Subject: Re: Julie Mayo's story (was Re: LRH and I) From: Julie Mayo Date: 1996/05/02 Message-Id: <4mbrl0$ih9@light.lightlink.com> Sender: electra@light.lightlink.com Organization: Art Matrix - Lightlink Electra Gateway v2.4 Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 2 May 1996 07:29:37 GMT, David Gerard wrote: >From: Julie Mayo 28 Apr 1996 00:42:19 -0400 >> On Wed, 24 Apr 1996 20:23:17 UTC, an557846@anon.penet.fi (David Cooke) >> wrote: >> >Thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough reply to >> >my post. But I don't think you have said anything to change my >> >opinion of David Mayo and those who ally themselves with him. > >> Wasn't trying to. I was just trying to relate some of my personal >> experiences with LRH and you were interested enough to post a follow up >> message. > >May I say also that it's nice to see a pro-Scn poster who can form >sentences and write something that doesn't look canned. (And you may >find that 'compliment' insulting -- but that's the way most of the >pro-scn posters up till now have been. Provably canned responses do >no-one credit and make it look like the poster isn't thinking.) Thank you. My responses certainly aren't canned. However, after 13 years of being on the receiving end of harassment, dirty tricks, and abusive litigation dished out by RTC/CofS operatives, I'm not sure I'd classify myself as "pro-Scn". I admired Hubbard's enthusiasm for mapping a way towards the realization of human potential, but I think some mistakes were made on the way. For instance, I am very much against the oppressive tactics and dirty tricks of OSA as well as the philosophic roots that excuse, if not encourage, that anti-social behavior. And to put it mildly, Hubbard didn't exactly encourage critical thinking. He was very, very clever about helping people spot and "blow" fixed ideas, but he tended to then insert some new self-serving concepts. (Such as, need I say? "Squirrels are bad, psychiatry is bad, the only hope for mankind is Scientology's "Bridge to total freedom" -- with "Hubbard is the only source" recited in the same breath.") [...] >> I'm not trying to convince you that David should try to take over LRH's >> technical hat, I'm just trying to get the truth known, because I think >> it has been hidden and people have been misinformed. >> And we have been harassed because of it, which I don't like. I would >> describe it in stronger terms than "not fun". > > >Xenu forbid. LRH's Tech Hat? That hat can go BACK to the shop I think. When we were still Scientologists David developed and co-authored some techniques that ended up making the Scn empire very rich. They used this money to harass us, over litigate, and intimidate. When we joined Scn, we did so because we thought that it was a benevolent, altruistic organization dedicated to mankind. The Scientology empire has become a commercial money making machine that uses trade secret, and copyright laws to enforce its monopoly and suppress personal freedom. I believe this situation needs to be remedied. >If you're aiming to get the CNC back up & running, the CoS is such a >great baaaaad exammmple ... but I guess you don't need me telling you >that. When we started the CNC we were determined to isolate the underlying philosophic and methodological causes for the cult's anti-social behavior and not repeat the same mistakes. I was leafing through some old AAC Journals written during the passion of the moment and I realized that we thought about and addressed many of the issues that the critics are now raising. It has been argued that the reason why the cult of Scn was able to destroy us was that we refused to adopt their behavior: dirty tricks, harassment, and so forth, but I believe that the CNC or other like-minded Churches must be able to survive or a true reformation within Scientology will not happen. People must be free to leave an oppressive environment without giving up their religious practices. (With this exception: if the practices are anti-social, such as Fair Game and dirty tricks, those practices must be disallowed.) I've heard the argument that the entirety of the philosophy and methodology of Scn is a scam. I don't think that is true. I also don't think so many smart people would have stuck with it if that were true. I don't buy the argument that it is hypnotic. I think the writings of people like Charles Tart and Gurdjieff are more accurate concerning people already being in a sort of consensus trance. Hubbard woke people up -- then isolated them, got them working for him, ... The waking up bit was great. It is the isolation and enslavement that needs to be fixed. David Mayo AAC Journal September-October, 1985: "There is a dilemma inherent in slave societies. It is very interesting. A slave society can survive only as long as it keeps the slaves uneducated. But ignorant people have very limited usefulness. What happens when someone gets the bright idea of training and thus educating the slaves to make them more skilled? The more they learn, the less content they are to be slaves: they decide that they would rather be free... Now I think this is very encouraging as the process of education, of learning, is our insurance against a slave society. "Furthermore, it seems that self-determinism and knowledge are the ultimate guarantee against a cult." David, I am not a Scientologist and have not been a Scientologist for many, many years. Hubbard did inspire me to attempt to realize my full potential, but what I do now is not Scientology. On the other hand, I think that Scientologists who want to practice their religion, but have irreparable differences with their Church, should be allowed "freedom of religion." I am a strong advocate of personal freedom of speech, religion, and especially, freedom of thought. Julie Mayo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMYlt0qUzTdUDYOWNAQF07QQArceeU7Ugk0PDDHI6Zzx9cMJZUngXR4VJ uP2KFIzqnf69OyROS5Hd3U7wJ2UnNBBaZsgCLGBGLRTJqCoZIH46Wg2TjtqF5VCA MABswlgkte9egdSi5yvKokZX1GiAK2j28q/OdimOFlytp3K5cRNc5gGeMMWVmmtJ RiXxnUrHqEg= =f1Sv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----