RON’S JOURNAL 34
Birthday March 13, 19821
THE FUTURE OF SCIENTOLOGY
There comes a time in all the great movements of mankind when they get attacked.
When one reviews the history of religious wars which laid the bulk of Europe in ruins time after time across the centuries, one gets some idea of the passions of man.
The primary passions are twofold: one stems from the decent impulses of man, the effort to do and be something good, to accomplish a resurgence and reforms that are worthwhile; the other is the evil hatred of the status quo who, in their violence oppose all who would question their right to oppress and maim and kill.
The first impulse comes from the very heavens, the second is born in the depths of hell.
All things worthwhile have to be fought for: every decent impulse in man’s history has been opposed.
The fate of the entire civilization is decided on the issue of which one wins.
No single human being can stand aside from the fray, a spectator wondering who is going to win. It is his OWN fate that is being decided: will he in the future have a decent life or will he be crushed down into the mud? Will the decent impulses of the civilization triumph or, in defeat at the hands of evil, have to wait again for another chance, another time?
The travails of the religion of Scientology may seem great but, frankly, they do not compare to those other faiths have gone through.
Time and again since 1950, the vested interests which pretend to run the world (for their own appetites and profit) have mounted full-scale attacks. With a running dog press and slavish government agencies the forces of evil have launched their lies and sought, by whatever twisted means, to check and destroy Scientology.
What is being decided in this arena is whether mankind has a chance to go free or be smashed and tortured as an abject subject of the power elite.
The issues are extremely clear-cut, there is no argument there.
But what is the result to date of enemy action?
Honestly, my friends, a review of these battles over the past thirty-two years moves one to contemptuous laughter. The enemy, perched in their trees or swinging by their tails, have been about as effective as one of their psychologist’s monkeys peeling a policeman’s club thinking it is a banana and then throwing it only to hit the chief ape in the face.
Oh, the furor has been very loud. The AMA, pouring lies into the press through gnashing teeth persevered for years-and then went bankrupt. The psychiatrist, riding high in 1959, hoping to place one of his ilk in a blackmail position behind every head of state, hoping to consign any citizen at his whim to a psychiatric Siberia, trying to preserve his right to kill and maim as a profession above the law, is today a butt of comic strips. And what of the FDA that for fifteen years snarled and snapped about the E-Meter? One hardly hears of them today. And what of the mighty Interpol, that tool of CIA? It was found to be a nest of war criminals hiding out from the law itself.
Oh, one could go on but in each case the enemy has gone down to defeat in the end. You do not hear much about this from the running dog press because, of course, they were the tool of the enemy in the first place.
They lose because they traffic in lies. But, because they told their lies so broadly, even when they were disproven, they still tend to hang around and make one feel there is-there isn’t-an adverse public opinion. The enemy and their press are not the public: you could ask yourself why, year after year, fewer and fewer people buy and read newspapers: people don’t believe them anymore.
I once checked, in the 50s the effect on org stats of howling bombasts of a running dog magazine called TIME. Its owner, a man named Luce, was said to be an LSD addict, both he and his wife carefully controlled by his psychiatrist. Of course he published blasts against anything which would expose his rotten condition. What I found was that not one of those lying bombasts had had the slightest effect upon org stats. Luce is dead now, a good testimony to his drugs and the psychiatrists. There are a dozen orgs today for everyone that existed in
And so it goes with these attacks.
Oh, yes, we’ve had some casualties. Oh, yes, we’ve had some trouble. But that is the way with wars: not only combatants but innocent bystanders can get wounded. That’s this universe: we didn’t make it that way but that’s no reason we cannot, bit by bit, correct it. Certainly, for mankind, there’s no escaping it and if there is a battle, there is more to do than simply duck one’s head: the bombs are no respecters of uniforms or identities.
It may appear that the enemy suffers no casualties for they hush them up.
With no great pleasure, I used to keep a roster of them. Through no will or fault of ours, many of them are dead. Some died from things that we have tech to help: it is rather poetic in justice that they were fighting what they themselves could have used. Many others, when the battle cleared, lost their jobs: and that is a precious thing to a suppressive, his garnered rights to do others in: it is sad to say there are many in governments who are there just so they can have this right: so when one gets fired for failing in his attacks on us, that’s very close to the end of his life. They do not care if you hurt the government or their association or their publication: threats against those things are part of their own plans to cause
trouble-typical of the insane. Where they can be hurt and practically the only place, is losing their job or position. And their casualties in this respect would fill some very long bread lines: when they fail, their mentors fire them.
They have lost power.
They have been hurt.
And in any contemporary attack, no matter how violent it may seem, the result predictably will be the same: failures and casualties in enemy ranks. Not because we harm or touch them-we wouldn’t. They are mad monkeys and they blame and shoot each other.
Now when you hear of some new attack or an old one, you could get the idea that we’re losing and are likely to winnow away and vanish. The enemy keeps saying that. But just remember a maxim: if the papers say it, it isn’t true.
Hearing such things, one may think that, as a Scientologist, it doesn’t matter what you do: it doesn’t make any difference now since all is lost. That’s silly. In or out of Scientology, one is on these firing lines. The crime-ridden, drug-crazed, misgoverned mess out there which they call civilization is no place at all to escape to. That’s surrender.
And it DOES matter what one does on post, particularly when the shots are flying hottest. If you think it’s bad in a Scientology area, look at Ulster or Detroit! And those poor guys are just innocent bystanders being mowed down.
At least the Scientologists are DOING something about it. They’re handling people, they’re making inroads on crime, they’re salvaging addicts, they’re even quoted, often unknowingly, by beleaguered business.
All you have to do is look at where Scientology was in terms of numbers of orgs and missions even a few years back and where it is now to know. All you have to do is count the additional countries using it year by year. All you have to do is count the memberships of the Churches. And you know conclusively that while the enemy goes down, whatever the bombast, Scientology is going UP.
It DOES matter what you do on post or in the field or in the world. This scene called Scientology is not going to end. Time after time the enemy, in our blackest hours, has told itself, “We’ve got them now! We’ve stopped them!
They’re through!” They were just praying past their own graveyard. Each time, there we were again, stronger, expanding, working better. And at this very moment of writing, that’s where we are at right now. The last enemy attack is winding down.
And there we still are all over the world, doing good, getting stronger, getting more numerous.
And in the coming decades so it will be again.
The guys in the white hats-with the S and Double Triangle-are winning.
They are winning because they mean well. They do good. They know their business. And the enemy is losing and will lose because they mean bad. They do evil. They are incompetent.
Remember the principle of Flourish and Prosper. It works!
And the next time you see an attack, remember the old truth, “This too shall come to pass away.”
But not Scientology. We’re here and will be here for all the decades and centuries that this civilization has left to it. And right now I am working on plans so that it will be here even when the madmen, in some possible last convulsion of evil, have blown this civilization away.
We are saving beings, not men.
And the evil die within their own generation.
So the next time you feel blue, read this.
The enemy can’t even plan for tomorrow.
We work in eternity.
L. RON HUBBARD
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 2 APRIL AD141
TWO TYPES OF PEOPLE
Completing research on the highest levels of clearing now being taught as the upper course at Saint Hill, Class VI, OT, I made a very fundamental discovery about man and life that I’d like you to know about.
You probably have speculated on this many times—are there two kinds of people: good people and bad people? Society is more or less organized on the basis that there are. And certainly one sees that some are successful and some aren’t, some are good to know and some aren’t.
Even in modern TV fiction one has the cowboys in the white hats and the cowboys in the black hats; indeed one probably couldn’t have stories at all to man’s way of thinking unless there were heroes and ogres. And even fiction is rigged as a moral lesson in good and bad people.
Philosophers long before Greece pondered moral conduct in terms of good and bad. And Diogenes was looking for an honest man, implying some weren’t. More recent speculation in the nineteenth century termed all men evil unless forced to be good.
Some schools of thought tried to avoid the point by saying early childhood formed character. Yet other schools maintained man would always be evil unless personally threatened, which gives us the presence of police in the society. But even police sometimes work on the idea that there are good and bad people.
From all this one could judge that man had a problem about whether people are good or bad.
Probably at this minute you could think of some examples of good people and bad people. You know those who rave and gnaw the rug at the very thought of Scientology helping anyone, so therefore there must be people of evil intention toward their fellows.
And there are.
The research results you would be interested in show clearly that there are two types of behaviour—that calculated to be constructive and that calculated to be disastrous.
These are the two dominant behaviour patterns. There are people then who are trying to build things up and others who are trying to tear things down.
And there are no other types. Actually there aren’t even shades of grey.
The disaster type can be repressed into inactivity (and illness) and the constructive type can also be repressed (and made ill).
Thus there are two basic actions, each with many other subsidiary actions.
There is also a cyclic or combined type who is alternately constructive and disastrous.
So there are cowboys in white hats and cowboys in black hats. And the cowboys in the grey hats are too sick to be in the game.
One scholarly chap (a very sick fellow) hopefully told me once that there were no true villains, no purely evil people. He was whistling past the graveyard. There may not be evil people, but there are people currently devoted to doing evil actions.
All such conduct is apparent and dominant. We see such people all the time. We just don’t want to see them.
The underlying reasons for this are, in the absence of processing, fixed and unchangeable in any one lifetime.
As man knows a man only in one lifetime, the basic cause or changes have not been observed. Thus to all practical purposes for man, some are good and some are evil. And if we didn’t have Scientology it would not only not be observed but couldn’t ever be changed.
That this condition exists—that half are good and half are bad according to their personalities—oddly enough does not alter basic Scientology concepts. It explains why certain persons appear to be evil and some appear to be good.
Examining the actual goals of an individual shows us why.
About half the goals of any one individual are constructive, the remainder are destructive.
It takes a being a very long time to live completely through the cycle of one goal, much less a series of goals.
Therefore any one individual at any given long period of his existence is only fixated on disaster and at a subsequent long period is fixated only on being constructive.
So the same being at different lifetimes is good and evil.
Given a sudden overwhelming experience a “good person” may be shifted violently in his own goals pattern and become evil. And a “bad person”, acted upon powerfully by life, will become good. But they also become sick. Their illness stems from being moved out of present time into past heavy energy patterns. It is no cure to so move them despite the assertions of nineteenth century mentalists and their shock “treatment”. This shows why shock sometimes works and why changes of character come about. And it also shows why such changes are accompanied by severe illness and early death. The person is thrown violently out of present time into a painful past.
The problem is not a problem of sanity and insanity. It is a problem of disastrous motives and constructive motives and the degree to which either is suppressed.
By suppressing the damaging motives of a being who is currently inclined to disaster, one can make that being “behave”. But by suppressing the constructive motives of a being currently inclined to constructiveness (as in the military), one can make that being “behave” also. But both will become physically ill, neurotic or insane in the absence of processing.
So the same being in one long period is constructive and in the next long period disastrous.
As Man measures time in small bits such as youth, old age or a lifetime, he could conceive of a being as either only constructive or only disastrous.
Fortunately for us, this also solves the ancient riddle that one cannot be granted power without also having good intentions. The only way final and powerful abilities can be returned to an individual is by ridding him of all these hidden compulsions, a task now accomplished at Level VI.
This gives the Scientologist a useful insight into character. A sick being is one who has been bent upon violence and was suppressed, or one who was bent upon constructiveness and was suppressed.
It also gives us a whole span of new processes for Level III called “Auditing by Lists”, available in HGCs or from informed field auditors. This is quite in addition to what it does at Level VI. And it also tells us that no one with obsessive intentions will ever make it to the highest and most powerful levels with disastrous inclinations.
But at the street level, with no processing involved, we have these two basic types—good and evil.
And these subdivide into the good who couldn’t be good and became sick, and the evil who couldn’t be evil and became sick.
But these facts are more than philosophic observations. They deliver to us understanding and more chance to be right about people. And they give us as well the wide open door to making people well at Level III.
One cannot push research as I have done in the past year into the stratosphere without learning more at sea level also. And this is what has happened here.
The basic travail of man is that he is divided into those who build and those who demolish, and in this conflict of intentions his fight, whichever side he is on, is always lost.
Or was lost until the Scientologist came along.
L. Ron Hubbard
- Document studied on the How to Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course. (2001 ed.) ↩