Tag Archives: cults

Scientology Floggers

Within 24 hours of posting Cyber Cults, the anti-scientology cyber-cult came unglued. If you haven’t read Cyber Cults and its links, I suggest you do so before reading on. The links are to three thoroughly unrelated people – also unrelated to me – who independently shared experiences of cult-like behavior from flogger (a blogger who flogs the alleged lives of others for money) Tony Ortega. Immediately, Ortega followers zealously rallied to his defense, characterizing the calmly-stated, fact-filled observations I linked to as evil-motivated “attacks” upon their dear leader. What was remarkable was the almost uniform application of an important characteristic of cult behavior.

That is taken from Steve Hassan whom the Ortega cult itself has promoted as quite the authority on cults.  It is, “Make the person feel that problems are always their own fault, never the leader’s or the group’s fault.”  Like so many hyenas, the anti-scientology cult members reactively rallied to attack in Ortega’s defense (ignoring the substance of the observations about his conduct) and viciously went after me and all three of those sharing independent experiences about their leader. We were accused of being Scientology operatives, mentally ill, and a plethora of derogatory epitaphs not fit for re-publication here.

One of Ortega’s more hysterical devotees called for censorship of myself and the other three, then targeted a facebook group (containing more than 400 members critical of scientology) as being fair game for having had the temerity to discuss the substance of my post Cyber Cults. Those pronunciamentos (and their avid acceptance and support by other cyber cultists) demonstrated most of the elements of the following additional Hassan cult characteristic:

Require members to internalize the group’s doctrine as truth
a. Adopting the group’s ‘map of reality’ as reality
b. Instill black and white thinking
c. Decide between good vs. evil
d. Organize people into us vs. them (insiders vs. outsiders)

For any who doubt these characterizations of the reaction to Cyber Cults, they can verify them by reading the thread themselves (or as much as they can stomach) at ex-scientologist message board.  While you read their treatment of the three I linked to along with me, keep in mind another of Hassan’s critical characteristics of a cult:

Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness, such as
a. Identity guilt
b. You are not living up to your potential
c. Your family is deficient
d. Your past is suspect
e. Your affiliations are unwise
f. Your thoughts, feelings, actions are irrelevant or selfish
g. Social guilt
h. Historical guilt

This is an interesting study in extremism. As Robert Hughes aptly demonstrated in his book Culture of Complaint opposite extremes always seem to have a way of meeting (becoming almost indistinguishable in behavior). On that score, principal stars of the anti-scientology cult are warning people that it is “dangerous” to communicate with me. That’s right, it is dangerous to be exposed to ideas that don’t march lockstep with the cult’s doctrinal black and white, us vs. them mentality.  These include people being promoted by Ortega for working with him on tv specials on scientology disconnection. They apparently are so appalled by scientology’s notion of disconnect that they are actively advising people to disconnect from me.

What I have witnessed personally on the part of the anti-scientology community’s leading lights recently is behavior that makes the average dedicated scientologist seem extraordinarily open-minded and tolerant by comparison.

As a final side note, I noticed a lot of cyber-cultists characterizing my recent posts as some sort of ‘war’ on Tony Ortega and that I wish to engage him in some public debate.  That is another indication of their cult-like, insular belief that the real universe revolves around their play world.  As far as Ortega is concerned I am only preparing the ground to correct the public record he polluted for four months about my family.  He is merely one of thousands of click bait floggers plying his trade as floggers do. I have no intention of changing that – that is fundamentally who he is.  The vermin he carries water for might be another story.  It depends on how they continue to respond and not respond.

Bunkeroos vs. Scientologists

The cult of Tony Ortega has recently surpassed the church of Scientology in dysfunctionally partisan behavior.  I have obtained documentary evidence that Bunkeroos (slavish believers and followers of the word of The Underground Bunker) have been soliciting donations to hire private investigators.  The Bunkeroos are promoting the fulfillment of Tony Ortega’s published suggestions on behalf of Ray Jeffrey that the home of Monique Rathbun and her two-year-old child be put under surveillance.

What is so surreal about this situation is that had Monique Rathbun not selflessly endured similar treatment in the past, Tony Ortega and Ray Jeffrey would have long ago become Scientology road kill.  The same is true for the cluster of vermin who have partnered in the Ortega/Jeffrey campaign against Monique Rathbun.

 

Cyber Cults

 

The New York Times recently covered some interesting phenomena that is happening online, see Frank Bruni – How Facebook Warps Our Worlds. Bruni observes that our newfound abilities to facilely pick villains, jump to judgments and duck/cluster with like-opinionated people (all without showing our faces or even necessarily identifying ourselves) has led to some creepy results. You can see how some of that has played out in the world of scientology – where kettles and pots are becoming increasingly indistinguishable – at the following links:

Goodbye to all that…

Alanzo on Ortega and his Underground Bunker

Tony Ortega and Carmen Llywelyn

 

Truth

The single most fundamental, sweeping and powerful truth in all spiritual study, contemplation and practice was probably best summed up in a single sentence.  It is an aphorism that has been popularly attributed to the Buddha:

You are what you think.

The Bible (Proverbs) succinctly echoes the same idea:

For as he thinketh in his heart, so he is.

This concept is the common denominator upon which virtually every workable religious and spiritual philosophy throughout the ages can be reduced to.  It is the truth that religion and spiritual practice of all denominations and creeds has capitalized on in one form or another.  When it is appreciated one becomes the master of his own destiny.  One is no longer the groveling effect of circumstances outside of his or her own control.  One is no longer the victim of external conditions.

Its realization can explain popular notions of attainment of nirvana, enlightenment, the kingdom of God, or as countless popular psychology/philosophy sects since the late nineteenth century have put it, self-realization.  One reaches nirvana when one recognizes it resides within. One attains enlightenment when one sees that it is all about how one thinks.  One enters into the Kingdom of God when one recognizes that realm is within one’s own heart. One is self-realized when one realizes that one is what one thinks.

Being creatures who use the via of language to conceptualize, communicate and understand, all of us require some degree or level of explanation to appreciate the power that comes with realizing the simplicity that ‘you are what you think.’ Or, some exercises that help us transcend language based associative, identification thought habits in order to perceive the truth of it.  Thus, paths and mythology and related attention-focusing practices fueled by glimpses of this truth have abounded.  Countless explications and related practices exist to bring us to the point of recognition of the seeming magic that comes with the simple truth that you are what you think.

So powerful is the recognition of this most fundamental truth that the attempted monopolization of it has made inestimable riches for priests, ecclesiastics and gurus of every stripe.  Close inspection of any one of these proprietary routes (irrespective of the ornateness of its projected piety) invariably exposes a common fault.

The fault is fatal to the accomplishment of the truth each of the routes purports to lead to.  It is incident to the attempted monopolization of the truth.

The fault invariably comes with attempted proprietorship of the truth.

The fault is that deference to the proprietor and his creations (priests, practitioners, institutions, practices, rituals, beliefs) – whether overtly required or not – ceases or prohibits attainment or realization of the truth the proprietor capitalizes on.

Once one is led to believe that the realization’s continued operation depends on some relationship external to self, the truth no longer obtains.

Virtually any practice or ism that overtly or covertly requires continued membership, obligation, participation, or belief becomes anathema to truth and all of the salutary effects that spring from it.

Identification and Membership

 

Identifying with that which arises in consciousness – as opposed to simply viewing its coming and going to, through and out of one’s own spacious awareness – is the process by which breadth of consciousness, space, process, and ability declines.  When one identifies his mind becomes the object, concept, idea, or picture rather than the spacious field through which such pass.  By identifying as a member of a particular class of people one begins to crave for and cling to that which that assumed identity craves for and clings to.  One also begins to automatically resist entire classes of objects arising in consciousness; all of those that are repelled by that with which he identifies.   All of this grasping and resistance results in persistence of dissonant energies within one’s field of awareness.

The first and most common means by which messiahs and gurus (wannabe or proclaimed; religious or secular) and their cults have entrapped, controlled, and enslaved well-meaning people by manipulation of the simple mechanics of awareness or consciousness (see Basics) is requiring the assumption of a specific identity.  Application requires one assume the identity of ‘member.’

The moment a seeker of truth assumes the identity of a designated category of person he has lost his mastery of that which arises in consciousness.  The degree he does so is the degree to which he has departed with the ability to perceive or be truth.  Once he identifies he becomes an object continually present within his own consciousness, with all its attendant baggage.  He begins to view what arises in awareness not as it is and for what it is but instead through the continuous via of the viewpoint of whatever ‘ist’ he has chosen to become.  All of the pre-determined prejudices, likes, dislikes, and judgments of his adopted ism shade and alter everything that he would otherwise view as it really is.

Self-identification breeds more identification.  It adversely influences the very process of looking.  Required membership is not only unnecessary to assisting a person increase rationality and awareness, it is injurious to it.  Becoming some-particular-body is counterproductive of the very process of self-actualization.  After some time when a cult member begins to feel entrapped he often continues so for long duration because he cannot see the source of his imprisonment.  He is certain somebody or some physical barrier is to blame. He has not yet come to realize that his jailer is himself, and his cell is self-constructed by the identity he has adopted.

Practice in viewing objects arising in and departing from consciousness (thoughts, ideas, pictures, emotions, etc) as the isolated, ephemeral, relatively miniscule and ineffectual things they are within the context of one’s potentially unlimited spacious awareness tends to help one separate out from unwanted previously assumed identities.  It allows them to pass on and out of consciousness along with all the other infinity of objects that so arise and so pass.  It also tends to expand one’s sphere of consciousness or awareness beyond limits one once considered fixed.

 

Cults, Enemies and Shadows

In the early eighties with the figurative barbarians at the gates of his Scientology kingdom  L. Ron Hubbard wrote a dispatch to his personal services organization, Author Services Inc. (ASI), that stated in sum and substance: a man’s worth can be judged by the stature of his enemies.  At the time he was referring to the fact that virtually all major news media, the U.S. Department of Justice (including the FBI), the IRS, and a number of other state, provincial and federal agencies in several countries were in hot pursuit of Ron.

In its context the advice from Ron seemed intended to steady the resolve and nerve of those he had appointed with defending against his formidable enemies.  There is some truth to his little axiom.  Whether it is honorable to have so many law enforcement agencies after you is another question entirely.  Under Ron’s standard, Osama Bin Laden would be more worthy than anyone in recent memory – including Ron himself.

Something I find interesting is the number of people who twenty-seven years after Ron’s death seem to derive their own sense of worth by virtue of obsessively continuing to go after L. Ron Hubbard.  More than a quarter century after Ron’s death it seems that an active cult thrives on the central religious practice of spitting on his grave.

Ironically, the members of the cult regularly, blatantly and shameless exhibit many of the behaviors they so indignantly protest in the cult Ron left behind. They engage in thought-stopping, censorship by censure, judgmentalism, stereotyping, ‘ends justify the mean’s,’ etc.  You name the cult characteristic they accuse Ron of and they have it down in spades themselves. If someone gives Ron the slightest credit for ever having displayed any human tendency that individual is castigated, condemned and shunned violently.  If a member of the anti Ron cult steadfastly pledges allegiance to, and demonstrates it consistently,  condemning everything about Ron or the cult he left behind – or even anyone who credits Ron with any act that cannot be characterized as demonic -, why, that member is honored and can be seen to do no wrong.  Hell, he could figuratively get away with murder.

The central, most unifying unwritten tenet of the anti Ron cult is that solely by virtue of condemning Ron they are somehow victims and have thus demonstrated honorable behavior.  Notwithstanding that while the church of Scientology is renowned for over-aggressive dealings with critics, the most prominent members of the anti-Ron cult have never had a glove laid upon them by Scientology.  Most cult members attempt to position themselves with those who have in fact been dogged by Scientology. However, they have also conveniently  omitted from the hagiographies they have constructed for their heroes that most of the folks they emulate have sold out to Scientology for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.  So, you can add hyporcrisy to the list of cult-like qualities of those obsessing with Ron.

One theme I believe that may have been apparent in Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior is that Ron Hubbard became the effect of factors he could have conquered by application of the very principles he codified.  In particular, Ron’s decision to engage with and destroy his enemies resulted in his unhappy demise.  It stemmed from his violation of the following fundamental Dianetics and Scientology principle which violation mars the cult of his creation to this day: that which one obsessively resists one becomes.  It seems to me that by so aggressively demonizing Hubbard, his enemies have followed suit on that score too.

It makes me think that Ron (and the cult that arose to demonize him and yet wound up mimicking him) should have taken the advice of Lao Tzu to heart when he wrote in the Tao Te Ching that one ought to consider one’s enemy as the shadow he himself casts.

related reading: The Great Middle Path Redux