|
>>[Kymus:]
>>I believe the bulk of
RPF staff have remained due to moral constraints
and not physical restraint
>[Kevin Brady:]
>Where would these people go?
[Kymus:]
The police, if necessary, who can assist them on
a timely basis in reclaiming any property they have in
the custody of the church facility where they berth .
You know the police are always being called in to
handle "domestic disputes" where one of the
parties is facing a "where do I go to live"
problem, has to retrieve some personal property from
the residence, etc. THOSE people mostly somehow make
out, and there are tons and tons of domestic dispute
cases like this all the time. RPF leaving isn't harder
than this at worst.
>They have no money, no
clothes, no food, and all of their friends are
organization members.
Modernly many Sea Org members are increasingly
woven into a matrix of social resources that might be
dominated by other Scientologists, so some of them
might have only organization friends or friends loyal
to the organization. Many others have the traditional
Scientologist's relationship with family and friends
which can be anti-Scientological or turn so in a
heartbeat. Most SO leavers I've talked to had
resources for departure not only among antiScieno
friends or family but *within* the ranks of
Scientologists in good standing, including within
fellow SO staff member ranks. The pravda that no SO
staff person would help another SO staff person depart
hastily or fund/assist them for this purpose is just
that: pravda. The image of the robot zombies over on
the other side is largely that: image. There are
probably examples of both indifference or cruel
treatment by the remaining staff to the leaver as well
as generosity in a complete survey of the leaving
process.
This lack of resources is a problem for
departure, but not something that keeps a person in
"slave labor camp" conditions!!! Properly
assessed, an RPF based at a Sea Org facility might
have some members who lack resources that would be
desirable to start fresh if they simply walk away, but
that doesn't explain why they continue to live in
"slave labor camps", as the a.r.s. pravda
repeatedly puts it. The rest of the RPF members have
the resources on the outside to leave and resume a new
life, if they are committed to that.
>The SO specializes in
hard-selling the idealist which volunteer for
service, totally unwitting about the deception and
fraud they are subjecting themselves to.
Agree, except that what constitutes deception
and fraud is partially a subjective matter in many
cases.
>I have never heard of
gang-bang sec-checks on Class IV
Hells bells I was *gang banged* in a mere
mission early on in my Scientology affiliation.
Generally I see religious groups that are
dogmatic and high-demand, and even mere therapy groups
in some instances, using multiple confronting parties
and demands for confession. The difference between
some AA meetings and Scientology gang bang sec
checking is a matter of topic and degree. The Bible
says you go with several other Christians to confront
the wayward one, e.g. People who view matters as being
religious, as of ultimate importance, generally
"gang up" on other members they consider
wayward and put the fault and choice to be made by the
wayward member to them bluntly. It's a question of
whether you truly believe the religion or not that has
to be decided, and if so how belief must manifest.
Gang banging is a gift in disguise. You get to
examine, by being put under great pressure, just how
valuable this belief structure and affiliation is to
you, something that an easy going demand for internal
loyalty might omit. If you decide to stay you do so
with possible impediments removed from participation
and commitment as you have less to hide afterwards,
but if you decide to leave you have something to
resent deeply and fuel that departure planning.
Gang banging ain't fun to be subject to, but it
isn't what made me eventually leave and being subject
to it surely didn't reduce my ability to assess where
I wanted to go, where the Church seemed to be going,
and act rationally based on the yawning gap between
these when the time came.
I'm joining the <<yawn>> conspiracy,
you see, here.
>>Consent eliminates
violation.
>Consent given under
fraudulent claims and misrepresentation of the
actual situation?
It becomes rapidly apparent to the SO member
when they enlist what the situation they will live and
work in is like. Unless we are confining ourselves to
people who route onto the RPF before finishing the EPF
(do such people even exist???) this isn't really an
effective vitiation of consent.
>The real reason an SO member
doesn't leave isn't because he is necessarily afraid
of reprisal, but because he is afraid he would have
to admit that he had slid down a slippery slope of
increasingly betraying his own internal compass, and
mortgaged his awareness to the "greater good" of
scientology INTERNATIONAL, which he is continually
lied to about.
I agree. As this description indicates there is
no brainwashing going on, as people retain their
ability to assess this sort of thing and act
independently and rationally according to their own,
indwelling values. Before they reach that decision to
leave they sort through a certain amount of deception
and false claims that may form part of the basis of
their prior commitment, and weigh just how important
it is to them to compromise on some points to prevail
in a common struggle to win on others. Exactly what
those deceptions and false claims are may well be very
very different for different people, subjectively
though, and exactly how much sleaziness by one's own
side is going to be tolerated is also idiosyncratic
too often enough.
>I am sorry if I seem
impatient. There is more to this story, for me (can
you smell the bypassed charge?)
Been there, mostly. But for those I left behind,
and they are not trivial in number, I marvel that they
still remain committed to what they are committed to
despite adversity. Is there more to their story? They
have made hard choices, and perhaps I feel they choose
the wrong side of things, but it was their choice to
make. I believe nonsense about calling SO RPFs
"slave labor camps" is part of a campaign to
deny these people their chosen way of life, which is
why I am in this thread. I personally do not think
highly of that as a way of life, but do not see it as
my role to join in efforts to deprive them of it
through societal pressure born of smear campaigns.
We can never, any of us, completely walk in
someone elses shoes. They have to decide their own
religious destiny, even if we think it is a stupid
one, and confine ourselves to protesting actual harms
inflicted on others not choosing that way of life. The
a.r.s. set too often wishes to deny the power of
choice to others with its overblown rhetoric about
"slave labor camps",
":brainwashing", and other such nonsense. |
