Skip to content

Scientology for the Rich

May 4, 2010

Even the most dedicated Scientologist can see the disparity between the stated goal of “Clearing the Planet” and the fact of the Church’s high “donation rates.” At Flag, the cost of a single intensive of auditing, 12 ½ hours, is $6,800.  You can get a used car for that. Scientologists can and do spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to reach Clear and OT. Add to that the donations to the IAS, Ideal Orgs and Superpower – those donations you’d better make if you want to keep your OT Eligibility, and it puts Scientology completely out of reach for at least 95% of the planet. Consider that only 6% of Americans make over $100,000 a year, and only 3% make over $125,000, or $250,000 household income.

And what about the rest of the planet? What about countries where the average per capita income is $20,000, $10,000, $5,000 or even less?

What happened to Clearing the Planet? How’s that supposed to work?

Or is Scientology really only supposed to be for the elite, the moneyed?

Sure, I was on staff, I know the policy (HCO PL 7 April 65 Book Income) – “Scientology planning is built to make the able more able, leaving the unable strictly alone for a while. If we do this, we grow. If we, like some foolish persons do, tie around our necks the unable, the helpless, the backward, we won’t be able to move high enough fast enough to then afford to help the helpless.”

Okay, I get it, a sort of trickle-down planet-clearing. But, one might ask, when is this supposed to happen? When will Scientology finally be able to reach out to someone other than the top percentage of ultra-rich?

When I was on staff, in the Sea Org, I thought it might occur in the 1980s. Scientology seemed to be doing well and expanding – wasn’t it time, at last, to broaden the base and reach out to everyone? I planned out and executed a huge Dianetics Campaign with just that in mind.

One of the first decisions I had to make was whether to market a paperback book or a hardback. For me, it was a no-brainer. If the goal was to reach as many people as possible, then a paperback would accomplish that. But, others argued, there’s more profit in hardbacks. You can sell fewer and make more money.  Well, fine, if your goal is to make money. But isn’t our goal, I asked innocently, to Clear the Planet, not to make money? Ah the innocence of youth!

The point is, if you really do want to get Scientology to the maximum number of people, if you really want it to go big and mainstream, if you really do want to Clear the Planet, then you have to plan things out so that happens. You have to look at prices. You have to look at what people can afford. You have to look at making it possible for anyone to set up a delivery center. There’s a lot of things to work out. And if that was your intention, you would work them out.

On the other hand, if your goal is just to make money, why then, set prices out the roof, cater to only the rich, think up more and more ways to get them to donate bigger and bigger amounts. Release huge packages of hardback books and CDs and charge a premium for them. Get the same rich people to do the same services over and over again, buy the same materials over and over again. That’s how you’d do it if you just wanted to make money.

The story Marty told about Isaac Hayes is a case in point. Isaac wanted to make Scientology more available to blacks. His concerns got relayed up the line. And in the end, it ended up being a big “donation project” to reg rich people for money to set up a couple of showcase “Ideal Orgs” in Harlem and South Central. No adjustment of rates. No inexpensive training. No real intention to get a volume of people trained or serviced.

But wait, you might say, we do have programs for the “less fortunate,” don’t we? Well, that’s a subject for another post, but suffice it to say that all of the so-called “social betterment programs” associated with the Church (TWTH, Applied Scholastics, Narconon, Crimanon) are all supposed to make their own way as independent profit centers and tithe to the central Church.  And those projects going out to “pioneer areas”? They’re supposed to make their own way, too.

So when will the Church of Scientology have the time and resources to reach out to the 95% of the planet that aren’t rich? Well, don’t hold your breath.

Because they have no intention of doing so.

  1. Marta permalink
    May 4, 2010 8:39 pm

    Precisely! (hack, spit) 🙂

    • lunamoth permalink
      May 5, 2010 5:43 am

      I’ve read this comment three times and it still makes me chuckle.

  2. May 4, 2010 8:44 pm

    Was it Hubbard’s idea to keep auditing rates high? I’m talking about after the late 70s, not the earlier policies he wrote.


  3. May 4, 2010 9:12 pm

    Scientology is for the rich? For the 5%?
    I don’t agree.
    Basic LRH Policy on books is to price them 5 times cost + shipping/handling… Same is applied to e-meters.
    What policy is applied to services I don’t know.

    scientology is for 95% of those who are willing to sacrfice their own life and values and join “the cause”.
    To me, they are fools (as I see it now while were one of them not so long ago).

    • Another Jeff permalink
      May 5, 2010 12:31 am

      Vad, you’re referring to someone joining staff…. this article refers to paying public, true I have known MANY public who made it up the Bridge and they were far from rich, but what they gave up in financial means could have at least let them live a decent middle class life not swimming in credit card debt. “Rich” would need better defining here.

      • Just Me permalink
        May 5, 2010 12:57 am

        Another Jeff,

        I’m so sorry you received a bum p.s. education. I swear my own p.s. experience was just as I described above. When I was a kid, my schools weren’t richly funded and didn’t have the fanciest resources. But they had great teachers who loved learning. And any teacher who loves learning can model for kids how wonderful learning can be for them.

        I’ve truly got tears in my eyes right now — partly in sadness for the education you did not receive, but mostly in gratitude for the teachers who taught me to love learning.

        Just Me

  4. May 4, 2010 9:12 pm

    If one wants to reach the population of earth with Scientology, one would release the material for free on the Internet – indexed and easily searchable.

    • lunamoth permalink
      May 5, 2010 12:44 am


      At the start of my scientology career (30 years ago), I felt the materials should all be free, too. They were magical, and I could see just from the little I had done that scienotology could transform the
      planet. Then I came to agree with the idea that one could not get case gain without “exchange.”
      What can I say, I was living in a Republican stronghold. I was getting it from all sides.

      Today, I am back to my original viewpoint. It should be free. No one is going to fail to value something that gives them real gains and wins just because it’s free. Being a mother has been
      one of the most rewarding and life-affirming things I have ever done. It has expanded my under-standing of everything and made me a bigger being. But I will never have a gig that pays so poorly, not even if I joined staff. Money and case gain, no matter what reference is quoted me, are not necessarily joined.

      Fortunately for the world, I believe what you describe is going to come to pass, and I give you a great deal of credit for that. A couple of years ago, when your doubt formula circulated on my
      email lines, you were the first to introduce that concept to my universe again after many years.
      It was a bold statement, and I have come to see, a very worthy one.

    • Mickey permalink
      May 5, 2010 3:05 am

      Hi Geir….when you first made your coming out splash as an Indie, I was intrigued by your proposal to move the whole of the Scn system to the Internet and make it available for free. A couple of questions about this:

      1. What about the OT materials? There goes the secrecy, right?
      2. What’s the feedback your idea is receiving from the spectrum of different “case and training levels” of Indies you interact with? Did you get opinions from some of the other mover and shaker-uppers of the Indie movement, eg. Marty, Mike, Dan, etc?
      3. If free to one and all, do you see course rooms, qual services and the whole contingent of service components found in the formal churches, mushrooming everywhere, decentralized and surviving because of an open and free market place?

      Thanks for your answers in advance. I’m truly interested in what feedback you are receiving.

  5. Freedom Fighter permalink
    May 4, 2010 11:55 pm

    isene, I hear you, but I believe you have an MU on what LRH means when he says “the work was free, keep it so”. I could be wrong, but when I read that, my understanding was that the work was free from outside influence and should be kept that way. He didn’t mean to give stuff away for free — in fact, LRH wrote quite a bit on the subject of exchange that would contradict your interpretation.

    That said, I do feel that things should be priced so the average person can afford to get up the Bridge. For that, too, LRH had policy on how much things should cost.

    • May 5, 2010 9:35 am

      I’ll be brief:

      1. The OT materials are already out and about all over the net, so it may just be a moot point. However I have not decided on my opinion on that one.

      2. The feedback has been almost unanimously positive. It seems to be a no-brainer.

      3. Yes.

      • Jim Logan permalink
        May 5, 2010 4:42 pm

        In the policy, 11 Aug 71, Issue V, Security of Data, the following occurs:
        “Until we ourselves have climbed well out of the hole, we must safeguard the materials. Our case gains depend on it. And others could make our salvage of people impossible.

        “We do not safeguard these materials from any commercial consideration. Our futures, those of each of us and those of all Scientologists, depend on our keeping this material under lock and safeguarded from abuse until we are well away as a group and can handle things better as individuals as well as a group.”

        It is evident to any who care to actually look, David Miscavige has brought about the exact circumstance, within the Church of Scientology, of making the salvage of people impossible. David Miscavige presently has corrupted the Upper Bridge to such an extent and with destructive purpose in mind, that the situation of unscrupulous use of the materials to enslave, as described in the same policy above, is a fact.

        The remedy? It’s already happened with the broad release of the cure to his perversion of Scientology. Perhaps the time track has been pushed up a bit, and we are as ‘well away’ as a group as we can be right now and have to rise to the occasion and use the data as individuals and groups to the purpose they were intended – freeing beings.

    • May 5, 2010 9:46 am

      I believe the MU is yours 🙂 since your interpretation requires more of a stretching (applying Occam’s Razor).

      Nevertheless; Exchange for property is obvious. Intellectual Property is a non-natural, artificial law construct.

      And then there is the overall purpose of getting the tech out to all peoples of earth -even the people of Congo. I believe it indeed becomes a no-brainer to release all the tech for free on the Net.

      • May 5, 2010 5:11 pm

        The Concept of Geir is a new one and not easy to understand. But if you look at it compared to open source software that is free, nevertheless people make a fortune out of it.

      • Freedom Fighter permalink
        May 5, 2010 5:49 pm

        The fact that I work in the software industry and feel that I should receive fair exchange for the products I produce rather than giving them away and relying on the production of others to support me through social “betterment” programs aside, LRH says what he says about exchange and the detrimental result it has on a being when it is out.

        He also says what he says in the reference about keeping the work free from outside influences (as opposed to the wrong definition of giving it away for free).

        All I’m saying is price it so the average person can afford it — just as LRH intended.

      • Joe Howard permalink
        May 7, 2010 8:16 pm

        Just to stir this pot a bit further, the value of Scientology is not so much in the materials but in their application. This is the case with most subjects, actually. What value is calculus if it’s just sitting in a book? Imagine where the world would be if calculus had become a restricted, secretive, trademarked subject and the sole property of Sir Isaac Newton, Inc. Knowledge itself isn’t really part of the MEST universe and making it available freely and widely as on the Internet has been a boon for civilization. The knowledge in Scientology made widely and freely available could not but help society as a whole.

        Now, when you get into whether auditing and training should be free, you’re down into my time and your time and auditing spaces, etc. and there has to be an exchange there because you’re no longer in the realm of knowledge but of application. And I believe that the more people who read something of Scientology the more people would want to see what auditing was like and the more conditions would improve, which is the sole, entire and ONLY purpose for the subject in the first place.

        Like Geir, I haven’t made up my opinion about the confidential materials, though I have yet to meet someone who read them who had an adverse reaction.

      • Freedom Fighter permalink
        May 8, 2010 1:57 am

        Joe, thanks for explaining this viewpoint a bit further. Put this way, I can have it. One question I have, though, is how would one go about ensuring things were kept standard? Maybe I’m still clinging to the regimented modus operandi, but I can’t help but think from a Qual viewpoint.

      • lunamoth permalink
        May 8, 2010 2:02 am

        Joe Howard,

        That was simple, logical and lovely. I agree.

      • May 8, 2010 4:25 pm

        I’ve read some OT-material (I’m not an OT) but never really felt restimulated. I’ve never heard of anybody dying from the material let alone getting sick. However, it’s highly controversial so having an official line of “not confirming nor denying anything” from the church might be a good idea.

        One amuzing fact is that Hubbard put everything in a film script called Revolt In The Stars because (according to some people) he wanted people to get restimulated and seek out Scientology if they saw the movie.

      • May 8, 2010 4:46 pm

        Joe Howard is right.
        In fact, LRH stated something similar on the first page of the first lecture in Student Hat (“Study: Introduction”) that “better than 50% are about how subject applied” (not worded exactly).
        I’d like to contribute from English Teacher’s viewpoint. There is a HUGE number of teachers and centers (schools) that offer English in Moscow. There are quite many people here who want or need to learn English – for various resons (travel, personal connections, job, International company… you name it). Why don’t they just learn it themselves? Materials are available at moderate prices (or for free in the Internet). Answer: They need a good “guide”.
        And – it happens that there are good teachers and teachers not so good. No matter how beautifully advertised the offer is, people recognize a bad teacher and stop learning with them. They CAN get upset and never try learning again. Well, it’s life. It’s sad but you can’t get people pulled and forced to learn English because “WE Have it right!”.
        Idea is that materials CAN be available at no or moderate price (there is a plenty of free materials available from Internet that I use in my lessons – like YouTube of free ESLPods).
        They are NOT the main part (Couple years back – working for Applied Scholastics English program – I thought that the secret of success was in the materials. Well, I was wrong). Now I see that “secret” is in person who teaches you. That’s what people want. That’s what they need.
        Personally – I’ve never advertised my services. Don’t like to show off. People just call me and ask if I can teach them. Word of mouth.
        Success or failure of MATERIALS is in the hands of those teachers who use them – for price or for free.
        Back to my example. I charge price for my service what is not low but also is not exorbitant. I’m thinking with realities of those teaching around me and with degree of my contribution. It’s viable enough for me. I like my job, so I do it – for the exchange and – mostly – for fun.

        To answer Freedom Fighter. I have also been “Qual dude” (my favorite place on org board). I think Qual services can be also available in the Internet in an area as needed. They don’t need to be regulated by some “authority”. Those would be paid services. And I think there would be enough offer of those who likes to do Qual rather than Tech Services. Myself included. 🙂
        If I could be in Qual with English I would do just that. I would have even more fun doing Qual Services with bogged English than with teaching… Well, I should think about getting it implemented via Internet. This good idea came up as I was typing this post. Thanks, Freedom Fighter, for a lead! 😉

        Like how threads develop into something more and more valuable.
        It helps come up with some new ideas for the future. Isn’t that what we are all looking forward to? 🙂

  6. Just Me permalink
    May 5, 2010 12:02 am


    This comment may be a bit of a tangent to your post’s larger topic. But going off on a tangent is rapidly becoming an honored tradition at your blog.

    During my long life I’ve served as a member of the board of directors for several non-profit organizations. Once upon a time I even served on the board of directors of Applied Scholastics. What I saw there made my skin crawl, and I could not get off of that board fast enough. Applied Scholastics has no more idea of how to improve education than … a man in the moon.

    I have strong opinions about education, and on this subject my opinion is neither humble nor uninformed. I have a Ph.D. in education and have worked in large public school systems, universities and public and private educational research labs.

    In my opinion, word-clearing is fine, although learning the definitions of words and their many uses is a basic educational tool that did not originate with Scientology. (I won’t revisit here the debate about who within Scientology first noticed the phenomena of misunderstood words and developed word-clearing technology.) My own public school teachers taught me to look up words in a dictionary and use them in a sentence ten times. Then, they promised, “The word will belong to you forever.” They were right.

    However one masters the meanings and uses of words, a good education requires much more than word clearing. It also requires that up-to-date, appropriate content be provided in the form of textbooks, films, recordings, lectures, and discussions. A good education also requires that students have opportunities to practice and receive helpful coaching.

    Most of all, a good education requires that students interact with teachers who are subject-matter experts and fill the role of knowledgeable tutor and capable coach, not just a content librarian. A good education requires that teachers offer their opinions and invite students’ questions and opinions. The best teachers (and the luckiest students) are those who, together, explore a subject that fascinates them. Good teachers also constantly learn new things about their chosen subjects, to excite and invigorate themselves as teachers.

    In K-12, a good education requires teachers who can manage easily distracted students, complicated schedules, and multiple educational resources in ways that maximize the amount of time students spend studying and learning. Interestingly, of all the factors schools can control to maximize learning and achievement, the one that correlates highest with students’ learning/achievement is “time students spend learning through educational tasks.” Yes, I’ll repeat that: Learning is proportional to time spent learning.

    So there it is: The VFPs (valuable final products) of education are the results of well-hatted educators who use their good management skills to keep students on-task as much as possible so they can learn as much as possible. Try selling that simple secret to the folks who “hey-you” manage the Church of Scientology these days. I wouldn’t want those guys managing any school system I helped fund, sent my kids to, or hired graduates from to work in my business.

    Just Me

    • Another Jeff permalink
      May 5, 2010 12:35 am

      Just Me, wow, I wish I had gone to your schools… I went through regular schools in Los Angeles area… garbage education save a few basics… I spent 100s of hours cleaning up all the misunderstoods I got and re-learning subjects, now I am a functioning student/worker.

    • lunamoth permalink
      May 5, 2010 1:39 am

      Just Me

      I really enjoyed your comments. I agree with you with all my heart. I, too, know way too much about Applied Scholastics schools, and I find most to fall well short of anything approaching “good schools” for the reasons you state here (add to the list completely unqualifed and untrained individuals being hired as teachers).

      Ironically, and completely infuriating, there exists within that particular culture a contempt for public schools (nearly all of which produce a higher percentage of better-educated graduates), and for higher education, as well. I cannot tell you how shocked I was to hear the OES of one school state that it was MUCH more important for students as young as 14 to join the sea org than it was to finish school or go to college. She counseled my own daughter in this way once (ONLY once).

      And yet, a lot of lip service is given to students going to college when the public is being addressed, and those few (mostly the children of non-sci, btw) who make it through with that goal intact and who manage to get accepted to any adequate school are promoted like crazy to the public, as if this was representative of the schools’ products.

      How does this relate to the theme of this blog? In case you have never dealt with Applied Scholastics schools, there is a definite heirarchy of prestige. Delphi Academy, which is to my knowldege the most expensive of the schools, is generally considered to be “the best.” Scientology’s
      OL’s and “upstats” (those with the money to contribute to the IAS, visit Flag and the Ship regularly, and often employ other, less well-off scientologists) usually send their children to one of the Delphi campuses. There is status associated with belonging to that particular country club. And the tuition keeps going up, of course. I’m sure the raised fees are justified by someone, somewhere, but intentional or not, it certainly keeps out “the riff raff.”

      • May 12, 2010 3:43 pm

        Eww… “Riff-raff: disreputable persons.” So you think people with less earnings are automatically more likely “disreputable”? Or that people with more earnings are automatically less likely “disreputable”? I know LRH thought people “who … pay more … have the greatest value to others,” but to judge the character of people by how much they earn is an ugly way of seeing things in my opinion.

      • May 12, 2010 6:46 pm

        R. Hill,
        Do you want scientology? (I hope and believe,” no” is your answer)).
        Why does it matter to you then?

        I don’t care about scientology. But I DO appreciate what people share here. Why do you challenge her for “the riff-raff”. Were YOU offended in any way?
        Feel free to speak. – But don’t be offended being challenged.

      • May 14, 2010 2:20 am

        “Do you want scientology? . . . Why does it matter to you then?”
        Sometimes I just feel like sharing an insight.

        “I DO appreciate what people share here.”
        Me too. And everywhere else also for that matter.

        “Were YOU offended in any way?”

        “Feel free to speak.”
        I did, by pointing out the implications of her statement.

        “Why do you challenge her for ‘the riff-raff’ . . . don’t be offended being challenged”.
        I didn’t post with a ‘challenge’ mindset. In any case, it’s difficult to reconcile these two statements you made: You appear to question me for ‘challenging’ her ‘riff-raff’, and then a bit farther advise me to not be offended if I am being challenged… I’m confused.

      • May 14, 2010 10:08 am

        R. Hill,
        I apologise for possibly having misinterpreted your words.
        I had thought that your words:
        “Riff-raff: disreputable persons.” So you think people with less earnings are automatically more likely “disreputable”? Or that people with more earnings are automatically less likely “disreputable”?
        were directed towards lunamoth because you said there: “you”.
        I don’t think she/he (?) does think that.
        You might have meant “one” saying “you” (?)

      • lunamoth permalink
        July 15, 2010 5:52 am

        R. HIll

        The purpose of the quotation marks around “riff raff” is to show the term is being used in a sarcastic way.

        You had to try pretty hard to misunderstand that one.


    • May 5, 2010 3:10 am

      Just Me, that was a most excellent tangent! I’m so glad you took it and I’m glad too that you knew you could. As you noted, doing so has become an honored tradition her on Jeff’s blog. And, that’s just one of the numerous reasons these blogs are so rich.

      With your comment Just Me, you got me looking and asking myself…”What did I actually know before I entered Scn and how did that change once I became a scio? Obivous question but I do believe there is something there for me to explore beyond the pat story I’ve gradually developed over the years. Perhaps my story is not as accurate as I influenced myself to believe.

      Thanks much Just Me!


    • May 5, 2010 6:49 am

      Just Me,
      Thank you so much for such an educative piece of writing!
      It is directly related to my current activity, and helps a lot.
      What you describe is DEFINITELY THE way how education and teachers should be (for the world to become better place).

      While in Sea Org and even after I had this idea that I don’t need any external education myself since “scientology has all the answers”. Mostly, to me it came from reassurances by LRH from “Product 0″ Sea Org courses – Welcome to the Sea Org”, “Basic Sea Org Member Hat” and “Personal Grooming Course”. And his reassurances sat there in my head turning me back to LRH’s teachings if I didn’t have good solutions and needed one. On the other hand, I was eager to shove my “LRH based” solutions as “the best and only ones” to others (even to students, even they were unreal from extenrnal viewpoint – like “the only best thing to do in you education is to clear words”) . Well, I saw it didn’t always work since “one solution to all the problems” doesn’t work for numerous and endless possible situations and questions to life…

      Now, thank God, I got over that passion for LRH’s solutions (including the ones in self-education and teaching).

    • May 5, 2010 11:01 am

      We sent our first kid into a scientology school but very soon we took him out again and sent him to regular school, as that what we experienced we knew wasn’t Scientology tech but kind of nonsense. Now he is a master in Computer Sciences done at one of the best University worldwide, he is not a scientologist, but such an intelligent free thinker. Compared to me as an OT he’s about 100x faster in analytcal thinking and in evaluating situations and come up with the solutions that many times I asked myself:”what the hell did I learn in Scientology ?”.
      When I have any problem in my business I call him and in milliseconds he comes up with the Solution including all the different viewpoints all have also to care about to make the right decision.
      Once he invited about 20 of his friends in our house for a party, all had a master or were working on a doctor. I was in awe about their speed of communication, their speed in nanalytical thinking, their love they had for each other, their knowingness about any subject and they in comm. with the world, they know what’s going on on this planet. And boy they can drink ! I knew I couldn’t disseminate to any of them as they would see in very short time what’s going on in the org. I dreamt about those kind of people at the head of Scientology…this would be nice…we teached our son some basics of study tech and for him it’s something normal that any intelligent person would do and apply.
      I would say about 90 % of Scientologists don’t apply Study tech the right way.
      Years ago I used to give courses in Computer technology to wogs. I was very successful at it. From time to time I’d one or two Scientologists in a class and they were very difficult students, having all phenomena of mu’s and asking silly questions. It was interesting to observe. At any course I explained that in this Technology you can’t clear all the words as every day there are new words, some words disappears as being old and there are words that don’t make any sense and gave them the solution that they must be aware of the things they don’t understand and so they’ll not fall asleep and I just show them the things they can understand and the purpose would be to get a product, not understand everything. Try to clear all the words in the menues of excel and word and you have a problem.
      This concept, which is per study tech was instantly understood by wogs and they stayed alert but the scientologists were bi’s on it and nearly fall asleep. But there were some very rare Scientologist that had no problem with it.

      Study tech is a good thing applied correctly and would help this world. But if you look at what they are doing with the basics… its totally against study tech.



      • Joe Howard permalink
        May 7, 2010 8:33 pm

        LO, yes, one gigantic point missed by most in Study Tech is that if you encounter a word and you know you don’t know it, it won’t hang you up. That’s not a justification for going by MUs but if you can’t clear, or just don’t feel like it for one reason or another, it’s not going to put you to sleep!

      • May 8, 2010 5:58 pm

        Joe Howard,
        In Student Hat LRH said that it you may happen to go past some MUs and not get problems. Yet, “for the masses” (BSM, “Learning How to Learn”, I guess in KTL&LOC and in preface to any LRH book) it’s NO-NO! (Taboo!). “Once you get past MU you can as well have done r2-45 on the subject” 😉
        It’s great what LO brought up. MUs DON’T ruin your ability to learn some subject. It’s just VERY HELPFUL to clear words. That’s all. No other “significance” (importance) should have been attached to clearing words.
        Especially, in the way I had to do that word clearing – “clear every definition as BSM said” (Honestly, I was slow student because I was doing just as LRH said…).
        Well, now I know how to get the best progress in learning because I teach and see what works. It’s very fulfilling (as opposed to supervising or undergoing 8C supervising)

    • Marta permalink
      May 5, 2010 3:15 pm

      Just me,

      Nice! Please, tangent anytime. Impressively spoken and much appreciated perspective.

    • Just Me permalink
      May 5, 2010 9:49 pm


      I loved your story about your son’s education and achievements. How very proud and happy you must be that he is so accomplished and has such high intellectual esprit de corps with loving friends. I could imagine being in your home while they were partying down together – what a moment!

      As a minor postscript to my original post about “good education,” I’d like to say out loud something we all know: Education does not end with schooling. We keep learning all our lives. At some point, we start to learn much from our colleagues.

      There’s an old saw that says, “A committee never accomplished anything” (or something to that effect). However, the more I work with others, the more I appreciate how very incorrect that saying is. Depending on the project and its goals and subject matter, a group may accomplish a lot more than a single person can, assuming they are all qualified and know how to work together well. Many times I’ve seen one person’s strong efforts be improved when that person collaborates with another qualified person. I’ve seen a third person improve two persons’ efforts. I’ve also seen a fourth and even a fifth person make the work product better—and increase the knowledge of all team members.

      Our work, knowledge and skills improve when we are challenged by our peers. By testing our knowledge, we move to a higher level. Obviously, Jeff’s blog and the other blogs and boards we visit provide us a forum for collaborative learning.

      And then there are autodidacts who, because of personal preference or circumstances, learn alone. These autodidacts often build extremely muscular minds. One such person many of us know is Jim Logan who, today over at Marty’s blog (at, posted about after been denied by DM the Scientology training and auditing he craved. Having no other choice, he obtained and studied from the ground up all the Scientology texts (and their precedents) he could find. Anyone who knows Jim appreciates that his certainty and confidence in this material is quite strong. Although I’m certain Jim and I don’t agree about everything, I would not begrudge him a penny’s worth of the certainty and confidence he has about his subject, and I’d always be more than willing to listen to his views on any Scientology texts.

      I think that’s all I wanted to say. Or perhaps I just wanted to prolong the conversation about education, learning and the joy of discovering so many new questions that deserve respectful inquiry as long as we are alive.

      Just Me

      • Heather G permalink
        May 6, 2010 8:36 am

        Education does not end with schooling. We keep learning all our lives. At some point, we start to learn much from our colleagues.

        I agree. In fact, just this morning in the shower I thought to myself that the day I stop learning is the day I start dying.

        I take the view that any person can teach me something, whether educated or not, adult or not.

        I really appreciate your insights, Just Me, and all who’ve commented.

    • May 6, 2010 7:03 pm

      Just Me,
      Great subthread in itself!
      Is there a blog of yours somewhere? I will definitely read and take part in the subject since I teach people and try to use the best ways. Also, I keep learning life and its venues.

      Heather G,
      “He who does not add to his learning diminishes it” – The Talmud.
      “Teacher, to be a good teacher, must keep learning himself”. – (don’t remember the author)
      Also, there is some good data from Student Hat, “Dynamic principle of existence is to learn”, and there also he says (not exact quote) “To learn one must observe as a first thing. … also ask questions…” There is some very good data in Student Hat. I find it useful (not all now but some of it for sure).
      Those are some things I cherish (so remember them by heart without pulling out the reference).
      So, Heather, I fully agree with you.

      And also appreciate Just Me adding to his original post. I also had this thought that when we speak of “learning” we are not talking only about some limited peroiod of time but about our total life span.

      True learning new things makes one younger. 😉

      • Just Me permalink
        May 6, 2010 9:40 pm


        Thanks very much for asking, but no, I don’t have a blog. It’s all I can do to keep up with the few blogs I participate in.

        Whew! What did we do with all our time before we had these online communities to enjoy?! This is a WHOLE new level of virtual relationships.

        I wish you great success in your new blog venture. I’ll cruise over there in a second to see how it’s going.

        Just Me

    • May 11, 2010 12:21 am

      Just Me,

      As VaD has already noted, this tangent of yours is indeed a great subthread! You opened the portal and, as is the usual on one of Jeff’s blogs, the insightful comments from this pool of elevated intelligence flowed in. It’s rich! But, not just for the rich. 🙂

      My education track, unfortunately, was not much like the one you described. From the time I entered the public school system to the time I graduated from highschool, I had attended eight different schools. And, amongst the many teachers I had, I’m sad to say that there was only a light sprinkle of teachers who actually knew how to teach and obviusly had a passion for teaching. I was one of those students who, as I progressed from grade to grade became more and more stupid. I went from knowing I could be and do anything to coming to the conclusion that I wasn’t cut out for near as much diversity as I had previously thought.

      When I took the Student Hat course (my second crs in Scn) it, among other things, rehabilitated my willingness to learn. And, while moving through the course, all the misdirected invalidation, evaluation and wrong indications were gradually stripped away from my track in public ed. I strongly suspect that doing the SH crs did more to change my life and the direction of my life than any other crs or action that I engaged in while in Scn.

      As a side note: while I was in highschool, being fully aware of the fact that I was not being educated, I mocked up a parallel universe wherein a different highschool existed. The teachers were all professionals from there various fields and there were many artists from all over the world who came to teach in this school. I spent many, many hours in the parallel universe of my creation.

      While on the subject, here is an excerpt from a blog I wrote and posted last summer…

      I have wondered what the current state of our society would be if our public education system that we have all journeyed through would have been an education system that, instead of being designed to create hordes of compliant factory workers to feed the industrial revolution, would have been a system with a mandate to produce free thinking leaders.

      Imagine, what if when you had attended school the many parts of the whole system were designed to work in concert to bring you, the student, into a state of being where you fully believed in yourself and in your ability to competently handle anything that life might hand you? A system where the objective was to put into your hands tools that you could effectively use to successfully navigate the sometimes stormy waters that the vagaries of life stir up around you. Tools like a set of communication skills that enable you to adeptly articulate your thoughts, opinions, ideas and feelings to another person. Tools like how to research and evaluate data then postulate solutions based upon your findings. Tools that help you in being to isolate the source of a problem and then formulate an optimum solution. Learning tools that you can use to study and learn anything as well as recognize when something is being presented in such a way as to thwart the learning process. And, what if the education system had nurtured and encouraged you to be curious, to ask questions, to explore and experiment and to look and decide for oneself. And that there was no such thing as failure but only a continuous series of opportunities for you to broaden your scope of understanding and knowledge. Then, what if this education system put its emphasis, high marks and rewards, not on you being able to correctly regurgitate data that was previously fed in, but instead, put its emphasis on you fully understanding and being able to successfully apply and extrapolate upon what you are learning and not being allowed to go forward to the next lesson until you do.

      I truly believe that if my generation would have gone through a system of education like the one imagined above, that this country, indeed the world, would be at this time in a much more civilized and harmonious state of existence. However, the reality is we didn’t go through such an education system and the state of our country and the world is what it is. But, while that is just so much water under the bridge, we are in NOW and perhaps while we are here in the NOW we can act to make some much needed adjustments in a few fundamental elements that have significant influence on the condition of our society not only in the NOW but for all generations to come.


  7. lunamoth permalink
    May 5, 2010 12:34 am

    What just happened? How did “ABLE” just get redefined as “RICH?”

    Actually, while I know it didn’t JUST happen, I know that the redefinition of words is a
    slick way to control a person’s thinking. As long as customers – er – parishioners of the
    c of m think of themselves as “the most able” and not as “those with the most money to
    spend,” they can continue to think of themselves as more deserving of scientology than
    others. It’s a workable little piece of self-delusion. With it, customers -er- parishioners
    can continue to think of what dm is selling as “steps on a spiritual path” and not a slickly
    promoted and packaged product, the way others see it.

    I would argue that the spirituality part has long since left the building, but hey, I’m a little cynical since finding out about dm’s Egyptian cotton shirts, palatial digs and that crazy little customized, armored vehicle that’s too heavy to actually drive on any public roads.

    • Elizabeth permalink
      May 5, 2010 4:37 am

      Lunamouth, I SO AGREE with you! Being able is not synonymous with being rich. The two frequently coincide but certainly not always. I know plenty of people (in Scientology) who make lots of dough but are not as able as the staff members who serve them. I know of a wealthy public who joined staff at our org who is a Patron Meritorious and who cannot produce a product and who is a horrible student who blows. He’s actually pretty low function.

    • Marta permalink
      May 5, 2010 3:49 pm


      I hear you, here! Ability does not equate to $$ earned or spent. Is one able to produce a product or service desired by another for an exchange, that will contribute to both short and long term survival for self and others? Or merely able to generate and garner $$ by whatever means, at the expense of others, and to the detriment of long term survival. Very different abilities based on different intentions and with vastly different outcomes.

      DM has proven he’s “able” to take command of a subject intended for good, and turn its vehicle (church/organization, etc) to sh*t from the top-down and inside-out. So what! If that’s the goal, then I’ve no doubt in his eyes he is extremely able. And by pure definition of “able”, then yes, he’s able to do that.

      In all my SO training, LRH Comm training, tech, admin, and book & lectures study, it has never been my understanding that LRH meant that Scientology was intended to make the evil more able to do evil and the unethical more able to be unethical – but, the opposite.

      “Able” alone is impotent (not to mention, used a generality by DM so spin his web) without the framework of “to ..(what?)..” as qualifier.

      Now, I’ve said DM too many times so, I ask your pardon when again I (hack, spit)

  8. Mockingjay permalink
    May 5, 2010 12:56 am

    I got up the bridge for very little money. I didn’t have any money. I trained. In the 70’s training was an incredible deal. The briefing course was $768.00. I kid you not. You could get the BC and Power for 1500.00 and they threw in Solo! To become a Cl IV auditor cost 1000.00. A meter was 500.00. The HSDC was 500.00 and you could co-audit for 100s of hours. It wasn’t perfect but it got the job done and people were winning and going free. If you wanted better auditing you could pay for it. That was the whole point of an Org. Superior Service Image.

    The more you worked on becoming a better auditor the more co-auditing opportunities you had. I co-audited everything except Power. I co-audited OT IV. My first real paid for auditing was OT V in 1983 or 84. I got for 1/2 price because I was a Class VIII. There were Sec checks when I got on OT VII but not the oppressive ones there are now. I used less than an Intensive the entire time I was on VII. I had huge gains.

    The auditing I had after 1989 was different. I paid a lot for it. I had very little gain. Sec checks that didn’t have anything to do with my case but some imagined case that the C/Ses had. It all had to do with how I felt about management and my thoughts. It was slow and laborious. I wouldn’t have minded it if I could have co-audited it. But to have a lesser quality auditor than I was used to having and pay 10s of thousands of dollars for the honor was awful. I had never been so caved in. When REM wrote “Losing My Religion” I felt like he was talking to me. It took me awhile to come up tone enough to say how much I hated it and admit even to myself that I never wanted to hold the cans again.

    So in the past you could go up the bridge with a little effort and not much cash. This is no longer true. DM’s regime has ended all of it.

    • May 5, 2010 12:29 pm


      Yep, I remember those days. I had just returned from Vietnam in late 1970 and got stationed on the east coast. Thought I’d go to NYC to sample the culture and ran across Scientology. Some of the girls were very attractive (my testosterone was raging) and everyone was so friendly that I started taking courses and getting auditing. I remember walking a model’s daughter home after course and thinking, “I’ve met an houri, she likes me and she’s a friggin’ Scientologist.” This was in an era when people spit on servicemen; the acceptance was refreshing. To a young guy, it seemed like a no-brainer: heaven or hell. And I’d been to hell. So, on military pay, I was able to purchase the bridge up through OT3, several intensives, and training up through Class 4 without a huge dint in my bank account. I also had just purchased a new Karmann Ghia for cash.

      Now, my wife and I earn enough to get hit with the alternate minimum tax if we aren’t careful about distributing funds to retirement accounts first. And, looking at what’s happening in Scientology, there’s no way we could afford the bridge and take care of all the bills. Granted, some of those bills are frivolous, and some of them are for luxuries rather than necessities, but if someone is going to drive a BMW with my money, I’d prefer it to be me rather than a petty tyrant.

      Much love,


  9. Genesis permalink
    May 5, 2010 1:01 am


    Another insightful article! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and perspective with us, it is very beneficial for healing.

    As far as “clearing the planet”, let’s start calling it by its real name, “cleansing the planet”. When you really dive into the ethics and tone level data……you slowly begin to realize the parallels to the Nazis……..per LRH …….that people who are below 2.0 OR those who REFUSE scientology……are to be disposed of quickly and quietly. That sends a chill down my back!

    Sounds more and more like a extreme terrorist sect to me….. and they are “tax exempt” …what a travesty!!!

  10. John Doe permalink
    May 5, 2010 4:03 am

    Some time ago, I’d noticed on the cover of FLAG’s Source magazine, that for the most part, the parishioners all look to be in their 50s and 60s. That’s because it takes almost a lifetime of earnings to get to the level of OT7.

  11. May 5, 2010 4:49 am

    12 1/2 hrs of auditing at Flag for $6,800.00 or $544.00 per hour!

    Money, money, money…it’s a rich man’s world!

    I worked Flag renos on and off from 94′ to 2000′. The Sand Castle and Oscelola were my last projects. At some point in that time period I had the realization that I was NOT going to be able to go up the Bridge. I knew, that no matter what I did (short of winning the lottery) I would never be able to afford the upper Bridge. And, I was adamant about not borrowing anymore money. No more buying the line…”When you do this action, course, give to whatever project, you will be more able and will make more money and so on and so forth.” NO MORE ON THAT!! So, that was the end of the road for me. Obviously, I was not anywhere near as able as I had been thinking I was for so many years. Thus, those who were the really able ones could go up the Bridge, arrest the decline of the planet and eventually, this lifetime but more likely the next, they could come back and pick up the folks like me who just weren’t able enough to make it go right the first time around. In the meantime, though, I figured I could still go out and do good things to help better my environment across my dynamics. Bottom line, though, was once this realization of mine about not being able to access my upper Bridge matured, I was ready for a good ole “walk about.”

    On another note….a friend recently sent me a link to a story written by Helen OBrien called, Dianetics in Limbo. I’m on page 48 now and very much enjoying this read. Anyway, speaking of auditing prices, here is an excerpt from the book that you can use to make a comparison…

    “Noyga was good at space design. He went to work on the
    interior of the square little house, putting in shelves and louvred
    doors and walls of canvas drapes. We soon had an attractively
    modern duplex, in which we lived and audited until November,
    1953, although a big four-story building around the corner
    became our Hubbard Foundation a year before that date. This was,
    incidentally, the only foundation bearing Hubbard’s name which
    remained solvent and successful throughout its span of life – and
    the only one in which, although he was given a lion’s share of the
    profits, he had literally no say in management.

    “Our certificates as ‘Hubbard Dianetic Auditors’ were gold
    bordered and gold sealed, and we proudly hung them on the wall.
    We had a choice of preclears for auditing sessions costing fifteen
    dollars each by regular appointment, and we didn’t accept anyone
    considered to be mentally ill. There were no dramatic cures as a
    result of our therapy – one reason being that we didn’t have
    any preclears with anything dramatically wrong with them, no
    doubt – but people benefitted in general ways, becoming happier
    and brighter.

    “The Dianetic Association left Saint Lukes and began to hold
    its weekly meetings in our neighborhood downtown, in The
    Whittier, a Quaker hotel. A couple of hundred people attended.
    John, who had been rather shy, now discovered that he had a
    flair for public appearance, and he soon became…”

    If you have not yet read Helen’s story I very much encourage you to do so. If you’re interested, here’s the link:

    • SherryMK permalink
      May 5, 2010 5:52 pm

      $6800.00 an intensive at Flag is for lower bridge PCs. If you are OT, the cost is $7865.00 unless it’s gone up in the last couple of years. That figure is forever ingrained in my mind.

  12. lunamoth permalink
    May 5, 2010 5:21 am


    The photo that accompanies this article is perfect. I have to ask, where the hell did they hold that
    dinner, Versailles?


    • John Doe permalink
      May 5, 2010 5:50 am

      I’ve been to a couple of these IAS dinners. Dreadfully un-fun. Steeped in “now-you’re-supposed-to’s”. Wary eye out so as not to be ambushed by reges. We snuck out intending to enjoy an expensive cocktail and it felt like the bell had just rung on the last day of school!

      Damn! Just realized I’ve had that last day of school feeling for some months now!

    • Fidelio permalink
      May 5, 2010 3:04 pm


      it’s the New York Palace Hotel in Budapest, a 5 star hotel in Hungary’s capital. Very posh.


      • lunamoth permalink
        May 5, 2010 8:36 pm

        I’ll say!

        Thanks, Fidelo.

  13. Aeolus permalink
    May 5, 2010 1:47 pm

    There’s been a lot of talk about DM being strictly money-motivated, but I don’t think that’s the main force behind the high prices. LRH describes an SP as terrified that others will get stronger, and just about everything DM does can be understood as an effort to keep that from happening. Make the tech less workable, price it out of reach, siphon off the PC’s money into the IAS or needlessly repeated objectives, etc. etc.

    One of the most startling examples of this was revealed recently by Joe Howard on Marty’s blog, where he tells of Miscavige pulling out a 2003 letter from Bush’s Education Secretary wanting study tech for the entire US public school system. With the Federal Government footing the bill, this could have brought in a fortune to the church, created millions of new Scientologists and raised the tone level of the entire country. Miscavige must have crapped in his pants. He buried that letter in a desk drawer and only brought it out to make a staff member wrong.

    Sure, DM likes his parishioners rich and gullible, but mostly he doesn’t want them to get powerful.

    • May 8, 2010 8:25 pm

      That’s the greatness of the Internet. Love it. Globalization. I keep getting those fanzy Scientology magazines at home where everything is going great and the expansion is overwhelming. Then the media news about Scientology being the most dangerous cult on earth. What the hell is going on I start thinking. Reading more and more on the Internet and seeing more and more interviews on YouTube makes you realize that things are nog going as great as you thought.

      Then realizing the worst possible scenario of them all: Mr. David Miscavige is actually driving the Church in the entirely wrong direction. Abuses, overprizing, altering of tech. I mean he must be the smartest anti-scientologist ever. Small steps and motivating everything in a smart way, outpricing etc. He can do this since of Scientology actually works and he uses that to hold on to people.

      Remove Miscavige. Now.

  14. May 5, 2010 2:13 pm


    I have been curious about something for several months. Though you may find me presumptuous to ask, the etymology of “arrogance” traces to “ask.” And oft considered arrogant, I can merely shrug, and ask, “What are your opinions of the subject of Scientology? And its founder?” This as opposed to the Church of Scientology which you have eloquently expressed.

    What have I lost in trying?

    Marty frequently mentions that he and you do not see eye to eye on the subject, yet I notice he gives you great respect. He seems more alert to your posts than most. And, like it or not, you are an opinion leader in this current movement.

    Not that I need an opinion. God, I’m overburdened with personal opinion. (And with curiosity.) And you probably have noted that you and I have different views.

    Some critic once accused me of “not caring what anyone else thought.” My response was, “Of course, I do. I don’t care what fools think, but I do value the thoughts of people I respect.” How else do we move toward understandings that elude us?

    I’ve been wrong so often that my life would be a tragedy if it weren’t filled with wry humor. And friends. And beauty. And fortune. I can change my mind mid-paragraph and see value in both positions. LRH might have accused me of “being reasonable and unable to make up my mind.” But that would be a gross miscalculation on his part. As others have discovered.

    And I say these things about myself simply to note that I am not asking from a fixed position ready to pounce with frothy judgements and wild-eyed accusations. I’m merely curious.

    And arrogant.

    Thus, in my arrogance, I ask.

    Much love,


    • Jeff permalink*
      May 5, 2010 6:08 pm

      I’ve written a bit on this and probably will write much more. Fundamentally I believe in open discussion and the free flow of ideas. I think that any idea or theory should be open to challenge and discussion – even LRH’s theories and conclusions. There are some in the Independent and Freezone movements that believe that LRH’s tech should not be challenged and is not open for discussion or debate. I disagree. That’s probably what makes this forum a bit different.

      At the same time I do respect anyone who considers themselves a Scientologist and wishes to practice it. I don’t think it’s all bad, and I’m not “anti.” I just think it should be approached with eyes wide open and in a spirit of free inquiry. I don’t believe in “sacred cows” that can’t be challenged, and I don’t believe anyone or anything should be blindly followed.

      • May 5, 2010 6:56 pm

        I like this blog because I can truly speak what I think (speak my mind) no matter how “off the rails” I’m about LRH and scientology).
        And I like Jeff accepting it without “streaming” it to think other way or his way.
        I like his posts because they provoke the thought and don’t tell how one should think and how shouldn’t. He just gives the idea on some subject that anyone can interpret his own way (according to his own lights).
        I like Jeff (despite the fact we’ve never met) because his visions are (I believe) free of boundaries and shores and, therefore, he can accept easily what I and you could think as “unacceptable” for him and “his visions”.
        It gives me joy of having such community and such forum.

        I was attracted to Marty’s forum after his “I’m no angel” post. Later it made me bore since it’s gotten back into much more of the same – “Tech is good, DM makes it bad”, “People are good, DM puts them at loss”, “scientology and LRH are good, DM works to make them bad”…

        Here I don’t have to limit myself to “DM is the ONLY cause and reason of the fact that scientology is f234ed up”.

        Today I got this quote from FSSO along with the survey to “buy more OT hatting”:
        “Once upon a time there was a thetan. And he was a happy little thetan and the world was simple thing. It was all very, very simple. And then one day somebody told him he was simple. And ever since that time he’s been trying to prove that he is not. And that is the history of the universe, the human race…”
        “…Only it’s too simple a story, much too simple a story, because this thetan would have to admit that he was simple if he understood it.” – LRH – 15th American ACC

        OnceUponaTime, I don’t personally need to learn all these ACCs and other endless data and hatting and grades and levels from LRH to understand that simple fact.

        I wish people wouldn’t get into their solutions to life made only more complicated where all they wanted were simple answers.

        Sincerely, Vadim

      • May 5, 2010 7:19 pm

        Thanks, I appreciate your response.

      • May 6, 2010 6:24 pm


        You wrote: “OnceUponaTime, I don’t personally need to learn all these ACCs and other endless data and hatting and grades and levels from LRH to understand that simple fact.

        I wish people wouldn’t get into their solutions to life made only more complicated where all they wanted were simple answers.”

        It left me scratching my head. Could you clarify? Have you gotten the impression that I urge others to do any of this especially?



      • May 6, 2010 7:20 pm

        Don’t take it personally, please. I believe that public forum is a bit different from private communication. I consider this blog to be a public forum.
        There was no assault meant or implied. I don’t troll.
        Yet, you mentioned the word “arrogant” describing yourself, and for me being arrogant nowadays is almost equal to being a scientologist, and being a scientologist is almost equal to trying to help people with more of scientology (event if there are better and simpler solutions). So, that’s how my thought went.
        Wild thought line, isn’t it?
        Sometimes, I’m surprised at myself how I come to this or that idea. Good study in itself. 🙂

        Please, don’t take offence. Ok?

      • Fidelio permalink
        May 8, 2010 10:10 am


        I am definitely looking forward to more from you on challenging LRH’s theories and conclusions, too. Since the contradictions within those are galore, the why we all sort of fell for them more or less, might clarify and helpfull to sort out one’s own point of view in order to move on from there.

        Since respect exudes from your communications always unfailingly I feel very much enlightened and I thank you for that.

        Best, Fidelio

    • May 6, 2010 11:37 pm


      No offense taken.

      Sometimes I say things just to cause cognitive dissonance. Being confronted with ideas which make us uncomfortable provides opportunities to think. It’s always a matter of choice which ideas we pursue. And I try not to push. I don’t think I have the right to push ideas on anyone. And I think every individual has the right to his or her own ideas.

      Thanks for the clarification.

      Much love,


  15. freespirit permalink
    May 5, 2010 5:19 pm

    Jeff- another brilliant analysis. How can I email you directly?

  16. May 5, 2010 10:02 pm

    For me it’s been digging and digging and digging in the Internet for the REAL reality for some months now, about what scientology is against what my experience with it has really been.

    1. I wasn’t allowed to believe, and decided to be overt and make an overt anyway,
    2. I read and kept believing it was all BS and Black PR and financed by “governmnent agencies” and those speaking out are just “the puppets of Powers to Be”
    3. I was struck that the church was not adequate in its responses.
    4. It became apparent that it’s the church that makes this BS – unwillingly but consistently.
    5. It got even funnier for me when it came to LRH’s “saintness” and his teachings “rightness”. My beliefs were demolished. And – I neither regret nor “eat the crow.”

    Somewhere along the way I started reading this blog. (Actually, I befriended with Jeff having found him on FB because his statements on Feb 12 were so clear to me. It was an eye opener – something I have always suspected to be true but never allowed myself be heard or believed).

    Then, reading this blog, I dug into the most remarkable for me thread “Bridge to Nowhere.”

    I started reading following threads and saw great many more highly intellectual and sensible statements (aside from scientologese, which – i had believed – was the only way and POV to make a sound judgement).
    I spent a great deal of time reading posts and comments (add the fact that I’m Russian and I had to use dictionaries extensively to understand your statements, people ;))
    Then I dared to state. And I found I wasn’t an outsider here to “the highly intellectual discussions among American native speakers”… So I posted more – more of what I thought. I wasn’t posting because of some plan “to destroy or bring harm” to scientology.
    I have no agenda. I posted much on this blog (it’s my own vision – since I’ve never written in the Internet anywhere more than here). It was because I had many delusions and illusions flying off (and I was trying to help them – reading and writing)…

    Now, with all my respect for Jeff and all you, posters, I am starting my own blog. There is no agenda or plan tomake one “disconnect from the church” or from “scientology”.
    It’s just locale to speak my mind which might resonate to some.

    • ButterflyChaser permalink
      May 5, 2010 10:45 pm

      Hey, Vadim –

      I thought a few times that you are so intelligent and articulate, you should start your own blog. The more the merrier! I hope you will continue posting here, however, as your insights are so very valuable to our sweet little group. XO

    • lunamoth permalink
      May 6, 2010 2:06 am


      You’ve spoken your mind very well on this blog, and you’ve given me a few things to think about, too, so thank you for that. I admire your ability to that in a second language – that’s a much steeper gradient than simply knowing how to ask where the nearest restaurant is, or how to get to the train station. Personally, I’m only able to do that in one language!


  17. Rebecca-Tribecca permalink
    May 6, 2010 8:37 am

    Thanks Jeff, for another thought-provoking article.
    I wanted to comment that if some extravagance and waste was curtailed, there would hardly be a need to charge exorbitant sums for auditing and cater to the rich.

    Some blogs on the web have recently pointed to what these huge parishioner fees purchase…..

    some examples….

    ++++$400,000 Birthday party on Freewinds for Tom Cruise
    ++++4 Private Investigators stalking Mike Rinder round the clock at a price of $5000 a day
    (This is the going rate for 24 surveillance of 4 PIs). This is $300,000 in 6 months
    +++++Private jet travel for DM with his entourage and lavish lodgings purchased for millions in Hollywood and other locations.
    +++++76 lawyers world wide on the payroll of OSA.
    +++++A ship built in the middle of desert at a cost of 1/2 million dollars
    +++++Warfare with seige mentality (Scientology JIHAD) against its ENEMIES. Lord knows what they have spent on pursuing Marty Rathbun.
    +++++They paid for Private investigators to spy on 2 Las Vegas exso members Janice Grady and Terri Gamboa, and used parishoner money for espionage for 20 years !!!
    +++Millions wasted on Super Power building after DM kept changing his mind on design, tearing it up, re-doing it.

    Okay, I am just throwing out a few things that come to mind, but the WASTE syndrome is clear.

    The high dollars are used in warfare because Scientology is always at WAR.
    Anyone that does not toe the DM line is “counter Intention” and if you speak about it publicly, you are a “SUPPRESSIVE PERSON” and here’s where they take it to a military
    mentality ~~ to take out opposition so that Scientology”handles” its ENEMIES.

    All this lawyering, Private investigators, suing and countersuing (AMY SCOBEE may be next) costs money. Only rich and wealthy folk have money. Money for huge operating expenses and stashing away into Reserves does not come from working class blue collar folk.

    I cannot help but feel that DM thinks “To hell with the poor, we need mega bucks for the JIHAD game we play, and we will pursue the Celebs and rich and famous.”

    • May 6, 2010 6:15 pm

      Of some interest: one of the stated aims of Al-Qaeda is to bankrupt the United States through war and security expenses. And they’re doing an impressive job of it.

      In economics you have the guns versus butter decision: what you spend on guns cannot be spent on life’s amenities.

      Unless you control the purse, then you can buy what you want and let the proles suffer.

  18. Jeanette permalink
    May 6, 2010 4:02 pm

    Has anybody any thoughts why there has been a rash of Scientologists being violent towards protesters lately? Is it the pressure within the group or are people doubting their beliefs and directing their anger and confusion outward?

    I can’t see them being directed to “confront” because assault charges are not good PR for the “most ethical people on earth”.

    How would a “good” scientologist reconcile being ethical and a superior being, and punching strangers in the face?

  19. lunamoth permalink
    May 6, 2010 4:43 pm

    Why WOULDN’T the violence be expressed by sci. public, as well? We see clearly from our outside viewpoint that dm’s psychosis has infected his immediate staff, those under them, those under THEM, all the way down to the orgs. People are being told repeatedly that the stress and pressure inside the church is the reason for the church’s current climate of fear and suspicion (sec checks on top of sec checks, intolerance of the least indication of “other intention,” people abandoning life-long friendships and family ties at the slightest sign of “disaffection,”constant pressure to fill a bottomless war chest). The perciption inside the church seems to be that their very existence is in jeopardy daily from attacks by numerous, faceless suppressives and the masked “cyber terrorists” who demonstrate in front of their orgs.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the incidence of violence within the homes and workplaces of those same scientologists who are still immersed in the sci. culture hasn’t also risen. Psychosis like dm’s is contagious. After writing that last line, I realized that we know of at least one incidence of this right now – Rex Fowler, active scientologist and OT 8.

    • lunamoth permalink
      May 6, 2010 6:55 pm

      correction to paragraph #1 above; please read: “… people are being told that the stress and pressure inside the church, the climate of fear and suspicion (…), are due to external sources. ”

      Got interrupted in the middle of an edit and the result just made no sense – sorry!


  20. May 8, 2010 4:30 pm

    I think current prices are insane and an auditing hour should cost a maximum a hundred dollars an hour so that people can afford it. High prices create pyramide games and is not the right way to spread Scientology.

    However, paying for auditing is important I believe because otherwise the auditor is probably not going to do as good a job as he would have.


  1. Defense Pepper Spray - 1/2 Alexandria’s experience at Scientology’s Mace Kingsley Ranch in NM - Free Shipping

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: