|
|
Vaughn
Young Writings #1
Scientology vs. Orwell's 1984
There are disturbing parallels between the book "1984" by
George Orwell and Scientology. Try to substitute "Sea Org/Dept
20" for "Party".
Text compiled by Andreas Heldal-Lund from different posts by Robert
Vaughn Young (RVY). Robert Vaughn Young, was a member of the Sea
Organization for twenty years, during which time he worked almost
exclusively for the Office of Special Affairs. Both he and his wife were
highly placed personalities, Stacy Young was the chief editor of the
Scientology Freedom magazine and Vaughn Young had made a name for
himself in the inner circles of Scientology. Both broke out of the cult
in 1989 and started speaking out against it in 1993.
On accepting unreality From George Orwell's "1984" published
in 1949:
"In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most
successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made
to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never
fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not
sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening.
By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed
everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no
residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the
body of a bird."
RVY commentary:
This degree of naivete will be found in other movements and groups, not
merely in Scientology. A difference is that in Scientology, they enforce
the lack of interest in public events and they continue to increase the
amount of unreality that one is to accept. It is dosed
out, which is one of the reasons the "upper levels" were kept
confidential. The matter of "swallowing everything" can be
found in Hubbard's study methods, where there is no possibility of
critical thought or disagreement. Disagreement means you have a
"misunderstood word" or some other flaw in you. You look up
words until you "duplicate" it, which means the grain of corn
slides on through. The difference is that there is harm in that lack of
use of the faculty of analytical criticism lessens the persons ability
to exercise it.
This can be shown by finding a long-term SO/Dept 20 member and asking
them questions about issues that have been front page on the New York
Times or on the evening news. They don't know because they don't read
the papers, especially the NYTimes. They don't care because they have
withdrawn and are living off the prescribed diet. They feel that L. Ron
Hubbard has told them how to find truth, so what else do they need?
Hence the same gullibility as in "1984."
On Lack of Privacy
From George Orwell's "1984":
"In principle a Party member had no spare time and was never alone
except in bed. It was assumed that when he was not working, eating or
sleeping he would be taking part in some communal recreations; to do
anything that suggested a taste for solitude, even to go for a walk by
yourself, was always slightly dangerous. There was a word for it in
Newspeak: ownlife, it was called, meaning individualism and
eccentricity."
RVY commentary:
Lack of spare time and never alone is characteristic of life in the Sea
Org/Dept 20. Solitude is highly suspected. One is expected to be a
"team member." If one wants to be alone, the Scientology
Newspeak that is thrown at a person is that they are being "first
dynamically
oriented." To understand this, one must understand there are
"eight dynamics" in Scientology:
self
sex and family
group
mankind
life
universe
theta or life force
infinity
While the public posture is that one is to "balance" these,
the truth is that one lives in the group and if one wants to take a day
off, that is being "first dynamically oriented" and means one
is being unethical, selfish and probably a sign of criminality.
From George Orwell's "1984":
"A Party member lives from birth to death under the eye of the
Thought Police. Even when he is alone he can never be sure that he is
alone. Wherever he may be, asleep or awake, working or resting, in his
bath or in bed, he can be inspected without warning and without knowing
that he is being inspected His friendship, his relaxations, his behavior
toward his wife and children, the expression of his face when he is
alone, the words he mutters in sleep, even the characteristic movements
of his body, are all jealously scrutinized. Not only any actual
misdemeanor, but any eccentricity, however small, any change of habits,
any nervous mannerism that could possibly be the symptom of an inner
struggle is certain to be detected."
RVY commentary:
In the Sea Org, private "berthing" (meaning where one lives)
is subject to inspection at any time, and these are done, often under
the guise of a "white glove." Rooms are allowed to be locked,
providing their authorities have a set of keys. Inspectors watch for
anything unusual that might be suspicious, e.g., a suspicious magazine,
a letter from a
strange person, notes that indicate anything suspicious. Everything else
Orwell describes are inspected and watched and reports made. If
suspicious, the person is called into "Ethics" which is
Scientology's "Thought Police." One might undergo a
"Security Check" which is an interrogation on Scientology's
lie detector, to get at any thoughts that the person might be hiding
from the organization. Under
this type of scrutiny, one learns to simply not think certain thoughts
and to adhere to the "straight and narrow."
On Scientology "expansion"
From George Orwell's "1984":
"Day and night the telescreens bruised your ears with statistics
proving that people today had more food, more clothes, better houses,
better recreations -- that they lived longer, worked shorter hours, were
bigger, healthier, stronger, happier, more intelligent, better educated,
than the people of fifty years ago. Not a word of it could
ever be proved or disproved."
RVY commentary:
L. Ron Hubbard loved statistics and he insisted that Scientology will
only expand, it cannot do otherwise. So at events the "up
stat[istic]s" are shown, with big graphs. The "expansion"
news is given. Nothing else. They will announce a new country where LRH
books are being sold, but fail to tell them the countries where they
were kicked out or
closed down or simply failed. In the eyes of Scientologists, every org
is booming, every continent is expanding, every book is selling like
mad. To Scientologists they are happier and better off than ever before
and International Management has the statistics to prove it. (If you
can't make one of their events, look at their literature, such
as "Scientology Today" or "KSW News" or one of the
other propaganda sheets.) Then again, no Scientologist has anything to
the contrary, which is one of the reasons the Internet is hated. It is
hated the same way the old Soviet Union hated Radio Free Europe: it is
an uncontrolled
source of information to people under control. That is dangerous.
On Big Brother
From George Orwell's "1984":
"At the apex of the pyramid comes Big Brother. Big Brother is
infallible and all-powerful. Every success, every achievement, every
victory, every scientific discovery, all knowledge, all wisdom, all
happiness, all virtue, are held to issue directly from his leadership
and inspiration. Nobody has ever seen Big Brother. He is a face on the
hoardings, a voice on the telescreen. We may be reasonable sure that he
will never die, and there is already considerable uncertainty as to
where he was born. Big Brother is the guise in which the Party choose to
exhibit itself to the world. His function is to act as a focusing point
for love, fear, and reverence, emotions which are more easily felt
toward an individual than toward an organization."
RVY commentary:
Hubbard gets the same praise. Every success is due to his methods and
every mistake or failure is due to someone or something else. His face
is everywhere in Scientology organizations, just as one finds the leader
in other dictatorships: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, China, the old USSR and Nazi
Germany, and for the exact reasons Orwell gives. Orwell's remark about
Big Brother not dying even applies to Hubbard for he didn't
"die." His death was unthinkable as it would have meant the
tech did not work. So he merely went to his "next level of
research."
On "doublethink"
From George Orwell's "1984":
"To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness
while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two
opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and
believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate
morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was
impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget,
whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory
again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it
again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself --
that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce
unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act
of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word
'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink."
RVY commentary:
After nearly 22 years in the cult, I came away puzzled how I could know
the truth and think otherwise. Many people asked me how it worked but it
wasn't until I read "1984" that I read a description that fit
the mindset to move up the command ladder in Scientology.
This is what one is encountering with Sea Org/Dept 20 personnel. One
wonders, can they believe this? Don't they know the truth? Yes and no.
It is doublethink, right out of "1984." And if you tell them
this, they will doublethink their way out of it as self-protection. As
one moves up the Scientology ladder of command, this is how one begins
to think and if one doesn't think this way, one does not move up the
ladder. One begins to learn that there are facts being withheld but
there are reasons and so one begins to hold both facts in one's mind
while learning to think with Scientology's "logic." Then one
does what Orwell says, the process is applied to the process so that one
if finally
deluding oneself that up is down or black is white. For example, one of
Scientology's favorite come ons is, "What is true for you, is true
for you," as if a person can believe what they want. It doesn't
take long to learn that this is true only as long as what you want to
believe is what L. Ron Hubbard wants you to believe. To do otherwise
sends you to
their "thought police." Further trouble and - if you are Sea
Org - you are sent to a camp for "rehabilitation," a word and
a concept that Orwell would have loved. In the meantime, the staff
member also believes the original promise: that what is true for him is
true for him. This is doublethink. It is also what one is astounded to
see, when one steps out of it and says, "I was believing
WHAT?"
|
|
|