Many people seek a world of order and discipline.
China is coming on strong, due to its centralized government.
Many Russians seek the return of their "glory days".
Fundamentalists everywhere, whether christian, muslim or jew, seek
a world of ordered peace.
Scientologists just propose a new unifiying solution to those other systems that failed.
Scientologists have just as much right as anyone else to support their beliefs and don't need to be browbeated and harassed by a few apostates.
We should have a peaceable kingdom here at OCMB...
I think Roy Wallis in his great work, "The Road to Total Freedom" on page 16 comments:
"Those features advanced as central to the concept of sect which have stood the test of time, therefore, seem to centre on the right to exclusion, a self-conception as an elect or elite, totalitarianism, and hostility towrds, or separation from, the state or society."
I think Hubbard failed to see where he was ending Scientology and the faithful up, with his accumulating rules, which frankly any of the ex members of many years participation until they couldn't stand it any longer, noticed the downsides to these totalitarian extremes.
Scientology made its way into a new religious movement, and Hubbard made the movement much like what Wallis notes is how sects historically become sects. Wallis' is a way advanced religious sociologist, and I cannot begin to do his ideas justice.
But Scientology is totalitarian, and in Keeping Scientology Working Hubbard clearly does not apologize for his undemocratic role in it all.
He clearly claims to have risen above it all.
Naturally, I agree, those that agree with Hubbard are on his side, and as a cult, sect or new religious movement, or con, or whatever label one puts on Scientology, it is inescapable that the movement is more inhibiting of its members, official Scientology that is, compared to other institutions in society.
If you are just asking for manners and politeness, I'm for it.
The ideas of Hubbard I think ended up a lot of people with unhealthy attitudes about the rest of the world, and about Scientology's "enemies".
There are just so many ideas of Hubbard turned into rules, that turn people against each other, and while historicially religious cults, sects or groups do do this, as Wallis notes, to me that does not make those groups or the ideas behind those totalitarian trends correct.
I think the ideas leading toward undemocracy are wrong.
I think the wider freer exchange of ideas between everyone is healthier.
Criticism of Hubbard is taboo in Scientology.
And today, the criticism of DM is even more of an "overt" and grounds for serious retaliation within the ranks.
Scientology has painted itself into its totalitarian image. The top ranks of Scientology today are a complete degraded subservient scene, with DM insanely thinking he is the only one doing any good, when in fact he has turned the top administrative ranks of the movement into a wasteland, with no top management allowed to even attempt their roles that LRH laid out in LRH's final years of orders for "Exec Strata" and "CMO Int" and LRH's other general policies in the early 80s for all of management.
Anyways, I think Wallis, who wrote the above in 1975-76, was spot on, and Scientology is totalitarian, and while other groups have headed that way, that doesn't make them right, not make Scientology right for going that way.
LRH's pie in the sky space opera societies that ran perfectly for millions of years (reference the "Chug" advices to Foster Tompkins who was the Mission I/C of the original INCOMM mission setting up Scientology's computerization) LRH went on about how space civilizations of old used computers to hum along for millions of years. The computer was in effect "big brother" keeping silent note of everything, and detecting the embezzling Duke of Chug, which the computer then orders the executive to replace Chug to arrive at Chug's planet, and replace Chug, who is executed.
Scientologists settle on LRH's reality, and are happy (or not, or to whatever degree happy or not) with LRH's take on all reality, and LRH has the embedded rules to keep things in line with all his views.
It is NOT being accepted world wide, the trend is NOT towards increased participation.
The trend is people leave, eventually.
The totalitarian aspects, the overly intrusive heavy ethics, the pressure to disconnect from troublesome family who are against and critical of Scientology, it is NOT healthy, and while Scientology is like other cults, sects or religious groups doing this in history, it does NOT make it right.
And currently it is NOT gaining support for Scientology, in my opinion, after looking back at my 27 years participation in the Sea Org.