Reality check.

It seems to me that as critics of Scientology we have stalled a bit.

Scientology is serious business. It harms people.

I recently had a discussion about the Church of Scientology with a profession person. In what professional capacity I won't say.

But in a serious discussion the person asked me--What can I really do about it?

I looked at the injustices of the Church and the bottom line is that the people who are there are there by their own will.

If they are imprisoned it is by their own consent.

There may be some actually physically detained. But since I don't know of this first hand I can't really go to the authorities.

All that I can effectively do is to persuade others not to get involved.

And this is where I think that the critics on this board have stalled.

All we can really do about the injustices of Scientology on this board is to persuade lurkers not to join and offer refuge to those who have recently left.

And the way to persuade others to stay away from Scientology is to inform them of our experiences and create a compelling argument against Scientology.

But lately, it seems, much of the discussion on this board has been about the people on the board itself.

I can totally understand it if lurkers looked at this board recently and thought to themselves that we are a crazy cult too, or perhaps we are members of opposing fan clubs battling out a popularity contest to make our celebrity number 1.

The two best critics on this board, in my opinion, Alanzo and Zinj, may have been caught up in this too.

Zinj writes the best and most succinct criticism of Scientology.

Alanzo is equally as good a critic and is entertaining too.

His posts always seem to be like leading questions as he tries to entrap his interlocutors.

But both of these critc's keyboards are silenced here right now, not because of their criticism of Scientology, but because of our on-going critic wars.

If we suspect there are newbies here who are here to disrupt, so be it.

If they post here their words can be challenged.

But if they condemn other critics or even other newbies to us via private messaging then we should be on guard.

It is in the private messaging where we are vulnerable.

If a person has a valid criticsm of another then they should put it on the board.

To keep it hidden in a private message is to act like a Scientologist; plus when it manifest itself on the board we look like fools to lurkers and other newbies.

Having said all this, I want to write again what I posted earlier about my suspicions of newbies:

"I think a few of the more recent people coming to this board have an inflated opinion of themselves.

And when I see that in a person I don't trust them.

Not because the person may be an OSA plant, not because the person isn't sincere, but because he or she still carries the phony hubris that comes with the self-delusion know as Scientology.

You can tell it by the way they talk to others. There is a fake air of self-importance and a condescending view and attitude towards others.

And like Hubbard, these people like to remind others and talk to others like they are their best friends with their best interests at heart.

And these people will screw up any social situation whether they intend to or not because they are still being a product of Scientology.

They are what Scientology creates. Whether or not they are still in."

The way to handle these people is through posting on the board with them.

We can deconstruct their Scientology certainty. We can learn their apparent intentions out in the open. We know how to do that.

The message board is our home field. Our strength is partly in our numbers and our experience.

But when the debate goes to private messaging then we lose our home field advantage.

Keep the private messaging for private matters.

And let's keep in mind this slogan: "Remember the lurkers!"

That is where we can do some good and prevent the growth of Scientology.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
Last edited:

Mystic

Crusader
Seems the item protested, I think it was called "scientology", is dead. In that it has not yet been buried, all we see these days is just momentary releases of stench from the unburied rot.

stench.jpg
 

Feral

Rogue male
It seems to me that as critics of Scientology we have stalled a bit.

Scientology is serious business. It harms people.

I recently had a discussion about the Church of Scientology with a profession person. In what professional capacity I won't say.

But in a serious discussion the person asked me--What can I really do about it?

I looked at the injustices of the Church and the bottom line is that the people who are there are there by their own will.

If they are imprisoned it is by their own consent.

There may be some actually physically detained. But since I don't know of this first hand I can't really go to the authorities.

All that I can effectively do is to persuade others not to get involved.

<SNIP>

The Anabaptist Jacques

Respectfully, I don't entirely agree and I have something to offer on that score;


http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=21523
 
I think that whether people are in by their own consent (or not) is a moot point,
but if it's worth discussing would be best in its own thread.

On this point:

"...And when I see that in a person I don't trust them.

Not because the person may be an OSA plant, not because the person isn't sincere, but because he or she still carries the phony hubris that comes with the self-delusion know as Scientology.

You can tell it by the way they talk to others. There is a fake air of self-importance and a condescending view and attitude towards others.

And like Hubbard, these people like to remind others and talk to others like they are their best friends with their best interests at heart.

And these people will screw up any social situation whether they intend to or not because they are still being a product of Scientology.

They are what Scientology creates. Whether or not they are still in."


I agree, and I would add that as well as its relationship to scientology, it applies also outside of scientology topics and outside this board. Arrogant people make their importance part of the persuasion of their arguments or views, which disempowers others.
It is the arrogance itself that is the problem IMO and Scientology fosters arrogance, and as you say certainty.
 
... All we can really do about the injustices of Scientology on this board is to persuade lurkers not to join and offer refuge to those who have recently left.

And the way to persuade others to stay away from Scientology is to inform them of our experiences and create a compelling argument against Scientology.

But lately, it seems, much of the discussion on this board has been about the people on the board itself.

I can totally understand it if lurkers looked at this board recently and thought to themselves that we are a crazy cult too, or perhaps we are members of opposing fan clubs battling out a popularity contest to make our celebrity number 1. ...


Very good post, TAJ. Unfortunately I hear all too frequently from non-scientologists statements which exactly support this point in your post.


Mark A. Baker
 

nozeno

Gold Meritorious Patron
Very good post, TAJ. Unfortunately I hear all too frequently from non-scientologists statements which exactly support this point in your post.


Mark A. Baker

Do a lot of non scientologists you "hear from" frequent ESMB or do they just originate their disdain for the opposing fan clubs out of the blue?
 

Mystic

Crusader
Do a lot of non scientologists you "hear from" frequent ESMB or do they just originate their disdain for the opposing fan clubs out of the blue?

There are many blues. From which blue does this disdain leak? The purpleblue? The wild blue yonder? Blue indigo? Blues in the Night? Blue Heaven? Blue blue? Pink blue? Midnight blue? Midday blue? Sky blue? Ocean blue? Sapphire blue? 8-bar blues? 12-bar blues? St. Louis Blues!

Leaking blues, baby.
Leaking blues all night long.
If you don't leak my blues, baby
Oohh weeee I'm gonna make you wrong.

I'll wrong you in the morning
I'll wrong you in the night
I'll wrong you wrong you baby
Until evah thangs all right.

Oh yeah leaking blues baby....
 

nozeno

Gold Meritorious Patron
There are many blues. From which blue does this disdain leak? The purpleblue? The wild blue yonder? Blue indigo? Blues in the Night? Blue Heaven? Blue blue? Pink blue? Midnight blue? Midday blue? Sky blue? Ocean blue? Sapphire blue? 8-bar blues? 12-bar blues? St. Louis Blues!

Leaking blues, baby.
Leaking blues all night long.
If you don't leak my blues, baby
Oohh weeee I'm gonna make you wrong.

I'll wrong you in the morning
I'll wrong you in the night
I'll wrong you wrong you baby
Until evah thangs all right.

Oh yeah leaking blues baby....

You silly boy.

Do you have blue balls?:omg:
 

Doom

Lurking.
Thank you TAJ, You managed to hit that in one.

Finally some reason, well worded and wise.
I would expect no less than that from a stalwart of this board.

Its good to reflect on the reasons why I am here and what kind of effect I may have.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
It seems to me that as critics of Scientology we have stalled a bit.

Scientology is serious business. It harms people.

I recently had a discussion about the Church of Scientology with a profession person. In what professional capacity I won't say.

But in a serious discussion the person asked me--What can I really do about it?

I looked at the injustices of the Church and the bottom line is that the people who are there are there by their own will.

If they are imprisoned it is by their own consent.

There may be some actually physically detained. But since I don't know of this first hand I can't really go to the authorities.

All that I can effectively do is to persuade others not to get involved.

And this is where I think that the critics on this board have stalled.

All we can really do about the injustices of Scientology on this board is to persuade lurkers not to join and offer refuge to those who have recently left.

And the way to persuade others to stay away from Scientology is to inform them of our experiences and create a compelling argument against Scientology.

But lately, it seems, much of the discussion on this board has been about the people on the board itself.

I can totally understand it if lurkers looked at this board recently and thought to themselves that we are a crazy cult too, or perhaps we are members of opposing fan clubs battling out a popularity contest to make our celebrity number 1.

The two best critics on this board, in my opinion, Alanzo and Zinj, may have been caught up in this too.

Zinj writes the best and most succinct criticism of Scientology.

Alanzo is equally as good a critic and is entertaining too.

His posts always seem to be like leading questions as he tries to entrap his interlocutors.

But both of these critc's keyboards are silenced here right now, not because of their criticism of Scientology, but because of our on-going critic wars.

If we suspect there are newbies here who are here to disrupt, so be it.

If they post here their words can be challenged.

But if they condemn other critics or even other newbies to us via private messaging then we should be on guard.

It is in the private messaging where we are vulnerable.

If a person has a valid criticsm of another then they should put it on the board.

To keep it hidden in a private message is to act like a Scientologist; plus when it manifest itself on the board we look like fools to lurkers and other newbies.

Having said all this, I want to write again what I posted earlier about my suspicions of newbies:

"I think a few of the more recent people coming to this board have an inflated opinion of themselves.

And when I see that in a person I don't trust them.

Not because the person may be an OSA plant, not because the person isn't sincere, but because he or she still carries the phony hubris that comes with the self-delusion know as Scientology.

You can tell it by the way they talk to others. There is a fake air of self-importance and a condescending view and attitude towards others.

And like Hubbard, these people like to remind others and talk to others like they are their best friends with their best interests at heart.

And these people will screw up any social situation whether they intend to or not because they are still being a product of Scientology.

They are what Scientology creates. Whether or not they are still in."

The way to handle these people is through posting on the board with them.

We can deconstruct their Scientology certainty. We can learn their apparent intentions out in the open. We know how to do that.

The message board is our home field. Our strength is partly in our numbers and our experience.

But when the debate goes to private messaging then we lose our home field advantage.

Keep the private messaging for private matters.

And let's keep in mind this slogan: "Remember the lurkers!"

That is where we can do some good and prevent the growth of Scientology.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Amazing post. Thank you very much.
 
Top