I just wanted to make sure that we started this congress off with a bang. How are you?

& How are you?

Audience voices: All right.

& Audience: Fine.

Male voice: We got a bang out of that, Ron. Good. Thank you.

& Voice in audience: F4 a 60th, ASA 200.

How are you doing this 4th of July?

& ASA 200 f4 at a 60th. I see people running around here flashing flashbulbs at these congresses. The light up on this stage is so hot that I very often have very hard trouble finding my body. The light goes through it, you know? I just thought you might like to know the light reading. Now that's for Super XX that is, for Super XX that would be a 30th, f4. And a box camera will do, simply on your, your Plus X, your 50 Weston and so forth, your Plus X, I suppose those are, I don't know what those openings are. But you actually would just get a picture if you just opened it up and snapped it. Just on ordinary, routine film. And all these flash bulbs keep going. See?

Audience voices: Wonderful!

& I want to introduce to you two very important people. Two people that you should know at this congress, if you don't already. The first of these is Mary Sue Hubbard. Well, you have some popularity out there, huh? She must have hired somebody to do this, that's all.

Well you look good. You look good.

& Voice (MSH?): No, no, the sign's over the side. (?)

Male voice: So do you.

& If you have any fainting spells or, or children, or you want to meet somebody, or so forth, why, you see Mary Sue. And if there's nothing anybody can answer for you or you just don't seem to be able to, to get the communication, you see Mary Sue.

Thank you.

& MSH: I'll fix it.

Audience voices: Thank you.

& She'll fix it up. Thank you. She's your hostess.

We don't have a program for this congress but Steve's had to print something up.

& And now I'd like to introduce to you your congress manager, Dr. Dick Steeves. I see that you've paid somebody down there, too. I see this. Dick has handled many of these congresses now, he's getting to be a very, very, very, very, very old hand at it. And if you've noticed, these congresses are getting smoother and smoother and smoother. And if you haven't noticed at this time, it is being run with considerable precision, which it just never had any acquaintance with before, at all. Isn't that right? And for all that we have to thank Dr. Steeves. And I wish to inform you, if I never have before, and if you haven't noticed it before, that Dick Steeves is actually now the organizational secretary who is in reality in charge of the Central Organization in Washington. So he's a very important fellow, so always say the right thing to him, propitiate him with the proper present, and you've got it made. Thank you Dick. Thanks for a very good congress. OK.

But as a matter of sober fact we are actually celebrating something. We are not celebrating just the independence of this great and glorious nation. Boy; I bet that has been used eighteen hundred - or will be in the course of the day - „For which our forefathers fought, shed their blood in the cause of liberty.“

& Now that I've given you the substance of the situation, there's hardly anything left to talk about at all. That's it, see? That's it. So, I've just got to kill time now 'til the end of the congress.

Well, we're celebrating something else. Do you happen to know that the birthday of the Washington organization is July 4th. It was organized, formed, chartered and incorporated on July 4, 1955, and is today two years old. Thank you.

Hardly anything to discuss. Hardly anything to discuss at all except a few minor factors that might have escaped your notice. Now having over-simplified it a thousand percent - you remember in the last lecture, I just over-simplified it all over the place. Terribly over-simplifying.

It is a fairly brawny youngster. I often say it's the first organization we have had. I know this because I can loaf. I do nothing these days, nothing. I just loaf; nothing to it.

Now I'm going to over-complicate it. I'm going to tell you about it now so that just nobody could understand what I'm talking about. This lecture is so complicated that I don't even know what I'm going to do just to get started on it. That's why I havn't started on it yet. It's complications are so extreme that as I glanced over my notes - I have several pages of notes... Ah, somebody present doesn't believe me. You notice every lecture is totally plotted out.

The incorporation papers of the Founding Church of Washington, DC, as well as the transfer and reestablishment papers of the HASI in the East, actually were signed on the 4th of July 1955, and it meant a tremendous independence for us. It was the first independent, non-downtrodden organization which Dianetics and Scientology ever had. It owed no money, no favors, no hat tips to anybody.

LRH to someone in audience: „Would you give me that Congress program you have right there please? Sure you have, yes. Thank you. Thank you.“

And since that time we've really been sailing. What we put in now goes in in concrete and basalt, particularly the preclears. We've had a wonderful time here in Washington. Some of us complain that it's hot, but very few of us complain that it's radioactively hot.

I want to show you every single lecture here has a name. Every single one. It wouldn't be a Congress unless I pointed this out to you. Says lecture number two - you'll notice there was no lecture number one. I'm now engaged in giving you lecture number three. Now that shows you, these lectures did have titles.

An earlier organization existing in Phoenix, Arizona was in an area which is very close to the test sites. And between the bombs that were being thrown at us by the US government, radioactive bombs, and the bombs which wore being pitched us by the APA squared - they are all squares - and the AMA and so forth, the area became radioactively hot. So we decided to move back to where law and order would have to prevail or there wouldn't have to be any nation here at all, you see. So we moved back into an area where all of the federal judges are directly under the surveillance of their superiors and have to get too high a price for their services to make it worth anybody's while.

Actually I had a terrible thing happen at the London lectures. I was over in London - Royal Empire Society hall just a few months ago and they had a wonderful Congress over there. I was all surrounded by plaques of impacts. As a matter of fact I was so overwhelmed every time I walked in the front door of the Royal Empire Society hall what with all the handmen and footmen and so forth. I was confronted, every time I entered the building, with the Cecil Rhodes room and Cecil Rhodes' bust and all kinds of busts. And... we actually were the ... one of the first gatherings the organization had there after it was recompleted. It took them years and years and years to build it back after the war. It was all bombed to pieces and they built it all back and when they mounted up all of these Empire plaques for South Africa and New Zealand and Australia and everybody and I was standing up on the stage, you see, surrounded by all this grandeur. I got terribly overwhelmed and it was very upsetting because I had to explain to them that I had forgotten all of my Congress notes. And there were three or four people who didn't believe me and spoiled the gag. (Laughing)

In these two years in Washington, DC, we have gone from one small building down on R Street to five buildings at the moment. That's an awful lot of buildings, it's an awful lot of space. But the amount of traffic being handled at this moment by the Washington organization is greater than - somebody who goes around and asks what happened to all the people in 1950 - our volume of traffic today is greater than it was at any time at Elizabeth, New Jersey in 1950.

But if you will notice here - if you will notice here it says lecture number three. And lecture number four, number five, number six. And then there's lecture number seven, number eight, number nine. Then ten, eleven and twelve. And I probably won't give anywhere near that number of lectures. As a matter of fact, I probably will ask you if you want some group processing tomorrow night instead of seminar. Well, now that just shoots the schedule all to pieces. I guess my secretary can just tear up the rest of those notes.

This is very significant because it tells us that there are more people sincerely - not passing or faddishly - more people sincerely interested in Scientology today than there were in Dianetics.

I want to talk to you about a very formidable subject though, under the heading of lecture number three. A very formidable subject, one which nobody in the United States has dare approach for a very very long time. And all the better auditors did it. And all the poorer ones didn't. But the nation as a whole would rather not.

Now we ask this question, we ask this question when it comes to the dissemination, the spread, the number of peoples interested in this subject of Scientology: How many people throughout the world have heard of it? How many people throughout the world are using it?

This subject is practically unmentionable. It has a lot to do with babies. Has a lot to do with anything. As a matter of fact, the words I am about to give you now would probably never be used in a drawing room. The material which I am about to give you has not even been discussed as itself between married couples.

And here is a great oddity. The Central Organization never contacts more than about six percent of those people. If you ask any field auditor why, he'll say, „Well, they'd have them come in here for processing, and I wouldn't get the case. I'd lose all my preclears!“

Now Freud, Freud in 1894 broke with Breuer who taught him to psycho-analyze, and announced the libido theory, a three-letter word adding up to sex. And Freud brought sex, they said ... they used to say out of the bedroom into the parlor. That was his contribution to humanity. But what I'm talking about has never even gotten to the bedroom.

But that isn't really the truth of the matter. The truth of the matter is that this subject is progressing beyond the various frontiers that we ourselves touch.

This subject has been known to make strong women quail and men weep. It's probably the most controversial as well as the least mentioned subject today in America. I'm sorry I have to go into it at this time but I do. It's for your own good!

I'll give you an idea. Do you want to know how this all started? How these organizations started? What this was all about? I think it is a fitting time and moment for me to tell you.

The subject is control.

Back in 1947 I wrote a little book to explain to some of my friends exactly what the work was on which I had been working and in which I was interested. That little book appears today under the title of The Original Thesis.

You haven't looked at that yet. What I've just said about control is totally true. If I told you bluntly that the mission of a Scientologist was to control within an inch of his life, everything in his vicinity. you'd say zzzzzr, it's not for me. People would run, shedding their coats and hats rather than to come to you for processing. Control what? „You mean this fellow’s going to sit there and control me? Ohhhhh. No, no.“

Now that original thesis was never published in book form until about 1951. But the original thesis was something which I handed out copies of in a hectographed, mimeographed way to people who were cursorily interested who wanted to know what I had been doing. And they made mimeographed copies of it - it's a very short book - and hectographed copies of it, and mimeographed and hectographed copies of it were given to their friends. And one or two of their friends made mimeographed and hectographed copies of it, and not three months ago I heard from somebody in a far part of the world who was asking me if any more had been done.

Child-ha-psychology - new way of pronouncing the word. By the way, it's being pronounced that way more or less uniformly throughout the world today. Child-hapsychology. You didn't think I could do it again, did you?

Now Book One, what we call Book One is not Book One. That is Book One, that original thesis. It is very amusing that this Book One, so-called, was also written because I was tired of explaining to people what they couldn't understand in The Original Thesis. So, I wrote that rather under pressure, and a psychiatric textbook house published it and it became a bestseller, and that was almost - that almost did us in. We were doing wonderfully up to that time, you see.

It has given America a vast gift - for which they all ought to be shot! That is, „a child must learn how to express himself and must never be interfered with at all times by nobody no place, and should just go on and on and on and on.“

And then the public got interested, and Lord knows what we. mean by this term „the public“ unless it is some newspapermen who can't duplicate.

You go to call on somebody in America - just shows you this deadly virus - you know the deadly virus that was just imported by the Public Health Service from China. Yeah, they assured everybody they weren't going to let it in and then they took a boatload of sick people and unloaded them into California and they've now got it down there. Anyhow, all of this deadly virus has reached deeply into the American home. You go to call on the average American family. Wonderful. You sit down. You do one of two things: you either fight junior off all night or you look at a TV program that you always avoid at home. It has become one of the favorite indoor sports of America to fight off the children before they fight your head off.

And Time magazine, without ever sending at any time - and nowhere in my career have I ever talked to one - without ever sending a reporter to interview me or anybody of the organization, managed to write in that year as many columns on my personal life and Dianetics as were devoted in that year to the President of the United States. This was intensely insincere interest. Do you understand that? I mean, it never went forward; it never did anything. It made a tremendous commotion, and it certainly almost did us in. An organization was formed at that time of a number of people and as long as I could keep my personality in high gear why, I could dominate it, but organizationally it was not under my control. And organizationally it branched out in various directions, and these people did a good job. But because there was too much traffic, because it was too hard to handle, because there wasn't enough known, because there weren't enough trained auditors and so on. it just overworked everybody. And it's taken us about six years to get over this tremendous popularity of Dianetics.

Now, one of the interesting things about it is it will undoubtedly result in tremendous cultural advances. Very certain it is that yon, in future years, would be able to be heard in the middle of a roaring crowd if you whispered, so great has been your practice of trying to talk across the top of your neighbor's children while you were calling.

And I can announce to you today that we have recovered from it.

Now, let's agree that they overdid it in the old days, but I don't think they knew anything about it to overdo it. What is it? Control. In other words, we have a whole cult - I hate to refer to psychology as a cult because it's reactive. It is a cult, definitely though. It's a German cult. They have various other kinds of cults in Germany. They had the Jungvolk and the Volkswagen and they had all kinds of... all kinds of cults in Germany and one of them was psychology. Psycholocult they call it over there. And they imported it over here. But it's got this factor of they're all animals anyhow and there's nothing you can do about it so why try. And that's psychology. That's child psychology in particular.

Now, there are people here at this moment who are here because they picked up a copy of Book One out of the bookstores way back when and wanted to know more about it. I think a copy of The Original Thesis would have gotten into their hands just as easily. I think you'd be here regardless of 1950.

But I'm not talking today about children. I'm merely talking about this deadly virus „don't control anybody“ sort of a philosophy which has swept the length and breadth of the land. America is losing on the international front simply because she nationally is unwilling to control anything. And she's going to get bit!

Now, what's amazing is that we never listened to any advice on the subject of „We must stop research. We must halt right here because this is a good thing.“ We all know it's a good thing but in a different connotation.

They hired me - They wrote me a letter and hired me, especially here a few years ago, to go out and shoot Japs to make them more amenable to democracy. They hired some of you too. They paid us money to go out and do this.

We have never permitted the subject to be totally, you might say, pegged at one level where people could say, „Well, we will profit by this for our own individual purposes, and the devil with the rest of mankind.“

Now they back out and they say, „Well, you boys do as you please. Uhhuh, nothing to it. Go on, trade with the Red side. Do whatever you please, and so on.“ Blaah.

We've continued its advance. I have called myself a liar more times than I would care to count just because I was doing an honest piece of reporting on research. In the early days I could ... I waxed more enthusiastic at times than later. I would say, „This is it! This is it!“ It was! But what do you mean by it?

Japan had methods of controlling its populace. It had an organizational structure there, a social structure. It was very interesting. Women had a role, men had a role and so forth. Well they just shot that to ribbons. Women are all free and the men are all free and everybody's all free and they've got a constitution they can't even read. And then we say „All right, now, there you are. Go ahead. Go ahead.“

Well, it's very simple what you mean by it; very, very simple. It was simply a further advance on our track, And therefore I could rather startle you today by telling you „This is it.“ But that is just what I am here to tell you at this congress: „This is it.“

And I'll bet you that some politician in a few years gets terribly surprised when it goes boom! And they say „What happened? Why those nasty people.“ No, it meant that there were existing methods of control of that particular culture; it meant they were chopped to pieces: no other control level was substituted in, and then they went off and abandoned it.

Well, the past seven years have been interesting - mild understatement. Have been interesting. The past seven years we have been quite active.

Now, my point here is not international relations. I couldn't care less because you could always ask the question of international relations is, what relations? There aren't any That's the trouble with international relations, a camouflaged hole. Everybody talks about our international relations. You mean our International inability to communicate? International relations was that psychosis which grew out of the fact that most other nations speak different languages.

And every once in a while an auditor says to me, „Well, why don't we get out? You know, why aren't we being heard! Why haven't we already taken the fort? I just keep talking to people and talking to people and talking and I never hear any of it coming back! Can't you hire somebody to listen to us?“

All right. But we are very allergic here in America to this idea of control. Very allergic. After the war they were talking about sergeants had to have a big brother attitude toward the troops, and soldiers didn't have to salute and so forth. Well, there's maybe everything wrong with armies but armies do run according to certain rules, so that makes them armies, you know?

I'll tell you something very remarkable: They are being heard. You simply have underestimated how many two and a half billion people are. It's a lot of people, a lot of people.

I well remember when Christianity hit the Roman army. . . Belonged to the tenthseventh legion at the time. Oh, that's on the backtrack. And they got so bad, that they were so out of control that they wouldn't even wear armor into battle - the Roman army after a while. And they either would run away or simply stand there and say, „Kill me, I wish to be a martyr to the cause,“ And that was the end of Rome.

The most amazing things occur. We get all sorts of feedbacks. Some fellow, by the way, who had gotten Book One, was a Book Auditor, had come in for a little briefing - he never did get trained in the Foundation - went back to some unlikely place in Texas and has been practicing ever since without any further correspondence with a Central Organization. He's just never breathed, he's just been getting results, and it's just fine. He didn't even ask me if there had been any further results! He didn't ask me if I'd made any advances in technique and theory! How do you like that? Was I insulted!

Well, if you depend on some channel of control, you don't reinforce it, don't take care of it, why, don't worry or don't wonder, please don't be surprised if everything goes to the devil suddenly. I mean if there is a set of control factors and you cease to exert them without substituting anything else for them, why be surprised if the thing blows up. You understand?

You know, good roads and good weather, „This is a great subject I certainly do get nice results. Been keeping a nice practice going. Everything's fine. Got all my friends patched up. Even - thing's going along fine.“

Control is a dirty word...much dirtier word than sex. Marriage couples fence without ever using the word, really. They fence on this subject all the time when they're having a bad time. And it merely comes down...the item boils down to this: You're not supposed to control me. I am supposed to control you and on the other side, you're not supposed to control me. I'm supposed to control you. And this argument can go on for years and years because it happens to be two opposed viewpoints.

What was he doing? The somatic strip... That was all he was doing. He was running preclears up and down the time track running off engrams. It was quite remarkable.

Usually never occurs to such a couple that as long as she can't control herself, he'll have to try to control her and as long as he can't control himself, she'll have to try to control him. And they're gonna get awful busy with control the more they chop out each others controls. And if they just reduce each others' controls to zero, we have the standard American home.

And I had to wind up and say, „You know, you know there's been some more material on this.“

Now, you say, „These are very interesting words you were saying, Ron. These words are pretty dynamite. It's really not safe to talk about this dirty word 'control' right out in front of public...tsk. It's not safe.“ Well, I pay you the honor of not being public. I wouldn't swear at you.

„Oh,“ he says, „there has? By the way, I want to tell you about an interesting preclear I had back in...“

Now, let's take a look at this. Let's take a look at this. What do we mean by control? Well, to most people it means, „I will beat you until you do as I say.“ That's control. Well, the funny part of it is that isn't control at all. „I will threaten you until you comply.“ That isn't control.

I said, „We know what this machinery is all about now. We know about things like overt actmotivator sequences.“ That was in his future.

If there is anything new under the sun, it is Scientology's new understanding of positive postulation. All control is is positive direction. And when it gets mixed up with „I will beat you unless you obey the postulate. I will kick you, fine you, jail you unless you obey what I have said.“ When it gets down to that, control has already long since disappeared.

And he says, „Well, why do you want to know any more?“

All these laws which carry with them a penalty are assuming that the government is no longer in control of the people. And that's an interesting observation because control, we discovered, cannot carry with it duress or punishment and still be control. Aaah... but you say... and here's the weak one. The do-gooders down the years say, „Well, we mustn't punish anybody, we mustn't duress anybody, we mustn't command anybody, we mustn't control...“ No! Those things don't follow. We shouldn't punish people' is not consecutive to 'we shouldn't control anybody', but usually is.

That was an awful state of affairs, wasn't it? And do you know that to a marked degree we have lost a great many Dianetic Auditors and a great deal of the Dianetic public because it's too good. It works too well. You understand that? This wouldn't really be the way it was, you see, or the way you would think of it.

What do we mean by this? We have discovered a zone, an area of control and direction which we call Tone 40, which means positive direction with total intention, considerations, Start, Change, and Stop. We found out the reason people hate control - it's become a dirty word - is because nobody can. They say, „If you don't do so and so I'm gonna hit you in the jaw.“ That's control, though. That isn't control. That's a „Because I can't control you I gotta hit you in the jaw because I don't want you, because I can't control you.“ See, see how that works out?

You'd think, „Well, a bunch of failed cases and so forth, and failed cases would cut us down on the line, and people would be unhappy about it; they found out it didn't work this way or that and therefore they wouldn't have any more contact with us.“ Well, that isn't the way it's working.

Actually, I tell you, when control starts hitting a dwindling spiral in a government, you get a very interesting state of affairs in a government. Somebody was talking to me about this the other day. I'll just mention it to you - brought this up. You get the government using duress to enforce compliance. Now the only people who disobey in a government are those who can't take orders. So the reason the government issues orders and punishments is so the people who can take orders .... Now wait a minute let's look at this again. All these speed laws and everything like that are put out so as to get the people who can't take orders to... now just a minute. If they can't take orders and directions, doesn't matter how many laws or how many threats are made, they'll never hear about them. Doesn't matter how often they're jailed - they'll never reform. And we get the enigma of our present criminal system. It is a criminal system.

People come into one of your Group Processing sessions and they go wong-wong, and three feet back of their head or something, and they find a havingness, and they can work better now, and they are not having any more trouble with the wife or something of the sort, and they go on living their life happily and that's that. And you don't ever hear of them again, simply because they don't come near you.

Now, people who can take orders, read the law and they say, „Well, I'm not supposed to...“ They read the law and they look it over and they say, „Well, all right, go along with it. Reasonable law, reasonable law“, and so on. Of course, if they put a four-pass highway down with no curves on it and say ten miles an hour is the speed limit. This is already a sort of a stupidity that would rather disgrace the idea of control because it doesn't make good sense. So, the order of direction connected with it doesn't make good sense and that's invalidative too.

But they tell people. Every once in a while we run into somebody, he shows up at the front door and says, „Well, here I am.“ We say, „All right, there you are.“

But these people that cause accidents and these people that have a rough time, are the people who run through the stop lights because they can't read them. Well, isn't that fascinating! You mean to say, all these duresses and laws and legislation and everything else are being launched to inhibit a group of people who cannot receive an order or direction and wouldn't read them anyhow. So we get the dwindling spiral of the general populace being victimized by an errant government that cannot cope with its inability to control its population in all strata. The dwindling spiral of government is simply the failure of a government to control its population. And it signifies its inability to the degree that it threatens and gives duress. Promises duress unless... And you get this fascinating ...well, you get penal systems and you get reformatories and you get laws and you get courts and you get jurisprudence and so on. Boy! There are nothing but vias on a control line, let me assure you. Because if you really knew what control was, you would not try to beat to pieces your havingness. You see that?

He says, „Well, I'm supposed to have some processing - whatever that is.“

I mean, a government says, „Well, we're gonna execute you“, they say to this fellow because, why, „well, we couldn't control you.“ „Gonna execute you because we couldn't control you.“ And the government is minus, at that moment, one person. They just shoot the havingness to pieces this way, don't they? It's rather silly. You say, „Well, if we didn't have restraints of this character - man being a beast and being naturally an anti-social animal 'cause just a little old baby, they bite - and man being an anti-social brute, beast, dog... wooff... we have to use the switch or a krock and the more we beat him, the more social he becomes.“ Yet the very people who do that - say, the more we beat him, the more social he becomes, if they went down to a prison they would find the people in it were the people who had been beaten. Can it be these guys themselves are kind of nuts? Can it be nobody's been thinking about this for an awfully long while? Can it be man was totally ignorant of this whole thing. Well, let's get on with this idea of control.

We say, „Well, all right. Okay. Go over and see the Registrar.“

You try to sell somebody on the idea of control and he's liable to flinch. He's liable to flinch for this reason: He doesn't know what you're talking about, the word has been totally misused, disabused; he hasn't a clue. But here is a way to explain it which is quite interesting.

He goes over to see the Registrar. We tell him this fantastic figure for a couple of hours, you know. He pays it. Goes up to the auditing room, sits down in front of a staff auditor, runs an intensive.

You ask him, „Have you ever been controlled by somebody?“

Ran into one of these fellows the other day. I couldn't understand exactly what it was all about because he knew absolutely nothing about technology, theory, he knew nothing about nomenclature. An auditor had to sit him down and say; „You are now a preclear.“ And he says, „A what?“

I ask you - have you over been controlled by somebody? Didn't like it, did you? Well, how would you like to de-control that area of your life? How would you like to pull out those old bad 8-Cs that have been run on you, and re-control that area of your life yourself? You'd buy that, wouldn't you?

No. Friend of his saw that he wasn't doing too well, says, „You have to go down to Washington, an organization down in Washington the name of Scientology. Scientology. This is the way you spell it; difficult word, doesn't sell worth a nickel. And here is the address of the organization. You go down there and get yourself fixed up. Now, you are supposed to go down there.“ And they just... They've seen something happen to this friend of theirs and he seems to be living a better life and so they have some respect for the word, and they come down and get some processing. I mean, we've had that happen lately - more often than not, You see that?

In other words, if you had a father that ran very bad 8-C, something like that, or ran none at all, which is worse. And he left a whole area of your life completely littered up with this sort of thing. Yes, that's an area of control isn't it? Well, you'd love to decontrol that, knock it out, knock it flat; and substitute your own control in that particular area. That would be a very good thing to do.

We are not just falling back on ourselves and taking in our own washing. Two and a half billion people are a lot of people.

Well, you could explain it to people like that and they'd have a little more idea what you're talking about. But it's control to them and it would still he bad. All control is, in essence, is positive direction. And the only way you can have positive direction is when it is on the basis of an optimum solution.

Somebody said one time that if Christ stood on the shores of the Sea of Galilee from the moment of his birth until now - although I imagine he would have had difficulty at his birth - pitching a dollar every minute into the sea, he would not, from that time to this, have yet expended one billion dollars - a magnitude of number. It's about 170 million people in the United States. How many people do you ordinarily talk to?

The optimum solution stems from the eight dynamics. The eight dynamics you know well. Now, an optimum solution is the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. What do we mean by „good“? Substitute „survival“ and you've got it. The most survival for the most dynamics is the best solution always. And as long as positive direction is leveled on this that we call the optimum solution, it is very acceptable direction. Isn't it? Very acceptable. We tell somebody - no matter how practiced we are, with controlling bodies and so forth - we say to somebody; „Jump over that cliff.“

Not very many, but the aggregate number adds up to something respectable. It's probably gone up toward a million now, something like that, but not all these people can talk yet. So what we get is you talk to people a little bit, and then they whisper. Got that? And then we talk to these same people a little bit more and put them in better communication and they talk just a little louder, but the people they're talking to whisper. Got the idea? And we talk more and talk more. So, you're not making a clean new contact every time who is then totally set up and in beautiful condition and ready to operate simply because you've talked to him. See, you talk to him again.

He goes and jumps over the cliff and he hits the bottom of it and he's dead. He gets another body and somebody says, „Jump over that cliff“.

Now, you multiply the number of times you've talked to 170 million people, the number of times you'd have to talk to each one of these 170 million even on an expanding geometric progression, you'll find out that you have to do a lot of talking, so let's get busy. It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable the number of people who have heard of this subject.

And he says, „To hell with you.“ Isn't that the way it works?

It's also remarkable the entire change that has taken place in medical circles with regard to Scientology in these past seven years.

So that commands or postulates which do not forward an optimum solution - the greatest amount of survival on the most dynamics - are bad commands. And that would then be bad control. And you might get the intention through the first few times, but after a while people would say, „Na-ah.“ They would set up a resistance to direction which could then become so psychotic that they would resist all direction and you'd have a criminal.

A fellow walked in the other day up at a hospital, I think they were treating TB or something in this hospital, and he was doing all right, he was doing all right. He forgot to pull the minister's card on the fellow and straighten him up when he was... they threatened to eject him, but he was doing all right. He was helping these people, he was putting them back together again, and he was just working in this hospital, you know. He wasn't on staff or anything - he was just an auditor and he walked in and he kept working with these people and working with these people.

A criminal is simply somebody who resists all direction. What's this make him, by the way? This makes him totally directed. How do we work that out? Well, that which ye resist ye connect with. So that we get this idea of positive direction and we find out that communication goes hand in hand with positive direction and a person to give commands or to control adequately must himself be capable of receiving a communication. Quite important.

One day the front office of the hospital called him up and asked him what he was doing, what he was, wanted his credentials, wanted some conversation with him.

The old-timers way back when making a big pitch out of this, trying to steer people into purgatory before their time, always said it another way: „Ye who would learn to command must first learn to obey. And when we've got you obeying good, we'll tell you to jump over the nearest cliff.“ See, this is the way it went. If you would command things, you must first learn to obey. Nah.. If you're going to command things you'd certainly better be in communication with them. Did you ever try to drive a car while you were sitting two or three blocks away, your body, too? You and your body are sitting two or three blocks away from the car. Well, you don't like cars, so you're going to direct and command this car. Yet you're not going to go near it, not going to have anything to do with it, but you're going to command it. Oh, no. See, that just doesn't work. You have to be in communication with that which you would command.

And he said, „I'm a Scientologist.“ And immediately „Oh.“ This guy was shattered. This medico director was just shattered at that moment.! Well, here's the oddity: this is a different story than 1950, 1954 even, or '55.

Now, here's what's interesting too. You mustn't be flinching from commands it gives you, see. Automobile commands you to turn it back on the road. See, very simple method of control.

He says, „I think you people are a wonderful group. I think you are doing remarkable work. As far as I am concerned I would be happy to let you work in this hospital from here on out. But I have to think of my personal standing with the AMA. And I'm sorry that you can't work in the hospital.“

By the way, there was a fellow or two, several of them, all Scientologists, who have been driving lately - the only people in the world who have been driving lately. The other people have been driven. People sit behind the power steering wheel with power brakes with power motors with power navigators with gimmicks that follow the white line, providing it doesn't turn black, and the car takes them down the road, you know. They're not there -... you know.

That is a different story. I see a couple down here - they were working in Phoenix in a hospital and all they did in those days was just simply kick them down the front steps. Now, they still kick them down the front steps but they apologize. In other words, we're getting... in other words we're getting there. You know, Independence Day is a great day. All sorts of heroic quotes come to mind, you know. John Paul Jones fighting the Bon Homme Richard against the Serapis „Surrender? Wo have not yet begun to fight.“ Well, I... you know, that sort of thing comes to mind. „Don't cheer, boys, the poor devils are dying.“ You know! that sort of thing. Independence Day.

„What's this thing?“ Crash! They say, „I didn't disobey any law. I was driving my Cadillac at ten miles an hour right down the middle of the road just where I should have belonged. I was not near either ditch. I was obeying all the laws, ten miles an hour and somebody came right down the freeway going sixty and hit me square...“ Well, this fellow that was driving this Cadillac - I don't know why it is all Cadillacs have to go ten miles an hour. And all cheap cars have to go seventy-nine. Cadillacs can go seventy-nine. The cheap cars can go ten.

But one of these quotes is terribly applicable. And that one is „We have not yet begun to fight.“ We don't intend to. That's how we lose everything.

Now, this fellow told a lie. He said. „I was driving down the road at ten miles an hour.“ No, he wasn't. Even though he was sitting behind the wheel, even though he had a driver's license in his pocket, which I think they have slot machines now in almost any station or so forth. You put a dime in you get a driver's license out. You see, if they issued these things and they were really valid licenses, and they really did enfranchise people who could drive to drive, they would be exerting control on the populace and we mustn't have that.

I'll tell you more about this later but the surest way to lose havingness is fight it. The way you have havingness is own it.

No, fellow had his driver's license in his pocket and he was sitting behind the wheel of the car and everything looked just as though, just as though he was controlling an automobile. Let me assure you that the bulk of accidents occur when the automobile is controlling the driver. He was being driven down the road by a car: and because he sort of has some trained responses that he picked up years ago that other cars are going along and he can duplicate those.

But we were not in a position, actually, in past years, to throw out our chests very grandly because, bluntly, there were numbers of cases which numbers of auditors could not do anything much for, and we know that as a complete honesty. They were not in the majority but they were around.

It's quite amazing this duplication of the other car as a method of driving. The other car's driving in the lane, so the fellow drives his car in the lane. You see, his car follows the other car because the other car, you know, the machinery is driving. It's very interesting. Very interesting to watch. Fellow crosses over the white line accidentally, see, crosses over the white line. It's quite interesting to notice that the two or three cars behind him will also make the same mistake.

We have done some remarkable things even with unconscious people. We have had unconscious people and we've fished them back, we've straightened them up, we've done remarkable things. But remember the invariability with which I was trying to come up in 1950 was not entirely there.

And when they put up these white crosses alongside of highways to show people who got killed there, the white crosses multiply at that particular spot. They say there's where a car killed a man. So the car sees the white cross and kills another man. What I'm telling you is true - these white crosses always multiply.

There were some cases that resisted the best efforts of auditors. That's terrifically honest. Now, that doesn't say that there weren't auditors around who could have cracked those cases. Some other auditor maybe or something of the sort. But it does say that it often didn't happen. Nothing happened, you see. All right. All right.

Now, this is a case of something controlling a person. Now, if he's totally unwilling to be controlled by a car, he can't drive it at all. If he's only willing to super-control a car and the car could never control him, this is kind of weird. It's also an unworkable situation because the car could be going off the side of the road and he would not notice it was taking him off the side of the road. So he wouldn't do anything about it because he was unwilling to be controlled by the car and we have an accident. Just as the person who is not controlling the car at all would have an accident. You see how these things go together?

It was necessary to get the subject and the training of auditors up to a level where it consistently happened, where there weren't any failed cases, And after that I was willing to do the equivalent of beginning to fight, see, We actually are just now up to a level of very, very good security on training an auditor, and processes addressed properly to any case will resolve the case. Now we are at that point. We were at it verbally from me in 1950, but we're at it in actuality today.

All right! We look this over and we find out then that a control is a somewhat give and take proposition. A person who accepts control, who can accept control, who can accept communication, who can accept postulate direction is the same person who can direct because the channels are open out if they're open in. It's just as true as this.

It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable. There are people here who know something about this, and there are people here who think they do and really don't. Because between now and the slight backtrack of just a few months, the entire proving ground of what we call CCH, a new system of processes, and TRs met the test, took the fort, all straight.

Now, it's true enough that a person can go on controlling things after he becomes slightly unwilling to be controlled. He can go on almost controlling things after he becomes very unwilling to be controlled. He can put up a show. He can put the Cadillac in the middle of the road so that it is driving him down the middle of the road, and he says, „I'm controlling this Cadillac.“ It's a very interesting thing.

In February, I could have said. „Well, we're pretty close to there. Must be.“ But it wasn't proven that we were.

Show you what...I'm not talking about cars but it's quite amusing if you want to vary your driving. One if you want to kill yourself, try to drive totally in present time with each action totally independent right then, recognized as necessary right then, done right then, and on no automatic action at all - no machinery at all. You'll just do everything there is to be done at the moment you do it. It's quite amazing. It almost kills you for the first few hundred miles. And after a while you really start driving a car. The point is that you have to have an intention to take the car down the road. And it's a very weird thing that you can just teach somebody to do this and as long as he can get away with it without a ridge kicking his teeth in, why, he has a ball. You say, „Now why don't you... YOU take this car down to that next turn, and then YOU take this car around that turn, and then YOU take this car up that next strait-a-way.“ You get some old knocked down, knocked to pieces Chevrolet and it starts flying like a bird. It's quite fantastic. He starts taking the car down the road, you know. It's quite interesting. He has an intention to put it up the next mile. Drivers who have accidents, have only this much acquaintance with intention. The intention's built in on the assembly line by Henry Ford. Later manufacturers have not built in any intention.

Well, now what's happened since February is that we know pretty well that we are there. When you can take a day-old baby or an unconscious woman who has been lying in a state of coma for six months or a raving psycho and crack their cases rather easily without much stress, wouldn't you say we were there?

What is this intention? What is this control and so on? What is this positive direction and so on? Well, it's just all the same breed of cat. You say to that speaker over there, you say, „Stay there“, you know. Hmm! Well, you could say that and you sometimes find somebody does that. There are people around, who, if you ask them to tell that speaker to stay there, right in that position, would say, „Oh, why should I do that. It's already there in that position, you know. Why should I tell it to stay there because it's already there. Everything is already there. Life is prepared for me this way and I just sort of go through it, you see. That's the way life is.“

Audience voices: Yes.

Now here's the funny one. You ask that person if he enjoyed the music that has just come out of the speaker and he will either say, „Huhah“, or, „What music?“ If he can't get the idea of placing it, controlling it, doing something with it, then he's not going to get anything back from it. You get that? I mean, that's the way it is.

Well, that's what we're doing. That's what we're doing; what I announce to you officially on this Independence Day of 1957.

Now, you take the control of a body - here's a vast subject. But if you realize that I just showed you a thetan... all right now, a body in most cases is busily controlling the thetan. Well, there's nothing wrong with this as long as the thetan knows he's there and knows it. But when it becomes totally unconscious and he's not there at all, everything becomes wrong with it.

There is a great deal to know about this thing called CCH. But there is an entirely different channel today to a state of Clear and control, or what ever else you want to have it, or Homo Novis, or anything else. There is an entirely different route than processing, and that route is training.

You walk down the street - well, to some degree you're being in controlled by a body, but to this degree you certainly are. There's a path through the woods. The body has to travel on that path because it gets scratched and muddied and it gets dirtied up, why you don't send up around through the swamp or the trees. You see what you do? You send it up the path. Got that? Well, you are controlled to the degree that bodies cannot go easily without paths. So you say, „Well, then the path is controlling the body too.“ That's right! But if you at the far receiving end of all this are totally allergic to control, you probably make the body walk off the path, or into the trees, or drown in the swamp before you will listen to a body controlling you to that degree.

If you can live through training as a human being and emerge from training still a human being, I'll fire the Instructor.

So, to some degree a body controls the thetan. Well, when a person refuses absolutely to be controlled by his body, when a thetan refuses completely to be controlled by his body anymore and so on. Why, he doesn't control his body any more and he himself just goes into sub-zero and that's that. After that bodies walk around and join the army and run for Congress. They do all sorts of things. Such a person becomes what an old time Scientologist calls an operating GE... Body being a Genetic Entity.

This is a tremendous thing. We never expected this one to happen, that there would be a sudden appearance of an entirely new route over here that just bypassed „Look at that wall and fall through it“ and other processes. „Who wouldn't you mind scraping off that wall?“ That by the way, I threw in as a gag process, but it's a wonderful process. Let me see, how would that work? It wouldn't work. Well that's all right - run it on your psychiatric friends.

Well, here's an interesting condition of affairs. Who's going to control this body unless there's somebody there to control it. You say, „Well, if Poppa and Mama lay in enough machinery ...” this is really what the society sometimes tries to do. If they just lay in enough machinery and get enough continued conditioned responses - Pavlavian - Pavlavian child-raising approved by the American psychological association. Ahh... we're gonna sue 'em for that some day, by the way. Make 'em give up the use of the wordit's fraudulent. Two fraudulent things. Psychology says - Psycheology, see. It's the study of the psyche which is the soul or spirit. Well, all you'd have to do is get them to admit it wasn't and they'd have to give up the use of the word. It's fraud - public fraud. And... you think a fellow couldn't sue on that basis and win but as a matter of fact, we probably could.

Here we have achieved something quite startling, quite unusual. We have achieved the technology and what we call the TRs which are the drills which means Training Drills - necessary to free up somebody and bring him into present time willy-nilly and let him operate totally in present time in life as well as just auditing.

Here's this fascinating condition of this fellow totally conditioned into the idea that his boss and his mama and his papa and his schoolmaster and so forth are responsible for those control factors which he experiences. He goes through life like an automaton. Well listen, papa isn't there and papa didn't lay in enough sensible machinery to control him through every existing situation he will ever meet. And mama isn't there any more. And mama won't control this person through every existing situation this person will meet. And the headmaster isn't there any more. And this headmaster isn't going to control this person through every situation this person's gonna meet... till we get an average citizen. Bitter, bitter truth!

And this was an amazing thing. But it isn't something that is done by an auditor. It is done by an auditor who is also an Instructor. It's a different approach. It's something new. Of course all the technologies of it emerged from the utter dismay I have experienced for years in trying to train auditors. No kidding.. I've done a pretty good job and so have they.

If you take a large strata of men and try to sort out of them somebody who actually effectively can do something about something. See, they're all doing what somebody else .. you know, who isn't there any more control... it just doesn't make sense any more, you see. These people do all sort of things. I see this happening - tried to teach somebody to add up a column of figures in some different way than they were taught. Well, I was actually trying to teach the head of the accounting school the person had attended, see, because the person wasn't there any more to be taught. Quite amusing. And listen, even if he were there, the head of that accounting school probably could not have been taught very much about accounting. Don't you see? He would have said, „I know the subject, I learned it from my master.“ Well, that's fine. So, then you would have had to, when you were teaching him, actually teach the person who had taught him. You see where we're going? We're going in the direction of nobody there, total unresponsibility, control being done by tradition and perdition.

But here we have a brand new set of (quote) „processes“ (unquote). See, they're not processes at all; they're Training Drills. And they're addressed immediately and intimately to the individual. They're not addressed to a class of people who sit there and dope off through the lectures.

And this is the way it would look. This is what would happen to people and what happens to people who just abandon the whole idea of controlling anything, of directing anything, of doing anything. I don't know, they're kind of - life is a sort of a chute and somebody dumped them onto the top of it and they go down the chute. Get to the end of it; somebody buries them. Some where on the chute they might have awakened for a moment but the probability is, is they never found out. It would be a funny day - some people alive today would find out they were on that chute or alive, And you can do this as a Scientologist. It's very, very amusing.

Training today has become something whereby we pick up somebody by the scruff of the neck and we put him in a chair and we say. „Do it.“

You can take acknowledgment all by itself and you can start working on the Effect Scale, a new scale I'll have to tell you about later on in the congress. You tell somebody, „Good. Good. Fine. Good.“ Just stand in front of them, you know, and you say, „Good. Fine. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. Good. Good. All right. Good! Fine. Thank you. Good.“ And all of a sudden the follow will say or just break out and cry horribly large tears. „Say, you know, I've never ... never been spoken to before.“

He says, „I can't.“

Now you don't see this happening much in Scientology because Scientology people - for the good reason, not that they’ve been educated in this at all, but because. they had to have some quiver of' life in them to walk into this subject.

We say, „Do it.“

But you take somebody who's just plowing around on total automatic: well, you start this with them, why you .. you'll have given them a point on the chute when they found out they were on it. Most of the time they didn't want to know.

And he says, „You're trying to ruin me.“

All right. What does this add up to then in terms of control? Control is a dirty word, a thoroughly dirty word because it's been thoroughly dirtied. When I say they have a pitch, they had a curve when they gave out the information; they twisted it, they perverted it - the information that was discovered in past ages about the mind - and so on - to use it for a control factor. Well, I'm merely saying that somebody violated an optimum solution. In other words, they tried to control people to their detriment. They tried to push them around and eventually they forgot that control was Tone 40, always, and they came down scale to where control was the exact meaning of punishment. Control and punishment became the same thing because when these people controlled something they did so with the end view of hurting; the end view of punishing or upsetting or spoiling an organism. And finally postulates themselves and positive direction itself became itself, nothing more nor less, nothing more nor less than punishment.

And we say „That's right. You’ve got the point right there. That's correct.“

So man has drifted away from control. But it's a dangerous thing to drift away from I assure you.

Now to show you the difference between processing - which is at an all-time high, and simple address to an individual is tremendously high - there isn't anything that is going to set processing aside, or the new techniques of processing. Nothing is going to set them aside.

But we have achieved this training route. And it's just like having been driving, you know, on a single-lane road, and all of a sudden you're on a two-pass highway. You know, it's a great deal of relief. We don't crack his case easily, we say he's - you know, he's one of these resistive cases, he's trained to be a tough case and so forth. We can always train him! It's quite remarkable.

Very interesting. If you don't want to live, why. don't control anything. If you don't want to be controlled by anything at all, why, go to another universe. If you don't want to be controlled against your will - which is to say against your best interests - by something else, then you had better learn control well enough and learn to control well enough that you can consciously and knowingly accept or reject whatever control comes your way. And that requires that you be in pretty darn good shape. You see how that would work out?

It isn't that we use training processes when we can't crack the case. And it isn't that we audit them when we can't train them. They're totally independent of each other. They don't have to interchange at all.

There isn't any avoiding this. You can't drop out of the game. You could possibly rise out of the game, but you couldn't drop out of it.

We used to do this: We used to bring somebody into class and he wasn't doing too well, so we'd give him processing and bring him back into class and he would do better. That isn't what we do now. We just bear down with both thumbs.

Do you realize the only reason anybody gets an engram in restimulation is he gets his attention on it. Well what is that engram doing to his attention? What is that picture of that cat doing to his attention, huh? It's got it. Picture goes here; his attention goes here. Here he is. He's perfectly free of the picture of a cat. What's controlling his attention? A picture of a cat.

This is quite amazing to have two routes. And we are so accustomed to having the routes of processing and for this to have the subdivisions of individual and group processing, that this new thing that has moved in since February looks like a strange beast.

Well, how come a picture of a cat could this irrationally control his attention? It's because he doesn't want to be controlled by cats. Believe it or not, that's the reason why his attention is fixed on it. He's got it there so it won't control him. And then he says, „I don't know anything about it and I've forgotten all about it,“ so he won't know that he's got it there so it won't control him. And he forgets about it so that lie won't notice or be bothered by the fact that it totally controls his working, sleeping hours.

We say, „What is this thing?“ Well, we say. “Well, it's the same as processing except we run the process of doingness on the fellow.“ Oh. no, that isn't it at all.

You see this? It's very logical isn't it? Isn't that logical? If we just keep it there it won't get around to where it controls us. Total resistance, you see. It's the resistance that keeps it there. So what does a body do to a thetan? To a marked degree it controls him. What does an engram bank do to a thetan? What does a reactive mind do to a thetan? Controls him! Well, let me assure you that until he finds out that it's possible for him to accept control, he will continue to keep the picture of the cat there and the body there so that they won't control him. Silliest thing you ever heard of, but that's the way it is.

Let me tell you that if you were to read the Instructor's Code, and then read the Auditor's Code you would know the difference. I advise you to get one of those ACC Manuals, and read the Instructor's Code in it.

You show him that by control he will not be annihilated; that he can accept a positive control without dying at once And he says, „What do you know? This fellow's been controlling me for forty-five minutes and I'm still here.“ And reverse-wise, he then finds out with further processing that he can control something else - himself. And these factors, one against the other worked in a processing session, bring a person up to a point where he is not totally resistant to control, and where he is not totally obsessed with controlling, and the end product is that he can control something.

It says „Never invalidate the preclear“ in the Auditor's Code, doesn't it? In the Instructor's Code it says „Never fail to invalidate the student.“ See, they're just mirror images of each other, just opposites.

He starts taking the automobile down the road by intention. He starts talking it over with his wife rather than worrying about whether or not she's controlling him. Funny part of it is he starts controlling her. But he could only start controlling her at the moment that he gets slightly willing to be controlled by her. And that unfortunately is the catch in the whole thing.

So if we can make auditors who can take care of such processes as are contained now in the lineup, and if we have processes which are good, why we've got it made across the boards, there's nothing to this. We've got both sides of it. We are always over this other stumbling block.

We have answered the question: What is good auditing presence and what is good auditing address to the situation, when we say the auditor must exert positive direction which must not be thrown aside by every circuit which jumps up in its way. In other words, the auditor simply works to get through the idea to the preclear that these controls and so on, aren't going to kill him. The moment the preclear's bank moves in the road of it, circuits move up, service facsimile moves in, everything else. And the auditor keeps right on and the service facsimile blows up, the bank blows up. It's very interesting. Fantastic.

Well let me tell you how this adds up. If you had a technique which would crack up and end forever the case of a Homo sapiens, it would chew hell out of the auditor, wouldn’t it?

What is a service facsimile but an old tired mechanism with which to control people? And what kind of a way of controlling people is it to lie down and be three-quarters dead. This controls people? No. I tried it once. I tried it once. I was lying down and I said, „Now I will be three-quarters dead, and everybody therefore will jump across the desk,“ see.

Let's look that over. If the technique had enough dynamite in it to blow up and explode and knock to pieces one of these carefully nurtured seventy-six-trillion-year-old cases and do that over a period of something under a couple of hundred hours - I say „something under a couple of hundred hours,“ I'm being terribly generous - then who is going to apply it? Are we going to import some robots from Mars? Look. if it is a human being sitting in this chair auditing that human being - boom! Fourth of July.

And they didn't. They didn't. They stood around. They gave me some attention, but they certainly weren't under control. So I think this is kind of an aberrated mechanism. I don't recommend it.

Let me tell you more distinctly what I'm talking about. The atom bomb, about which this congress is not and about which we couldn't care less ...

But the service facsimile is used as a control mechanism when the person can no longer control things. So therefore, every sick person is a person who is no longer able to control his environment or the people in it. It is only necessary to give him a certainty on his ability to do so once again for him to become well. This, amongst other things, is the secret of psychosomatic medicine. But it isn't that we don't practice psychosomatic medicine, we just make people well.

I loved the headline that appeared the other day. They were counting off a bomb which didn't go off. And the headlines in the papers here in Washington said, „Five- Four-Three- Two-One-Zero-Thffst.“ When an Atomic bomb is no more a weapon than some of these flintlocks they used to make two or three hundred years ago - they'd hang them together with baling wire, a piece of iron pipe - and it was far more dangerous to fire one than it was to stand in front of one.

Here is one of these things that came up, and became very important, is very important, will continue to be very important and that is this factor which we will have to call, just to convey some vague meaning of what we're talking about - control. We actually don't mean control the way people mean control at all. We mean a new thing - which means a positive direction, in present time, from one being to another, with the end view of matching up to the optimum solution. The greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. And positive intention, optimum solution, positive direction and wonders are worked. All a magnetic personality is, unless it's somebody who's had a magnet installed by a psychiatrist, would be somebody who could pervade an environment with an intention. That would be all there is to personal magnetism. He could pervade an environment with an intention. It's as easy as that. Not an intention for yesterday, but an intention for right now.

What happens if anybody uses this A-bomb? Boom! Boom! No boom's anymore. We bomb Russia, Russia bombs us. Within twenty-four hours of Russia bombing us there would be no Russia, there would be no us. Is this a weapon? No, No more than the old flintlock pistol was a weapon. And I think the A-bomb ought to be classified with it. It's a complete bust. They don't know what to do with it. They're now having a disarmament conference trying to get rid of it gracefully. They talk just as though they had something.

You understand this a little better now? Audience: Yes.

Anybody could blow up Earth. Just jokingly, any OT could go up to one of the nearby planets, pick up a flying saucer, come down here and stick a few rays into the core of molten earth, and that would be the end of Earth, but you wouldn't call that a weapon. That's just jokingly. But it wouldn't really work, would it?

Well, you'll be hearing a lot about it. I hope you do. I'll see you all tomorrow at one o'clock.

No, a weapon is something, according to nations, which must coerce obedience from some other nation or a „better attitude“ on their part toward the nation. That's a weapon. A weapon is supposed to accomplish something, not wipe out everything.

Thank you.

Well, these new techniques couldn't really be pushed too heavily into people's laps or released too far, because they weren't techniques if they were run by people who would have been annihilated by them.

We all know the phenomena of an auditor sitting there and getting into something with the preclear which is so restimulative he can't keep himself in present time, you know. He says, „Well, mock up your mother.“ He had a bad mother himself or something like that. „Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again.“

Well, by the time somebody runs some of these CCH processes perfectly - and they have to be run almost perfectly to produce much of a result - if he himself hasn't been up the training route he can't run up the CCH route. I mean that's it.

But we can put him up the training route, which leaves us in the interesting state of we don't have to have it work this way: I audit an auditor on CCH and that makes him clear enough to use CCH, so then he can audit somebody else on CCH, which makes that person clear enough. Get it? You know, if we could go theoretically on geometric progression of this character and so forth, who is going to audit me? You know, I'm in terrible condition. You've seer me staggering around for years. Hardly able to keep up. Hardly able to take it any more. Getting along in years. Have to use motorcycles to get around. Starting to read books instead of simply absorb their contents, Slipping. So, it wasn't really very feasible: it was much easier to invent TRs.

Now, the funny part of it is, that anybody can put somebody through those TRs. And somebody who has been put through the TRs can then use CCH processes. QED - nothing to it.

If you can't audit totally in present time the beefiest process there is, the roughest process there is, there is no sense in even starting it. Because you re going to get lost in the backtrack someplace - going to be way back there somewhere. And that phenomenon which some of us knew back in 1950 whereby the auditor would gradually fog out (we were running an engram that he should have had run - that's why he told us to run it) and gradually he's going thud! thud! His voice is getting weaker and weaker. We get up off the auditing couch, put the auditor on the auditing couch, and say, „We will now begin a session.“ There are actually people present who have done this.

Well, that’s no way to go about this business of clearing Earth. That's no way to go about it. We were actually falling over the fact that when we got very, very good processes, we would often fall back from them as too dangerous to touch. They were too restimulative to handle and instinctively we would turn away from them and have as little to do with them as possible. In this way a great many good processes were invented on the track which people didn't use very much.

And I'll let you in on a secret. There isn't a technique in CCH, really, which in some form or another hasn't been known for three or four years. They're all old processes. They're the best of the processes in all these years. But expertly administered they become very powerful processes, which tells you why nobody ever dared administer them with total expertness - he would have wiped himself out, too.

All right. Well, that's a very technical way to go about talking about things. I'm just discussing things with you here. I'm just telling you that something did happen between the last congress and this one, that a total new route of address to the problem of civilizing mankind - if that's the problem - a total new address to it has come up.

You could probably have all sorts of organizations by just teaching people to audit, and then they'd never audit at all, you see? You could take a large group of people and do this with them and you've got Group Processing, you've got this new weapon over here in the Training Drills, and we've got all of these new alignments here with processing and so on, and boy, if we were using arrows and these things were arrows, this is about the fullest quiver you ever wanted to have anything to do with. You could hardy pack this one around, be so full. All kinds of arrows. In other words, for a long, long time, with many vicissitudes, with good days and bad ones, with hard work and sometimes not any work at all, we have accumulated a technology all amongst ourselves which belongs to nobody but us, maybe. Belongs to him who would know. We have found how to administer it. And there isn't anywhere anybody who can say, „Well, we will use this now only for profit,“ or „we will no longer research along that line because it might invalidate us with the public.“ I never met the public, by the way. I only know people.

And here we are arrived in a very happy state of being in this year of l957 - in a state of owing no favors, being under no security with our information, being in a position where no security could be. placed upon it because the silliest thing in the world would be to place security on anything known in Scientology today, since it is known in almost any nation on Earth.

People ask me, „Why do you keep slugging away at that Dublin Office? Its bank account is only 59 pounds! It takes up more administration around here.“

And I say, „Well, make sure they don’t fall behind.“ Well. it's a whole experiment. It's a microcosm, you might say, that we're going on soberly along our way clearing the Irish nation. And we're doing it; we're succeeding, little by little by little. But Ireland has such good comm lines to anybody that's an enemy of England that anything known in Ireland, that it was known would invalidate putting it under security wraps anyplace else. It's known in Paris, known in Berlin, Egypt - all kinds of places around the world. The very funny part of it is, is most all the information which you have under your skull at this moment is also known anywhere any government would try to deny information to.

So anybody comes along and says, „You know! What's this do? This make pilots who could kill kill! kill! Ah, hah-hah-heh-heh-heh! Security! You mustn't breathe any more of this stuff. Shhhhh.“

We can say, „What's the matter with you, Joe? This can't be put under security. The law which you have just put under security as not to be released was known two years ago in Moscow's largest stronghold, Cairo. It's well known in Cairo. It was printed in German, well circulated into East Germany. To whom are you trying to deny this information - the Martians?“

Actually the international character of Scientology is simply my effort - sometimes exaggerated - to keep the communication lines open so wide that it drives everyone into apathy at the thought of shutting them off. They do go into apathy, too.

I said to some fellow one time - he said. „Wel1, it would be very easy to close down the Central Organization in the United States, and you could no longer get out your stuff.“

And I said, „It doesn't come out of the Central Organization, United States.“

He says, „It doesn't?“ I said, „No! It's ... all the Professional Auditor Bulletins are distributed from London, England.“

„Ohhh??“

It's a funny thing. It's a funny thing to be standing here talking to you about security. You say, „Well, Ron's really reaching for it now.“

Boy, there is only one thing that is not under security, only one thing now, today, really that is broadly spread about - that's your personal income. That's one thing the government doesn't want under security. But the more ... if governments of the world go mad enough to assume that weapons which are not weapons are weapons, if they go so mad as to believe that they can actually depend for their national security on such a thing as an atomic bomb, of course, the next biggest appropriation to the military would be the security.

And then that reverses. They finally find out that the atomic bomb is no longer a weapon, so they stop appropriating for it and they simply appropriate for the security agencies. After that all they have to do to govern is just be secure; be more secure and more secure. After that why they test everybody's breath to make sure no information is getting out when he exhales.

No, truly enough, in a world where science and scientific secrets are the stock in trade of the militarist, one has to be alert to the fact that developed scientific information such as that in Scientology continue to be free, continue to be available.

It's too large a temptation for somebody to say, „Oh. hey! we can button this up. We've got it made here. We've got it absolutely made. All we've got to do is take all this technology, brainwash everybody and put up thought police towers in all the towns and it's all set, we've got a government.“

No, they haven't got a government as long as there are textbooks out there showing how fast you can undo this same thing called brainwashing and thought police. It's discouraging, you know, to brainwash somebody and then have his friend walk into the nearest bookstore and buy a manual of how to unbrainwash. It would seem sort of pointless, wouldn't it?

So, as security measures increase and as security tightens across the world on scientific matters, it is of great interest to us that the information we have and which has been developed with your help, your finance, your. interest, across a period of seven years, is today free. That hasn't been just a little bit of doing.

You're probably not aware of the fact that before the incorporation papers of the HDRF were filed in 1950, the Office of Naval Intelligence right here in Washington, DC, threatened to call me to active duty to use what I knew about the mind. And after that I made sure that the channels were so wide that they were very uninviting.

Nobody wants something that isn't a secret. There is nothing quite as unwanted by a government as yesterday's secret known today. A very amusing story connected with that attempt to seize Dianetics, a very amusing story from my standpoint anyway. Months and months and months before I had decided that the Navy and I had come to a crossroads and I had requested permission from the secretary of the Navy to resign my commission - my commission had been hanging fire since the end of World War Il - and he had granted permission. Now, that's the lengthiest amount of time consumed, trying to get a letter into a government office and get an answer to it. See, that's pretty long.

And I already had that. So this fellow, this officer from the Office of Naval Research, came to see me right here in Washington and he wanted me to go on as a civilian employee in order to use what I knew of the mind to make men more suggestible.

And I smiled a feline smile. And I said, „No.“

And he smiled like something out of Faust, and he said to me, „Well, all you have to do is saw 'No' and I will call you back to active duty because you still are an officer of the United States Navy.“ And with that purr he exited.

So I dived into my briefcase and pulled forth the secretary's permission. I dashed down here and found out there was actually a naval command in this area - it's called the Potomac River Naval Command, I don't know what they run. Once I think they tried to run the battleship Missouri. But there it sat down there, and it had an admiral in charge of it and everything, and I found out that my papers were resident in two places. People thought I belonged in Washington, in Washington, and people in New York thought I belonged in New York, and I had two sets of papers. This admiral that had come to see me thought I was totally out of New York. So I went down here to the Washington Navy Yard, the Potomac River Naval Command, and I got my resignation accepted. And Thursday the admiral came back to see me, and he says, „Well?“ And I said, „Well?“ Fastest resignation on record. There wasn't anything he could do about it then. And I went back up to Elizabeth, New Jersey and the HDRF, the first research foundation, was formed, and we went happily on our way just throwing it all over the place.

The Bureau of Naval Personnel still has a form letter. If you want to know what it says, write them sometime and say, „Why don't you use Dianetics or Scientology? What do you know about these subjects?“

They send you back a form letter, and it's very polite, and it's personally written. It's always the same letter: „We are keeping full records on this and are learning more and more about it. We do not know whether or not it's applicable to our work at this time. Sincerely yours, Soand-So, Chief of Naval Personnel.“ But they've got it on file! And meanwhile we go on and use it.

In other words, here over a period of time, over a period of many year's working together, using our own finances, squaring things up, doing things ourselves in spite of anything that stood on the track, skipping the fact that we fell on our faces here and there organizationally, not paying any attention to the entheta and the upsets but going on doing our job developing Dianetics and Scientology, we have come to this day of July 4th, 1957 with, for my money, a very thoroughly developed subject which commands the field of human behavior and ability. And that subject and information is ours and it is free and it is not subject at any moment to any censure by anybody from anybody! And we can use it as we please. We have what we have fought for these seven years! And this too, I wish to tell you on this Independence Day of July 4th, 1957.

Thank you.

I'm very glad you're here and in the next hour we'll get the congress started. Goodbye now.