Scientology And The Wrong "Why"

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
This may well have been posted before, because of the possibilities of thread titles I am not up to searching. It's from November last year and I think an excellent article from the wonderful Ask The Scientologist blog:
http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2010/10/scientology-and-wrong-why.html

Sunday, October 31, 2010
Scientology And The Wrong "Why"
In a comment on my Scientologists: Can You Remove The "Cult" From Scientology? article, one commenter reminded me of one of Outside Scientology's major mistakes. In my experience, all the True Believers who have left the Church of Scientology make this same mistake.

The commenter, Vertley, stated:

Seems that practically everyone makes the same mistake when calling Scientology a cult.

Below is the "admin why" and a more correct statement. When broadly grasped, this then will open the door for the necessary handlings.

"The Sea Organization: The current senior management group of the "church" lead by David Miscavige, is a rogue cult within Scientology. In every sense of the word and by any definition this group is a CULT. Public Scientologists and Staff Members not in the Sea Organization, are sort of "collateral damage" victims of the activities of this toxic cult group within Scientology and therefore exhibit cult symptoms even though they would argue vociferously to deny such." Vertley

From the "The "WHY" For Scientology" article/project.

(To non-Scientologists: This use of "why" as a noun is from L. Ron Hubbard's Data Evaluator's Series and is basically defined as the true reason a "non-optimum" situation came to be. Part of the definition is that the "right Why" opens the door to a handling that reverts the non-optimum situation.)

Let me rephrase this as it appears in many of the Independent Scientology sites so it is clear what "non-optimum" situation we are talking about and what they claim is the source of all their problems:

The Church of Scientology is guilty of tremendous abuses, crimes, fraud and lies -- but all of it is because of, and only because of David Miscavige.

It must be noted that the "Why" espoused in Vertley's comment is not a good example of a "right Why". It's merely a description of the the existing scene, not the cause of it.

Going to Vertley's website to investigate, I find that he has a "Who". To no one's surprise, Vertley has decided that the "Who" is "David Miscavige". I'm sure he started his "analysis" with that "finding" already decided upon.

As with almost all Outside Scientologists, he has the wrong "Who" and the wrong "Why".

Certainly, David Miscavige is a primary player in this drama, but Vertley, and other outside Scientologists aren't even asking the right questions.

Consider what "handling" Vertley's "Who" and "Why" leads to: "Remove David Miscavige from the organization".

Yup, that's it.

Now, you need to understand that David Miscavige has set things up, legally and organizationally, so that he cannot, ever be removed. Get it? Pretty much every Independent Scientology analysis comes up with David Miscavige as the "Who" and "Remove David Miscavige" as the "handling". Just a little hint: An analysis with a "Who" you cannot touch and a "Handling" you cannot implement is, by definition, totally wrong.

Wrong "Who". Wrong "Why".

No, this "Why" is a justification for all the things that have gone so very, very wrong in Scientology -- both inside and outside of the church. This bogus "Why" is Scientologists' excuse as to why it isn't their fault.

Let's see how the data analysis could have gone a bit deeper:

* The situation is that David Miscavige is abusive, destructive and has been destroying the Church of Scientology.
* The earlier problem was that Miscavige was allowed to do it. He was allowed to take over the church. His sociopathic behavior was not a secret. It was well demonstrated before he came to power.
* Miscavige destroyed L. Ron Hubbard's tech and Scientologists not only let him do it, they applauded him for doing so! Thousands of people worked to help Miscavige do it.
* Miscavige had and has no qualifications to lead Scientology, no training and no experience, yet no one stopped him. Many Scientologists followed him and helped him.
* Miscavige was abusive from the start and none of the senior Scientologists stopped him. In over thirty years, no Scientologist stopped him or stopped his abuses. Many Scientologists started emulating the abusive Misavige.
* Only a few Scientologists stood up to him and they were destroyed -- and other Scientologists helped Miscavige destroy them.

The "Why" is not that "David Miscavige came to power" or any other equally careless, cursory "reason why".

Scientologists, you have to look deeper and look honestly or this "non-optimum situation" will come back again and again. Since you haven't figured out the real reason David Miscavige came to power nor the real reason no one stopped him in over thirty years, you have no way to stop the next sociopath -- or the next, or the next one after that. I'm talking about Scientology, inside or outside of the church.

As I said before, David Miscavige is a symptom of what is wrong in Scientology, not the cause of it.

Wrong "Who". Wrong "Why".

Here is a question that you need to investigate and answer honestly: "What, in Scientology, allowed a sociopath to gain power unopposed?" It was way too easy for him.

Here is another: "Why were and are Scientologists so lacking in responsibility?" They didn't take responsibility earlier and they uniformly refuse to take responsibility now. The new motto for Scientology should be "It's not my fault!"

You start talking about the problems of Scientology and Scientologists will unanimously point all their fingers at David Miscavige. We're supposed to ignore all their actions and inactions for the last thirty years and just focus on Miscavige. Wrong! He is only one man. He needed a lot of people to follow him and a lot more to say nothing.

Which were you, dear Scientologist? Were you the one who applauded while your church was destroyed? Were you one of those who disconnected from your parents, your friends, your children? Did you help the church destroy innocent people? Or did you just turn away, hoping "things would get better" and didn't say anything?

Were you the coward, or the enabler? How many of your principles did you fail to uphold? When did you decide it was too hard to be honest and decent? How did you help in the destruction of Scientology and your fellow Scientologists?

Don't look too far for the "Who" in all this. Some day you might grow enough to take responsibility for what you have done, what all us Scientologists have done.

I don't care much about the Church of Scientology, but what is important is all the people who have been harmed and destroyed -- with your assistance, or at least your tacit approval.

Now, do you think you can find the right "Why"? One that doesn't involve blaming David Miscavige for everything?

I doubt you can do it. Judging by the last thirty years, you have neither the courage, the honesty nor the decency to do it. As long as you keep insisting on the wrong "Who" and the wrong "Why" -- excuses for why you're not responsible -- you will never be able to stop the inevitable destruction of Scientology.

The ball is, as it always has been, in your court.
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
This may well have been posted before, because of the possibilities of thread titles I am not up to searching. It's from November last year and I think an excellent article from the wonderful Ask The Scientologist blog:
http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2010/10/scientology-and-wrong-why.html

Good post, Free!

BYW, new ESMB member Vertley wrote that comment being discussed there by askthescientologist, lol He also used the term "haters" in the Bill Frank's thread and well, you know where how far that went, lol .
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=542800&postcount=356
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=22265&page=36
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=542800#post542800
 

haiqu

Patron Meritorious
Scientologists who found the correct why and who have already performed the correct handling.

They left.

No sense flogging a dead horse.

There was only one earlier correct handling, and the opportunity was missed. If you had a time machine you could go back to the Mission holders' meeting and apply R2-45, but that was the last opportunity to fix things.

Big thetans overcome by brute force and stupidity. It's our historic downfall on the whole track.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Scientologists who found the correct why and who have already performed the correct handling.

They left.

No sense flogging a dead horse.

There was only one earlier correct handling, and the opportunity was missed. If you had a time machine you could go back to the Mission holders' meeting and apply R2-45, but that was the last opportunity to fix things.

Big thetans overcome by brute force and stupidity. It's our historic downfall on the whole track.

There's too much scio jargon here for me to try and decode.

The message of the above article is in the present. The abuses exist, the crimes still exist. Now.
 

clamicide

Gold Meritorious Patron
hmmm.....

Well, it can speak to current ins I guess. Very good in that respect, but one of the things that took me a long time to work out once I left was there isn't necessarily one correct "why". There can be a whole hell of a lot of contributing factor to any situation and why-finding is another thing that I have come to view as total BS.
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
If you found the real 'why' that people can see an abusive character take over a community and run it with fear you would find the handling for Libya, Tunisia, Israel, Russia, Yemen, China need I go on?

History is full of Stalins and the like. We all knew that Idi Amin was a crackpot, likewise Mugabe and Ghengis Khan. And they all were loved by their people, and probably hated in equal measure.

When you watch Ghadafi speaking to a room full of loyal subjects, spouting utter shite and getting a standing ovation it reminds me of the way I used to clap a torn photo of Ron, after sleeping a couple of hours and eating beans and rice for weeks.

I think having a 'strong leader' means that you don't have to think about the problems, you leave that to the 'boss' and so have no responsibility yourself. It takes the weight off your shoulders.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Well, it can speak to current ins I guess. Very good in that respect, but one of the things that took me a long time to work out once I left was there isn't necessarily one correct "why". There can be a whole hell of a lot of contributing factor to any situation and why-finding is another thing that I have come to view as total BS.

I think "why finding" is a load of you know what....I think the article is aimed at people who still use that tek.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Well, the "why" or "who" below Miscavige is Hubbard.

For the question, "What, in Scientology, allowed a sociopath to gain power unopposed?", well the basic sociopath on the chain is Hubbard. Miscavige, in all honesty, is simply applying MANY LRH policies as best he can. OSA tech is in full swing, just as it was when Hubbard was alive and directing things. The "tech" of convincing people, the "tech" of manipuating people with ruin-finding, the "tech" of lying, are all still in full swing, just as they were with Hubbard. While Miscavige IS an idiot, the people who try to view HIM as the "why" are more of an idiot than him. The "why" has always been Hubbard and the "subject" that he created.

Hubbard CHANGED the "tech" himself, day after day and year after year. Now Miscavige does the same, though not as intensely as Hubbard did. Remember, at first the ONLY command necessary in Scientology was "be three feet in back or your head", and then do ROUTE ONE from Creation of Human Ability (old OT 5 and old OT 6).

He then created a HUGE Bridge after finding that these degraded Earth humans couldn't so easily do THAT. Everything else after THAT was an additive. Rundown after rundown to "undercut" the reasons why the poor PC couldn't follow the simple commands. Hubbard called it "evolving" of Scientology, based on "further research", but in a certain regard, Hubbard was doing what he did best - he constantly made shit up. Lying - lowest form of creation. Hubbard excelled at THAT.

And, while it is true that "basically" the followers allow the nutjobs to take and continue power (DM or Hubbard), it is also true that a few factors make that not quite entirely true. First, oppressive regimes, including Scientology, are set up to exert HUGE amounts of FORCE against members to keep them in line. Black and white becomes very gray.

Second, the GRADIENT nature of Scientology dissemination and indoctrination should not be underestimated in its effectiveness and power (over members). For example, as time went on, I MANY times mentioned to myself, "geesh, this is NOT what I assumed I was getting involved in when I first started". As one stays longer, one can't help but contact more and more aspects of the organization and subject that were NOT obvious to you at earlier times along the involvement. Negative apsects. Unless you are blind, entirely in denial or really stupid.

The problem with the indoctrination gradient, so carefully designed by Hubbard, is that you get sucked in, little by little, more and more, every step along the way, and the accumulation of these many attitudes and beliefs prevents most members from accepting and acknowledging the MANY shittier/nasty aspects of the subject, group, operation and Hubbard that he or she is confronted with as one gets more involved with the Church of Scientology.

So, yes, basically, we each, as a Church member allowed, tolerated and supported (by default) both Miscavige and Hubbard (sociopaths). But, there is more to it than that over-simplistic comment. The "more" to it involves the mind-fuck involved with any person who accepts, thinks with, and acts upon any form of severe Scientology indoctrination (including all Marty-types and similar adherents).

+++++++++++++
 

blownstaffmember

Patron with Honors
Hubbard was doing what he did best - he constantly made shit up.

clapping%20hands-thumb.gif
 

freethinker

Sponsor
It's a very good post.

All the power that Scientology, Hubbard, and Miscacige ever had came from the people who follow it and support it and from the people who know it and don't object to it.

None of it has power without followers.
 

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

There was only one earlier correct handling, and the opportunity was missed. If you had a time machine you could go back to the Mission holders' meeting and apply R2-45, but that was the last opportunity to fix things.

Since it was Hubbard who ordered the looting of the Missions, if your extreme suggestion had been taken, Hubbard would have appointed someone else to be his chief henchman, to replace Miscavige, and that person would have, in obedience to Hubbard, looted the Missions.

Big thetans overcome by brute force and stupidity. It's our historic downfall on the whole track.

I'm an itsy bitsy teeny tiny thetan so I wouldn't know anything about that.

What's it like being a big thetan? :p
 

haiqu

Patron Meritorious
There's too much scio jargon here for me to try and decode.

Your quoted article contained much more jargon, I just summarized.

The message of the above article is in the present. The abuses exist, the crimes still exist. Now.

And my point is that anyone still in there is dumb as a stump and deserves everything they get. That "brief breath in eternity" gasped and expired about 20 years ago.

Why feel pity for a masochist?
 
Top