The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[FoTi]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Probably. And the most help I saw people get out of all their scn auditing was from a really good life repair program!

And it was pretty damn rare evn back then for anyone to get a really good life repair program.

I got most of my gains on Life Repair......but it didn't really repair my life. :confused2:

In fact, I was way overrun on the EP of Life Repair because I never looked at the EP and I just kept getting auditing. It was good stuff back then.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

That's what Captain Bill said. That what Hubbard was doing with Scientology was a sort of pilot program, a test, an experiment, etc.

Captain Bill assumed a benign motivation, a humanitarian objective.

Yet, evidence indicates that Hubbard had a self-aggrandizing long term goal of establishing his own fan(atic) club, one that was supposed to last thousands of years, along with a goal of building monuments to himself, and a goal of carving his name into "hard granite."

Everything else - including some good ideas, and some potentially beneficial counseling procedures - was to distract and fool the faithful, and to keep them members of the fan club, keep them polishing his monuments, and keep them protecting his granite (steel) engraved name.

I hope I haven't disoriented any of you late cogniters.

I can't disagree with anything you have written but your last sentence is an unnecessary put down to other people which did not need to be written. Some of us had already cognited quite some time ago although I do admit that the concept of a pilot program was totally new to me. What I liked the most about Ilove2lurk's post was its succinctness, so short, though all encompassing, direct and to the point.

There's a lesson there for you to learn as well, if you could paraphrase and summarize what you know as succinctly as Ilove2lurk, you might be able to get your points across quicker and easier.
Lakey

 

[Leon]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

The EP of any repair program is given in the C/S Series early in the sequence of numbers. From memory, the pc feels great and feels that he/she can get case gain.

"Life Repair" is a marketing thing for newbies. Repair is repair. Repair, as a series of processes or actions, can be run at any time, any place on the pc's overall, major program, i.e. "The Bridge." Pam Kemp built an entire practice on giving "life repairs." As she explains in her talk available on xenutv. Working at the Mission level, I have delivered a lot of Life Repairs. I can tell you that it is more fun than any other auditing I have delivered. Kinda keeps you on your feet and honest because the pc has no grooved-in "now-I'm-supposed-to's."

Given the big letdown for many people who have been pushed into OT-3, 4, 5, 7, I believe a lot of them would be far better off alternating a life repair with living. On a microcosm of that, not requiring major programming usual in a scio repair, an alteration of Clean Slate and SPIEPR would also work wonders on anyone provided they got off on the procedure and did not resist because it is Knowledgism. Scios have many special, trained-in, cultural considerations that can make them tough cases. Like the auditor that doesn't think he knows anything because he hasn't been browbeaten with clay, starrate checkouts, hours of R3R to a wall, degraded correction cycles, Class 8 training, and so on.

:wink2:

Yes. Though one should add (for the sake of completeness) that whereas with Grades Processing it is the process command which restimulates a portion of the bank and the subsequent itsa which destimulates it thoroughly; with Life Repair, by contrast, the processing was intended to destimulate those portions of the bank which the living of life itself had brought into restimulation in the preclear. So here it was not the process command that did it but life itself.

This really is the key aspect of the Life Repair level. It takes a skilled auditor to do it because one can so easily slip into Q and A with the bank - well, the level is that exactly but it takes a skilled guy not to get sucked into it any deeper. It is probably the most fun auditing and C/Sing on the entire line-up.

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

What I liked the most about Ilove2lurk's post was its succinctness, so short, though all encompassing, direct and to the point.

Thank you Lakey for the compliment. Coming from you, that's big.

If I can "move your TA" for lack of a better term, it's a good thing. Makes my day.

BTW, I'm fine with Veda's comment.

When I first came to this board a few years ago and was too shy to post, Veda was nice enough to answer a few of my PMs that asked some very specific questions. He took the time to point me in the directions I wanted to go. I've read many of his posts over the years also. I know his views on matters.

We're all good.

I don't disagree with what he wrote either and know it to be true.

However, LRH was a very multi-faceted personality and changed his spots over the years and during different historical eras of Scientology. I try to view the many facets best I can.

If you think about it honestly, we're all quite multi-faceted, especially as we pass through our decades of life, aging, and spiritual development . . . or lack of it. Most of us do not act on one single impulse throughout our lives, but usually many. And they change as we go. At least they did for me.

I'm trying to see and understand the multi-faceted prism here.

ILove2Lurk

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Thank you Lakey for the compliment. Coming from you, that's big.

If I can "move your TA" for lack of a better term, it's a good thing. Makes my day.

BTW, I'm fine with Veda's comment.

When I first came to this board a few years ago and was too shy to post, Veda was nice enough to answer a few of my PMs that asked some very specific questions. He took the time to point me in the directions I wanted to go. I've read many of his posts over the years also. I know his views on matters.

We're all good.

I don't disagree with what he wrote either and know it to be true.

However, LRH was a very multi-faceted personality and changed his spots over the years and during different historical eras of Scientology. I try to view the many facets best I can.

If you think about it honestly, we're all quite multi-faceted, especially as we pass through our decades of life, aging, and spiritual development . . . or lack of it. Most of us do not act on one single impulse throughout our lives, but usually many. And they change as we go. At least they did for me.

I'm trying to see and understand the multi-faceted prism here.

ILove2Lurk

Another very thoughtful post. On Veda, yes the man is a fountain of information. He knows a lot and seems willing to help others. Kudos to him. I commented just a tad on what I thought was a tinge of unnecessary bitterness. Maybe I was out of line in doing so but it felt correct at that moment. No big deal either way, if I was wrong, I apologize.

SOME OPINIONS on the Multifaceted Characteristic of People -
You make some good points. It seems to me that saner, successful people have some main, basic principles "wired" into them. They do change, sometimes very noticeably, when the rigors of life test their dreams and aspirations; however, I believe that they tend to retain their core values and principals.

Some people seem to wildly change persona, sometimes making a big splash but then often crashing. The unpredictibility is frightening to a lot of us and scares us off from getting too involved with them.

LRH seemed multifaceted as if he was changing wildly all over the map. It appeared that he was inconsistent as regards his core priniciples. However, if you go with current thought, here on ESMB, he was actually very consistent. He wanted fame, power, money and control over people from the beginning and stayed true to those goals.

For other people, I have not seen that much multi faceted type behavior take place. Hopefully, we learn a lot in our journey through life and we gain maturity and sophistication to a noticeable degree but often the major core values stay reasonably true throughout a lifetime though the maturity level changes.

If you have some examples of extreme multi-faceted type behavior changes, I would like to hear them.
Lakey

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

OK, I'll do my best Lakey.

I’m sure when he wrote the famous “smash my name into history” letter to his first wife, he really believed it and felt that way that day.

In subsequent days and years, I’m sure he had 2,000 to 20,000 thought a day, like we all do. He probably had a lot of ideas all over the map, like we all do.

I have copies of about 100 pages of correspondence between Ron and Robert Heinlein dated from early ’48 to ’51 and mostly in the earlier years he talks about doing a rewrite of the Excalibur or Dark Sword book, making a bunch of money and retiring.

He also borrowed $50 from Heinlein so he could go to a Navy hearing as part of an ongoing project to get his Navy retirement (or disability pension?). Again, wanting to go off and retire with Sara and Alexis somewhere.

March ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“Soon as I get myself in the chips I am going someplace where I can breathe! And man, when this retirement comes through, these US [sic] can sure get along without me. Mexico or San Salvador or the North Rim for a bomb shy sea dog!”

June ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“I just signed up a couple of new contracts on books. If I ever dig out from underneath this snow pile I am going to buy a sailing vessel and take her over to the Mediterranean and catch up on my loafing.”
​

From what I read in the letters back and forth during that period, he doesn’t talk at all about smashing his name into history. He was more concerned about making a living and supporting his family. Money problems were always top of mind. He was not flush with cash.

I also remember hearing him on a tape – don’t remember which one right now – say that he had never planned on being involved in the Dianetics business in the early years. That he had originally wanted to simply publish the book and go off on some expeditions/adventures outside the US. He said he got drawn into the messy business not of his own choice.

Again in my opinion, probably money concerns and supporting his young family and the subsequent loud divorce forced his involvement.

Most people have thousands of thoughts every day. Each one is very valid and true the moment it’s had. I’m just sayin, I see differences and moods here and there in a life, not an unchangeable solitary drive. I could be wrong.

Here’s a flip flop for you: When the stock market plummeted a few weeks ago, I was 100% totally convinced beyond debate I was going to end my retirement, find a job and go back to work.

In recent weeks, well I’m 100% totally convinced beyond debate that I’m going to stay retired and enjoy the rest my life. (I think this idea will win out since retirement has been so good so far.)

You’d really need to ask someone much smarter than me about Ron’s most “basic basic” motivation. I never met him or worked around him.

Face?

When one looks closely, I think the early 50’s Scientology and the post-65 Scientology are two truly different subjects. Many of the concepts and freedoms of the early 50’s subject turn out to be misdemeanors or crimes or things you get in trouble for in the post-65 subject. Many contradictions and incompatibilities are visibly present. It’s a fact, not an opinion.

I prefer the early 50’s material and, if truth be told, utterly ignore much of the heavy control and stringent rules and any self-determinism-disabling techniques of the later years.

Works for me.

ILove2Lurk

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

OK, I'll do my best Lakey.

I’m sure when he wrote the famous “smash my name into history” letter to his first wife, he really believed it and felt that way that day.

In subsequent days and years, I’m sure he had 2,000 to 20,000 thought a day, like we all do. He probably had a lot of ideas all over the map, like we all do.

No doubt about that!

I have copies of about 100 pages of correspondence between Ron and Robert Heinlein dated from early ’48 to ’51 and mostly in the earlier years he talks about doing a rewrite of the Excalibur or Dark Sword book, making a bunch of money and retiring.

He also borrowed $50 from Heinlein so he could go to a Navy hearing as part of an ongoing project to get his Navy retirement (or disability pension?). Again, wanting to go off and retire with Sara and Alexis somewhere.

March ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“Soon as I get myself in the chips I am going someplace where I can breathe! And man, when this retirement comes through, these US [sp] can sure get along without me. Mexico or San Salvador or the North Rim for a bomb shy sea dog!”

June ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“I just signed up a couple of new contracts on books. If I ever dig out from underneath this snow pile I am going to buy a sailing vessel and take her over to the Mediterranean and catch up on my loafing.”
​

From what I read in the letters back and forth during that period, he doesn’t talk at all about smashing his name into history. He was more concerned about making a living and supporting his family. Money problems were always top of mind. He was not flush with cash.

I see your point there! He had made a name, of sorts, for himself in pulp fiction writing. Maybe at that time he was content to rest on those laurels.

Boy I sure don't see that he was EVER concerned with supporting his family! Alexis wasn't born yet and with Nibs and Katy, he virtually abandoned them and his wife when they were toddlers and ran off to live in New York City as a writer, living the life of a bachelor play boy and having affairs with many women.

I also remember hearing him on a tape – don’t remember which one right now – say that he had never planned on being involved in the Dianetics business in the early years. That he had originally wanted to simply publish the book and go off on some expeditions/adventures outside the US. He said he got drawn into the messy business not of his own choice.

I believe I heard the same tape. In it he states that the success of Dianetics was totally unsuspected, a bolt from the blue!! The publisher geared up to print 3,000 to 5,000 copies and the book immediately became a national best seller. He further states that he had a Safari of some kind planned for Aftrica later that year. He says that when the book became so successful and people from all around the world were asking him for help, he realized that his private life was over and all his time would be spent on Dianetics.

Again in my opinion, probably money concerns and supporting his young family and the subsequent loud divorce forced his involvement.

Most people have thousands of thoughts every day. Each one is very valid and true the moment it’s had. I’m just sayin, I see differences and moods here and there in a life, not an unchangeable solitary drive. I could be wrong.

Here’s a flip flop for you: When the stock market plummeted a few weeks ago, I was 100% totally convinced beyond debate I was going to end my retirement, find a job and go back to work.

In recent weeks, well I’m 100% totally convinced beyond debate that I’m going to stay retired and enjoy the rest my life. (I think this idea will win out since retirement has been so good so far.)

You’d really need to ask someone much smarter than me about Ron’s most “basic basic” motivation. I never met him or worked around him.

Face?

When one looks closely, I think the early 50’s Scientology and the post-65 Scientology are two truly different subjects. Many of the concepts and freedoms of the early 50’s subject turn out to be misdemeanors or crimes or things you get in trouble for in the post-65 subject. Many contradictions and incompatibilities are visibly present. It’s a fact, not an opinion.

I prefer the early 50’s material and, if truth be told, utterly ignore much of the heavy control and stringent rules and any self-determinism-disabling techniques of the later years.

Works for me.

ILove2Lurk

I believe that you are right about people having all those thoughts daily and each one being right for the moment. I see moods, thoughts and drives changing throughout life as well. There is no question about that. It looks like the only area where we may not have agreement is whether or not most people have some long term purposes and goals which remain constant and even there, neither one of us is certain in our belief.

Face is a good one to ask. He has revealed so much of LRH's inner workings on ESMB, it is unbelievable. I do not know if he has a lot of reality about LRH's motivations prior to Scientology. We'll see how he will respond.

Retirement, well I am glad that you are having a good one so far! Its going to be interesting to see the 2012 elections play out. The results may effect peoples' retirements quite seriously.

That divide between the two major eras of Scientology which you touch on has been commented on thoroughly on this thread. Between Roger, Face and Ted, the time LRH changed over appears to have been in 1963. If I understand correctly, the change over occurred about the time LRH stole the study tech away from a married couple who were devout followers of his.

The next big event had to do with GPM handlings. LRH shifted almost overnight from having people work out GPM's for their specific cases to having everyone run prepared lists of items which he supplied and insisted be run on all people. That was an enormous turning point!

The post 1965 era with the KSW #1 bulletin, Ethics Tech and Management by Stat being fully in seems to have definitely changed everything. All that you say about pre 1965 and post 1965 is true.
Lakey

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Ron was with Sara during the period all these letters were written to Robert Heinlein and he never mentions the previous family, I don't think. That's the family I was referring to: Sara-Alexis. He refers to Sara as Sara Hubbard and sent out an announcement about Alexis being born in March '50. He was a very happy dad. Also mentions he taught Sara how to audit him on the rudimentary techniques of the day.

ILove2Lurk

 

[Smilla]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Some of the later 'technical' posts on this thread remind me of an evil teacher I had, who had a special punishment for girls who had really annoyed her. This was it:

"Write five thousand words about the inside of a table tennis ball, and make it interesting."

 

[Auditor's Toad]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

<snip>
I hope I haven't disoriented any of you late cogniters.

I guess some people didn't get at the end of that sentence the smiley face at all.

Anyway, I really liked the phrase " late cogniters ". It is not only highly descriptive, accurate, and humorous..... but also true.

Veda, surely hope you don't mind if I take the 'liberty' of using that " late cogniters"from time to time.

 

[Veda]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

A couple of quotes from 1950 and 1951:

"There was a difference between the ideals inherent in the Dianetic hypothesis and the actions of the Foundation in its ostensible efforts to carry out these ideals. The ideals, as I saw them, included non-authoritarianism and a flexibility of approach. The ideals... continued to be given lip-service, but I could see a definite disparity between ideals and actualities."

Dr. J.A. Winter, who wrote the Introduction for 'DMSMH' in 1950, from his book, 'A Doctor's Report on Dianetics', 1951.

"In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent that Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult."

John Campbell, editor, 'Astounding Science Fiction', 1951.


Hubbard wrote many letters to the FBI during the early&mid 1950s, claiming, amongst other things, that he had been contacted multiple times by the Russians. He also claimed that many of his prior associates and friends, including his 2nd wife Sara, were communists or communist sympathizers.

This, from a letter of 29 July 1955: "...it seems that I can go to Russia as an advisor or consultant and have my own laboratories and receive very high fees. And it would all be so easy because it has already been ascertained that I could get my passport extended for Russia, and all I had to do was go to Paris and there a Russian plane would pick me up and that would be that.

"Indeed that would be that.

"This is my third invitation to go to Russia..."

These letters eventually earned Hubbard the words "appears mental" on his ever growing stack of bizarre letters.


That the 'low toned' [Read: anti-Dianetics/anti-Hubbard] should be "Disposed of quietly and without sorrow," or isolated from society with "no rights of any kind" (if not "handled"), and other similar sentiments, were expressed in 'Science of Survival' of 1951. "Ruin utterly," intolerance for criticism, "attack never defend," and the introduction of the deceitful stratified template of Scientology, date from 1955, as does Hubbard's hoax "Russian textbook" which he used as a propaganda device.

Like it or not, the pattern of deceit and abuse by Hubbard began in the early 1950s.

Scroll down to the bottom (of the below link) and note the list of "communists" or communist sympathizers, and other accusations, etc. (There are other similar letters from Hubbard to the FBI during the 1950s.) Some of these people were Scientologists in good standing, others were dissenters. All had fallen out of favor with Hubbard, although some didn't know it yet.

Being labelled a communist or a Russian sympathizer at this time in American history could ruin some one's career, or worse. http://www.ronthenut.org/appears-.htm

No desire to become part of this thread. Just a few tidbits of information for anyone attempting to assemble the Scientology jigsaw puzzle.

Other letters of note are Polly's 1951 (wife #1's) letter to Sara, Hubbard's 1951 letter from Cuba to Sara, and Sara's letter to Paulette Cooper in 1972.

Hubbard's August 1938 "real goal" Excalibur letter to Polly is worth reading, as is his 1946 'Affirmations'.

What's remarkable is that - beneath the multi-facetedness - Hubbard never abandoned his secret "real goal," pursuing it all the way to the end.

 

[Leon]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

When one looks closely, I think the early 50’s Scientology and the post-65 Scientology are two truly different subjects. Many of the concepts and freedoms of the early 50’s subject turn out to be misdemeanors or crimes or things you get in trouble for in the post-65 subject. Many contradictions and incompatibilities are visibly present. It’s a fact, not an opinion.

I prefer the early 50’s material and, if truth be told, utterly ignore much of the heavy control and stringent rules and any self-determinism-disabling techniques of the later years.

Works for me.

ILove2Lurk

^^^^ This ^^^^

 

[Veda]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

^^^^ This ^^^^

Bait on the hook. Cheese in the trap.

 

[Smilla]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Different eople pick different points in time as being the point where it all went sour, but people have been pointing at those places from the very beginning, depending on when they were involved. The logical conclusion to draw from that is that there was something very rancid in the mix from day one.

 

[Auditor's Toad]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

A couple of quotes from 1950 and 1951:

"There was a difference between the ideals inherent in the Dianetic hypothesis and the actions of the Foundation in its ostensible efforts to carry out these ideals. The ideals, as I saw them, included non-authoritarianism and a flexibility of approach. The ideals... continued to be given lip-service, but I could see a definite disparity between ideals and actualities."

Dr. J.A. Winter, who wrote the Introduction for 'DMSMH' in 1950, from his book, 'A Doctor's Report on Dianetics', 1951.

"In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent that Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult."

John Campbell, editor, 'Astounding Science Fiction', 1951.
<snip>
QUOTE]

I got out in 2000 so I am definitely in the late cogniter category!

 

[Terril park]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

OK, I'll do my best Lakey.

I’m sure when he wrote the famous “smash my name into history” letter to his first wife, he really believed it and felt that way that day.

In subsequent days and years, I’m sure he had 2,000 to 20,000 thought a day, like we all do. He probably had a lot of ideas all over the map, like we all do.

I have copies of about 100 pages of correspondence between Ron and Robert Heinlein dated from early ’48 to ’51 and mostly in the earlier years he talks about doing a rewrite of the Excalibur or Dark Sword book, making a bunch of money and retiring.

He also borrowed $50 from Heinlein so he could go to a Navy hearing as part of an ongoing project to get his Navy retirement (or disability pension?). Again, wanting to go off and retire with Sara and Alexis somewhere.

March ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“Soon as I get myself in the chips I am going someplace where I can breathe! And man, when this retirement comes through, these US [sic] can sure get along without me. Mexico or San Salvador or the North Rim for a bomb shy sea dog!”

June ’49 to Bob Heinlein

“I just signed up a couple of new contracts on books. If I ever dig out from underneath this snow pile I am going to buy a sailing vessel and take her over to the Mediterranean and catch up on my loafing.”
​

From what I read in the letters back and forth during that period, he doesn’t talk at all about smashing his name into history. He was more concerned about making a living and supporting his family. Money problems were always top of mind. He was not flush with cash.

I also remember hearing him on a tape – don’t remember which one right now – say that he had never planned on being involved in the Dianetics business in the early years. That he had originally wanted to simply publish the book and go off on some expeditions/adventures outside the US. He said he got drawn into the messy business not of his own choice.

Again in my opinion, probably money concerns and supporting his young family and the subsequent loud divorce forced his involvement.

Most people have thousands of thoughts every day. Each one is very valid and true the moment it’s had. I’m just sayin, I see differences and moods here and there in a life, not an unchangeable solitary drive. I could be wrong.

Here’s a flip flop for you: When the stock market plummeted a few weeks ago, I was 100% totally convinced beyond debate I was going to end my retirement, find a job and go back to work.

In recent weeks, well I’m 100% totally convinced beyond debate that I’m going to stay retired and enjoy the rest my life. (I think this idea will win out since retirement has been so good so far.)

You’d really need to ask someone much smarter than me about Ron’s most “basic basic” motivation. I never met him or worked around him.

Face?

When one looks closely, I think the early 50’s Scientology and the post-65 Scientology are two truly different subjects. Many of the concepts and freedoms of the early 50’s subject turn out to be misdemeanors or crimes or things you get in trouble for in the post-65 subject. Many contradictions and incompatibilities are visibly present. It’s a fact, not an opinion.

I prefer the early 50’s material and, if truth be told, utterly ignore much of the heavy control and stringent rules and any self-determinism-disabling techniques of the later years.

Works for me.

ILove2Lurk

You appear to have unique records.

can ou say more?

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

A couple of quotes from 1950 and 1951:

"There was a difference between the ideals inherent in the Dianetic hypothesis and the actions of the Foundation in its ostensible efforts to carry out these ideals. The ideals, as I saw them, included non-authoritarianism and a flexibility of approach. The ideals... continued to be given lip-service, but I could see a definite disparity between ideals and actualities."

Dr. J.A. Winter, who wrote the Introduction for 'DMSMH' in 1950, from his book, 'A Doctor's Report on Dianetics', 1951.

"In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent that Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult."

John Campbell, editor, 'Astounding Science Fiction', 1951.


Hubbard wrote many letters to the FBI during the early&mid 1950s, claiming, amongst other things, that he had been contacted multiple times by the Russians. He also claimed that many of his prior associates and friends, including his 2nd wife Sara, were communists or communist sympathizers.

This, from a letter of 29 July 1955: "...it seems that I can go to Russia as an advisor or consultant and have my own laboratories and receive very high fees. And it would all be so easy because it has already been ascertained that I could get my passport extended for Russia, and all I had to do was go to Paris and there a Russian plane would pick me up and that would be that.

"Indeed that would be that.

"This is my third invitation to go to Russia..."

These letters eventually earned Hubbard the words "appears mental" on his ever growing stack of bizarre letters.


That the 'low toned' [Read: anti-Dianetics/anti-Hubbard] should be "Disposed of quietly and without sorrow," or isolated from society with "no rights of any kind" (if not "handled"), and other similar sentiments, were expressed in 'Science of Survival' of 1951. "Ruin utterly," intolerance for criticism, "attack never defend," and the introduction of the deceitful stratified template of Scientology, date from 1955, as does Hubbard's hoax "Russian textbook" which he used as a propaganda device.

Like it or not, the pattern of deceit and abuse by Hubbard began in the early 1950s.

Scroll down to the bottom (of the below link) and note the list of "communists" or communist sympathizers, and other accusations, etc. (There are other similar letters from Hubbard to the FBI during the 1950s.) Some of these people were Scientologists in good standing, others were dissenters. All had fallen out of favor with Hubbard, although some didn't know it yet.

Being labelled a communist or a Russian sympathizer at this time in American history could ruin some one's career, or worse. http://www.ronthenut.org/appears-.htm

No desire to become part of this thread. Just a few tidbits of information for anyone attempting to assemble the Scientology jigsaw puzzle.

Other letters of note are Polly's 1951 (wife #1's) letter to Sara, Hubbard's 1951 letter from Cuba to Sara, and Sara's letter to Paulette Cooper in 1972.

Hubbard's August 1938 "real goal" Excalibur letter to Polly is worth reading, as is his 1946 'Affirmations'.

What's remarkable is that - beneath the multi-facetedness - Hubbard never abandoned his secret "real goal," pursuing it all the way to the end.

Thanks for all this data. We "late cogniters" have already been through all of this and discussed it long ago. Still, some of the newer viewers on this extremely widely read thread may not have seen some or all of it and your fine recap should be helpful and valuable for them to read.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

A couple of quotes from 1950 and 1951:

"There was a difference between the ideals inherent in the Dianetic hypothesis and the actions of the Foundation in its ostensible efforts to carry out these ideals. The ideals, as I saw them, included non-authoritarianism and a flexibility of approach. The ideals... continued to be given lip-service, but I could see a definite disparity between ideals and actualities."

Dr. J.A. Winter, who wrote the Introduction for 'DMSMH' in 1950, from his book, 'A Doctor's Report on Dianetics', 1951.

"In a healthy and growing science, there are many men who are recognized as being competent in the field, and no one man dominates the work... to the extent that Dianetics is dependent on one man, it is a cult."

John Campbell, editor, 'Astounding Science Fiction', 1951.
<snip>
QUOTE]

I got out in 2000 so I am definitely in the late cogniter category!

I see a difference in terminology between some of us here. I was using ESMB as my reference point. ESMB started in early 2007. All of what I learned about Hubbard and C of $ was learned after Sept., 2005 when I started researching on the Internet. Probably 85% to 90% of what I learned came from reading ESMB. I figured that if someone had the inside scoop in 2007, 2008 or 2009. they were not late cogniters. Those who learned things in 2010 and 2011 were late cogniters.

It is just an arbitrary assignment, figuring that if we have known something for 2 years or more we are not late cogniters.

Now, Toady, you are saying that you did not get out until the year 2000 and that makes you a late cogniter. I got out in late 2001 so I am also a late cogniter per your definition. The term is completely arbitrary but if we are going to use the term, we should agree on what would constitute a late cogniter. Better yet, it is not an important point and the term, perse, should just be dropped.
Lakey
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Different eople pick different points in time as being the point where it all went sour, but people have been pointing at those places from the very beginning, depending on when they were involved. The logical conclusion to draw from that is that there was something very rancid in the mix from day one.

Thanks for your input. We on this thread have tackled this topic very extensively from all sorts of angles. From all that I have read, mainly on this thread plus a few other threads, I feel that many of us here have an excellent CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING of this topic.

To me, your final conclusion, though basically true, is oversimplified. It's as if at first some of the milk came from a bad herd. Some of the milk was rancid but a significant portion of it was good. The customers of the dairy figured that the dairy was suffering from growing pains and would get their quality control department to solve the problem. Not enough milK was rancid to justify totally abandoning the dairy.

THE REST OF THE STORY.....
Over time, more and more rancid milk appeared. Soon the harmfulness of the milk completely outweighed any small benefits from buying milk at the C of $ dairy (er I mean Org). The dairy's quality control department blammed everyone and everything but themselves. All remedies which they took to get rid of the rancid milk only made things worse. Clearly, a point was reached where "early cognitors" started boycotting the dairy. The "late cognitors" read the writings of their predecessors and suddenly started leaving en masse.

Further investigation revealed that it was always the dairy's goal to sell sour and rancid milk. The good milk which they offered was only produced as a lure to hook people to becomming dependent on that particular dairy.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Different eople pick different points in time as being the point where it all went sour, but people have been pointing at those places from the very beginning, depending on when they were involved. The logical conclusion to draw from that is that there was something very rancid in the mix from day one.

actually, for me.

I think it is like a barrel of apples. One rotten apple can only affect a few at a time. The rest of the apples are just fine until it is their time.

I got out in 8 years, having only been insulted by stupids (Frank Benjamin and Fred Schwartz come to mind). I did OT 3 and found out that Sci wasn't all goodness and light. Then the increased prices hit, and I was gone. Enough was enough. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice , shame on me.

Others took much longer.

Others were out quickly.

When the rot gets to you, it's time to leave.