Is There A Base Population In The Scn. Cult That Would Exist Regardless Of What Happens?

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
The report from the supervisor at Atlanta, and he is so proud, there are three people doing the student hat. I did not ask details, so I would believe that these people probably are not on a full time schedule. He also did not identify if those people were staff or public. I know this person, and he would say the truth, three people, but would probably hide that there weren't really three paying full time people.

My, how dead is this? Pretty dead.
 

onceuponatime

Well-known member
Sad but three is probably upstats for them. Goes to show how dead class V orgs are.

I think most class v orgs are like that. They're already dead, they just don't know it yet. It will take a little time before they stop twitching but it's too late for them.

The only places still alive are flag and LA. Perhaps the other cont areas and some of the larger class v orgs will carry on for some time but the future of flag being the only place where you actually do services is not too far off. In my opinion.
 

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
My, how dead is this? Pretty dead.
It's probably game over for the COS. We just don't have the insider view entirely.
It could be just running on it's war chest monies right now, never to rebound.

With $3 billion in net worth/reserves + non-taxable real estate, it can keep
"reading rooms" (ala the Christian Science Reading Room) open indefinitely.

Rosicrucians are still around . . . since the early1600's. Christianity, even longer.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
It's probably game over for the COS. We just don't have the insider view entirely.
It could be just running on it's war chest monies right now, never to rebound.

With $3 billion in net worth/reserves + non-taxable real estate, it can keep
"reading rooms" (ala the Christian Science Reading Room) open indefinitely.

Rosicrucians are still around . . . since the early1600's. Christianity, even longer.
God that is a weird thought, but could be. They know how to raise money, they can attract an affluent and easily persuaded (I didn't want to use the word "gullible") clientele.

In 2075, it will be housed in large, empty buildings manned by monks, I mean able bodied seamen. (Now, if I could only take a pic of a male S.O. dude with a tonsure, it would be complete.)
 

Marko Ex

Active member
Not at all masochistic, if those particular persons felt they were getting good results with their auditing program and wished to complete it before leaving the RPF. Without Staff Auditors under the Staff Section Officers in most of those orgs, they would absolutely been left in the middle of unfinished auditing actions.

Perhaps you might try interviewing those who stayed and asking them why they chose to stay ? Blanket judgmental disparagement of people whom you don't even know personally is a bit hypocritical, if we are pissed off about such behavior from Churchies, don't you think ?
Damn, never mind the crack or the fentanyl, that scientological kool-aid is a bitch!
 

PirateAndBum

Administrator
Staff member
God that is a weird thought, but could be. They know how to raise money, they can attract an affluent and easily persuaded (I didn't want to use the word "gullible") clientele.

In 2075, it will be housed in large, empty buildings manned by monks, I mean able bodied seamen. (Now, if I could only take a pic of a male S.O. dude with a tonsure, it would be complete.)
No I expect their garb to be more space opera-ish

 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
Listening to Ian Rafalko today, more data that they are using the kids to try to staff the orgs because it's tough to find anyone else. My experience with the 2nd gen kids at that they had not been given a normal childhood. If there is something of a normal childhood, being raised in scamatology isn't it. It is not going to be a long term solution for the choich. The ED of Atlanta day has two daughters in the S.O. I think one is in South Africa. Sadly, these kids may end up making an almost entire life in the cult.
 

Karakorum

Well-known member
Listening to Ian Rafalko today, more data that they are using the kids to try to staff the orgs because it's tough to find anyone else.
That's already been a practice in the late 90s and early 2000s. 2nd gen kids were prime candidates and were pursued very strongly, especially if anyone in their immediate family were staff or SO at any point.
I have empirical personal experience of that :/

Sadly, these kids may end up making an almost entire life in the cult.
Yes and no. My personal observation would suggest 2nd gens are less often "deep kool aid drinkers" and are less likely to be in love with the tech. But they are far more "systemically involved".

1st gens usually stay for the tech, or to save the world. 2nd gens usually stay for the organization and the social network.

I know I did. If the tech was all their was to scn, I would never have stayed, never joined staff or the SO.
I think that's why you almost never see kids raised by independent scientologists go on to become indies themselves.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
Yes and no. My personal observation would suggest 2nd gens are less often "deep kool aid drinkers" and are less likely to be in love with the tech. But they are far more "systemically involved".
I have seen more 2nd gen kids leave than stay. There are some exceptions, but what you say is true. When I was in the EPF, I met a Russian kid that was nearing doing the FRU at flag. He confided to me that he was uncertain about never having kids. He wanted that experience, but there he was, along with me doing something that deep down inside seemed odd.

I hardly fit in anywhere anymore anyway, and that's ok with me. I am not a good fitter inner. I DEFINITELY would not have been a good sea org member. Only by virtue that I am less tolerant overall, as some here can testify to.
 

TheSneakster

Well-known member
I'll say this once more: any Scientologist - in or out of the C of $ - who is happy with the results they got from their auditing and/or their auditing of other folks is pretty much immune to any anti-Scientology / anti-Hubbard critic propaganda. Only people who are not happy with their results are candidates for departing the subject and maybe becoming critics.

Some folks who don't accept this state of affairs resort to various disparagements ("brainwashed", "cool aid drinkers", etc.) of those of us whose experience with the subject itself is generally positive. Those among us who reckon the official organization is endemically evil leave and become independents and maybe critics of the organization.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
I'll say this once more: any Scientologist - in or out of the C of $ - who is happy with the results they got from their auditing and/or their auditing of other folks is pretty much immune to any anti-Scientology / anti-Hubbard critic propaganda. Only people who are not happy with their results are candidates for departing the subject and maybe becoming critics.

Some folks who don't accept this state of affairs resort to various disparagements ("brainwashed", "cool aid drinkers", etc.) of those of us whose experience with the subject itself is generally positive. Those among us who reckon the official organization is endemically evil leave and become independents and maybe critics of the organization.
I don't think you are brainwashed, or a kool-aid drinker.

I think that I could communicate to a group of people where I said that I was, at one time, a kool-aid drinker of monster proportions, and did things that people here might say "what a damn kool-aid drinker he was," and they would be correct. I would think that it was disparaging of me about the way that I was back then, but it would be true.

I can change my mind, and I did.

I try changing my mind quite a bit lately. It feels like the process of learning.
 

TheSneakster

Well-known member
I don't think you are brainwashed, or a kool-aid drinker.
Well, thanks.

I rejected the entire "Kool-Aid drinker" meme after diligent study of what really happened at the People's Temple aka Jonestown. At least 90% of the persons who drank poisoned Flavor Aid did so at the point of guns wielded by Jim Jones' hardcore cultists. Those 90% were murdered and the use of this particular meme utterly disrespects their memory.

I was raised on the Bible and Jesus from a young age. I was myself bullied and abused extensively as I grew up. The entire time I was in the Sea Organization, I never once used Scientology as an excuse to disparage, mistreat or abuse one single person in or out of Scientology.

I stood up to the INT Missionaire bullies when the INT Command Team Ethics Mission (1993-1994) - who had been explicitly trained to abuse the staff by James Byrne at Davie McSavage's orders - came to PAC Base and ultimately got myself kicked out of the Sea Org for it.

Edit Addendum: While I was on the illegal Deck Project Force after being illegally removed from post by this mission in Nov 1994, I found out from Tom Martiniano (now an Indie Scientologist) of SIPRO (Scientology International Property Renovations Org) that a rumor was being spread around that I "enturbulated OTs". Imagine that.
 
Last edited:

Karakorum

Well-known member
Some folks who don't accept this state of affairs resort to various disparagements ("brainwashed", "cool aid drinkers", etc.) of those of us whose experience with the subject itself is generally positive
Point taken, I should have thought twice before using the "deep-kool-aid-drinker" term without further explanation. It ended up sounding as offensive as the "wog" and other such terms.

Basically, what I meant to convey is to distinguish between two very different forms of CoS fanaticism.

1. The "organizational" fanatics. (I was one) The people who join the SO, see nothing wrong in OSA, inv and general ethics invigilation and oppression, who support the enforcement methods and disconnection, who do the "how high sir?" routine and who believe in the: "Wrong or right, my cult!". 2nd gens and people who join as little kids tend to more often fall in this category. There's many examples: Me, Mike Rinder, Julian Swartz... Davey was one of these as well when he was just a regular SO dude.
Basically they will take a bullet for the organization, but not necessarily believe every single word Ron ever wrote.

2. The "tech lover" fanatics (these are what I previously called the deep-kool-aid-drinkers). The guys who will probably not take a bullet for the org, but who instead believe every single piece of dogma literally. The people who think touch assists are amazing, who believe that postulates always work and that farsec is a real place and the 3rd invader force really happened. If a 1st gen becomes a fanatic, it is more often this type.


Type 2 often leave because they think that Davey squirreled the tech, because of some serious specific instance of regging or some very nasty upset, but often go on to be independent scientologists.

Type 1 get thrown out, or leave over long term systemic abuse issues - sleep deprivation, the hole, being separated from their families etc. But once they are out, they more often then not throw out the whole philosophy entirely.


If I remember correctly @Karen#1 used the term "deep-kool-aid-drinkers" in one of her videos and said that OSA has a significant number of those. In contrast I can tell you that inv, ADU and the archives have mostly type1 people.

Ain't nobody at inv who believes they can resolve an investigation by making a postulate.
 
Last edited:

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
.....
Ain't nobody at inv who believes they can resolve an investigation by making a postulate.
.
I notice that you often create a special category (which you always include yourself in) of someone who did Scn. investigations & high level ethics enforcement. And to that stellar category you always attribute elite levels of logic and rationality not found in other ordinary Scientologists. Congratulations! LOL

Somehow these amazing folks up lines (yourself included) were not fooled about Scientology like the others. LOL. Because when you signed a billion year contract to "slam in ethics on this planet" and make it possible for all beings to attain miraculous powers and total freedom---that wasn't magical thinking at all—was it? LOL

(You proudly bragged): "Ain't nobody at inv who believes they can resolve an investigation by making a postulate."

(Guess what?): "Ain't nobody at the reg either who believes they can pay for their Bridge by making a postulate".

Sorry for the disappointing and shocking news that you were just a plain old cult mark who got duped, scammed, hoaxed, gamed and tricked---just like everyone else. Instead of boasting about your glorious status as a cult investigator/enforcer, try cringing and the bad cult hangover will begin to fade.

.
 
Last edited:

PirateAndBum

Administrator
Staff member
I'll say this once more: any Scientologist - in or out of the C of $ - who is happy with the results they got from their auditing and/or their auditing of other folks is pretty much immune to any anti-Scientology / anti-Hubbard critic propaganda. Only people who are not happy with their results are candidates for departing the subject and maybe becoming critics.

Some folks who don't accept this state of affairs resort to various disparagements ("brainwashed", "cool aid drinkers", etc.) of those of us whose experience with the subject itself is generally positive. Those among us who reckon the official organization is endemically evil leave and become independents and maybe critics of the organization.
I have to disagree because I am quite happy with the auditing I got, especially L11. Also trained to Class V.

That being said I now have a deep understanding of the true reality of Hubbard and Scientology. And it is not positive.

I will say that I think the lower grades can be useful. The upper level BT tech - no.
 

onceuponatime

Well-known member
That's already been a practice in the late 90s and early 2000s. 2nd gen kids were prime candidates and were pursued very strongly, especially if anyone in their immediate family were staff or SO at any point.
I have empirical personal experience of that :/


Yes and no. My personal observation would suggest 2nd gens are less often "deep kool aid drinkers" and are less likely to be in love with the tech. But they are far more "systemically involved".

1st gens usually stay for the tech, or to save the world. 2nd gens usually stay for the organization and the social network.

I know I did. If the tech was all their was to scn, I would never have stayed, never joined staff or the SO.
I think that's why you almost never see kids raised by independent scientologists go on to become indies themselves.
I have seen more 2nd gen kids leave than stay. There are some exceptions, but what you say is true. When I was in the EPF, I met a Russian kid that was nearing doing the FRU at flag. He confided to me that he was uncertain about never having kids. He wanted that experience, but there he was, along with me doing something that deep down inside seemed odd.

I hardly fit in anywhere anymore anyway, and that's ok with me. I am not a good fitter inner. I DEFINITELY would not have been a good sea org member. Only by virtue that I am less tolerant overall, as some here can testify to.
I agree with these statements. There are a ton of 2nd gen kids who never even get involved. Many of those who do get involved, including stints on staff/SO, end up waking up and leaving.

In my experience the die-hard 1st generation people are pretty much there to stay (I get it, they've already invested their entire life into Scientology, hard to turn away). The 2nd gens though, not so much. They are much more open to opening their eyes and making a change.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Well-known member
I'll say this once more: any Scientologist - in or out of the C of $ - who is happy with the results they got from their auditing and/or their auditing of other folks is pretty much immune to any anti-Scientology / anti-Hubbard critic propaganda. Only people who are not happy with their results are candidates for departing the subject and maybe becoming critics.

Some folks who don't accept this state of affairs resort to various disparagements ("brainwashed", "cool aid drinkers", etc.) of those of us whose experience with the subject itself is generally positive. Those among us who reckon the official organization is endemically evil leave and become independents and maybe critics of the organization.
I see where you're coming from there but I disagree. Some things worked and some didn't in my case, but on the whole I don't regret my time in Scn and yet I'm still critical of what I see going on in the CofS and of Hubbard, and I like to think I'm questioning the subject too.

Even when I was in the FZ it was always my intention to leave at some point and go on to other spiritual disciplines (and this was encouraged at the centre I was at); in fact I left when I attested to Clear in May 1987 and went off and did other things then (such as attending Barry Long's meetings in London), and then came back.

Maybe it's different where I was because we didn't have the top OT levels such as OT 8 (our bridge ended with New OT 7 and the Ls), so we couldn't maintain the pretence that we had the whole Bridge even if there was one.
 
Last edited:
Top