Being rooted to a time that is gone

We recently posted an article about Yet another library scampaign looking to get 2 copies of Clear Body, Clear Mind into “every library in the world”. A new email doing the rounds on this campaign uses an LRH quote that has been used to punt the idea of library donations:

“You’ve got to put the books in the local library You’ve got to do these things or nobody believes you’re there. Because they go and ask to be told by the shelf, before they’re told by a human being.”

It is not clear where exactly this quote comes from or when it was written or said. However, it is so indicative of how the thinking within the church has become moribund.

Without any deep research in the matter it is clear to anyone that the truth of this statement has long passed. Somewhere in the mid 2000s Google took over this function. We would be willing to bet that not a single reader of this blog ever goes to a library to ask a question.

This is not to say that the value of libraries has become defunct but to present a 40 year old statement as a unulterable truth in the modern digital world tells us why the church still believes it is possible to survive by control through the process of enforced disconnection.

Advertisements

25 thoughts on “Being rooted to a time that is gone

  1. I’d like to give a personal example of delusion (in the bubble). I’d been persuaded by some (in the bubble) that you could improve your eyesight by chucking away your glasses and thereby strengthening your eyes, which after all are just muscles and need to be WORKED. After misplacing my glasses while frantically blowing a reg cycle at an org, I decided to put this to the test. I was still (in the bubble).
    For the best part of a year I wore no glasses, neither driving, nor watching TV (I just sat very close to the TV) or movies or anything. I informed all scientologists I knew (my ONLY friends in life) that if I walked past them without acknowledgement not to get offended because they were just a blur (till my eyesight improved) . You understand this was ‘mind over matter’ or an OT postulate.
    At the end of that year I was smashed into by a car I literally did not see. I then bit the bullet and went for an eye test to renew my driver’s licence. Behold my horror when I could not see a damn thing beyond the vaguest blur in the test. So much for my eyes strengthening without the artificial crutch of glasses. So this datum goes alongside ‘the fewer police we have the less crime’ and ‘the more education you have the stupider you become’ as scientology DELUSION, AKA BS.

    • That is a tough one, i was given glasses by a eye specialist they mad my head ache,
      my father tool me outside asked me to look at that far away and tell him what I saw, I could see clearly,
      I then went to a eye doctor who asked me if I has been prescribed glasses before , I lied and said no, after the test he found I have 20 20 vision but slightly light sensitive to light so need sun glasses,
      i broke the prescription pair with a brick.
      The problem I had with my eyes was a study barrier lake of mass mostly only found that out after finding Scientology ,
      Thankfully my father has intelegence

      • HC,

        I don’t see how your comment is relevant.

        So some staffer gave you a bum steer on ocular muscles affecting your vision when there is no actual Scientology data I’m aware of that confirms this.

        Me personally I have seen people who’s vision improve in *Standard Auditing*. Not only that but I’ve experienced it myself.

        So what is your point?

      • RM.
        Huubard claims that Dianetics and scientology to be able to cure cancer, diabetes and a host of other diseases – including leukemia.
        .
        I think Hubbard gave everyone a bum steer on what his subjects can do.

      • Old Timer,

        He doesn’t make any such claims in fact he recommends those who are sick get medical treatment.

        Did you miss reading those policies and HCOBs on Physical Healing etc.?

        Now more on topic.

        Honeychile from what she says was told by some staffer to exercise her eye muscles and as I wrote I’ve never seen an HCOB regarding this.

        In fact the recommended solution for people who have trouble with their eyesight especially if it concerns reading an E-meter is to get proper eye glasses.

        Did you ever read that HCOB, Old Timer. If not here it is:

        (Begin Fair Use)

        HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
        HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1971
        C/S Series 24
        IMPORTANT
        METERING READING ITEMS
        (NOTE: Observation I have recently done while handling a C/S line has resulted in a necessary clarification of the subject of “a reading item or question” which improves older definitions and saves some cases.)
        It can occasionally happen that an auditor misses a read on an item or question and does not run it as it “has not read”. This can hang up a pc badly if the item was in fact a reading item or question. It does not get handled and exists in records as “No read” when in fact it DID read.
        THEREFORE ALL DIANETIC AUDITORS WHOSE ITEMS OCCASIONALLY “DON’T READ” AND ALL SCIENTOLOGY AUDITORS WHO GET LIST QUESTIONS THAT DON’T READ MUST BE CHECKED OUT ON THIS HCO B IN QUAL OR BY THE C/S OR SUPERVISOR.
        These errors come under the heading of Gross Auditing Errors as they affect metering.
        1. An Item or Question is said to “Read” when the needle falls. Not when it stops or slows on a rise. A tick is always noted and in some cases becomes a wide read.
        2. The read is taken when the pc first says it or when the question is cleared. THIS is the valid time of read. It is duly marked (plus any blow down). THIS reading defines what is a reading item or question. CALLING IT BACK TO SEE IF IT READ IS NOT A VALID TEST as the surface charge may be gone but the item or question will still run or list.
        3. Regardless of any earlier statements or material on READING ITEMS, an item does not have to read when the auditor calls it to be a valid item for running engrams or listing. The test is did it read when the pc first said it on originating it or in Clearing it?
        4. That an item or question is marked as having read is sufficient reason to run it or use it or list it. Pc Interest, in Dianetics, is also necessary to run it, but that it did not read again is no reason to not use it.
        5. When listing items the auditor must have an eye on the meter NOT necessarily the pc and must note on the list he is making the extent of read and any BD and how much. THIS is enough to make it a “reading item” or “reading question”.
        6. In Clearing a listing Question the auditor watches the meter, NOT necessarily the pc and notes any read while clearing the question.
        7. An additional calling of the item or question to see if it read is unnecessary and not a valid action if the item or question read on origination or Clearing.
        8. That an item is marked as having read on an earlier Dianetic list is enough (also checking interest) to run it with no further read test.
        9. To miss seeing a read on an origin or clearing is a Gross Auditing Error. 79
        10. Failing to mark on the list or worksheet the read and any BD seen during pc origination or clearing the question is a Gross Auditing Error.
        EYESIGHT
        Auditors who miss reads or have poor eyesight should be tested and should wear the proper glasses while auditing.
        GLASSES
        The rims of some glasses could obstruct seeing the meter while the auditor is looking at the worksheet or pc.
        If this is the case the glasses should be changed to another type with broader vision.
        WIDE VISION
        A good auditor is expected to see his meter, pc and worksheet all at one time. No matter what he is doing he should always notice any meter movement if the meter needle moves.
        If he cannot do this he should use an Azimuth Meter and not put paper over its glass but should do his worksheet looking through the glass at his pen and the paper— the original design purpose of the Azimuth Meter. Then even while writing he sees the meter needle move as it is in his line of vision.
        CONFUSIONS
        Any and all confusions as to what is a “reading item” or “reading question” should be fully cleaned up on any auditor as such omissions or confusions can be responsible for case hang-ups and needless repairs.
        NO READ
        Any comment that an item or question “did not read” should be at once suspected by a C/S and checked with this HCO B on the auditor.
        Actually non-Reads, a non-reading item or question means one that did not read when originated or cleared and also did not read when called.
        One can still call an item or question to get a read. That it now reads is fine. But if it has never read at all, the item will not run and such a list will produce no item on it.
        It is not forbidden to call an item or question to test it for read. But it is a useless action if the item or question read on origination by the pc or clearing it with him.
        IMPORTANT
        The data in this HCO B, if not known, can cost case failures. Thus it must be checked out on auditors.
        LRH:nt.rd
        Copyright © 1971
        by L. Ron Hubbard
        ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
        80
        L. RON HUBBARD Founder

        (End Fair Use)

        Again:

        “EYESIGHT
        Auditors who miss reads or have poor eyesight should be tested and should wear the proper glasses while auditing.”

        So what is your point?

    • Honeychile, this was a very stupid advice. There are a lot of people around who have simply no understanding of the basic philosophy and following their advice can be fatal (as has happened to me in other areas).

    • Well, the Scientological explanation of why that did not work for you Honeychile – is that you simply did not donate enough money. LOL

  2. The books in library scampaigns are not actually designed at informing the public at large – its just a something that LRH once said, that might have been true in the post-war pre-digital era. But that is of no moment, when the the real purpose is to MAKE MONEY. And since it does just that, it is a “successful” scampaign, If even a handful of people in the world came in to the orgs as a result of the books in the libraries, I would be surprised. Certainly, the stories of such events are very “thin to nil”. I am willing to bet that many many more people have become disaffected and / or declared in the same time frame as duration of the scampaigns. THAT is the result, if anyone in the orgs care to take an unbiased look. But I am sure it is difficult to look when one’s head is up one’s ………

  3. Library campaigns are just there to sell the books and take the money of the parishioner. Not only nobody reads them but library are getting rid of the books if ever those books arrive there. Library scam is big source of money. Each of the 25000 scientologists maybe left on earth must have bought an average of one set of books. It’s millions of dollars.

  4. The actual truth is that Corporate Scn today selects quotes from LRH to support Miscavige programs that are destructive. Those quotes are taken our of context and routinely the name and details of the reference are not given. Of you dig up the actual reference and read it in full it is glaringly obvious that the quote does NOT justify what is being done.
    Classic example is the Ideal org program. Cunningly named after a policy of the same name, but that policy does NOT in any way justify what Miscavige is doing and pushing. And a search of basic policy in OEC Vol 0 and 7 shows policy states clearly that what IS important is delivery of results and neat clean quarters. It is training and auditing people that make an Org – and fundraising was prohibited by LRH. But ask the church for the policy behind the Ideal Org program and they bring out a small quote from the Hymn of Asia, taken our of context completely.
    I am posting an article On Milestone Two later today that details why this is occurring and what LRH actually says it is an indicator of. Link coming soon.

  5. “We would be willing to bet that not a single reader of this blog ever goes to a library to ask a question.”

    Depends on the library: also depends on how reliable you consider Google and Wikipedia to be; the former has become well-known for blocking certain content due to legal and commercial pressures, while the latter is by no means infallible. It’s also possible that at least some readers use a library’s computer facilities to read this blog – either because they don’t have the internet at home – or else because they are still under the radar and understandably wish to avoid OSA and KRs.

    But the point about CoS living in the past is well made. I get dispirited contemplating just how much paper and ink is squandered needlessly, churning out these books nobody will ever read. Easy enough to find the reason: the ignorance and stupidity of Miscavige – a man who dropped out of school at 15, and who famously claimed that CD sound-quality was inferior to tape-cassettes – to cite just two of his many failings.

    I doubt whether even bringing Scientology “properly” into the digital era would work now (discounting its existing websites devoted to laughably crude propaganda and character-assassination, or its clogging up Craigslist with spam ads). Without wishing to impugn the enthusiasm some people may still have for the subject, I should say that its day has already passed – was there ever a worse misnomer than the subtitle to ‘Dianetics’ – “The MODERN Science of Mental Health”? A sixty-two year old text is self-evidently not at the cutting edge of psychological, religious or philosophical thought – quite apart from its racist, sexist and homophobic prejudices – prejudices which Hubbard never recanted.

    It’s not just that the world has moved on and Miscavige’s “church” is an anachronism – Scientology itself (sadly for those who have devoted so much time and effort to it) is already history.

  6. The key outpoint here is not “presenting a 40 year old statement as an unalterable truth”. Rather it is “It is not clear where exactly this quote comes from.”
    It’s what the corporate church does. Quotes are dug up from some remote corner, presented out of context, their actual meaning missing and distorted, in order to justify the current destructive actions. Lana M is right.

  7. This post is long overdue. My husband William and I are officially resigning from the corporate C of S. We are not “joining” anything. But certainly can’t continue to support this suppressive group. COB is a crazy man. I know it plenty well. I was an RTC Rep at Flag and PAC for quite some time. We’re done. The more who follow suit, the better chance there is that management will grow a sack and burn out the cancer within it, starting from the very top. They could so it if they wanted to. I know it’s a long shot.

    • Glad you and William are out and OK. Working as an RTC Rep is something I would not wish on anyone. I have reality on what you guys have been through. Take a breath and destimulate from that crazy place. If you ever need someone to talk you are welcome to write me at lana@hushmail.com, anytime.

      • You’re good Lana, and you propose to be a terminal and that’s great. I may write you once and get more comm with you. I really like your viewpoint. It give the idea that actual scientology may still exist. Thank you really…

  8. Telling people who had improper vision not to wear glasses, I am sorry to say, came from LRH. In 1970 on the flag ship he told his aides not to wear glasses.

    • I was told not to wear my glasses, that I didn’t need the. In the 1970′s a lot of us went around squinting. I am legally blind without my glasses. I went two years without them.

      • Interesting data Travers.

        Yet it contradicts the HCOB I just posted.

        The problem I have with former SO Execs is they say a lot of Ron said this and Ron said that without backing it up with actual dox.

        Then when asked for dox please?

        They accuse the person for having the temerity to ask of having evil intentions toward them or being an OSA plant or whatever instead of whipping out the advice or SOED or FO or GOD or whatever and posting it here or somewhere else for all us benighted to see.

  9. I have a friend who divorced her abusive husband “Tom” four years ago. She is now remarrying. “Tom” wouldn’t sign the divorce papers stating “the Bible doesn’t believe in divorce”, so the courts granted her a default divorce. After that, he kidnapped the children and it took her over a year to get them back from him. “Tom” is now attempting to turn her two teenage children against her calling her an adulterer because she is remarrying.
    “Tom”, a Mennonite, spends more time lying and playing games trying to bend people to his will than anyone I know. After having to deal with him this week because I was working with his children on a project, my husband actually said “the man must not believe his religion because he is going to Hell just for the lies he’s told this week.”
    The sad truth here is that if someone wants someone else to believe something bad enough, they can probably find something they can take out of context that will back up their assertions. Then they can proclaim from the rooftops how right they are for committing unspeakable acts.

    • Well you know what they say Val.

      About the devil quoting scripture to suit his needs which can apply to other religions as well.

      Like a lot of “Scientologists” I’ve known in business who screw people over and claim they are doing it for the “greatest good” etc.

      Or an Organization that can glibly quote Keeping Scientology Working and in the next breath totally violate it.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s