Why control of Scientology is no longer possible (or necessary)


Internet technology

Many thanks to Ryan Hogarth for submitting this brilliant article. It certainly presents a new way of thinking about this and the whole subject could do with some new thinking. 

In line with this, we found a very interesting passage from the 1956 edition of Fundamentals of Thought: “Give this book to a man or woman in trouble, a man or woman with an enquiring nature, a man or woman with associates who need a better life, and let that man or woman study this volume carefully and apply it. Change and a better life will result” 

Why control of Scientology is no longer possible (or necessary)

The subject of Scientology can no longer be controlled. In truth it’s been uncontrolled for years and individuals and groups the world over continue to make free use of the material.

The reason it can’t be controlled is the same reason that control is no longer possible as a central business model in a modern 21st century world. I make my living talking to business leaders about the changing world of business and the new way of thinking that modern business demands.

Control was a central concept of business throughout most of last century. The idea being that a business makes or provides something that the public want. The business then controls distribution of the product so it can only be obtained from them. By controlling distribution price can be manipulated according to the whims of the business.

Of course as soon as a business has competition control becomes harder. The element of choice is introduced. Given a choice a customer will generally go with the option most convenient for the customer. In many industries competitors would collude to give the illusion of choice while still being thoroughly controlled.

This was the model upon which Scientology organisations were based. Born out of 1950’s business thinking every effort has been made to control the distribution and practice of Scientology. Control of who can train, who can be audited, who can practice. Great expense and massive effort has been expended over the years. Think of the missions, groups and field auditors where the environment is preferred but they too are controlled by local organizations which in turn report to and comply with the international management structure and eventually fall victim to it.

The internet changed everything. Social media then changed everything again. Control as a business model is dead and buried, never to be revived.

My favourite example of an industry whose control was upended is the music business. The model for the industry was simple. Find an artist, produce his, her or their music and tightly control its distribution. Make money.  Many of us are old enough to remember a time when to own just one song you really liked you had to buy an entire album of songs you didn’t know or like, and you had to buy that album during shopping hours at an outlet wherever it may have been located. Control = Income.

Piracy was always an irritation. There was always someone making illegal copies of records or recording songs off the radio instead of purchasing. An irritation but nothing more. There were of course more serious pirates producing multiple copies and selling these. But such rings were often and regularly smashed.

During the 90’s two technologies went mainstream: Digital music and the Internet. Their combination was a killer! Music could be digitised. Songs made into high quality audio files that could be easily shared across the Internet. In the late 90’s a 19 year-old named Shawn Fanning developed a service called Napster. This allowed people across the world to connect to each other and share their music libraries. No more low quality tapes or CDs that were difficult to come by. Piracy went global and it was no longer an irritation. It was a pandemic! Overnight control had been ripped away from music labels. Travel to a music shop? Buy an overpriced CD? Nah. Download it right now at 11pm sitting at home.

Record labels didn’t take it lying down. They went to war! They brought out their lawyers. Their very big and nasty lawyers. Sometimes many of them at the same time. Young Shawn Fanning never stood a chance. Napster was forced to change its operations and within a few years ceased to exist.

But the fire had been ignited and there was no stopping it. Similar services sprang up as quickly as they were shut down. It was only when Steve Jobs sat down with the industry and forced upon them some change that they saw the future a little more clearly. Radical change. He convinced them to make music available online and at a reasonable price. Relax the control. Give people what they want, when they want it. iTunes was born and it boomed. This, along with the iPod, revived Apple.

When it comes to music consumption the average user – you & I – are quite happy to pay for music as long as it is easy to access, it’s affordable and we can get it at our convenience. If it isn’t this way then there are plenty alternatives we can use. Customers don’t owe their loyalty and they certainly don’t need, want or accept control.

With bandwidth now faster & cheaper the same revolution has come to the film & television industries. And so it is with just about every industry in the world today. The business-customer relationship has changed. Business models must change accordingly.

Control is outdated. Today it is TRUST that must be the central business model. Trust is built through transparency and open & honest engagement.

The customer is in charge. The customer has access – fast, cheap access to just about everything. How do you control such an animal? You don’t, of course.

For the purposes of this article piracy and squirelling are the same thing. Why go through the control of the church when you can get the Scientology info for free and at your convenience on the net? Why should anyone study Scientology the way someone else wants them to? Do we really want to have to commit to a fixed schedule? No, we want Scientology to fit our lifestyles in a way that improves that lifestyle according to our own understanding and our own observations.

And really, do I want to be listening to CD’s and reading a physical book? Where are the MP3 versions of the lectures? Where are the E-books?

The gargantuan efforts still being made by the church to control how Scientology is used and distributed is ridiculous. It’s like catching the wind or holding back the tide. Futile and unproductive. It’s already out there. That’s why control, even if it were desirable, is simply no longer possible.

The future though, lies in the opportunity that this new, technological world presents us.

Imagine the business model used by tech companies (Google, Facebook and the like) being applied to Scientology. That model is based on growing a user base rapidly. Get as many people as possible using your product. If there are a million users a percentage of them will pay for the premium version. The philosophy of Google is get everyone connected to the Internet. They know their business will grow if more people are online so they focus a lot of attention on getting the world connected.

How would this apply to Scientology? Make training cheap and easy. Very cheap and dead easy. Do EVERYTHING possible to help people train. Make it so easy that THOUSANDS train themselves. Subsidise it if necessary. Just get people auditing –  whether it’s good auditing, bad auditing, indifferent auditing. Make it abundant!

The orgs would be the pro’s. When someone is ready for the real deal that’s where they’ll get it. With this model the orgs would drown with people. With a million people auditing in some fashion a good few thousand would seek out pro training or auditing. You would certainly have a vastly greater number than the 5 field auditors currently practicing in South Africa. That after 60 years of “making auditors”.

How do you make it easy for people to train up? Here are a few of my ideas, I’m sure there are many more. Once you get the hang of this free and broad use of the subject the ideas are endless:

  • Give away e-meters. Or sell them at a few hundred bucks. If  you really wanted to be crazy & bold about it publish details on how to make one at home.
  • Make the training material available for free online in Kindle & other e-book formats including a Scientology dictionary. Most the of the material is already on the net so make it official and more user friendly.
  • Put tutorials and demo sessions on YouTube (tech films)
  • Offer a free advice line by email, twitter or an app. Whatever. Answer questions promptly (instantly if possible).
  • Have drilling sessions available in the org where people can come to practice and drill procedures. Do it regularly and make it cheap or free.
  • Now we can get fancy. Write an app for things like Self Analysis (and between you and me this app has already been written and it’s awesome) and Dianetics. Ensure it is a free download.
  • Continue to find ways to make it easier. This should be the focus of the organisation. The rest, quite literally will take care of itself.

With volumes of people doing this there will be plenty who want professional training and professional auditing. And when this happens, they will flow into the orgs – in abundance.

As LRH says, cases are better opened than not and any auditing is better than no auditing so even the dodgy auditing happening out in the wild makes the world a little better.

Forget about what critics or others say. Let results speak for themselves. With instant global communication those amateur auditors will be disseminating their wins like mad on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter & blogs without prompting or direction.

Probably most importantly, with such a model the labeling of people as “Suppressive” or having a policy or practice such as disconnection becomes utterly irrelevant. With such a model we achieve what I honestly believe was LRH’s early view of Scientology: A subject of complete inclusiveness.

In my view this is the only viable future for the subject: Firmly in the public domain.

113 thoughts on “Why control of Scientology is no longer possible (or necessary)

    • I agree Jill! I feel inspired by the possibilities this viewpoint offers. It is a huge step but with modern tech COMPLETELY doable!

  1. Ryan, thank you for being willing to take this drunken, flailing, thrashing monster, “CO$”, by the back of it’s neck, holding it up in front of it’s abused congregation, and saying to all:

    “You see this? — ( while pointing to the wretched creature flailing in your grasp …) Well, I am
    saying to every one of you, you need no longer have this abuser, torment, and destroy your lives, families, and rob you of the fruits of your labors! ”

    “There is a Better Way! Ahead of You! Seize it with both hands! You can receive help to recover from this spent monstrosity……while we collectively march this ‘monster’ out of our lives, to trouble us no more!”

    “What say you, my friends?”

    Brilliant job, Ryan. Can’t wait for the ripple effects, to follow!

    Best, Calvin, Durbs.

  2. Yep, the future is heading in this direction. The bottom line stats are: ‘Auditors made’ and ‘Satisfied PC’s ‘.
    MS-2 can help keep the tech standard. What more do we need?
    The C of S Superpower Building is another pyramid. (Don’t understand what it is needed for.) Cute, but we can live without it. (We can leave it to the historians to figure what it is used for.)

    • Lol! They will have a hard time and probably give up in disgust at such folly!

      The young ‘uns will shake their heads and say, “Yissee, old fogeys what done this.” And go back to scrolling their iPads… or whatever else is new.

      • How many auditors could have been made with the money spent of this building that is doomed to be a white elephant in the near to not distant future to become just another piece of empty real estate to add to the other dozens?

  3. How would this apply to Scientology? Make training cheap and easy. Very cheap and dead easy. Do EVERYTHING possible to help people train. Make it so easy that THOUSANDS train themselves. Subsidise it if necessary. Just get people auditing – whether it’s good auditing, bad auditing, indifferent auditing. Make it abundant!

    The orgs would be the pro’s. When someone is ready for the real deal that’s where they’ll get it. With this model the orgs would drown with people. With a million people auditing in some fashion a good few thousand would seek out pro training or auditing.

    Ryan, you’ve just described Scientology’s original business model. That is precisely how Dianetics spread like wildfire across the English speaking countries in the early 50s. I don’t remember where I read it, but LRH talked about that very model, in relation to the positioning of orgs versus missions and field practices.

    His idea was that it was more important to get tens of thousands, then hundreds of thousands of people auditing. Eventually, the cream would rise to the top, and find their way into the professional academies. He also said not to worry about amateurs making mistakes in the field. It was going to happen, but at the same time, hundreds of thousands would benefit greatly, and those few who ran into real difficulty could always be helped by professional auditors.

    I really love the way you laid out the 21st century business model for Scientology. I think LRH would heartily agree with your logic and reasoning on the subject and would give that CSW his stamp of approval. It’s really the way to go for the church, although I think the Independent Scn movement will beat them to it.

  4. Brilliant Ryan. I was just about to write something like that! What stands out for me from your dissertation is that Scientology is not a religion – all that 4th dynamic campaign drivel is just cover. It is a business and should be viewed as such, based on exchange. Every comment and proposal you make relates to modern business – and these should be applied to Scientology 100%. An analogy I consider comparable is open source software. Even car companies have learned to involve customers in the design of their engines – and reap enormous public goodwill from the process. That’s modern marketing – experiential. You experience something, mess around with it, and if you get some benefit/win – you buy.
    I frequently look at Scientology today and consider – if it was like this when I came in 20 or so years ago, would I buy? No damn way! So why should I stay in today? It’s like investing – don’t consider the losses you’ve made on a share. Get out fast and rather buy a new share with some upside potential. If it’s an issue of beliefs – well, you already have those beliefs ingrained.

  5. I agree Ryan its 2014 the church must get into present time!. When i listen to LRH on lectures he always has an lightness about him, what he says is for everyone and anyone to hear and apply. The church is so SERIOUS now, its not for me.

    • Brilliant article, Ryan! And as Ron said, “Build a better Bridge!” You have pointed out how to do just that. I hope your article is ground zero and all flows from that and that it comes to pass as you wrote it.

  6. In the late 90′s a 19 year-old named Shawn Fanning developed a service called Napster.

    Sometimes many of them at the same time. Young Shawn Fanning never stood a chance. Napster was forced to change its operations and within a few years ceased to exist.

    Just a minor clarification/additional info:

    Music was shared on the BBS/USENET long before Napster, and still to this day one can freely download anything you want. Napster by software design was an easy legal target in the manner it was shared, USENET was not, and current TORRENT access is also mostly beyond the scope from such legalities. Same sharing, different tech where legalities can’t bite into.

    Where are the MP3 versions of the lectures? Where are the E-books?

    Nearly every Scientology Course, auditing process, lecture, picturebook, etc. had been fully PDF compiled years ago and been widely available on the net. All the way from the original “Survival Rundown” to the 3-Part “Solo Auditor’s Course”. Most importantly these are the original pre-GAT materials, and thus even if the CO$ were to freely give away all their GAT I and II, we wouldn’t want it. They’ve long been completely bypassed, makes no difference what they want to control, CO$ has become totally irrelevant. Thus pointless to give them any good advices as CO$ is passè. It would be far more productive working on how we can organize to move others up the bridge than worry about what the CO$ is doing.

    Give away e-meters. Or sell them at a few hundred bucks. If you really wanted to be crazy & bold about it publish details on how to make one at home.

    No need. Better high tech meters already exist, and again, CO$ has no hand in any of this.

    Make the training material available for free online in Kindle & other e-book formats including a Scientology dictionary. Most the of the material is already on the net so make it official and more user friendly.

    GAT I or GAT II is worthless to us. They’d have to go back to the original LRH authorized checksheets, etc.

    • Most the of the material is already on the net so make it official and more user friendly.

      There is nothing left for them to do … it’s already pretty much all out there. Done deal, already years ago. As long as the material isn’t being sold, anyone is free to download or distribute it, since CO$ no longer sells the original pre-GAT materials. Secondly, lapsed copyrights prevent them from being drawn into any civil actions, as they risk losing them.

      • I am not suggesting “they” or “them” do it. I’m very aware the material is out there but it is yet to exist in a format that is user friendly and easy. The full array of technology is yet to applied to this material.

      • Hi Ryan.

        I’m very aware the material is out there but it is yet to exist in a format that is user friendly and easy.

        That simply isn’t so. Post your e-addy and I’ll fire you out a sample. You probably just haven’t seen it yet.

      • Ryan.

        The full array has been applied to it … in full, totally complete. You just haven’t seen it yet. Post your e-addy.

    • “It would be far more productive working on how we can organize to move others up the bridge than worry about what the CO$ is doing.”
      Very interesting point!

      “GAT I or GAT II is worthless to us. They’d have to go back to the original LRH authorized checksheets, etc.”
      Yes, absolutely

    • It was only when Steve Jobs sat down with the industry and forced upon them some change that they saw the future a little more clearly. Radical change. He convinced them to make music available online and at a reasonable price.

      One more tidbit, although irrelevant to the topic of the thread:

      The reason piracy continued unabated was in part because iPod simply added another level of control monopolizing devices and reducing the quality of the music into degraded compressed formats. Even less flexibility than CDs which can be losslessly encoded any which way you want. Make .flac, .MP3, .wma … you name it. Steve Jobs just cut himself into the loop, profit was the motive for all concerned. The RIAA & others are still busting out-of-control piracy to this day. If iTunes got 15% of the piracy market, I’d say that’s a really high estimate, and was likely merely marketing hype to get consumers on board. To this day, more than 100 file trading apps are up for free download, and mommy is not gonna spring a couple of bucks for junior’s type of music. When I was young, I had to hide radio recordings because Grandma had adjucated music from long-haired Beatle hippies to be the work of the devil. I remember the first 1968 BBC Pink Floyd Ultra-short wave via Radio Europe broadcast … triggerfinger pre-glued to the reel-to-reel RECORD button … lol

  7. Oh what a FANTASTIC and SANE (and up-to-date) viewpoint!!!
    I hope I can be part of THIS rebirth!
    Most certainly the only way to go.
    Bloody Well Done!!

  8. I agree absolutely with Ryan, Scientology has become way too expensive for the ordinary guy, OK if you are a millionaire. There is no overt committed by breaking away and forming a new group, but the vested interests would try and make you guilty and call you a squirrel or whatever. Life is in you today and you make your tomorrow.

  9. Why control of Scientology is no longer possible

    This idea is very challenging, very new, but also very hard to envision.

    Re: Making training very cheap and easily available…
    Scientology is a third dynamic activity. Training is done in accordance with “What is a course” etc. on the basis of a course supervisor, a schedule, a word clearer etc. These elements are part of what makes successful training. So much so that I dare say they are indispensable elements.

    How do you, then, envision that this be done on a broad scale? How do you envision that these above elements can be dispensed with or transformed into a different format?

    • I’m not suggesting they be dispensed with. These elements would be present in a professional academy. On a large scale let people do the best they can. Encourage it and allow them to do what they will. When they want the pro stuff they will come to an academy that will have these elements present.

    • Meja, I completely agree with you that the practice of Scientology is a group activity, and that there’s no practical way to get around that. In my opinion, the future lies in independent Scientology groups and organizations.

      In watching the mother church in present time, there’s no doubt that it’s undergoing a slow motion implosion. Its real stats (well done auditing and training) have fallen something like 95% since the late ’70s. Look it up on FriendsOfLRH.org if you want to see the the documented proof of that.

      Further proof that the church is going into cardiac arrest can be found in abundance on the various Indie Scn blogs, including Mike Rinder’s, which has tons of excellent firsthand reports by people on the inside.

      It’s only a matter of time until the corporate church completely flat lines, and ceases to exist as a functioning enterprise. Some would say that it’s already reached that point, and that the lights are only being kept on through cash infusions from uplines. I don’t know how it could be otherwise, seeing as how their customers have mostly disappeared.

      The point is, at some point in the not-too-distant future, the wicked witch will be dead, and all the Munchkins can come out in the open and begin building the new paradigm of organized Scientology. I believe that new paradigm will look a lot like independent Christianity, where any small group of like-minded individuals is perfectly free to set up their own storefront church, and begin delivering services.

      • If I’ve learned anything from my years in the church it’s that Scientology will happen if allowed to. The church spends most of it’s energy in stopping any going concern in Scientology whether it be missions, field auditors or individuals. Whenever there is something positive going on it is killed with control. It is my contention that if Scientology is allowed into the wild and is being practiced in volume the 3rd dynamic of it will naturally evolve. But let’s not over think it. Lets do.

  10. you people are like a bunch of old men sitting on the porch thinking about the good old days..[Moderator: Hi Mia. Please see our moderation policy. The rest of this comment has been removed in accordance with this]

    • Yip, the good old days when auditing actually work, where real auditors were made, OT miracles were widely published. when reging were only signups for your next step on the bridge, when your org were a save haven and pleasure to go to.

      But most importantly WHEN SCIENTOLOGY WAS FUN!!!

      But ya, from your email I get your seriousness and your tone. Where does seriousness fit on the tone scale and where is fun.

  11. Ryan. Very very good essay.
    There is some merit to protecting intellectual properties.
    No sooner does Disney release a new movie, which has cost the studio millions to make when the Chinese are selling each other bootlegged copies.
    Tiffany and Gucci sued Ebay successfully for the fraud counterfeit versions of jewellery and handbags.
    It is not right that Microsoft develop advanced software and the Chinese sell it for their own profit and their Government turns a blind eye.
    BUT
    We are talking Religion here.
    Can the Catholic Church forbid an Ex-Catholic from using the rosary in prayer ?
    Can a Church control BELIEF or a practice or ritual as it if it was a crate of coca-cola for revenue ?
    Of course not.
    The person practicing any version of their former faith or belief has as much 1st amendment rights in the US as anyone else.
    On your other great points ~~
    The “Church” has never WANTED broad dissemination for free. It has a large printing /publication office but parishioners must PAY fresh new cash at the rate of $1.20 cents per Way to Happiness booklet, when it likely costs them 5 cents to make.
    Way to Happiness booklets are only distributed when fresh new sales are made for them to be shipped……..It isn’t about dissemination, its about how much *NEW* revenue can be sucked in…

    • Great point Karen…imagine if the Pope ordered private investigator’s to spy on a non-catholic married to the catholic because he was holding “prayer sessions” in his home…offering confessions and blessings….and they get caught and actually admit that it was their religious right to harass …they were interfering with “business”?

      Kind of puts it in a proper perspective!!

      • That’s exactly the correct perspective, I.M. Miscavige is obviously dramatizing the days of the Inquisition, when the Pope in Rome ruled the adherents of Christianity like a bloody dictator.

        The Reformation put an end to the Vatican’s iron-fisted rule over that religion, and I see the same thing happening in Scientology today.

  12. I agree with the idea and spirit of this article. Scientology needs to have continued delivery and the Church’s model is almost dead. There are also some interesting ideas for making delivery easier.

    But it glosses over the central problem which is how are we (Scientologists) going to establish and maintain professional delivery units?

    Frankly, throwing materials out into the ether and then trying to make book readers or internet browsers into serious auditors has been tried and it failed. Delivery of Scientology only made strong inroads when it was organized and run by groups.

    In fact the whole idea was only feasible for something like Book 1 which used a few basic techniques. Modern Scientology auditing demands more from a person than most professional disciplines and you won’t see civil engineers or architects advocating anyone at all download a few pdf’s and start building bridges. I personally saw the most amazing screwups in the field from untrained people doing SOP 8 and creative processing. It’s difficult to see the value of that. When you look around, all that untrained field activity has completely run out of steam without a book on the best seller lists and talk shows to boost it along. And it is easy to see why. No matter what wins a lone book auditor gets, inevitably he will run into some major losses sooner or later and stop auditing.

    Another idea that is debatable is about the modern business model. It is as much about control as it ever was. The internet is a good dissemination tool but even that is being shut down as it is counter-productive for those seeking control. Just two days ago, 500 million Chinese internet users were shut down for a day because their censor made a mistake. They already control all Chinese internet traffic and the US and UN are not far behind them. They may not be very interested in shutting down Scientology at the moment. But one day a bunch of Scientologists will do something they don’t like and they will use the control they insist upon. Monopolistic, anti-competitive control is the traditional, current and future business model in the absence of wide-spread clearing. And these things are being introduced at the legislative and military level where they cannot easily be circumvented.

    This article proposes that somebody unspecified should provide cheap emeters and put a lot of attention on making things easier. Who?

    As the article points out, the materials are available and have been available for 20 years or more. Yet you can’t get a comprehensive, coherent, organized copy. Why not? I personally know of individuals who have spent thousands of hours working on this but their work isn’t being shared. One I know who has started from scratch only recently and put in over a thousand hours work with an estimated 6,000 to go to produce an initial indexed, basic, hyperlinked reference work. Why must he duplicate work which has already been done by others?

    Such a reference is essential to training and delivery. It’s point 1 of the 10 points of KSW. So this is problem number 1 for larger scale delivery. How are we going to achieve that?

    EMeters are probably the next big issue. There are emeters out there. How can one have confidence that they are going to work? There needs to be a test people can use so they can be confident they have the tools they need.

    There are many, many people in the field who are working on their own ideas and plans along these lines. Mostly duplicating each others work. But it is more resource than the Church has that’s for sure. We need some ideas on how to coordinate and harness that.

    This is a good, provocative article and it helps move the focus in a more survival direction. Training and auditing.

    Thanks Ryan.

    • What my article did not touch was the greater effort of organisation required. This will be without doubt necessary and remains the greatest independent challenge. This article deliberately assumes these issues are in place.

      • As long as you have people are committed to standard tech, others who feel the tech changes should be made as the result of having had bad experiences at the CO$, those just plain nuts no organization would want around … organizations are pointless to encompass the whole. With such an ensemble you’ll never get any organization of the ground if you can’t get KSW in. There has to be a basic agreement all would have to subscribe to. Lots of brilliant organizational ideas have been proposed over the years, but these will only live on as “Talk” on blogs forever without any follow-up action. Except for those who have rolled up their sleeves and are actually auditing and training, the majority just talk.

        Just a couple of cents on the subject …

  13. Here’s my shopping list:
    – Digital books where I can highlight and make notations on a mobile or tablet device.
    – Digital lectures where I can bookmark important quotes.
    – Videos on meter reads and demo’s and lectures.
    – Apps are a wonderful idea! A Self Analysis App is perfect.

    Once I’ve done my home study and have used the various online platforms to study and two way comm through my own questions I’d like the option to go to a place to get a checkout and green light to audit. A theory course room has limited use for me but a practical one would be more useful.Just tell me what to learn verbatim and know perfectly and I’ll get the theory handled.

    This is a thought provoking article, it’s exciting to consider the options.

  14. This is a good article, and points the way for Scientology if it wants to survive on a broader scale, rather than a niche group of old timers sharing secrets with select few and reminiscing about the boom years.

    I disagree that today’s model is not about control. Apple is all about control. iTunes, Steam, DRM are definitely ALL about control. eBooks from Amazon? You license them, they aren’t yours to keep. Yes, you can learn the tricks to circumvent DRM, but most won’t. So IT skills become essential to retain some of the freedoms we took for granted a decade ago. Obama, president of change, is introducing change: he is setting up Big Brother like never before. All in the name of “your safety” of course. Total and absolute but invisible control. I think what you are really aiming for is a distributed, open source model. But how does open source make money to survive? The open source model, with all that it entails (people further advancing the tech themselves and disgarding LRH as the sole arbiter of truth) could be embraced. But will it? Scientologists need to overcome the indoctrinated need to be right and fear of defying KSW in order to let that happen. It is happening anyway, among those who are willing. The question is whether CSI and the indie field can jointly or separately get some semblance of organisation together without nullifiying each other in the need to be right.

    I think it’s great Ryan wrote the article, and think more ideas like this should be advanced, and people get together and try it out, see if and how it works in real life, tweak as you go. Grow and adapt, it is not insane. Anticipate paradigm shifts and consider the (potentially) inconceivable: that while we are here floundering and discussing, other people on the planet have developed their own tech to help people and are doing so.

    • From a branding point of view, however great the effort to control, it is trust that will build a brand. Apple succeeds because it has built trust, not because of its effort to control. It could be argued that they have stifled greater growth through their efforts to control.

      • Apple also succeeds because it has a closed environment that is too much bother to circumvent for most people.

    • You’re not entirely incorrect. iTunes, Steam and the rest ARE all about control, and that the creators of those media get a percentage. However, saying this misconstrues the reason for those outlets becoming popular, and most of the “control” was put in due to industry standard.

      For those mediums, no control = no income, and they came about because the artists were getting 0.02 to the dollar from the publishers, to combat pure piracy, and to offer an alternate means of acquisition which the publishers did not support.

      However, the big difference between old and new mentalities (and what I’m reading from Ryan’s point) is that these platforms made the materials broadly available to anyone quickly and easily, rather than forcing an outdated “come into the store” mentality where the distribution was managed ONLY by a few record labels or publishers.

      While these publishers still exist, they are no longer the sole outlets for acquisition, and no longer can say “this store can carry our product, but these others cannot” – or at least, not with the power that they used to.

      Indie artists, indie game devs, all can get their work published via these platforms, paying only for the point-of-sale (commission) fee. I have had friend start up a game company, pay Apple zero dollars, and have their app up on iTunes, making millions, without any limitations or agreements in place other than “we get a percent of what you sell through our storefront”. You can’t ignore the healthy part of the distribution because of the “limitations” (yes, I even have an author friend published electronically via Kindle’s store, who would never have had a chance with a publisher).

      Scientology is attempting to force things through a non-digital, non-distribution friendly model that these digital mediums killed. Steam killed Gamestop; it’s dead as far as anything but a console – and the console-based stores are killing them even further.

      However, I feel that this “open distribution” is missing the ultimate point. Scn isn’t about trying to free the planet anymore, so this idea (while it is forward thinking) will fall on deaf ears because getting Scn into the hands of the public is no longer the goal of the CoS.

      Picture the CoS as if it were the MPAA or the RIAA, and you’re pretty close to the mark, honestly. Adopting a viable distribution platform would (in Miscavaige’s mind) destroy what they are trying to accomplish – the “standardization” of Scn internationally, and keeping everything under the thumb of the CoS so that no one but Mother Church makes a dime off of anything with Dianetics or Scientology in the content.

      It will never adopt a viable pattern of operations because it itself is a parasitic organization, only feeding off of those who are convinced, while not actually giving anything back to those being fed off of. Everyone else is evil.

      “You wouldn’t steal from a store” ads being run on DVDs are pretty much how RTC is operating. They don’t want the data out there. Any messages to that effect are fluff and totally false, and meant for the people inside the Church to think that Scn is actually doing something in the world.

      Meanwhile, a single video game (and not a AAA one) has more active players than the Church has active members.

      • DAoT, I agree with your RIAA comparison. Very apt, and yes, you have outlined the benfits well. Due to the claims made about it, distributed out in the real world the way Ryan suggested, the tech would naturally be inspected (at some point) by mental health practitioners and experts. The results will also be examined by them as more and more people show up at their doorsteps asking for help. Psychologists already treat people who have lost through auditing instead of have gains. As more people use the tech, willingness for open discourse will be necessary, including the willingness to see what other approaches do right and the willingness to use the tech to resolve disagreements and achieve a common understanding, if that is possible. How could this be achieved?

  15. Bravo for this article Ryan!!! Brilliant reflection!!! and I agree with Steve: future Scn needs a bit of coordination.
    In one recent post, somebody mentionned the site “stss.nl” as having all the materials that can be used.
    I’m eager to see what will happen and to be part of it.

  16. Ryan I loved this article. It certainly shifted focus for me. A refreshing change from the normal articles focusing on all the PROBLEMS in the Church (which I DO believe are still important and should be kept up big-time).

    Your article was however different and bold in that it shifted focus somewhat onto a possible solution to all of this. It’s awesome to look at things from ALL points of view, and you have made us do that here today.

    You’re like a Steve Jobs quietly walking into the boardroom and turning it on its head by suggesting a simple yet revolutionary idea! Thanks!

    Love BP

  17. Ryan, this is brilliant PGM. If Scientology was a democracy and we could vote, I would vote for you as the next “COB”. Not a joke… Scientology should be on the 21 th century.
    This old structure is dying, and Bejnev/Miscavige is so outdated… Need some new blood.

  18. Great Ryan, and your idea is actually being practiced in many ways. I have students on Internet (mail) who comes for drilling now and then, and it works very well and in fact they study faster in their own time and place, it’s a joy!
    EverFun
    Per, DK

    • This is no lie. Irritated by having to go into the org and all that entails – not the least of which is simply the wading through rush hour traffic there and back, and having to leave well in time so as not to be caught in traffic and be chitted for being late for course – I started studying the Basics at home. With just one hour a day (and drinking a cup of coffee at the same time as opposed to sitting three hours on course with no refreshments) I made far better progress than on a proper schedule.
      I really started to wonder how many of the MU phenomenon I’d previously had to handle simply came from no refreshment breaks. Cut out the travel, EO trips for ridiculous offences (not that Jhb really sends you to EO, but Flag certainly does), chats with regges and general social chit chat – and time can be used far more effectively. By the same token, business wise I started doing all by ‘meetings’ telephonically. Far more effective.

      • Your comment is great. To it you can add all the added in unnecessary interference and hassling given by the supervisor to coerce speed without understanding, not to mention attesting to know understand and can apply over the top of knowledge that certain things have not been addressed to completion. Do your own thing , its simpler and easier and you steadily work through it. Far more effective.

      • I’m still a proponent of “HCOPL 16 Mar 71R I What Is A Course”. It’s a technical point.

        * A Supervisor’s skill is in spotting dope-off, glee and other manifestations of misunderstoods, and getting it cleaned up, not in knowing the data so he can tell the student.

        * A Supervisor should have an idea of what questions he will be asked and know where to direct the student for the answer.

        * Student blows follow misunderstoods. A Supervisor who is on the ball, never has blows as he caught them before they happened by observing the student’s misunderstanding before the student does and getting it tracked down by the student.

        Scientology will never survive out here if we practice something else, it’ll become altered and unworkable. All delineated in KSW.

      • Amen, Formost. The most effective, workable methods to transmit the data of Scientology to students, and train them to be crack practitioners of the subject, were piloted and proven long ago. That wheel does not need re-inventing.

        I agree with Ryan that it would be a fantastic thing to get millions of people applying the basic techniques to each other, but there will always be a need for advanced, professional training – and for that, you need some type of brick and mortar orgs.

  19. I like your article Ryan. Makes Sense ! The comments by Karen #1 are spot on. The official church is out of balance – ALL PROFIT, very poor delivery, especially now with altered tech. Opening the doors is OUTFLOW and a lot more remunerative. Clearly the official church has abandoned the works of Ron – “THINK BIG” has come to mean think big only on how much profit we can take for the least cost – the same idea as a poor exchange business. Spiritual Freedom is not the central issue it is more about creating want so as to roll in the suckers. What a poor idea. “Think in FUTURES” seems to mean finding and exploring ways of increasing control and compelling their view. EXPANSION is more along the lines of expanding those outside the orgs, expanding the field who want RON’s tech. Perhaps all the people who have been declared can send a thank you for doing things backwards and altered and by so doing contributing to enabling more to see the truth.

    In terms of the money grubbing on the part of the church I come again to

    St Luke

    Go your ways: behold, I send you forth
    as lambs among wolves.
    Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes:
    and salute no man by the way.
    And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say,
    Peace be to this house.
    And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it :
    if not, it shall turn to you again.
    And in the same house remain, eating and drinking
    such things as they give :
    for the labourer is worthy of his hire.
    Go not from house to house.
    And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you,
    eat such things as they set before you:
    And heal the sick, that are therein, and say unto them
    The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you.

    Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see :
    For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to
    see those things which ye see,
    and have not seen them ;
    and to hear those things which ye hear,
    and have not heard them.

    ST LUKE 10 : 3 – 9 , 23 – 24.

    On the one hand you have the the flesh and its pursuit and on the other the spirit. The differences are simple. It is strange that the church has slowed and blocked the path to truth by alterations – it explains motivation.

  20. Great essay Ryan.

    What would Google do? Give it away for free, of course…
    Remember the Netscape browser? They couldn’t compete with a “free” Microsoft browser. There are lots of examples where the number one product/company simply disappears from the competitive scene..

    The Co$ is shrinking and the Independent field is growing. That trend will continue unless the Co$ changes…… which is not going to happen because LRH left no authority to change policy to fit the times. As Marty once said, “It’s in their DNA man” or something like that…

    So, as the Co$ shrinks, how will the independent field evolve? These are interesting times for everyone. Your essay is making people think and talk about it I can’t predict how it will evolve, but the Independent field is certainly growing and evolving and the Co$ is certainly stuck and shrinking.

  21. Groups move up and down through the conditions of existence just as individuals do. I feel we are part of an emerging third dynamic activity which will have a lasting effect on the lives of those who join it and even those who oppose it, but I do not feel we have enough visibility to say what condition we are in

    Back in the mid-late Seventies I remember a third dynamic of scientologists whose primary purpose was going free as individuals and helping others do the same. (Ft Lauderdale Mission and Miami Org ) We had sky-high dreams but we were not aware of our condition as a group. I am sure there were similar groups elsewhere, but I have total certainty on the existence of this one. We were just having the adventure of our lives and we never thought it would be necessary to apply conditions to an activity that was in such obvious power. (Little did we know!)

    Within a very few years, I saw the cancer of a militant priesthood (the Sea Org) spreading fear and uncertainty through the formerly high ARC mission network. Enforced can’t-have, enforced non-communication, and enforced contribution to the group slowly and surely strangled the last vestiges of a real Third Dynamic among Scientology public. We had to be careful who we talked to, what we said and what we thought.

    The cancer analogy has a lot going for it. Normal people get converted into a cult mentality like normal cells get converted to malignant matter with the same end result. Vital communications and life giving energy are diverted or blocked and the organism falters and dies or operates in a crippled and unhealthy fashion. The life blood of the old mission network was the theta communication that went on at all levels. People had wins, people needing help got help, auditors got trained quickly and were encouraged to audit without delay.

    When SO missions became a regular occurrence, we quickly learned what not to say and when to turn a blind eye to injustice. Our happy third dynamic of scientology died in a very short time and was replaced by cult think on an ever increasing gradient. Most of the effort at current orgs seems to be directed to spying on who is talking or thinking forbidden thoughts. There is a whole team of toadies who spend their time policing FaceBook pages and telling the still-faithful who they can be friends with and who they must de-friend.

    Once we become independent, whether we’ve gone public or not, we are exterior to and almost free of the middle class PTSness of the church of scientology. We are becoming aware of ourselves as a group with a commonality of purposes, a common enemy, and we communicate freely amongst ourselves about anything and everything.

    I would estimate that some of us are well into a condition of Non-Existence as a group but we still need to determine what is needed and wanted for us to survive as a coherent third dynamic. We may not all choose to speak with one voice and that is as it should be if we really have different goals.

    At some point we will have to answer the question of whether a priesthood, militant or otherwise, is what we want to see in our future. I feel it is a vestige of the old command and control mentality that surfaced in the mid-sixties and should be laid permanently to rest.

    I have observed that the open connectivity of the Internet has allowed independents to successfully run out group engrams which is a feat that the church was unable to achieve except in rare instances. This is a power that the church cannot control and gives the field an “Unkillability” that must be frightening to DM and his cohorts.

    Because of our open communication and instant connectivity, every DM attack is quickly analyzed and commented on until the confusions blow, the upsets are handled and correct targets are found for handling. The CofS has nothing to compare with this Indie group ability.

    What is more ominous for DM’s future prospects is that every attack made against an isolated independent individual or group brings the rest of the independent field together in a response against the common enemy, the suppressive church of Scientology. If we did nothing except continue to communicate amongst ourselves in response to CofS attacks, we would find ourselves being shaped into a Third Dynamic by the actions of the suppressive CofS organization that is trying to destroy us.

    I think our future lies in maintaining open communication between all levels of independent practitioners and groups. This implies a network solution for delivery of services and training instead of a central org structure, but I feel that open communication will lead to a workable solution to support the goals and activities of this new Third Dynamic of Independents. At some point we will find our way to deciding what condition we are as a group and this will lead to a more focused approach to ridding ourselves of the fetters of the cult we used to be a part of.

    On the other hand, the span of activities and purposes may be so great as to result in the creation of several, or many, interconnected Third Dynamics. In this case, there is the interesting possibility that the different independent Third Dynamics will be in different conditions!

    Whatever happens, as long as there are some Indies with the primary purpose of going free as individuals and helping others do the same, I will feel there is a future track I can contribute to for the rest of my current lifetime.

    Meanwhile, I am ready to support any effort that will bring about desirable changes in the availability and universal use of workable technology.

  22. Its the Old times who helped to put the Bridge there!
    They helped LRH with his research!
    When we say we want the old days back we mean exactly
    that – we want the tech to be in present time not the Squirrel
    Tech the Church offers at the prices only a certain income
    bracket can afford! Then the bloody stuff does not fully
    work – yes OSA we have not been given all the Tech.

    Show some respect for those who are Smart and joined
    LRH in the early days many before they were gotten rid
    of and declared by the CAPTAIN COB.

    I count the early days up until he departed
    and I know he will have a big smile on his face knowing
    this blog is BOLD enough to communicate and expose
    the truth and the lies.

    Well written Ryan and once again we utter the war cry –
    THINK FOR YOUR SELF AND COMMUNICATE!

  23. Refreshing, high-toned article, looking for the positives – excellent! Grassroots must not be hampered by having to have before it can do. Ryan, you are so right on this point about trust, because the stable factor in Scientology and Dianetics is that it works, and from that the rest can develop – it’s as simple as ARC.

  24. Dear Ryan,

    Your article is brilliant. It’s a huge evolutionnary step. 100’ds of indies were trying all kind of things on the Internet, but didn’t yet really succeed. You article is revolutionary, as it gives a clear-cut simple vision of how it could be done and it is very inspiring and motivating.

    Few things I would like to add:

    – There could be a huge data-base, where any auditor worldwide is reporting his sessions and the results of the auditing (with long terms reports about how the pc is doing). This data base should be built up in a scientific manner and thousands of different evals. could be made and new things could be developped out of this data.
    Dianetics and Scientology processing would then become a real science with proven results and could evolve further, as any Science does and would have a tremenduous renaissance. The data could be made available to Scientist of any subject and it would change and advance lots of subjects through the gained knowledge. It could change a lot in Medicine, Psychology, Psychiatry, Physics, Sociology, Education and many other subjects too, but only if it is constructed by the scientifics standards of today. I think Universities would love those data !

    – Wikipeda is an example of how knowledge can be disseminated broady and I think this would be the best example – by creating a Foundation – to create a encyclopedia about all of Dianetics and Scientology, with thousands of people helping to create it ! It could also include above database.

    – we could create an University that is using above and studying the whole subject, developping and evolving new applications of it in any sciences and could train and certify pro’s. Also it should eliminate any tech that doesn’t work under scientific test’s, as for example the FO about “LSD cases and years after they came off”. This was written by LRH after having observed 2 LSD Cases and then evaluated and invalidated millions of people that took either LSD or similar drugs and labeled them as psychotics. There is now Scientific work behind this FO.

    Any knowledge is evolving and new techniques are developped, but not in Dianetics or Scientology. The RCS is working hard on it becomes a rigid belief and doesn’t change and evolve futher. How silly !

    As soon as DM is gone – in 1-2 years- we could grab those 3 billiions and use it for that purpose. At the end it is our money. Isn’t it ? We gave our life for it and should get it back !

    • These are fantastic ideas. The capacity and resources certainly exist but we struggle with the current dirty word of organisation. The outside field grows daily with practitioners as well as Scientologists who are looking for somewhere to do what they want to do but much uncertainty remains. For now it is my belief that discussions such as these push us closer something workable.

      • People are still healing and reorientating and all the blogs here are for to discuss it and help the process of healing.
        The potential of the indies must be gargantuous, but is asleep. You article is an awakening and more awakenig will follow ! 🙂

      • You are so right Ryanh.. This discussions do push us closer to something that is workable.

    • Hi Roger,

      I completely agree with your point on putting the tech out there for further scientific development. Or at least a broader use of the technology. Just as an example, I read an article this morning on how lack of sleep increases weight gain. Tests were done on 168 000 different people. I don’t think Scientology was ever tested on those kind of numbers before saying therefore it is fact.

  25. Hi Ryan

    I think you have suggested a completely radical, outrageous and novel way of thinking about Scn. I like it!

    Very interesting read indeed, thank you. It will be a good thing to make Scn completely accessable for those who wish to pursue it. Definitely the way forward; encompassing all persons. Personally I don’t wish to necessarily pursue it, yet I am all for making whatever people want (to advance spiritually) accessable to them!

    This may also potentially integrate the isolated circumstances in which the SO and other higher Orgs live and operate to live more within society at large and use developing technology. Since if there aren’t these exorbitant fees charged, then the SO and other higher Orgs lifestyles will not be funded; they will need to work in the world as well as assist with drills, answering questions, etc (as you mentioned above).

    I really like this forward thinking and moving with the times, it makes sense.

    As touched on before, a course or the like to educate persons about the basics of how our world operates in the 21st century is vital for ones survival. If we are lucky our parents teach us how to manage our money, open a bank account, plan for our own retirement, take out medical aid, get an education allowing us to earn a living, etc.

    It happens far too often that person join staff and drop out of school or leave staff with no money to show for years of work done or very sadly, get to retirement with nothing (or if you lucky the grace of perhaps only your family to support you).

    When I was at Flag on my ethics cycle, I was put in the kitchens with other persons who were also on ethics. There was this one guy who was like a third generation SO member, 17 years old. He spoke to me of the outside world (off the base) as if it was another world. He loved heavy metal and would light up to hear about an actual concert I had been to. This boy had never really been a boy. He read and heard only about this world he was saving. This kind of devide from who reseives the tech and who carries on it’s existence needs to close.

    I think the thinking which you have shown in the above article may very well be the beginning of doing away with very unrealistic, impractical and potentially very harmful and dangerous systems upon which Scn has based itself, which do not serve a purpose any longer.

    You certainly are going back to basics and right on through to present, technologically advanced present moment 😉

    Well done to you!

  26. You know, what a refreshing possiblilty! Ryan’s thrown the Lion amoungst the ostriches brilliantly! This is why.

    1. Its a new dream that defies conventional perception of how it all could be. It is not what millieCOB would like and not necessarily what the Indies see it as either!

    2. We are forced to revaluate Scientology in the 21’st century and decide what works for us and what doesnt in a MUCH more self determined way than EVER before!

    3. This new approach tantilizingly puts out the possibility of making the tech of SCN truly ubiquitous! Made available freely everywhere the likes of which has never before, wow!

    Afterall whoever has the most Knowledge and better tech seems to dominate over the less fortunate. If any and all had access to that very same data the new game may become lets see who can apply it best!

    The age of special interest groups, Hitler wannabes and ancient covert cults is over! The time of Scientology existing for the people, by the people and completely controlled by those people independently, is at hand!

  27. Brilliant ideas Ryan. You foresee the future unlike the existing organization. But then we all know where their goals and purposes lie.

    As a note – it doesn’t take a long time to digitize the audio materials. My wife and I condensed our volume of CD binders by digitizing the ACCs last year – it now occupies some 50 or so gigabytes on various hard drives and 15 or so DVDs. Next time I get the whim it will be the rest of the basics and congresses.

    Bruce
    PS it was a pleasure to meet you and Melissa when there! 🙂

  28. Great article Ryan,

    I believe this was the kind of model Ron was discussing in the lecture “What Scientology is Doing” i.e. small organization big field.

    Personally I think it was the zeitgeist of the mid twentieth century which influenced him to change that model by having Central Organizations, City Offices and Franchises and turning Field Auditors into FSMs.

    Of course back then computers where in their infancy and what we know as the Internet was still a concept that was being funded by ARPA in the early ’60’s.

    Few would have realized that in the ’80’s it would become World Wide Web.

    Just to acknowledge Ron’s brilliance though he did create a World Wide network of Orgs which could communicate instantaneously with one another via Telex which only a few businesses and organizations were doing back then which changed somewhat when fax communications were broadly introduced.

    (I mean telex, fax machines and rotographs had been around for decades yet hardly anyone but Governments, News Offices and major corporations used them because they were considered too costly.)

    Not that model failed.

    It actually worked quite well during the ’60’s and ’70’s until what I call “the coup” took over and turned the Organization into some kinda Byzantine Empire and virtual Dictatorship totally controlled and monopolized by the Sea Org.

    But I digress….

    Anyhoo….

    The model you recommend Ryan is totally workable in this day in age.

    I mean all we needed a Centralized Org for was as an exemplary of Standard Tech. This is the reason for HGCs and hold the line on ethics first by insuring what was promised was delivered and prevent infiltration by individuals who would use Scientology exclusively for their own personal gain or the gain of a small clique of individuals and to covertly manipulate and control others.

    They’ve obviously failed on all counts so in my opinion:

    Who needs ’em?

    I personally wouldn’t revise any of the steps you’ve listed.

    To me it looks like a perfectly workable program.

    So I tip my tin foil hat to you 😉

    It’s fuckin’ brilliant 🙂

  29. Great theta 21 century ideas that would really make a change!
    Hope this comes to life, LRH would be so happy to see his dream coming ture at last!
    This could realy work, I would love to buy the self Self Analysis app, how wonderful!!!
    also having LRH’s books in audio… Sicentology is for the people not for COB turn it into dust, scientology can be like a phoenix coming back from the ashes. This is so theta 👍👍👍👏👏👏

  30. Hopefully, Mike Rinder will pick this article up on his blog. It truly sets forth a new paradigm, a fresh, workable viewpoint addressing the future. As mentioned by other posters, we no longer have to dwell on fixing the status quo. We let it continue to wither away as it seems that is its intention anyway.

    Ryan’s article should get the same aclaim as did Debbie Cook’s call to arms. And similar results.

    Really, Ryan, you have raised the bar for many of us in the same way as Steve Job’s did.
    Thank you so much.

    Old JHB geezer.

  31. This Post made me dream and think. If we really want to have one unified field composed of church members and indies, we need to propose to them first a new strategy. Rtc and DM are making the tech NOT available to mankind. They need to see that the prices are way to high for mankind. We need to propose, once DM is gone, a new contribution strategy : each month you donate 10% of your income in order to start either your next course in the accademy or your next intensive in the HGC. If you are jobless you give to the Org your contribution by working. No more Reg cycles, no more Ias donations. Scientology can only expand if we stand together as one group and if we make the tech available to mankind. This is the only working strategy. A church not based on asking money but based on creating Auditors and Clears in volume. Obviously this aim cannot be achieved with DM on power. He failed to expand the church, he created more enemies than ever, he declared good people SPs, he altered the tech, he emptied orgs worldwide, made people go through the bridge from start to end and least twice !!!! He made the tech available just to the rich ones , if we use this reasons, we will be able to convince many people that scientology cannot be about getting people broke. Parishoners need to see that with these prices no one will ever reach OT. Apple was very smart. Indies could be like Apple : we could be the o e that start a new workable strategy in order to have as many people as possible using the tech.
    I dont see any other way to expand Scientology today.
    This applied philosophy has a bad reputation when it comes to money.
    We need to address this issue and transform it.
    We need to do it with the help of every preclear and ot on this planet.
    They must realize that if they can afford these prices, many honest working wog people dont have their means. And they never will.
    If they want to clear the planet, if we want to clear the planet, we need to start by getting the first agreement IN : donations need to be 10 % of your monthly earnings.
    Let’s start talking with people ….

  32. Pingback: Why control of Scientology is no longer possible (or necessary)

  33. Great article in more ways than one. Ryan has put his finger on what is really relevant at this point in time – how the future of Scientology in general is likely to unfold. This is an issue which touches a great many people around the world – those connected to official C of S structures, those who have left and many others who, in some way or another, have been affected by the blind self-interest of corporate Scientology.

    It has intrigued me in recent years as to what will emerge after the collapse of corporate Scientology. The history of the Catholic Church and the reformation might serve as an example of what to expect, but then again maybe not. The thing about crumbling “empires” of whatever kind, of which there are many examples, is that what follows is seldom as imagined or predicted. The consequences of both the French and Russian revolutions did not come close to what was originally envisaged. A bit too dramatic?

    Anyway, long story short. The conception of every human endeavor is due to the fundamental dynamic of constant renewal – constant creation – be it the Catholic Church or Scientology. It seems inevitable that at some point those who inherit the power develop the notion of maintaining the status quo – the power – which then requires more and more control. Unfortunately such control, as evidenced throughout history, results in the suppression of constant renewal – constant creation – particularly in terms of the individual.

    Since creation is probably the strongest inherent characteristic of consciousness (theta) it should be self evident what is bound to happen should the lid of suppression be lifted. As corporate Scientology unravels expect to see a burst of released creativity, the nature of which we have as yet not witnessed. And it won’t be to the liking of everyone. For instance, kiss the idea of standard tech goodbye.

    It is my view that as the dust begins to settle, the differences in mindset of those involved will become obvious. With time likeminded people will find each other and move on to create their own brand of a life philosophy. Who knows, perhaps everything is unfolding as it should – perhaps we are witness to a quantum leap in renewal, which may have positive implications for all of humankind.

    • As corporate Scientology unravels expect to see a burst of released creativity, the nature of which we have as yet not witnessed. And it won’t be to the liking of everyone. For instance, kiss the idea of standard tech goodbye.

      I agree that when the wicked witch is finally dead, the Munchkins will come out and go into a burst of frenzied activity. There’s going to be an awesome amount of create in the way of new groups forming when the mother church has lost her teeth and fallen for the last time.

      I don’t, however, see standard tech going by the wayside. Far from it. I believe most of the new Scientology groups will insist upon maintaining the workable standards of the red on white tech, while paring back the green on white to those elements that are actually necessary and beneficial to any organized activity.

      Now, there are going to be some self-styled gurus out there who will create their own little sects using LRH’s discoveries as a launch pad. It remains to be seen how successful any of them will be with their squirrely, mish-mashed concoctions. I think of such efforts as predictable, off-beat outgrowths of any newly emancipated philosophy or religion.

      As the natural order of human organization goes in, I expect those groups who adhere most closely to the proven, workable practices of Scientology to survive and thrive. In the end, the marketplace will be the final arbiter of success for every group. Those who get good results will be rewarded with solid growth and longevity, while those who don’t, will wither on the vine.

    • Sorry Joe, but I can’t agree with what you say about standard tech and creativity. You appear to imply that one’s innate desire to create will undo Scientology. The reason we’re here at all is because standard tech has been abandoned by the church. If Scientology didn’t work everyone would just walk away. The results of Scientology and Dianetics are palpable and quite unmistakeable. Other practices, old and new, may also produce spectacular results, but this is not the issue.

      LRH’s Scientology is unique in its modern approach. LRH was able to expand Scientology because he embraced modern technology and the opportunities offered by his era: mass self publication, rapid communications, easy world-wide travel, the e-meter, opening up a new religion and spiritual practice in relative safety from vested interests. Even so, it wasn’t easy for him by virtue of the bank, the very point of his attack. You may or may not agree on the existence of such a thing, but without a doubt, the subconscious mind is the most frightening precipice there is. It was all very well to establish practicing groups of Scientologists, but at no point was it good roads and fair weather. LRH deliberately downplayed the alarming attraction Scientology became for psychos: imagine the prospect of someone lying down ready for you to operate on them.

      Hence, the necessity for ethics, org policy and especially technical procedure. I’m not a techie, but it appears to me that LRH devoted more time to the procedures than the processes themselves – the Auditor’s Code, rudiments, training, and the vast quantity of detailed explanation of the subject. He was at pains to point out why one did such and such a thing in auditing. He admitted mistakes. How the ‘creativity’ of early auditors must have frustrated him, and equally, how frustrated he must have been about auditor robotism, corporate inertia, social PTSness, the human craving for games and sensation. But most of all, LRH’s biggest problem was the chronic tone level of society at large – don’t nobody kid themselves it’s high or even in the survival band (switch on the news for a hearty slap in the face).

      Creativity be damned! Where has that natural and beautiful genie led us? Into the mud with rockets on. Scientology isn’t perfect, and Ron was still developing it to the end. So what – you’re not going to feed your family because it’s raining outdoors?

  34. This is a very good analysis. The model of a mid-20th century US corporation was adopted in the 1950s, and even then it wasn’t a good fit to the freethinking, creative people who were drawn to the subject of scientology.

    You’re so right about the decline in control as a viable business model, as exemplified by the collapse of print-era copyright concepts. The mp3 lectures and the Ebooks are there in the freezone and on Wikileaks, and now the church has become incapable protecting its intellectual property claims there will be many more.

  35. One of the most fundamentally ground-breaking concepts that Ryan has laid out here, is that the corporation known as the Church of Scientology, no longer ‘owns’ the philosophy and spiritual technology pioneered and perfected by its founder.

    In fact, in studying Scientology, one soon realizes that LRH discovered a large body of truths which are common to all beings. He then developed techniques based upon those axiomatic truths, to assist others to rise above the murk and amnesia of their physical universe existence, and reacquire long suppressed abilities.

    How can anyone ‘own’ a demonstrated truth that is common to all of mankind? How can anyone ‘own’ the logically dictated utility of those truths to escape the well of darkness we’ve all been subject to?

    Well…no one can. It was always a lie to imagine that the truth was ‘owned’ by any single entity.

  36. Where there is reference made to truth or truths it inevitably boils down to personal orientation. If a particular truth supports personal orientation it will be perceived as “The Truth”.

    The truths associated with Scientology are LRH’s creations. Where we have made Scientology work for us has been due to our own inherent creative capability.

    Throughout the ages inquiring minds have asked, “what is the truth behind existence – what is really real?” The supposition here is that this question is unanswerable until we first understand how we decide what is true and real.

    So, how do we determine what is real – how do we arrive at our conclusions about the truth of our world and existence? In the simplest of terms, what we see and accept as reality and consequently experience as real is determined by our prevailing mindset.

    Regardless of the facts we are exposed to our conclusions about the validity of anything is first and foremost shaped by mindset. The only truth and reality we live by and respond to is based on how our mindset interprets what we are looking at. Nothing is as it seems – nothing. Consciousness (theta) is in constant creation mode.

    Psychologists now acknowledge that our worldview is a psychological construct and scientists have known for some time that what we observe isn’t necessarily what is out there.

    * * * * * * * *
    • There is no independent evidence by which to decide between two different paradigms. All evidence is interpreted in the light of either one or the other”. Thomas Kuhn.
    • “What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning”. Werner Heisenberg
    • “We don’t see things as they are we see them as we are” Anais Nin.
    • “Science reflects the content of our consciousness”. Ernst Mach.
    • “Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world”. Albert Einstein.
    • “What we see depends on the theories we use to interpret our observations” Amit Goswami.
    • “Man has closed himself up, till he sees all things through the narrow chinks of his cavern” William Blake.

    • “It is in the nature of human beings to bend information in the direction of desired conclusions” John Naisbitt.

    • “It all depends on how we look at things, and not on how they are themselves”. Carl Jung.

    • “Every man takes his own limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world”. Arthur Schopenhauer.

    • “Reality is what we take to be true. What we take to be true is what we believe. What we believe is based upon our perceptions”. Gary Zukav.

    • “Nothing is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”. William Shakespeare.

    • “Reality is merely an illusion albeit a very persistent one”. Albert Einstein.

    • Joe, it’s pretty obvious that you reject the notion of universal truth. In that case, I don’t see how Scientology can possibly be true for you, as the entire philosophy and practice rest upon a foundation of axiomatic truths that are postulated to be held in common by all beings.

      If that’s how you see things (and it’s certainly your right to do so), then every individual would have to invent their own Scientology to escape the trap. If, indeed, all would even consider that they’re in a trap to begin with.

  37. Ronnie Bell’s observation that it’s a lie that anyone can “own” truths that are common to all mankind is so powerful, and so pertinent to what is unravelling and why.
    The stupidity of this exclusive and excluding viewpoint, and the suppressive practices it generates brings to mind Monsanto’s push to own all the world’s seeds and thus control its food supply and thus control ( coerce at will) its entire population.

    As for Ryan’s brilliant piece: it has substance as well as vision.

    And let me add that I am often amazed by, and appreciative of, the eloquence, erudition, intelligence, understanding and creativity manifested by the ideas and comments I read here.
    Reading this site is always informative and interesting. Sometimes, it’s nothing short of an enlightening pleasure.

  38. Excellent article Ryan.
    It made me think of the LRH datum; Quantity-Quality-Viability.
    The other thing it made me think of is the amount of effort and expense people would go through to get Dianetics to people. We used to do Seminars and rent space and use a lot of man hours just to get about 5-10 people to a seminar. Your method would be much more cost effective and simply more effective.
    Another thing this makes me think of is how obvious it is that the current management doesn’t really have the goal of helping Mankind. If it did it would have implemented some or all of this years ago. When I was on OT7 they used to parrot off how once we had 10,000 people on or through the level it would tip the theta/entheta ratio. I thought if that were really true they could make it much easier for people to get onto it and they could use some of their reserves to help supplement it, if it was THAT important.
    Anyways, great post and I am very happy to see you creating!

  39. Great article that creates debate.

    There are 70 online colleges in China. The UK has at least 1 million online leaners.

    The USA had over 6 million in 2010. Some developed markets are growing at 20% per annum.

    All it takes is this kind of thinking to create models that will work in this new world.

    Dianetic webinars
    Online auditing a la David St. Lawrence
    Online coached courses with online two-way comm
    Cleverly designed workbook-cum-checksheets for all basic courses
    1,000’s of You Tube videos covering all manner of subjects within the subject
    Apps of all kinds

    If hundreds of smart solutions are offered to people and they work, the subject will have the potential to expand within that level of tech. More advanced stuff can be offered differently.
    The mind boggles.

    PS: The truth debate is interesting. If we see truth thru our own lens and tons of us agree with each other, that’s reality right? Like agreeing to the law of gravity.

  40. “If I’ve learned anything from my years in the church it’s that Scientology will happen if allowed to. The church spends most of it’s energy in stopping any going concern in Scientology whether it be missions, field auditors or individuals. Whenever there is something positive going on it is killed with control. It is my contention that if Scientology is allowed into the wild and is being practiced in volume the 3rd dynamic of it will naturally evolve. But let’s not over think it. Lets do.”

    Ryan, I agree with your article, and with your vision. The tech is incredibly powerful, and even when delivered in a flubby way, still gives gains that are better than any other field or tech out here. It is not hard to use and apply Scientology, as it works,

    Over the last several years I have gone over and over the current situation with the C of S, and with delivery in the field, looking to look at how to assist that group to evolve. It takes a group to maintain technical standards and just as you point out, delivery can be occurring in the field as long as there is somewhere a person can go if they get bogged or have trouble. You must have a place where someone can go to become a professional auditor, supervisor or C/S.

    My original view was that if there was a group that simply assisted people to do what they had drive and purpose to do (whether that was training, or auditing, or disseminating, or business consulting, or tutoring, or life coaching, or whatever) to get the tech being used and applied, then anyone who had a passion to do something could do what they want to do. If basic Qual lines, hatting lines, and a great Academy existed, then no matter what people decided to do, they could get assistance if they ran into trouble.

    In April of last year we launched Milestone Two with that view, and the attack that hit us like a torpedo was fascinating. There was a campaign that we were trying to recreate a controlling Sea Org elite that judged others and decided who was OK and not OK to receive service (totally manufactured and could not be further from the truth).

    Another campaign was that those involved with Milestone Two cannot think for themselves and must have an LRH reference to be able to justify anything done – with names like KSW Kamakazee, Fundamentalist, and others. We responded by saying that we stand by LRH’s Scientology, and no other brand as we know it works and produces incredible case gain.

    We have been accused of being OSA, and run by Miscavige himself – which is a bizarre accusation that is interesting to try and prove wrong. We concluded that our honesty and integrity will shine through if we just keep communicating and delivering, and this does seem to be working.

    And best of all, there has been a campaign that people stay clear of us, do not get involved and do not affiliate with us. This had some impact back in April and June of last year, but since that time, as new people have come across Milestone Two, it appears to be failing.

    The source of these campaigns has been from both the field and also the C of S. The idea that people could get organized and work to make the tech available on a planetary scale, really does concern many, with their own vested interests. And the C of S fell back on its proven technique of 3P and Black PR to create friction, upset and entheta between those in the field. They have been using this since the early 80’s to stop groups that were forming, and they have been active to use the same in recent times.

    Reflecting on the last year, I can say that we had initially set up Milestone Two with a similar model to the HASI, as a basic membership organization — a fraternity for professional Scientologists. But we misjudged the fear that people have with disclosing their names and details due to Church retaliation, and forced disconnection with friends and family. And in the face of the campaigns against Milestone Two, people were initially made to feel very uncomfortable and were publicly shunned if they gave us support.

    Regardless of this, our activities and support has just continue to grow, and will do so into the future. We have to routinely re-assess and reorganize as things expand. And we regularly have to put in more organization and work out internal policy using LRH management technology basics. What is interesting however is that without the heavy control, off-policy and out-tech activities of the corrupted church, people just flourish and prosper, the tech goes in, and people have great gains. It is surprisingly easy.

    There are fantastic technical resources out here – such as MP3 copies of lectures, and digital emeters, and e-books. There are apps, and also website popping up that are great resources. There are trusted technical terminals, who really do know their tech, and use standard lines and actions to deliver LRH’s Grade Chart.

    There is no limit on what can be achieved if we simply get LRH’s materials into the hands of those who want to use them, and help them as needed, to get the best results.

    • Good going, Lana and your team. You’re a credit to our blossoming community. Thank you for what you’re doing. Long may you flourish.

      Richard Kaminski

    • I second Poet’s ack, Lana. Thank you for being there, and for everything you’re doing. You’re one who truly ‘walks the walk’, and sets a stellar example for us all.

    • Thanks for sharing, Lana. To keep one’s field ‘connected’, I believe it is even more important to pay due homage to 2-way comm. This results in not only a feeling of ‘appreciation’, but also of ‘sincerity’! People are not ‘just ‘people’ They’re ‘beings’ and do best when they are fed live comm.
      I learnt this, early in the 70’s, due to the ‘encouraged’ regular 2-wc with none other than LRH himself. The Generation of Old timers, reading this, would remember the warmth thus generated, rather fondly.
      ARC, Calvin.

    • Lana,

      Oh yeah the ol’ “accused of being OSA” accusation goes back to ARS.

      Like the CIA (they did this to the Apollo way back and started what was known as the “Rock Festival”) OSA likes spreading that rumor themselves in my opinion in order to discredit anyone they consider an actual threat.

  41. The goblin shivers and laughs but does he know he is ?

    As I read threw the valley of interlect the writing show intelegence , but so does time mag or your local paper ,

    How’s the stats and the next topic, any updates on the rathburn court case worth telling.

    I have changed my name as Neptune is not willing to put parts of his soul on and have it sit in a wait

  42. Currently if you are to google: Kindle scientology then you only get peoples books about it.
    It will be nice to check back in a year and see if results have changed.

  43. Thanks Ryan, great article…nice to start the debate on the way forward and possibilities out there…also nice to see so many new names….growing by the day…this is amazing….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s