Is scientology a racist organization?
eqtr...@020.co.uk
scientology a racist organization? I know from reading biographies and
information on L. ron Hubbard that he despised psychiatrists and made
hidden derogatory references to asians as "chinklos" in his novels
such as battlefield earth. The "chinklos" in his novels seemed to be
extremely stereotypical media depictions of asians depicted as
studious, enslaved, and submissive towards the psychlo conquerers.
Scientology also uses known racist terms such as "WOG" which stands
for "worthy oriental gentleman". Another thing that leads me to
believe scientology is founded on groundwork of racism is their
paramilitary look and the outfits their members wear at rallies. I
watched an A&E documentary on Scientology a couple months ago and it
showed a rallying of their church and it looked remarkably similar to
a NAZI parade. The auditorium they were in even had large streaming
banners with columns of young kids dressed in neat pressed shorts,
skirts, short sleeved shirts with ties holding large banners with the
scientology emblem which looked remarkably like hitler youth. If you
don't know your history or have ever seen triumph of the will Adolf
Hitler frequently paraded "hitler youth" in rallies to show the future
strength of the organization in its children. The whole thing reeked
of propaganda and seemed to be a rally to show the power and control
the "church" had on its members and society.
Tilman Hausherr
<39224e18...@news.tstonramp.com>:
>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>scientology a racist organization?
Yes. Example taken from Professional Auditor's Bulletin
No. 119, 1st September 1957, "The Big Auditing Problem," as
published in "Level 0 PABS," by L. Ron Hubbard (c1968, The
American St. Hill Organization), pages 80-81:
"In North Africa they had the Arab with the gun and whip, but
he could force people to do things a gun and a whip [sic] and
he accomplished a tremendous amount of extermination, but he
certainly didn't advance that civilization very much. In
South Africa they had a bit of the whip but everybody just
gave up. The South African native is probably the one
impossible person to train in the entire world--he is probably
impossible by any human standard. I'll give you an example.
A South African native is being shown how to sow crops and he
has a basket, and he's got some seed, and he's walking along
back of the harrow disc--and he is supposed to throw seed out
this way, seed out this way, seed out that way, seed out this
way. A white man is riding a little tractor that's pulling
the disc and scraping the soil for the seed. And this scene
was enacted and was witnessed and was told to me with
considerable hilarity as some kind of learning rate. The
white man was sitting on the little tractor pulling the harrow,
the native along behind him, sowing the ssed straight down
in handfuls on the ground. The white man got off the tractor,
came back to the native, took the basket away from him, put
his hand in the basket, threw it to the right, put his hand
in the basket, threw it to the left, and gave it back to the
native. And the native waited, the white man got on the
tractor, drove along, and the native took a handful out of the
basket and threw it straight on the ground. So the white man
got off the tractor, came back, took the basket away from the
native, showed the native, throw it to the right, throw it
to the left, gave it back to the native, took him [sic] seat
again on the tractor, the native followed along behind, took
handsful and threw it straight on the ground! And this went
on for a very long time. The native never did throw any
handsful of seed to the right and left. Never did. That is
farming in South Africa.
Now did anything ever come along and change that? Yes. Man
had to cease to be Homo Sapiens and had to become Homo
Scientologicus in order to accomplish any action that was
anywhere near efficient in South Africa. And we have had
some auditors in South Africa who have actually succeeded in
training natives easily and well and have successfully
managed large organizations there. That's certainly something.
Now with these people it was still possible to get something
done. But what had this native done? Was this native what
we think of as primitive stock? No, we make a great many
mistakes. We say a child is in a "native state". A native
is in a "native state". People are in a barbaric condition
and then they grow up and become civilized. How do we know
that this barbaric condition isn't a retrogression from a
highly civilized condition back to an Only One category?
How do we know that isn't true? How do we know that that
native didn't at one time achieve a great civilization of
culture which then collapsed on him and he went back into a
state of being a barbarian?
But the point is, is this true that a native is in a clearer
state, and is it true that it requires Livingness to advance
somebody in that crude state up to a condition of ability?
No, that is not ture. The child, the primitive, the native,
are in retrograded states. They are worse off than
somebody who is at a civilized or thinking or analytical
level."
More examples of scientology racism are available. However racism is not
the primary aim of scientology, i.e. although scientology is a hate
group, their hate is primarly focused on psychiatrists, then
journalists, etc., the blacks come later.
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Ted Mayett
>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>scientology a racist organization?
A web page that explores this:
JimDBB
>From: eqtr...@020.co.uk
>Date: 5/17/00 2:47 AM Central
>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
Scientology is a nazi cult in disguise. It has its own:
Mad Messiah L. ron Hubbard
Gestapo: The OSA Office of Special Affairs
SS: the Sea Org
Prison camps: the RPF Rehabilitation Project force
and its own Final Solution:
"to be Disposed of Quietly and Without Sorrow."
Asians and dark races are inferior or 'Degraded Beings' according to L. Ron
Hubbard.
Hubbard as he became more and more insane came to believe that humans were
pawns of evil alien psychiatrists who run the earth show. therefore earthling
psychiatrists are controlled by the evil galactic psychiatrists. This secret
and bizarre crap is 'revealed' on scientology's OT courses.
JimDBB
Hartley Patterson
>
> Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
> scientology a racist organization?
Hubbard was no more or less a racist than other white Americans of his
generation, that is he held what we today would consider racist views
but which in his day were unremarkable.
The CoS today is not racist in the sense that its beliefs do not contain
any race superiority ideas. Its 'Creed', on the contrary, has the
standard disclaimer about all men being equal. Certainly there seems to
be no barrier to advancement in the CoS heirachy on race grounds.
On the other hand the CoS has not hestitated from supporting racists if
that might advance the cause of Scientology. The CoS was openly
supportive of the apartheid regime in South Africa for example, not for
racist reasons but in order to have a free hand in recruiting there.
> Scientology also uses known racist terms such as "WOG" which stands
> for "worthy oriental gentleman".
It doesn't and the use of 'wog' by scientologists is not by origin
racist, see
http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/wog_faq.htm
> I
> watched an A&E documentary on Scientology a couple months ago and it
> showed a rallying of their church and it looked remarkably similar to
> a NAZI parade.
Convergent evolution. The CoS is totalitarian as are nazism and fascism,
so one would expect there to be parallels. Republican and Democratic
party conventions look remarkably similar on TV, but that does not mean
their party platforms are the same.
--
"I think of my beautiful city in flames"
http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/
A medieval spreadsheet, enturbulating entheta, how to outrun
Thread and some riddles preciousss....
David VanHorn
Hash: SHA1
> Hubbard was no more or less a racist than other white Americans of
> his generation, that is he held what we today would consider racist
> views but which in his day were unremarkable.
You mean like: "Blacks are too stupid to register on the E-Meter"?
> It doesn't and the use of 'wog' by scientologists is not by origin
> racist, see
> http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/wog_faq.htm
So because you redefine the term to your convenience, someone else is
supposed to be less insulted?
Like: "Sorry, when I said "Nigger", I meant "presumably Nigerian
Gentleman"..."
That dog don't hunt.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.2 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOSMfmIFlGDz1l6VWEQK5uACg+7Bu2JYydXilFLPPH9y1Z1AleZcAoKYG
2yUqWPIZUbl8++kGcbQ0zIEm
=rE+g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Lronscam
<8l65isolfbkebmtel...@4ax.com>, On or about Wed, 17 May 2000
06:12:44 -0700,
Ted Mayett says...
>On Wed, 17 May 2000 07:47:00 GMT, eqtr...@020.co.uk wrote:
>
>>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>>scientology a racist organization?
Actually, Scn'gy is an equal opportunity enslaver.
Dave Bird
writes:
>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>information on L. ron Hubbard that he despised psychiatrists and made
>hidden derogatory references to asians as "chinklos" in his novels
>such as battlefield earth.
Hubbard was born in the 1910s, and reached his forties in the 1950s.
If you follow his writings, yes, they are racist about black
and chinese people -- but not much worse than many other writers
of the same generation. I wouldn't sat Scn is based on racial
hate or envy as such, though (because it isn't).
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
David Gerard
:Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
:scientology a racist organization?
http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fun/scn/racism/
--
http://xenu.netizen.com.au/ http://www.caube.org.au/
"Damn straight. 'Computer Science' is an art. In much the same way as
'Piss Christ' and 'Voice of Fire'." (Paul Tomblin)
M. C. DiPietra
NQSPAML...@aol.comNOTs escribe en 5/17/00 5:39 PM:
> The addy of ted-m...@msn.com, In article ID
> <8l65isolfbkebmtel...@4ax.com>, On or about Wed, 17 May 2000
> 06:12:44 -0700,
>
> Ted Mayett says...
>
>> On Wed, 17 May 2000 07:47:00 GMT, eqtr...@020.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>> Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>>> scientology a racist organization?
>
> Actually, Scn'gy is an equal opportunity enslaver.
Good point, but there is a marked lack of nonpink people in uniforms in
Clearwater, in BE, etc...
>
>> A web page that explores this:
>>
>> http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fun/scn/racism/
>>
>>
>>
--
--- http://maggiecouncil.iuma.com
M.C.DiPietra <mdip...@earthlink.net>, SP4
"Hell, if you understood everything I say,
you'd be me!" -Miles Davis
Catarina Pamnell
wrote:
>In article<39224e18...@news.tstonramp.com>, eqtr...@020.co.uk
>writes:
>>Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>>scientology a racist organization? I know from reading biographies and
>>information on L. ron Hubbard that he despised psychiatrists and made
>>hidden derogatory references to asians as "chinklos" in his novels
>>such as battlefield earth.
>
> Hubbard was born in the 1910s, and reached his forties in the 1950s.
> If you follow his writings, yes, they are racist about black
> and chinese people -- but not much worse than many other writers
> of the same generation. I wouldn't sat Scn is based on racial
> hate or envy as such, though (because it isn't).
I'd agree with Dave. Just as Hubbard wrote in 1950 that women should
exclusively dedicate their lives to taking care of home and family,
but today you find many women as Sea Org (Scientology elite layer)
executives who abstain from ever having children, Hubbard's several
racist remarks are not in any obvious way influencing the way
Scientology works now. Check out the cult's promotion - you will find
people of various colors and both genders used as show pieces in
magazines such as "Source". Some recent Sea Org recruitment ads (in
"Highwinds" magazine for example) show non-white people.
Basically they don't give a shit about race, as long as you're willing
to worship Hubbard and fork over the money.
They also would have no particular qualms about cooperating with
racist groups, if it fits their own agenda.
Catarina
==================================
"Love the truth, forgive mistakes"
(Voltaire)
==================================
M. C. DiPietra
cata...@pamnell.com escribe en 5/18/00 12:42 PM:
Take a closer look at those showpiece photos. Are they credited to an image
service?
I noticed in every Scn publication I saw in the early 90s used stock photos
from an image service when they wanted to sustain the illusion of diversity.
Believe me I was paying attention after a Flag FSM told my mixed-race ass
that black people don't spend their money on spiritual things, but material
ones; that blacks fixate on matter [talk to hats?].
This was after I had noticed for the previous few years I had to be downtown
Clearwater every day for my job, that I could count on one hand the number
of black people I'd seen in Sea Org uniforms. Way less than the population
would suggest. Oh, the FSM also told me that Flag was used as a retreat by
Europeans [who wouldn't be black]. Wish I could ask him now about the
millions of South African kids who were taught to read by Scn, and where
*they'd* go for upper-level processing...
You can hire anyone you want to pose in a uniform for an ad.
>
> They also would have no particular qualms about cooperating with
> racist groups, if it fits their own agenda.
>
As has been shown here before.
>
> Catarina
>
> http://xenu.just.nu
>
> ==================================
> "Love the truth, forgive mistakes"
> (Voltaire)
> ==================================
--
Michael 'Mike' Gormez -- www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths
(Catarina Pamnell) wrote:
>> Hubbard was born in the 1910s, and reached his forties in the 1950s.
>> If you follow his writings, yes, they are racist about black
>> and chinese people -- but not much worse than many other writers
>> of the same generation. I wouldn't sat Scn is based on racial
>> hate or envy as such, though (because it isn't).
>
>I'd agree with Dave.
I'd disagree a bit. remember the Hubbard textbook debacle in LA? One of
the reasons was that the LRH books depicted handicapped people as isolated
from others, and coloured/blacks were under represented in a major way.
So, the cult may not be overtly racist (would get them less money) it
nevertheless is on a subtle level. It personaly made me puke to know how
low they will go to influence children in a very sick and twisted manner.
But then again, they are Scientologists... Shouldn't have surprised me.
Mikey
--
Scientology & Dianetics
Tax-exempt child abuse and neglect?
http://www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths/childabuse.html
Hartley Patterson
> > Hubbard was no more or less a racist than other white Americans of
> > his generation, that is he held what we today would consider racist
> > views but which in his day were unremarkable.
>
> You mean like: "Blacks are too stupid to register on the E-Meter"?
A good example!
> > It doesn't and the use of 'wog' by scientologists is not by origin
> > racist, see
> > http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/wog_faq.htm
>
> So because you redefine the term to your convenience, someone else is
> supposed to be less insulted?
Read what I wrote. The evidence is that 'wog' as used within the CoS for
non-members is not derived from 'wog' used as an insulting racist term
for Asians in the UK. The source (!) is L Ron Hubbard, from his time in
the Navy where 'wog' means an inexperienced sailor.
Catarina Pamnell
Gormez -- www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths) wrote:
>In article <3924163c...@news1.tninet.se>, cata...@pamnell.com
>(Catarina Pamnell) wrote:
>
>>> Hubbard was born in the 1910s, and reached his forties in the 1950s.
>>> If you follow his writings, yes, they are racist about black
>>> and chinese people -- but not much worse than many other writers
>>> of the same generation. I wouldn't sat Scn is based on racial
>>> hate or envy as such, though (because it isn't).
>>
>>I'd agree with Dave.
>
>I'd disagree a bit. remember the Hubbard textbook debacle in LA? One of
>the reasons was that the LRH books depicted handicapped people as isolated
>from others, and coloured/blacks were under represented in a major way.
> So, the cult may not be overtly racist (would get them less money) it
>nevertheless is on a subtle level.
Sure they are. Isn't still most of western culture subtly or overtly
racist? What is the popular image of a successful person? It's not
exactly a black, disabled, lesbian woman, is it? Scn is preoccupied
with "being successful" in a rather narrowminded way. They utilize
people's dreams of "becoming successful" whatever those are.
>It personaly made me puke to know how
>low they will go to influence children in a very sick and twisted manner.
They want people to believe that by joining Scn they will become rich,
attractive, influential in society and gain superhuman powers. I doubt
that whoever put that textbook together had spent even 2 seconds
contemplating equal rights issues, unless forced to do so by
authorities.
I still understand "a racist organization" to be one that is mainly
driven by racial hate issues, and I don't think CoS is. They have
their own hate issues. "Elitist hate organization", certainly.
Catarina Pamnell
<mdip...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>in article 3924163c...@news1.tninet.se, Catarina Pamnell at
>cata...@pamnell.com escribe en 5/18/00 12:42 PM:
>
>> On Wed, 17 May 2000 20:11:05 +0100, Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article<39224e18...@news.tstonramp.com>, eqtr...@020.co.uk
>>> writes:
>>>> Ok I have a question for all of you out there in the know.. is
>>>> scientology a racist organization? I know from reading biographies and
>>>> information on L. ron Hubbard that he despised psychiatrists and made
>>>> hidden derogatory references to asians as "chinklos" in his novels
>>>> such as battlefield earth.
>>>
>>> Hubbard was born in the 1910s, and reached his forties in the 1950s.
>>> If you follow his writings, yes, they are racist about black
>>> and chinese people -- but not much worse than many other writers
>>> of the same generation. I wouldn't sat Scn is based on racial
>>> hate or envy as such, though (because it isn't).
>>
>> I'd agree with Dave. Just as Hubbard wrote in 1950 that women should
>> exclusively dedicate their lives to taking care of home and family,
>> but today you find many women as Sea Org (Scientology elite layer)
>> executives who abstain from ever having children, Hubbard's several
>> racist remarks are not in any obvious way influencing the way
>> Scientology works now. Check out the cult's promotion - you will find
>> people of various colors and both genders used as show pieces in
>> magazines such as "Source". Some recent Sea Org recruitment ads (in
>> "Highwinds" magazine for example) show non-white people.
>>
>> Basically they don't give a shit about race, as long as you're willing
>> to worship Hubbard and fork over the money.
>
>Take a closer look at those showpiece photos. Are they credited to an image
>service?
Not the ones I was thinking of, at least they are shot at Flag. Some
are those little "interviews" with named Flag public spouting off how
going to Flag was TheBestThingIEverDoneInMyLife. The Sea Org promo was
artwork.
>
>I noticed in every Scn publication I saw in the early 90s used stock photos
>from an image service when they wanted to sustain the illusion of diversity.
I know the ones...
>
>Believe me I was paying attention after a Flag FSM told my mixed-race ass
>that black people don't spend their money on spiritual things, but material
>ones; that blacks fixate on matter [talk to hats?].
>
>This was after I had noticed for the previous few years I had to be downtown
>Clearwater every day for my job, that I could count on one hand the number
>of black people I'd seen in Sea Org uniforms. Way less than the population
>would suggest. Oh, the FSM also told me that Flag was used as a retreat by
>Europeans [who wouldn't be black]. Wish I could ask him now about the
>millions of South African kids who were taught to read by Scn, and where
>*they'd* go for upper-level processing...
Think I should try to express myself more clearly. I certainly don't
think that Scn is anti-racism. Since Hubbard's idiocies are "sacred
scriptures", any scieno who for whatever reason wants fuel for their
racist view could find support there. (Just like that FSM.) So can
anti-feminist or anti-gay or ultra right wing people. It's great that
there are websites such as
http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fun/scn/racism/
pinpointing these idiocies.
(BTW, has anyone made a website with Hubbard's anti-homosexual rants?)
But I don't see racism in itself as any obvious driving force for the
CoS. l could be wrong, I can only talk from personal experience
limited to Europe, and my interpretation of their materials.
What I do see as major driving forces are money and power (surprise!).
Check out who has money and power in the societies where the CoS
operates, and you'll see who they will try to grab hold of. Society
not equal = CoS not equal. As for the guys without money who are
recruited for staff, I'd even say that money is still the issue. If
the CoS are targeting a public of white middle-to-upper class because
they think that's where the money and power is, and these people will
be more reluctant to buy from non-white sales staff - heck, they are
not going to put any non-whites there. If some FSM or reg suddenly
becomes successful in getting a non-white group to hand over a lot of
money, all hail to him/her. If a non-white still pulls in money to the
org, keep him/her. Greed.
I would also guess that quite a bit of the recruitment of new members
is through friends and family of those who are already members. If
white scientologists only have white friends (and I'd say that a lot
of white people in general stay in white circles) that's who they will
recruit.
Here in Scandinavia, anyone not north-western european (or from the
US, Australia etc. but of north-western european ancestry) risks being
discriminated against. Greeks, Italians etc. are "black heads". (Oh,
not officially of course, but far too many people still have that
attitude) I have seen it up close, was married to a Portuguese for
ten years. Against that background, I did not find people in Scn in
Sweden and Denmark to be more racist than the surrounding society,
maybe even less. There were non-european "black heads" on staff in my
org - just saw one (who was my auditor for a while) in a magazine,
he's a top FSM in Sweden now. I don't know how they experienced the
situation, can only say that I did not hear anyone talk bad about
them. They were good scienos - they produced! When my ex-husband moved
to Sweden, he was better treated in the org than in society at large.
I also, being young and a woman, felt less discriminated against in
the org than in society.
Anyway, scientologists don't need blacks or asians or jews or women as
scape-goats to bolster their own imagined superiority. As their own
ads claim, there are over 1 billion SPs in the world... That's plenty
of people to hate. They have the extremely nasty elitist mindset in
common with other hate groups. No wonder the CoS can appear similar to
white supremacists.
M. C. DiPietra
cata...@pamnell.com escribe en 5/19/00 5:33 AM:
I agree that it is not a driving force, but it continues as a catalyst for
perpetuating racist ideas and mindset, and no one addresses it in the CoS at
all; the idea that black people register differently on an e-meter implies a
difference that is not cultural {since Latin Americans are heavily recruited
at this time - last night at Tampa org there was a'Presentacion Dianetica -
Gratis' on the sign marquis.} but racial [what would Hubbard do with an
Afrocuban?]
>
> What I do see as major driving forces are money and power (surprise!).
> Check out who has money and power in the societies where the CoS
> operates, and you'll see who they will try to grab hold of. Society
> not equal = CoS not equal. As for the guys without money who are
> recruited for staff, I'd even say that money is still the issue. If
> the CoS are targeting a public of white middle-to-upper class because
> they think that's where the money and power is, and these people will
> be more reluctant to buy from non-white sales staff - heck, they are
> not going to put any non-whites there.
This idea is completely racist; assuming money and power are the domain only
of whites? Assuming white people wouldn't make a purchase from a nonwhite?
Disturbing.
> If some FSM or reg suddenly
> becomes successful in getting a non-white group to hand over a lot of
> money, all hail to him/her. If a non-white still pulls in money to the
> org, keep him/her. Greed.
>
> I would also guess that quite a bit of the recruitment of new members
> is through friends and family of those who are already members. If
> white scientologists only have white friends (and I'd say that a lot
> of white people in general stay in white circles) that's who they will
> recruit.
Well, part of it may also be that the structure of Scn, which is very white,
may not be as appealing to those who are not.
By this I mean the linear-thought patternsgraphs and charts and grades, all
written-culture worship of His Written Words and dominant culture ideas of
individual advancement, paying for wisdom with money, some of Hubbard's
1950s leftovers about patriarchal and white superiority, even down to the
military heirarchy, etc.
I'm not saying that all nonwhites would feel alienated by these and other
aspects of Scn, but there are so many cultural biases within the Scn
construct that it is identifiable as such, no matter how non-biased it wants
to believe itself to be, and how diverse it tries to pass itself off.
>
> Here in Scandinavia, anyone not north-western european (or from the
> US, Australia etc. but of north-western european ancestry) risks being
> discriminated against. Greeks, Italians etc. are "black heads". (Oh,
> not officially of course, but far too many people still have that
> attitude) I have seen it up close, was married to a Portuguese for
> ten years. Against that background, I did not find people in Scn in
> Sweden and Denmark to be more racist than the surrounding society,
> maybe even less. There were non-european "black heads" on staff in my
> org - just saw one (who was my auditor for a while) in a magazine,
> he's a top FSM in Sweden now. I don't know how they experienced the
> situation, can only say that I did not hear anyone talk bad about
> them. They were good scienos - they produced! When my ex-husband moved
> to Sweden, he was better treated in the org than in society at large.
>
Thanks, this was an interesting view on racism! So you can have European
blacks and noneuro blacks?!
Here in Florida, where there are large Greek and Italian populations, Latin
people are mostly considered white and I'm sure those born here would be
horrified to know they aren't elsewhere!
> I also, being young and a woman, felt less discriminated against in
> the org than in society.
>
> Anyway, scientologists don't need blacks or asians or jews or women as
> scape-goats to bolster their own imagined superiority. As their own
> ads claim, there are over 1 billion SPs in the world... That's plenty
> of people to hate. They have the extremely nasty elitist mindset in
> common with other hate groups. No wonder the CoS can appear similar to
> white supremacists.
>
yes!
A 'racist' group doesn't necessarily have to be driven by wild-eyed hate to
be effective at perpetuating racist ideas; I agree with you that CoS may not
have racism as a central theme, but organizations rarely do these days.
Racism isn't always so overt.
However, the atmosphere of distrust built on the creation and maintenance of
an 'enemy' to sustain an organization, the way Scn does, is almost built to
suit a hate group.
Let's put it this way, in my years downtown there I saw all of two black
people in a SO uniform. This is not representative of the local populace,
which is around 15% black.
>
> Catarina
>
> http://xenu.just.nu
>
> ==================================
> "Love the truth, forgive mistakes"
> (Voltaire)
> ==================================
--
Dave Bird
<hpt...@REMOVE.ME.vossnet.co.uk> writes:
>David VanHorn wrote:
>
>> > Hubbard was no more or less a racist than other white Americans of
>> > his generation, that is he held what we today would consider racist
>> > views but which in his day were unremarkable.
>>
>> You mean like: "Blacks are too stupid to register on the E-Meter"?
>
>A good example!
>
>> > It doesn't and the use of 'wog' by scientologists is not by origin
>> > racist, see
>> > http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/wog_faq.htm
>>
>> So because you redefine the term to your convenience, someone else is
>> supposed to be less insulted?
>
>Read what I wrote. The evidence is that 'wog' as used within the CoS for
>non-members is not derived from 'wog' used as an insulting racist term
>for Asians in the UK. The source (!) is L Ron Hubbard, from his time in
>the Navy where 'wog' means an inexperienced sailor.
Not from his few weeks in the far east talking to people in British
colonies, or from his time in the UK ar Saint Hill?
HOW DO YOU KNOW? What is this evidence you possess that Hubbard
got it from one or other origin.
Actually there is conclusive evidence in Hubbard's own words that
he meant it in the racist way. Wog is a British soldier's word,
a way of calling darkskinned people -- especially Arabs and
South Asians -- "golliwogs". If challenged by a naive person
they would say, "no, no, it is only 'Worthy Oriental Gentleman'"
(sniggering behind their sleeves in the knowledge it means something
much more offensive). And, if you use that euphemism, you know
it is a reference to Asians.
Well, Hubbard put exactly that euphemism in the Tech dictionary.
He knew the word means Asians, and he knew it meant something more
offensive than that expression says.
jrf...@atlascomm.net
wrote:
>In article<39243E56...@vossnet.co.uk>, Hartley Patterson
><hpt...@REMOVE.ME.vossnet.co.uk> writes:
>>David VanHorn wrote:
>>
>>> > Hubbard was no more or less a racist than other white Americans of
>>> > his generation, that is he held what we today would consider racist
>>> > views but which in his day were unremarkable.
>>>
>>> You mean like: "Blacks are too stupid to register on the E-Meter"?
>>
>>A good example!
>>
>>> > It doesn't and the use of 'wog' by scientologists is not by origin
>>> > racist, see
>>> > http://village.vossnet.co.uk/h/hpttrsn/wog_faq.htm
>>>
>>> So because you redefine the term to your convenience, someone else is
>>> supposed to be less insulted?
>>
>>Read what I wrote. The evidence is that 'wog' as used within the CoS for
>>non-members is not derived from 'wog' used as an insulting racist term
>>for Asians in the UK. The source (!) is L Ron Hubbard, from his time in
>>the Navy where 'wog' means an inexperienced sailor.
>
> Not from his few weeks in the far east talking to people in British
> colonies, or from his time in the UK ar Saint Hill?
>
> HOW DO YOU KNOW? What is this evidence you possess that Hubbard
> got it from one or other origin.
>
I have seen this argument go back and forth before. Now its my turn to
put in $.02.
The Navy hazing Mo Ron went through as he crossed the equator was
probably one of the most humiliating experiences he ever had. To
think, enlisted men even got a chance to pour kitchen waste on him
with no retaliation allowed. And then, to make matters worse, he was
flown across the equator to get back to the states. In other words,
he never got a chance to do the same to others. I am sure he was
aching for a chance to humiliate someone else and never got the
chance.
A polywog, or wog, is not used in the Navy as a derogatory term. It
is part of an ongoing joke. Most men do not even realize they are
polywogs until just before they make shellback. However, the way the
cult uses the term is definitely as a slur.
I am sure the ritual must have had a deep effect on a young,
egotistical Mo Ron Hubbard and feel that is the reason for the use of
the term wog. I am also sure that when a $cientologist uses the term
it is meant to convey the same attitude as the word nigger when used
by a redneck.
Arnie Lerma <www.lermanet.com>
says...
{paraphrased) 'hi Im a clam and I duplicate source, I'm on the bridge
to total and freedom and OT,'
>
hey Mike if there was ONE OT in Scientology you wouldn't be reading this line
Try clay demoing that
arnie lerma
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
The internet is the liberty tree of the 90's
http://www.lermanet.com - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
Mike McKean Sr
No, Scientologists are not racists.
http://www.whatisscientology.org/Html/Part14/Chp40/pg0728.html
"We of the Church believe:
That all men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal
rights. ..."
Let's see where racism REALLY comes from:
http://www.cchr.org/exposes/racism.htm
"Psychiatry, accompanied by its quintessential precept that man is an animal
to be controlled by drugs, has systematically subverted minority groups
since its inception. The results have been catastrophic: escalating drug
abuse, violence, crime and unabated ethnic discrimination. Never has this
been more evident than in our black communities where psychiatry's false
claims of "violent genes" amongst blacks simply fuel its efforts to keep
black communities under the influence of drugs. Psychiatry spawned South
Africa's apartheid and, while apartheid may have ended in South Africa, it
lives on in psychiatry's research and practices. ..."
barb
various races in here. Are you contradicting Source?
Bad clam! No beans for you! Report to the pole, and bring your Nikes!
--
--barb
"Every week, every month, every year, every decade and now
every century, Scientology does wierd and stupid things
to damage its own reputation."
-Steve Zadarnowski
Catarina Pamnell
Gormez -- www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths) wrote:
>In article <3927c1c9...@news1.tninet.se>, cata...@pamnell.com
>(Catarina Pamnell) wrote:
>
>>>>Sure they are. Isn't still most of western culture subtly or overtly
>>>>racist? What is the popular image of a successful person? It's not
>>>>exactly a black, disabled, lesbian woman, is it? Scn is preoccupied
>>>>with "being successful" in a rather narrowminded way. They utilize
>>>>people's dreams of "becoming successful" whatever those are.
>>>
>>>I beg your pardon. The aforementioned LRH books weren't meant for managers
>>>but small kids.
>>
>>You mean "thetans in small bodies"? Not much difference to a
>>scientologist. And anyway, it's not kids who decide what school books
>>are used, it's adults.
>
>I don't understand your sentence.
Sorry - another attempt. What I mean is that Scn is not first and
foremost interested in getting some message out to kids, but to get
books that say "L Ron Hubbard" on the cover sold and spread around.
And so they must try to appeal to adults, to what they think people
think their kids should be reading.
Fortunately, regardless of what the cult thinks, there are a lot of
people who don't want such a narrow view for their kids.
> I am saying is that Scientology
>publishes textbooks for small children which covertly feed Hubbards
>sickening views on coloured/disabled persons and at the same time are
>lying about them being non-"religious".
I see what you mean, and there is truth in it.
It just doesn't fully explain the sitution to me...
>>>Handicapped persons have only themselves to blame for their current
>>>situation. They are downstats, not "honest producers" (ie. sub-human).
>>
>>Unless they happen to have a fat bank account, then scientology "can
>>help with their problem"... :-(
>
>Yep, look at Wayne Whitney who was sold "a cure" by his scientologists
>sister! http://home.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/wwhit01.htm#000
Raul Lopez was told Scn would cure his brain injuires, while he was
scammed out of around $1 M:
http://www.parishioner.org/lopez.html
"By the end of the second week following his initial interview with
the Scientology agent, Plaintiff had already spent or pledged
approximately $30,000 for Scientology courses, materials and/or
auditing services that Plaintiff had been told would bring him back to
his pre-accident condition, curing his permanent injuries."
>
>This isn't a "one Org matter", at least 3 Scn corps. were involved.
>(CST/ABLE/Applied Scholastics and Xenu knows how many more..)
Bridge Publications, at least.
>
>How ever chaotic it maybe in an org, I simply refuse to accept that such a
>high profile/priority OSA project to get Hubbard into schools, would have
>been done by a unsupervised lone person behind a desk on the 5th floor in
>a dark room minding his own business muttering about body-thetans in the
>sky.
Who knows ;-)
You are right in that this would be an important project, and I'm
sorry if it sounds as if I'm trivializing the matter. I just find it
hard sometimes to take the view of Scn as "everything they do is
maliciously planned" as it doesn't correlate with my experiences, or
most of what I heard from people who have been in the SO.
>
>
>>> They purposely painted a dark
>>>picture of the handicaped/coloured people. If not, they could have let
>>>the handicapped person out if it entirely.
>>
>>But weren't they required to put them in, to conform to the standards
>>of educational materials? I'm sure the original book illustrations
>>didn't have *any* handicapped/non-whites at all.
I have to revise this statement somewhat. In my piles of stuff, I
located a copy of "Learning How To Learn", which is an Applied
Scholastics text book aimed at 8 to 12 year olds. "Based on the works
of L. Ron Hubbard". Published 1992 by Bridge Pubs.
While most of the kids shown in this book (black-and-white cartoon
drawings) are clearly white, there are a (probably) Afro-american boy,
and one (probably) Afro-american girl and her mother. They are shown
in similar situations as the white kids, no particular difference that
I can see other than the fact that there are many more white kids in
the book. There is no illustration of black and white kids together,
(but OTOH most of the illustrations only show a single kid). There are
no handicapped persons.
The book is really full of sexual stereotypes, BTW. The main character
boy fixes a bike and builds a dog house. Girls learns to sew a dress
and bake a cake. Boys swim or bike or play football, while girls stand
around or sweep the floor...
Among the adults shown there's a cowboy, and a general who is making a
clay model of the battlefield - are we talking shades of Hubbard here!
>
>Can't remember/don't want to dig in my archive - and Deja.com is
>not useable on the moment. Luckely some of it is webbed:
>http://www.religio.de/publik/arsreview/191097.html#20
Thanks, this seems pretty much what I expected - they were told to add
some disabled so they did, but obviously not very successfully.
What made me wonder about whether the Scn main purpose here was to
influence kids with a negative view of handicapped people is
- Why didn't they paint those in from the beginning? If they actively
wished to show people with physical problems as less valuable, they
could have put those illustrations in on their own initiative.
- If Scn felt strongly that disabled should not at all be present in
their books, then why did they change the illustrations on request?
And say they were prepared to make even more changes, when they still
got criticised.
But OTOH it is suspect that they never did go through with those
changes, and it's possible that you're right...
>http://www.religio.de/publik/arsreview/140698.html#3
On the whole, I don't feel the Scn goal is to get their message out.
There are exceptions when they put up anonymous groups to work on
specific issues that would serve their purposes, such as anti-income
tax groups. But most of the time they are not trying to spread their
message as such, they are trying to spread the name of Scientology and
Hubbard - especially the latter. Hubbard was a very vain man, a sucker
for acknowledgement.
If all Scn really wanted was to spread Hubbard's actual ideas of
"study tech" (or even anti-handicapped people) in schools, they could
circulate those ideas without any mention whatsoever of Hubbard,
without getting license fees or royalties paid to the Scn empire,
without boasting about the fact in Scn magazines.
They (or individual scientologists) do sometimes make attempts to
start groups, schools etc. without mentioning Hubbard or Scn, but
somehow it seems they just can't keep it up for too long - sooner or
later they just *have* to boast about it in "Impact" or "International
Scientology News" or something like that.
There's a chapter in the latest edition of "What is Scientology?"
which I think is typical of this attitude, "L. Ron Hubbard: How his
work has influenced the world" There they talk about ideas such as
natural child birth, past lives, out-of-body experiences and improving
people's IQ, and try to claim that the only reason such things are
discussed today is because of what Hubbard wrote in the 1950s. It is
far from enough from a Scn point of view if natural child birth is a
commonly spread idea today. What they really want is for Hubbard and
noone else to get the credit. It's the credit that is important, not
how the babies are doing.
>
>"'Scientology practitioners ... may utilize these textbooks as a vehicle
>for inculcating their students into at least the terminology of
>Scientology and, perhaps, more,' said Doug Merill, an attorney and board
>member of the Southern California ACLU. 'When a religion itself tells me
>that its scripture is everything that L. Ron Hubbard has written, then two
>plus two to me equals four,' he said. 'It appears that the textbooks are
>Scientology scripture as defined by Scientologists.'"
>====
>
>I like that guy!
Excellent quote that!
tommy...@webtv.net
good in 1987, I remember having this
same concern of the group appearing
to appeal mostly to whites. Years later
having a discussion on this topic with
another ex-cultie that was former staff
(I was just public,) I remember his
shocking blunt reply that went some-
thing like........"Nahhhh they only don't
like fags and queers, but they will
extract money, scam, and fair game
anybody .......chinks, kikes, wops, ginnys,
spics. micks, degos, crouts, niggers,
japs, ruskies, limies, yankees, wetbacks,
gooks, sandniggers, pollacks, grease-
balls, french whores, and ?!?!?!?"
The guy made his point with me quickly
though ugly (pardon my spellng!)
An equal opportunity employer, (church,)
and mind control recruiter was the Co$.
This is evident in their newest ethnic
market segment efforts - american
indians! see <www.nativestate.org>
Tom
Hartley Patterson
> HOW DO YOU KNOW? What is this evidence you possess that Hubbard
> got it from one or other origin.
He would have come across it first in the Navy, only much (20 years)
later in the UK in its other meaning.
> Well, Hubbard put exactly that euphemism in the Tech dictionary.
> He knew the word means Asians, and he knew it meant something more
> offensive than that expression says.
Do we know for sure Hubbard wrote the Tech dictionary, or did he just
put his name to it?
If he did write it, then OK by then he had realised the problem and was
using a simple getout rather than use the one he knew to be true. That's
my theory anyway!
Dave Bird
<hpt...@REMOVE.ME.vossnet.co.uk> writes:
>Dave Bird wrote:
>
>> HOW DO YOU KNOW? What is this evidence you possess that Hubbard
>> got it from one or other origin.
>
>He would have come across it first in the Navy, only much (20 years)
>later in the UK in its other meaning.
This makes no sense; after all, it seems likely he used it
for non-scientologists only AFTER he knew both meanings i.e.
during the Saint Hill days (does anyone know when Hubbub first
used the word "wog"?).
You are also ignoring the possibility that he picked it up
around British soldiers and colonies during his brief trip/s
to the East i.e. **before** he was in the Navy.
>> Well, Hubbard put exactly that euphemism in the Tech dictionary.
>> He knew the word means Asians, and he knew it meant something more
>> offensive than that expression says.
>
>Do we know for sure Hubbard wrote the Tech dictionary, or did he just
>put his name to it?
It seems a very good bet, as it is in his characteristic style.
>
>If he did write it, then OK by then he had realised the problem and was
>using a simple getout rather than use the one he knew to be true. That's
>my theory anyway!
...and I still don't buy it.
-- . ___ .
'-|:::|@\-[x]/__/| .-|:::|@\
||--|"" . |__|/ ||--|"" .
'-|:::|@\ (")"""-. .-|:::|@\ --+--.(")"""-'
|| |"" ||""| || |"" ' ' |""|
DEMOCRACY: two wolves & a lamb LIBERTY: a lamb with a kalashnikov
voting what's for lunch contesting the vote
Steve A
<mikemc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> No, Scientologists are not racists.
>
> http://www.whatisscientology.org/Html/Part14/Chp40/pg0728.html
>
>
>
> "We of the Church believe:
>
> That all men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal
> rights. ..."
If it became politically expedient tomorrow to be a racist,
Scientology would have its jackboots and brown shirts on so fast...
--
"Battlefield Earth...achieves what must be a land-speed record for
plagiarism" - Baltimore City Paper