Why ex-members and never-in protesters fail to understand each other

To whoever derailed my great thread into some Trump&Hitler nonsense - shame on you!
Maybe we should convene a Board of Investigation. :)
 
To whoever derailed my great thread into some Trump&Hitler nonsense - shame on you!

I was reading and found interesting.. yep, till the orange van hit it.....
Anyway, thanks for one of the rare topic never yet addressed.
😉
 
Last edited:
I guess there is also SO vs Staff
Perhaps, though tbh I have not observed really that much misunderstandings between just SO and staff.

I'd say otheer than "never-ins & ex members" the other similar pair with frequent misunderstandings caused by a very different life experience is "1st gens & 2nd gens".
 
Good post.

I came across this dude today and thought it really explains a lot of what is going on today.

Kinda hard to remember that this guy published his book in 1951!

This article explains things a little more:

I've recommended his book for a long time as a way to understand Scientology

Published in 1951 in the shadow of World War II and the rise of the Soviet Union, Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements became one of President Dwight Eisenhower’s favorite books. As the former Supreme Allied Commander of European forces during World War II, Eisenhower saw firsthand the rise of mass movements and how they turn destructive. During one of the nation’s first televised presidential press conferences, Ike cited the book, turning it into a bestseller.
 
To whoever derailed my great thread into some Trump&Hitler nonsense - shame on you!
hi ,
good point.
it has been used for so long here.
very boring and same.
If someone thinks this is a way of "handling" posts here it is funny.
this "way" used to work on old platforms 10 , 15 years ago.
thanks
 
hi ,
good point.
it has been used for so long here.
very boring and same.
If someone thinks this is a way of "handling" posts here it is funny.
this "way" used to work on old platforms 10 , 15 years ago.
thanks
I mena it tongue in cheek mostly. But yeah, we have a whole "US poilitics" and "Geopolitics" and "War in Ukraine" threads for that. We have other places to discuss political stuff unrelated to scientology, all I'm saying.
 
I mena it tongue in cheek mostly. But yeah, we have a whole "US poilitics" and "Geopolitics" and "War in Ukraine" threads for that. We have other places to discuss political stuff unrelated to scientology, all I'm saying.
hi,
thanks for reply,
but same reply is used with "those other people"
They say it was just "tongue in cheeck" ...
instead of admiting " I was passive agresive"
(i love that frame of words)
good luck.
and I like your posts , seems like you know what you stand for!
all best from LRHs Bulgravia.
 
They say it was just "tongue in cheeck" ...
instead of admiting " I was passive agresive"

Well, I have said it with a wink and a smile, or alternatively I could have been 'active agressive' and say: "Yo, stop going off topic and take that stuff to the politics thread thank-you-very-much".

There was really no other or better way to say it. I think I chose the less hostile option. :D
 
Depends on character. I think Mark Bunker and Tory Magoo have hit it of from the start. And Second gens are closer than the Mike Rinders of this world to Never ins.

I think most of the never-in protesters mean well. But in their actions, they tend to be preocuppied chiefly with the well-being of other never-ins: the 'potential recruits' or the 'public-at-large'. If they think about still-ins and current SO members, it is either as foes or as an afterthought.

We ex-scientologists tend to be preocuppied chiefly the well being of former members or the still-ins.
In that sense, I feel we and the never-in protesters are often talking past each other.

When we say "some forms of protest are bad", we mean that confrontational, hostile forms of protest make current members double-down and make it harder for them to leave. That it feeds into the siege-mentality Miscavige wants to spread.
By saying "there is no bad way to protest" I believe the never-in protesters mean that "there is no bad publicity", that anything that helps spread public awareness of scientology abuses among the general public is a good thing.

I think that is the main underlying misunderstanding and that this is what OSA is trying to use as a crowbar to pull us apart.
 
Last edited:
I've been noticing a lot of zeitgeist disruption recently in the 'stop scientology abuses' village. I haven't given it any time to investigate, study or mull over--but I do notice it and sometimes wonder if this is possibly one of the very first (think operating system 2.0) times that OSA trolling, dead agenting and "third party" disruptions have ever been effective.

yeah - i've just not had much energy for getting into it.

my take is there was just some of the sort dissension that tends to occur between people -- particularly spurred on by ASL's ex-cultie nature, and then given opportunity by the outbreak of new round of protesters/1A auditors -- and OSA is just exploiting that.
 
Kinda hard to remember that this guy published his book in 1951!

i think what's been forgotten, is what went on on the first half of that century, with all sorts of authorities and gurus, and psychologically and spiritually oriented teachings and movements. one of the reasons LRH got away with as much repackaging of earlier stuff as he did, was particularly by the time the boomer kids came along, they had little to no knowledge of people like Elbert Hubbard, Napoleon Hill, Aleister Crowley or Edgar Cayce and their 'work', and couldn't recognize copying and plagiarism.

also, i checked Wikipedia, and it turns out that all that's known of Hoffer's background is what he himself said, at least some of which seems not to actually fit with things like the type of german accent he actually had -- and there is no evidence, no records (meaning he was likely some sort of 'illegal immigrant') and no one who knew him when young ever came forward. i wonder if he was a sort of reverse Hubbard, someone who was better educated than he let on.
 
Last edited:
hi,
thanks for reply,
but same reply is used with "those other people"
They say it was just "tongue in cheeck" ...
instead of admiting " I was passive agresive"
(i love that frame of words)
good luck.
and I like your posts , seems like you know what you stand for!
all best from LRHs Bulgravia.
"Tongue in cheek" does not = "passive aggressive". "Tongue in cheek" simply means expressing something in a humorous and entertaining way, to make a person smile. Your characterizing Karakorum's reply as "passive-aggressive" IS passive-aggressive, and indicative of your Scientology indoctrination ("Jokers and degraders"= "1.1, covertly hostile"). Try to think for yourself instead of defaulting to what you've input.
 
I think I am the guilty party, at least one of them.

I'll save the Dev-T of a Comm Ev. I'll just go clean out a nearby dumpster with a toothbrush and apply for acceptance back into the group.
And no using an electric toothbrush, that's for upstats. :)
 
IT'S OVER.

 
more clickbait, or something newsworthy?


There was very little in the video that was newsworthy. It was mostly Aaron thanking people who came out to Clearwater and some locals who helped out. Nothing in the video was in any way remotely related to this thread.

The only thing that was newsworthy IMO was when Aaron and some others were protesting in Clearwater the CoS called the police on them when they were in front of the SP building (across from the Fort Harrison). The police did nothing because the protesters weren't violating any laws. And two of the cops ended up taking group photos with the protesters, something that probably really pissed off OSA. :D

This is a screenshot from an earlier video of the protesters in front of the SP building with the police.


1713478063066.png



Here's a little bit of a clearer picture of that sign:


cwpoliceatprotest.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top