Category Archives: l. ron hubbard

Awakening – Part II

 

Reference: Awakening from scientology

Using scientology parlance, we begin by attempting to help people move above ‘know about’ on the ‘know to mystery scale.’    I have found plenty outside of scientology that explains and validates the sequence of Hubbard’s scale; illuminating the reason for the relatively high position for ‘not know.’  Thus, the Tao Te Ching – a book Hubbard once credited as offering in application all that scientology could hope to attain through its psychotherapeutic methodologies and training – teaches:

The Master leads; by emptying people’s minds

and filling their cores, by weakening their ambition

and toughening their resolve.

He helps people lose everything they know,

everything they desire, and creates confusion

in those who think that they know…

 

…The ancient Masters

didn’t try to educate the people,

but kindly taught them to not-know.

When they think that they know the answers,

people are difficult to guide.

When they know that they don’t know,

people can find their own way…

 

…Not-knowing is true knowledge.

Presuming to know is a disease.

First realize that you are sick;

then you can move toward health…

 

Notwithstanding their seeming alignment with such concepts as the know-to-mystery scale, scientologists are taught to eschew such ideas in pursuing  and exuding certainty.  And yet it was application of them that led to their own indoctrination or ‘enlightenment’ in and with scientology.  Scientologists are plied with a continual diet of tearing down all schools of thought that preceded  scientology – even those that led to its creation.  These facts necessitate that our first several chapters focus on pointing out the inconsistency, illogic, and even absurdity of some of your core scientology conditionings.  Perhaps I haven’t done it as ‘kindly’ as the Tao would prescribe.   Nonetheless, I want to make clear the purpose for doing so.  I am not doing it in order to replace your faulty stable data in order to become a new director of your destiny, but instead I hope to assist toward ‘when they know that they don’t know, people can find their own way.’   In that regard, the second reading recommendation that I make (the first being The Tao Te Ching – An English Translation by Stephen Mitchell) is a classic novel called Siddhartha by Herman Hesse.

Siddhartha is the quintessential lesson on the virtue – even necessity – of blazing one’s own path.  Even if you read it many years ago, I suggest that if you are seriously exploring the idea of moving  beyond and above scientology that you read it again.  Evaluate your scientology experience against Siddhartha’s experience.  Siddhartha sublimely demonstrates that the very act of becoming a follower or belonging  is anathema to enlightenment.   If in being introduced to new ideas and horizons one in particular seems to be the golden goose that will continue to forever lay you golden eggs, hark back to Siddhartha.  Clinging to one-stop enlightenment sources can defeat the entire purpose of the quest. Siddhartha also reminds us that when in doubt or despair it is rejuvenating to turn to and fully enjoy the  wonderment of the simple present; the Zen transcendence of doing what one is doing while doing it.

A system of thought purporting to be the ‘science of certainty’, that overtly asserts the goal and product of boiling all of creation down to simplistic blacks and whites, can be seen in the light of the wisdom from the Tao (and even scientology’s know-to-mystery scale) to potentially be the conveyor of a sort of sickness.  The resultant awareness myopia  – the death of life-promoting curiosity – is held firmly in place by ego and pride.  It requires an adopted air of superiority to automatically dismiss any ideas or information beyond one’s own ism or ology.  The certainty that one need not continue to look and to search and to find is protected and bolstered by pride in having arrived, having achieved all there is to know.

The disability (or as the Tao puts it, sickness) concomitant with such pride is described in Power vs. Force:

In our discussion of the levels of consciousness, we noted that one of the downsides of Pride is denial.  Every mind engages in denial in order to protect its “correctness” – this begets the fixity and resistance to change that prevents the average consciousness from advancing much more than five points in a lifetime.  Great leaps in levels of consciousness are always preceded by surrender of the illusion that ‘I know.’  Frequently, the only way one can reach this willingness to change is when one ‘hits bottom’, that is, by running out a course of action to its end in the defeat of a futile belief system.  Light can’t enter a closed box; the upside of catastrophe can be an opening to a higher level of awareness.  If life is viewed as a teacher, then it becomes just that.  But unless we become humble and transform them into gateways of growth and development, the painful life lessons we deal ourselves are wasted.

Awakening from scientology

I have been administering a course in graduating from scientology for the past couple months.  While doing so, I have been writing and sharing with students the chapters of an in progress book on the subject.  I recently added an introduction to the course/book as I recognized it required a further undercut.  I am publishing that introduction in three parts here as it might serve to spark productive thought and discussion.

A course in graduating from scientology

Introduction – Part I

One of the most difficult traps that scientology creates for minds is that of creating an arrogant sense of certainty in the member.  It is ultimately the ceiling that keeps people beholden to scientology, afraid to explore outside of it, and thus serves to entrap them within its own limitations.  What makes it so binding for scientologists is that they are taught that such an attitude has that effect at the outset of their studies. That is, the first barrier to learning is the student thinking he already knows it.  Scientologists apparently never think that the datum might apply once they had learned all there was to know about the subject that taught them that very datum.  That type of tricky dichotomy is peppered throughout the subject.  It is one thing that makes reasoning, discussion or debate on scientology so confounding.  A scientologist is only permitted to view the subject within the parameters of its own nomenclature, constructs and logic. He must never permit the thought to enter his own mind, ‘is there more to life than I have been instructed?’

As we shall see as we progress, scientology is finite.  It consists of the words of one man who wrote and lectured on the subject between the years 1950 and 1986.  By firm policy scientology enforces the notion that those thirty-six years of observations by one man are all that need be known on the mind and spirit and a host of other subjects.  It even instills the idea that to think or explore outside of the box of Hubbard words is dangerous.  In the book Power vs. Force David R. Hawkins succinctly described how such mental mechanics generally obtain:

The truth of each level of consciousness is self-verifying in that each level has its native range of perception, which confirms what’s already believed to be true.  Thus, everyone feels justified in the viewpoints that underlie his actions and beliefs. 

Presumably, the reader has to some degree shaken the scientology tenet that if it isn’t written or spoken by L. Ron Hubbard it is not true nor worth knowing. Otherwise, why would you even pick up a book entitled Graduating from scientology?  Nonetheless, in my experience the notion of fully self-contained infallibility is so heavily implanted with scientologists that it tends to come off in stages or layers.  It is common for scientologists, and even former scientologists, to continue to weigh any new data they encounter on the mind and spirit against a hidden standard, ‘how does it measure up against what scientology holds?’  Measuring up is not the problem.  Our course of exploration is all about comparing and contextualizing scientology indoctrinations.  It is a virtual exercise in Hubbard’s Logic 8: a datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.  The problem arises when your mind is trained to work on an automatic default (read thought stopping) where any data, no matter how vital and workable, is discredited and discarded to the degree it does not agree with one’s scientology indoctrination.  Scientologists come to know about scientology and in the process are convinced that they know all there is to know.

That is a perfectly normal state of affairs for a monotheistic religious belief system.  For those seeking the comfort and security that type of system lends to adherents, you would be well advised to drop this book right about now.  This course of exploration is for those who never signed up for such when they embarked on scientology study.  This exploration is for those who got involved in scientology from the beginning as part of a search for truth, wisdom, and enlightenment.

Overcoming Scientology Instilled Ignorance

Attempting to remedy Scientology instilled ignorance is a hazardous venture.  It can result in losing your job and having your family and friends harassed into abandoning you, and worse.  The resistance to truth can be so intense that in most cases the proponent of light is reduced to adopting the Scientology constructs of opponents, enemies, battle, and war.  Before long the seeker of truth becomes a mere ‘attacker’, over time becoming more and more like that which is attacking him and which seemingly by necessity he must attack in order to survive.

Scientologists – even many independent ones – have a habit of collapsing the ideas of  a) exposing corruption and lies to the light with b) attacking.  There is a reason for this.  Scientologists have been indoctrinated with the false idea that a=b when it comes to Scientology.  That then justifies the application of Hubbard’s hundreds of pages of war-upon-‘attackers’ technology.  Debate, even discussion, becomes impossible.  Scientologists are taught that argument is best performed by destroying the messenger of the idea (or truth) they oppose.  That is the ‘dead agent caper’ technology where the Scientologist becomes a one trick pony performing only ‘gotcha’ – that is, falsus in unum falsus in omnibus becomes the end all.  When ‘successful’ it justifies and perpetuates all  manner of falsehood and rotten corruption and abuse.

Part of overcoming the implantation of these falsehoods and the vow to fight to the death to protect the most astounding abuses is some honest contemplation of why such indoctrination is so intense and effective in Scientology.  Why was such false indoctrination introduced in the first place?  Why does it intensify over time, and intensify exponentially in the face of the most truthful, cathartic whistleblowing?  I think such contemplation will lead you to some answers you may at first find uncomfortable but ultimately will find liberating.

To those shining the light upon Scientology abuses, you may find you have better perspective, more equanimity and even credibility if you understand these Scientology games and take care not to fall prey to them.

“Ignorance does not yield to attack, but it dissipates in the light, and nothing dissolves dishonesty faster than the simple act of revealing the truth.” – David R. Hawkins

“Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.”   –  Louis Brandeis

 

Scientology Preview – 60 Minutes Australia

Will be available to international viewers shortly after airing at 60 Minutes Australia.

Scientology’s Code of Honor

I haven’t done any editorializing or analysis of the series of recent posts on the aims of Scientology (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, OSA Statistics).  I have simply posted the words of L. Ron Hubbard directing his Scientology troops at various times towards what he considered vital objectives.  More books could be written on the hundreds of lives that were ruined (both targets and executors of the objectives) by execution of those directives – and the many more like them that were issued over the years.   Most of the commentary on those posts has gravitated toward two poles.  At one pole is denial, strained justification.  At the other pole is condemnation, wholesale and definitive.  What few have assayed to do is explain the behavior of those who adopted and carried out these aims.  Those people who really believed the future of humanity was won or lost on whether those directives were thoroughly complied to. I have some views to share on that score which are derived from subjective experience and objective observation.

If you want to change out rotting upholstery you need to get down to the brass tacks. One piece of fundamental ‘scripture’ that most Scientologists – corporate, independent and otherwise – tend to agree upon wholeheartedly is L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘Code of Honor.’   It is so popular amongst them that it could be said to in some ways serve to define ‘Scientologist.’   There is no doubt that the Code contains some sensible and lofty principles that could serve someone well at certain life crossroads.  Just as certainly, there are aspects of the code that could serve to suggest destructive, even sociopathic, behavior.

“2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.”

I watched a documentary on Jonestown wherein the son of Jim Jones reflected on the single most powerful factor that led 900 people to follow his father’s directions to commit suicide – including some murdering their own children and authorities investigating the group.  After decades of therapy and soul searching he concluded that the common denominator of this mass insanity was an overriding concern on the part of each individual, ‘what would the rest of the group think of me if I withdrew allegiance now?’  That rang consistent with the Scientology experience to me.  It was the very moral question I grappled with for four years before deciding to expose the Jim Jones like behavior of David Miscavige at the international headquarters of Scientology.

I have investigated and studied organized crimes in several forms.  One common means to organize crime – from street gangs to white collar – is to establish the agreement early on to ‘never withdraw allegiance once granted.’  Usually, initially the vow is taken because the group somehow serves to protect the individual taking the vow or serves to give the individual a sense of belonging and empowerment. Over time, the crimes of the group and any member of the group become the crimes of each individual member to justify, glorify, and protect from outside exposure and accountability.  Ironically, but not surprisingly, throughout the history of Scientology that very cycle has repeatedly played itself out as it continues to today.

If folks feel the ‘Code of Honor’ is something too valuable to eschew wholesale, I think it would behoove them to replace item 2 with something along these lines:

“Only maintain allegiance as long as the recipient of it demonstrably remains true to those purposes and principles to which allegiance was granted in the first place.”

“12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.”

By Scientology’s own ‘technology’ nobody is ever hurt by another without just cause.  A being automatically manufactures just cause when he harms, or fixes to harm, another being.  If one credits Scientology ‘technology’ as infallible, as Scientology demands it be credited, then item 12 of the code encourages Scientologists to park their consciences at the thresholds of the homes they terrorize in the name of Scientology.

On death row of any prison you will find just about every cold-hearted murderer absolutely certain that the acts for which he was convicted and sentenced fit squarely within the advice of item 12 of the Code of Honor.

To fear to hurt another is not weakness, it is not unethical, it is not immoral. When that fear is real and consulted – most particularly when one feels he is carrying out a just cause – it has another name.  It is called conscience.   And so I see item 12 of L. Ron Hubbard’s Code of Honor as tantamount to an invitation to abandon or forfeit one’s conscience.

Again, to those wishing to continue following this code, they might be well served by replacing item 12 with something like this:

“Always give due consideration for the rights and well-being of another before doing something that might hurt that person, most particularly when you or another have pre-justified the act as being in pursuit of a just cause.”

ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION

Attached is a 2006 publication of the church of Scientology International.  It details the statistics of the Invest (Investigations) Bureau (the espionage and intelligence branch of Scientology’s dirty tricks and propaganda arm, Office of Special Affairs).   It carefully measures Scientology Inc’s accomplishment of the aims of Scientology as explored recently in several posts. The quality of the lives of the dozens of staff of OSA Invest are determined by whether these statistics are uptrending week to week or whether they are downtrending.  If the statistics are uptrending the staff member is not punished and is sometimes rewarded. If the statistics go downward, the staff members responsible can lose pay, lose eating or sleeping privileges, and be made to perform hard manual labor (in addition to a full work schedule) in order to make good with the group.  All of these statistics are carefully designed to add up to the ‘valuable final products’ of the Investigations Bureau, one of which is: ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION.

Note well that one of  the first Hubbard references that these statistics are based upon per the publication itself is ADVICE 27 Mar 1972 COUNTER ATTACKS TACTICS.  We have explored the implications of that publication before, e.g. ‘Standing one’s ground’,  and no doubt will do so again in the future.  It explicitly states that when you cannot shut up a whistleblower by costing him or her their job you then effectively attack that which he or she most values (in most cases, that means spouses, children and other family members of the target).  If there was any doubt that it is currently enforced, you see it here prominently highlighted in modern OSA context.

Investigations Statistics Issue

Bare-Faced Messiah by Russell Miller

Russell Miller’s book is finally going to be published in the U.S. apparently.  An interview with Miller was posted on Tony Ortega’s blog this morning.  I read the book last year.  I actually thought I had read it back in the eighties when it was published.  After all, I helped direct and coordinate the abusive litigation tactics that drove his U.S. publisher into dropping the project.  When I read the book, I recognized that in fact I had never read it all those years back.  It was lingering cult delusion that made me think I had.  In the eighties I had only read summaries and ‘dead agent’ packs compiled by Office of Special Affairs.  Even in the past couple years I have referred to Miller as a propagandist; that was before actually having read the book.  What I found remarkable about the thorough read I did was how balanced and even-handed Miller was about L. Ron Hubbard. It is not a wholesale condemnation.  While I don’t attest to the accuracy of all his facts, for the most part the book covers a lot of irrefutable history pretty accurately.

As Miller noted in his interview, the nature of the legal attacks upon the book, similar to the defenses in Rathbun v. Miscavige incidentally, revolve around strained (read invented) intellectual property rights theories.  If the book were inherently dishonest there would have been claims based on defamation theories.  But as we have noted previously, to Scientology the purpose of the suit is to not to win, but instead to harass.

Mr. Miller makes reference to a profanity-laced Scientology outburst about the book during the legal proceedings.  The actual quotation is interesting.  It is a quotation from the deposition of Norman F. Starkey, then executor of the estate of L. Ron Hubbard.  It appears in the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York Opinion:

2. Norman Starkey, the Executor of Hubbard’s estate who licensed plaintiff to exploit the Hubbard copyrights stated in his deposition: “That scum bag book is full of bullshit, man, and you know it. It is full of bullshit…. goddam, fucking bullshit.” (Gready Aff.Exh. A, p. 94.)

If you think that language is strong, you should have heard Miscavige’s reaction to Starkey nearly blowing millions of dollars of litigation fees on that one infantile, albeit honest, outburst.  One of the most remarkable feats in the litigation was overcoming that clear evidence that the real  Scientology complaint about Miller’s book was that it did not like the facts being aired, and not that it was suffering any harm by having copyrighted works quoted. But, again as Miller notes the U.S. legal system has some flaws, and Scientology has perfected the ruthless, if expensive, exploitation of them.

As to the man in the red sports car following Mr. Miller in Los Angeles, that in fact was the infamous Eugene M. Ingram.  Ingram made so much Scientology money by his aggressive, noisy investigative tactics that he bought himself two shiny new sports cars (a Mitsubishi 3000GT and a Lotus Esprit), one with gold-plated mag hubs.  In his inimitable style he wore loud, flashy Hawaiian shirts during his stake outs with those bright low riders.  When I reported on the flap of Ingram being so easily and regularly made because of his audacious ways, David Miscavige ordered that Ingram be encouraged to be even more loud and noticeable, ‘it’s supposed to be a noisy investigation, isn’t it?’  Incidentally, that is what ‘ensuring the orthodox practice of the scriptures’ that Scientology lawyers are paid so much to repeat interminably is all about.

I apologize publicly to Mr. Miller for my involvement in the investigative tactics designed to shudder him into silence, and the unlawful abuse of legal process to block publication in the United States and cost his publishers inordinate sums in other countries.

I encourage people to purchase his book once available and read it.  Not just because it will make me feel a bit better about my own efforts to suppress it, but because I believe it is essential reading for anyone involved with Scientology.

The Aims of Scientology: Part 4

references:

Aims of Scientology: Part One

Aims of Scientology: Part Two

Aims of Scientology: Part Three

How to obtain ‘humanitarian control’ by L. Ron Hubbard:

“All of a sudden somebody is jumping all over us in “Wango-bingo” and all itwould take would be a quiet phone call. That’s one way to keep order. That is an intelligence method of handling things. It’s not blackmail, because blackmail is demanding money and that has nothing to do with it. “You jump on us, you’re dead” — that type of material.

It follows this way: We start to expand an area and we instantly and immediately want protective information in that area. We may be able to coordinate who causes the unrest of the world against the channels that they would have in that area. And that tells us the most favorable protective information.

That is the formula. And the more we study the general scene, the more we can coordinate, how do these birds do it? And then we will find what lines they use and get protective information on the lines they use.

So, Mr. Big decides to knock us flat in Bongville. All of a sudden it cools by the simple reason that we already know that the head of the public health service at Bongville has three wives. What you normally do is leak it to him. Somebody goes out and has dinner with his daughter as a perfect stranger and says “You know, I would be awfully careful of jumping on those Scientologists in Bongville if I were you. You know somebody ought to tell your Daddy that there’s some wild rumor—of course, we don’t know what the truth of it is—that actually you have three mothers. And they know that over there.”

Our general world study tells us what we look into to find protective information.

If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.

     Information is the keynote.”

(emphasis added)

– L. Ron Hubbard 1 July 1968, Information and Control

Full Scientology Office of Special Affairs Issue, Information and Control

The Aims of Scientology: Part 3

References:

The Aims of Scientology Part 1

The Aims of Scientology Part 2

“SITUATION: Governments hold onto and nurse psychiatry and the mental health movement. Vital tech of Scientology not used by governments yet.
DATA: Psychs can’t deliver yet governments hold on. Psychs just PR without delivery. Government still retains them.
ADMIN WHY: We have not PRed governments properly to make them offload psychs and onload Scientology.
ETHICS WHY: Governments not evaluating and accepting false reports.
IDEAL SCENE: Scientology has replaced psychs in all government zones.”

L. Ron Hubbard – Occupy Territory Eval (now Office of Special Affairs policy)

click here for The full OCCUPY TERRITORY EVAL

The Aims of Scientology: Part 2

Reference: The Aims of Scientology: Part 1

As promulgated by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1969:

                                                         TARGETS

     The vital targets on which we must invest most of our time are:

     T1.  Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration. 

     T2.  Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or  proprietors of all news media.

     T3.  Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures.

     T4.  Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard…

–          L. Ron Hubbard HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 FEBRUARY 1969  TARGETS DEFENSE

For Full Policy click hereTargets Defense