This fascinating account of the very early days in London, St Hill and Australia by Dennis Stephens shortly before he passed away was linked on this blog not too long ago. Not sure how far in it is (there’s over 4 1/2 hours in total) but he lays claim to having come up with Dear Alice as being a better option to the newspapers that were being used.on the drills at the time, which he says was suggested to LRH who immediately endorsed it.
http://www.antology.info/index-8.html

The Why for not letting anyone go is “No new people to replace them”. Actually, that is the Situation. Simple Why would be outpoint of not promoting/inneffective promoting to raw public, but then that becomes a situation also. Would be interesting to hear if anyone on this blog ever did a Multiple Sit Eval on the Why for the shrinkage of Scientology. Because, much as we love to hate him, David Miscavige, SP that He most certainly is, is not a Why. He’s a Who.

Well, thanks for the invalidating comments, I guess. What I wrote is not really that far out, though. The phenomenon of adults regressing to earlier development stages in various circumstances is well-documented and observed — outside of Scientology. Inside Scientology it would be called something else.

And there is evidence that such regression can be tied in some sort of relation to children’s stories, and its not a recent suggestion. The Economist was writing about one angle on it over a decade ago. See http://www.economist.com/node/954828 for example.

So I guess any number of thinkers trying to tease out the mechanisms of how Scientologists got so mind-controlled, and how children’s stories can tie in with some sort of regression can all wear a tinfoil hat. Better that than a closed mind.

True I agree Chuck,

Theoretically you could run the phenomenon covered in III and NOTs forever. Just as you could run engrams forever as well.

Probably again theoretically you could run objectives forever because as you remember according to C/S Series 37R there is really no such thing as overrun but then who would make any progress on the Grade Chart?

Especially in a universe where absolutes are unobtainable.

This is why you only run processes to an F/N Cognition and VGIs and then only if it reads and/or if the PC is interested (since you can’t check objectives for a read) which is what we were taught.

But of course under the new regime this is totally ignored. Just like any F/N that doesn’t swing back and forth the proscribed three times perfectly like a frickin’ metronome.

I guess you could blame the Ol’man for that but there where no additional HCOBs that changed anything in the penultimate paragraph above this one.

Just a bunch of stupid drills written by RTRC and approved by RTC and some verbal data about what an “F/N” is which has pretty much spread like a wild fire and burning the subject up in the Org and is now turning into smoke.

Actually Ron covers this point in a Briefing Course called Levels of Release where he talks about running an objective past this point is a waste of time which seems to be what the Church is really good at doing these days.

I agree Mike,

Even that theory is wilder than any that I’ve come up with.

So much so that it deserves Tin Foil Hat award with full honors.

Actually Ron explains why he picked Alice in Wonderland in a PAB called Dummy Auditing Step 2.

Through the Looking Glass is used as well.

Both of them contain nonsensical none restimulative dialogue that you can randomly pick at any point in the books and not attach too much significance to unlike say Naked Lunch or Howl for example.

I doubt if the Magic Kingdom as I call it will be another Jonestown.

Different circumstances time and location. Also no State Department and CIA worried about the group defecting in mass and requesting asylum in Soviet Russia.

Also no crusading Congressman around who wants to do an investigation of the cult.

Besides even on his best days Miscavige’s charisma or his intellect for that matter doesn’t even come close to the late Jim Jones.

No in my opinion the Church of Scientology will just collapse and Miscavige will be forced to get a real job.

Dear Kemist,

Good assessment!

Hubbard presumed all humans were drenched with mental pictures, and the beginning level Hubbard Objective processes supposedly if done thoroughly will give one the ability to hold one’s case off en masse mentally, and also gets one trained as a recipient ready for the upcoming thousands of crank therapy processes still to come where you supposedly REALLY do some slicing and dicing of your mental accumulation of bad karma memories.

I did the Objectives 3 times through. So redoing them, even in the late 1970s, was common.

There’s a funny in house movie, nicknamed the “Doll movie” which I wish were public for all to see what the end phenomenon of the Objectives is.

One bigger unseen unappreciated and important aspect of Scientology still hidden, is their in house movies, which have not leaked publicly. Events of Scientology have leaked, but not yet their in house training movies which have some really interesting depictions of their honest views of the whole cosmos.

The “Doll Movie”
The “Chaplain Movie”
and
The “Why TRs” (the late Isaac Hayes narrates it) is my all time favorite

+1 I wasn’t so quiet though. 🙂

My conclusion even when in the movement, was that almost all people still in the movement were “bypassed cases” and thus validly, per LRH’s rules, needed to be case supervised to redo all those levels they had not obtained.

Hi Chuck,

I see what you are saying and the comment above appears
to me you are referring to an Advanced Program….is this correct?

If so, I would not totally agree that on such a program the pc has to redo
ALL levels not obtained, nor do I agree all cases doing an Advanced
Program are bypassed cases.
If there are some questionable parts of a grade, objectives or
Dianetics or other level, those need checked and redone as needed,

I have not seen an Advanced Program state to redo a whole level
as opposed to checking certain processes in a level that could be questionable
per an interview and FES. An Advanced Program (Return Program) is designed
to return a pc to a point on the grade chart but not with the point of view that
almost all pc’s need to do this.

If in an Advanced Program there was a
step to redo a whole level, then I would certainly call that a bypassed
case. Then everything done from that point forward could be considered
bypassed and would have to be rechecked for EP’s and handled accordingly
to get the pc back to the level on the grade chart he supposedly attained.

I’m not trying to make you wrong here by any means….because what you
are saying is quite true….unfortunately there are many bypassed cases that
in my opinion are not handled properly. As far as LRH saying to redo all
levels, I can only go by what programs each individual pc has in their folders.
They are all not exactly the same.