Scientology Managment Style?

Question answered by formerscientologist in Scientology

yertletheturtle asked this question on 8/8/2000:

My question here is basically why should one be obgligated, or practially left with no choice, but to have to fully accept the management style of LRH or David Miscagage in order to participate in Scientology?

Irregardless of all the points of view concerning the tech and it's benefits, this seems to be the main issue I see coming up again and again with those who might have some disagreement with Scientology.

formerscientologist gave this response on 8/15/2000:

One should not be obligated to accept the management style of LRH or David Miscavige. However, independents run the risk of becoming too independent. Once they start thinking for themselves and looking at the truth and spotting all the lies, they are apt to as-is their Scientology goals and their Scientology cases.

(For those non-Scientologists who are unfamiliar with the axioms, as-isness causes something to vanish, while lies bring about persistance.)

The CoS can't afford scrutiny by its critics or the independents. The more exposure it gets, the less it persists.

I'm straying a wee bit from the subject, but here are a few LRH quotes:

"Don't ever think that a monopoly of this subject is a safe thing to have."

"Did you ever read poor old George Orwell's uh..1984? Yes, yes, that's wonderful. That would be, could be, the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence."

"It's a very simple remedy. And that's just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That's all. Don't hoard it. Don't hold it. And if you ever do use black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn't available. Because he's the boy who would be electing himself "the new order." We don't need any new orders..."

Are those postulates or prophecies?

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.