Informative Freezone Links

[Veda]

The below is mostly self-explanatory, however, the piece titled 'Workable Technology', which is an essay on 'Keeping Scientology Working', is perhaps most significant.

http://www.goldcenturypress.com/fr-jan06_issue1.pdf

Some more background information on the history of the Freezone, from their own sites:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=13221&postcount=43

The Freezone, in recent years, has attempted to present individuals and groups as being part of the "Standard Tech Freezone" when they were/are not - most notably, David Mayo, whose writings from the early 1980s are sometimes presented, while Mayo's writings and observations from 1986 and beyond - when the Scientology cult conditioning was wearing off - are avoided.

Is the "Standard Tech Freezone" attempting to replicate the Cult of Scientology, complete with "standard" PR cloaking?

Can the subject of "auditing" be separated from the Hubbard personality cult, from Hubbard's bleak conspiracy-ridden Science Fiction cosmology, with its psychs and Marcabians, and from other undesirable aspects of Scientology, including its dishonest "PR"?

Some think so, but it appears that the "Standard Tech Freezone" is doing its part to push the subject of "auditing" back into the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box."

For the sake of the basic activity of "auditing," outside the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box," the above links have been presented as a reminder that the "crazy box" is still with us.

For a look at what's occurring, with the discipline sometimes known as "auditing," in its best expression, see the "Independent Field" section on this Message board.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

A. "The Freezone" is a generic label for non-Co$ scientologists. It is NOT a single group with a common ideology. It is certainly NOT operating on any centralized plan of action or intent.

Your post refers to two different freezone associations: the IFA & the Free Zone Association. There are many others. They all share some interest in scientology tech. They do NOT necessarily agree on what "scientology tech" is.

I can speak from personal knowledge that even within the IFA there are distinct and significant differences of viewpoint concerning the technology of scientology and how best to implement it.

The freezone as a whole is almost as varied in it's views of scientology as is ESMB. The only real difference, for obvious reasons, is that, unlike ESMB, it lacks those who are wholly opposed to the subject of scientology.


B. David Mayo's views are his own.

Since the litigation he endured with the Co$ he has been enjoined against making public statements regarding scientology.

I was unaware that he has appointed you as official spokesperson in his absence. I know a few freezoners who would, for very good reason, dispute the accuracy of your comments in re Mayo's scientology views. Their views hold a bit more sway as they are familiars of David's.


C. You seem to be personally as bothered by the existence of the freezone as the Co$ is. That is a curious thing under the circumstances. You might wish to examine the source of your fear.



Mark A. Baker

 

[Soul of Ginnungagab]

For the sake of the basic activity of "auditing," outside the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box," the above links have been presented as a reminder that the "crazy box" is still with us.

Interesting that you use the word "us". That means that the reader is automatically embraced as being part of that group called "us" if (s)he don't think about it. It also automatically includes yourself of course. So if the "crazy box" is still with you, it is at least something you are aware of. And that can make a big difference in life. Those that are not aware of a "crazy box" they subscribe to contra those that are aware of it. That awareness can be an asset that makes it possible for a person to be able to listen to other people and to be able to be more flexible in life generally speaking. A rather important issue I would say.

 

[Veda]

More info:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=29401&postcount=8

David Mayo's talk to Free Zoners in Europe, 1986. Note: Audio is complete, transcription is edited.

Plus the 1986 interview of Mayo by Russell Miller:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=42821&postcount=4

An article by David Mayo, from 'Free Spirit' magazine, also 'IVy' magazine, 1991:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=75265&postcount=15

 

[lionheart]

B. David Mayo's views are his own.

Since the litigation he endured with the Co$ he has been enjoined against making public statements regarding scientology.

I was unaware that he has appointed you as official spokesperson in his absence. I know a few freezoners who would, for very good reason, dispute the accuracy of your comments in re Mayo's scientology views. Their views hold a bit more sway as they are familiars of David's.


C. You seem to be personally as bothered by the existence of the freezone as the Co$ is. That is a curious thing under the circumstances. You might wish to examine the source of your fear.



Mark A. Baker

I didn't read anything from Veda that implied he was acting as David Mayo's spokesperson. Where did he say or imply that?

I didn't see any "fear" in Veda's post. Where did you see that?

The emotion you have assigned to criticism of Hubbard technology seems to have gone from "hate" to "fear". Why do you persist in assigning one of Hubbard's "low human emotions" to criticism of Hubbard's technology?

Why does a critic have to be operating from a low tone? Isn't that just an example of Hubbard-think as regards "crtiics"?

 

[lionheart]

I repeat, where does Veda say he is Mayo's spokesperson? Where did you see "fear" in his post?

Why do you label Hubbard critics as "down-tone"?

Why do you appear unwilling to debate these points?

 

[Veda]

I repeat, where does Veda say he is Mayo's spokesperson? Where did you see "fear" in his post?

Why do you label Hubbard critics as "down-tone"?

Why do you appear unwilling to debate these points?

IMO, if someone is in the role of a PR man (and a Scientology PR man at that), and tries one "angle" and then another "angle," sometimes clumsily done, sometimes slickly done, and, once in a while, finds that an "angle" doesn't bring a desired result, the tendency is to pull back - until at least a "winning angle" can be conceived.

 

[ThisFenceHurts]

it appears that the "Standard Tech Freezone" is doing its part to push the subject of "auditing" back into the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box."

For the sake of the basic activity of "auditing," outside the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box," the above links have been presented as a reminder that the "crazy box" is still with us.

I think this be the reason that one might consider Veda's criticism to be "low-toned" - insulting someone's belief and generalizing are not usually looked at on Hubbard's Tone Scale as being "high-toned". I'm sure Veda does not care.

The matter has been debated ad nauseum elsewhere, but calling anyone's beliefs "crazy" and putting people in "boxes" is generally not taken as an attempt to help. Just sayin'.

 

[Soul of Ginnungagab]

The matter has been debated ad nauseum elsewhere, but calling anyone's beliefs "crazy" and putting people in "boxes" is generally not taken as an attempt to help. Just sayin'.

Calling anyone's belief's "crazy" is quite easy as long as the belief is different from consensus reality. But it really doesn't matter if someone has a "crazy" belief as long as he/she behaves decent. I have met many people with different kinds of "crazy" beliefs, people that are well functioning in society. It is simply no problem.

Problems arrive if someone, whether he/she have a "crazy" belief or not, has a blind, fanatic destructive behaviour that effects others.

***

Here are some more remarks regarding this:

For the sake of the basic activity of "auditing," outside the "Commodore Hubbard/Xenu crazy box," the above links have been presented as a reminder that the "crazy box" is still with us.

Let people do what they feel is right as long as they keep a decent behaviour.
As I said above (replying to ThisFenceHurts) it is not believing in something that others find crazy that is a problem, it is if people are blindly fanatic doing something that destroys the living of other people that problems arrive.

It is my impression that people who like to do the RONS org bridge are doing fine, having great relationships with the environment, family and whatever. At least those that I have met.

For a look at what's occurring, with the discipline sometimes known as "auditing," in its best expression, see the "Independent Field" section on this Message board.

Yeah, the "Independent Field" actually opens up to a whole new series of viewpoints. It seems as if a lot of the great things that can also be found in Scientology is widespread and further developed often to such a degree that it no longer has any relationship with Scientology. Some people even studied something else before they encountered Scientology and still hold on to their original subject, Scientology was just a "station" on their path so to speak giving them some extra viewpoints, tools and inspirations.

Regarding the discipline sometimes known as "auditing":
The basic idea of auditing which is "listening to the person in front of you and handle accordingly" doesn't belong to any person, group, cult, organization or other entity. That idea wasn't even invented by any person, group, cult, organization or other entity. It was only applied and/or included. So the discipline sometimes known as "auditing" is built on something that is rather universal.

 

[lionheart]

IMO, if someone is in the role of a PR man (and a Scientology PR man at that), and tries one "angle" and then another "angle," sometimes clumsily done, sometimes slickly done, and, once in a while, finds that an "angle" doesn't bring a desired result, the tendency is to pull back - until at least a "winning angle" can be conceived.

That's true and it makes debating with Scientologists sort of wierd, because they suddenly stop communicating when their PR line isn't working.

This is of course why I was pushing the point with Mark, but it's a waste of time.

Unfortunately the Hubbard mind was so layered with overt and covert purposes that his "tech" is similarly layered and Hubbardologists are not always aware of the different layers that Hubbard wove into their minds and the different "techs" that they are using.

I still maintain the only solution to the Hubbard Black Magic is to drop all his techs, opinions, policies and beliefs. With a fresh, clean slate, one can be human again and build new beliefs based upon honour and decency instead of black, Hubbard traits.

 

[lionheart]

I think this be the reason that one might consider Veda's criticism to be "low-toned" - insulting someone's belief and generalizing are not usually looked at on Hubbard's Tone Scale as being "high-toned". I'm sure Veda does not care.

The matter has been debated ad nauseum elsewhere, but calling anyone's beliefs "crazy" and putting people in "boxes" is generally not taken as an attempt to help. Just sayin'.

Suppose Hubbard's "Tone Scale" behavioural aspects (Science of Survival) is wrong!

Suppose his definitions of "low" and "high" tones are false or simply his mechanism for controlling his disciples?

Suppose Ron was manipulating us?

Once you drop his many, multi-layered "techs", it becomes perfectly clear that he put us in his Scn box.

Outside the box there is freedom of thought, action and opinion, inside there is ... Hubbardology. This was his Black magic spell.

 

[Tanstaafl]

That's true and it makes debating with Scientologists sort of wierd, because they suddenly stop communicating when their PR line isn't working.

This is of course why I was pushing the point with Mark, but it's a waste of time.

Unfortunately the Hubbard mind was so layered with overt and covert purposes that his "tech" is similarly layered and Hubbardologists are not always aware of the different layers that Hubbard wove into their minds and the different "techs" that they are using.

I still maintain the only solution to the Hubbard Black Magic is to drop all his techs, opinions, policies and beliefs. With a fresh, clean slate, one can be human again and build new beliefs based upon honour and decency instead of black, Hubbard traits.

Honour and decency come from motives.

Auditing up to Clear can be practised with such motives.
As for Veda's Commodore Hubbard/Xenu Bridge - I'm not sure.

 

[lionheart]

Honour and decency come from motives.

Auditing up to Clear can be practised with such motives.
As for Veda's Commodore Hubbard/Xenu Bridge - I'm not sure.

In my experience it can be done up to Clear, but generally this only happened in outer orgs and Missions far from the influence of Hubbard.

Certainly a well done HRD specifically addresses these virtues.

But, but, but, I think this was rare and there is still an insideous layer of dishonesty, dishonour and indecency even woven into the "lower techs", so insideous that most Scns don't even see it and are unaware of it.

There are other techs, not interwoven with Black Magic, that can be used instead of Scn.

Above Clear - well .....

 

[Tanstaafl]

In my experience it can be done up to Clear, but generally this only happened in outer orgs and Missions far from the influence of Hubbard.

Certainly a well done HRD specifically addresses these virtues.

But, but, but, I think this was rare and there is still an insideous layer of dishonesty, dishonour and indecency even woven into the "lower techs", so insideous that most Scns don't even see it and are unaware of it.

There are other techs, not interwoven with Black Magic, that can be used instead of Scn.

Above Clear - well .....

Could you be more specific LH?

 

[Alan]

Suppose Hubbard's "Tone Scale" behavioural aspects (Science of Survival) is wrong!

Suppose his definitions of "low" and "high" tones are false or simply his mechanism for controlling his disciples?

The tone scale is fairly accurate - what is not clear is the tone scale has to do with goals and purposes. That is the amount of effort needed to move towards a purpose or goals completion.

The goal can be to destroy you - thus the tone level if the person is winning at that is quite high

Suppose Ron was manipulating us?

Once you drop his many, multi-layered "techs", it becomes perfectly clear that he put us in his Scn box.

Outside the box there is freedom of thought, action and opinion, inside there is ... Hubbardology. This was his Black magic spell.

It does not take much to observe the tone level of Scio - it is failing to enslave people thus its tone level is very low!

Alan

 

[Leon]

Good post, Alan.

Thank you.

 

[Leon]

That is the amount of effort needed to move towards a purpose or goals completion.

i.e. how mestified your postulates have become.

 

[Veda]

Scientology will be up-tone again, once the Scientology mental-healing-coated slave-machine is running smoothly.

 

[Mojo]

Scientology will be up-tone again, once the Scientology mental-healing-coated slave-machine is running smoothly.

That will never happen.

Again.

Mojo

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Either a concept works or it doesn't. If it does, then one ascertains to what degree it works and if it's worth having/using in the future.