The Anabaptist Jacques
Crusader
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
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:
