Wow, EB...you got a real pair of 'nads!
What you're talkin' about goes all the way back to "Source". The first time I heard El Ron excoriate and trash long term Scns that I knew personally be dedicated, competent and caring Service Org Execs and “Tech” folks—in absentia in a "Highly Confidential" Aides Briefing—it was a one helluva WTF for yours truly.
You’re lookin’ into your own Heart without flinchin’—that can very lonely and painful, but it's also the Gateway to the Grace of Life.
Please watch out for yourself and use your noggin.
My Heart is...all of our Hearts are...with you.
Hi ethicsbait and very welcome to ESMB. I also was an auditor and C/S, for fkn years and years and too damn many years.
And you are amazing. You're still in an org! Man o man, that is a very thin line. We had someone do this before, on staff and realizing the scam and posting on ESMB while still on staff. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. What a trip!
Yes, we can get free of the tech trap.
May The Buddha (the real one) be with you.
There may be two aspects to the arrogance of auditors, and for that matter, admin staff too:
Personal arrogance, where a persons own pre cult levels of arrogance are now functioning in his/her role inside the COS, and the arrogance that is reuired as part of his/her post. All staff are required to be arrogant. Their jobs require it, for all COS jobs.
I was not an auditor beyond HQS, but even I picked up on the arrogance that you're talking about with some auditors, and the overall pathway the "pc" took on the "bridge". That is a completely separate issue form the fact that auditors are really trying to help someone, and that some are really very very *not* arrogant personally. I guess it would be less evident where "pc's" go through with no problems, but if there are problems then the pc can be seen as a problem.
don't know if you noticed, but Ron is dead.
people are responsible for their own actions.
I'm very impressed by your honesty, specially as you're still with an org.
I think that, beyond what auditors/CSes think about their PCs/POTs, that there's something wonderfully self-serving about the "tech" that is infallible yet continues to fail, with o/r this and unflat that, messed up something else, the fixing up of which has to be paid for by the auditee with nary an apology from the auditor or CS (or Founder, for that matter). Yes, I know that it can all be put down to auditor and C/S error (or sometimes auditee not being forthcoming enough), but at what stage do auditors begin to think that maybe there's something fundamentally flawed with the "tech" itself?
And no, you don't sound particularly American to me!
Geez. What BULLSHIT! Sure people are responsible for their own actions. BUT . . .
IDEAS run the world. The primary battles in this world are over and for the acceptance of IDEAS. Sure, people accept and forwards "ideas", BUT a body of knowledge DOES have a slant, often inherent postulated motivations, clearly described BEHAVIORs, and so forth.
Example. Here are two IDEAS. Without any people involved.
1. Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You (Jesus)
2. Attack and destroy all critics using noisy investigations, overwhelming lawsuits and manufactured phony crimes. (Hubbard)
The ideas themselves, without any person involved, CONTAIN tremendous ramifications for ACTIONS in the physical universe.
Follow the first idea and see what happens. Follow the second idea and see what happens.
Ideas are NOT "entirely neutral". They are NOT always like a "gun" where the intention and use matter ONLY and entirely.
Yes, with an idea such as ARC, it can be used with decent intentions or with bad intentions. But, MANY ideas include the intentional slant and acceptance of the idea involves acceptance of the slant.
Hubbard may be dead, BUT his IDEAS continue to exist, and people accepting, thinking with, and exactly applying MANY of these Scientology ideas directly cause various abuses.
The above statement is just so shallow, and possibly contrived.
Ideas are often NOT "neutral". Very often, when ANY person accepts certain ideas he or she MUST also accept the slant and intention. There is no way to be responsible accepting the above idea number 2, and NOT harm people.
I apologize if I gave the impression that I don't think that ideas can be dangerous. Of course they can. Particularly if people allow themselves to be lied to. Was Hubbard a good hypnotist and con-man? Absolutely.
Had me pretty good for a while.
Outside the Co$, real help aka auditing continues. As an example:
A few years ago, our daughter wanted a job at Kiva, an international micro finance organization. She could not get a job offer. My wife (a Class Vlll from the 1960s) gave our daughter a series of prep checks over three days time. Within an hour of the last prep check session, there was a phone call with a job offer.