That explanation is a pretty good start.
There's no doubt that Hubbard wanted to convey the idea that Dianetics and Scientology were tremendously powerful forces for good, and that, if used in "Black" or "Reverse" fashion, could be tremendously powerful forces for bad.
That hyperbole aside, I think Hubbard wanted people to be under his influence and control, but to functional well enough to be able to serve him.
Only in extreme cases would it be necessary to completely and permanently destroy a person. The ideal was a happy complaint follower, who would have "VGIs" on Hubbard's pronouncements, and be useful to Hubbard.
Here's some background, in additional to the background already recently added to this thread:
Old timer John Sanborn, the editor of many of Hubbard's early books, said this during a 1986 interview:
Sara was a lovely woman. She was intelligent. She was quite young. I suppose she was around 24, and Hubbard was around 40. She had an aristocratic look...
Early on (before the divorce) he [Hubbard] made this stupid attempt to get Sara brainwashed so she'd do what he said. He kept her sitting up in a chair, denying her sleep, trying to use Black Dianetic principles on her, repeating over and over again whatever he wanted her to do. Things like, 'Be his wife, have a family that looks good, not have a divorce'.
And here's a re-post from a thread called 'Scientology = White Scientology and Black Scientology':
The clarion call amongst the Independent Scientologists is that Miscavige has "reversed Scientology" and is using "Black Dianetics," and "Reverse" or "Black Scientology."
In the 'Technical Dictionary', 'Black Dianetics' is defined as "
1. Hypnotism 2. There are those who, to control, resort to narcotics, suggestion, gossip, slander - and thousands of overt and covert ways that can be classified as Black Dianetics."
And yet, examining Scientology, it appears,
since its inception, that Hubbard carefully constructed Scientology to be a mixture of both its "white" and "black" aspects, and that this mixture is, and always has been, Scientology.
This is a cover of a 1968 edition of a Scientology book.
It features an image from what Hubbard believed to be a super-engram from 75 million years ago. During this super-engram, what Hubbard called "R6 Bank" images were "implanted" in the minds of billions of humans and human spirits.
All other Scientology books had similar images placed on their covers, and these images were to induce a state of hypnotic suggestion over anyone looking at these book covers, causing them to buy and read the book, and to obey its instructions, notably to contact their local "Org."
The best known hypnotic image is the "exploding volcano" on 'DMSMH':
Below is the Children's Security Check of 1961. It inundates children - six and up - with questions about bad things that they, supposedly, did.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMmnBXcYN9Q
Imagine subjecting a six or eight year old child to such questioning.
(Note: Children older than 12 would be subjected to the adult Security Check Question list.)
Is the Children's Security Check of 1961 "Reverse Scientology"?
And then there's Hubbard 'What to Audit' (later renamed 'History of Man') of 1952, where HUbbard tells Scientologists that, "
This is a cold blooded and factual account of your last sixty trillions years."
Isn't that suggestion? Isn't that 'Black Dianetics" or "Black Scientology"?
And there are many more examples.
How long will it take for the Independent Scientologists to recognize that Scientology is a mix of both "white" and "black" - carefully, deliberately, step by step, over many years, fashioned by L. Ron Hubbard to achieve his hidden agenda?
It isn't always as blatant as
What to Audit's "
This is a cold blooded and factual account of your last sixty trillion years," or the Clearing Course, OT 2, and OT 3, where the content of the person's mind and/or space is told to him, or her, by Hubbard through the OT materials.
Sometimes, it's more subtle.
Using the old glue analogy, IMO, Scientology, as designed by its founder, consists of two main aspects: the solvent ("truth," "abreaction"/catharsis/"key-out" etc.), and the lacquer (the sea of words, half truths, falsehoods, smoke and mirrors, gimmicks, tricks, manipulation, etc.)
In the proper ratio, these combine to make a mind-glue that sticks a person to Scientology. Currently, Miscavige has screwed up the ratio of solvent and lacquer with too much lacquer and not enough solvent. (Without solvent, glue doesn't "work.")
____________________________________
Usually, Scientologists can grasp the notion that "Black Scientology" might be used on "Suppressive Persons," but not the idea that Scientology's founder used "Black Scientology" on his own loyal followers. This is difficult to explain to Scientologists, since Scientology (Hubbard's teachings and "applied philosophy") is regarded as a "gift" from Hubbard for their benefit. Yet Scientology, as crafted by Hubbard, is a devious mix of "Black" and "White" Scientology.
Currently, about as far as "Independent" and "FreeZone" Scientologists can venture is to assert that corporate Scientology's current leader, David Miscavige, uses "Black Scientology." Beyond that, things become foggy for them.
In his confidential writings, Hubbard taught that Scientology's enemies should be subjected to "enemy tactics," and to the various mechanisms of the mind (and "reactive mind"), and Hubbard, in writings and lectures, would sometimes describe these and, on a few occasions, even warn the wide eyed and eager Scientologists that some evil force (not him of course, but the communists, Nazis, psychiatrists, etc.) could use Scientology to enslave - such is "the power the tech,
" etc. FZ and Indy Scientologists are fond of quoting these warnings. This, while remaining subject to many of the manipulative ideas and methods woven into Scientology by its founder.
Here are a few examples. There are many.
L. Ron Hubbard described himself as "Mankind's Greatest Friend," etc., so his writings and comments about "aberrative mechanisms" and "enemy tactics" never came across as a warning about himself. If anything, it made others more inclined to trust him.
For example, in Dianetics, what's "aberrative"? Something that equates to "survival." The "held down 7s" are "aberrative" because they're identified with the person's survival. "Survival," as a "mechanism" becomes "aberrative."
Even in 1950, Dianetics was presented as being a "race with the atomic bomb." The message was plain enough: Dianetics = Survival. No Dianetics = Doom.
And this continued into Scientology. One of many examples: In 1956, Hubbard wrote, "
With Man now equipped with weapons sufficient to destroy all Mankind and Earth... The primary race on Earth is... the one being run between Scientology and the atomic bomb."
Yet, how many Scientologists read Hubbard's descriptions of Dianetics and Scientology as essential for Mankind's "Survival!" - and their own "Survival" - and thought, "Oh, Ron's using the 'Survival mechanism' to manipulate me"?
Another example from 1950 Dianetics is the "ally computation." Someone comes out of the blue and helps another person, helps the other person in some way or other. The "help" could be indifferently offered, or insincerely offered, but if the needy person regards it as aiding in his "Survival!" (or well being, or the alleviation of pain or the attainment of pleasure or relief), then (so the theory goes) the "ally" mechanism is in place and in effect. For example, an uncle, who may not be a particularly nice fellow, gets his little nephew a glass of water when that nephew is sick in bed and thirsty. The uncle (in the mind of the little nephew) becomes an "ally," and the uncle become identified with "Survival!"
Now, who would have thought that "Mankind's Greatest Friend," on whom the "Survival!" of Mankind, and the "Survival!" of each person (Scientologists, through Ron's "Bridge") depended, would use the "ally computation" and the "Survival mechanism" in order to deceive, manipulate, and exploit? Nah, that could never happen.
However, it did happen, and not only years later, but sometimes the same day, or previous to Hubbard mentioning a deceptive, manipulative or destructive mechanism or tactic.
But it was disguised, and so wasn't recognized. Hubbard's warnings about the race between Dianetics or/and Scientology and the atomic bomb were regarded by Scientologists as warnings by their, and Mankind's, #1 "ally," L. Ron Hubbard. Who amongst Scientologists suspected? Yet, the warning noted above - from 1956 - was less than a year after Hubbard had published, and distributed, his fake "Russian Psychopolitics textbook"
http://warrior.xenu.ca/Brainwashing-front.jpg (which of course denounced Dianetics), a "textbook" that, amongst the haughty "Russian Commie"-sounding rhetoric, and a few brief references to psychiatrists practicing sex with their (unconscious) patients, "Pain-Drug-Hypnosis," shock treatment, lobotomies, etc., was a compendium of enemy ("Russian Communist") ideas and practices for "
asserting and maintaining dominion over thoughts and loyalties."
From Hubbard's "Russian Textbook":
"
The failure of Psychopolitics might well bring about the atomic bombing of the Motherland. The psychopolitical operative must succeed for his success means world peace... The end thoroughly justifies the means."
Even "Survival!" - used to manipulate - was mentioned in the fake "Russian Textbook":
"
It is pointed out in many early Russian writings that this is a survival mechanism. It [the "Survival!" mechanism]
has already been well and thoroughly used in the survival of Communism."
Hubbard's 1955 "Russian Textbook" was loaded with manipulative and exploitative ideas and practices, many of which were being used on Scientologists themselves - used on them by their "Greatest Friend" and ally, L. Ron Hubbard - ideas and practices which were, ultimately, from the 1960s onward, formally incorporated, by Hubbard, into Scientology doctrine and practice.
Yet, who suspected? Yet, it was right there. And because it was right there it was unthinkable.
I did a re-do, and removed the paragraph that referred to your post:
