The St. Petersburg Times is running a series on the Church of Scientology that has some pretty eye-popping allegations, particularly with regard to Church leader David Miscavige. For those who have long argued that the Church is a cult (most recently in Europe) the exposé will likely reinforce their views.
The newspaper reports bizarre and abusive conduct by Miscavige, including hitting high-ranking officials and forcing them to play a game of musical chairs (where the losers allegedly are banned from the Church).
The Los Angeles Times also has a story alleging rampant corruption in the Church.
The series on Scientology is something of a surprise. Many reporters that I have spoken with over the years are privately reluctant to do Scientology stories because of the Church’s aggressive reputation in responding to press. The Church has a history of suing critics and pursuing members who have joined the movement opposing Scientology. This has led to recent lawsuits ( and here) and complaints. Recently, Scientology also was barred from making edits on Wikipedia because of what it viewed as a pattern of misleading or false changes on sites referencing the Church.
For the first part of the three-part series, click here.
For the second part of the three-part series, click here.
please explain why Pinochet had to take over the government in the first place.
Also why did he give up power?
So I.S., why do people, both left and right follow totalitarianism? I see you still haven’t addressed this issue and I would like to know your opinion on the matter.
“Augusto José Ramón Pinochet[1] Ugarte (25 November 1915 – 10 December 2006) was a Chilean army general and head of state. He was the Commander in Chief of the Chilean army from 1973 to 1998, President of the Government Junta of Chile from 1973 to 1981 and President of Chile from 1974 until the return of democratic rule in 1990.
He studied to become an officer and was a professor of the War Academy in Chile.[2] At the beginning of 1972, he was appointed General Chief of Staff of the Army. In 1973, he was appointed as Commander-in-Chief of the Chilean Army by socialist president Salvador Allende.[2]
On 11 September 1973, with active support from the CIA[3][4], Pinochet, who twenty days prior had been appointed, led a coup d’état which put an end to Allende’s government, and, along with the Navy, Air Force and Carabineros (a national police force), established a military dictatorship. In December 1974, the junta appointed Pinochet as President by a joint decree, to which Air Force General Gustavo Leigh disagreed.[5] From the beginning, the government implemented harsh measures.[6] According to the 1993 Rettig Report, over 3,200 people were killed[7], while (according to the 2004 Valech Report) at least 80,000 were incarcerated without trials and 30,000 subjected to torture[8]. Another 200,000 people went into exile, particularly in Argentina and Peru…” (wikipedia)
Jill:
“So now that we’ve got that out of the way I was wondering if you were able to understand why people, both left and right turn to an authoritarian mindset. I noticed you didn’t address this issue.”
I don’t know any “conservative” societies that have gone totalitarian. Conservative meaning – individual liberties, free markets, etc.
But to hazard a guess as to why societies degenerate into totalitarianism I would say that ultimately they loose a sense of personal responsibility and self determination. They look to government to satisfy their needs. Once they are dependent on government it is over.
Governments are able to do this because who doesn’t want the least among us taken care of? And that is why altruism is such a slippery slope. So there you have it, social welfare programs eventually lead to totalitarianism.
BIL:
do you mean the Wiemar Republic or do you mean the National Socialists?
the NAZI’s were definitely leftists, in fact they and the communists came to an agreement that the comms would be called leftists and the NAZI’s right winger/facists so that they would not be confused. The NAZI’s are in fact socialists. Had Hitler died prior to 1939 he would have been a hero of the left and hailed as one of the greatest Germans of all time. His greatest mistake was to invade the Soviet Union, that gave impetus to Roosevelt and his merry band of reds to enter the war to bail out Stalin and his socialist “utopia”. This is purely my opinion and I have done no research to back it up although I do believe it would make a fine premiss for a book and there is some historical evidence that does suggest this.
Namely the number of communists or communist sympathizers in Roosevelt’s administration and the climate of the time-namely the infatuation with communism by the intellectuals of the day.
Ditto to Buddha,
So now that we’ve got that out of the way I was wondering if you were able to understand why people, both left and right turn to an authoritarian mindset. I noticed you didn’t address this issue.
BIL:
“I’ve said some pretty wild things in here, but I’ve never called someone I openly revile like Cheney “Anti-American”. A treasonous traitor for certain, but never “Anti-American”. That’s pure Neocon jingoistic trash.”
isnt the very essence of being a treasnous traitor anti-American? Isnt a traitor to ones country being anti-country? How does one be a traitor to ones country and not be anti-country?
I suppose treason is in the eye of the beholder, Count Von Stauffenberg was a patriot but was considered a traitor. But in the sense you mean it seems that being a traitor would have to go hand in hand with being anti-American.
Please explain.
IS,
Germany. Very conservative before WWII.
No, Jim. All that was proven is that you’ll use the slander “Anti-American”.
That’s pure Neocon troll trash Jim.
And while I do have to tolerate you, I can still tell you to go fornicate yourself once you’ve gone to “Anti-American.” Welcome to Freedom of Speech, Jim. I’m as American as you are and well that’d make you the elitist, wouldn’t it? The very selection of words shows you somehow feel superior in your citizenship – a feeling that is factually incorrect in addition to showing some lovely character, ah hem, traits. Because “Anti-American” is pure propaganda language, Jim. It’s fascist anti-liberal smear in the Rove mold. A Neocon word of choice. If your attempt is demonization, it’s painfully transparent. What’s next? Some more of the tin hat birther nonsense? Some semi-informed circular logic? Are you going to call for a return to Freedom Fries? But don’t worry.
I support your decision to be a negative example. It’s your choice.
I’ve said some pretty wild things in here, but I’ve never called someone I openly revile like Cheney “Anti-American”. A treasonous traitor for certain, but never “Anti-American”. That’s pure Neocon jingoistic trash.
Jill:
please tell me a conservative society that has gone totalitarian.
Actually the term Liberal was highjacked by the progressives/totalitarians.
I.S.,
I have noticed that progressive movements often do go totalitarian. This same is true of the conservative movements. Reading the article, I was very much struck by how obediant to authority people were. Why did they go along with it? Why didn’t they walk out and report things immediately. It’s just like our torture program. So denigrate progressives all you want, if you have the courage to acknowledge these same tendancies play out amongst conservatives as well. And have even more courage to examine why this pattern repetes itself over and over in almost every area of our society. Why do you think that is?
Mike S.,
“It’s sadly ironic how blatantly government can disregard some rights, like torture and rendition, and yet treads so softly when it comes to organized religion.”
In one way it’s a contrast. But really, the authorities are condoning the same behavior in each case. It’s very scary.
MS:
if Scientology is a scam then prove it and shut it down. Personally it sure seems like it to me. But there is some amount of personal responsibility that goes along with being a member or joining in the first place.
The government cannot and should not protect every weak willed stupid idiot from themselves.
With the advent of the Internet there is no excuse to be ignorant of anything. And the same can be said for public libraries. If a person gets scammed oh well, I guess he wont be as gullible the next time out.
Mike Spindell:
I dont have a problem with abortion, I did not think the Patriot Act was a good idea at all. Rendition and torture arent to good either.
The entire history of progressive philosophy has been one of totalitarianism. From Marx to Saul Alinsky to whomever the progressive de jour is today. They limit free speech and other freedoms, they are agressive, in short they are thugs.
They cannot win in the ballot box so they use the courts or other forms of intimidation. They have no belief in anything except the certainty of their knowledge that their beliefs are right and must be implemented no matter the cost.
they need to change the name to regressives.
“Being a church isn’t a license to break the law, or at least it sure as hell shouldn’t be.”
Jill,
My thoughts exactly. The problem is the courage of governments to proceed against them. It’s sadly ironic how blatantly government can disregard some rights, like torture and rendition, and yet treads so softly when it comes to organized religion.
Mike S.,
I’ve been thinking along the same lines and also about what Jim has been saying. When I read the article I saw behavior that was clearly illegal. Beating people and stealing money is illegal. It’s no different than the Catholic church and child molestation.
To me the doctrins of both Catholicism and Scientology do not make sense. People should be able to freely criticize religious ideology. They should also practice it until behavior crosses the line into illegal.
I’m with lottakatz that tax exemption does legitimize these organizations. I also think the state has been way too reluctant to take aggresive law enforcement action when it is clearly warrented. In Toledo, the police protected the Catholic church from charges of abusing children, litterally for decades. Had the police/prosecutors done their jobs, the abuse of children could have been stopped in its tracks and so much pain and suffering would have been prevented.
To my way of thinking, there’s no banning stupid. I know I’ve done plenty of jaw dropping stupid acts myself (and I’m sure it will happen many more times!), but the line is crossed when the law is broken. These people were beaten. There should have been charges and hard time, end of story. Financial fraud, same thing. Being a church isn’t a license to break the law, or at least it sure as hell shouldn’t be.
“It is rather fascinating but understandable as most progressives are anything but.”
IS,
And with the use of things like torture, rendition, The Patriot Act (supported by Democrats too but proposed by Bush),
a preemptive war and fighting against the right of a woman’s choice, conservatives are believers in freedom? I think not.
If you want to check the history, past and current, the belief in civil liberties is not one owned by the left, right, center, or political party. That you state it as such shows your bias and your inability to recognize that totalitarianism isn’t about the political philosophy/theory, it’s about people’s will to power. No political side has a monopoly on purity and those who think so are ultimately blind.
Buddha et al.
I look to this blawg for reasoned debate and legal meaning to current events. I am here to learn more than to contribute.
I believe in free speech and I believe in freedom of thought, philosophy and worship. However, what is a society to do about con games that use religion as a cover for their scam. This is Scientology. I’ve actually heard hours of L.Ron Hubbard on the radio in NYC, in the 50’s, debating Scientology with Sci-Fi
writers Fred Pohl and Lester Del Rey. They had all known each other for years being in the same profession and they nailed him for the scam he was trying to perpetrate. A common topic of discussion in the 50’s was how to set up a money making enterprise as a religion to avoid taxation and scrutiny. Scientology was the most successful of the scams. Do the proponents on this thread of a hands off policy towards it, really think that con games are protected speech and thought?
While I agree that often it is hard to differentiate between most religions and scams, in the case of Scientology I think it is easy and necessary. GWLSM referred to EST, which though non-religious was another scam. Back when I was in practice as a psychotherapist I had 3 patients who had been through it, ripped off by it and were in worse psychological shape from the experience. I suppose in some people’s minds this type of charlatanism should be protected from government
interference and I sympathize with that view. However, while both Scientology and EST are scams, as are many seemingly mainstream religious money drives, Scientology reaches beyond the pale and should be treated as the con game it is.
Jim Byrne:
I agree with you, as long as your stupidity dosent inflict a negative outcome on me you are free to pursue whatever it is that floats your boat. within the confines of the law.
You will find on this blog that many champion individual rights but when you really get down to the core they tend to be of a totalitarian mold/mindset. And the funny thing is they think they are being supportive of individual rights.
It is rather fascinating but understandable as most progressives are anything but.
FFLEO,
Thanks for your encouragement.
I’m glad you don’t always agree with me. If everyone on this blawg agreed with everything I said, it would be a waste of time for me to say it. -That is, unless I was so insecure that I would need my ego stroked.
FYI – I consider any effort that advocates to deprive the freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights to be un-American. The right to make stupid irrational choices is, I believe, one of those protected rights.
Evangelicals hurt our nation many times by voting according to their authoritarian ministers’ leanings- which tend to always favor eye-4-eye problem solving and of course Republicans.
It worked for Hitler and it worked for Neo Cons. Religion made Nazism falsely legitimate while it conducted it’s cleansing operation. Ditto for Bush/Cheney’s preemption, occupation, torture, and domestic subversion.
Christians harmed this country deeply-perhaps permanently-by voting a dictatorship into office not once but twice. That collective act put this nation where it is now and permanently colored it murderer, torturer, and thief. Yes, I’d attempt to stop someone attempting suicide. Yes, I fully support an absolute separation of civilization and religion so the nation doesn’t have to worry about another suicide attempt at the hands of authoritarian seekers.
There’s a reason for the Separation of Church and State.
It harms.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/t_equals.html