Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Cerridwen) wrote in message news:<8565Q0RF37605.704837963@anonymous.poster>...

<snip>

> I would like to give my viewpoint of Scn expansion (or lack thereof)
>
> With all the different stats I collect, with all the Scientology promo
> and mail I receive and by attending the Scientology events, as well has
> having the added bonus of getting feedback from Scientologists I know
> and stay in touch with, I have come to some conclusions.
> Now it should be noted that I know that the C of S
> lies through their teeth at these events and in these mags and I am
> ever mindful of that when I make my evaluation of the stats
>
>
> US/Canada Expansion.
>
> Even with both AOLA and Flag's 2002 completion stats WAY up from the
> previous year, I do not believe Scn is expanding in the US and
> Canada.
>
>
> As stated before, there was a tremendous push to get Clears and OT's
> back onto the bridge and through the OT levels, but these reflect
> Scientologists already on line. It does not reflect NEW
> Scientologists. And my guess is that the C of S is burying those
> numbers in a very deep place because they suck beyond compare.

I'm very sure that this is true. And this has been a situation for quite a long time.

Management has, for a very long time, tried to crack the problem of getting new people in the orgs. Supposedly, there have been quite a number of intro books sold, such as Dianetics, or a New Slant on Life, or Evolution of a Science. (Though, with the way Scientology screws with booksales, it's hard to know whether anyone new is actually buying these books or it's just Scientologists helping with the stat push.)

However, nothing they have tried has worked in terms of getting these booksales to translate into new service starts. And, believe me, they have been trying for years.

They have tried tickets to intro seminars inserted in the books. They have tried Book One videos to get people to learn about Dianetics.

They have tried infomercials.

They have spent millions renovating the orgs to help with Scientology's "image." They have pushed to make the staff "more upstat looking." They have redesigned and revamped the design of every book and tape, then done it again and again.

They have also tried some things which one could say have actually backfired. One was the movie "Battlefield Earth;" the idea was that this would become a box office hit and drive thousands of new public into the orgs. Another was the film "Orientation," which is an intro film about Scientology shown in the orgs. Neither one has exactly gotten the desired product.

The reality is that they way most new people get into Scientology is that they are gotten in by an individual - an existing Scientologist gets them into an org or mission, encourages them to start a service, kind of "mentors" them until they are fully in on their own. If you ask most existing Scientologists how they got in, I can bet that ninety or more percent of them will tell you they were gotten in by someone else.

Field auditors were a good source of this in the early days also. A field auditor would get someone and give them some auditing. He would then get that person onto an org service and become their FSM. This was the way the FSM structure was supposed to work; what it's original purpose was.

What is killing getting new people into Scientology is an inactive, "ARC broken" field. My guess is that existing Scientologists, even if they love Scientology, evn if they are still more or less on service lines themselves, don't WANT to bring new people into the oppressive regime that now exists. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of public don't even want to bring their own kids into the orgs because they are afraid they will be recruited by the Sea Org.

It's true that years ago, in spite of their problems, the orgs were friendler, happier, more relaxed places. Until and unless they become friendly, happy places again, I don't think you'll see too many new people starting. No matter how many millions the church spends on PR and marketing.

Go Back