A Special Correspondent sent this to me and it is an interesting study for a couple of reasons.
First — you can see the contempt LRH had for The Auditor being “damagingly commercial” and “putting emphasis on speed through courses.”
How do you think he would view the current scene in scientology?
The statements made in this Auditor are positively pathetic compared to what is said today about the “speed up the Bridge” and with GAT II ESPECIALLY focused on the “speed of training.” But even worse, commercialism pervades EVERYTHING in scientology these days — it is ALL about the money.
Below this issue is a full copy of Auditor 35 so you can see what it was that got him so pissed off.
But there are some other fascinating things in this issue which I noted below. And something that even surprised me.
Featured prominently on the front page — Otto Roos. Soon to become an internationally reviled SP. Along with virtually every other name you see on this front page. Ray Kemp. Allan Walter. Baron Berez. I am sure there are others. This is a theme that runs throughout this magazine. Just how many people who were the “leading lights” of scientology fell into disfavor and became “overnight suppressives.” This is NOT a new phenomena. It has been going on since the days of Dr. Winter and Don Purcell.
Here we go again — the stars who became “SP’s” are legion on this page too.
I wonder what percentage of these people still consider themselves Scientologists? Probably a tiny percentage.
This page is where it really gets interesting. The bombshell drops in the section entitled “Racket Exposed”, oddly I have never seen this before and I do not recall it ever surfacing in court cases either. I have seen the Fair Game policy raised MANY times and various ethics orders that refer to Fair Game, but I have never seen this before where it says:
“Any Sea Org Member contacting them is to use Auditing Process R2-45” and
“If they ever come to a Qual Division they are to be run on reverse processes” and
“find any and all crimes in their pasts and have them brought to court and prison.”
These commands from LRH are NOT “tongue-in-cheek” or “jokes.” They accompany other statements that are clearly not intended to be anything other than “fact.”
For any who still hold to the notion that the abuses within the church of scientology all emanate from “others” and that “if LRH knew he would not sanction it”, time to wake up and smell the coffee. It’s not all rainbows and butterflies.
This is reality. The practice may have been canceled due to bad public relations (and I am sure this generated some bad public relations) but the fact remains these statements were published in the international magazine of scientology for EVERY scientologist to read. Remember the old motto “If it isn’t in The Auditor, it didn’t happen.” Well, it IS in The Auditor and it DID happen. And the excuse that the meaning of Fair Game was “misinterpreted” and it ONLY meant that people were not permitted recourse to scientology justice is as big a lie as Hubbard ever told.
Again, featured prominently is “Clear 1” John McMaster, on a world tour. He would soon become an “SP” — though he was personally supervised and CSed through the Clearing Course by LRH? How is this possible?
Gotta laugh at this page. Neville Potter is still around. He was the spy for Miscavige who was with Mary Sue after she was released from prison and until she died. Today he is the “comm line” to Arthur, Suzette and Roanne — performing the same function.
Showgirl Nikki Freedman would go on to become CSG Assistant — Mary Sue’s right hand and much feared. She married Rick Merwin and left the Sea Org, though I don’t remember when.
William Burroughs being promoted as a “big catch.” That did not last long either.
Again, the page is FULL of “SP’s”? How is this possible? It is WAY more than 2 1/2%. And these people were not all “declared by the Miscavige regime.”
I believe there are some more early issues that may be available.
The provide valuable and interesting insight into the history of scientology and some perspective on the current scene.
UPDATE:
Some have asked about the “Racket Exposed” and as usual, a Special Correspondent sent in the original Ethics Order it was reprinted from.
Reverse processes? What courses covered that? Were those issues in the tech volumes?
GorillaVee – Research anything you can about Black Dianetics or Black Scientology.
Here are some links that might be helpful:
http://watchfulnavigator.wordpress.com/tag/reverse-scientology/
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/reverse-processing-from-cultists.htm
“Anyone can assume as many viewpoints as they wish. You can assume one viewpoint and look at things from a completely different perspective and then another and another if you so choose. I can certainly look at things from different views, compare them and ask myself questions.” – Mike Rinder.
The Universe is our playground.
+1 Dodo
There are a lot of points of view one could assume. I am wondering how LRH felt about his own struggles. I see him as a human man. In many of the events he’s criticized most for, I see an immature man, a man struggling to support a family, a frustrated man. I see someone with some anger issues, someone with middle age insecurities and a midlife crisis or two. I see someone recovering from major health issues and someone with poor health over a long period of time. I see his exasperation and disappointment in his losses. He rollercoastered, got overrestimulated and dramatized. He also wrote the axioms, the laws of listing and nulling and the data series. He was an extraordinary human man.
+1
He was a human man, fraught with the basic insecurities that we all have. But being the Founder and Chief Architect of a philosophy, he’s not supposed to have any of these. Talk about a hidden standard.
Perhaps LRH’s greatest ability was in finding a way out and teaching it to others. Maybe he simply never took the time to properly take care of himself. Would you curse the woman who discovers a cure for cancer, and ignore her findings, simply because she finally succumbs to it herself?
Maybe it’s more of a double-standard we’re looking at here. Maybe he never fully ran those OT levels on himself. Maybe he never took the time to have an auditor get in his L11 or L12.
Saying LRH was simply a trickster, a con, is beyond words. No one, spends a lifetime weaving a tale as deep and wide and tall as LRH was supposed to have done — just for money. If he was that smart and that clever, he would have found an easier and far safer method of “duping” all of us.
Odd
“Talk about a hidden standard.” Right on!
Odd Thomas, um there are no OT levels (auditing levels that make one OT). THUS, he didn’t find “a way out”. THAT is objective truth. So, your argument isn’t then about much a its based on proven false data…
Old School – Your assertion that there are no OT levels or that no one has acquired improved OT abilities from using L. Ron Hubbard’s Scientology are as provable as Christians saying that God provides all things. It’s a personal reality.
If you didn’t get those gains, well, that is unfortunate and disappointing, I’m sure. But the world isn’t based on your own personal petrie dish of experiences and observations. You may fault Ron for “not doing real research” but aren’t you doing the same, yourself?
You can speak for you but, please, don’t speak for the others.
For the sake of a little levity: “It is absurd to divide people into good and bad. People are either charming or tedious.” ~ Oscar Wilde
Mike, I want to thank you for being such a good blog moderator. You have had more patience with some people than I would have. You grant beingness while shining the light on truth. And you have the steel hand inside the velvet glove as you guide the threads and get rid of distractions and counter-productive or invalidative things. I liked your comments where you say that you’re cutting off arguments in which each person tries to convert the other and you sum up your comment to the person by saying that at least so and so was brave enough to comment and to use his real full name, and the person attacking him was not willing to use his name and was thus hiding behind a pen name. That is so true. Thank you for providing this forum for us all.
🙂 Well stated.
This prompted a lot of great discussion and if I wanted to crack a joke, I would say this auditor magazine proves that the only thing Scientology does produce with great consistency, perfect reliability and 100 % accuracy is: SPs.
LRH said a lot of things, some are truth and some are just plain lies. But “Intention is cause” and seniority of thought was one of the truer things he said. (As many others said it before him)
While we look at the different manifestations and LRH’s life and his creations they are indeed interesting as hell. They invite judgment, praise and condemnation at the same time. But one important question is ” What was the intention that created these manifestations?”
A lot of the debate is dedicated to the topic if LRH was good or bad, that he was a great deceiver and great inventor at the same time. All that at least for me falls apart and gets somewhat irrelevant if I try to look at the true cause of these manifestations – the intention behind them.
His creations are stated in his works, his behavior is documented by his history – the manifestations of his intentions moderated by culture, his individuality and his case. They can only be deducted from the manifestations. Part of deception is to misstate ones intentions, as once intentions are known they are most vulnerable to be countered.
LRH dealt in power- Power to ‘influence the outcome’, power to control peoples thoughts and actions.
When I first came to the “Mecca of technical perfection” the desire to control and have power in that place was so thick in the air that it literally caused me nausea. As any system Scientology was created with a carrot and a stick serving the intention of managing power and control. And as people nibbled at the carrot and they did not fall in line to ‘obey the will’ the stick had to come out. The design flaw was that the carrot would lead to people to discover their own will and consider it more worthy than the creator’s will. Thus Scientology became the SP factory for those who ‘suffered’ the side effects of the carrot. LRH had enough charisma and creativity that he could reserve the stick for the few. David Miscavige in his attempt to serve the original intention has only the stick at his disposal, that is why he relies on it so much more heavily than LRH to the extend to almost use it exclusively. But he too deals in power and he still relies on a partial set of tools LRH had provided.
Sometimes I ask myself if LRH’s true genius was to put a microsystem in place and play it out in a single lifetime allowing people to observe and learn how power dealer operate, how unbelievable deception is possible and to what depth people can be deceived and betrayed. If people observe and learn the lesson played out in front of them and apply it to the macrocosm of our world, it may lead indeed to more freedom.
Wow. Very meaty comment, Gerhard
This made my jaw actually fall on the floor:
“Sometimes I ask myself if LRH’s true genius was to put a microsystem in place and play it out in a single lifetime allowing people to observe and learn how power dealer operate, how unbelievable deception is possible and to what depth people can be deceived and betrayed. If people observe and learn the lesson played out in front of them and apply it to the macrocosm of our world, it may lead indeed to more freedom.”
Ever since the early 50’s, whenever LRH came out with a new process, Scientologists would eagerly grab it up and say to themselves “THIS IS THE PROCESS THAT I WILL FINALLY GO CLEAR ON!”
It didn’t matter what he put out, Scientologists were so IN SESSION, that they always saw their own route to spiritual freedom in whatever LRH did. They set LRH up as the guy that was going to take them all the way, and no matter what he did, they believed he did it for their own benefit – so that they could Go Free.
There’s something wrong with that thinking, though.
Sometimes LRH was simply lying and ripping people off for his own gain. And STILL some Scientologists look at it and think he was just trying to teach us a way to go free.
No.
A truly genuine spiritual teacher does not spend any time trying to rip off his followers. Not one second. He understands that they are extremely vulnerable students to him. A genuine spiritual teacher can be trusted NOT to lie to anybody, or to try to rip them off.
The Dalai Lama says that if the Chinese had not run him from his home, burn all the Buddhist monasteries, kill all those monks, and try to wipe Tibet completely off the map, then he would not have had the chance to practice compassion and forgiveness to his enemies, and he feels he has benefited spiritually from the Chinese invasion of his country.
If you mean that you can look at LRH and all the depraved things that he did to Scientologists and go free from that, then from a Dalai Lama kind of perspective, maybe I can see the point you are trying to make.
Otherwise, no.
Ripping people off and lying to them, enslaving them in billion year indentured servitude contracts, throwing them overboard, putting children in chain lockers, ordering fair game and murder on people, is NOT the work of a genuine spiritual leader. Those acts are as spiritually freeing as the Chinese rape of Tibet.
Alanzo
Hey, maybe LRH set out to separate “the wheat from the chaff”. “What ever doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”, that’s a cruel philosophy, right?
And didn’t Jesus reportedly say, “I bring not peace, but a sword”?
Personally, I believe one has to make up his own mind and follow his own path, “spiritual teachers” be damned….
Not a one of them has ALL the answers….. though some have been kinder than others. 🙂
Correct Alanzo. LRH was a genius who was also a criminal who intentionally lied to people about what he could help them accomplish spiritually. He lied to them to obtain more money and power over individuals. At this point, anyone who cannot see that by looking at objective evidence isn’t ever going to understand. Why? People such as that will fall for any scam that comes along if packaged correctly. P.T. Barnum said it best. I will continue to expose his criminality so tht others don’t get taken in newly. Anyone who makes excuses for his criminal actions are themselves of a criminal mind set.
Well, wasn’t Jesus a criminal? Why else would they have sentence him to have been nailed up like that? Ipso facto…
after reading some of these comments, i can only shake my head.
if LRH himself told some of these people that it’s all a scam, still they wouldn’t believe even him.
News Flash: LRH NEVER made a discovery period…….never mind great discoveries.
and that is not a matter of opinion.
the wog world is not too stupid to understand. if there were any discoveries, great or otherwise they would be acknowledged regardless.
roy used isaac newton as an example. that same example shows that regardless of what “flaws” a man has, if his discoveries hold water then they are accepted.
I would certainly and respectfully disagree about LRH not making any great discoveries. While others like Freud were earlier to note the affect of earlier traumatic and hidden incidents’ affects, LRH developed a technique of having a person return to the incidents and run through them multiple times as necessary to reduce charge, AND without evaluation from the therapist. In SOS, he not only codified an emotional tone scale for identification, but developed processes to raise a person’s emotional tone. A VERY new development in the field of any mental/spiritual therapy was his insistence that each process be run to an end phenomena of the person doing very well on the process. Almost all of his processes, post DMSMH were new things, processes designed to expand a being’s sense of and command of space, to increase one’s recognition of other terminals, etc etc etc. Many hundreds of these processes, very workable and in fact, not even needing the person to have ever even heard of LRH or Scientology or them to have positive results. Of course, Ron’s directions that the OTHER flows are also extremely important and need to be addressed as well as flow one, was a new discovery. I just scratched the surface here. LRH left a boatload of great stuff behind for people to use. Yes, it is a shame, he was so fucked up himself so much of the time in many areas, but ….. to me, it does not invalidate his work, which while obviously not perfect, is still enormously valuable I think. We Americans almost all revere the Founding Father, who wrote the greatest words about liberty and equality in the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, though he himself denied these things to the hundreds of human beings he owned and kept in slavery. Similarly, for the “father of the Constitution”, James Madison. Both men were also President of the United States for 8 years each. Such is life.
+1
LRH made no discoveries?
just the type of snide remark I would expect a from non-Scientologist who could not even begin to grasp the Axioms of Scientology.
As far as I know, there is another “RACKET EXPOSED” with different persons on whom R2-45 should be performed. It’s in The Auditor Nr. 37 I have not seen the original, only a internet copy.
Hi Mike
I would like to thank you for publishing this article mate.
LRH hit the nail on the head. Today I think he would simply declare the Dwarf in an instant.
It was nice to see a genuine comment from him in print.
That was what I liked about him NO pissing about!
Label them and move on, it was also cost effective.
How much money has the Dwarf wasted surveilling you?
What for exactly I ask?
again
thanks
I read all the above comments this morning. Very interesting and enlightening. So much information about LRH. I am not a vindictive person and I find it very foreign to my very nature to be vindictive, so it’s hard to reconcile this attitude in LRH. I think maybe it’s an attitude he adopted when he attempted to succeed in the military but failed and then brought so much of his military life into Scientology.
Robert, I agree it is hard to confront and reconcile. There are many different viewpoints concerning LRH’s characer, mental health, “human flaws”, etc.
To me for several years the question has been, How much of what he did over the years was done CONSCIOUSLY? I think – A Lot.
LRH had several, I think 3-4, major goals in life, which he expressed at various times, such as (not necessarily in priority order), 1. “smash my name into history”, 2. “Man needed a hand” (help) 3. Make a lot of money, both for himself and his posterity(family and children).
His chosen vehicle(s) were the development, codification and dissemination of scientology auditing tech, and the establishment of an “orthodox” or “catholic” CoS. These might be titled #4 and #5.
But, there is more.
Today it is fashionable to equate “Scientology” and “the CoS” and “the Koolade drinkers” in the field. To me, this seems like a very narrow view, because it seems to me “scientology” actually includes all the Freezone, the Independents, the Ron’s Orgs at the very least, including the many individuals who have integrated some degree of the ideas and practices into their lives.
So my question is, To what extent was LRH aware of the possible consequences of his actions and policies in establishing the CoS in the way he went about it?
I think, He was much aware. For one thing, he had the examples of the histories of other churches. Thus I think he knew his draconian policies would drive many trained and processed people out of the “orthodox church”. I think he foresaw the likelihood of the growth of a “freezone”. It is quite plausible to me that he approved of CBR’s attempts to create a “free zone”, and then the Ron’s Orgs.
Why? Because all that helped insure the broader dissemination of the basic tech.
Historical parallels abound, from the struggles of early Christianity and the divergence into “Gnostic” and “Orthodox and Catholic” establishments, with the subsequent persecution of “gnostic heretics”, to the same kind of splits in Islam, with the mosques sanctioned by and allied with the secular rulers on the one hand, and the Gnostic, and often persecuted, “Sufis” on the other.
Scientology has recapitulated these histories in a mere 60 years because of the speed of modern communications, which took hundreds of years in the cases of Christianity and Islam.
The view that LRH basically “knew what he was doing” even explains his choice of DM as a leading player, the ‘mission massacre’, the departure of CBR, and LRH’s own decline and eventual sordid death, which to me seems like the inevitable result of the huge number of overts LRH had to have known the Church established under his name Church would commit, had already committed, on countless numbers of people. Because of LRH’s pursuit of those goals of his, already mentioned. His manner of death would be consistent with his awareness of the consequences of his own actions, and by his own adherence to the Code of Honor.
LRH was part of a remarkable generation of men – Asimov, Heinlein, van Vogt, John W. Campbell Jr, Fritz Leiber, E.E. “doc” Smith of Lensmen and Galactic Patrol fame and many many others. These were very aware people who envisioned history in broad strokes. LRH was right in there with them. And listening to his lectures, I find it hard to believe he was not very aware of the probable historical consequences of his own actions. Not the exact details, but the broader outlines of how it would all play out, for sure. I think he meant for the scientology genie to be let out of the bottle, and in that I think he succeeded. Partly by knowingly creating a new GPM on top of some older ones, and letting it loose on the world. At the same time as he created the solution to it.
This planet is a planet of out-ethics.
Economics are arranged to have a few wealthy and many under an economic whip, a percentage of them starving.
Economics is degrading into a casino. A fibre to evade producing something which is needed and wanted is widespread.
Nature is being exploited and destroyed, mostly for petsonal profit reasons.
Governments “govern” by streams of lies they are calling “news” or “information.
Wars of various kind are waged and executed. Countries devastated, areas poisened, men, woman, children killed, tortured, maimed. The most vicious kinds of weapons and methods of control are invented. Populations exist who permit their governments to conduct in this way.
The life time of younger generations is to a large degree sucked up in playing electronic games instead of engaging in real life communication involving the confront of another person.
Education is testing new lows.
CofS is degraded into a “vulture culture” (Thanks for this term, Mike,), perverting tech and damaging people’s lifes.
This is out-ethics.
It wasn’t different in the past. Just this year it is only 50 years since blacks were permitted to vote in the US. I think it is cruel out-ethics to catch persons from another continent, kidnap them and have them working as slaves. This has been going on for centuries, And how about the members of a society who accepted or tolerated that this went on?
How about the Indians? Has the land been aquired by fair exchange? Have you ever heard of a public discussion about giving it back to them?
This was and is a planet of out-ethics.
As I perceive of LRH he was able to extrovert his view enough to be emotional about that. Many people are far away from being emotional about the above.
In this scene, to bring about something good and to help people in a somewhat larger scale is bound to produce friction.
Also, trying to help can involve you in matters of hostility, because people have been mean to your pc. And because you feel affinity for one you may evaluate the other side as being bad. Or receiving counter-efforts and stops can elicit one to reduce one’s tolerance level of opposition.
(I remember one situation, whereas I am normally quite calm and collected this time I wasn’t. When a certain person who was supposed to build a sauna for the org, would only present stops and difficulties for days and weeks, I came to point of reduced tolerance when he told me that he couldn’t drill a hole because it might interrupt some session anf told him to “just drill the dammed hole and get his work done.” – Of course, then, it did interrupt some session, I remember that even I could get into such a state of emotion.)
When viewing errors, overts, crimes, out-points of LRH a view of the broader outlines has to be included. And also the question “What is my personal answer to these broad issues listed above?”
(The Data-Series helps.) If one has no answer one should at least understand that one has probably some part of the scene missing.
I understand LRH as a person who has tried to answer at least some of these issues, and I think that he had found workable answers. Just for having tried it I include him to the people I feel affinity for. That he developed applicable methods is an extra bonus.
I have taken many comments that were extreme in LRH tapes and writings as very dry sarcastic, dark humor and never took the R2-45 seriously. Don’t know maybe I’m being blind or silly.
Anyway, funny Robert A. you should bring up the Military life, I often think about the period of time that LRH went through and I think he was of the thought that “all is fair in love and war” (as do I) so therefore, any enemy needs to be destroyed, no questions asked, no-sympathy. And obviously he felt he was fighting a “war” and many “enemies” to keep Scientology alive.
Hell, let’s just say the man was brilliant but fighting off many demons at the same time. There sure are hundreds like him throughout history.
The Ethics Order is all pretty humdrum until the chilling line “they are to be run on reverse processes”. So, (presumably before an SO member performed R2-45 on them!) they were to be subject to a fate WORSE than death. Reverse processes apparently can easily put people into mental institutions and render them spiritual basket cases. That’s pretty heavy stuff. I suppose on the flip side you could say at least LRH was OVERT about running black Dianetics / reverse Scientology on people.
In any case it’s a valuable addition to the overall picture of the subject and its history and I thank you for making it available.
Martin — thanks for noting this. I was going to respond to some comments about whether the R2-45 reference was a joke by noting that to a scientologist, running someone on reverse processes is worse than body death (though you can’t be put in prison for it). And nobody seems to have a question about whether he was serious about this.
If the R2-45 reference is a “joke” or not to be taken literally, then why include it in such a public issue?
Because running someone on reverse processes and driving them nuts even more than they already are “works and helps people”. Thank you for opening this can of worms, Mike.
It’s worth it. Good to see people question and discuss these things. Happy spring to all.
Remember people, LRH committed this insane felony (In the US at least it is a felony to order employees to murder people) AFTER he was “clear” (no more reactive mind) AND, OT 3 (handled his insanity on the 3rd dynamic).
Ergo, auditing does NOT accomplish any of the large results LRH claimed it did. Watching the few remaining people continue to explain away his criminality and insanity by using the moral equivalence logical fallacy is a fascinating study in human irrationality.
No no no Old School.
Because LRH did bad things, it doesn’t follow that auditing does not accomplish any of the large results LRH claimed it did. These are different issues. Many people have had those large results; and many of those have very likely done bad things after those large results.
Hi Morris –
This is actually what Old School wrote:
“Remember people, LRH committed this insane felony (In the US at least it is a felony to order employees to murder people) AFTER he was “clear” (no more reactive mind) AND, OT 3 (handled his insanity on the 3rd dynamic).”
So he is saying that the behavior that LRH displayed in this order to use “R2-45” on people and to run “reverse processes” on them demonstrates that auditing did not work on LRH.
He was OT 3 (at least) and the Founder of the Class 8 course when he behaved in this irrational and, some say, criminal way.
Make sure you duplicate and understand the criticism of LRH first so that your response to it can be more effective.
Alanzo
Morris, I am afraid that your lack of English language comprehension (as evidenced by your irrelevant reply to me) makes it impossible to have a conversation with you about logic on a board, in writing. It would simply take too long to get you to understand basic points being made. I made specific points about a person who supposedly (per his own written works) handled the aberrations that would cause/allow him to commit the crimes he committed. Until you can demonstrate a minimal ability to apply the subject of logic, I won’t be directly addressing you again. Good luck and I hope you take this post as an opportunity to seek out real knowledge that LRH discouraged his followers to learn. Namely, LOGIC.
Yes, this will be the last comment as it is just degenerating into a silly argument and personal attacks.
Neither of you will agree with the view of the other and I think that is a given. By definition, when there is faith involved logic takes a back seat. But on the other hand, I do not believe there is anything wrong with faith and that it can produce miracles that defy logic.
That being said, of course your logic is sound. But it cannot persuade someone who has had personal, subjective gains that they didn’t happen.
Be thankful that Morris at least has the confront to be here communicating, and doing so with his real name. You gotta grant him some respect for that.
Mike wrote:
That being said, of course your logic is sound. But it cannot persuade someone who has had personal, subjective gains that they didn’t happen.
This is what is so fascinating. If you point out that Scientology did not work in some instance, many Scientologists feel that you are saying that it did not work for them.
And that’s not what’s being said.
Each individual had their own experience in Scientology. The people who experienced the good things do not cancel out the people who experienced the bad things.
They are not related.
If OT3 and running the Class 8 course did not make LRH a sane being, that says nothing about whether it made someone else a sane being.
Just because Scientology did not work on LRH does not mean it did not work on any body else.
Alanzo
Beware(or Congratulations?) Al, you are starting to think a bit like Valkov….. 🙂
“(In the US at least it is a felony to order employees to murder people) ”
Unless of course you are Law Enforcement or the Armed Forces, then you may order to “shoot to kill”.
It is of course a HUGE outpoint that so many highly trained and audited Scientologists would be declared “suppressive” after DECADES in the church. After all, the goal of training and processing is to get a person to be their most rational and ethical. So why don’t on lines Scientologists question this? I think that most Scientologists think that the vast majority of people are completely fucked up and that includes their fellow Scientologists. They are VERY quick to accept the most vicious rumors about anyone and seem almost gleeful and gratified that folks they are know are being declared (and that THEY are not). When I was declared. only two people contacted me before disconnecting, one was a long time SO member and friend that asked me what happened and then cut the comm line in almost moments as I tried to type out a response. The other was someone I had known for 32 years, recruited and had been my junior for years, whom I had mentored and who had told me how much she admired me ….. she just wrote “and so I must disconnect’… not even ONE question as to what happened.
Scientology auditing works wonderfully well in my experience and there are many many benefits from training also. But I am convinced now that beings still remain and become even more robotic and mind controlled when they belong to a fundamentalist religious group which is backed up by heavy force flows and threats of loss of family, jobs and friends. Yes, people can have what they consider huge wins and become solid emotionally as beings over time anyway as they give up their OWN right to be cause over their personal observation and ARC on every dynamic.
I think LRH really became bitter towards humanity as he also started to believe that people are just WAY more fucked up than he had thought, and that he need to “get tough” for real if he had any hope of accomplishing his mission. This in the mid 60s – OTIII was one explanation for their condition and continual overts was another, thus the long line of auditing actions for over 10 years ALL focusing on overts. The mid 60s also saw the long lists of crimes and high crimes drawn up, the lower conditions and the kangaroo court Scientology “ethics” and “justice” system. All as LRH “cognited” how truly bad off people were. Thus his List One RS witch hunt. And so Scientologists have come to believe that even people they may have personally loved and admired for decades, even gotten auditing by, are just a hair trigger away from falling to the devil’s temptations and going evil. I don’t think they give these declares a second thought. I think they are probably surprised when there are NOT declares. Does this actually make any sense? Of course not. BUT DID THE LIST ONE WITCH HUNT MAKE ANY SENSE? DID EVEN ONE PERSON STAND UP AND SAY NO? And some people wonder how the Nazis got away with it for so long? Really?
Joe –
I read an extremely profound book on the subject of Moral Psychology which explains the human behavior you describe here, Joe.
“The other was someone I had known for 32 years, recruited and had been my junior for years, whom I had mentored and who had told me how much she admired me ….. she just wrote “and so I must disconnect’… not even ONE question as to what happened.”
It’s called “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Religion” by Jonathan Haidt.
It explains human beings from a moral/group perspective better than anything I have ever read.
You might like it.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Righteous-Mind-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777
Alanzo
Alanzo, thanks for the recommendation. I’ll check it out.
It is extremely difficult to turn the other cheek. This is what holiness is really all about. It is not about never doing anything wrong. It is about being able to continue reaching in spite of every invitation to with draw. And it is a hell of a lot to ask of someone. It is not owed, it can not be enforced. To be forgiving is a holy matter. It is like digging yourself out of a grave after you have been buried alive. It is about remaining at cause over your identity even though you want to fall back on some other identity that is capable of punishment. In this way you can become degraded. To forgive/ not forgive is a GPM. And people that violate you can push you into this GPM. Help / Harm. It can extremely difficult.
Staff fall deeply into “help” as an almost fanatical sacrificial elemental purpose. When it is a button pushed or an identity re stimulated. It is very easy then for them to flip into a “harm” flip side of this where they gobble everything up around them while frantically trying to “save”. One could probably list out half a hundred GPM’s a staff member or Scientologist can be pushed into. And if you have not done the L’s and have no understanding of the sensation and mechanics of being pushed into a GPM, you are vulnerable.
I mean, you can , if you can just understand the mechanics, rise above it.
Scientology groups made Gods and then turned them into demons. Same old fucking shit. GPM’s.
“Must be a God, can’t be a God” is a nice meaty GPM. “Hubbard is God/ Hubbard is Satan” has got a lot of thetans wrapped around a pole.
“Walk the middle path” was the first piece of brilliant truth to hit this section of the universe.
Amazing comment, Joe! Several great points you make.
To comment on only one of them, I too have often thought that, after trying many, many things, he finally decided that he had to “get tough” if he or we were going to get anywhere on planet Earth.
But then I wonder, too, if this phase would have passed if he had been able to stay around longer. Sure seems like the “getting tough” scenario didn’t work! (Pretty astute observation, eh? Haha.)
As Scientology progresses from here (which I think has a good chance of happening in the independent field), I don’t think the “get tough” scenario will survive along with it. I remember that LRH once said something like “the only thing you really have to work with is the person’s own willingness”. Getting tough does not lead in the direction of “more willingness”.
“Again, featured prominently is “Clear 1″ John McMaster, on a world tour. He would soon become an “SP” — though he was personally supervised and CSed through the Clearing Course by LRH? How is this possible?”
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/mcmaster.htm
Since years I ask myself questions like:
Did I serve the wrong master?
Did He prevent the arrival of the real master?
Did He go crazy or had He been crazy from the beginning?
Why the subject of Scientology had been one point of discussion in the Between Life? (and considered something to be destroyed)
Did I serve the slave masters or the opposite side? (the point here is not, that it works but the effect it created for all of us)
For me those questions are difficult to answer. It is not a question if Scientology can do good things or if Scientology is a scam. It is more a question regarding directions and distractions.
What would have been possible without His arrival.
Basically that are the “OT questions”.
No OT I ever met or that claimed to have made it to OT did address those questions for himself (as far as I could observe his universe). [replace OT with wise man for other schools of wisdom or claimed wisdom if you wish]
Are we the lost souls no one intends to free or is there a way out? But whom to trust.
In case someone does not want to dig into that confusion, it is always a save haven to believe in big bang, evolution and we are only a brain.
It is a two terminal universe. The only way you can ask “yourself” questions, is if there are actually at least two of you. The only way people can “have conversations with themselves” is if there are actually more than one of them there. This simple and obvious datum might be enough to assure a person that there may be something to learn about invisible influences and assorted identities.
I think you are missing something. Anyone can assume as many viewpoints as they wish. You can assume one viewpoint and look at things from a completely different perspective and then another and another if you so choose. I can certainly look at things from different views, compare them and ask myself questions. And there aren’t two of me. Thank God.
‘Believing’ that we are only a brain and that there is no reason for humans other than the Big Bang and evolution is not a ‘safe haven’.
It means the universe is a cold, indifferent place and that death is final. Yes, it is scary at times. Lie on your back outside at night and contemplate how big this stuff is – and consider that a large portion of the stars you’re looking at are long extinct, these measly photons the only clue of their billion years of existence – and you’ll feel utterly small and insignificant.
I have accepted this without much trauma, probably because fascination is stronger than fear in me. Yes, I’m ‘just a brain’ – if that brain is damaged, I won’t be the same person. Just ask the family of any victim of major cranial trauma. Humans are fragile and ephemereal. But that fragility also makes them beautiful and precious. There’s no outside purpose to human life. But that also means they’re free to dream up their own purpose, and it can be as big as they wish.
I know that not everybody can face this without extreme anxiety. Thus the need for religion/spirituality, for something bigger that makes sense to a human mind. But like all security blankets, it comes at the cost of part of your freedom.
Interesting Kemist. You have just made a statement of BELIEF that is beyond attempts at falsification and is thus, not scientific.
It is as much a belief and a non-scientific position as those who strongly assert the existence of the human soul… 😉
OldSchool says:
Interesting Kemist. You have just made a statement of BELIEF that is beyond attempts at falsification and is thus, not scientific.
It is as much a belief and a non-scientific position as those who strongly assert the existence of the human soul… 😉
HA!!
AWESOME POINT!
And one which too many people never get.
No human being knows what happens after death. Even Kemist.
Way to go, OS!
Love to see actual logic being employed in matters of human mortality.
It’s so rare, is it not?
Alanzo
Really ?
Examine it very carefully. It is what is called the null hypothesis : There is nothing beyond death.
It is actually quite falsifiable, like any hypothesis.
All it takes is one demonstrated instance of someone who does anything, at all, after their death. Reincarnation, ghost, ect, you name it. Something that could not be explained by anything else. I’ve seen nothing of that nature that was not an obvious parlor trick, but it does not mean it does not exist.
I will also add that I believe nothing with an absolute degree of certainty.
It is a mistake however to say that being uncertain about something means that you believe there is a 50/50 chance that something is true or false.
Uncertainty, as opposed to the certainty of faith, can be nuanced. Some things are more likely to be true than others. For instance, I’m way more certain of the sun rising tomorrow than of the existence of souls.
I’m simply inclined to believe that religions, souls and gods are all man made ideas. Their construction has to do with the needs and fears of human minds and not with how the universe that produced them works. I think getting rid of those ideas, and of the implied duality of the human mind, is what will allow us to really understand how our minds work, no matter how uncomfortable that makes us about our mortality. I’m more interested in truth than comforting ideas.
Yes, REALLY Kemist. Your statement was unscientific and one of belief. As written. ANYONE who has University level degrees in the physical sciences knows that to be fact.
Kemist wrote:
I’m simply inclined to believe that religions, souls and gods are all man made ideas. Their construction has to do with the needs and fears of human minds and not with how the universe that produced them works. I think getting rid of those ideas, and of the implied duality of the human mind, is what will allow us to really understand how our minds work, no matter how uncomfortable that makes us about our mortality. I’m more interested in truth than comforting ideas.
As your belief about what happens after death, this is a well constructed worldview.
But it is based on the same quality of evidence as a voodoo witch doctor’s, or a even a Scientologist’s. With the superiority and false certainty as a match, as well.
Welcome to the human race, Kemist, where one mortal knows what happens to them after they die just as much as any other.
Alanzo
OS, I happen to have a degree in the physical sciences (actually, two. I’m a curious, easily bored kind of person living in a place where degrees are fortunately affordable). I also have experience publishing my work in those two fields.
I think I have offered a way my null hypothesis could be falsified, which makes it a legit hypothesis.
Except perhaps in the case of an afterlife which would take place in a completely immaterial / alternate plane with no possibility of contact with the world of the living. Or reincarnation with an absolute impossibility of remembering anything from a previous incarnation.Then it becomes, as you said, unfalsifiable.
But to be honest I don’t think that’s what physical, material minds imagine when they conceive of afterlives and souls – how could they ? Our entire life experience takes place in the material universe. Which is why all versions of heaven you can find in religious books are either filled with the pleasant but mundane (huge houses, virgins, banquets, reunions with great grandpa Eugene) or pretty much suck (you spend all eternity contemplating/loving god, really ? I’m bored already). Most religions propose miracles in one form or another, and those are definite interactions with the physical universe (with an alledged violation of its natural laws to boot). People who believe in deist religions are a minority, because in such belief systems, god(s) do… nothing. Litterally. To do anything noticeable, you have to interact with the material world. It is pretty much a waste of time to pray to the deist god of the non-overlapping magisteria fame.
The situation is a bit the same with impossible-to-remember previous incarnations. First, they are a bit boring and pointless. Second, a big part of what makes me, well, me, is my memories and experiences. The rest is the part of personality that is inherited from genetics, and that dies with my body. The point of reincarnation for most people who believe in it is the hope that they can carry memories and experiences from previous lives, however subtle they are – and that is squarely in the domain of the falsifiable. One demonstrated instance of memories you should not have, and you have falsified the null hypothesis.
Furthermore, a completely isolated immaterial plane, existing specially for humans – according to all the religions I know of, we humans are the only living things on earth who happen to have those soul/spirit/thetan things for some reason – as separate from the rest of the universe that spawned them also strikes me as unparcimonious. But YMMV on that point.
tl;dr version : I am not certain that there is nothing after death, but the possibility as I evaluate it is so remote, and the ideas proposed by humans about said afterlife so ill-fitting with the rest of our model of the universe, that I have resolved to live my life as if that was the only chance I’ve got at it.
I’m hoping I won’t screw it.
“No human being knows what happens after death.”
Now there’s an all-encompassing statement of belief if I ever read or heard one!
It’s about as meaningful as the statement that “Every human being knows what happens after death.”
Valkov wrote:
“No human being knows what happens after death.”
Now there’s an all-encompassing statement of belief if I ever read or heard one!
It’s about as meaningful as the statement that “Every human being knows what happens after death.”
Well, it has to do with that word “KNOWLEDGE” which is built into the word “SCIENTOLOGY” but which Scientology fails utterly to define. This is a major flaw for any subject that calls itself a philosophy, and which contains the teachings that Hubbard gave you on KNOWLEDGE.
If you only had Hubbard to tell you what knowledge was, you would have things like “What is true is what you have observed yourself. That is all.”
When you really engage in a study of knowledge, which you can not do in Scientology because it is not actually a study of knowledge at all, you realize that this “stable datum” from Scientology on knowledge is utterly false.
The real study of knowledge comes from the branch of philosophy known as epistemology, of which Hubbard was either totally ignorant, or he omitted its ideas in Scientology intentionally in order to create Scientologists who were ignorant of what knowledge was.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/
Alanzo
Well Al, I checked with Plato and some of his cronies including those at Stanford, and they agreed with me.
Kemist wrote:
tl;dr version : I am not certain that there is nothing after death, but the possibility as I evaluate it is so remote, and the ideas proposed by humans about said afterlife so ill-fitting with the rest of our model of the universe, that I have resolved to live my life as if that was the only chance I’ve got at it.
I’m hoping I won’t screw it.
Very well written, Kemist.
Yours is a belief about human mortality that is certainly worthy of respect: It is well fleshed out and clearly expressed.
However, the evidence for your materialistic view lies only in the material, and there is nothing measurable outside of the material. Therefore, you have no evidence for the existence or non-existence of any immaterial phenomena.
The question to ask which dismantles your worldview is “Do immaterial and immeasurable phenomena exist?”
If not, then you’ll need to provide the evidence that the immeasurable does not exist per the limits of science. Which is impossible for science to do as it is limited only to what is measurable.
So your belief system about human immortality is logically inconsistent: Science has limits, and you are attempting to use scientific (measurable) evidence for conclusions beyond the measurable.
If you are going to be logically consistent, all you can say is that any existence beyond death of the body is immeasurable. Therefore, science is incapable of determining an answer to life beyond death of the body.
Period.
But, being a human being, you need an answer. So you cobble together something based on your present scientific worldview that makes you feel consistent and whole, never noticing that your scientific worldview is not capable of answering the questions that you ask of it.
That’s okay, we all do that to a greater or lesser degree.
Scientists just do it a lot more than others who accept that things exist for which there is no measurable evidence.
Alanzo
I have a copy of the 1955 edition of COHA in which R2-45 is described as “an enormously effective process for exteriorisation but its use is frowned upon by this society at this time.” Interestingly enough the modern (2007) ‘Basics’ edition is identical!
But of special interest and maybe fitting in with the general theme of this post is that the frontispiece (if that’s the correct term) of the 1955 edition reads as follows:
“Go your ways: behond I send you forth as lambs among wolves.
Carry nether purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by
the way.
And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house.
And if the son of peace be there your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again.
And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
And in whatsoevr city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before your:
And heal the sick that are therin, and say unto them, The kingdom of God is come nign unto you.”
* * * * * *
“Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see:
For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them”
St Luke 10:3-9
10:23-24
In 1957 Reg Sharpe in London created off his own bat an “auditor’s association ” and invited the field auditors in London to come to a meeting at his new office premises (he’d sold his former premises to the org). LRH heard about the meeting and instructed HCO to “cancel the certificates of all who attended the meeting; declare them persona non grata and forbid them from entering the org.” A field auditor managed to contact him in Washington and handle the ARC break. The field auditors were within days ‘cleared’ but not Reg Sharpe. He remained persona non grata until some time in the sixties when he managed to get back into LRH’s good books; moved to East Grinstead and worked closely with LRH on a number of projects. But I understand he did not formally joifrom post.
A one time employee at Saint Hill (Joan de Veulle) once reported Ron had told her he kept Reg Sharpe close at hand so he could ‘keep an eye on him’ : see website of Scientolipedia: London 50’s.
n staff. He was the first person (together with his girlfriend Jenny Edmonds) to be formally declared in a Condition of Doubt by LRH. Apparently the first ever sea org mission to Saint Hill removed him
Very interesting, Sonja.
What other option did LRH have but to declare those people. What are we doing here on the internet but saying the current church of scientology is a dangerous suppressive group and if you know whats good for you then disconnect from it . Same solution !
Seriously?
I believe the Co$ is selling forged and altered upper level material in present time and that the Co$ is trying to cause insantiy and death . I have read on the internet about that happening with the original OT VIII course on the freewinds, about people whom done the course became ill and died and also about OT VIIs who have become ill and died some posters on the internet seem to think its because of altered upper level material , I have read about all this on the internet .
Well, I hate to break this to you, but not everything you find on the internet is true. It may be written, but unfortunately it doesnt make it true….
Er, are you saying a few critical blog posts is the same as declaring what amounts to a fatwa against your ennemies ?
I am absolutely not saying that,
I am not going to post here anymore because people will try to misunderstand what I am saying .
You would need to be a lawyer or barister or knowlegable in law to post on this blog . For FUCk sake
.
It comes with the territory of posting on a blog where views are generally allowed to be aired. There will invariably be someone who doesnt agree with you and tries to make it seem that you don’t know what you are talking about and they do. This is debating 101. It happens in life. It happens on blogs.
My only advice to you is that if you are too sensitive about what others say or think about you, it is probably not a good idea to tip your toes into blog water.
Mike , how about you putting a notice on this blog that anything you say here can and will be used against you . Becasue apparently thats the way it is . And the Co$ fucking poxy bastards will declare anyone who posts here .
ealadha, perhaps I misread your post.
To me it read as if you were saying that people disconnecting, avoiding and talking critically of the Co$ was the same as LRH declaring those people, and ordering the SO to ‘R2-45’ them, which was a bit surprising.
My apologies if that is not what you meant.
Virtually all the original authenticated upper Scientology materials have been available since 1985, long before the internet. The forgeries are quickly identified and discarded. I’ve never heard of anyone ‘buying’ these materials ever, it’s been distributed freely since 1996 on Usenet.
The full scope of the original OT VIII materials in HCOB and other forms have never been available outside the church, and only reconstructed issues exist from ex-Freewinds personnel. The CO$ had ‘substantially’ revised OT VIII at least twice, hence the confusions. The earliest 1980’s version had a lot of people blow SCN and not doing so well afterwards, some even got all sorts of physical conditions, incl. death; this however has nothing to do with the FZ/Indies. The latter versions delivered by the likes of Indie Class VIII Trey Lotz is the standard core version and no one has ever died from it.
Formost, how do you KNOW that what Trey is delivering (OT 8) is Standard if you have never seen the original LHR materials??????
Formost, I’ll give the low down. Although you can probably find this data elsewhere (maybe Marty’s). I had a friend who was once the Senior C/S Int (Commander RA) ahead of the OT 8 roll out. He got away with confronting DM and even threatening to bring in legal authorities. Now, you don’t see DM listing him as an SP, criminal, etc. even though he left the SO shortly after that. Part of why he left was over OT 8. How to put this… LRH never did OT 8, never came up with a workable OT 8. What is being delivered on the ship is crap. Trey has nothing “standard” to get a hold of to deliver.
Already explained in my post above and on what basis the materials exist. The multiple viewpoint system was/is utilized.
He had been getting stuff through various channels I deal with. Long story short, if I don’t have it, it probably doesn’t exist out here.
Whatever the rationale for someone leaving was is completely irrelevant, they are his own reason(s), and is non-sequeteur to the workability of OT VIII. Trey’s pre-OTs pretty much tell the whole story, your assertions to the contrary that the level doesn’t work is also … completely irrelevant.
The folksingers from Portland could be 2014 Portland folksingers. Eerie.
O.K., this big flap happened in 1968. Almost half a century ago. It wasn’t last week, it was a different time and a different world. A different universe really.
It seems to me someone tried to rip him off and he got pissed off. Half a century ago.
Yes, many others fell from grace with the Magus. And at this time Hubbard was asserting that Scientology was not a religion and the source of it was Magic.
So if he felt like a face rip I guess he let it fly.
This is a far cry from David Miscavige asserting that he is a “religious leader” and building “cathedrals” and “saving humaity through the I.A.S.”
There are similarities and DIFFERENCES. Mainly this was half a century ago and people were steeped in magic, not a “religion” with a warlock leading the way!
In 1968 I was saying and doing and living something different too. I was in the eighth grade living in inner city San Francisco.
Thank God nobody kept records of what I was saying and doing and thinking when I got pissed off.
History is relative, to “the past”. I am not saying what Hubbard did was right or wrong. It is not what I would have done but he did valuable things I didn’t do also. At least many people thought so then.
Magic is about forces and conditions. That is all it is about. It is not about good manners or being a savvy politician. A person who can not deal with forces and conditions (first you have to even be aware of conditions, which most people are not) should not be involved with Scientology, at all.
He was very clear in the beginning about the magic.
He got greedy with the money and didn’t pay his taxes and it flapped. All the lies and alter is came down to the almighty dollar.
I do not judge him for his bad manners. The illusion he created to save a buck is a little petty. O.K. he had a weak spot. Greed. Must have. He had GPM’s. He was a man. He was “flawed” according to aesthetic standards.
I can’t say I have been above it all myself. We are all a work in progress. When or who has anyone ever been given “a pass” by everyone?
Never happened. It is an unattainable goal that some people seem to think Hubbard should have achieved.
Well he didn’t. And I haven’t either. I have people on my lines right now that I have been caring for, contributing to, and helping for many years. Whatever I give them, they seem to need so much more. It is a thankless duty but I continue. I do not expect “a pass” or some applause. If I did for a minute I would become heartbroken.
There are people out here who have the purpose to set you up for a loss. And that is the purpose that flows through time with them. They are very artistic at moving others into GPMs.
What good does it do me to squabble about them? I throw them a bone at noon at they are back at the back door at sundown. I just throw them another bone.
This just seems to me to be the tax one pays when one is affiliated with very large groups or projects.
Or if one has a herd of dogs.
Anyway, one is supposed to cycle through Qual on the Org Board, not blame.
If everyone was happy we wouldn’t be having these conversations. People are not happy. I think if Hubbard would have constructed the L’s so they were run on all four flows, and put them on the grade chart as grades, 5, 6 and 7, we could have pulled off.
For me, I am still digging the ditch because I do see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Now, I do not see the light because I am hallucinatory. I have kept moving. I know there are plenty of valid reasons to be stuck inside this current GPM.
However, if you have a goal, it is on you to make that goal. To overcome barriers. If you are in a coal mining shaft working as coal miner, the shaft caves in and someone digs their way in to lead you out, and the guy drops dead halfway out, do you sit down and kick him? Or do you pick up his lantern and at LEAST trust in yourself that if he could get you out, you could get yourself out too?
A person is supposed to take information and build on it. At some point quit bitching about the “leaders” and get to work on their own goals with out having to nurse on some big tit.
You want to be “totally free” and “clear” in the true meaning of the word? But have come to realize it is “not attainable” because the “right leader” hasn’t shown up for you?
Why hasn’t it occurred to you to make your own way? To figure out your own path? Why was someone else supposed to do something for you that you can not do for yourself? You know who you are really pissed off at? YOURSELF! For being so god damned fucking NEEDY.
This thing CAN be figured out. Columbus discovered America and I do not see people kicking him around because he also did not plan for solar energy.
I am not going to blame Hubbard if I am unhappy or stumped or have challenges. I have someplace to go and a goal and he is just a guy who was selling books and information standing on my path.
I am my only potential savior. When you shift that responsibility to someone else, it is YOU that makes these decisions. Anyone you depend on, you become the effect of. If you were not a dependent you would not be disillusioned.
Nobody fucked you up with out your permission. Nobody can get you out of it but YOU.
Let’s keep it real folks. For me to pretend it is any other way will only do you a disservice.
Yes it is disgusting what David has done to people and to this body knowledge.
But he is not a big enough being to stand in my way.
There ARE people out here CORRECTING. Karen, Mike, Marty, work more or less full time on sporting out false data. Correcting correcting correcting.
This is a wide distance from blame.
Finding why’s spotting who’s pointing out false information, this is all QUAL.
In thirty fucking years the only way the guy could make an Org “ideal” was to beg from the public, yank their certs, beat up and rob mission holders, kiss ass of a celebrity and stuff volunteers in trailors. He has just put everyone into a big fucking Q and A with him and Scientology. Petty Warlock conquers through dev t. Seriously?
It is so crazy you have people out here blaming Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard for failures and they are not even or never have been thinking with Scientology or using it!
It is like blaming a cook book when you didn’t even use the recipe!!!!!!!!!!!
Wow Oracle! Great stuff you say here! I am going to re-read it a couple of times. I’d like to get in comm with you more directly. This is possible through Mike, or the South African blog, if you want to.
LRH had distanced himself from Black Magick well before 1968. I don’t know what you are referring to that he was asserting Scientology was not a religion and the source of it was Magic. The exact opposite in fact was true. THis was the time when “religious image” was being asserted by LRH more heavily than ever.
I did make reference to Hubbard’s shifting gears with the “religious” angle. Yes, I saw that happen and I understand he was the force behind that. I am not negating that. He shifted gears. I didn’t.
There is not one incident in history, not one single testimony, not one single complaint, anywhere on any books from any person, that Jack Parsons harmed another human being, or violated another human being, or enturbulated another human being, or dabbled in anything considered evil, beyond co habitation with women without the sanctity of marriage. Yet look at what people have spewed out because of his interest in the supernatural.
THAT, is the black magic.
I AM POSTING THIS WITH THIS NOTE: PLEASE DO NOT DERAIL THIS THREAD INTO A BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHETHER THERE IS OR ISNT ANY TESTIMONY, COMPLAINTS, HARM OR OTHERWISE BY JACK PARSONS OR ALISTEIR CROWLEY OR ANY OTHER OTO/MAGICK/BLACK MAGICK PERSON. I KNOW I STARTED THIS BY CHALLENGING THE ASSERTION THAT LRH WAS STILL PUSHING MAGIC AND NEGATING RELIGION IN 1968 AND NOW IT HAS ALREADY DERAILED INTO WHETHER THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH MAGIC???
NO MORE COMMENTS ON THIS SUBJECT WILL BE ACCEPTED, AND I AM DELETING ALL THE OTHER RESPONSES FROM THE ORACLE TO HERSELF ON THIS SUBJECT.
To me real Scn was always just about achieving as-isness via truth. Anything that didn’t align with that wasn’t of much interest to me. Having terrible authority issues, I tended to be very skeptical when I started in Scn. It always surprises me that anyone thought they were supposed to do anything LRH said without agreement or inspection. I never believed that integrity could ever be absent in one’s personal life, for the spiritual journey to be successful. LRH was certainly responsible for his own decisions and actions, but then, so are we.
+100
Right on, Hallie Jane 🙂
I find this post and the subsequent comments to be fascinating!! There are so many diverse viewpoints regarding LRH, the man, the technology, his penchant for self-promotion and the very human characteristic of wanting to hide certain flaws from public view.
There is also another datum I see at play – if you want to kill the idea, discredit its source. This dictum has been used by every Gov’t agency, Marketer, PR (Black PR) Person and competing fast-food restaurateur, this side of Kathmandu.
LRH was a man ahead of his time. As was Newton, Edison, Gandhi, MLK, Jefferson, Elizabeth I, and so on. They were brilliant, insightful, passionate, creative, quirky, eccentric, suffered from subject-specific blindness and in certain parts of their lives, were absolutely bat-shit crazy.
If one was seeking to validate their beliefs or theories solely by measuring the number of areas in their lives that they were totally sane in — good fucking luck. This can only be accomplished by measuring the effectiveness of their data. Did it work? The rest of it … interesting, perhaps. Curious, most certainly. But not The Deciding factor on whether to listen to or respect what they said or did.
What LRH, and everyone else of Greatness accomplished, they did in spite of their flaws and aberrations. This is what made them great.
Early on, I constantly had to differentiate what LRH said from what he meant. I had to determine the value of data and come to my own conclusions. I’m still doing this; not just with LRH data but with everything I read or listen to.
LRH did say, listen to me and do what I say. He also said, trust yourself. And to have the courage to know and say what you have observed.
No one said figuring this shit out would be easy and without conflict or indecision. And if they had – who would have believed them.
Odd
I forget who posted this link but thank you. Look at what Ron says about people misusing Scientology and Dianetics – squirreling.
Sounds like little Davey to a tee.
“They are quite violent on the subject of ethics as you ordinarily expect a criminal to be and are savage about organizations, having stolen money and lists from ours. They are being careful not to attack me publicly in the hopes people will think them noble and inspired. They’re inspired all right — by the “buck”. But we wish them no bad luck. We don’t have to. It’s punishment enough just to be themselves and live with what they are.”
Also very interesting is how Ron chooses to blame Jack Horner for Nibs (L. Ron Hubbard, Jr) leaving the group. I wasn’t there and don’t know the whole story but interesting how Ron tries to blame someone else for his favorite son leaving. Nibs doesn’t say that Jack is the reason he left but because of Ron’s use of Black Magic and because he was broke. All of the money flowed to his father.
“In 1960 he was instrumental in ruining the life of Nibs Hubbard, with the help of Nina West by setting the boy against an organization and then getting him arrested in the Middle West. Smooth and glib, many people have been deluded into helping him. ”
http://www.suppressiveperson.org/sp/archives/3750
Thanks for that bit of nostalgia, Mike. A lot of familiar names there, including my own.
Wow, man. I know some of those people. A couple of them are still alive and in. Crazy times those were – It just turned “AD64” last week, by the Scn calendar, and that magazine was a look back to AD17. It was all so new, then. Now Scientology’s on its deathbed with a different madman at the helm, who’s trying to wrest every last dollar from His diminishing flock before the whole sham folds. Wild.
Mike,
Your commitment to the exposing confronting and as-ising the unvarnished truth, warts, dimples and all, is evident by your posting of this data from LRH’s regime.
I’m not going to deny that this vindictive side of LRH is disturbing to me. It is. I wish it wasn’t there. I find myself wanting to explain it, excuse it. I find it difficult to reconcile this side of him with what is to me the obviously caring, compassionate man who created the tech that helped me so much, that I use every day to improve conditions in my life, to understand people, and to just operate in a happier more peaceful frame of mind.
But you know , there it is. There it is. LRH was capable of intense vindictiveness and cruelty when he felt wronged. There it is. And I have to put my own money where my mouth is when it comes to confronting unpleasant truths. I can’t just be spouting off about the still-ins’ low confront of evil and theetie-weetie -ness with regard to DM while at the same time clinging obstinately and blindly to my own myths and delusions contrary to obvious fact.
Thank you for posting this. I do seek to live with the truth. I do want to know what really happened. I strive to be someone who is always willing to LOOK.and who doesn’t need to cling to fixed idea and myths. I know I will work thru this until its sorted thru in my mind: that what LRH did that was good – which was, IMO, a lot, was good, and it is there for me to use to help myself and others, And what he did that was bad is there for me also to know so that I can learn from it by not doing it. And the bad does not cancel out the good, nor does the good cancel out the bad.
Thanks Aqua. I know this is probably bitter medicine for a number of people who read this blog. But pretending these things don’t exist is foolish. The truth WILL set you free. I do not condemn everything about LRH (or anyone for that matter) because they were far from perfect. But it is truly insane to look the other way or put your hands over your eyes and ears and hum.
OK, it doesn’t upset me. I think i have a pretty realistic view on Scientology. I’ve read a lot of its history and have seen that ED years ago. Its a strange one for sure, but I took it as being at least partly “tongue in cheek”. You don’t think he literally ordered SO members to shoot these people in the head??
Heartfelt comment Aqua. I quite agree with you. MIke, your reply to Aqua is excellent.
“The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.”
― Gloria Steinem
Hi Mike,
It is good for me to see this data and
learn he wasn’t the nicest guy in the
world at times. Thank you for posting
this data from the Auditor mag.
I have read on this blog
and Marty’s many things that make me
think LRH could be an absolute prick.
It is mean nasty stuff he could put out
at times and I don’t condone it by any means.
Especially how some of his crap has been
morphed by Miscavige into what it is today.
Roy’s earlier comments were very good and kinda put
it where I think.
I must say Mike that I will never….never….forget all the times
I had a beaming, sparkling, smiling face
with twinkling eyes, sometimes tears of
joy running down their face in front of me.
Only because I asked them questions developed
by LRH, that they could answer and experience
relief from some life situation it addressed.
There were many of these times for me and I
will cherish them forever knowing I was able to help
someone with some of the tech he developed.
🙂
You’re right, Mike. And I DO want to be free, so bring on the truth whenever and wherever you find it. So LRH had a reactive mind, so what? If he hadn’t had one, how could he have discovered how to handle it, mitigate it, or erase it? With no reality on it himself, why would he even want to bother doing any of this? I get it. This is good, very good for me.:)
I feel you, Aqua, and feel the same. <3
You echo my thoughts, Aqua. What is …..IS; and what Mike posted is something that IS. It is obvious that LRH could be mean and do stupid, destructive things when he was angry or upset. It can be difficult to reconcile these acts with the brilliant technical discoveries and applications he produced which many, many people have benefited from. But I never expected him to be perfect and never thought that he was perfect, despite what a couple of people posting on this blog have suggested in the past. In his personal life, he did not always live up to the lofty principles which he put forth. For example, he abandoned some of this children, even though there is a question on a sec check form asking, “have you ever abandoned a child?”. There is no valid excuse for doing something like that. But on the other hand who among us has never done anything mean or destructive or violated our own principles? I plead guilty. I think it is wise to judge everything about someone with a spiritual “balance scale”. It is still possible to see the good in people without being blind to the bad things. It is possible to admire the good things a person has done without giving approval or acceptance to the bad things they have done. Possibly the shortest Policy Letter LRH ever wrote (and one of my favorites) reads as follows:
“An old poem which has been newly adapted as policy:
There is so much bad in the best of us
And so much good in the worst of us
That it ill behooves any of us
To talk about the rest of us.”
-HCOPL 13 Sept 1978
I would suggest that, despite those destructive acts which he has done, we might have the kindness and humility to apply the above principles to L. Ron Hubbard, himself.
…..as well as to each other.
Beautiful, Espiritu.
Yes!
Do a search on old issues of the aberree magazine (1954 – 1964). This sort of thing has been occurring since the beginning of Scientology.
Also check out the 1965 HCO Executive Letter on Amprinistics – more Fair Game: http://www.suppressiveperson.org/sp/archives/3750
Hi B.V.,
I see from the date of this that LRH was “fair-gaming” people at least as early as 1965. Interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Northrup_Hollister
Hey, I also noticed in the mag they use a name then “clear number”…..______.
When I went clear I got a number too. I came in a little over the 10,000 mark when I was 20 years old. That was back in the day when we were running Dianetics for hundreds of hours. Back then if you were hoofing it you could get up the whole bridge including the OT levels in two years, and be back on the streets. You could COMPLETE A CYCLE OF ACTION! It’s true! Not true today. You see people that have been in for 50 years still spinning their wheels and back on objectives.
Anyway, wonder when they stopped giving the clears numbers and why?
Lately they have been unmocking clears. Calling people in to tell then they are not clear.
Correct me if I’m wrong, Oracle: I dimly recall Chick Corea around 1972 becoming Clear 2000, a number I was eyeing for myself. However, in London we ceased running ‘hundreds of hours of Dianetics’ at around that time, and there was a flurry of HCOB’s issued trying to deal with assorted problems of exteriorisation and bumping into upper level material which occurred on R3R. Dianetics for us was a hot potato until C/S 93 and the new Grade Chart in 74.
A Special Correspondent sent in the original ethics order the “Racket Exposed” was reprinted from, so I added it to the end of the post.
Say what you will about miscavage, he doesn’t order r2-45 run on anyone. I’m sure he would if he could get away with it, still…
Right TW, I am sure he would.
I’m sure he has. He is just more covert about it. In recent years, it has been by the use of “reverse auditing” which has, I believe based on first hand accounts, resulted in suicides.
So many familiar names. So many SPs. And still, it was an utterly atmosphere alltogether back then. But then the whole western culture was different. The Beatles, the Stones, the Who, Woodstock, muddy Woodstock, was just a year away. Anti-Vietnam demonstrations, Martin Luther King assassinated. Rebellion. This was the general spirit and scientology profitted from thousands of people wanting to change the world. Scn was riding on that wave.
We were naive. And hopeful. Any joyful. — And betrayed.
Good point GPM. It was a time Scn took that wave and rode it strong for quite some. You could argue the same for Christianity. The Life Cycle unfortunately I think has run it’s course for Scientology and Dave is running it into the ground further. He must be searching for his copper pipe.
True, Mike. The life cycle began its decline when it became ‘serious.’
I am currently (still) dealing with constant “fair gaming” by the “wasband.” So this post really shows the truth about the unbelievable gullibility of people…….Yes, I was “in” for 27 years. Yes: I am a fool and was hood winked. Yes, I regret it all.
Scientology has an obsession with washing out it’s most experienced and talented members. Other organizations will typically send such people off to a distant, sometimes cushy assignment, where they will be forgotten, but generally not tormented. Occasionally they will return to power since the organization never condemned them in the first place. One of scientologies flaws is you are either high status or you are in deep trouble or even committing treason. They do not allow any middle ground.
The crimes of the ‘Racket Exposed’ people wasn’t just using ‘research’ and use of pre-publication ‘data’ but not paying the proper vigorish up the pyramid scam.
The warning about auditing people with health and mental problems was intended to keep the FDA away, that part of the scam seems to have worked. Now the auditors and case supervisors make any health promises only verbally, harder to prosecute that way.
$cientology was always about the money and adoration of Lron and the money. Did I say money enough?
No you didn’t zemoo.
Absolutely fascinating, Mike! Thanks for taking the time to do this!
Well, the big stars who completed section 6 OT course, highest advanced scientologist of the time start with: Otto Roos, Bill Robertson etc… look page 2, there is even a picture of a gathering of futur SP’s. That’s history of scientology… Mike Rinder, Marty Rathbun… latecomer to the club….
But the guys in the church are blind but this is a complete demo. Before Miscavige LRH was running out his near associaté…
Needless to say that the use of any policy that calls for Fair Game, R2-45 and so on only leads to the destruction of the group. Many past veteran auditors and staff have been declared, currently thousands have left the Church evidence that, abusing others, has not and never will work.
DM followed these policies and took them to higher and cruelest levels, but again, it is only leading to his and the group’s destruction.
Thus lets not follow these steps and lets treat others with decency and care as much as we can.
Hi Silvia,
Do you know the date of the original Fair Game policy? Was it 1967 or later or earlier?
I am under the impression that Ron changed after he came back from his sojourn with OT 3, and didn’t have this large vindictive streak before then.
@ Morris
That sounds like a very important question indeed and I read so many things about the fact that he changed to such an extent at some point that even very close friends of his didn’t recognize him
It starts earlier than Fair Game. Read the Manual of Justice, 1959.
http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/man_just.htm
Then consider the often cited “disposed of quietly and without sorrow.” That would include me.
Morris, please watch this video. It will give you the history of fair gaming policy and how long Hubbard had this sort of thing going on. But even before the HCO Manual of Justice, evidence of his vindictive and intolerant nature goes all the way back to Dianetics and Science of Survival.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqalTJWGYj4
Silvia – Yes. If we intend to use this technology to help people, we can’t become a mirror of the things we hate about corporate Scn. I see people who are out who hate Scientologists as much as Scientologists hate SPs. For us to hate those who are still in because they can’t see or aren’t given the truth improves nothing.
Granting beingness will allow people to see which group is the most sane and, potentially, the most effective.
Individual Scientologists are not the “enemy.” They are the victims of the cult that Scientology has become. Plant seeds of truth and doubt. When bad things happen to them directly, they will remember what you said and come to you for help.
Thank you indie8million- and I agree, granting of beingness is a correct attitude toward others. Being judgmental on who is right or who is wrong places one in a position of “know best” rather than allow any other human being lead his life as he chooses and change it/improve it, also, as he deems best.
Also, when honestly one can let other be, then you can be yourself too.
Indie 8 Mill and Silvia, right on! Yes!
Well said Silvia!
Totally agree with you Silvia.
I have seen others getting called “enemies” because they have a different opinion and voice it.
We should all learn from this and change such behavior and “grow” up and “move up a little
higher”.
We all came into Scientology to become better people and learn. I don’t think anybody will get any better in being judgmental and condemning others. I myself try to go to the other side of the spectrum, toward tolerance and granting beingness. On that side there is much personal gain and improvement possible.
Nostalgia RD, good article Mike.
Mike, what a great find! I wish I’d had this when I did my video on disconnection just last week! These LRH instructions would have been great to include in that. You have made it abundantly clear here that anyone putting out the idea that LRH was not behind Fair Game and the harassment, stalking and attempted ruination of SPs is simply delusional. Great reveal, Mike, just great!
Chris – I’m surprised that you (and Mike) are surprised. That R2-45 order from LRH has been on the web for at least 15 years. It can be found in at least a dozen places in less than a minute on Google.
What this demonstrates (again) is that Scientology is a tightly compartmentalized organization where folks are entirely focused on their own activity and largely unaware (willfully or accidentally) of what is going on elsewhere. Plus, they have been scared into not looking. This is characteristic of coercive, totalist organizations, such as Scientology.
It is also why Hubbard drove the “overt” issue so hard. While there are benefits to openly inspecting and confessing ones own transgressions, in Scientology this “tech” has been turned into a tool of deliberate introversion to cause one to be so obsessed with their own “ethics” that they cannot even see that they are being robbed blind by the organization and it’s manipulations – starting with Hubbard and continuing with Miscavige.
This too, is a characteristic of coercive, totalist organizations.
Hubbard codified totalist practices, wrapped them in some basic truths and called it a religion. He became wealthy because of it, then he died. Not much else to the story.
Themoreyouknow, I don’t think that Mike was unaware of the ethics order but, was not aware of the particular Auditor Mag issue with THAT data in it as BPI.
I knew of the ethics order from my position which was WAY inferior to Mike’s SO posts held but I hadn’t ever read that Auditor mag issue (and most others for that matter).
I could be wrong but, many SO members knew of that E.O. decades later.
NOTHING that is posted only on the web is actually reliable and acceptable evidence of anything.
A couple of decades ago, a common saying was that “photos do not lie”. Today with Photoshop type tools, anything posted online can be a lie. That something has been posted for 10 or 15 years no longer means anything.
That’s why it is so important for Mike to have received actual original hard copies of these materials.
Scientology: Founded by a psycho, currently run by a psycho. Ordering S.O. Members to murder many human beings. He belonged in a rubber room surrounded by armed guards. Anyone making excuses for a madman like that is also mad.
Wait OS….are you saying people were actually
murdered? Or are you saying he made demands
that SO members murder someone but it never
happened?
Potpie, did you READ what I wrote? If so, where is your MU? I was CRYSTAL clear. I named the EXACT act that was a felony. What don’t you understand about what I ACTUALLY wrote?
Yes I did read what you wrote. My mistake for
not understanding.
What is R2 45? I know it’s from COHA but my edition doesn’t show the process. Thanks.
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R2-45
Thanks Mike. You put that together with fair game and that is some seriously messed up s«»!. What’s hidden is so opposite to what is professed its no wonder scientology could never be the salvation for mankind, let alone be taken seriously as a religion.
At the time LRH wrote COHA, in the 50’s, it was a joke. It was R2-45 as in:
R2-22. R2-357, R2-38, R2-44. R2-45 if you know what I mean,
And in the original COHA book, LRH doesn’t describe it, because it is a joke.
But as time went on, it became sort of a serious joke and a dark joke, and then semi-serious. I would bet that it has been completely removed from the “Basics” version of COHA (which I can;t look at right now because the trash collector picked it up many months ago).
To back up your claim:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ_OX3nK_Nk
It all looks so “spiritual”? There is NOTHING religious about this – it reads like an Amway Magazine! I can’t believe this turned into a religion. There is nothing spiritual or religious about it – it is nothing but SALES!
The LRH ED seems to suggest that Ron had not seen Auditor 35 before it was out. I assume he would have stopped it if he would have seen it. Therefore, I find it unlikely that he had seen the “Racket Exposed” section before it went out.
That the “fair game policy” was on at that time is evidenced. That the text given was intended to be published in this way and wording by LRH is an assumption, not necessarily a fact. All I would know is that somebody wrote it and published it and that LRH did not make this a separate point in his disproval of the entire issue.
The text rather creates a mystery. There is very little detail as to who did what and when. It is quite a list of people, unlikely that each of them did the same and all of these things: What had exactly happened? Can these allegations be trusted?
See earlier comment where the Ethics Order this is taken from is listed. The Ethics Order says “Publish in Auditor Mag”.
Confront what is there. Don’t try to explain things away.
Hadn’t seen the Ethics Order yet when wnen I wrote the comment. That clears that this proclamation was intendet to be published by LRH. However, I still don’t know what exactly was done – allegedly – by those persons. That each of them had done the same I find unlikely. I miss differentiation and detai,l even more so after having seen that Ethics Order. It itself carries the same outoints.
In the length and breath of the Sea Organization (and progressively getting worse) it is *Management by Punishment.*
This has trickled over to Public.
Public report Sea Org abuse at them including screaming tirades, held against will, gang bang activity, threat, threat, threat and thuggery for $$$$$.
There is no concept of WIN/WIN
The escalating abuse is a type of behavior modification, which is curious because Hubbard despised psychiatric methods and wrote about Pavlov’s dogs with disgust.
SP Hole is nothing but an attempt at behavior modification.
Excellent to roll back the clock and see earlier times and references.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hole_%28Scientology%29
Hero to Zero finally one too many times for me, boy if I ‘d known all this back in the 70’sI would have been long gone a lot sooner.
If I didn’t go to the internet and research, I wouldn’t have all the answers to the many questions I had. Sad that the truth cannot be gotten in the organization. In the 70’s the truth was not readily available. Even in 2010, until I went to the internet, I still had a toe in the bubble and had gone back, which cost me many dollars. I’m sure happy to have found the truth through looking at documents, reading and asking questions on blogs with an open mind for what’s really going on with this thing I got so involved with back when.
GTBO, I think you would have thrown out the baby with the bathwater and with the bathtub itself.
In my experience it is the staff members of the Church of Scientology whom put out dangerous upper level data at their events, I have seen people becoming ill after attending events in the Church of Scientology .
I regard current staff members of the Church of Scientology as suppressive .
ealadha, there is no such animal as “dangerous upper level data”. That was a lie told by LRH to keep people from disseminating the sci-fi story he wrote and sold to public as The Wall of Fire, et al. Proven harmless to read by tens of thousands of people.
Disagree, Old School, from my own personal observation.
I saw Wollersheim himself get sick from his exposure to it, as well as others who almost died.
Answer to Morris Adams. I was never in, read all the OT-levels and I was and am perfectly fine. And what do you think of all the people who saw Southpark? 🙂
Another never in here.
Seen South Park, read the OT levels. Felt fine. My only reaction was : “This is the nuttiest stuff I’ve ever read in my life”, and went on with my normal day.
I have admittedly read nuttier stuff since.
We have a saying among science geeks : the plural of anecdote isn’t data.
To have data as opposed to anecdote you have to be systematic in your collection, and consider factors which might explain your observations. You might begin with collecting all those people you know who have read the OT levels, and calculate a statistic like say, the proportion of them who got sick within a certain time after it.
Then you can compare these percentages between never ins, who think the whole thing is a joke, and dedicated scientologists, who expect to be sick. Just like there exists a placebo effect, where people get better from sham treatment because they expect it, there exists what is called the nocebo effect, where people get worse because they believe it will happen. You can then compare the percentage of sick scientologists to expected values from nocebo studies.
The idea that the upper level materials are inherently “dangerous” to those who are not prepared for them is no more than a manipulative sales practice designed to make them mysterious and thus worth the $$$!
One of my children was in, the other NOT. The one who was in, in all seriousness, threatened to call Child Protective Services because I had given his younger brother a copy of OTIII and thus had seriously”endangered” the 15 year-old’s life! I told him to go for it!
The 15 year-old had stopped reading mid-way because it was “SO BORING!”
It’s been 17 years since this incident and I’m happy to note that we are all alive and well!
Personally, from reading many accounts and theories, I have come to think it may be dangerous for some, and not for others. Old Auditor on Possibly Helpful Advice blog has some good discussion about why this may be so.
To state flatly and absolutely that it is “not harmful” (to anyone) is only an unprovable statement of faith, like any religious belief.
I regard the staff members PTS to … who else?
Funny, I read the material and never got ill.
DAoT, THOUSANDS, lie you, have read it with no ill effects. Only the hopelessly deluded think otherwise. I guess that it’s possible that someone could believe something SO strongly that they could get ill. But, you’d be talking about borderline neurotics.
Sorry Morris, disagreeing with reality is insane.
Sorry Old School. I saw what I saw and I know what I know.
DAoT
I remember as a newbie in the SO on staff in 1972, we chatted about an example LRH wrote about in History of Man (now p.46) how to induce a pain in the jaw of an uninitiated person by describing and doing the motions of a clam opening and closing. So I read History of Man and then proudly announced how it had NOT restimulated me. When I look back at this I see of course that I had NO REALITY – NO EFFECT whatsover about what LRH was describing.
So reading about OT levels may not kill people as LRH described. Likely it is the same NO REALITY.
On the other hand, having run across a few cases that had upper level materials APPLIED to them on lower levels in the field by people who think ‘everything goes’, I have personally witnessed how incredibly messed up such people were and what extra time and effort -plus requiring a high classed auditor it required- to fish those persons back out of this mess.
For anybody who wants to make gains with LRH tech ask yourself if that is worth it. The Bridge works well when done in proper sequence.
Greta
Greta, yes, it’s about the reality. I heard about the craziness caused by the film Exorcist when it came out, and thought to myself, what hogwash! At the time, I thought nothing could scare me, so I went to my local cinema to watch the film and mock. People in the audience were laughing their heads off, for them it was a hoot. But me, I gripped the armrests tighter and tighter, thinking, I can get through this because it’ll all turn out sensibly. Boy, was I wrong, I couldn’t sleep for a whole year afterwards, I was in a panic as soon as nightfall came. Really, I do not lie, I was at my wit’s end, and I didn’t know why because I didn’t even believe that possession rubbish.
I can snarl and brag and talk big like anyone else, shooting off my mouth and starting fights. But anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows this just an act which can be undone by a kitten. The world is an exceedingly strange place, not least those amongst us who pretend they’re not pretending. And in the context of this blog, a Scientologist is a pretense, but the Tone Scale is quite real.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Mike
What is the exact date of this no 35 issue of THE AUDITOR?
No wonder LRH had to write the reform code (Rons Journal 1968) to calm ruffled feathers.
Greta
It has no date, but it is copyrighted 1968. So it was sometime between 1 Jan and 31 March when the issue was written.
ADVANCED ORGANIZATION Yacht Royal Scotsman
HCO ETHICS ORDER
To: Those Concerned No. 30 INT
From: The Founder E/O No. 28 INT added to
Subject: RACKET EXPOSED 6 MARCH 1968
(BPI and goes in Auditor)
[this was posted on holysmoke dot org] as the source of the issue.
btw, by my stat collection, the SP’s run about 97 1/2%. Quite a stellar list of names in that one Auditor issue!
1968 started with Auditor No. 31; so it is three numbers in between. Therefore I would date it March or closely before.
Great posting Mike. And you are correct, this business of targeting and declaring individuals goes way, way back, and is certainly not a new phenomena. I would say it is woven into the very fabric of organized Scn. One day you are a star, the next your are the scourge of the universe.
Anyone who has done even superficial research into LRH, whether it be books, interviews with old-timers, etc, will recognize this pattern of behavior. This is the way LRH often treated people around him. This character flaw could rightly be described as paranoid or even psychotic.
Unfortunately, the organization, particularly the Sea Org, has embraced this aberration. This is one of the main reasons why I left and will have nothing to do with them. They’re just too crazy for my taste.
Like an ageing dog, one day he’s playful and friendly, the next he’ll growl and take your finger off. You have to warn visitors and keep children away from him. Too unpredictable, too dangerous. And you also know you’re going to have to put him down eventually.
Yes, this shows scientology’s fatal flaw in full gory detail. What is slightly strange is that in several places LRH stated in policy that man cannot be trusted with justice and that it normally devolves into witchhunts and persectution.
Yet the policy that describes this was detailing LRH’s own blindspot. A tolerance for other people and their weaknesses is also expressed in several places, one of the most famous being from one of the tech films where LRH shows kindness to someone who has really screwed up and when asked why says something like “you have to be able to confront the world and the people in it”.
The inability to grant beingness, the inability to show mercy and the inability to accept people who are far less than perfect without harsh judgement are all god-like qualities. Ones that LRH himself failed on repeatedly and ones which David Miscavige has inverted.
DM has taken witchhunting and harsh justice to new lows of inhumanity and callous disregard for the human condition. Though LRH certainly set precedent.
This issue is fascinating in that it shows LRH’s contempt for commercializtion of scientology services yet also shows in full his own harsh and angry treatment of anyone who failed to follow his exacting expectations.
And in the end – what do you see?
You see LRH- a MAN, with strengths and fatal flaws a-plenty.
It also fascinates me to see people villifying LRH for his flaws, when his biggest and most destructive flaw was that he was to quick to villify people for their flaws.
The fact is that the right path is to accept people with warts and all, and help them to see and overcome these flaws. Then you can build strong and lasting groups and improve conditions and make a positive impact on the world.
Great comment as usual Roy.
Roy wrote:
You see LRH- a MAN, with strengths and fatal flaws a-plenty.
Good comment Roy, but there is one thing I see a lot in your comment that I don’t really understand.
When you make the point that LRH was A MAN, with strengths and flaws, I get the feeling that you are saying, first of all, that someone ever said LRH wasn’t a man. No one has ever said that LRH was not a man, that I know of. I know that I have never claimed anything else than LRH was a man.
And second, by making this point, are you saying that EVERYONE has the kinds of flaws that LRH had?
If you are, I have to disagree with that, too.
I don’t know many people who would go to the levels of deception that L Ron Hubbard went to, and who would dig as deeply into the minds of people in order to find their vulnerabilities and then to use those vulnerabilities against people like LRH did.
This was one reason why it never occurred to me that LRH could have been lying to the degree he did, because I have never known anyone to be as deceptive as that to good, well-meaning people, and to exploit them like that.
Have you?
Alanzo
As always, provoking response Alanzo.
LRH described as a man? Hell no, he has been diefied in radical church of scientology publications for decades now. Immense effort has been made to cover his flaws and make him appear superhuman. No flaw is ever admitted. LRH is portrayed as perfect, his every word gospel trurth. If LRH said use R2-45 then it was for the good of mankind!! If you asked any scientologist in the world so simple question about a clear fault of LRH they would deny, deny, deny and be hugely offended. And LRH was the starting point for this – he himself did not admit to much of his past and his failings.
Second, I absolutely do not say that everyone has the same flaws of LRH. Actually most people have the flaw of living medicore, boring, meaningless lives. LRH lived large, lied his ass off, and made discoverys in the 1950’s that were many decades ahead of his time. His working model of the reactive mind, the concept of “earlier similar”, the concept of mind seperate to spirit, these are all gigantic advances in human thought that fully entitle LRH to a proud place in history – which he will not get. He could have had a place in history as the person he actually was. But he cannot have a place as a demi-god, because he most certainly was not. Lordy people complain that Clears are not 100% impervious to illness and OT’s can’t move things with their minds! Hells bells, these people are positively changed in ways that no other psychotherapy can dream of coming close to!
The other thing that I have never seen anyone ever comment on is that LRH was a different person at different times in his life. When I was in my 20’s I was a very differrent person to my 30’s, and so on. I had some horrible flaws in my teens that would be incredibly hard for me to own up to now. But there is no such fine parsing of LRH’s life. He is just a lying asshole because he was married more times than he cared to admit, and did this and did that wrong.
When I say LRH was a man, I mean that he was a person who screwed some things up, and who got somethings right. He did these things on a much larger stage than most of us ever aspire to.
How can you judge and criticize any human being without a fine division of the periods of his life, plus his overall failings and his accomplishments?
As long as you take all of these things into account, then at that point everyone is free to love or hate LRH as they see fit.
The radical scientologists have tried hard to diefy the man and hide and lie about his failings. This has created a horrible backlash that has damaged his repute a thousand times more than a factual accounting of faults would have done.
LRH was at many times mean minded and vindictive. LRH was at other times kind and forgiving. He told lies about his personal life, but he discovered important truths about the human mind. He was a rocking genius in many of his thoughts and discoveries. Other people say, well if he was a not a perfect human, then his discoveries are bunk. Isaac Newton as a teen threatened to murder his mother and stepfather. Does that mean that apples may not fall?
And LRH’s greatest achievement was that while many people have discovered great truths of life, he is one of the very few who ever worked out how to train some joe off the street to apply those truths to others.
I vote that the baby sitting in the dirty bathwater have be seen as a whole. The good, the bad and the smelly. When you look at all, you can make your decision, and I respect that. In fact, I respect even the decision of a person who just sniffs and says “that baby smells like poop” and walks away. You have the right.
Kudo’s to Mike for allowing such an open discourse on his blog.
Roy in your answer to Alanzo,
I never ever read long comments to the end because :
1 my mother tongue not being english it is tiring ….. :0)
2 I read this blog first thing in the morning with my coffee so I don’t have much time
Just to let you know that your answer was so amazing to me that I read it to the end and enjoyed every single word of it. I could not have expressed better what I feel and think about LRH and my conclusion ( and of course that conclusion will not include trolls…obviously!) about him and his work and life will be that human beings can be incredibly ungrateful especially those who haven’t done much….really.
Thank you very much Roy!
Roy,
Great pair of posts!!
The point you made about LRH living large… I picked up a copy of the book Twelve Against the Gods by Bolitho which LRH mentioned somewhere along the line as an inspirational book or something of that nature.
I have just begun reading it, but I think in doing so I think I have a found a bit of a window into the motivations and core personality of this bold and unique and complex man – L. Ron Hubbard.
After reading just the forward and introduction chapter 1, I really began to see how LRH was every bit the Explorer! However, the turf HE set out to explore was indeed “Terra Incognito” the human mind! I think LRH may have said just this in Dianetics and other early writings, but somehow reading this very unusual book really shed light on LRH’s life’s work for me. LRH was obviously proud of his membership in the Explorer’s Club, and I see now why that was so very important to him. Maybe LRH’s own mental battles led him to want to explore this territory, and I am glad he did whatever.
Twelve Against the Gods is an accounting of 12 vastly different explorers/adventurers – high dynamic but often flawed individuals who changed the world. More than accounting, though, it is an examination of the thread of commonality between these vastly different, unique individuals and the lives they led – not a physical commonality, but one of mind and intent and how each made their mark on history and opened doors to new vistas and ways of thinking by the lives they led.
I am very glad I picked up this book. The book is fascinating on its own, but also I feel more appreciative of LRH’s efforts to explore and experiment with “terra incognito” and more forgiving of his foibles and failures. No question the man opened doors to new thought, new realities, new understandings, and new approaches to dealing with the human mind and spirit.
Leonore
PS. Mike, the truth and fresh air you publish are blessings and will help things for the better.
I would like to know the actual details of the “Racket Exposed.” Did they steal his materials with mal-intent and take money or conspire to take money for them? Did they presumptuously try to use them without authorization. This is not clear as is so often these kinds of orders were. Seems an overreaction at best, a mad man’s rant at worst. Truth is probably somewhere in between.
Excellent reply Roy!
It’s great to have someone who can eloquently and passionately express your position, and who uses logic and reason to do so. Scientology and Scientologists need people like that, very badly. I’m glad you exist to do that.
I do however, have a comment on your reply.
LRH was at many times mean minded and vindictive. LRH was at other times kind and forgiving. He told lies about his personal life, but he discovered important truths about the human mind. He was a rocking genius in many of his thoughts and discoveries. Other people say, well if he was a not a perfect human, then his discoveries are bunk. Isaac Newton as a teen threatened to murder his mother and stepfather. Does that mean that apples may not fall?
The part I bolded is not what other people say.
If you are going to communicate effectively against positions that you believe are untrue, then you have to duplicate, understand present those positions accurately.
No critic that I know ever said that “if LRH was not a perfect human being, then his discoveries are bunk.”
I would say, for instance, that LRH’s character has nothing to do with whether anything in Scientology works.
I would say that LRH was not a perfect human being, and a lot of his discoveries are bunk, some are not bunk, and some are discoveries which were not his but claimed they were.
You can’t do an “A=A” on all of Scientology processes and tech. It certainly doesn’t ALL WORK. Some parts of Scientology do work and other parts plainly don’t.
And none of the workability of anything in Scientology has anything to do with the gargantuan amount of deception that LRH practiced all his life.
This is actually my position on LRH and Scientology.
Can you address that position?
What do you think about it?
“And LRH’s greatest achievement was that while many people have discovered great truths of life, he is one of the very few who ever worked out how to train some joe off the street to apply those truths to others”.
I will agree with you there. I have a brother in law who is a truck driver and a Scientologist, and he made this point to me very clearly very soon after I left Scientology.
He said, “Sure all those ideas exist in Buddhism and in Hinduism and in other philosophies, but LRH took them and wrote them in plain english that everyone could understand, and he put them in course packs and sold them to people in mini malls where I could get at them. I don’t know any one who has ever done that before.”
That is totally true. And when I look back at my life and realize that I joined up with that kind of quixotic crusade to sell philosophy to make a living in this society… well… I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
But I did it. And when you think about it, the whole thing is quite extraordinary.
Thanks for your articulate expression of your point of view. I hope you inspire many more people to step up and express themselves as you have.
Alanzo
I agree with Mike. Great comment, Roy.
I have seen videos of lectures where LRH showed tremendous compassion and caring for others – the 1959 Clearing Congress, for example. He wouldn’t have worked so hard , for so many years, to develop the tech if he didn’t really care.
But it certainly seems to me that ethics was his blind-spot. And his extreme harshness is so obvious here.
I love this comment of yours:
“It also fascinates me to see people villifying LRH for his flaws, when his biggest and most destructive flaw was that he was too quick to villify people for their flaws.”
It seems to me that he changed after he “came back” from OT3 in 1967. It was after this that Class VIII came out, which was accompanied by the new practice of “overboarding”. I haven’t heard of any harshness from him before this, but I wasn’t around then. I wonder if anyone knows of examples of this prior to 1967.
Oops. I meant 1958.
Roy,
Your answer to Alanzo’s comment was wonderful!!
I especially like your statement:
“The radical scientologists have tried hard to deify the man and hide and lie about his failings. This has created a horrible backlash that has damaged his repute a thousand times more than a factual accounting of faults would have done.”
I never looked at this before, but it rings so true!
Thank you, Roy!
I would like to thank you to Roy, great comment to Alanzo!
One thing LRH said about writing his biography was to write it “warts and all”. From that I would gather he knew there were warts there to find. Ok, so heres a wart. I think if this invalidates the tech and Rons body of work for you, youve got a problem, and a doubt formula to do.
Maybe he had charm, but compassion isn’t even on the Tonescale
And judging by the way he treated his wifes he had little compassion when it didn’t suit him.
Roy – This is basically what I’ve been saying too: “Actually most people have the flaw of living mediocre, boring, meaningless lives. LRH lived large, lied his ass off, and made discoveries in the 1950′s that were many decades ahead of his time.”
“The other thing that I have never seen anyone ever comment on is that LRH was a different person at different times in his life. When I was in my 20′s I was a very different person to my 30′s, and so on. I had some horrible flaws in my teens that would be incredibly hard for me to own up to now. But there is no such fine parsing of LRH’s life. He is just a lying asshole because he was married more times than he cared to admit, and did this and did that wrong.
When I say LRH was a man, I mean that he was a person who screwed some things up, and who got somethings right. He did these things on a much larger stage than most of us ever aspire to.”
– So true, Roy. Ron said, “We’re not trying to make good little boys and girls here, we’re trying to make OTs.” What I have observed in Radical Scientologists is the school marm type of service fac/valence. That everyone has to be a goody goody two shoes and never do anything off the beaten path.
LRH WAS ALL ABOUT GOING OFF THE BEATEN PATH! How else could he find all this out, if he didn’t go off the path? DUH. If you’re off the beaten path, you might sometimes slip and fall but AT LEAST you are going where no one else had the guts to investigate.
Then you say: “LRH was at many times mean minded and vindictive. LRH was at other times kind and forgiving. He told lies about his personal life, but he discovered important truths about the human mind. He was a rocking genius in many of his thoughts and discoveries. Other people say, well if he was a not a perfect human, then his discoveries are bunk. Isaac Newton as a teen threatened to murder his mother and stepfather. Does that mean that apples may not fall?”
On the point about LRH being an asshole and mean minded and vindictive – I recently met an old, old timer who was not only on the ship with LRH but who became his friend. I said something to her about someone complaining about LRH. She said, “What is there to complain about about LRH?” I said, “You know, he threw people overboard, etc.” She said, “He threw me overboard. But then, some time later he came up to me and apologized for it and said, “That wasn’t very gentlemanly of me, was it?”” I forgave him and that was the last we said about it.
Just saying. His close friends knew his good points and his bad. That’s what friends do – they weigh the good with the bad and decide if the friendship is worth it. Obviously, many people decided that his wisdom and friendship was worth it.
Thanks again, Roy. Thanks always, Mike.
Thanks Roy.
Your perspective on this subject is very helpful in understanding LRH, especially in light of information about him that I was never allowed to have in my 40 years in Scientology.
Roy, excellent comments. You so eloquently crystalized my thoughts on Ron too. I love reading your comments. Sometimes Ron was a study in dichotomies, but then again at different ages in one’s life, who isn’t? Ron wrote “What Is Greatness” about being able to grant beingness to others, and then you see times he was unjust and harsh with others. You’re right that the two sides of the coin are to either deify him as a demi-god who could do no wrong, or to villify him as a completely black and evil charlatan, and both of those extremes do him and the subject a disservice. Thank you, Mike, for reporting the good, bad, and ugly in your quest for truth. And thanks, Roy, for your comments.
Roy
Love your balanced post that shows great understanding and enough granting beingness not to throw the baby out with the smelling bathwater.
Greta
Applauding, you right now Roy. Way to call it like it is.
Page 2 of The Auditor 35 ‘Racket Exposed’ was shown on national TV in the UK in Granada TV’s ‘The Shrinking World of L. Ron Hubbard’ back in 1968. Available on youtube, skip nine and a half minutes in. The whole programme is well worth watching.
This is really a good documentary. Here’s the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_w-YWwC1lI
Seen parts of this before, but not the whole enchilada, thanks Alanzo. Having taken this from the viewpoint of an unbiased wog, or normal Joe Shmoe, I would think this portrayal of Ron is just strange. At least he had the guts to get interviewed (though the session grade would be a flunk, by his PR manager). Dave would never do this. Agreed on the the scene of Scn Inc was going on back then and I ad it’s gotten far worse.
OMG… his teeth look absolutely terrible. Fascinatingly terrible. Hard to look at… hard to look away.
Clearly, you seek to live with the truth, Mike.
Thank you for this glimpse into Scientology history, and for your commentary.
Alanzo
Yes the truth is showing up! Thanks Mike for showing this which I hadn’t seem before.
Yes, thank you for posting this, Mike.
It is important to recognize that just because someone said it, doesn’t make a datum true or false. And that goes for LRH as well. People who have found successes with the tech shouldn’t care to fight for LRH’s personality; it frankly has nothing to do with whether something works or doesn’t. That’s tabloid stuff.
And exposing the things that have been hidden about LRH for so long only prooves even more that those who have found successes from the tech can see that not only was the man who wrote them down flawed, but it didn’t change their own personal history with it.
If you liked the Purif, you liked the purif. If you hated it, you hated it. How does something a guy did in 1957 change your own personal experiences in life? I guess it only matters if your goal is to become the person you are fighting for, instead of yourself.
Perfectly said, Anon.
“If you liked the Purif, you liked the purif. If you hated it, you hated it. How does something a guy did in 1957 change your own personal experiences in life?”
Here is how:
LRH told everyone, in writing, that he had the solution to the crime, war and insanity. He asked people to make tremendous sacrifices to “help him” spread the solutions he said he had to these problems. What he did NOT tell you is that he implemented policies to viciously silence anyone who had unfavorable experiences with his “solutions.” And while LRH was asking Sea Org and Staff members to dedicate their lives to spread his “solutions” and work for peanuts, he was secretly, personally enriching himself with millions of dollars of royalties from book sales, accomplished by people supposedly forwarding his “solutions.”
It took decades for the truth about LRH to come out because anyone who said anything about the truth was savagely attacked.
You had a good time on the Purif? Good for you. Thousands of people suffered agonizing fates in the Sea Org and elsewhere in Scientology to facilitate your good time.
LRH’s “solutions” produce hit and miss results, with much calamity along the way. They clearly are NOT the solutiosn to war, crime and insanity as evidenced by the horrid life stories of people who were severely damaged in the Sea Org and on staff. Look at the organizations – they are a seething mass of crime and failure. How is that a solution to anything?
The best histories of anything or anyone include ALL of the observations by ALL of the participants in that history. Picking out the wins and hiding the losses is not the true history of anything.
As the full history of Scientology comes into view, it makes sense to question LRH’s true intentions as his actions and outcomes did not jibe with his words.
That’s why history matters and that’s why I don’t care whether you had a good time on the Purif or not.
I love you: Themoreyouknow. You have said it perfectly.
Anon — I have to agree with you, and not simply because it aligns with my thoughts (which it does) but because it makes empirical sense. I have worked with people who were unadulterated dicks and yet in certain areas of their lives were brilliant. They were equal parts good and bad – you just never knew where the madness would leak from.
LRH screwed the pooch more than once, and let his emotions dictate stupid orders and purges – not exactly the first person to do this. He enthralled thousands of staff with his dreams and made it theirs. Curse him for that if you like – some will agree – most I think will accept the fact that there were both good and bad times and that they literally signed on for it. That would include me – three separate times.
So yeah, I can point my finger at him and shake it vigorously while letting loose epithets of various color for all the bad things he did to me. But that’s not how it shook out. I got gains, as described. I had wins applying the Tech, as was described. I had losses because getting humans to agree with certain principles en mass, is like herding fucking cats. I wasted 3/4s of my time on staff doing and redoing the same thing over and over again. Have you heard of Sisyphus – look him up. Frustration as a word, only scratches the surface of what good staff went through trying to get things to work.
He started a movement with an obscene amount of good potential. It attracted great people and complete lunatics. It produced unbelievable theta results and absolute chaos in alternate months. It worked and it failed miserably and at last count there were about 55,713 people over the past 60 years who had a direct hand it making it GREAT and fucking it up beyond all recognition.
Enough with the blame, there’s enough to go around if it means anything. I don’t think it does.
Odd
+ 1
Fascinating.
Ditto.
Wow, this is fascinating stuff indeed! Thanks for sharing it Mike.
Whoa. Yeah the fact that he would invoke R2-45 in a PUBLIC publication like that shows the true character of the man. Definitely not joking around. I mean he declared them enemies of the planet and mankind. That is pretty SERIOUS.
When I look at things like this and someone wants to tell me about the “good old days” of Scientology in the 70’s, you know before things got messed up, I think WHAT??? I guess in San Francisco they were having a way GROOVIER time!
It was clearly messed up from the start.
No one read that and went, “What the fucking FUCK? Oh HELL NO! This shit is CRAZY! I’m OUT!” Instead they read it and were like, ” Imma put these names on my fridge so I can punch these motherfuckers right in the Jack Johnson if I see them on the street.”
You captured the tragicomedy of it all perfectly, Jane. Thank you.
San Francisco in the 1970s may have been “groovy” but the org there was a nightmare of unpaid staff, weird stats drives, suppressive management, and totalitarian culture.
Once there was a push to clear the city with an immediate goal of getting everyone on lines immediately. Certain quotas had to be met. If you had to drag a bum in off the street to get a stat, then that’s what you did.
The fact that Scientology organizations can become suppressive, dishonest, out exchange, unlawful, totalitarian, and headed by a sociopath is adequate proof that the admin “tech” does not work.
The fact that in 60 years not a single true Clear or OT VIII has ever been produced is adequate proof that the auditing “tech” does not deliver what it promised.
The illusion of “Scientology works!” is sustained by gullible minds turning off their ability to reason critically and myopically latching onto the sporadic genuine successes that could have been achieved just as well by virtually any semi-logical method.
And now, to play Devil’s Advocate, I would add: some of it really does work, and impressively so. And darn it, that’s what kept me and lots of people in.
Thanks for sharing this Mike. Are any of those people still alive? It would be great to hear their version of things that went down and whether the declared people actually did what LRH said they did. LRH really had an ego and a vindictive side to him that this shows big time. I mean publishing for BPI that it is OK to use “R2-45 and reverse processes” on them is pretty out there.
Lrh was 1.5. This tone explains all the situation. Lrh destroyed more than he built.
bbj, I think you may be underestimating the number of people who, in the 1970s and early 1980s, even before the “mission massacre”, responded to the Sea Org’s assault on the Field auditors and missions with “F*ck this sh*t, I’m outa here!” These were good auditors who had subscribed to the basic tech ideas and were applying them in constructive, helpful ways. They knew they did not want to be a part of the direction LRH was taking the “official” organizations towards. Whether LRH knew what he was doing in view of his overall goals, is debatable; I tend to think that in 1968 he had some idea of where it would all lead.
I agree with you, iamvalkov. Vast numbers of regular UK public fled in the late 60’s.
It took London Org a whole year to sort out CF and bring it back to order in a determined, all-hands project between 1971-72. We new staff were able to read all the letters in and out from the bygone days, and it was obvious some disaster befell the world of Scientology in the UK, though at the time we didn’t know what could cause such a thing.
More was to come, because in the Battle of Britain project of 1974, a similar occurrence befell CF, though not nearly as badly as before because there were fewer public. It was obvious that there were two eras in UK Scientology, with one ending in the mid 60’s. The second era was dominated by the SO, the GO, Int Management, Missions and bogey-man Ethics, and the old-timer staff were cleared out.
Nowadays, it’s fascinating to read those Top Secret LRH GO dispatches and realise the extent of his descent into James Bond land, probably he’d always had that side to him.
It was fun going exterior, having incredible experiences, walking on air, laughing uncontrollably, yet accompanied by that brutish organisation – a rose with thorns. None of us wanted to conform, we considered ourselves rebels, laugh though many will. It was a compromise made in good faith and trust in LRH because the personal wins were definitely there. I found the ‘Duty’ hat really hard to wear, and blew in 75. Ron issued successive Amnesties and I came back, eventually rejoining staff and noticing CF in chaos again.
Yes, I think LRH knew where he was going with his dramatic turn of direction in the mid-60’s. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I forgive LRH everything – he did a way better job than I did, or anyone else I can think of.