Crowley, Hubbard, and the New Individualism, by Maureen Mullarkey (re Scientology)


@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Crowley, Hubbard, and the New Individualism, by Maureen Mullarkey | First Things (re Scientology)

A very good article. Read it in full.

First Things: Crowley, Hubbard, and the New Individualism

Straightaway, let me clarify. In the previous post I quoted Ron Hubbard as saying: “The one super-secret sentence that Scientology is built on is ‘Do as thou wilt—that is the whole of the law.’” The words belong to L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., not Sr.. Speaking of Scientology, the son added: “It came from the black magic, from Crowley.”

Hubbard Sr. was a confessed admirer of Crowley, calling him “my very good friend.” According to Hubbard Jr., his father prepared for his Philadelphia Doctorate Course lecture series, taped in 1952, by reading Crowley. The title of the son’s book, L. Ron Hubbard: Messiah or Madman?, indicates a certain filial tension. But let us take that as a healthy response to having grown up with Hubbard’s attraction to Crowley’s occult system.
Whatever else they might contain, they are fueled by ambition—phrased and costumed in variegated ways— to divinize oneself. Here are Icarus’ wings to fly us toward new possibilities of becoming. Or, as Scientologists would phrase it, to reach the “upper echelon of theta beingness and behavior.”

What the Crowleys and the Hubbards of our times represent is a quasi-spiritualized individualism. Here is David Riesman’s autonomous man in fancy dress. Or devil’s gear. The insignia of this new autonomous individual is his heightened self-consciousness, and a de-socialized will that transcends the virtues of the old bourgeois individual still tethered to civil society.

Our new individualism comes wrapped in the exotic, like Crowley’s cult of Thelema or Hubbard’s Scientology, to suggest evermore extravagant and hallucinatory understandings of the self. And the Self so discovered is, inevitably, superior to the restraints and formalities of ordinary life. If Crowley’s squalid end is any gauge, that is hell enough.
On might add, if Hubbard's squalid end is any gauge, that is also hell enough.
Last edited:


Oh, a wise guy,eh?
Re: Crowley, Hubbard, and the New Individualism, by Maureen Mullarkey (re Scientology

I have recently been contemplating "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law". I see this as the bedrock of Scientology.

The first chapter of the first book of Scientology, Advanced Procedure and Axioms states "The only thing which can actually alter self-determinism and reduce it is self-determinism itself. One can determine to be used or worked upon by the environ and its people. But until one makes a determination to do so, one is not so affected."

I see this as only a more verbose version of the former maxim.


A little background

The first Thelemite was Francois Rabelais.

The origin of "Do What Thou Wilt" and the "Law of Thelema" was benign.

The original Thelemite, Rabelais, wrote:

Do what thou wilt.

Because men that are free, well born, well bred, and conversant in honest companies have naturally an instinct and spur that prompteth them into virtuous actions, and withdraws them from vice, which is called honor...

Crowley modified that, and Hubbard modified it further.

From Aleister Crowley's 'The Book of the Law':

We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit; let them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is the vice of Kings: stamp down the wretched and the weak: this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world.

...I am the snake that giveth knowledge and delight, and stir the hearts of men with drunkenness. To worship me take wine and strange drugs. They shall not harm ye at all. It is a lie, this folly against self...

...The Kings of Earth shall be the Kings forever: the slaves shall serve.

Them that seek to entrap thee, to overthrow thee, them attack without pity or quarter; and destroy them utterly.

The 'Law of Thelema' is "Do What Thou Wilt.

In Scientology, conscience, as with truth, flows upward, but not necessarily downward.

One is supposed to be truthful upward, and have a conscience upward, but downward there are no such conditions.

From 'Cause on All Dynamics' lecture of 29 December 1951 by L. Ron Hubbard:

"What is conscience? It is simply negating against your own, not somebody else's causes. If there is such a thing as conscience, it would be that...

"Now you want to know any time in your life when you have felt guilty... you go back earlier and find the postulate that you are guilty of disobeying [and erase the postulate]..."

L. Ron Hubbard, on "inventing facts," from an April 1955 'HCOB':

"A datum is an invention which has become agreed upon and solidified... When it is thoroughly agreed upon it becomes, then, a truth.

"The word 'lie' is simply 'an invention with a bad connotation'... Thus society frowns upon the invention of facts."

This is as much a part of Scientology as the "auditing comm cycle," "ARC," and discharging tension by finding "earlier similars" (wording is Korzybski's), and these ingredients, along with others, combine - per the founder's design - to make Scientology.

In Scientology, lying is only supposed to flow downward, with Hubbard, and his senior representatives, free to lie to other Scientologists, while Scientologists are expected to open their minds completely to inspection by those above them.

It shouldn't be surprising that a 'Good Scientologist' is willing to lie to those he sees as below him: the "SPs," "DBs," "Homo Saps," and "Wogs," and also willing to lie to less "aware" fellow Scientologists.

It also shouldn't be surprising that what the "average run of the mill humanoid," or "wog," regards as conscience does not apply to a Scientologist when that Scientologist is dealing with another who is "lower on the scale."

It's quite a system: an "applied philosophy" that make liars out of good people - lying to others, and also lying to themselves.

It also can make sociopaths out of good people - but a specialized kind of sociopath.