One of the Saddest Things About Scientology....

Gib

Crusader
Xenu
Nice post- you are correct in details but wrong in the larger view. First you are assuming, that Like McDonalds, CO$ has a product. But suppose McDonalds had a splashy add campaign and beautiful restaurants- and gleaming kitchens. But what if the burgers they sold were not made with beef (cow) but dog meat (which they advertised as beef). And what if the dog meat contained bacteria that if eaten over and over caused mortal infections? It would not matter if they changed from hamburger buns to pita or called the infected dog meat shrimp. The product is not there and never has been.:duh:

But I needn't speak only of that- I had a good shake of my head with regards to your comment on Marty Rathbun- which I found to be rubbish. Marty Rathbun pictures himself as some type of Luther (as he has convinced Mark Bunker one of my heroes).:omg: That analogy holds up only if Martin Luther had spent his entire priestly career leading the inquisition in Spain torturing Protestant Heretics and had converted to Protestantism ONLY when the Pope threw HIM in prison and began to torture him! No Marty Rathbun ONLY left when the machine that he assisted DM in creating was turned on him. I have scant sympathy for MR (excepting the persecution of his wife). He ONLY left CO$, I posit because DM turned on him. The idea that he would reform, or thought about reforming CO$ is rubbish as well. He only thought about it because of his 8 months in the hole. Had that not happened MR would be leading the charge and probably trolling this space attempting to put together puzzle pieces and disconnect those post here from their loved ones. I submit that Marty Rathbun was sitting at the right hand of Lucifer, Mike Rinder at the left hand- and only when the black angel turned on them did they get "religion". :angry:

Don't mistake my post as an attack on you, btw, ESMB is a REAL exchange of ideas- it is just that the posits in your post are misguided especially as regards MR.

While that is true, there is a back story to that.

If I remember correctly, Marty posted on his blog he blew, and DM recovered him by promising to the stop the beatings, and the cheese DM also used was that he could get full auditor training. So Marty went back, trained on the ship I believe, then was in charge of recovering Tom Cruise. Then audited TC, then Marty got thrown in the hole with Mike Rinder. The beatings by DM had not stopped. Marty was beating Rinder, and Rinder says to Marty, "hey, I'm done with this game" or something like that, then Marty blew, and soon to follow was Rinder.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
The other day I was watching a YouTube video where Brian Culkin suggests that Scientology as an organization in many ways is still stuck in 1962.

It made me think that one of the saddest things about Scientology, and what will ultimately lead to their undoing, is that they simply cannot and refuse to change.

As far as I know, LRH made no provision for change. There is nothing in the vast literature, there is no HCO bulletin that says, "If the church sustains consistent criticism on any particular issue, to the extent that it alienates and causes a lack of enrollment or seriously effects fundraising efforts, we must continue to stay true to the basic tenets of Scientology while making adjustments to ensure the life of the church at all costs..."

(Or maybe he did and a certain Tasmanian Troll destroyed it!)

Anyway, I remember reading that at some point LRH was impressed with Ray Kroc's business model for McDonalds, and created the Orgs and Missions with the idea of "franchising" Scientology. This was probably a great idea financially, the only problem is he left one thing out of the business model - the capacity for change.

While he was alive, if there were any changes to be done, HE would make them with revised policy or bulletins. From his behavior, LRH was very paranoid about the possibility that someone would supplant him as the head of Scn. Hence, only HE could make changes.

It leads one to think that LRH didn't really care about what happened to Scn after he died.
 

Xenu's Boyfriend

Silver Meritorious Patron
Xenu
Nice post- you are correct in details but wrong in the larger view. First you are assuming, that Like McDonalds, CO$ has a product. But suppose McDonalds had a splashy add campaign and beautiful restaurants- and gleaming kitchens. But what if the burgers they sold were not made with beef (cow) but dog meat (which they advertised as beef). And what if the dog meat contained bacteria that if eaten over and over caused mortal infections? It would not matter if they changed from hamburger buns to pita or called the infected dog meat shrimp. The product is not there and never has been.:duh:

But I needn't speak only of that- I had a good shake of my head with regards to your comment on Marty Rathbun- which I found to be rubbish. Marty Rathbun pictures himself as some type of Luther (as he has convinced Mark Bunker one of my heroes).:omg: That analogy holds up only if Martin Luther had spent his entire priestly career leading the inquisition in Spain torturing Protestant Heretics and had converted to Protestantism ONLY when the Pope threw HIM in prison and began to torture him! No Marty Rathbun ONLY left when the machine that he assisted DM in creating was turned on him. I have scant sympathy for MR (excepting the persecution of his wife). He ONLY left CO$, I posit because DM turned on him. The idea that he would reform, or thought about reforming CO$ is rubbish as well. He only thought about it because of his 8 months in the hole. Had that not happened MR would be leading the charge and probably trolling this space attempting to put together puzzle pieces and disconnect those post here from their loved ones. I submit that Marty Rathbun was sitting at the right hand of Lucifer, Mike Rinder at the left hand- and only when the black angel turned on them did they get "religion". :angry:

Don't mistake my post as an attack on you, btw, ESMB is a REAL exchange of ideas- it is just that the posits in your post are misguided especially as regards MR.

Great points, here, HPM, and I take them all. On Marty Rathbun: I was thinking only in terms of the "church's" alternative it it truly wanted to adapt; Marty is definitely no hero, I'm clear about that, in fact, he is a criminal in many ways, but within the paradigm of CoS's insanity, he did seem to be offering an alternative for a while - an emphasis on auditing without all the other punishing aspects that the church is now known for. Still, your point is well taken.

I love (and I'm not being sarcastic here) the way that many of you are deconstructing the McDonald's analogy, and I am inclined to agree with you. Still, one could argue, while they aren't serving dog meat, what they are serving is extremely harmful to the public and specifically to the young children they are constantly trying to target with their nutritionally deficient "happy meals", not to mention the cruelty of factory farming of cows, pigs and chicken. I do consider them to be a nefarious organization in a different way, perpetrating another type of fraud, and I feel brainwashing from childhood to eat their product. (As much as I hate them, I still wander in one once in a while because I get certain cravings.) But that's another conversation.

I still come back to one point though - for those of you who pretty much liken Scientology to a opening a Big Mac box and finding absolutely nothing inside it - what keeps public Scientologists coming back year after year, donating hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars? I know about the brainwashing that takes place in the Sea Org and throughout the organization, especially at places like INT Base and on the higher levels, but I still have to ask myself, is it an apt analogy to suggest that people are getting absolutely NOTHING out of it. Are the thousands of people who come back over and over again for auditing around the world all deceived, and what makes a person decide to become and remain a public Scientologist?

I want to also be clear: I appreciate that people are tearing my argument apart or I wouldn't have posted it. So say whatever you like. I can take it. I appreciate your points here.
 

Xenu's Boyfriend

Silver Meritorious Patron
One point I've seen brought up again and again on this board by Cof$ and Hubbard apologists is "well did it not help anyone?" as though this is a criteria to judge Cof$ by. It's not. There are very basic, common sense principles in the lower levels of the Cof$'s services which will help anyone who is looking for help. Hubbard blatantly plagiarized these principles throughout the years that Dn and Scn were "being developed" and then claimed he alone had discovered these things. In regards auditing, there is the placebo effect. I don't know what the actual percentages are but Hubbard himself said it was as high as 20% who will claim to be helped by anything, even if you hit them over the head with "hammer therapy."

The Cof$ has been, is and always will be about money and control. There is not something else wonderful and great behind these control mechanisms. There is just the desire for money and control. When you take these things away from the Cof$, you are left with no reason for its existence. And I for one hope that this happens much sooner than later, for the sake of those who are being conned and lied to right this very minute.

Awesome. This is crystal clear. Thank you.
 

OhMG

Patron Meritorious
While he was alive, if there were any changes to be done, HE would make them with revised policy or bulletins. From his behavior, LRH was very paranoid about the possibility that someone would supplant him as the head of Scn. Hence, only HE could make changes.

It leads one to think that LRH didn't really care about what happened to Scn after he died.

I did get His approval to add one line to a PL back in '83. VERY difficult to do though.
 

Udarnik

Gold Meritorious Patron
Jeff's awfully smart, so I don't want to say this is wrong; and indeed I think that in a way it is right. But I don't think that the 'exquisite cheese' in the Scientology mousetrap is that 'the tech' really helped people some fantastic amount. As far as really helping people is concerned, I think the cheese is more like Velveeta, or Kraft cheddar at best. It's ordinary stuff that can be had elsewhere much cheaper.

In one way I have no basis for saying this, since I was never in and have never even known any Scientologists personally. But I do have a viewpoint that brings a bit of a different kind of authority. I've read a lot of accounts of what people say they've gotten out of Scientology, and I've also seen a lot of people who were never in Scientology at all. From that perspective, what I've seen is that some people may have had fantastic epiphanies in Scientology, but earnest seekers who spend years in seeking can have fantastic epiphanies just from walking in the woods. Some people may have had less fantastic but still tangible benefits; but hundreds of hours of serious therapy normally do produce tangible benefits.

People who spent their youth in the Scientology bubble may know better than I do just what can be gotten from Scientology, but I'm not sure they really know what can be gotten outside. They compare themselves before and after Scientology, and see an improvement, but I don't think they're taking it enough into account, that they're comparing themselves young and mature. The real question is how they look after Scientology, compared to how they would have looked at the same age, if they'd never gotten into Scientology.

I'm just not seeing many signs that the Scientology cheese was really so exquisite, except in the sense of being a cunningly alluring bait.

To a starving man, even a crust is exquisite. Scientology specializes in finding people who have been searching for something for a while and haven't found it.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
Scientology handles the stimulus-response pat answer of the reactive mind that has a being stuck in the past and it does that by receiving a stimulus and responding with a pat answer from its reactive mind, which is the collection of HCOBs and HCOPLs as written by L. Ron and no one else stuck back there in 1960 or so. Sleep peacefully, ESMB, knowing that in this digital/virtual age there's a mimeograph and telex busily being used in an org somewhere.
 

Udarnik

Gold Meritorious Patron
<snip>I love (and I'm not being sarcastic here) the way that many of you are deconstructing the McDonald's analogy, and I am inclined to agree with you. Still, one could argue, while they aren't serving dog meat, what they are serving is extremely harmful to the public and specifically to the young children they are constantly trying to target with their nutritionally deficient "happy meals", not to mention the cruelty of factory farming of cows, pigs and chicken. I do consider them to be a nefarious organization in a different way, perpetrating another type of fraud, and I feel brainwashing from childhood to eat their product. (As much as I hate them, I still wander in one once in a while because I get certain cravings.) But that's another conversation.<snip>

Let me throw another wrinkle in that one. When I was in business school, I was shocked to hear, for the first time, a Ray Kroc quote:

We are in the real estate business, not the hamburger business.

Really? Well, yes.

McDonalds outlasted a lot of the early competition (Burger Chef) and stayed far ahead of the rest (Burger King) until recently. They did that because of really two things, because their hamburgers are anything but top notch: they had clean bathrooms that parents could count on, and they were in the right places.

Now, everytime I drive up a turnpike, and time and time again I pass a rest stop and McDonalds is the major or only restaurant, I think about that real estate quote. That's why I don't like McDonalds - they monopolize all the best spots like the turnpike rest stops. I get off the turnpike to eat at a 5 Guys before I'll touch McDs, just because of that monopolistic behavior.

Ron, too, was not really in the self help business (nor is DM, but he does seem to be in the real estate business :omg:), it was just a cover for Ron's real business.

And just as better information and changing attitudes is pushing McD's down the food chain, so the Internet is shining the light on the Co$ and ruining their business model. At least McDs can change the menu a bit, though, Co$ can't even do that.
 

Xenu's Boyfriend

Silver Meritorious Patron
You know, when it comes down to it, all one really needs to remember is...

Scientology is an organization that justified keeping a grieving mother from seeing the dead body of her child because of their policy of disconnection.

Case closed.
 
Last edited:
The other day I was watching a YouTube video where Brian Culkin suggests that Scientology as an organization in many ways is still stuck in 1962.

It made me think that one of the saddest things about Scientology, and what will ultimately lead to their undoing, is that they simply cannot and refuse to change.

As far as I know, LRH made no provision for change. There is nothing in the vast literature, there is no HCO bulletin that says, "If the church sustains consistent criticism on any particular issue, to the extent that it alienates and causes a lack of enrollment or seriously effects fundraising efforts, we must continue to stay true to the basic tenets of Scientology while making adjustments to ensure the life of the church at all costs..."

(Or maybe he did and a certain Tasmanian Troll destroyed it!)

Anyway, I remember reading that at some point LRH was impressed with Ray Kroc's business model for McDonalds, and created the Orgs and Missions with the idea of "franchising" Scientology. This was probably a great idea financially, the only problem is he left one thing out of the business model - the capacity for change.

When you look at McDonald's, their menu is different around the world. They have a special potato burger in India that is different from the veggie burger served in Germany. In Australia you can order Vegemite with your English Muffin. In Japan you can order an "EBI Fillet" which is basically a shrimp Big Mac. McDonald's in Egypt serves the McArabia - a pita sandwich with lamb or chicken, and on and on.

My point is McDonald's knows that one menu is not going to work for the whole world, and that if it wants to continue to be relevant, an organization has to evolve. It's too bad that LRH never had the idea for a board of directors or a Scientology "congress" that the President or leader would have to be accountable to - things might have been very different.

For example, that fact that the church continues to be homophobic (in Hollywood, for God's sake!) is so counterintuitive to its desire to make money, given the fact that professional gay people, very often, have lots of it. (Let me be clear, I know that there are many who don't.) But until more gay people begin to adopt, there is a large group of us, specifically gay men without children who live in big cities, who might be willing to spend their money on Scientology if it wasn't common knowledge that "the church" will try to change you or might humiliate you one day because of your sexuality. Major source of revenue, but they'll never see any of it.

What if there was an oversight or steering committee that decided to finally put an end to disconnection? People would be able to socialize with non-Scientologist family members and ex-Scientologists and even bring them to events without censure or fear of reprisal.

They would then make the price of auditing more reasonable and affordable (in other words, they would stop being so goddamned greedy!), and would do away with the Hole, the RPF and all Sec Checks.

The Sea Org would be a 10 year contract, renewable, and people could build families with proper opportunity to spent time with their children. The profanity and emotional violence through the organization would stop, and anyone engaging in physical violence would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Work days would end a specific time, regardless of whether goals were achieved. There would be no more knowledge reports, and an eventual phasing out of the Potential Trouble Source material.

All workers would be paid minimum wage and would be given regular holidays off and Sundays. If someone wants to leave the church or the Sea Org, they can leave freely, and return at a later date if they left on good terms. No freeloader debt.

Auditing would exist, without the motivation of making money but of truly helping people. There would be no OT levels and the name Xenu would never be mentioned again. It would be agreed that at some point LRH lost his mind when he created the OT levels, that they are a delusional fantasy and undermine the church's authority in the eyes of the public.

The only goal would be to go "clear", and going clear would be redefined. Being declared "clear" wouldn't have anything to do with perfection or cause over matter, it would be a state of consciousness where one takes full responsibility for how they effect others and choose to see the impact of their choices on the world around them. In other words, it would be a commitment one made to how they lived their life from now on rather than an actual spiritual state or achievement.

A formal apologize would be made to Lisa McPherson's surviving relatives and a building in Clearwater would be named in her honor - dedicated to mental health. A olive branch would be extended to psychiatrists, specifically those who don't work to overmedicate their patients and who seem willing to create a world that is free of pain and dedicated to peace.

Even as I write this, I wonder - if all these things were taking away, maybe it wouldn't be Scientology at all anymore, which makes me think that Scientology is really just the brain child of a man who had, perhaps, a few good ideas but eventually descended into madness (or was mad from the beginning) and finally paranoid schizophrenia. Perhaps all these aspects of Scientology that I'm modifying or taking away are what makes up the religion and it isn't Scientology without them.

However, my final thought is that the church was foolish not to listen to Marty Rathbun and to accept his leadership. If there was a way out, it was Marty. He might have truly lead things in a new direction and implemented some of the things I'm describing here. But we'll never know, because they eventually wore him down, and he had real enthusiasm and belief at one point. He was their Sunshine Boy once, but eventually the light went out.

Ultimately, the church is going to die because it will go extinct, like the dinosaurs. In a world of iPhones, iPads and great technological feats and spiritual and psychological breakthroughs, I believe that people will grow more and more impatient with Scientology's fear-based approach and will simply walk away.

As for me, I'm counting the days....

nice post XB

CoS is hamstrung by anachronism and needs to produce a good commentary on ron's writings to bring the work into PT

but the great provision for change is the timeless nature of the best features of the work which is surely based on the eternal verites (often presented as hubbard's unique origination) AND the fairly timeless nature of so very many specifics of tech


and don't hold yer breath on that CoS funded mental health building in clearwater named for lisa
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
The Marty we see now is not the Marty that existed in Scientology. He didn't have all these 'bright ideas' or new points of view when he was a member. The Marty we see now is evidence of a slowly-evolving-out-of-the-mindset Marty, a work in progress with a long way to go, IMHO.
 

afaceinthecrowd

Gold Meritorious Patron
While he was alive, if there were any changes to be done, HE would make them with revised policy or bulletins. From his behavior, LRH was very paranoid about the possibility that someone would supplant him as the head of Scn. Hence, only HE could make changes.

It leads one to think that LRH didn't really care about what happened to Scn after he died
.

This is true, IMO, and I said that also on ESMB, a few years ago.
 

hpm1999

Patron with Honors
Great points, here, HPM, and I take them all. On Marty Rathbun: I was thinking only in terms of the "church's" alternative it it truly wanted to adapt; Marty is definitely no hero, I'm clear about that, in fact, he is a criminal in many ways, but within the paradigm of CoS's insanity, he did seem to be offering an alternative for a while - an emphasis on auditing without all the other punishing aspects that the church is now known for. Still, your point is well taken.

I love (and I'm not being sarcastic here) the way that many of you are deconstructing the McDonald's analogy, and I am inclined to agree with you. Still, one could argue, while they aren't serving dog meat, what they are serving is extremely harmful to the public and specifically to the young children they are constantly trying to target with their nutritionally deficient "happy meals", not to mention the cruelty of factory farming of cows, pigs and chicken. I do consider them to be a nefarious organization in a different way, perpetrating another type of fraud, and I feel brainwashing from childhood to eat their product. (As much as I hate them, I still wander in one once in a while because I get certain cravings.) But that's another conversation.

I still come back to one point though - for those of you who pretty much liken Scientology to a opening a Big Mac box and finding absolutely nothing inside it - what keeps public Scientologists coming back year after year, donating hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars? I know about the brainwashing that takes place in the Sea Org and throughout the organization, especially at places like INT Base and on the higher levels, but I still have to ask myself, is it an apt analogy to suggest that people are getting absolutely NOTHING out of it. Are the thousands of people who come back over and over again for auditing around the world all deceived, and what makes a person decide to become and remain a public Scientologist?

I want to also be clear: I appreciate that people are tearing my argument apart or I wouldn't have posted it. So say whatever you like. I can take it. I appreciate your points here.
So lets leave the McDonald's analogy- which I am not sure is apt.
Here is the formula
For sure for many people CO$ provides wins (that means victories). After TR0 I had a euphoric feeling- like I had discovered a new dimension- a new mountain that if climbed would provide me a vista and perspective on life- it was emotional and rational all at the same time. I still have the ability during crises to keep my cool. So for me and many others I do believe, the wins are real...HOWEVER

The gains become harder to get- whilst the mental and financial costs mount. Think of CO$ as a drug like crack or heroin- most drug addicts people don't out thinking "I do believe I will ruin my veins and life and spend a fortune in order and ruin my life"- no they get immediate relief and a high. It is only LATER as the highs subside and lows kick in that problems come. Of course this also is not a perfect analogy.

But the rewards for CO$ reduce geometrically whilst the costs increase. Soon- many are paying for CO$ to fuck them up- or to not be disconnected or, poor souls, in the case of SO's because they have no where to go, no credit, no work history, no funding , sometimes no fucking idea where they even are. So for SO's they continue to take abuse because the alternative appears null to them.
 
Let me throw another wrinkle in that one. When I was in business school, I was shocked to hear, for the first time, a Ray Kroc quote:



Really? Well, yes.

McDonalds outlasted a lot of the early competition (Burger Chef) and stayed far ahead of the rest (Burger King) until recently. They did that because of really two things, because their hamburgers are anything but top notch: they had clean bathrooms that parents could count on, and they were in the right places.

Now, everytime I drive up a turnpike, and time and time again I pass a rest stop and McDonalds is the major or only restaurant, I think about that real estate quote. That's why I don't like McDonalds - they monopolize all the best spots like the turnpike rest stops. I get off the turnpike to eat at a 5 Guys before I'll touch McDs, just because of that monopolistic behavior.

Ron, too, was not really in the self help business (nor is DM, but he does seem to be in the real estate business :omg:), it was just a cover for Ron's real business.

And just as better information and changing attitudes is pushing McD's down the food chain, so the Internet is shining the light on the Co$ and ruining their business model. At least McDs can change the menu a bit, though, Co$ can't even do that.

ya wanna know sump'n?

we really DON'T know what ron was really all about. he was a rully rully interesting cat and though i never met him myself i'm sure i know by deduction some things other have yet to consider and i deduce it from things which are notable because of what he DIDN'T say

this is one of the higher forms of thinking (see "earth abides"); to pick up on the meaning of what's NOT there
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
I still come back to one point though - for those of you who pretty much liken Scientology to a opening a Big Mac box and finding absolutely nothing inside it - what keeps public Scientologists coming back year after year, donating hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars? I know about the brainwashing that takes place in the Sea Org and throughout the organization, especially at places like INT Base and on the higher levels, but I still have to ask myself, is it an apt analogy to suggest that people are getting absolutely NOTHING out of it. Are the thousands of people who come back over and over again for auditing around the world all deceived, and what makes a person decide to become and remain a public Scientologist?

I want to also be clear: I appreciate that people are tearing my argument apart or I wouldn't have posted it. So say whatever you like. I can take it. I appreciate your points here.

I was thinking about this and some words came to mind, "social engineering". I Googled it:

Social engineering is a discipline in social science that refers to efforts to influence popular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale, whether by governments or private groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_(political_science)

I think a large factor is the 'group' one. Once you have accepted the basic tenets of scientology, which is a fast process, you become one of the 'elite'. You have new friends, and often a new 'family' and virtually turn your back on the normal world. That is very, very hard to leave ... because ...."what if they are right?" That carrot of high ideals is still there, which provides strong blinkers as part of the package.
 

Gib

Crusader
So lets leave the McDonald's analogy- which I am not sure is apt.
Here is the formula
For sure for many people CO$ provides wins (that means victories). After TR0 I had a euphoric feeling- like I had discovered a new dimension- a new mountain that if climbed would provide me a vista and perspective on life- it was emotional and rational all at the same time. I still have the ability during crises to keep my cool. So for me and many others I do believe, the wins are real...HOWEVER

The gains become harder to get- whilst the mental and financial costs mount. Think of CO$ as a drug like crack or heroin- most drug addicts people don't out thinking "I do believe I will ruin my veins and life and spend a fortune in order and ruin my life"- no they get immediate relief and a high. It is only LATER as the highs subside and lows kick in that problems come. Of course this also is not a perfect analogy.

But the rewards for CO$ reduce geometrically whilst the costs increase. Soon- many are paying for CO$ to fuck them up- or to not be disconnected or, poor souls, in the case of SO's because they have no where to go, no credit, no work history, no funding , sometimes no fucking idea where they even are. So for SO's they continue to take abuse because the alternative appears null to them.

yah, it's called dependency. Or transference.

Hubbard called it "the way out is the way thru". Or you can say, you must continue up the bridge of evaluation

to continue what you want handled in life based on my (hubbard) evaluation. Yep, it's a bridge to total freedom.

Who's freedom?

Once one has achieved freedom to act on his own, why would one need to continue on this bridge?
 
Top