Scientology: Hubbard = Hitler?

[Lonewulf]

Here's a question... I've been researching into L. Ron Hubbard, scientology, and the works. I've been going up and down Operation Clambake, I've been viewing an interview with The Commodore himself, and have been going up and down Youtube viewing some interesting videos. I've also viewed the docudrama, The Bridge.

However, what struck me most was this page in the Operation Clambake website. I am going to quote what was quoted in there:

"ENEMY SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 18 October 1967

[SP = Suppressive Person a.k.a. critic of Scientology]



"The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations.

This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 21 October 1968, "Cancellation of Fair Game"



"A truly Suppressive Person or group has no rights of any kind and actions taken against them are not punishable."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 1 March 1965, HCO (Division 1) "Ethics, Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists"



"The names and connections, at this time, of the bitterly opposing enemy are: 1. Psychiatry and psychology (not medicine). 2. The heads of news media who are also directors of psychiatric front groups. 3. A few key political figures in the fields of "mental health" and education. 4. A decline of monetary stability caused by the current planning of bankers who are also directors of psychiatric front organizations [that] would make us unable to function."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 16 February 1969, "TARGETS, DEFENSE"

Now, this is probably known already to people on this forum. However, this part I've never seen quoted before:

"In any event, any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should not have, in any thinking society, any civil rights of any kind, because by abusing those rights he brings into being arduous and strenuous laws which are oppressive to those who need no such restraints."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, 1989 Ed., p. 145 [The "Tone Scale" is Scientology�s measure of mental and spiritual health.]



"There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170



"The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170



"A Venezuelan dictator once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 171



"Unfortunately, it is all too often true that suppressors to a creative action must be removed before construction and creation takes place. Any person very high on the Tone Scale may level destruction toward a suppressor."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 159

He's talking about CLEANSING SOCIETY of a certain group of people (based on thoughts and deeds rather than heritage, admittedly), in order to make society better.

How is this different than Hitler? Or Big Brother? Big Brother especially seems to be the best example, thanks to "Knowledge Reports" (students in scientology schools are encouraged to spy on each other and act as "thought police"), and the desire to wipe out or "convert" anybody that thinks a certain way, or questions the practice of scientology.

How is this not scary? Seriously?

Scientology wants to take over the world, and I'm becoming more and more convinced that if they did, 1984 by George Orwell will become a reality, though not in the way that Orwell imagined it. But the same concepts are there: Thought control, brainwashing, thought police, and the liquidization of certain members of the populace.

Blah.

I wonder if I'll be targeted as an "SP" just for making this post. When does logical fear turn into paranoia?

I know that Hubbard is dead and gone, but his followers worship him and his word more than even christians worship Jesus. And I'm serious about that. In all of the orgs, they even have an office (fully furnished) available for Hubbard should he "return again". Even Jesus doesn't get that much cred!

The fact is, this madman's organization is still operating based on this mad man's every word. They still label people as SP's. They still enact the Fair Game clause (though they deny it, naturally). They libel, they slander, and they have even caused the deaths of individuals (albeit discretely). They also use "psychoanalysis techniques" to crudely open wounds in individuals, drawing in individuals through "free personality tests", and then promising that scientology could take care of their opened psychological wound. They attempt to disconnect families if those families question scientology, either through disconnection or the "Good Roads, Fair Weather" acts. Blah.

 

[HarryKeogh]

"The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered."

- L. Ron Hubbard, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, p. 170

How does the COS PR machine defend "sudden and abrupt deletion"...How could one go about accomplishing that? That is one of the scarier things I've seen written in a Scientology book.

 

[MelBrooksfan]

How does the COS PR machine defend "sudden and abrupt deletion"...How could one go about accomplishing that? That is one of the scarier things I've seen written in a Scientology book.

Given their disposition, I imagine such inflammatory passages would be edited out of later publications. Another tactic would be to say that it's all lies made up by us SPs. Still a third would be to say that Hubbard was speaking of it as a sort of 'thought experiment' and would never, ever, advocate the genocide of a group of people.

 

[Lonewulf]

Given their disposition, I imagine such inflammatory passages would be edited out of later publications. Another tactic would be to say that it's all lies made up by us SPs.

The first is unfortunate, but meaningless. It won't remove the existance of earlier publications, and the fact that Hubbard ACTUALLY SAID IT -- the same man that's praised as the equivalent of Jesus and Buddha. The second complaint can be disproven; simply produce the book involved and demonstrate it was created by Hubbard.

Still a third would be to say that Hubbard was speaking of it as a sort of 'thought experiment' and would never, ever, advocate the genocide of a group of people.

But that seems to be contradicted by this line:

"Unfortunately, it is all too often true that suppressors to a creative action must be removed before construction and creation takes place. Any person very high on the Tone Scale may level destruction toward a suppressor."

"Any person very high on the Tone Scale may level destruction toward a suppressor."

That seems pretty damning to me. Mayhaps the apologist can explain what "may level" means here?

 

[andyandy]

That is pretty disturbing -

is there any explicit reference to what "tone 2.0" and down actually refers to? Is that everyone who isn't a co$ member or the "undesirables" like the lepers and beggars mentioned by Hubbard?

 

[andyandy]

That seems pretty damning to me. Mayhaps the apologist can explain what "may level" means here?

straight from the horse's mouth

From: Theta (theta@btinternet.com)
Subject: ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY MYTH #326: Scientology Advocates Genocide!
Date: 2002-01-09 08:18:15 PST

"The reasonable man quite ordinarily overlooks the fact that people from 2.0 down have no traffic with reason and cannot be reasoned with as one would reason with a 3.0. There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the tone scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow." L. Ron Hubbard, from Science of Survival.

Yes, this is a Hubbard quote. On its own, it reads like an advocation of genocide - a claim made by many Scientology critics on the web and on the usenet group alt.religion.scientology. Why would any religious group teach such a thing? And what kind of person was Hubbard to have written this in the first place? Such questions, of course, open the way for much criticism and hostility towards Scientology.

Such claims are simply ridiculous and offensive, based only on ignorance of Scientology teachings.

The quote comes from the book Science of Survival, a training book for Scientology practitioners (Auditors). In it, Hubbard goes into great detail on human emotions, and presents, what he called, the Tone Scale. (A scale which shows the emotional tones that one can experience throughout one's life, ranging from highest to lowest). e.g.

40.0 - Serenity +
4.0 - Enthusiasm
3.0 - Conservatism
2.5 - Boredom
2.0 - Antagonism
1.5 - Anger
1.1 - Covert hostility
1.0 - Fear
0.5 - Grief
0.05 - Apathy -

To view the Tone Scale in full, visit:
http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/full.htm

When Hubbard talks of "people from 2.0 down" being hard to reason with he is referring to those at and below 2.0 on the Tone Scale, ie. those who are antagonistic, or angry, or who are secretly hostile to others, etc.

Science of Survival helps practitioners raise people on the Tone Scale, up into the higher brackets and thus helping them to become happier and more joyful. The three methods outlined are:

1) Education - learning the tools and knowledge necessary to improve oneself and conditions in life.

2) Change in environment - move out of a hostile or antagonistic environment and into an environment that is more positive and higher toned.

3) Auditing - receive Scientology counselling which frees up more of one's own natural, positive energy, enabling one to be happier and more able in life.

These are known as the three valid processes which Hubbard mentions in the above quotation. These processes are used by Auditors on their clients to help them achieve heightened states of being.

However, a very small percentage of people who are stuck, chronically, in the lower bands on the Tone Scale do not respond to the three processes, and does not make much, if any, gain in Scientology as a whole. Such individuals (see http://www.theta.btinternet.co.uk/quotes.htm) often exert negative, oppressive influences on others and tend to be destructive in nature.

Such an individual would be taken off services (which would be refunded) and routed-out of Scientology.

"Our policy is we don't waste time on them. To cater to them is to betray 90% of the population. So we set them aside for another day. We get them offlines, out of orgs and to one side." L. Ron Hubbard, from HCO PL 16 Oct 1967, SUPPRESSIVES & THE ADMINISTRATOR

In this fashion, they are indeed disposed of quietly and without sorrow.

Those who have no knowledge of Auditing policy, and Church structure as a whole, are quick to misinterpret these words of Hubbard's. Unfortunately, when these misinterpretations are propagated to others as fact, hysteria and intolerance can, and do, occur.

http://www.cosvm.org/tone2p0.htm


the main page of the anti co$ website http://www.cosvm.org/ has a lot of info on the co$ nuttiness....

 

[calebprime]

So, in practice, Scientology boots people out of the organization if they are disliked or they cause trouble.

And, in theory, they don't deny Hubbard's words.

They just don't like people bringing them up.

Does anyone feel de-enturbulated by this cromulent explanation?

 

[Darth Rotor]

It won't remove the existance of earlier publications, and the fact that Hubbard ACTUALLY SAID IT -- the same man that's praised as the equivalent of Jesus and Buddha. The second complaint can be disproven; simply produce the book involved and demonstrate it was created by Hubbard.

Here is a thought, not completely fleshed out. Feel free to play with it, even though you Godwinned from the OP.

Consider the known/understood timeline: it took some 30-60 years for the followers of Jesus to emerge from their status as a small and rather marginalized group into a growing concern. This growth built on preceding institutions, and grew to the point that Constantine, over two hundred years after Christianity showed that it would not die on the vine, adopted it as his Imperial standard.

Scientology has only been around for forty years. The Disciples of Hubbard (let's call them DoH's ) are either headed for self immolation, or are building a foundation that in a hundred years will explode across the civilized world in a powerful movement. The disadvantage DoH's have is that the modern understanding of psychology and manipulation is better understood than a couple of millenia ago, and so objections to this approach/philosophy/religion is treated more skeptically.

For my money, to extend the comparison out onto the gangplank, I think Scientologists are too much like the Gnostics, as elitists, to succeed on a grand scale. This elitism (which you point to in your excerpt) is where the Scientologists are digging their own graves. The Church itself fell into the problem, as manifested by the Great Schism between the Greek and Latin churches: it became about "me" not "we" and broke a powerful common cultural bond. The Mohammedans benefitted from that immensly in the following centuries.

The message (besides being sent to illiterates in many cases) of Christianity was seductive by being all inclusive and to a certain extene, egalitarian. The Gnostics were much more elitist in approach, in that only certain perfecti could actually ever "get" the mystery. Paul's message was simpler: you can all come to God, as you are, if you accept God via Jesus. No need to become a mystic.

Rather simple.

The key similarities I see, from a structural standpoint, is that a prospective Christian had to accept imperfection, sin as a condition, as true and work from there. Hubbard's disciples use the egrams and "clearing" as a similar premise, "I enter flawed, and will be made less flawed by this regimen of ________ (fill in the blank.)"

Getting into Scientology is both complex and expensive, which was not the case in Christianity: the tithing tended to have practical limits. I see this critical difference, particularly in a world filled with literate people, as being a core flaw in the COS strategy to grow.

It is too easy to find out the downside, since it is based in the here and now, than it was/is to get around the more metaphysical downside if Christianity, particularly as it grew early on.

DR

 

[Miss Anthrope]

They can try to explain it away however they like, but it's damning indeed. And horrifying.

 

[rymdman]

oh you are such an SP.. why are you afraid of Hubbard

 

[D'rok]

Here is a thought, not completely fleshed out. Feel free to play with it, even though you Godwinned from the OP.

Consider the known/understood timeline: it took some 30-60 years for the followers of Jesus to emerge from their status as a small and rather marginalized group into a growing concern. This growth built on preceding institutions, and grew to the point that Constantine, over two hundred years after Christianity showed that it would not die on the vine, adopted it as his Imperial standard.

Scientology has only been around for forty years. The Disciples of Hubbard (let's call them DoH's ) are either headed for self immolation, or are building a foundation that in a hundred years will explode across the civilized world in a powerful movement. The disadvantage DoH's have is that the modern understanding of psychology and manipulation is better understood than a couple of millenia ago, and so objections to this approach/philosophy/religion is treated more skeptically.

For my money, to extend the comparison out onto the gangplank, I think Scientologists are too much like the Gnostics, as elitists, to succeed on a grand scale. This elitism (which you point to in your excerpt) is where the Scientologists are digging their own graves. The Church itself fell into the problem, as manifested by the Great Schism between the Greek and Latin churches: it became about "me" not "we" and broke a powerful common cultural bond. The Mohammedans benefitted from that immensly in the following centuries.

The message (besides being sent to illiterates in many cases) of Christianity was seductive by being all inclusive and to a certain extene, egalitarian. The Gnostics were much more elitist in approach, in that only certain perfecti could actually ever "get" the mystery. Paul's message was simpler: you can all come to God, as you are, if you accept God via Jesus. No need to become a mystic.

Rather simple.

The key similarities I see, from a structural standpoint, is that a prospective Christian had to accept imperfection, sin as a condition, as true and work from there. Hubbard's disciples use the egrams and "clearing" as a similar premise, "I enter flawed, and will be made less flawed by this regimen of ________ (fill in the blank.)"

Getting into Scientology is both complex and expensive, which was not the case in Christianity: the tithing tended to have practical limits. I see this critical difference, particularly in a world filled with literate people, as being a core flaw in the COS strategy to grow.

It is too easy to find out the downside, since it is based in the here and now, than it was/is to get around the more metaphysical downside if Christianity, particularly as it grew early on.

DR

Good stuff. What fascinates me is the fact that Scientology is perfectly adapted to life in the technological age. It's almost like it had to happen. We killed God and replaced him with science/technology/ourselves, so if we are to have a new religion, it must have a technological approach to spirituality.

Someone like Heidegger would see it as evidence of how technology "destines" us for certain ends. Everything we do requires a technological solution - even problems caused by technology. The answer is always more technology. We are "enframed" utterly by a technological approach to life - everything is system.

Scientology is the perfect expression of this. Humanity is in spiritual crisis, and the answer is technical. Hubbards "revelations" are supposedly the result rational scientific explorations into the spirit. In their own jargon, their rituals and scriptures are called "tech". Their nonsense is "applied philosophy". Hell their name says it all - "Scientific Ontology". It's a "scientific" approach to metaphysics, being, and Truth.

They have tuned right into the Geist of our times. Who knows? 100 years from now they may be as mainstream as the Mormons.

 

[VanillaCone]

Just the scale alone creeps me out.

40.0 - Serenity +
4.0 - Enthusiasm
3.0 - Conservatism
2.5 - Boredom
2.0 - Antagonism
1.5 - Anger
1.1 - Covert hostility
1.0 - Fear
0.5 - Grief
0.05 - Apathy -

Since it's a list of emotions most everyone experiences from time to time, Hubbard's statements about 2.0 and below must refer to people who have tendencies toward these emotions. How disgusting that people who tend to experience fear or grief are to be dispensed with like garbage. And look at the way these emotions are ranked: Apparently being an antagonistic prick is considered far better than being melancholy. Gee, I wonder if that's because Hubbard was an antagonistic prick?

 

[Herzblut]

How is this different than Hitler?

It will never materialize. Not in Germany, never.

http://www.verfassungsschutz.de/en/en_fields_of_work/scientology/

The "Scientology Organisation" (SO) is still being monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution. Concrete evidence of activities directed against the free democratic basic order continues to be available. This is why the legal requirement for the organisation to be monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution is met.

SO: <Cry> <Whine> You dirty German Nazis! You never found any concrete anticonstitutional activities! Quit the supressive monitoring! <blubber><snivel>

Germany: Shut the fook up! You never unfolded any activities BECAUSE of our monitoring, cookheads!

You might want to have a look at the "Annual Report of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution 2005", see link above, and read the chapter about SO. It's very instructive and very much inline with your findings.

Herzblut

 

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

Scientology is the Esperanto of religions. It is perfectly engineered, from the ground up to maximize profit and minimize dissent.

Other religions came from nobler purposes, but not Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard created Scientology for three purposes: Cash, power, and revenge on his enemies.

 

[D'rok]

Scientology is the Esperanto of religions. It is perfectly engineered, from the ground up to maximize profit and minimize dissent.

Other religions came from nobler purposes, but not Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard created Scientology for three purposes: Cash, power, and revenge on his enemies.

Same origins as Mormonism.

Frankly, I think time and history have given a shine to the origins of most religions. We rightly scorn Scientology, but that is because we are actually here witnessing its origins. I honestly think that it's not drastically different than most. There is great civilizational and historical weight attached to the "major" religions. Stripped of that, many would be just as naked as Scientology IMO. Not all, perhaps, but many - possibly even most.

Mormonism is the most relevant comparison. The parallels are striking. It's the Scientology of the 19th century. It's origins aren't lost in the mists of time. We really know who Joseph Smith was and what was happening at the time. Despite the obvious deceptions, charlatanism, and base motives, Mormonism has adapted and thrived. Scientology might do the same, although I sincerely hope not.

 

[fuelair]

Scientology is the Esperanto of religions. It is perfectly engineered, from the ground up to maximize profit and minimize dissent.

Other religions came from nobler purposes, but not Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard created Scientology for three purposes: Cash, power, and revenge on his enemies.

And because he told John Campbell he could.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Here's a question... I've been researching into L. Ron Hubbard, scientology, and the works. I've been going up and down Operation Clambake, I've been viewing an interview with The Commodore himself, and have been going up and down Youtube viewing some interesting videos. I've also viewed the docudrama, The Bridge.

Those are good. I also very highly recommend Andreas in Hollywood. There is also David Miscavige's interview on Nightline that's quite interesting. (There are many others I've enjoyed, but those two I found very worth the time to watch, in addition to the two ones you listed by name.)

 

[Lonewulf]

It will never materialize. Not in Germany, never.

Is that the only difference? I was looking for something more substantial.

http://www.verfassungsschutz.de/en/en_fields_of_work/scientology/

The "Scientology Organisation" (SO) is still being monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution. Concrete evidence of activities directed against the free democratic basic order continues to be available. This is why the legal requirement for the organisation to be monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution is met.

So they're being monitored by Germany because they not only intend to, but are being shown to, break the German constitution? I can understand that.

SO: <Cry> <Whine> You dirty German Nazis! You never found any concrete anticonstitutional activities! Quit the supressive monitoring! <blubber><snivel>

Germany: Shut the fook up! You never unfolded any activities BECAUSE of our monitoring, cookheads!

Germans say "fook"?

You might want to have a look at the "Annual Report of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution 2005", see link above, and read the chapter about SO. It's very instructive and very much inline with your findings.

Herzblut

I thank you for the information, and I will indeed look at it when I get the chance.

 

[Lonewulf]

Such an individual would be taken off services (which would be refunded) and routed-out of Scientology.

"Our policy is we don't waste time on them. To cater to them is to betray 90% of the population. So we set them aside for another day. We get them offlines, out of orgs and to one side." L. Ron Hubbard, from HCO PL 16 Oct 1967, SUPPRESSIVES & THE ADMINISTRATOR

In this fashion, they are indeed disposed of quietly and without sorrow.

Those who have no knowledge of Auditing policy, and Church structure as a whole, are quick to misinterpret these words of Hubbard's. Unfortunately, when these misinterpretations are propagated to others as fact, hysteria and intolerance can, and do, occur.

AI don't see an explanation for here:

Any person very high on the Tone Scale may level destruction toward a suppressor."

AndyAndy, did I miss something? There's no explanation for the claim that they "may level destruction toward a suppressor"?

Also:

"The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the Tone Scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered."

The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals.


...Deletion.

I don't think that there's a lot of room for interpretation here.



Okay, so how does this fit?:

"A Venezuelan dictator once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country."

 

[Lonewulf]

oh you are such an SP..

Okay, I'll help you feed the scientology propaganda machine:

I'm a strip belly dancer with no morals at all. I can hire a PI to say it for you.

I'll admit to child molestation, but only for a few million. That's how $cientology works, isn't it?

why are you afraid of Hubbard

I am not afraid of Hubbard. I am afraid of scientology, which hangs onto Hubbard's every word as gospel. Which, brings me back to reading Hubbard's writing. The writings themselves are harmless; the cult-like following of his ideas are not.

I am not afraid because I think Scientology can harm me. They're too weak and too blatantly, obviously ludicrous for that. The word's out on the Xenu thing, so they won't get enough followers.

But I am afraid for those people that join the cult, and are kept in thanks to a fake harmful form of psychotherapy and cult environment. Not to mention how they are encouraged to work as slaves, for free. Then there's the deaths. Who can forget them?

Scientology is a virus. A harmful virus. And if it ever takes over, like it plans to, it will destroy whatever it infests.

Fortunately, it won't ever do that. That makes me happy.

People are being harmed to feed the scientology machine. That doesn't make me happy.

Bad ideas should be countered, and good ideas set forth. Scientology is a bad, harmful idea.