Did Scientology poison curiosity?

Veda

Well-known member
:scratch:Perhaps the opening post wasn't clearly expressed.

Is it my imagination, or is a totalitarian mindset becoming prevalent in society? A mindset that includes "political correctness," "speech codes" (no free speech), instant ostracization, and - in its most strident form - is similar to Maoism, including the cultural revolution, in China, of the 1960s?

This mindset has similarities to the (core) Scientology cult mindset.

Even some of the language: "trigger" = "key in"; micro-aggression = invalidate ("ding"/"de-ding"); ideas similar to "PTS," and also "SP"; the term "safe space"; "social credit score" = "down stat"/"out ethics" etc., etc.

People who are paying closer attention to this than I can probably add more correspondences and similarities.

This is the "new normal." It's displayed on college campuses where, fifty+ years ago, free speech was popular and, now, "correct speech" has replaced free speech, with any speech, deemed not correct, labelled as "hate speech," or with a number of other stigmatizing labels.

This is what was meant by the "current zeitgeist." It's prevalent in big corporations, public schools, the corporate media, etc., even the medical and public health bureaucracies.

Large numbers of people moving in lockstep.

The term "conspiracy theorist" carries tremendous stigma, which is great for those engaging in shady activities behind the scenes, plus there are plenty of kooks who see conspiracies everywhere (although this was always the case, but now is reinforced by stigmatizing anyone spotting deliberate shady activities.)

Hubbard, of course, while instructing that his organization operate as a (ruthless) "tight conspiracy," saw conspiracies (large and small) virtually everywhere he looked. It's not surprising that someone recovering from exposure to Scientology might be allergic to the notion.

And allergic to almost any notion forwarded by Hubbard.

When the "correct think," of the "current zeitgeist," intersects with (the understandable) repulsion from things Hubbardian (or views forwarded or used by Hubbard), a kind of ideological "perfect storm" can form.

This is not prevalent on this message board, but I've noticed it elsewhere.

Strange to contrast the micro psy op of the Scientology cult with macro psy op in which we are now residing... "on this planet."


Or perhaps that's just silly :innocent:



Anyway, this is a much more enjoyable message (and quite true):


 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
.

I don't think Scientology necessarily poisoned imagination.

Perhaps that's unduly harsh.

They simply outlawed* imagination and made it a high crime.




* (exception): Scientologists are robustly encouraged to use their imaginations while in auditing sessions.

.


,
 
Totalitarian mindset IS becoming prevalent in society. I have been waiting for young people and college students to show some of their natural rebellion agains this. I am still waiting.
I am very concerned with the power that the new media has over thoughts and minds. Still wondering who is driving and what their goals really are.
Scientology in its best days was a fart in a hurricane compared to this.
 

Riddick

I clap to no man
.

I don't think Scientology necessarily poisoned imagination.

Perhaps that's unduly harsh.

They simply outlawed* imagination and made it a high crime.




* (exception): Scientologists are robustly encouraged to use their imaginations while in auditing sessions.

.


,
Hubbard embraced imagination, it was the imagination of going clear, and then OT. All those rhetoric abilities one could attain.
 

Zertel

Well-known member
:scratch:Perhaps the opening post wasn't clearly expressed.

Is it my imagination, or is a totalitarian mindset becoming prevalent in society? A mindset that includes "political correctness," "speech codes" (no free speech), instant ostracization, and - in its most strident form - is similar to Maoism, including the cultural revolution, in China, of the 1960s?

This mindset has similarities to the (core) Scientology cult mindset.

Even some of the language: "trigger" = "key in"; micro-aggression = invalidate ("ding"/"de-ding"); ideas similar to "PTS," and also "SP"; the term "safe space"; "social credit score" = "down stat"/"out ethics" etc., etc.

People who are paying closer attention to this than I can probably add more correspondences and similarities.

This is the "new normal." It's displayed on college campuses where, fifty+ years ago, free speech was popular and, now, "correct speech" has replaced free speech, with any speech, deemed not correct, labelled as "hate speech," or with a number of other stigmatizing labels.

This is what was meant by the "current zeitgeist." It's prevalent in big corporations, public schools, the corporate media, etc., even the medical and public health bureaucracies.

Large numbers of people moving in lockstep.

The term "conspiracy theorist" carries tremendous stigma, which is great for those engaging in shady activities behind the scenes, plus there are plenty of kooks who see conspiracies everywhere (although this was always the case, but now is reinforced by stigmatizing anyone spotting deliberate shady activities.)

Hubbard, of course, while instructing that his organization operate as a (ruthless) "tight conspiracy," saw conspiracies (large and small) virtually everywhere he looked. It's not surprising that someone recovering from exposure to Scientology might be allergic to the notion.

And allergic to almost any notion forwarded by Hubbard.

When the "correct think," of the "current zeitgeist," intersects with (the understandable) repulsion from things Hubbardian (or views forwarded or used by Hubbard), a kind of ideological "perfect storm" can form.

This is not prevalent on this message board, but I've noticed it elsewhere.

Strange to contrast the micro psy op of the Scientology cult with macro psy op in which we are now residing... "on this planet."


Or perhaps that's just silly :innocent:



Anyway, this is a much more enjoyable message (and quite true):


I'm aware of all the "items" in this post/comment. Some of them I was unaware of just a few years ago, mostly because they didn't directly affect me and I didn't investigate. I think this could be said of tens of millions of people nationwide in the US and a backlash is in progress. To what extent this counters current "American Marxism", a term and a book by Mark Levin which is on the best seller list, remains to be seen.

Trump got people thinking about and speaking openly about these things with his statements about fake news, the swamp and so on. I think this thread tends toward politics and culture rather than scn which is okay since it's accessible to a non member passerby.

Here's the Amazon link to "American Marxism" with the "Look Inside" browsing feature. It's said that the last chapter in the book has suggestions on how the average citizen can become an anti American Marxism activist with several choices on how to engage, for example parents attending school board meetings and other possibilities.

 
Last edited:

Enthetan

Veteran of the Psychic Wars
Totalitarian mindset IS becoming prevalent in society. I have been waiting for young people and college students to show some of their natural rebellion agains this. I am still waiting.
What some saw as "rebellion" in college students in the 1960's, was simply conformity to the ideology of their new peer group. They "rebelled" against their parents' culture, by conforming to their Marxist professors' culture.

In the 1960's, as today, true rebellion would have been to be an anti-Marxist.
 

Veda

Well-known member
What some saw as "rebellion" in college students in the 1960's, was simply conformity to the ideology of their new peer group. They "rebelled" against their parents' culture, by conforming to their Marxist professors' culture.

In the 1960's, as today, true rebellion would have been to be an anti-Marxist.
There were some Marxists, but most of the people of (what was later labelled as) the "counter culture" were not Marxists.

They were people who had started life crouching down under desks in grade school during drills in anticipation of eventual nuclear missile attack from the Soviet Union. During the Cuban missile crises of 1962, many schools handed out dog tags to children with their names and date of birth engraved. The explanation given was that, in the event of a nuclear war, and the children incinerated beyond recognition, the metal tags would enable the piles of charcoal ash to be identified.

As they grew older, these children were told they had to go to Vietnam, or - -if they were in college - their less fortunate friends had to go, to fight in a civil war between those Vietnamese who sided with the Japanese who had lorded over the submissive French, who had administered Indochina for the Japanese during the first half of the 1940s. Later, with the Japanese defeated by the allies, the French attempted to reassert their position as colonizers of Indochina. This was resisted by the Vietnamese who despised the brutal Japanese and the corrupt French. After the French were finally defeated and driven out, the USA replaced them.

The foreign policy "experts" in U.S. Intelligence and the military privately knew it was hopeless. That the South Vietnamese government was corrupt and weak, that those who had fought the Japanese were strong and determined, and that the defeat of U.S. forces and the South Vietnamese government was inevitable. But war is a profitable business, and generals enjoy testing new equipment in wars, so there was a war.

During the mid 1960s and into the 1970s, young men, many of them teenage boys, were conscripted (subjected to involuntary servitude) into an undeclared war, with the dubious justification of the Gulf of Tonkin incident:



Meanwhile there was music:





It was a very different time.

There was no spirit of totalitarianism and viciousness, and the threats were real, not manufactured.
 

Veda

Well-known member
Hubbard embraced imagination, it was the imagination of going clear, and then OT. All those rhetoric abilities one could attain.
The topic was, "Did Scientology poison curiosity?", with a reference to the odd similarities of (core) Scientology and today's (self consciously trendy) totalitarians.
 
D

Deleted member 51

Guest
The topic was, "Did Scientology poison curiosity?", with a reference to the odd similarities of (core) Scientology and today's (self consciously trendy) totalitarians.
It is possible that world governments have used the Scientology/cult saturation/ brainwashing approach to indoctrinate the young.

But it didn’t begin with Scientology, either. Scientology is late on the chain.

When the young start switching off, they’ll start waking up. And they are beginning to switch off.

They haven’t had an opening, an opportunity, yet. Nor a leader. History tells us this will happen. Every system has its weaknesses.

I believe in our youth. They will pull through yet. They’ve been oppressed with Cancel Culture and haven’t yet found a way out.

In China, the young elites protest the extreme work and control by “laying flat.” And it’s scaring the hell out of the Chinese government.

Our 20-35 year olds have become very quiet in the last month or so. They are waking up, IMO, and not so easily manipulated now by fake news, fake politicians and man-made disasters.

They’re getting fed up and pissed off. They also miss how things were before. When the rebellion starts, we won’t have to look hard for it. :coolwink:
 

Cat's Squirrel

Well-known member
I agree with Veda. I'm not an expert on American politics but I have read a couple of books about the period including Kirkpatrick Sale's book about the SDS (Students For A Democratic Society) and one about the Kent State shootings in 1970, and I think the Marxist professors came later and in many cases were the 60s radicals grown up / older (like Bernardine Dohrn, Bill Ayers and Angela Davis).

More music from the 60s radical period (though I'd use the word 'music' loosely in the case of the last track, it's certainly of its time);



 
Last edited:

Veda

Well-known member
From an old re-post. Seems appropriate for this thread:

Haven't read the Voice in recent times (decades), but the Village Voice I remember (of the mid 1960s though the mid 1970s) was a respected weekly newspaper. I remember a dozen or so weekly, and some monthly, political and philosophical publications, ranging from Socialist Labor Party weekly newspaper to American Opinion magazine, published by the John Birch Society. The only exclusion, from the full range of views (spanning the political spectrum), was the Socialist Workers (Communists) and the Neo-Nazis. These were both regarded as not worthy of consideration, but all else was included.

Other publications included The East Village Other, Paul Krassner's The Realist, I. F. Stone's weekly, etc.

Nowadays, the control-freak busy-body bureaucrats are regarded as the good guys, and the invasive nature of the bureaucracy is beyond anything that was imagined years ago - except in works of fiction such as 1984 - and anyone, and everyone, is supposed to be happy with this state of affairs, or be labeled a "right winger" or be identified with "Q" - whatever the hell that is - or have some other label attached.

Not my cup of tea.

At anti (Vietnam) War gatherings I'd encounter various groups. The Socialist Labor Party people typically wore sweaters and were polite and could converse intelligently; the Socialist Workers Party people liked leather jackets and hard tipped boots (for kicking) and were profane, angry, and thoughtlessly impulsive (very much like today's Antifa), and incapable of expressing themselves except with a chanted slogan or a shouted profanity.

There were also Quakers (who were pacifists) and they were very quiet, and the Anarchists who wore black and actually read the writings of Anarchist thinkers such as Bakunin, Leo Tolstoy, Max Stirner, and were not violent at all, and were very much unlike today's Anarchists who appear to be illiterate children playing at being (their idea) of Anarchists.

And then there were people who opposed the Draft - conscription - on the the grounds that it's involuntary servitude, and, in this case (Vietnam), sans any declaration of war.

In addition, there were books such as A.S. Neil's Summerhill (about his free school in England: "Freedom not license"), and endless books on philosophy starting with the ancient Greeks, then Eastern philosophy, Zen, "consciousness," psychedelics, etc.

And then there was the space program which, despite being a government program, and populated by astronauts who were military pilots, was enthusiastically supported by most except the hardcore nihilists and crazy far Left.

The contrast between then and now is startling. Discourse was possible and expected, and name calling was rare. These people were not the products of the public school system. They were true non-conformists.

In contrast to today, where government funded schools produce conformists who think they're "rebelling" after having been trained to "rebel," with "rebelling" becoming mandatory.

The "vibes" were very different then.




 

Zertel

Well-known member
Did the disappointment of Scientology make some into conformists (sheep) to the current zeitgeist ?
Disappointment with or failure at scn might turn some people toward an atheist scientific materialism or realism position with a dismissal and rejection of anything in the category of extrasensory, paranormal or supernatural. An ex scn would probably be less likely to follow any zeitgeist with a Utopian flavor having already been through one with scn Planetary Clearing. I don't think an ex scn exploring some other avenue of self awareness is in the same category as being in the "current zeitgeist" which has a very broad description.

noun (from dictionary.com)

Sometimes Zeitgeist . the spirit of the time; the general trend of thought, feeling, or tastes characteristic of a particular period of time:

It’s one of those iconic novels that represents the zeitgeist of the mid-1990s so perfectly that reading it provides the ideal dose of nostalgia.
 
Last edited:
Top