Whether or not Hubbard is brilliant or ridiculous on idea X is not as important as the fact that his system does not allow freedom of discussion of his ideas.
Zane (zane@die_spammers.ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: On Sun, 08 Feb 1998 19:07:10 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (Bernie) wrote:
: >There are very few Scientologists posting to this newsgroup,
: >Mari, and they are usually not that interested to discuss their
: >beliefs in an hostile environment.
: Actually they are utterly unable to discuss their beliefs in a
: critical environment because their beliefs are entirely ludicrous and
: without merit.
Actually, no, Zane. They cannot discuss LRH's ideas because it is
forbidden to discuss them. You can discuss APPLICATION, e.g., "Let's
discuss how we can use the dissemination policies to get in more people"
but you can't discuss the policy in the sense of testing it as an idea,
e.g., "Let's discuss if Hubbard was right when he said..." ZAP!
Compare that to, e.g., a university classroom where you can discuss the
ideas of any philosoher, politician, writer, explorer, scientist etc. You
can actually say you disagree with so-and-so's idea and that you think it
is wrong because... And you are free to do so EXCEPT in a totalitarian
society, e.g., can you imagine the ideas of Saddam Hussein being
challenged in an Iraqui university? ZAP! "Hi, we're from the State Police
and would you come with us?"
No, Zane (and others), let's get it right. Whether or not Hubbard is
brilliant or ridiculous on idea X is not as important as the fact that his
system does not allow freedom of discussion of his ideas. That is critical
for while Scientologists try to sell Hubbard to other systems (businesses,
politicians, religious leaders) they hide this fact. Okay, hang on! What
is also amazing is that they don't think they are hiding it. A prime
example will be found in totalitarian systems where citizens convince
themselves that they have freedom and countries like the US do not. This
was found constantly in the old USSR where citizens would say, "We have
complete freedom of press and speech here, unlike the US where it is
controlled by the capitalisit war-mongers." Sound familiar?
I, myself, am not interested in challenging or discussing Hubbard's
theories as much as I am interested in discussing the nature of the actual
system, the truth of the system and what it truly advocates because it is
a double-think system. For example, Grade Zero supposedly gives one an
ability to communicate to anyone on any subject. Yet the truth is quite
the opposite. In fact, right in the ethics codes it says any criticism of
Hubbard/Scientology is a crime. That is where one begins to do mental
acrobatics, saying, "Oh, I could if I wanted to but I just don't have any
criticism" etc etc etc. Just like the old Soviet citizen who claimed
he/she had the freedome (to speak out, to even leave) but they didn't want
I really know it because I was there. I had this mental attitude and I
wish I could think of some mental antidote, some snap of the fingers that
would bring out out of that stupor. When I do, I'll offer it. But in the
meantime, all I can suggset is to just chip away at it. There are a lot of
instances when incongruities (conflicts between what one is thinking in
there an what one sees/hears) really rattle around in the head. E.g., when
some major/top aide to Hubbard is suddenly denounced as an SP and one
wonders, why were they so close to Hubbard? Why weren't they found
earlier? (I spoke to this in another post.) One tries to reconcile the
tech with the facts and sometimes it doesn't work so one comes up with
another mental contortion to explain it away.
That's why there is no discussion, because it would fall away. And that is
why it is prohibited inside the actual organization.
And THAT is the ambush on the "The Road to Total Freedom."
Robert Vaughn Young * The most potent weapon of the oppressor is *
email@example.com * the mind of the oppressed. - Steve Biko *