The Church of Scientology is a cult created by L Ron Hubbard (Elron) in 1952 as an outgrowth of his earlier self-help system called Dianetics. Unfortunately there are some problems with the organisation and with Hubbard as a person. This is the top 10 problems with Scientology.
1. Hubbard was a drug abuser
L Ron Hubbard was a drug abuser, which is ironic considering the organisation is very anti-drugs and even runs an organisation called Narconon to help people get off drugs. This from the Narconon website: Narconon is a non-profit drug rehab program dedicated to eliminating drug abuse and drug addiction through drug prevention, education and rehabilitation. I am not sure how much you can trust an organisation to help you with the very problem its founder suffered until his death.
Here is a quote from Hubbard’s son Ronald deWolf:
“I have personal knowledge that my father regularly used illegal drugs including amphetamines, barbituates and hallucinogens. He regularly used cocaine, peyote, and mescaline.” — Ronald DeWolf a.k.a. L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. Affadavit in Schaick v. Church of Scientology, US District Court Mass., No. 79-2491
When Hubbard was in Las Palmas during 1967 he wrote a letter to his wife. In it Hubbard tells his wife: “I’m drinking lots of rum and popping pinks and greys.” See the decision by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge, Jr. in Scientology v. Armstrong, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153.
2. Hubbard was a liar
Mr Hubbard told his followers that he was Nuclear Physicist:
Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, C.E., Ph.D., a nuclear physicist, Scientology has demonstrably achieved this long-sought goal. Doctor Hubbard, educated in advanced physics and higher mathematics and also a student of Sigmund Freud and others, began his present researches thirty years ago at George Washington University.
[Hubbard, "P.E. Handout", HCO Information Letter of 14 April 1961]
In fact, Hubbard had no scientific degrees. In February 1953 he decided to obtain a “degree” from Sequoia University, a notorious “degree mill” in Los Angeles that was eventually shut down by the Californian state government in 1958. [Quoted in Russell Miller, Bare-Faced Messiah, page 212].
Hubbard also claimed to being a war hero – this was not true. In an eighteen month period, Hubbard was relieved of duty three times.
3. Hubbard was dishonest in his marriage
When Ron’s wife Sara filed for divorce in 1951, she claimed that Ron was married when he married her. You can view the court document here.
That in the early part of 1946, plaintiff, then age 21 and unmarried, resided with her family in Pasadena, and at the University of Southern California, that at said time, defendant L. Ron Hubbard, hereinafter referred to as “Hubbard”, was a married man, age 35, he being then married to Margaret Grubb Hubbard of Bremerton, Washington, they having two children; that said Hubbard represented to plaintiff that he was single and unmarried. [Stamped: FILED Apr 23 1951, Harold Cecily, County Clerk]
4. Hubbard was a criminal
In 1979, whilst not living in France, was found guilty of fraud and sentenced to four years in prison. You can read sections of the court record translated into English here.
“… the french group of scientology was presenting itself falsely, as it sells services … and never its leaders did indicate that there was any possibility of failures…”
Even more telling is this quote from the same court record:
“Whereas it is proven fact that that method’s application was unable , used alone, to ensure the success in trade or in job, that it was in fact a mere hope of chimerical events, fallacious promises, those having done such promises being very aware that they could not be done…”
5. Scientology uses dirty tricks
The worst of these tricks is called Fair Game. The organisation claims to have ceased using fair game but many people have experienced harassment since that claim was made. What is fair game?
“May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.” Hubbard
As part of this fair game, Scientology members have created and distributed pamphlets full of lies and slander against people who have publicly protested against them.
In the recent panorama documentary you can actually see one of the leaders of the organisation in Florida slandering a man who is speaking to a reporter about the group. You can see part 1 of the documentary here.
6. Scientology has killed
Wikipedia explains this the best: Lisa McPherson (February 10, 1959–December 5, 1995) was a Scientologist who died of a pulmonary embolism while under the care of the Flag Service Organization (FSO), a branch of the Church of Scientology.
Following her death the Church of Scientology was indicted on two felony charges “abuse and/or neglect of a disabled adult and practicing medicine without a license”,[source] putting under trial the nature of Scientology beliefs and practices.[source] The heated controversy included regular pickets outside Scientology offices on or around the anniversary of her death until the year 2000. [source]
The charges against the Church of Scientology were dropped after the state’s medical examiner changed the cause of death from “undetermined” to an “accident” on June 13, 2000. [source]
A civil suit brought by her family against the Church was settled on May 28, 2004. [source]
7. Scientology is a rip off
When you first start out in Scientology, you pay about $15 dollars per course. You get about sixteen hours of “treatment” for that price. It sounds like a bargain. However, this is the last time you will see such a low price at the organisation.
The first series on the Hubbard hierarchy, auditing or processing, consists of several courses or grades, which enable a “preclear” to become a “clear.” If each course is taken separately, it costs approximately (the prices are always changing) $750 just to go from O-IV grade, $500 for the next one, $1,200 for Grade V (“Power Processes”), $775 for Grade VI, $600 for “Solo” (in which you audit yourself) and finally $800 for the final “clear” or a total of approximately $4,625, although package deals bring the price down a bit lower. For an extra $2,850 you can go on to OT level VIII. Interestingly, the group are planning to release a new OT IX very soon, which will no doubt cost a great deal more.
8. Scientology is anti-psychiatry
The Church of Scientology is opposed to psychiatry in a big way. The offer an alternative to psychiatry which has no founding in science whatsoever. The organisation has this to say in its psychiatry FAQ (This is the URL – I do not want to link it so you should copy and paste it if you want to have a look: http://faq.scientology.org/psychtry.htm).
“What the Church opposes are brutal, inhumane psychiatric treatments. It does so for three principal reasons: 1) procedures such as electro-shock, drugs and lobotomy injure, maim and destroy people in the guise of help; 2) psychiatry is not a science and has no proven methods to justify the billions of dollars of government funds that are poured into it; and 3) psychiatric theories that man is a mere animal have been used to rationalize, for example, the wholesale slaughter of human beings in World Wars I and II.
A number of psychiatrists have strongly spoken out against the Church of Scientology. After Hubbard’s book, Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health was published, the American Psychological Association advised its members against using Hubbard’s techniques with their patients. Hubbard came to believe that psychiatrists were behind a worldwide conspiracy to attack Scientology and create a “world government” run by psychiatrists on behalf of the USSR.
Hubbard also decided that psychiatrists were an ancient evil that had been a problem for billions of years. He cast them in the role of assisting Xenu’s genocide 75 million years ago.
9. Scientology is un-scientific
Scientology is entirely man made. It is the invention of one man: L Ron Hubbard, science fiction writer. It has no basis in reality and teaches such concepts of aliens attaching “thetans” to human bodies by means of nuclear bombs in various mountains around the world.
When questions about Xenu (the evil overlord that comitted this act) Scientologists deny it, but leaked documentation verifies that it is, indeed, a part of their belief system.
Scientology, through its narconon organisation and auditing, tricks people into believing that they are getting help. They instruct people not to take psychiatric medicine (even in the case of sufferers of schizophrenia or other physically based mental disorders).
10. Scientology is a secret organisation
The Church of Scientology closes guards its secrets. On the few occasions that they have managed to leak on to the internet, the organisation quickly follows with lawsuits and threats. If you search for the OT level documents now, you will not find a copy (except for the first two which are available as court records). The swift and calculated responses from the group have managed to do what no other organisation or government has done – censor certain information from the internet. You can find out how to make a bomb on the internet, but you can not find out what you have to do to pass OT level VIII in the Church of Scientology.
Ironically, considering they are so secretive, it does not stop them using information taken from people they audit against them if they turn on the group. This would be the same as a person confessing to a priest, leaving the Church, and having the priest publish their confession on the internet and hand out fliers.
At all costs, avoid the Church of Scientology.
It failed to mention Hubbard was once an understudy to Alister Crowley and one of his famous quotes that is something along the lines of “You can’t get rich writing science fiction, If you want to make money create a religion”
Ben: Bulls eye! I wonder why none of the rest of us had remembered that? It is, after all, a well-known statement. Thanks for putting that up for everyone.
LOL, did enyone else watch the program on BBC about scientology, they are trying to blame world war 2 on psychiatry as theyr attempt of world domination
i think L Ron Hubbard stuck to writing science fiction, this would hav made a great book, lol ALIENS who would have thought aliens would be in this.
Callam: I have seen it – they are totally nuts!
Let me start off by saying I am an atheist. I am not playing favorites, because I dislike organized religion in all its forms.
With that out of the way, I personally feel that Scientology is one of the more dangerous religions out there. I hesitate to even call it a religion because it has almost nothing in common with any of the more popular ones.
One of my main complaints about organized religion is that the leaders convince the followers to do things they normally wouldn’t. Psychotherapy has been scientifically proven to be effective…religion has not. Some religions are against blood transfusions, some are against medicine, but Scientology takes it to a whole new absurd level.
I believe that Scientology is right up there with the Peoples Temple cult (Jonestown), the main difference is that Hubbard was smooth enough to amass a relatively large following, and they haven’t committed mass suicide or murdered a congressman yet. I’m waiting for the explosion when one of the leaders decides it’s time to “clean house”.
Mr Mojo: I am with you on that completely.
another problem, L Ron Hubbard was a science fiction writer. i mean, if people are to believe about the whole story with Zenu, they must be mental.
This is a good piece of investigative reporting that I hadn’t seen before, and addresses some of the problems that I hadn’t seen addressed elsewhere, like the psychologically damaging aspects of Scientology.
Their belief in space aliens is by far the most innocuous aspect of them, except for the fact that one needs to pay at least $300,000 to hear the Xenu story. Most Scientologists DON’T believe that, not because they disbelieve it, but rather because they have not been taught that story YET. Don’t judge them by that belief. Anyone is allowed to believe anything they choose. However, a group should NOT be allowed to engage in thought reforming tactics, emotional abuse, and extortion.
Wow, we have quite a bit of hatred for theology. I’ve notice with a lot of ppl who enjoy bashing Christianity…their “logical” explanations as to why it is inherently bad comes after they have had a bad or emotional problematic experience with religon.
Their cynical attitude comes after, by an experience but usually not specifically due to the religon.
I think a telling difference between scientology and legitimate religon is the use of money. Though it is a part of religon Christianity only asks for tithes. It is not the Bible’s fault if a corrupt priest and preacher sends around the second offering plate.
Scientology cannot vouch for that. And Hubbard just sounds like an overall *****.
Just like Ayn Rand who wrote Anthem and made the philosophy Objectivism…both her and Hubbard made their philosophy and Hubbard, later, this religon based on nothing but the fact that….they could
“I’m a writer…I have ppl who like my writing..I think I’m the *****…I’m going to make a religon.”
That would be somewhat badass if it was anyone but him or they were *****y…I’d follow a religon if it was made by Angelina Jolie or Beyonce.lol
Xay Xay, I can’t speak for anyone else, but I did have a “bad emotional experience” with religion. It happened when I was about 12 and started thinking for myself. I was very upset when I realized that everyone had been lying to me all my life.
I also realized that nothing in any religion matched observable facts. I also realized the observed behavior of people was far from their professed beliefs and that the reported behavior of “god” was not that of the supposed “loving father”, either.
In short, is is all a scam and deep inside, most people know it. That’s why they give lip service to a religion for social, political, and business reasons. Hypocrites, all of them.
After reading the list, I’d say the problem with Scientology numero uno should be: IT EXISTS!
Hear, hear!
L. Ron was quoted as saying — and I'm paraphrasing — that the best way to make money is to form your own religion. Look it up! What a freak. And it worked!!! Ugh
“[...] If you search for the OT level documents now, you will not find a copy [...]”
Hah. Try Freenet. (http://freenetproject.org/ )
Anyone else think that L.Ron lokks like NHL coach Mike Kennan? Just an observation…
Interesting posts everyone. Almost as good as the dreams list. It’s nice to see intelligence instead of just plain stupidity.
Bob: that is one of the things that makes me keep writing lists every day – the comments are all intelligent and thoughtful
Well – mostly 
“This would be the same as a person confessing to a priest, leaving the Church, and having the priest publish their confession on the internet and hand out fliers.”
Incidentally, a priest who makes any leak of confession will get excommunicated. (“The more you know!”)
Hey, whaddya gonna do. People can believe in whatever they like, even a completely fabricated ‘religion’ which many of us see as essentially comedic. If that’s what you want, then go for it. Just keep in mind that by the same token I have the right to laugh at you for believing in Xenu. Oh, and for the posters who say it did them some good, well I’m sure we could find some people for whom the Nazi regime were the good old days. Heh-heh-heh. ‘Xenu’.
Slammerworm, you make some good points. Although “Completely fabricated religion” seems to be a redundancy. Heh Heh
I agree that people should be free to believe what they choose. They are going to do that anyway. It’s when they are trying to impose those views on me either through violence, threat of violence, or rule of law (another kind of implied violence) that I strongly object.
Ahhh!!!! My memory hurts!!! forgot until just recently, about a hour ago, Marilyn Vos Savant, currently the worlds “Smartest Person” is a Scientologist. check out the comments section in the “Top 10 Geniuses”. It’ll make you think twice about Intelligence.
Is Marilyn still listed as “smartest person”? That was quite a while ago she had that, decades I think.
At any rate, intelligence test mostly measure how well you agree with the opinions of the people that wrote the test.
It also shows that even very smart people do not always think for themselves. Perhaps as a result of spending too much time in academia, where original thinking is discouraged.
since when has scientology been “Running with the Crowd”?
Wouldn’t it be even worse if a group covertly tries to impose its belief structure, rather than being straightforward about it? I think thats the big difference between cults and non-cults, regardless of whether they are religious in nature or not. Scientology preys on people in a way that most other groups don’t. Forget about their being a ‘church’; there are plenty of other cults that are not religious in nature that do VERY similar things. Most scientologists don’t even know the Xenu stuff, because they aren’t taught that until they are deep into the cult.
Nobody should criticise their beliefs, but everyone should criticise their deceptive recruiting practices and mistreatment of their members.
Also that’s a very interesting point about a test measuring how much you agree with its author. Those personality and stress tests they give were ripped off from another test, but the “correct” answers were all determined by Hubbard himself. HMMMMM
I think a lot of religious organization do try to impose their beliefs covertly in the guise of it being “For your own good” or “to protect the children”, etc.
Why should we not criticize beliefs? Believers never hesitate to criticize other’s beliefs or lack of them. They often do so most stridently with name-calling and even threats.
It’s been said on here before, but one can question, criticize, or demand proof of anything except religion. That, we are supposed to accept without question or doubt, no matter how ridiculous.
We shouldn’t criticize someone’s personal beliefs because we live (or at least some of us do) in a country where the freedom to believe whatever you want is highly valued. “But they do it!” is a pretty immature attitude to take if you ask me, but you can argue that it’s within your rights to criticize, and you’d be right, so I’ll leave it at that.
I don’t think that’s covert at all. Presenting a why for a belief is not at all like conditioning or manipulating a person into obedience without their knowledge. You might argue that religions manipulate people, but they really do not do it the way Scn does. Scn has precise, formulated tactics to evoke thought reform. Most churches (the majority that are not cult-like in nature) do NOT. Guilt bodies fear of eternal damnation are manipulative themes, but Scn goes well beyond mere themes. They SYSTEMATICALLY break down your concepts of identity and replace them with their own. I’m sorry, but most churches simply do not do that.
I have to disagree. Most churches do systematically brainwash their belief systems into people. What else would you call forcing children to attend special schools every week and made to memorize and repeat things they don’t really understand?
Even as they grow up, they are not permitted to question or examine these things but are expected to accept them without thinking, without examining the facts. The pressure exerted on them by parents, teachers, and “authorities” (most self-appointed) is tremendous.
Those methods are precise and have been honed over centuries to produce the unthinking robots that most theists become.
Do you think Ron Hubbard came up with all those techniques by himself? He was not that smart. Anyone that has read his books could see that he was not.
Sunday school hardly qualifies as systematic brainwashing. Children aren’t put in a hypnotic trance, or deprived of sleep, or made to become utterly dependent on the group at Sunday school. They aren’t subjected to having their personalities broken down and rebuilt. And not only is Sunday school voluntary on the part of the parent, it is straightforward in what it is teaching. Arguing that the child has no say is moot because children in general have little say in most of their life until they’re old enough to make their own decisions.
In most churches of course you’re allowed to ask questions. Are you implying that there has never been any theological debate? Sure, maybe one is taught that the Bible is the ultimate authority on whatever, but there is no unilateral interpretation of the Bible, and I doubt that anyone in a non-cult church has been punished for looking for their own answers in the Bible. Compare with Scientolgy, where literally zero interpretation is tolerated. If you don’t understand something in church, or at Sunday school, you can ask and you’ll receive an explanation. It might be an answer in the context of the liturgy or within a specific interpretation of the liturgy, but there WILL be some bidirectional communication. Ask at a Scn class, and you’ll be told that you misunderstood a word, and to go look it up in the dictionary. Communication is completely one-sided.
And no, he didn’t invent the techniques, he consolidated techniques that have been employed by many a gulag.
ALSO he totally does look like Mike Keenan! If he could lead the Rangers to another cup, i’d consider following him too. Maybe he could postulate some offense.
Apparently, you were never forced to go to Sunday School or Vacation Bible school. It IS brainwashing. And no, you may not question anything.
If you do not understand something, you may ask for an explanation, but you are required to accept whatever explanation is given without questioning the legitimacy of either then answer or the person giving the answer. This is hardly two-way communication.
Who is Mike Keenan? (I know nothing about Hockey)
Some two way communication is infinitely more than zero two way communication.
I did go to Sunday school, and it was nothing like that. I’m sorry you had to go through something like that, that was obviously at least a little traumatic for you. Not every Sunday school is like that, though. Be glad you didn’t go to the same camp as in the documentary “Jesus Camp,” which in a related note is airing on A&E tonight. I’m tivo’ing it!
Google mike keenan to see what he looks like. Sorta like Hubbard but not as fat. He coached the NY Rangers to their Stanley Cup in 1994.
james: when was the last time you were in a “sunday school”? alot of what you are saying is nothing like what i have known or experienced. you say “What else would you call forcing children to attend special schools every week and made to memorize and repeat things they don’t really understand?”
understanding is the goal of every theology based class i have ever been in. any sunday school teacher worth their salt would not be happy with a person who gives the right answers but lives in contradiction to that.
also if your quote above is true, then just about every class you ever attended is brainwashing you into a cult. i sat in many science/math/history classes from 1st grade through post-graduate work where i was made to go up to 5 times a week and memorize and repeat things i didn’t understand.
you also said “Even as they grow up, they are not permitted to question or examine these things but are expected to accept them without thinking, without examining the facts. The pressure exerted on them by parents, teachers, and “authorities” (most self-appointed) is tremendous.”
the size of this stereotype is amazing. it sounds like you are making decisions without examining the facts. who are these “self-appointed” authorities you speak of? specifically, what is the “tremendous” pressure that they exert?
i would love to have a discussion about particulars but all of these generalizations keep the truth from surfacing and keep you from understanding a beautiful part of humanity.
IT sounds to me as though you are a “true believer” in some religion. If so, there is no point in discussion it with you as facts, logic, and observable truths will have no effect on you. Religion is a matter of conditioning and emotion. No amount of truth will affect what people want to believe.
I was forced to attend religious instruction every week of my life until I was 13. I stopped believing any of or when I was 12 and started thinking for myself. Blame that on my parents. They always told me to “think for yourself.” I doubt they ever considered what might happen if I actually did it, though.
I never make decisions without examining the facts. The facts are, there is more evidence for the existence of unicorns than there is of any god or religion based upon one.
What is beautiful about religion? It is based upon lies that are designed to permit a small group of people to control the thoughts and actions of a larger group.
We can discuss it off line as much as you like. No one has lasted more than a few exchanges with these discussions because I don’t play fair. I insist upon provable facts.
slrman@terra.com.br
we are all “true believers” in something, either a religion or our own ability to find truth.
i noticed you didn’t answer most of the questions i asked.
is normal schooling a brainwashing method?
do you think an average sunday school teacher would be happy with understanding that doesn’t change a life?
which religous leaders are “self appointed”?
what is the pressure that is exerted?
religion is beautiful becuase one of the main faults of humanity is a nasty selfish streak. religion points people to serve others and give what is valuable away to take care of the needs of others. this is one of the benefits. there are many more.
I notice that you did not respond to my invitation to take this off this forum.
Yes, normal schooling is often Brainwashing. Or do you believe everything you were taught there, too? No one ever made any mistakes or told you things that they had to know were not true?
Yes, I know the average Sunday school teacher is perfectly happy with what they are saying because they never stop to think if what they are saying is true or even plausible.
All religious leaders are self-appointed. They have established powerful organizations to appoint each other and to protect their monopoly on there scams.
The pressure is from parents, teachers, peers, and other “authority” figures.
Religion is not selfish and nasty? How do you then account for terrorist bombings (and not just islamists), the inquisition, the crusades, and church support of slavery, denigration of women, and the aforementioned brainwashing?
For every “benefit” you name, we can examine lots of things that benefit only the churches, not the people in them. If you are so inclined, you have my e-mail. Otherwise, we are finished.
why do you want to talk about this elsewhere? this is the joy of this web site. we can disagree about the purpose of religion, whether or not lara croft is a movie badass and talk about the usefulness of pet products all in the same location. this also invites everyone to the party, not just you and i.
if normal schooling is brainwashing then is there such a thing as good brainwashing? i would assume that we would agree that sending kids to school is a good thing. if so, then you definition needs some refining.
being someone that has struggled mightily with what is true and right, i would have to disagree that religous people “never stop to think if what they are saying is true”. if religion is true, to knowingly misrepresent a higher power to an impressionable child without ever checking to see if it is true seems like a poor choice. what i mean is, if i believe in God i should represent him accurately. this would require learning and study. to portray the believer as an ignorant person, in the sense of lack of information, is just not true.
isn’t the job of parents, teachers, peers and authority figures to live out whatever they believe to be true? if this is the case, why is religion being singled out when what book to read, how to play a sport properly and how to take care of the enviornment is all passed along by parents, teachers, etc.?
hasn’t all of humanity, outside of religion, bombed things, fought wars and supported that which is evil? why does religion get the bill for the bad things that have happened?
Steady on lads, let’s have another perspective.
‘Brainwashing’ is essentially a pejorative term. Fundamental ‘three ‘Rs’ education aside, schooling is acculturation more than it is deliberate ‘brainwashing’. Of course, this depends upon the school under question. There are several religious schools and colleges in which theology is taught alongside readinritinrithmatic. For some people, equipping their children with the intellectual tools necessary for survival includes inculcating a spiritual dimension. Personally I don’t think we should burden children with religious concepts until they are old enough to be able to do something about it themselves. Teaching very young children prayers by rote does seems a bit ‘indoctrination’, so we have a sliding scale on ‘is schooling brainwashing’, with religion as the tipping-point.
Religions do deserve contempt for involving themselves in armed conflict because virtually all of them preach peace. Also, it’s morally questionable on a motivational level. There’s a difference between saying ‘I’m taking your stuff’ and ‘I’m taking your stuff because God said it’s ok’. It’s an abdication of responsibility at heart.
James Smith, while I agree with you that extremist religion often leads to violence, I do NOT think that religion is the direct cause of that violence. If people weren’t killing eachother over religion, they would find some other stupid reason to. When it comes down to basic instinct, humans are brutal animals who more often then not have their own desires as the top priority.
sdgrant, you make a good point. But religion is STILL the #1 reason people attack one another.
I also agree that, for most people, personal convenience is the most important thing in their lives. It transcends truth, justice, and simply being a decent human being.
DiscHuker, the reason I offered to take this away from this forum is this one is supposed to be about Scientology, not religion in general and the basic human condition.
This forum has been very graciously provided and maintained for us and I think we owe it to that provider to treat it respectfully and not clutter it up with long discussions of a different nature. Yes, I know, I started it. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!
I’ll try to bring it back a bit. I think you’re using the term “brainwashing” too liberally. I can’t quote the whole section of the book, but in Margaret Thaler Singer’s book, “Cults in Our Midst,” she gives a table discussing the continuum of influence and persuasion. The categories she gives are education, advertising, propaganda, indoctrination, and thought reform. Would you not agree that each of those, while all dealing with influencing or persuading others, are in fact different? I think they are. Calling any type of class or religious instruction “brainwashing” does a disservice to victims of actual coercive thought reform; it’s tantamount to saying it doesn’t exist, since we all were “brainwashed” by the public school system.
I think that’s my greatest beef with James, that he seems unwilling to consider that there is a difference between brainwashing and other types of persuasion, between religious extremists and your average church-goers, between the type and intensity of persuasion employed by Scientology and that by most other institutions, religious or otherwise. He seems perfectly content to indulge in the same flavor of unthinking prejudice that he accuses religions of effusing. Honestly, I agree that any kind of organization of people is created with the purpose of controlling people to SOME degree, but it does not necessarily constitute an abuse of power, or malicious intent. The possibility for power abuse is part of the organization itself, not the nature of the goals of the group. Groups like Greenpeace or PETA have the same potential for abuse as other moralistic groups like religions or political parties. But so does the Boy Scouts, or 4H, or the Kiwanis, or a company, or the army, or Habitat for Humanity. Exploitation is not inherent in organization, and cults are at a far end of the spectrum. Exploitation in general derives from an individual’s abuse of power, whereas a cult is a closed system devoted entirely to the recruitment, exploitation, and retention of members, beyond that of any other type of group. Not all cults are religious in nature.
spninja, You are simply far too generous with groups. Brainwashing, by any definition, is the indoctrination of false thinking in another by mental or physical persuasion.
Yes, it is true that some forms of brainwashing are more innocuous than others. But mostly, the indoctrination that takes place in the school system is not intentionally false. That done by religions, political groups, and yes, Greenpeace and PETA is often knowingly a lie.
I am right in that brainwashing is a general term and the techniques are used far more liberally than you choose to believe. One of the wisest things I have ever heard is, “Beliefs, no matter how sincerely held, do not alter facts.”
Abuse of power is as widespread as eating. Perhaps you have heard that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Most of the groups you mentioned do abuse their power to further their own agenda. Believing, no doubt, that the ends justify the means. After all, “It’s for your own good.” I am reminded of a Robert A. Heinlein quote about that.
“Whenever someone tells you they are doing something ‘for your own good’, you can be certain that you won’t like it. Furthermore, they will expect you to pay for it. If they’re ‘protecting your morals,’ you’ll have to pay double.”
My work here is finished.
Once again you are ignoring the difference between influence and brainwashing. The Boy Scouts aren’t manipulated. They aren’t lied to.
It’s not the content of the beliefs that is important, it is the honesty or dishonesty in how the beliefs are transferred. If you join PETA, you know up front that they believe in the ethical treatment of animals. If you don’t agree with that, then you don’t join, or you leave. They aren’t deceptive about the fact that they are presenting a set of beliefs that may be different from your own. The same goes for a religion. You might not agree with their beliefs, and you might think those beliefs are a lie, but the fact that they are trying to affect your thinking isn’t a secret agenda, it’s out in the open. The same goes for school, or a political party. You know ahead of time that they are trying to influence you. Same goes for advertising, you know they are trying to influence you. If you joined PETA and it turned out that they were secretly trying to get you to buy a particular kind of cruelty free makeup by Revlon, then that would be manipulative, because you didn’t know that was their goal ahead of time. However, if it was the Revlon Loves Animals Club, then it wouldn’t be manipulative. Which brings me back to not criticizing beliefs. Anyone is free to believe what they want. If they believe in something that is unsupported by scientific fact, or maybe something that is unsupportable by scientific fact (like animal treatment, that is purely a matter of opinion), then that is their right. But when someone is made to believe something without their knowledge of or consent to the influential forces at work, then we are starting to talk about the realm of cults and true brainwashing.
Ah well, it seems the major problem here is that I will not instantly accede to your views. You talk about respecting beliefs while at the same time, refusing to acknowledge mine. You must be a closet Christian LOL
To take just one example from you post, the Boy Scouts. They refuse to accept atheists and gays. What message does that send to their members? That atheists and gays are fine? Or not so subtly, that they are bad wrong, and not worthy of associating with god-fearing hetero*****uals?
To me this is brainwashing in its worst, most underhanded form. Your mileage may vary.
This is obviously a fruitless discussion as there is no possibility of working with anyone who refuses to accept facts. Tchau, all.
I just stumbled across this site and the lists are terrific, but I have some stuff to convey to James.
James:
“This is obviously a fruitless discussion as there is no possibility of working with anyone who refuses to accept facts. Tchau, all.”
I must say that everything you have written, and yes I have read it all, is very articulate and well-spoken. I do have one very clear message though to you, sir. You mention facts. Where is the proof of YOUR facts? Have you included any links to any factual documents supporting anything that you have written? NO. Everyone that has disagreed with you you have attempted to discredit by either pointing out that they don’t have any facts, or that their facts are wrong and yours are right. Where is YOUR proof? The more I read your posts and various responses, the more I think that you’re a Scientologist. (I mean it in the nicest way possible of course
)
Also, your refusal to actually debate or answer anyone’s queries leaves me with a feeling that you really have no proof in whatever you say beyond your own personal experiences. Others have show you other personal experiences that were vastly different than your own, but you clearly don’t see it that way because of your personal bias. I hate to tell you but personal bias does not equal fact.
I have a personal bias of my own. The moon landing was a hoax. I can state it’s fact, but is it really? I have no proof that someone landed on the moon or not, but I don’t say it’s fact.
I’m sorry you had a rough childhood, religious-wise, up until age 13. My life was vastly different growing up. I went to “church”, “Sunday School”, etc. I, as a child, didn’t entirely understand why I was going and what this God entity was really all about either. I was FAR from forced into going. It was my decision. I am currently an atheist, but it didn’t stem from me “thinking on my own”, it stemmed from the fact that I control my destiny. I am an individual. I do not follow a sheep herder.
The point I think I’m getting at, without having to write a 500 page dissertation on the topic, is that without proof facts are worthless. Back up your statements with fact and please do continue the conversation.
I saw something on TV on the Church’s retaliation tactics a few year’s back. Kirstie Alley was on half ass defending the tatics. It gave me the same creepy feeling that the tatics of the Westboro Church uses when people threaten or speak out against them. LAWSUITS, LAWSUITS, LAWSUITS, DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER, ETC.
jbjr – Westboro !! Haha…now you’re talking. That is one sad bunch of nutters.
Here’s the edifying website of the Westboro Baptist “church” for those who haven’t yet had the pleasure : http://www.godhatesfags.com/
HA!HA! Fred Phelps what a kook!
James Smith: “Ah well, it seems the major problem here is that I will not instantly accede to your views. You talk about respecting beliefs while at the same time, refusing to acknowledge mine. You must be a closet Christian LOL”
I could pretty easily say the exact same thing to you, now couldn’t I? I thought we had a good thing going on here, but if you want to bow out in an immature fashion, be my guest.
The Boy Scouts’ stance that homo*****uality is immoral, while disappointing, is NOT brainwashing. Brainwashing is not the same as communicating, its not the same as teaching, its not even the same as indoctrinating. Brainwashing requires a closed system– a setting from which a person is literally unable to escape. Brainwashing uses emotional and psychological abuse to break down a person’s identity, and rebuild it from scratch. If Scouts were locked up at their summer camps, and made to confess their sins (or “crimes”, in Scientology-speak) in front of others or have them recorded, and had their entire personalities remolded, then yes that would be brainwashing. Or if they were forced to sit for hours in some sort of sensory deprivation chamber, and then had to watch movies extolling the virtues of the Scouts, then yes that would constitute brainwashing.
I was in the Boy Scouts for a long time, and homo*****uality was never once addressed. Not even remotely. And while a belief in God is indeed a theme in the Scouts, and yes an atheist Scout was kicked out for his beliefs, I personally have never once felt that I was forced into any kind of such belief. So even if the BSA holds certain beliefs, and even if it expects its members to hold similar beliefs, it is NOT BRAINWASHING anyone.
I highly, HIGHLY doubt your experiences in church (though obviously I could be mistaken here) resembled that. Were you ever locked in a room for hours? LOCKED. Unable to leave, even for a bathroom break or fresh air. Did they try to destroy your personality?
I just want you to recognize that there is a difference between teaching and brainwashing. Even between indoctrinating and brainwashing, there is a difference. Brainwashing involves indoctrination, for sure, but it also involves a set of circumstances that very few groups actually engage in. Saying they are the same thing is like saying ***** is the same as heroin. No, they’re not.
I think to say that this cult be called a religion is alarming. I myself don’t believe in organized religion and all that comes with it, but i’ve got to say that scientology bleepin’ freaks me the bleep out. to think Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are going to be teaching their daughter this scientocrapology is horrible. and that applies to anyone else. everyones welcome to their own opinions and welcome to believe whatever hey believe in, but this is nothing but a freaky a** business.
and JF, you should do lists about mormons and Jehovah’s witnesses. those don’t stray that far from this list.
All I have to add to this conversation is that all religions are a cult to some degree and I personally will never belong to a church although I do believe in an a higher power. My big thing with any religion is I do not agree with being told how to worship (another stupid word in religion I hate… I do not worship anyone,) and honestly do you really think that God is sitting up there thinking “Man I hate gays….and how bout those teens having premarital *****, I guess they’re all going to hell.” Now I’m just ranting there is too much on this subject to ***** about. So I am going to leave it there. Really I just wanted to post something…
I have been asked for “proof” without naming what proof was wanted. I have always felt that “Some truths are self-evident” but perhaps not to all as is very obvious here.
I stayed away long enough to have my suspicions confirmed. As I expected, this debate has degenerated into name-calling as in “immature” etc. This always marks the end of all logical debate and, in this case, my permanent exit from this forum. Have a nice life.
JS – “Have a nice life.”
LOL. How many times is this guy going to say goodbye. If you’re gonna go…then go !!
For real. C’mon, James, you said, “Ah well, it seems the major problem here is that I will not instantly accede to your views. You talk about respecting beliefs while at the same time, refusing to acknowledge mine. You must be a closet Christian LOL”. That IS immature. I thought we had a good debate going on here, with contributions from everyone, and then you go and say that. I could _easily_ say that about you. So come on, don’t be like that, baby. You know I love you. Shhhhhhhhh… =D
Anyway, I thought of another important aspect of brainwashing that most religions don’t engage in: isolation of their members from the outside world. Scientologists are forbidden from reading what they call “entheta” material, which “refers to communications which, based on lies and confusions, are slanderous, choppy or destructive in an attempt to overwhelm or suppress a person or group.” (http://www.scientologie.tm.fr/gloss.htm) Take one guess what group they’re talking about. They are even encouraged/instructed to install censoring software on their computers to block such material. Why is this censorship so important, if Scientology “really works”? Isn’t it strong enough to stand up to critical thought? It’s important because when brainwashing someone, you have to remove the possibility of outside thought. You have to remove their reference point. When a person joins Scientology, they are drawn deeper and deeper into the Scientology universe, to the point that they are always surrounded by Scientologists, and only ever interacting with Scientologists, and are trained to ignore anything that might possibly contradict Scientology.
_Most_ churches don’t do this. Cultlike churches DO do this, to some extent. I watched this hilariously bad movie on TBN (the huge evangelical tv network) the other night called “Timechanger” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295725/), which was about a Bible professor from 1890 that uses a time machine to travel to the present day. As you can imagine, he is horrified by everything
But throughout the film, they very blatantly lay out their own political agenda for what’s wrong with this nation. It’s a little scary, but if that’s what they want to believe, then… yeah. What bothers me more though, is that in the film they talk about how secular movies were “the devil’s greatest victory.” Which means that not only are they promoting their own cause, which they’re allowed to do, it’s encouraging its viewers never to consider anything that isn’t promoting exactly the same agenda. THAT part is creepy to me.
This is a good website about the real people been affected by Scientology.
http://theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com/
Scientology is a complete and utter load. Anyone who believes it, follows it or defends it has to be mentally imbalanced. there’s no other explanation for someone to be so stupid.
Scientology is crazy, but not much more crazier than any other religion that claims to be the “truth”
I am reminded of an episode in 6th grade science class, where our teacher was trying to teach us the difference between the greenhouse effect and the hole in the ozone layer, and went over it again and again to hammer into us that there is a difference, and then he asks my friend Matt, “ok, so which one is responsible for global warming?”, and Matt replies “…the ozone hole?” Our teacher literally screamed so loud that another teacher came over to make sure he was alright.
GAHHHHHH!! These last two comments. YES SCIENTOLOGY IS CRAZIER THAN OTHER RELIGIONS. THEY DO. THINGS. TO. YOU. Things that other religions do NOT do. That is how people follow and defend it, they have had things done to them!! They’ve been isolated from the outside world, they’ve been put into constant light hypnotic states, they’ve been forced to confess personal details that have been recorded and stored in files, they’ve been bombarded with overwhelming pressure that if Scientology isn’t working for them, then there is something wrong with them and they have to try harder, they’ve been in some cases deprived of sleep and proper nutrition, they’ve been forced to separate from their friends and family if they show anything resembling criticism… the list goes on. These are things that normal churches do not do.
Scientology DOES THINGS to people. Sinister things.
Some observations on Scientology: when I lived in South Africa, they were doing a roaring trade squeezing money from the poor, amongst the uneducated and uninformed masses. Not unlike the tobacco companies who are doing the same thing.
Both organisations (Big tobacco and Scientology) are making money in the unregulated third world like it’s going out of fashion.
The Scientologists put leaflets in my letterbox that look as if they are selling genuine educational guides, as in: “your children will benefit from our scientifically proven educational material blah blah” just sign here, pay this much and your children can have it too, brackets, small print, Church of Scientology.
Their publically-visible literature is full of borderline pseudo-science – a picture of Einstein with the caption that we only use a tiny part of our brains, for example. Equating Einstein with Scientology, he must be spinning in his grave.
More sinister, I have a friend working with a vulnerable children NGO (Non-Govermental Organisation) in a major South African city. She was approached by the local Scientology branch to run a “workshop” for the chldren on abuse, with free venue, refreshments and guess what, propoganda leaflets thrown in.
Fortunately she knew what Scientology is, and told them where to get off.
Incredibly and sadly the Scientologists have actually managed to get the ear of the government to run “workshops” for the nations youth.
Incredibly, this went ahead. (In South Africa, see http://www.mg.co.za/articledirect.aspx?articleid=310747 )
Here in London where I live now, the tube and train stations have little cardboard adverts by the escaltors about how Scientology can change your life and sort out depression, anxiety and .
These direct backpackers and passers-by to a drop-in centre in central London, I saw a young back-packer in there filling in a form, this is their “Oxford Standard Capacity *****ysis”, only it has nothing to do with Oxford. As usual they falsely claim associations with something that has nothing to do with Scientology, but seems academic and scientific.
Their questionaire identifies vulnerable people who are likely to pay for courses and get sucked in. Questions about loneliness and self-esteem are among the many other questions on the form.
I have driven past the palatial grounds of the Scientology East Sus***** headquarters. Make no mistake, these people are:
* very well organised
* very well funded
* have a crack legal team at their disposal
* have a global infrastructure
* are very media savvy. Just google on anything with the word Scientology” and see the rash of sites they have put up.
They are not a church, not a religion, they expolit the vulnerable to make money.
So what about Tom Cruise? Not exactly vulnerable is he? The face they present to him will not be the same as the one they present to new recruits.
Islam recruited Mohammed Ali and Cat Stevens, if Scientology can recruit people like John Travolta and Tom Cruise, then this will spread the word and who knows, maybe even help them to hoover up a few more of the ignorant and vulnerable.
Hey, in your other list on top 10 evil children, I quote:
“After Kemper murdered and dismembered eight women over the next five years, these same doctors affirmed his insanity defense. In fact, even as he was carrying parts of his victims around, a panel of psychiatrists judged him to be no threat to society.”
Do ya think that maybe such are the reasons why Scientology is against Psychiatry? Boy, if psychiatrists are letting freaks like that out into society and saying they are “no threat to society”, I would take Scientology any time.
I am sure I can find many other examples on your site…..
Makes as much sense as any religion, NONE
Organized religion, in the hands of the corrupt, is corrupt. Whether it be Scientology, Mormonism, Islam, or the Catholic Church, when religious leaders abuse their power and the power of their belief system, it’s just wrong. But, faith in a higher power is not a bad thing, and has done good things for many people, including myself. It’s okay to believe in something…that’s sort of what being a human means.
yeah I personally think that most of the arguments that are pro-scientology can be destroyed by this article, especially the line “dismissing it as too crazy”
http://www.cracked.com/article_14932_p10.html
HAHAHAHAHAHA it makes it that bit more worrying, no?
To quote my friend: “Anyone who is a Scientologist should be ashamed. And see a psychiatrist. Actually, they should see several. An entire team of them. In fact, if you have a moment, they should be sent to Switzerland and placed under sterile laboratory conditions where a team of scientists from the world’s great universities, Oxford, Cambridge, Paris, Berlin and Leiden and so on, can study them under controlled conditions and with full protective gear with careful attempts to make sure that the scientists’ cash doesn’t mysteriously go “missing” and into the coffers of the Church.”