Skip to comments.Indoctrinated Tyranny (The Forbidden Side of Scientology)
Posted on 01/18/2005 4:57:40 PM PST by Murray Luther
The Forbidden Side of Scientology
By the Reverend Murray Luther, Jan 18, 2005
Unauthorized Correspondent for The Church of Scientology
One of the first things a new Scientologist encounters when studying Dianetics and Scientology is the absolute authority of L. Ron Hubbard. There's a gradual indoctrination process that takes place in which the Scientologist eventually comes to the realization that everything Hubbard says is absolutely true and completely correct. Sooner or later every Scientologist arrives at a point where Hubbard's word becomes law, not to be questioned.
Every course begins with the same Hubbard Policy Letter, Keeping Scientology Working, which establishes the infallibility of Hubbard's so-called "technology." In that PL, Hubbard boldly states, "What I say in these pages has always been true, it holds true today, it will still hold true in the year 2000 and it will continue to hold true from there on out." Another frequently studied Policy Letter is, Safeguarding Technology, in which Hubbard claims, "Scientology is the only workable system Man has." In the mind of the Scientologist, these are absolute and self-evident truths.
In Scientology, you cannot challenge the word of Hubbard and expect to remain a member in good standing for long. There's nothing whatsoever in Hubbard's writings and recorded lectures that a Scientologist can maintain even the most minor dispute. The Church considers that all disagreements with Hubbard doctrine come from some lack in understanding of the inviolable truths contained in the material. The only option a student has to reconcile a contrary view is to keep restudying the particular area in dispute until the misunderstanding is "cleared up." In this way the rigid dogma of Scientology is preserved, and all thoughts or opinions contrary to Hubbard's view are subdued.
The Scientologists' unwavering devotion to their rigid dogma is one of the reasons why so many critics use the word cult when describing Scientology. Personally, I've avoided the use of that word. While it's true that calling the Church of Scientology a cult is apt in many ways, the meaning of the word has been diluted over years of misuse. The term cult has too often become a lazy argument against any religion a critic doesn't happen to like. Moreover, the word has turned into a media buzz-word which has rendered it virtually useless in meaningful discussions.
Instead, I would prefer to use a phrase with less baggage attached to it. The term "mass movement," is the operative word used in a book by philosopher Eric Hoffer. His book, The True Believer first came out in 1951, a full year before L. Ron Hubbard established his Church of Scientology. Hoffer's concept of a mass movement is large in scope, and can apply to many groups that may not be religious in nature.
Mass movements, even if they differ in doctrine and aspiration, often contain common elements: a fervent desire for worldwide change; a call for united action; a willingness to make extraordinary sacrifices to achieve their utopian vision. The true believer, whether he's a religious zealot, a political radical, or social revolutionary, is usually the extremist in society; the fanatic driven by some grand ideology. In this context, Scientology is a form of religious fanaticism that claims that Hubbard's "technology" is the only answer to a troubled world.
While Hoffer recognizes that there are both good and bad mass movements, he focuses mainly on the "fanatic who is often ready to sacrifice relatives and friends for his holy cause." The Scientologist, as a "true believer," is consumed with a need for united action and is compelled towards acts of self-sacrifice. Eric Hoffer describes this particular brand of fanaticism in this way:
"The absolute unity and the readiness for self-sacrifice which give an active movement its irresistible drive and enable it to undertake the impossible are usually achieved at a sacrifice of much that is pleasant and precious in the autonomous individual."
Mass movements tend to be totalitarian organizations obligated to follow the dictates of its leaders. The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics defines totalitarianism as "A dictatorial form of centralized government that regulates every aspect of state and private behavior." By comparison, there's hardly a single aspect of living that Hubbard hasn't covered in his writing. Consequently, Church members live their lives according to the word of L. Ron Hubbard. In Scientology his word is literally referred to as "scripture."
In order to maintain their tyrannical hold over their members, the Church must constantly enforce upon the minds of its members the imperative of complete obedience. This is done through a technique called the "security check." The purpose of this process is to discover if a Scientologist is withholding any disagreements, incidents of policy violations, or any other sort of trespasses against the Church. The procedure involves an elaborate interrogation called a "confessional." It's used mainly to ensure that members never stray from the principles of Scientology.
There are numerous "Sec Check" lists the Church uses in any given circumstance. Many Scientologists have gotten questions like, "Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about L. Ron Hubbard?" It can get personal, too with questions like, "Have you ever practiced masturbation?" Or "Have you ever practiced Homosexuality?" Going from the personal to the weird, the same checklist includes, "Have you ever practiced Cannibalism?" From another checklist, you get this strange question, "Have you ever given robots a bad name?" Believe it or not, there's even a security check for children. This confessional list asks, among other things, "Have you ever spied on anyone?" Apparently, even children have the potential of becoming subversives within the totalitarian structure of Scientology organizations.
Understanding the mind of the Scientologist is to understand the mind of the political extremist, the religious fanatic, and the social revolutionary. All are driven by ideologies that promise to bring their version of salvation to the world. But in fact these extremists are blinded from reality by the causes that they so fervently serve. So says author Daniel J. Flynn, in an article titled "Are horrific means justified by utopia?" In that article he concludes, "Unfortunately, utopian ideologies never succeed in their ends or spare in their means. The road to heaven on earth invariably detours to a dead end more closely resembling a much hotter place."
Murray Luther is the pen name of a Scientologist of over twenty-five years who remains in good standing with the Church. © Copyright Murray Luther 2005. All rights Reserved.
Scientology is bogus and all thta. But generally one isn't really supposed to or wanted to come to this site and post your own stuff just to gain a wider audience.
In other words its not appropriate.
Having run across a wackadoo Scientologist on a nutrition board, I'm happy to have the additional insight from reading these posts.
I heard a story about how scientology came about, L. Ron Hubbard and another writer, I can't remember who, made a bet about which of them could come up with a religion that people would actually believe and follow.
Hubbard actually believes in scientology, though, so it's not all a farce, it's just a completely made up and bogus religion, based on a bet. Which Hubbard evidentally won.
Scammintology is an organized, ongoing, criminal enterprise using religion as cover for its cult operation. Its leaders should be immediately arrested, it's property siezed, and its operations halted. The US govt is negligent in not doing this TODAY.
From the article:
"The Scientologists' unwavering devotion to their rigid dogma is one of the reasons why so many critics use the word cult when describing
Can posting this expose FR? I know over the years Scientology has sued and won suits over disparaging sites with copyright enforcements.
"What I say in these pages has always been true, it holds true today, it will still hold true in the year 2000 and it will continue to hold true from there on out."
One can see why Hubbard's writing never made him as rich as he craved to be. Had he been a more careful writer (and thinker), he would've recognized that he should've ended this sentence from his introductory pamphlet with 'from then on' rather than 'from there on out'. It's a small thing, but telling.
Sloppy writing, sloppy thinking, dangerous consequences for those having difficulty finding their way in the world.
What wouldn't Hubbard have done to become rich? And what wouldn't his epigones now do?
I wonder. We have a thread going Here on free will. To me, Scientology sounds like anything but. As the title says: tyranny. Coherced confession. It really sounds facist.
What of the character quality of the believers? Do the checks enforce moral straightness? I've heard spiritual experiences of Scientologists - are they true?
What does any dangerous, criminal cult do? Extortion, fraud, involuntary servitude through brainwashing, bribery, you name it.
By the way, I'm not relying on some website to form my opinion, I know former members who will confirm what is at that website. Countries all over the world have decided that Scammintology is in fact not a religion but a criminal organization. Only in the US and to some extent GB have these parasites had a free hand to conduct "business."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.