era of Scientology techniques, and those involved. I've been to the last 3 freezone conventions, and other gatherings, and have many friends who consider themselves "freezoners", and do not accept or practice Bill Robertson's tech, and many who do.

I've noticed that when an independent Scientologist is upset or angry about others, they often claim to disassociate themselves by stating that they are not or no longer a freezoner, and speak in derogatory tones about "the freezone", but in either case it is not used widely in present time to identify someone as being associated with Bill Robertson's group or their particular practices. "Independent Scientologist" has come to have 2 different meanings, the first being the broad spectrum of Scientology practicioners outside the CoS, and those don't want to be associated with others who are known as "freezoners".

Love, Dex

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, I've dabbled in quite a few "off-stream" practices myself, and although "some" people considered me their Guru, or wanted to make me their "own personal Jesus", I NEVER took any money for that, because that would have been unethical, in my book.

Well, I think it depends on what's being done. If someone counsels someone- which is what auditing is- they spend their time. So why not charge a fee? If they give a course, there's overhead. And, again, as Dex points out, I've seen quite a few people get a LOT of "freebies" in the FZ.

It's just like when there was a thread about the 2009 FZ convention, someone actually wanted to know why there was a charge to get in. That was so ridiculous. The convention was being given at a hotel. It costs money to hold it. There were cookies, coffee, soft drinks- that costs money.

So I personally think some people take the "you shouldn't charge money" thing too far. I think it depends on what's going on. I would think there are things that should be gratis and that there are things where it's ok to charge. In any event, I'm free to withhold my money AND my business from anyone.

 

[Auditor's Toad]

Well, I think it depends on what's being done. If someone counsels someone- which is what auditing is- they spend their time. So why not charge a fee? If they give a course, there's overhead. And, again, as Dex points out, I've seen quite a few people get a LOT of "freebies" in the FZ.

It's just like when there was a thread about the 2009 FZ convention, someone actually wanted to know why there was a charge to get in. That was so ridiculous. The convention was being given at a hotel. It costs money to hold it. There were cookies, coffee, soft drinks- that costs money.

So I personally think some people take the "you shouldn't charge money" thing too far. I think it depends on what's going on. I would think there are things that should be gratis and that there are things where it's ok to charge. In any event, I'm free to withhold my money AND my business from anyone.

I have always thought this "nobody should pay for anything" ( lack of ) mentality is most prevelant in those who have spent a TON of money in scientology. Ain't that funny?

Seems to me it costs to produce a product and people are entitled to be compensated IF one wants to buy what is being sold.

Somebody might listen to the whines of " I was very willing to spend $10,000 per intensive for NOTS but how dare anyone ask me to pay to get in an event being held in a NICE hotel. Or, yeah I spent LOTS of $$ to do training at ( org of your choice) but how dare anyone ask me to PAY a fraction of that for their training! "

Pay or pass, but, geez, to whine about these pittance prices after hundreds of thousands of dollars to scientology? Really?

 

[freet43]

ARC - clarification for Blip

Somehow the simplicity of ARC appears to be being missed. ARC is NOT some kind of Scientology technique or something that one "applies to someone" to get some kind of result....

Affinity cannot be faked... Most can sense when someone is being phoney with them, right? On the other hand, one can look at just about anyone and find something likeable, correct?

Reality - that which is agreed to be real. Have you noticed that people generally hang out with others that they have things in common? people that view things as they do, or that they think the same way as, or that have the same interests? Don't people choose their friends usually because they have things in common? And, can't one say that they like their friends...that is where affinity comes in....

Communication. Have you noticed that if you start taking with people, you then find things that you share - ideas that you have in common - ie: things that you share reality on....

And, that brings understanding. If you like someone, and share some reality with that person, and communicate with them, don't you then feel you have some understanding of that person, or whatever it is being discussed?

Long ago, I found that this made so much sense - it was something I observed in life. I did not have to buy into it somehow...

By seeing this, one can also see how the parts interplay - for example, if one stays communicating with someone, and then starts to understand them better and where they are coming from, then oftentimes one will find they like the person better....

Many people that have never heard of Scientology may still be aware of parts of this and how the components interplay.

for example, in mediation, one gets the parties to communicate - bring up their individual sides and realities and try to come to some agreement...

Ever heard the saying "communication is the universal solvent"?

Marina

When a Scientologist uses ARC with a wog, they are doing so to generate agreement about Scientology being positive - true or false?

I can understand the use of ARC in an auditing session. Strip away the Scientologese and you're right, it is basically engagement and rapport. Nothing wrong with that - PROVIDED the PC knows BEFORE HAND that they are participating in a religious activity. Out in the "wild", though, I find the application of the ARC model to be manipulative in that the user has a pre-determined end-goal in mind.

Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps Dexter and I can have ARC on any number of subjects other than Scientology. His advertising in a food co-op newsletter is an interesting avenue we could probably explore. I'm involved with a food co-op myself. But, given the application of ARC, can I expect our possible shared reality in the need for alternative means of food production and distribution going forward will mean the discussion will, eventually, become coloured with references to Scientology beliefs as part of a gradual selling process?

Do you get what I'm saying? Its a bit like dealing with staunch Christians: sure, I can maintain friendly relations but there will always be a "hands off" distance in their dialogue with me. There won't be any genuine "affinity" as such, just the exercising of the common manners required for everyone to get along sufficiently well that we can all exercise our rights without impinging on the other. Perhaps that's all Dexter is talking about.