Scientology makes people stupid.
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 1997 09:20:13 GMT, concern@atnet.at (Heidrun Beer)
wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:38:16 GMT, armstrong@ntonline.com (gerry
>armstrong) wrote:
>
>
>> I challenge David Miscavige to respond to my communications, and I
>>challenge him to debate with me the fact that Scientology makes people
>>stupid.
>
>
>Scientology is NOT making people stupid.
>
>The stupid enforcement of stupid violations of the most
>basic laws taught in Scientology is it which makes people stupid.
>Hubbard called this SQUIRRELING: "It means altering Scn and
>offbeat practices" (Def. from Tech.Dict.)
It is the violation of basic wisdom which is stupidity.
The concept of "altering Scientology" being a cause of stupidity leads
to the question, which has been debated for years on ars: what is
Scientology? As it is presently practised by the cult it could not
incorrectly be defined as: whatever David Miscavige says it is. I'm
saying that what he makes of it and what he makes other people make of
it is stupid, and makes those other people stupid.
Miscavige's purpose for making people stupid is to control them for
his stupid purposes and have them do stupid things, like pay him
enormous sums of money for the stupidity he peddles, or spend their
time bullying good people who question his stupidity. It can seem
like he is terribly smart in this, but that is only because one of the
world's stupidities is the glorifying of confidence games; e.g.,
capitalism's pinnacle. But the conman is inevitably rewarded with a
harvest of fear, labels like "pathological liar," and his own colossal
autogeous stupidity.
Hubbard was stupid because he violated basic wisdom. He intended that
his lies be believed, and lies believed make people stupid. Miscavige
does the same. A bunch of stupid lawyers (selling their valuable
souls for valueless lucre), through the concocting of the corporate
con called RTC, have made "Scientology" whatever DM says it is.
Stupid courts, conned by these stupid lawyers, have made DM's
definition of "Scientology" "legal." Until he quits investing in
stupidity, his stupid cult only makes people stupid, and stupider. He
will show his choice for wisdom over stupidity when he quits lying and
quits bullying. He would be wise if he moved with some alacrity,
however, because the people he works so hard to make and keep stupid
just might thmselves wise up and grab control of their organization
and make him quit lying and bullying. Bullying, of course, is the
really stupid's response to a call for wisdom.
If, therefore, Scientology is what DM says it is, and DM is really
stupid, and what he makes of Scientology makes people stupid, then
some "squirreling, " or altering Scientology, would be beneficial;
i.e., it would end the stupid-making.
>
>The fact that the CoS tries to censor you is one of the
>most stupid stupidities I have seen so far in terms of
>violation of Scientology basics. They have given in to
>a squirreling leadership. I can prove it and would LOVE
>to do so in court of before TV-cameras at any time.
>
A "Scientologist" is defined in WIS or somewhere as something like
"someone who subscribes to the Creed of Scientology." (Someone else
can come up with the exact quote and source, as I don't have my files
with me.) The "creed" contains a number of worthy and not unwise
beliefs such as "in the inalienable right of people to speak freely."
(Someone will have that language as well.)
DM's stupid cult cabal, as you've noted, does not subscribe to the
belief that people should be able to speak freely. They have stupidly
spent millions, which they extracted from their followers to make them
stupid, on trying to have the justice system stupidly deny people
their, not just legal but God-given, right to free speech. I do
subscribe to the belief that people should be able to speak freely.
Am I not then a Scientologist. And as a Scientologist, can an
antiscientologist cult leader like DM legally prevent me from
discussing my "church." Scientologists don't come to my defense, in
this matter which threatens their "religion," only because they have
been rendered too stupid by all DM's lies and other stupid-making
practices.
DM, demonstrating the recoil of a life of stupidity, was the final
approval point on WIS. He takes credit for the book.
There will come a time when Scientology and all the "trade secrets"
and writings will be owned not by Hubbard, not by his estate, not by
DM, not by RTC, not by COST, not by any corporation, not by Lawrence
Wollersheim or any other creditorvictim, not by any lawyer, but by
Scientologists. Hubbard was not a practising Scientologist, and had
no legal control of Scientology and its members' practices to be able
to legally pass on to DM, RTC or anyone else. DM with his lawyer
coconspirators is running a "religious" extortion racket.
Scientologists could not legally give away their right to practise
Scientology and their right to say what Scientology is to a bunch of
extortionists any more than a group of Christians could legally give
away their right to practise Christianity and say what it is to a
bunch of "Christian" thugs, bullies or shakedown artists.
It would be quite easy and swift for Scientologists to change the
course of their organization. Wisdom is not necessarily more
difficult than stupidity to attain, it costs nothing and has no
downside.
>It is totally contradicting Hubbard's most fundamental
>writings, and if it is what Hubbard wanted them to do,
>then he was, in this moment (and nobody is 100% perfect
>100% of his life), stupid himself by contradicting himself.
Wisdom is not absent from anywhere, and always available. Hubbard
tried to make it unavailable in his organization, calling himself
"Source," which is really stupid. Much of what he wrote is really
stupid. In that he wrote millions of words, it couldn't all be
completely stupid, since he was, after all, in the business of selling
what he called "knowledge." Wisdom is related more closely to the
application of knowledge. Hubbard's application of his knowledge was
to defraud people, hurt people, deny them justice, deny them wisdom,
enslave them, and make them stupid. That's really really stupid.
Crediting Scientology with what it doesn't do is one of the
stupidities the cult implants in people. (Wrong source.) A Travolta
crediting Scientology with his career success is stupid. It didn't
give him his looks, charm, ability, luck or life. The part
Scientology plays in all those things is so miniscule it can be
ignored completely and nothing would have changed.
Scientology can't cure illness and can't change IQ, other than to make
people stupid. When people leave the stupid influence of DM they get
smarter, a miracle cure which costs no money.
>In "Notes on the Lectures", article about the group engram,
>he tells us that the fully detailed truth about a painful event
>has to be published to a group in order to resolve it for
>the group members. I have translated this book for publication
>after having been trained as a translator on a Sea Org checksheet.
>They even have paid me for this translation. I guarantee that the
>summarized message I am giving here is what Hubbard is saying.
>
That is not an idea that originated with Hubbard. Telling the truth
is what the spiritual practices of Justice and Education are all
about, and have been about throughout history. Hubbard took that
knowledge and led people to believe that they would get that at his
hands in Scientology. Then he systematically denied them the truth,
lied to them and bullied them if they sought to find or tell the
truth. All this made the very people who looked to him for wisdom
(guidance) and believed in him tragically stupid. Hubbard knew he was
a liar. DM knows he is a liar. And that is their cruelty.
>The Church of Scientology's attempt to censor you is doing
>the opposite of what Hubbard envisioned. After all the research
>you did, you would be one perfect candidate for the position
>of the "group auditor" who provides the total transparency
>of time, space and event to those who have been harmed during
>the violent times in the CoS. This would enable them to perceive
>the truth of what happened, to such an extent that it would as-is
>(dissolve) forever.
>
Forgiveness is technically, artistically and in every way the
recognition that that which needs to be forgiven didn't happen.
Hubbard taught that that which didn't happen did, and he conned
people, he thought, out of their money and lives with promises of
reducing, or "clearing," the effects of these non-existent causes.
Hubbard also taught that forgiveness is condemnation (see HCOB What is
Greatness), which is sadly is stupid, but happily a point where
stupidity and wisdom can be distinguished.
Hubbard can be forgiven. And DM can change Scientology's terrible
practises and policies.
>
>
>Of course you would have to carefully restore your own ability
>to differentiate and weigh data. The very force of the attacks
>you have suffered makes this quite unlikely. It needs a balanced
>floating above the complexity of data to really weigh them,
>and such attacks are certainly un-balancing any balanced state
>which might have existed.
>
>But, a really able thetan could do it. He would assume an
>exterior viewpoint to the situation, and he could recover
>the balance needed for data evaluation, simply because
>he would be brave enough to decide to do this step.
>
>If necessary, he would make sure to get some auditing,
>or do it solo. There he would look at the precise time span
>during which he was suffering force impact; he would alertly
>duplicate the point(s) of its origination and its precise
>direction, speed, amount and wavelength characteristics -
>until the received force, no matter how brutal,
>would no longer bother him.
That is the function of forgiveness. If direction, speed, amount and
wavelength, etc were real; i.e., the cause of some significant effect,
then their "duplication" would not reduce them. Because they are not
real, they can be seen as having no effect, and their apparent effect
eliminated. It need not take time at all. Then time can be spent
with what really is real. The idea of elimination of the Scientology
"group engram" is a worthy goal. I would say that ars, with all of
its auditing errors and unskilled auditors, and in spite of all the
detractors, snipers, spammers, DM apologists and bullies, is engaged,
knowingly or unknowingly, in that goal. All that prevents its
immediate achievement is stupidity, and since we are slowly and
speedily entering the age of wisdom, stupidity will slowly and
speedily be seen for what it is: just plain stupid.
>
>And then he could and would make use of his unique experience.
>He would establish himself as one capacity who really looks through.
>He would lend the understanding he has gained to those who are
>in need of it in order to resolve their trouble and grief.
>
>This would be the ultimate proof that he is stronger
>than the church which has tried to destroy him.
>
If he were very wise, he wouldn't try to recruit people to build a
better bridge.
>
>
>
>
>Heidrun Beer (clear baby)
>
>
>---
Gerry