Thank you.

Thank you.

Now today we have some great lecture material for you for a change. And I brought my notes. So you now know all about it.

I'm not going to give you a demonstration now on this particular lecture. I'm going to give you a short talk on the subject of individuation, and some of the things you'd better guard against in Scientology.

Okay, that was a good lecture?

First Melbourne ACC, 25th November.

Let's see, this is what? The 25th?

Now, what we're up against in Scientology is we're trying to fit an organization and organizations and people, in amongst a tremendously aber­rative society.

Audience: The 25th.

Female voice: Yes.

The 25th lecture, 25th of November 1959, 1st Melbourne ACC. All right.

We have to adopt certain patterns of agreement with the society. If left to our own devices, we would not.

Title of this lecture is Counter-Creation. And it's about time you learned the facts of life. I talked to you yesterday, albeit a little bit offbeatly, on the subject of thetans. But I was setting you up and giving you a gradient scale of looking at this thing called a thetan, without having to conceive a static.

As a matter of fact in the earliest days of this, I didn't. And as a net result we might have gone far and fast, but at the same time, eddies of confu­sion developed of sufficient magnitude to completely overset and upset organizations and everything else.

The closest you come to creat — seeing a thetan, actually, because there's nothing there to stop vision, is of course, an expression in terms of matter, energy, space, time, postulates, forms. This is as close as you come to seeing a thetan.

I didn't even control the early organizations of Dianetics and Scientology. Now, we've only started to pull out of the rut since I had to assume responsibil­ity administratively as well as technically and so forth.

The matter is that a thetan makes it. A thetan makes matter and makes space, energy and so forth.

Our upward curve actually begins somewhere in the vicinity of about 1953. And with many vicissitudes here and there throughout the world, the more order that has been established in organizations and in communication lines and qualifications, in technology, and so forth, the further and better we have gone.

Now, a thetan has something. He has himself. He has an individuality but this individuality can be suppressed by other individualities which tend to degrade or overwhelm his individuality. You get the idea?

Now, people sometimes in the United States look at the early hysterical, commotional burst of Dianetics as being a tremendous upsurge and that was known far and wide, and that there were tremendous numbers of students involved, and there were tremendous numbers of preclears and tremendous numbers and all of that sort of thing. Well, that's all strictly, to be very tech­nical, "for the birds." They just tore everybody to pieces; that's what hap­pened. And right this minute we have many more students, many more preclears and many more Scientologists than we ever had early Dianeticists. And they're making more progress and things are calmer all the way along the line, and everybody could live.

Now, let's get technical about this thing and realize that we're talking about individuality, not individuation. Now, individuality would sim — is simply pure, unadulterated first dynamic beingness. Pure first dynamic beingness, that's all, that's what it is. That isn't a thetan's own valence, that would be something he trumped up in order to fool the audience or something of the sort, you got the idea. That is himself. And that is, this exists, believe it or not, this exists. Please bear with me, it does. There is such a thing. Please.

But the point is simply this: we are operating in a very aberrated world, where counter-creativeness is the order of the day, and creativeness itself is at minimum. Very little creativeness, tremendous amount of counter-creative­ness that busily eats up nearly every mock-up put up.

And the reason for all those "pleases" is everybody's got it figured out that the only way a thetan could ever possibly be creative or be a writer or an artist or anything else, is that he's crazy. There's even a book been written, Be Glad You're Neurotic. That's the title of it.

Now, safeguarding organizations and that sort of thing would be very simple if we did not become ourselves guilty of overt acts. Inadvertently, in one way or the other, in trying to fit in to a very, very neurotic society any kind of an administrative system which is at the same time using people within its ranks who are splendid people, but who aren't Clear, you get a condition of the development of overt acts. It's almost impossible not to, because the society at large ... Trying to make forward progress, every once in a while you find yourself stepping on the wrong head. Get the idea? Then you say, "Well, I shouldn't have done that."

Now, as thetan (subject) starts disappearing out of view in the society and less and less is known about this item, they begin to substitute more and more things.

This is easily true, that our progress is much greater when we take no punitive action of any kind in any direction. Our progress in dissemination is much greater when this happens. But our progress in administration spins in. In other words, we might disseminate, but we get out to a point where we're not administering. And when we get out to a point where we're not administering, why, there's some guy way out there on the end of an outpost and somebody shoots him down in cold blood, you know? Not a lot we can do about it. We can't do anything about it. We've disseminated way beyond any organizational reach.

And in 1894 with the libido theory they'd substituted neurosis. They'd gotten down to that point. And of course, now they substitute gone and science proves to you conclusively there's no such thing as a human spirit, soul, beingness and so forth and everything is done on brains, brains, brains — fried brains, baked brains. It's all done on brains. And if you could just condition somebody's brains, you've got it made. You could shoot him into space and everything. That's why they're not going to get anybody in space. Because, you can't condition anybody's brain or educate anybody's brain or do anything else with anybody's brain except maybe spread it on toast.

Well, the society itself is absolutely certain that anybody that puts up a mock-up these days ought to have it knocked down. It's on a create–destroy, almost total closure. Well, that shouldn't be a discouraging fact to anyone, but it certainly should be an understood fact.

It — as far as it's concerned, a brain is a shock absorber, and thetans like them because they pick up shocks — absorb them. If you'll notice the shock absorption quality of the nervous system — impede or channel incoming shocks and handle outgoing currents. If you were to hit somebody constantly and continually in the hand — the theory of evolution is — has some fact related to it — if you hit somebody in the hand and hit him in the hand and hit him in the hand, he'd eventually develop some mechanism which would absorb the shock. And that mechanism would be capable of not delivering the same immediate impact of injury to the person, you see, as before. In other words, he'd soften down this impact against himself by shock absorbers or some such things.

Now, one of the things that happens is very lamentable. The word is around that in Scientology organizations the life span, you might say, of top executives is very short and lots of top executives get sacked, and therefore there's a tremendous turnover organizationally in Scientology. This is just an idea that is around, here and there. Well, actually, as far as personnel is con­cerned, there isn't a terrific turnover. People drift in and out of organiza­tions, but they usually drift back.

You'd call these things resistors and condensers and so forth, electroni­cally. You'd put them up in some kind of a circuit whereby an impact, electri­cal impact going into this end, gradually gets slowed down and filtered and channeled so that it doesn't arrive as an impact at the other end. You got the idea? Well, that's a brain. All it is is a shock absorber. And a thetan likes a body, actually, believe it or not, because it absorbs shocks.

You look into an organization over a period of time, and you will see that somebody has been there and moved out in the field and come back again, he's moved out in the field and he got some auditing and straightened out, and he's back again. And it moves around, and the population stays pretty constant.

Well, oddly enough he figures if he were just out of his head and didn't have a body, why, then he'd be all set because you see, he wouldn't have to absorb any shocks because nothing would swat him. In a pig's eye! But not in a thetan's. The truth of the matter is, is exterior he is more susceptible, in a relatively unprocessed state, to feeling than he is inside. That's something that is normally — that hasn't really been known. I mean I just give you the dope. I think it's the first time I ever said it.

But top executives do blow off. They blow off. And of course, they're so visible. They are so visible. You see, they're carrying a public-front represen­tation and so forth. And one of these boys goes up in smoke or disappears off the organization, looks like the whole organization must be getting fired or sacked or something bad happening to it.

You start wandering around naked (by which I mean without a body on) and you start bumping into walls and you start doing this and that, and so on; you don't like it. You think it's for the birds. That's because you're still carrying certain masses of energy which collide with matter. Thetans don't dive easily through walls.

Well, I want to take up with you just this one fact, because the fact that with all of the confusion and upset that we run into in the society, if we in Scientology can't handle this thing, we're licked. And it's just this: that hold­ing things together administratively brings about two things in the execu­tives in Scientology and the people in charge of things. It brings the isolation of command, and the overt acts incident to administration. And one of the things causes the other. Person gets out of touch, doesn't understand the sit­uation too well, and then acts, then finds out he acted wrongly, and he's got an overt act on his conscience, and they start building up this way and they blow themselves off post.

In fact, a thetan moving in a straight line doesn't go through anything. He has to dematerialize and rematerialize. In other words, he has to postu­late himself in a new position.

It's been an awful long time since a top executive was fired. Actually, they quit. Actually, they quit. Now, I have been known to stop their paychecks two and three weeks after they disappeared. That sounds very funny, but you don't know the workings of these things unless you are right up against them, in tight, looking very hard at them. And that's more or less the truth of the situation. They have blown themselves off, or they've caused a circum­stance to exist that they can't exist in anymore. And I would say — oh, there have been some that have simply been grabbed out of the line and booted out the front door. That's for true, you see? There have been some, but they're not in the majority to any way, shape or form. They blow themselves out. They blow themselves off post. And why do they do this? Isolation of command, overt acts — one more action.

Now, by departing from a position, by ceasing to be in that position, that's all, and materializing or becoming in a new position, he can appear to go through walls, you get the idea? He didn't go through any wall.

It's almost impossible to administer a large number of people with abso­lute justice. And where the justice cog slips a little bit and they do something to the people, they're guilty of an overt act, don't you see? Then they recog­nize that they are and they've had it. So this one other factor is altitude. Altitude.

If he himself went through the wall, well, I don't know. Go over to the wall and stick your fist through the wall. There's sensation involved with pound­ing holes in the wall with your fist. Well, as a thetan, you find there's some sensation involved in running into walls and that sort of thing.

Now, you face up to one of these people that's famous in Scientology and that sort of thing, and if you as an auditor slip into a weak valence and start flubbing the dub on it, I'll growl at you, real hard, because that's normally what happens. Some guy is in an area, whether he's a field auditor or part of the organization or anything else, and because of his altitude he never gets any auditing. He's the Association Secretary, or he's the Director of Process­ing or the Director of Training, or he's in charge of a field operation of one kind or another, or he's the most important or best-known auditor in the area — in someplace — and immediately, anytime anybody walks forward to audit him (he asks them to audit him, something like that), it kind of gets to be a sort of a self-audit. You see how?

Some people, the Irish particularly, are more understanding about these things. When somebody dies they open the window and — they do, they open the window, you see — and he doesn't have to turn around and recover the facility of dematerializing and rematerializing someplace else in order to go shooting out of something. And he doesn't pass through things with attend-ant upset, and he doesn't have to not-is the whole scenery in order to pretend he's gone through it and all kinds of nonsense is done away with. Somebody simply opens a window, get the idea?

Person sits down in front of him, says, "Look at all this altitude I'm look­ing at," and goes into a weak valence and starts to stammer and spit. Well, don't do it, because it's wrecking the works.

Well, I'm not trying to convince you that a thetan in his best condition is susceptible to pain and all of that sort of thing and always packs around a lot of mass with him, because he doesn't. But a thetan in any kind of a knocked-about condition has always got old tin cans and his favorite machine and junk and some chains that he picked up back in the fourteenth century, and he's just packing more junk. He looks like a kid, that you tell the kid to — "We're going away for the weekend. Pack a suitcase," you know. Little kid will pack anything you ever heard of. And that's practically what a thetan does. And he has a considerable amount of mass connected with him.

For instance, I've had auditors blow on me on several different occasions over a period of years — many auditors blow on me. I've also gotten a lot of good processing. But I've had auditors blow on me. Unpredictably, somebody sits down and starts running something that's just a little bit offbeat, or that requires an analysis with an E-Meter, or something of the sort; the next thing you know they're going ... They've forgotten the auditing commands, and they turn the E-Meter upside — it isn't that they can't audit. It's the fact that they think they're looking at a source-point. And looking at a source-point they are then incapable of being anywhere but an effect-point. And an effect-point can't audit. You hear me? Well, the devil with this being an effect-point.

Another thing is, he keeps this mass around as a shock absorber against other thetans. In other words, he not only uses the body itself as a shock absorber but he uses (quote) mental energy (unquote) as a shock absorber so that another thetan can't come sail along into his head and take over his body. He feels this would be a bad thing to have happen. So he carries, very often, shielding of one character or another.

The administrative future, in particular, of Scientology depends on us getting over this one. That one right there. And getting over something else: Not taking responsibility for source-points. Failure to take responsibility for source-points leaves these birds working hard, unaudited. Leaves them in amongst the lions and tigers, unaudited. They're usually fronting for organi­zations. They're fronting for staffs, and that sort of thing, and they become willy-nilly guilty of overt acts. And then they chop somebody on staff, and they're guilty of an overt act there.

Now, this shielding is very often made up of engrams or is made up of engrams and other horrible circumstances. He hopes when he gets very anx­ious about being invaded or — and he feels that he is separate, very, very separate and nobody else must approach or something like this — he has a tendency to throw up these things which are an impenetrable screen. And the more horrible they are the better. See, the more horrible they are, the more they'll deter somebody from coming along and going through them. And he even­tually traps himself, of course, because this is an overt act against other thetans. And that's the most fundamental reason why you have somebody all packed up in past deaths and all of this sort of thing. It's a defense mechanism.

And the next thing you know, why, their whole idea with regard to staffis just shoot everybody. Get the idea? It just builds up from a little overt to abig overt. They suddenly recognize that they're — they should fire everybody.Well, that's a highly dangerous condition for a staff to exist in. Andthat's a highly dangerous condition for a city to be in that has an im — , very important auditor who's looked to as the most important auditor in that city. And for this guy, trying to hold down what he's doing and do what he's doing and so forth, sooner or later is going to commit some overt act one way or the other, administratively or in some fashion. He's going to steal some-body's pc — not even know he did it. All kinds of weird things going to hap-pen. He's going to wake up one morning and find out, well, he just committed a lot of overt acts. He kind of realizes he isn't doing too well. And he wants somebody to audit him. Who does he get to audit him? There isn't anybody else in the area to audit him, because he's got altitude.

And so you ordinarily have a thetan in his head but kind of not in his head because it's not safe to be that much located, you see, and protected by all the absorption mechanisms of the body's nervous system and able to use the solidity of the body to reach and withdraw, move things and exert auto­matic force which is motivated by other forces such as food he eats. In other words, he's running a machine. A body is a low heat engine. It's a carbon-oxygen heat engine that runs at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit. That's its combus­tion rate. And it's just a motor machine of some kind or another — biological machine. But it does perform solid actions as far as he's concerned and he's highly in favor of that. And then he'll surround this body with some sort of an additional protective screening to prevent shock from coming in.

Well, this is some — this is quite a thing. Now, you in Scientology have got to take responsibility for such people because they can't take responsibil­ity for themselves. They cannot do it.

Now, that's why, on your E-Meter you get the tone arm going up when the thetan area and mass and number of engrams and so forth is up. Got the idea? That's — in other words, the higher the arm goes the more dense the area he has around, impinged on the body, as a protective mechanism.

On a staff and in an organization you see somebody looking hectic, over-worked or something, well, don't try to cave in his anchor points and pull a bunch of sympathy on him, something like that; just insist that you audit him! That's all!

Now, this is completely contrary to electronics. And I might as well tell you why. It's because it isn't the kind of — electrical mass is what it is — and it isn't that kind of electrical mass which assists conductivity. It impedes con­ductivity. And, of course, the more mass he has, of the kind he uses, the more ohms resistance he has, the higher it reads on the tone arm.

Well, maybe he says, "Well, I'm being audited." Well, check up on it! Is he? It's just as simple as that. Is he being audited? He says, well, his auditor is quite good and so forth. Ahh, you got a right to see his profiles. Is he changing at all?

Now, if this was just ordinary mass he was using, if it was just the kind of mass you'd find in a table or an old blacksmith's bar or something of this sort, why, it of course would be more conductive, you see. And the more mass there'd be there, why, the lower the tone arm would read, so you see? But that, that's not the kind of mass it is.

Now, that sounds like a hell of an invasion of privacy and an upside-down of the command line and every other confounded thing you ever heard of. Well, you just better turn it upside down! Of course, that's a horrible weapon for an executive to have to face, if his staff is told by me that he — he better be checked over once in a while by his staff. Right away he'll say, "Well, Ron said that and therefore they're making a victim out of me, and they're trying to victimize me." What are you going to do? You're going to lose somebody there sooner or later. He's going to blow himself off the post. He's going to blow the whole thing wrong side out.

It's mass which is there to resist shock and therefore is — has a very, very high absorption resistance. In other words, it reads very, very high in terms of ohms and probably goes up — I have never measured this all the way up the line, I don't even know what an E-Meter reads in terms of ohms at 6.0 — but it would go all the way up to 6.0 on the tone arm of the E-Meter, however many ohms that is.

Now, maybe this is all right if you hope to get promoted and promoted and promoted. If you want to get promoted there are so doggone many areas of Scientology that need somebody in that you can't practically count them at all.

The "M" reading (3.0 position) on the tone arm is 12,500 ohms — 2.0 is 5,000 ohms.

No, top figures in this particular business are not expendable. They just aren't. It's up to the staff, it's up to the auditors in the town, to see that such people are processed and to keep them from going out the bottom. Get those overt acts off them. Get that isolation off of them. Get them back in there pitching again. Don't let them slip and slide and skid around, and then stand there being effect-point and saying, "Of course, well, we can't do anything about him because he's source of Scientology in this particular zone and area, and there's nothing we can do about it."

Now, a body itself has its own electrical field which complicates the whole picture. And the body is built as an electronic thing made out of anchor points. I refer you to other lectures and data. And this anchor point system permits the body to have an apparency. And this anchor point system can become collapsed, as well as the thetan's facsimiles can become collapsed, and actually the more collapsed the anchor points is, the more the thetan's facsimiles get collapsed, and the more the thetan's facsimiles get collapsed, the more the anchor points get collapsed. You get the idea? So, they tend to complement and aid each other in this nonsense but all it adds up to is with-hold.

Yeah, well, you're a source of Scientology in that area, too. And some-thing else — is you, you've got a situation on your hands where everything you've got in that particular zone, every vested interest you have is being jeopardized by somebody who will go this kind of a course. He does some-thing administratively or to straighten something out, and then he finds out — wasn't much of an overt act; it was a little bit of an overt act. It wasn't quite right. It just had a curve on it. The later data came along that said the pc actually hadn't been shot by this other auditor or something of the sort, you see? Later data said that the action was really an overt act.

Now the more separate a thetan is from the society, the more in — the more overt acts he has committed against the third dynamic. He is as sepa­rate or individuated, different than (obsessively), not himself, you see, but some tailor-made, super-nonsense difference — he's different than the society around him to the degree that he has committed overt acts against the soci­ety. Where any one person is concerned, he is different than that person to the degree that he has committed overt acts against that person.

All right. We move into the next lineup. We get another little overt act and after that it gets very easy, and they commit another overt act, and they commit another one, another one. They're perfectly legal things, you know?

Now, naturally, having committed lots of overt acts he feels in need of a great deal of protection. And needing a great deal of protection, a person who has committed a lot of overt acts is apparently then doing an enormous with-hold. Actually, he isn't doing an enormous withhold at all, what he's doing is shielding himself. He's doing a super protection device. But, he thinks he has to protect himself to the degree that he's committed overt acts.

They're perfectly reasonable things. They're things that people do in corpora­tions all the time, only we're not a corporation, don't you see? We are a corpora­tion but that's just to agree with the law, you understand? We're something else.

You're not looking at the simple mechanism of withhold, in other words, when you read the high mass of a thetan's area. You're looking on a — there's another via there and that via is the truth, and the simple withhold isn't the truth.

Actually, you can't even run a Scientology organization the way you'd run Jaguar Limited or something. It just won't run that way, that's all. I know; it took us years to find that out. And we know how to run one of these organizations now but that's beside the point.

He explains it to everybody by saying, "Well, I'm withholding these things because they'd punish me." No, he's saying, "I know I am guilty because I committed overt acts, therefore I am liable to be penetrated and cut to rib-bons by other thetans. I must therefore protect myself and I am therefore separate from them. So, therefore, I need all this mass around me." And that is the withhold. And that's his basic logic and reasoning with regard to that.

The point is, we can't go on an administrative line which is a stuck one-way flow, which adds up into numerous overt acts and which finally sepa­rates out one of the most able guys you've got in the area right on off from the staff, the post and a blow. They just walk right straight up that line.

Now, simple withholdingness, simple withholdingness does resolve this. You — but you start talking about withholding and so on, and you get a reso­lution of the circumstance.

Of course, this fellow did come in and tear up the front hall and wreck the Coke machine, and — and that sort of thing, and they had to sack him. This executive did — had to sack this fellow. Good friend of his, but he had to sack him. I mean, just to make things straighten out, that was the only thing he could do.

Now where a person has committed no overt acts, he doesn't have to do a withhold because he doesn't feel incompetent in that zone or area. It's as simple as that. And he doesn't stack up facsimiles. So, you'd say then that a person who was Clear — and this would be in an ultimate sense, a person who was Clear just all the way up — would be totally Clear on overt acts, and then you'd have no bank. So, it gives you a brand-new rationale to Clear, see? No overt acts, no bank necessary — Clear! Got the idea?

Only he realizes he's maybe got other overts on this fellow, and he doesn't know for sure whether he should've sacked him or not. And he thinks maybe he should've been able to straighten him out because he's a Scientologist. He should have been able to ... So he failed the fellow somehow, and that he sacked him is an overt act. And he hears three or four weeks later that the fellow is practically starving to death and ... Oooh! Here we go, you see?

See? It isn't that the individual has had bad things happen to him, and he was — these have all become stacked up. See, it's necessary to his mecha­nism to tell everybody else that things can happen to them because then they don't invade him.

Next thing you know, why, this executive, believe it or not, Scientologist or not, will be picking on some file clerk or somebody in the organization, wanting to sack them. For what? See, it's just overt act goes into overt acts goes into overt acts, which gets into compulsive overt acts. Then they realize they're doing wrong. And then they realize they're victimizing the organiza­tion so they know very well what they should do. They should be absent. To prevent themselves from doing further harm, they take themselves off. And that's the way they go, every time.

"If you invade me, then something will happen to you," you see. That is a lie! That is a lie of the first order. That can't happen, see. And that is a social truth. And that is the basic social truth that keeps everybody aberrated — that something can happen to the other fellow!

Now, you've seen in just one area several Assoc Secs go. HASI Melbourne has seen several Assoc Secs go up in smoke. Don't think there was any differ­ent mechanism than this operating. These were good men, all of them. And they all did a great deal for this organization. But in the earliest times of an organization, you get the greatest randomity and commit the most overt acts, so you expect a more dishabille, tangled-up condition early in an organiza­tion's history than later ones.

Now, thetans teach each other that something can happen to the other fellow, so the other fellow will never come in and take over their zone or area, see? It's a constant educational system which is brought about by the overt acts the person himself has done against the other person, see? Having done something to somebody it's then necessary to have a protective system.

Nevertheless, these people committed this little action and that little action and separated themselves out further and stayed in the isolation of command and then went out further and tried to stay on this Earth's admin­istrative pattern one way or the other — which is the isolation of command, which invites overt acts — and did a few more and a few more and a few more, and finally — finally in practically all cases — most cases — were writing me letters, begging me to let them leave.

I remember vividly thinking that I needed protection in the very, very early days of Dianetics. Actually, probably from a social standpoint you would have said this was true because a book had just been launched which had an enormous repercussion all over the place, and people were beating the front door in. And for a very short time, not more than a month or — oh, a couple of months, I think, about at the outside — why, I had the idea — no, I didn't have it for more than about fifteen or twenty days as a matter of fact. I — it grew up to a point of where I got the idea that I needed some protection somehow or another, you know. There was just too doggone much pounding in the door.

Well, what's the mechanism? They wanted to cease to act in an area because they had begun to believe they were damaging the area. Do you understand that?

And then I stood up in front of a lot of thousands of people and almost got myself shot in an early setup. And I just handled that so easily that I decided that there was no reason to have any protection.

Well, that this condition existed falls straight back onto the fact that people considered they had altitude, didn't get them audited, let them drift too long, and to stay in an administrative pattern like good soldiers, went ahead and accepted and absorbed their overt acts. You understand? Why, that's not called for. That's not called for at all.

Now, the basic mechanism which went behind that is I had to decide, in spite of everybody screaming at me that I had, I had to decide that I had not committed an overt act against society, psychiatry, psychology, the American university, foreign universities, God, man, beast, you see, on up the dynamics. And I had to decide myself that I had not — had or had not committed an overt act. And in those early days — you're getting, even today, in some iso­lated areas of the world, where they totally lack originality, they reprint some of the early — never later than 1950 — some of the press that was launched against Dianetics in those days, you know.

By and large, the organizational population, you might say, of Scientology is very stable. Very. Seldom changes very badly, but its executive stratas change all too rapidly, and that's why. And the remedy for it, technically, is now in our hands. Very easy for it to be in our hands, too. But technically, is now in our hands.

Every time I see that, you know, why, I have to decide all over again whether or not I'm guilty of an overt act. See?

Now, part of the business of being in charge of something is to have secrets, according to this society at large. You mustn't tell why George was really fired. It's all got to be secret. The communication lines have got to be wrapped up in cotton batting one way or the other. There's some things going on; there's some planning; there's things going to happen someplace, and one has to keep that under wraps and something else under wraps. And next thing you know the guy is — the guy is a case. He might be a MEST Clear, but he'll wind up as a case again. Because right in present time he's restraining things. Now, you could clean this up slick as a whistle by putting him on an E-Meter and finding out — just shaking him down for all of his overts. And then, not punishing him by wrecking his authority and position because you now find out what a — some of his overts were. You get the trick?

And when I finally get — get this thing looked at again, you know, bing, and so on, why, any mass that I have started to put up, why, I just throw away. That's as simple as that, you see.

In order to keep going you'll just have to have a higher tolerance and be more outspoken. You see that? You just have to have a higher tolerance and be more outspoken. That's all. Don't be so eager and anxious to counter-create against somebody, see? But actually just shake them down for all the overts, all the secrets, free up that needle, straighten them up, and get it square. You see that?

Now, the — the only way you could — I apologize for using myself as an example in this but I'm just more familiar with me.

Well, if this is the case in our own organization, think what must be the case in large corporations. Think what must be the case in large govern­ments. Look, they don't know anything about anything. They got communica­tion lines, but no communication formula. They think they know all about it. They're so bad off they don't even know they don't know. And that's as bad off as a guy can get. Now, this fellow doesn't know there's nothing known about anything. You know? That guy is a stupid fool. You get some idiot down in the barnyard or something of the sort, and you'll find out that's more or less his state of mind. He doesn't know anybody doesn't know, you know?

I very often use you but on such a point as that, that's a rather touchy point. Now, the main thing here is that a thetan has gotten the idea that something could be done to him. And therefore has gotten a series of protec­tive mechanisms of one character or another to prevent it happening. But these protective mechanisms, being based on a lie that he needs protection, which he doesn't, of course tend to multiply. And just as a lie will — a lie is a pure creation, a whole cloth, which agrees really with very little, so therefore it tends to remain hung in — on the track.

Well, let's take presidents and prime ministers and dictators and heads of department and ministers of state and take the heads of corporations and so forth, the heads of organizations, and so on: You have the men that run this planet. You have the men that run this planet — that's them. And look-a­here, if we lose our own executives, where we can do something about it, if we're dull enough to stand around as auditors on somebody's staff and let him blow himself right off post because we never grab hold of him and say, "Here, we have a right to have you stay as Clear as we can get you!" If we don't do that, ah, do you wonder there's as much war and stupidity and unrest and execution as there is?

This lie going on and on, that he needs protection and so forth, causes him to assert more and more the protection until you get somebody up in the governor's palace and he has to have eight squadrons of police, you know. He has to have them all over the grounds and he has to have them here and there, and he has to have cops, cops, cops, cops, you know, making sure. The king in olden times used to have somebody used to have to sweep the handle of a broom underneath the bed before he retired as one of the actions that was undertaken by the valet de chambre, in making sure his room was ready for going to bed, you know. Had to make sure there's nobody under the bed, and so forth. Old maids today do the same thing.

I could tell you right now that I could go to any corporation president — I don't care who he is — put him on an E-Meter and have him about 100 percent improved over anything he's got, just with the trick I've taught you of shak­ing a meter down. Just do that! And there'd go his ulcers, you know? And you say, "Wow!" This guy will say "Wow! That's really something. That's really something!" Then clean him up the rest of the way.

Now, he's basically suffering from his own overt acts and you could gen­erally tell a monarch who — who was, well, he had the idea he wasn't doing too well, by the amount of household troops that he had to have. You get the idea?

All these guys, practically, have trouble familially. Oh, they're having trouble with their wives and their daughters, and this and that and so on, and their son-in-laws and all of this sort of thing. Well, why? They're so darn busy they can't pay much attention to the family. But it's worse than that.

Now, some point along the line, why, he's got to make his — to buy any leisure time, why, he's got to keep from — everything from caving in on him and he tends to build up some kind of a social mechanism or social ridge of some character or another, which again fends off but — this is simply an agreed-upon thing in the society, and so on.

Because of they're a source-point, they tend to put other people in a weak valence. See that?

If he starts believing that he dare not go around or he dare not go out-side that ridge, and so forth, right then he's been guilty of an overt act, got the idea? He did something to people! He knows he did something to the people. He knows it's an overt act.

Well, doggone it, get over the idea that you're in a weak valence because you're in a subordinate command position. I've found ordinarily I had to be in a much stronger valence than the man in charge to get anything done.

And it's very easy to find very successful men all over the darned place or men that have fairly clean consciences all over the darned place and other people who believe implicitly that they should be protected, you know, run­ning their legs off trying to afford the necessary protection and so on.

But you could really make tremendous progress on the upper dynamics if you just started shaking things down in this fashion. If you opened up marital-relations counselling, and took husbands and wives and simply take the trick of pulling the needle down, and then make them tell each other. My God! Marriages would patch up all over the place and the divorce rate would fall and zingity-bang, you see? Simple trick. It doesn't even require that you run any of a — thing of a process on these people.

Once in a great while, they get a president who doesn't believe he's guilty of overt acts and they have an awful time in the United States. The Secret Service darned near blows its brains out, you know, because its idea of preparing a reception is to put Secret Service men in every position where any gunman could lurk along any route of march, you know, and they've built up a system there which is really complicated.

How long does it take? Well, you better make your rates awful high because it doesn't take very long. That's real — being really effective.

Truth of the matter is anybody who wanted to kill the president, they wouldn't stop him. I mean, they wouldn't have a prayer of stopping him, they couldn't even discourage him. It's the truth. Because, I know I can tumble over an antelope at a mile with a high-velocity rifle, telescopic sight. Well, what's all this point of this super protection, see?

Now, if you were to go around and pick up a few corporation presidents, manage to meet them out to the golf club or something like that, and they say, "What are you?" You say, "Well ..." You don't give a damn for the truth. Just — if you know it's a lie, it's okay. You just tell them you're a psychiatrist or something of the sort. Say whatever you are; it doesn't matter. If you're in too much trouble, write me a letter and say, "I've represented myself as a psychiatrist at the Bide-a-Wee Golf Club and I have no credentials of any kind." I'll get you some.

Well, similarly, no thetan could ever keep another thetan out of his skull. That's a fact, so it just couldn't be done. If any thetan thought he ought to be in somebody else's skull and he didn't consider it an overt act against the other person on the invasion of privacy, he would simply go into his skull, that's it!

Or you meet this guy, and if you just look at him and say, "Well, what are you? What's your line of business?" You know?

For instance, I've been in more darned skulls. That's a fact. And also by looking around you can see pictures and you can do all sorts of darned fool­ishness because pictures aren't imaginary, they do have a certain radiative quality and a reflective quality and so on. There's no necromancy or non-sense hocus-pocus magic or werewolves connected with this thing. We're just dealing with matter, energy, space and time, positions in space and masses and that sort of thing.

And the fellow says, "I'm president of the Saxony Mills Corporation, you know, Limited. And what's your line of business?"

Well, now, if you're guilty of an overt act against the other fellow, you won't get into his skull. All you have to do is intend to do him some harm and his protective mechanisms work. It's just like nobody ever gets as tied up in burglar alarms as a burglar.

You say, "Well, I'm a psychiatrist."

For instance, I'm sure you wouldn't get tied up with burglar alarms. I know I upset a jeweler no end one time when I was studying at police methods and so on, down in Los Angeles. I was trying to find out if criminal minds were different kinds of minds, and if police minds were different kinds of minds, and I was taking a good, broad look at this sort of thing. So, I got me a post as a special officer. And I was around for quite a while. They didn't know quite what to make of me. They didn't know whether to call me "officer" or "doc" or what, see.

And he says, "Oh, you are, you are. One of those headshrinker fellows," and so forth.

And I upset a jeweler considerably by finding that his transom had been sprung and so I just reached through, you might say, the grating and unlocked the door and shut off the burglar alarm and went in and closed the transom so that it wouldn't upset anybody. And at this moment, he evidently remembered there must be something wrong with the shop and he pulled up in front of the shop and he finds a police officer inside the shop but the bur­glar alarm isn't going. See, that's totally incomprehensible. How could any-body shut off the burglar alarm? Well, I frankly don't even believe it would have worked for me. I don't believe it would have gone off at all. Get the idea? Because I wasn't invading his premises. I'm giving you a wide bar here but the postulate would be necessary that the premises would have to be pro­tected against me before the premises would react against me.

And you say, "Yes, yes, that's right. How are you doing?"

Now, that appears to be slightly mystic and slightly odd but it isn't. It's quite mechanical.

And he says, "Well, I'm doing all right. I suppose you're really interested in insane people and that sort of thing."

Knowing the premises are protected against you about the first thing you'd do to a burglar alarm would be to fall over it or tamper with the wires or something trying to shut it off, get the idea? Only, you'd probably go about shutting it off wrong because you knew it was set for you, see?

"No, no, no, mostly interested in corporation presidents."

So people trying to invade each other's skulls with bad motives don't have much luck at it. They run into everything. They have a bad time of it.

"Well, what could you do for me?"

I remember trying to pick a little girl up out of a bombed carriage one time, about 1685, and I had quite a lose because I didn't succeed in making her get on her feet, she was half blown to bits. And mechanisms didn't work, and so forth, and tried to pick her up and dust her off, you know — as a thetan.

"Well, quite a bit as a matter of fact, but we're out here at the golf club right now. This isn't a professional sphere," or something like that. "But here's my card, and I'll come around and see" — you don't make him make the appointment — "I'll come around and see you, or you report to my office two o'clock next Tuesday."

And it didn't work and it gave me a big lose and I got all confused and upset about the thing and then that was an overt not to have done it, you get the idea? But I was guilty of an overt in the first place, I eventually realized and found out, in that I was riding as the — as a bodyguard on this particular carriage, see, and I didn't do it, you know. Something bad went wrong, see, something bad happened. Well, that's guilty of an overt act right then. Don't expect to control a situation that you've caused to that degree. Got the idea?

And he says, "I have a board meeting at two o'clock."

You've caused it, you regret it, now you're going to be the effect of it, too? Oh, no you're not.

You say, "Good, be at my office."

And now, you could be the cause and the effect of the same line provid­ing that you — your heart was pure, you might say. You'd be the cause and the effect at the same line, providing you weren't doing anything that you thought was wrong. But you couldn't be the cause and the effect of the same line when your effect is supposed to be harmful; when it's an overt act that you know it's an overt act, then for God's sakes don't get around on the effect's end of the line, too, because you're not likely to get out of it. You'll get all mishmashed and monkeyed up about the whole thing. Do you see how that would be?

Shake him down on the needle. Next thing you know, why, you'll have to shake his wife down on the needle, and his daughter down on the needle. And the next thing you know, why, you've explained to him, "You know why you're having so much trouble with your various departments, is the execu­tives of each one of these departments is just as guilty as you've been." And then he says, "Fine," so he feeds all these guys through the hopper. Now, you haven't done an awful lot of processing there. Actually, you're just clearing needles and keeping them straight. Well, it'd be quite a thing.

So, you could be where you wanted to be and do what you wanted to be as long as you fell somewhere within an optimum solution. The optimum solution is the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics which would be the least overt acts necessary to the least dynamics. That would be a reverse look at it. Another definition.

Now, I'm not advocating you do this, professionally. I'm not advocating it, I'm not not advocating it. I'm just saying this is something to do.

Now, a thetan being a thetan, creates. And that is what's wrong with him. I observed as long ago as 1954 — 55 I think it was, about the 7th ACC, something on that order, the 8th — that everything that's wrong with a thetan is what's basically right with a thetan. The only thing that can go wrong with a thetan is what's right with a thetan.

Now, if you got mixed up in governments — I already know that I can't go into the Senate office building without winding up processing Senators. I always get wound up processing a Senator.

In other words, you pick up some selected, downscale harmonic on an ability of a thetan, twist it wrong and that's wrong but it's also right.

Once in a while I get reversed and process a lobbyist. But I've never been able to go up to the Hill in Washington without getting involved as an auditor. Never have been able to. I mean, I've even kept my mouth shut. Of course, they have some vague idea of who I am and that sort of thing and ...

Now, I've spoken this as the mockery end of it, you see. Perfectly all right for you to save England but some nut comes along and he hasn't a clue but he's talking about saving England. Well, you see, you can do something else besides save England, but he can't, get the idea? And furthermore, he couldn't save England. But he can talk about it, get the idea?

I had one lovely dinner one night. Halfway through the dinner — it was a absolutely fabulous dinner. It was wonderful. And I was sitting there slopping up the lobster and all the rest, and everything was going along beautifully, you know. And finally, why, the political boss that was sitting alongside of me looked down the table at another fellow there who was quite well known and said to him, "You realize that when I introduced Hubbard to you, that he's the Dianetics Hubbard."

So, everything that is wrong with a thetan is also what is upper scale right with him! And he becomes a victim of his upper scale rightnesses. And basic, first and foremost, the thing that basically goes wrong with a thetan is creativeness. That is the thing that goes wrong with a thetan. That is the one thing he does, that he does obsessively, that he continues to do, that he never finishes doing, that he never forgets how to do but he tries to prevent himself from doing and all of this sort of thing and it's all under the heading of cre­ativeness. And that's one of his — his highest purpose and his craziest pur­pose. It's at once the highest and the lowest.

Right away, everybody — like this. That was the end of the dinner, as far as I was concerned. I didn't get a chance to eat anything else. Out of revenge I threw them all into engrams.

A pure Create Process run on and on and on ad nauseam, probably would get your pc into more trouble than you ever cared to get anybody out of. See? Ah, you'd probably go through it if your pc was — lasts that long but you could probably blow him through on a pure Create Process. But it'd be a rough beef because that's basically what's wrong with him, always been wrong with him, and — same thing, it's everything that's right with him. That's kind of goofy if you take a look at it.

And one 1.1 started to work me over one way and the other way and — expecting I had to defend everything and so on. It's quite interesting. Every-body expects me to defend Dianetics or Scientology to the last ditch. Well, that's fine. I'll go that far. But then they expect me to defend all the condi­tions of the world and the hell of a state the world is in. Well, that's not so good, because if it wasn't in a hell of a state, we wouldn't be here. Get the idea? So challenging you with the fact that the world is in terrible condi­tion ...

Now, a thetan then has creativeness as his greatest game and his great­est calamity. And when creativeness becomes obsessive and a person can't do anything else than that — or super-specialized — and when versatility in cre­ativeness is lost, you get to a condition where the thetan can be said to be aberrated. Furthermore, he's unknowing and unwilling in his creativeness. He's being forced to create things he doesn't want to create.

It's very funny. People come around to me all the time, and I'm sure they come around to you, and tell you accusatively that there's just been a murder or a car accident, or that things are running very badly in some quarter or another and — or tell you about some quarter of your operation or something of the sort, or that you had a student and he's now going all over town saying so-and-so and so-and-so. What they're doing is saying, "You do something. You do something. You do something. You do something." It's just like they're wound up cuckoo clocks, you know? "You do something. You do something." They expect you to immediately solve all the problems of existence, just as they are, just as you stand there, or explain them all away to them.

That's basically what happens to labor and why labor goes into so many — if there is such a thing as labor — goes into so many agitated upside downs and that sort of thing and revolts against management and other things, takes up various -ologies and so on.

Now, I finally developed a mechanism. When people jump me — sometimes people jump me right after a lecture. They're always sorry for it because I always hang them with it.

There's too many fellows around there who have created too much too long. If you're going to raise production at all, you've got to solve this factor. You cannot do it with social education or a new -ology, you'll have to just solve it with Scientology. There's just no other way to change this downward spiral as far as labor, production, manufacture and so forth. The solution to it is Scientology, not some new dreamed-up piece of monkey business.

And they say, "Such-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so is the case," you see? Oh, I don't know, "The Fire Department is out on strike, and four babies were just murdered down the block" or something like — something I got noth­ing to do with. Nothing, you know?

Now, when his creativeness has been devoted to destructiveness, he of course is guilty of overt acts because that is what an overt act basically is: it's creativeness devoted to destructiveness. And when creativeness is too often and too long devoted to destructiveness, he goes around the bend.

And I'd say, "Well, why aren't you doing something about it?" It's a very emphatic defense, you know? I don't do it unless I feel kind of ornery.

The physicist, for instance, that specializes in weapons, weapons, weap­ons, weapons, weapons; the aircraft designer who builds nothing but pursuit planes, pursuit planes, pursuit planes, these boys are too close from — between the create — destroy. And you'll find they're — they're pretty batty. They're setting themselves up. One day they will find that it's an overt act that they did such a thing. They do it for quite a while without realizing it's an overt act. And then one day they unfortunately get prima facie evidence that it's a total overt act and at that moment they go flip! That's it; they've had it. They get it all at once. You call this sort of thing a nervous break-down; a sudden descent into chaos and calamity; the sudden shift from being sane to being a nervous wreck. See, that's — that all to pieces sort of a situa­tion is a slip into realization of an overt act. Creativeness which has been devoted along a certain line, we all of a sudden recognize that it's destructive. And the realization can be so long in coming and a person can have created so many destructive things over such a long period of time without any real­ization of this sort at all, you see, that he hits this and it looks very, very funny to the mental expert of the olden days, you see.

Some little kid comes along and wants to know about something, I'll take an hour and a half and explain it to him, you know, because he really wants to know about it. But somebody else wants to give you all this junk — it's just a counter-create, see? So I just turn it right straight around on them, splash, you know?

This fellow was a great, big brawny fellow and he was a warrior par excellence and he just went around cutting off heads and chopping up people and — and he just went on and on and on and one day he stumbled over a pin and went stark, staring mad. "Well, I guess stumbling over pins drives people mad, therefore, brains are very, very, very tender and brains go very bad very easily and everybody will have to be careful they don't go mad." You get the whole erroneous chain of conclusions drawn out of this!

But the basis of this — being responsible for everything: Well, that's fine. Be responsible for everything if you've got to be responsible for everything and get something done and so forth. But you aren't necessarily responsible for everything that ever happened anyplace. What you are responsible for is your own overt acts, your own isolation from your fellows and for your own failure to help guys here and there who couldn't be as responsible as they might be or are blowing themselves out into the middle of nowhere. See, these are the only things that are important. All else is dross.

No, all he did was fall into the realization it was an overt act. He went around — something happened, it doesn't even have to be as dramatic as this, that this big brawny fellow was going around knocking people's heads off and knocking in their breastplates and kicking them in the teeth and stamping all over the darned place, and he was just fighting, fighting and he gets along to a point one day that he's fighting away, and he knows he's fighting for the right because he's fighting for the archbishop. Eh!

Now, as far as being responsible for existence is concerned, and how responsible one is, and so forth, well, you can take just as full a responsibility as you can possibly take right up to here. And of course, by doing anything about man or about the mind or solving some of these evidently too simple secrets for great minds to wrestle with and as I've told you before, the only reason I got it whipped is because I'm not a great mind; I'm just a simple idiot, you know? And that's very simple. That's an overt act against myself I'll have to run out. And ...

And then the archbishop orders him to destroy a certain town and he finds out why the archbishop wants to destroy this certain town — because the archbishop has always been interested in a silver plate in it. He had immedi­ately made everything he ever did for the archbishop an overt act, see.

The thing adds up to the fact that, sure, I can be responsible for every-thing, but my being responsible for everything doesn't return any sanity to anybody. See? They've got to take over some of the burden, too. And boy, I get rid of it as fast as they'll put their hands out, let me tell you. Anytime any-body wants to speak up and says, "I want south Indonesia," man, they got it! They act as though I'm in charge of it and maybe I am, but the point is they get it.

Actually, there was one single series of destructions in central France that wrecked knighthood, it just finished it, just overnight. The Church decided to get even with some heretics. And all the knights all over the place flocked in to protect the Church and they all rode up to get even with these heretics. The Church brought along a lot of mercenary troops and they raped and burned and pillaged and were much more interested in the pillaging than anything else. And then they come to find out that the people that they were killing, they weren't such bad people at all and it was a holy horror as a crusade, not a holy crusade and so on. And all these knights sat around and said boom! Spin! See? They'd all realized they'd committed tremendous overt acts. You see? They realized their cause was not worthy and so on.

Now, here's the thing that messes up all the control and command lines there are, is just secrets and overt acts, the narrowness of the public. Evi­dently you get into the idea that the public mustn't be let in on anything, that it would be scandalized if this were the case, and horrified if that were the case, and so on.

And you want to watch people snooping around to tell you your cause isn't worthy, and so forth, because that is the little trick or the trigger that can throw you, get the idea? So, if it can be that deadly, don't think that man doesn't use it.

You — particularly in an executive position, or in a large city as its prin­cipal auditor or something of the sort, you get so you're saying, "Well, I hope nothing blows up because ..." you know? And you get feeling responsible for everything that's going wrong. And finally you get tired of being responsible for Joe or Bill or Pete or somebody down the block, and all he seems to be able to do is mess up every family he walks into or something like this, you know? So you just shoot him. You know, in some fashion, you shoot him. And then you find out that, actually, the last family he messed up he didn't mess up, and he was actually trying to put the thing together. And you shot him just at the wrong time, just as he was winning. And, here we go. See?

Well, here's this big, brawny fellow goes along one day, and he — just after the field of battle, and he's been fighting against townspeople of some kind or another — and it starts getting him because as he walks across the field of battle, he realizes there is nothing but old men there, and young boys, and there's nobody in mail and they're all in leather jerkins and they aren't armed with very much, you know. And this was the army he was busy fight­ing, you see. And then he sees a little kid lying there dead, you know, boom, see. And he goes stark, staring mad and joins the church or something. Total overt act! See, he just recognizes suddenly that this was a bad creation.

All right. Well, now you can be as responsible for that area as other people will be responsible. And the reason you shot him, of course, was to make him more responsible. But shooting him didn't make him more respon­sible. Let me point that out. It never does. All it did was to protect, momen­tarily, somebody else.

Well, a bad creation is a creation of something destructive that wasn't deserved — undeserved destruction and so on. It just didn't add up. So, in other words, a bum solution on the eight dynamics. And all it has to do is come home to somebody that he's been indulging in a very bad solution on the eight dynamics and he's had it.

Now, any time you shoot a guy, you got the job of rehabilitating him. But how about this? You've got the job of rehabili — , of shooting him, and then rehabilitating him; who's going to rehabilitate you if nobody else anyplace takes any responsibility for anything? You very rapidly get on a superstuck flow. You see? There you are. See?

For instance, sometime an auditor starts processing a girl or somebody's wife, something like that, and processes this person's wife because he's been totally convinced that she's crazy, you see. And as fast as he processes her up, she seems to spin in. And he listens to her, you know, and he's spent a lot of time in on it, and he's been very rough in his processing and he starts invalidating her because she says that she isn't the trouble in the family and so forth. And he finds out that all the time he's been doing this, this was just the time to give the husband freedom to go around and do anything he pleased and the husband was nuts! See?

Now, right in this unit, this First Melbourne ACC, you're marked people because you have been through this ACC. You're marked people. You'll be expected, then, to inherit all the responsibility for all the counter-creations and everything else at — you'll have altitude.

And he was processing the wrong person, putting the wrong person under the gun and so forth. He'd been made wrong, his target is upset and so on. He'll feel kind of queasy about this, it won't spin him, but he'll say, "Rrrrr, how wrong can I get?" You know, and usually, vengefully grab ahold of the husband and do something with him one way or the other.

And you're up in Port Darwin or south Honolulu or lower Chicago, and ... Well, there's just nobody else around that's been through this ACC and — or any ACC. And there's nobody around but HCAs or HPAs or some-thing. And you're trying to take care of something; you're trying to do right, and you're trying to go along with it. And somebody sits down in front of you and takes up the meter and hands you the cans and goes tongue-tied, do you see, because you have altitude. Well, you get a copy of this tape, and you play it to them. Because there's no sense in just knocking yourself to bits from there on out. You got the idea? Just because you're taking over a zone of responsibility.

But this happens all too often to auditors; that they believe one or another member of a family who feed them false data and then they go in on the false data or are critical about this or that person in the family based on this false data, don't you see. Makes them guilty of an overt act along the line. Or, after they've audited somebody, then somebody else in the family comes around and tries to give them all kinds of foolish gen to the effect that they have committed an overt act. Don't you see? Men work real hard on this overt act thing. So, an auditor has to be pretty stable in that he knows he is doing as right as he can do at the moment and with the data he has. And if he knows that, why, he can never be made guilty of an overt act. Get the idea?

There are people right here who have done this executivewise in organi­zations. There are people here that have done this in cities, and in field operations, so forth, and finally blown themselves halfway into squirreldom and three quarters of the way out of Scientology, you get the idea?

So, therefore, the people who get made guilty of overt acts are the people who squirrel. They really don't know their data, they really don't know what they're doing. Their own intentions are not clear-cut to them. They have vast worries about the principles or people in the organization or something like this and they get worried about it and they're shaky this way.

Female voice: Yes.

Well, actually, all they had to do is take the data, know it well, see what good it does, do good with the data, add it up — they could never be made possibly guilty of an overt act. Don't you see?

They get wrapped around and shaken up one way or the other. All because of what? All because of what? Because nobody is willing to share the responsibility for their altitude, and nobody has really understood the fact that it is the sorry companion of command that one goes alone.

But, not knowing the data, and not knowing what it does, and that sort of thing, then almost anybody coming along saying, "You wrecked my sister." "Ohhh! Did I?" You know? He's falling over the pin, see. He could be made guilty of an overt act.

One walks with the ghosts of his own misdeeds, and otherwise he's totally alone. And you get too much operation and protecting too much public front and holding too many facts to your bosom and too many secrets you mustn't disclose, and next thing you know, you wonder what you're doing there. And you have to move off to north Phoenix or Mexico City or Rio or Melbourne or Darwin. And maybe you'd do much better in Tokyo. And maybe Scientology isn't quite right. Maybe you'd kind of better move halfway out of it. And then let's just keep a big toe in it somehow or another. Well, you just blow yourself off the perimeter.

Basically, if your intentions are good, only a very thorough amount of ignorance can upset you on this line. You'd have to be pretty ignorant and pretty stupid to be upset and fall into this trap.

How do you do this? It's just because you didn't get anybody else to share your command responsibility anyplace. That's the way you wind up, if you don't watch it.

But if you know what you're doing and know that your intentions are straight and know that where you're going is right, and so forth, people come along and try to convince you you've committed an overt act against them, and you just listen to them and acknowledge. It doesn't bother you any.

The only thing that can do you any harm, actually, is your own overt acts. The only way these come about is because you're on an administrative or public responsibility level, which puts you in a position where you have to act against your fellow man according to the optimum solution. And because you find occasionally that your ability to see, and so on, wasn't quite as good as you thought it was, and you shot the wrong dog, you see? That adds up to another one. That adds up to another one. Now it gets real easy and it starts to get kind of automatic. And the next thing you know, why, you say, "Well, before somebody else gets shot around here, I'd better get out of this vicinity." See, it's — it's actually still an optimum solution. But that's going pretty far to make a solution optimum because you're needed where you are. You're not needed in lower Chicago and upper north Amboy. See? You're needed where you are.

See, actually, the only way you could stay in life fighting is to know what you're doing and know that your intentions are right and that you are going along and doing right and so forth. And then never really slip away from your own code or — or modus operandi. Depraving somebody would be to cause him to fall away from what — doing what he thought was right.

Now, once again, organizationally, the Director of Processing should be fully and thoroughly responsible for all cases on staff and particularly, par­ticularly, executive cases. And horribly enough should also be responsible over into HCO for cases. Particularly, the Assoc Sec ought to take some responsibility for HCO cases, and HCO ought to take some responsibility for organization and field cases. Some responsibility ought to be taken in this regard. But basically the D of P, the Director of Processing, is the responsible person for organization cases, HASI and HCO, and for field cases. Really, this person is the responsible party, because this is the party that will do the processing. That naturally leaves the Assoc Sec directly responsible for the case of the D of P. That's the way it ordinarily works out you'll find.

For instance, I had a bad moment with the United States because — I did! I was in an office in Phoenix, Arizona. A little girl came in and she wanted auditing. And at that time a lot of people were being sent in to the organization just to enturbulate it, and so forth, and were actually having processing paid for so they'd spin in and raise a fuss.

Now, you can't leave a staff auditor standing in there forever, unaudited. You can't — you at least better clear up the needle on him once in a while. You see, you're talking about a short operation. You've got to get clever at this, you understand. You've got to make this a quick one. Make this fast. Don't be slumping around doing it slow. Get so you can knock needles down. Get so you can get real clever at this sort of thing. And then if you knock them down into a weak valence, why, find out their unwillingnesses at giving up the information and bring them back up again.

And I sat there and I looked her over, and I looked at the check she had to pay for some processing and this check was drawn out by an attorney firm that we had some idea was an attorney firm that had been financing attacks on Scientology, and I told her I wouldn't process her.

There's no trick on getting these low needles up. It's just getting the person to take responsibility for what he just told you. See? You've taken the full responsibility for his telling you, and now he hasn't taken the responsibil­ity for telling you, and he'll go down into a low needle status every time.

My instant — next instant comment was, "To hell with this country!" If this country can get so squirreled up and spun in that it fixes up so that you cannot help your fellow man — well that's so far from anything I'm trying to do that I'm upset. Get the idea?

Now, keep this thing squared away, and you'll be able to live with your-self and your fellow men. You'll be able to live with yourself and the other girls, and you'll be able to take care of your — of your show in Scientology. But you'll find out the closer you get to the top in any area or in any organization, the less actual liking you have for the idea of spilling your guts to an auditor. Because you have committed overt acts. It's for sure, for sure.

Well, of course, the thing is naturally based on the fact that I must have done overt acts against it, and some years later found out that I had killed one of the famous American Revolutionary generals. Well, anyhow, that's beside the point. Yeah, that's a fact. During 1775 I went over to America for a few months. Just long enough to commit an overt act and went home.

In the ordinary course of human existence, you commit overt acts. This is it. You have secrets, and things you shouldn't disclose, and to disclose them is an overt act. And you know, you get all these kind of rish-rash-oo-ow. And for a while, why, you'll think all this is very tenuous and extremely delicate and has to be very carefully handled and all that sort of thing. Well, you'll break down out of that fast enough.

The basis of all creativeness or creative impulses and so on, the basis of all creative intents and goals and so on, are quite subject to misalignment, misunderstanding, aberration and so forth, because everybody tries to get in on the act. And that makes a universe.

But you're not going to make it unless the people around you are willing to take some responsibility for you. And I know; I speak from experience, bitter experience, over a period of many, many years. I have given congresses when I was so damned sick I couldn't stand up. I've stood up to the public front when my heart was just like a piece of lead. This has been a rough go. Very few people take any responsibility for me.

All creativeness is met by counter-creativeness of one character or another and that is the best game there is according to the thetan. And it's also the most game there is, and also it's the only game there is. Okay.

Now, we've recently had a couple of blowups throughout the world, of executives blowing off of posts. They didn't blow off because they were sacked off. They blew themselves off, basically. These people are well worth salvag­ing. You understand? And the only reason they blew off is just their com­pounding overt acts against the staff and the organization and Scientologists. To do an administrative job, they had to stand in there and hold their own feelings down, you understand, and act in the direction they thought was best on the third dynamic or some upper dynamic, you see? And they just let themselves go, and finally the first dynamic just swamped them.

Now, let's look at this game of creation, counter-creation. You remember overt — you remember Effort Processing? Well, there was such a thing called counter-effort, wasn't there? Well, think in the same way of counter-creation.

Now, for me to say, "Well, you shouldn't let yourself get in that condition" is nonsense, because you will let yourself get in that condition. You'd be — wouldn't be in Scientology otherwise. You understand? Scientologists aren't people who think very well on the first dynamic, oddly enough. But you sure as the devil better not let people stay around in executive roles, and that sort of thing, unprocessed, because you're going to lose them. And you need them.

Now, here's the thetan who is creating something and he — well, refer­ence is The Factors. He picks up somebody else's mock-ups and that some-body else picks up his mock-ups and then they mishmash them so nobody knows who owned them, or who created them and after that they've got nice, thoroughgoing matter that doesn't disintegrate, got the idea? Well, that's not counter-creation, that's co-creation — cooperative creation of something.

There's a great deal of hammer and wrassle and bang where it comes to putting Scientology out through the world. And the people who carry the gui­don, more or less, the people who are up there fronting and so forth, are usu­ally there because they can cover up what they themselves feel best, and still be effective on their job. You understand? So they're terribly good at it. Awfully good at it. And nobody ever tears the veil aside. But you're Scientologists; you ought to recognize what's going on.

Well, thetans get along and they're very happy doing this but one fine day they individuate somewhat from the rest of their fellow thetans and they start creating against, against the creations of their fellows.

Now, it isn't actually bad motives or misdeeds, or anything of the sort. Oh, occasionally there are some misdeeds involved in it one way or the other. Pardoning the ladies, you wake up in the wrong bed or something of the sort. These things are rather inevitable in this alley-cat society we live in. But where your forward progress is concerned, you're not a group of people that is following a person. You're not following a person, you're sharing in the — in the building of a new knowledge and a new world.

All destruction is, is counter-creation.

People look on this as being "my science." Yeah, I own all of your postu­lates. I bought them one day at a raffle. Like the devil I did! About the only thing, as I told you the other day, that I have done is organize and put together, and maybe I can look a little bit better than anybody else has been looking for a long time, and so I can see it. But if you can see it, well, so help me Pete, it's yours. Got that?

A fellow makes up — mocks up a stone image, somebody else mocks up enough force to blow apart a stone image. Now we start getting debris, chaos and a disorderly setup. Nobody is swapping mock-ups or doing anything like that. Somebody's putting up a mock-up and somebody else is trying to blow the mock-up to pieces with a counter-creation, got it? All right. Create, counter-create.

Male voice: Yes.

Now, after a person has done enough overt acts of blowing everybody else's mock-ups to pieces, his own mock-ups become vulnerable to being blown to pieces. Isn't that right? So, everybody that is subject to this must have made up their minds simultaneously that it was an overt act to blow the other person's mock-ups to pieces. So, you get counter-creation against counter-creation and that's war. And that is about the most pointless activity anybody heard of. There really is no creation which is the target of anything. There is simply the counter-creation flying against the counter-creation. And that builds up to be a ridge.

All right, if it's yours that far, then you're going to be fronting yourself along the line one way or the other. And one fine day you're going to feel like blowing off or blowing out or quitting some area or quitting some organization, or blowing yourself off of the top or something like that. Well, you certainly bet-ter look at this as a master fact of the whole thing. Your isolation, combined with your overt acts, combined with your secrets, combined with this weak valence proposition, and so forth, has put you in an unauditable classification, and you better get yourself some auditing. And as I say, get this tape played.

Now, there are two causes of the ridge, one on one side of it and one on the other side of it. There are two causes to any ridge. And any ridge that you find lingering around your pc actually has two causes — his cause and the other fellow's cause. It took two things to make a permanent ridge, two sources to make a permanent ridge.

Now, if you're being fronted for in some department, some area, some organization and so forth, by somebody, let's not be so hot and heavy on, "Audit only the pcs that walk in the front door because they're money." Let's not be so warmed up about auditing only the preclear in the field and that sort of thing, because I'll tell you one of the two greatest Scientologists alive are dead now because they forgot that. That's right. George Wichelow is one of them and Peggy Conway is the other one. And these people are dead, and picking up some mock-up someplace or another, and completely lost on the show, you see, for a while, simply because of one thing: always auditing the other fellow, and nobody paid a bit of attention to their case. Up to a point where they just practically didn't think there was anything could be done about their cases. You see?

Well, by knocking out the person you're processing's share of counter-creation in the ridge, the ridge, of course, evaporates because there's nothing going to hold up the other half, got the idea? You don't actually do anything about the other half, it just goes! See this?

Now, nobody took any responsibility for them. What responsibility I tried to take for them, I probably didn't try hard enough. You see? Instead of saying to Peggy, "Peggy, you go in and see the Director of Processing tomor­row morning, and they're going to give you an auditor, and you are going to get some processing before you go to South Africa. And that is it, Peggy. And, of course, if you don't want to, I can always yank every certificate you've got. Otherwise it's on your free choice."

Now, I didn't say it that tough. I simply said, "Peggy, go in and see the Registrar and get yourself signed up for some processing before you go down to South Africa." And she said, "All right," happily, and that was the last I ever saw of her. She didn't do it. She gets down to South Africa with this tremendous altitude, tremendous public presence, a trained actress, so forth — very, very famous in her day. Nobody ever knew that girl was in trou­ble. She had a lot of personal affairs banging her around one way or the other. She was getting raked over the coals at home, and an attorney that handled a lot of her legal and monetary affairs turned totally traitor on her and sold her down the river for thirty pieces of silver while she was that far away — South Africa — and it killed Peggy.

Actually, it doesn't work that way. Because his creations, you see, are fundamental and his counter-creations are — are just a battle that he's engaged in of enturbulence of one kind or another which depend for their force on earlier creations. So, you never get the earlier spot by running the death spot, you might say. In other words, you don't run the counter-creations to any great success. What you do is run the creations, and you can run those to great success, or the confrontings.

Ah, but if somebody had been able to pull a needle down on her that would have been an entirely different proposition. Now, the Scientologists down there tried all they could, AFTER she collapsed.

Now, the reason why a person counter-creates against somebody else's mock-up is because he can't confront it. And so, the workability of the proc­esses you're running right this minute. That's all, that's all there is to it.

George Wichelow walked off a BScn course in London; went back over to Jersey. He was feeling bad, and he was mad at himself and mad at everybody else. He only confided to his wife that he felt bad. He didn't confide to any-body else. Nobody took a look at him and saw that George was nervous and upset. And he went off the end of a rock. Fellow fell overboard into the water, and George dived in to save his life and didn't make it. The guy came out, but George didn't. Lack of processing.

Now, to rehabilitate a person's confrontingness is to knock off his counter-creativeness.

Now, there's too much of this sort of thing. If the people are going to carry the ball in Scientology, somebody has got to help carry them. And if you yourself are carrying the ball very heavily in some area, then you for sure better make sure that you're in shape to carry the ball without falling on your face. Or blowing yourself off some post from some misguided idea that the post would be better off if you weren't there. Because that's always a lie.

The reason why you hate to hear me speak of psychiatrists — and you don't. You don't like to hear me speak of psychiatrists and communists and so forth and snarl and so forth. The only thing is, is you realize what I'm doing. I'm counter-creating. Simple. To some degree I'm counter-creating in your estimation.

Oh, I know organizations try to convince you they got along much better before you came along, but they don't try to convince you very hard of that. I know they give you the idea a little bit like you're horning in on something occa­sionally when you show up suddenly out of the blue, but they don't mean it.

The only reason I'm — I say anything about it at all is I don't really con­sider it an overt act; I'd consider it an overt act in reverse to try to kid people that we're going down the same channel because I know I'd get somebody lost up one of those bayous, you see. Somebody would be up there on the mud flats high and dry studying animal brains. You know, saying "Well, well, ani­mal brains, you know." And spinning in like mad.

Any one of us that knows what we know now have a certain value, vested value, in remaining in the mock-up for a while, hm? So let's see if we can't make it stick.

Now, you notice that I give you every time I talk to you about these things, I give you as a remedy: Get them together, educate them, process them, get their wives. I've — see? You get all this stuff, see. It's — actually the counter-creations I'm handing you are all constructive. They aren't counter-creations. They're saying, "Let's get these boys out of counter-create." But you don't like to hear me counter-create. You see? Because you know basically that's a lousy thing to do. Isn't that right?

Thank you.

Audience: Yes.

Well, maybe you disagree with me, maybe you don't care if I counter-create or not.

You, yourself, would hate to have anybody that was a good, tough thetan around, counter-creating, because you know you couldn't put up a mock-up if your life depended on it. Get the rationale, see? If he decided to counter-create against this mock-up there wasn't anything you could do about it, your mock-up would go.

Now, what happens is, is a person who is guilty of a great deal of counter-creation which is added up to actual overt acts — counter-creations added up to overt acts. You see, a counter-creation couldn't care less unless it's an overt act. It wouldn't be anything if it weren't an overt act. So what! So you put another coat of paint on Venus de Milo, you know. That's a fact. I mean, that's — if you saw that the statue was going to pieces terribly and put some preservative on the thing it certainly wouldn't be much of anything. And yet it'd be a creation against that or a creation over that. No, that would merge around to a co-creation, wouldn't it?

So, perhaps a counter-creation only exists in the presence of an overt act and maybe your nomenclature better stay that way. You have a co-creation or a counter-creation because co-creations are possible and counter-creations are overt acts. All right.

Now, here we have a person who is guilty of a great deal of counter-creation, tremendous guilt on counter-creation. See? Just blasting up every-thing, you know, sees a mock-up, knocks its head off, you know? He just can't resist him, don't you see. All of his creative activities have entered into counter-create.

You know, a movie critic, or a — or somebody of that sort, or a book critic or somebody of that sort. He never wrote anything himself, all he does is say that everything everybody else wrote was bad! You know? Or everything everybody else painted was bad, or everything everybody else sculptured was bad and why didn't they do it in the — in the Milan tradition and so forth. It would have been much better, you know, chop-chop-chop. Well, that's just counter-creation pure and simple and does add up to an overt act. All right.

When a person is doing these overt acts, counter-creations and so on, he's in an interesting state of rendering himself very vulnerable to being destroyed and he slips at once over to the mishmash which becomes Axiom 10, communication formula and cycle of action, all super tangled.

Because if anybody else creates anything it kills him. Got the idea? Because everything he creates tries to kill something they've got. That's his overt act, so therefore he gets it back doubly. And the more he tries to knock off somebody else's mock-ups ... You know, a thetan isn't a mock-up. But a thetan puts up a mock-up and then this fellow comes along and tries to knock off this mock-up one way or the other, counter-creates against this mock-up. And the fellow who's doing the counter-creation might or might not succeed in doing anything to this mock-up but he for sure is going to succeed in believing that he is scheduled for destruction. He believes this. And after that his mock-ups can be destroyed like mad. He's already consented to the destruction of his own mock-ups; he's already consented to counter-creation, therefore cause-distance-effect becomes create-survive-destroy. All out of his own counter-creativeness.

His mock-ups could never be knocked off; they wouldn't ever do anything he didn't want them to do in any way, shape or form unless he, himself, had origi­nally intended wrong with these things and intended as an overt act and done all this sort of thing. The intentions all had to be there and after that he's going to have a hard time of it, he's going to have a bad time of it. Do you follow me?

Audience: Yes.

Well, that's how you get this cycle of action slid over there to create­survive-destroy. This person has been creating something to destroy some-thing, so that's awful close to create-survive-destroy cycle of action. So, he if — after a while he is in danger from everything. He has to protect himself from everything.

I see some poor inventor sometime or another inventing something and then running down to the patent office and hiring attorneys all over the place. I know where he's going to wind up, he's going to wind up in court. If inventors would just go on inventing they'd get off all right but they don't. Inventors invent one-hundredth of the time, and spend ninety-nine hundreds in court trying to protect their inventions in some fashion. And they all seem to snap over to the patent office and then snap into the patent courts. That's where they go.

I used to wonder why I always failed doing this. I used to get these fel­lows to stand still long enough and I'd say, "Why don't you just invent!"

And the fellow says, "Well, yeah, you couldn't get any revenues, you couldn't do any of this with it, you couldn't do any of that with it, and so forth." "You'll wind up in court." I tell them, "You'll wind up in court. Why don't you just invent? Why spend all this time and your fortune and anything you would make on lawyers and judges and all that sort of thing? Why don't you just invent and take your chances?"

"Nah, nah. I couldn't do that."

In the next breath they'll be telling you that Bill Sykes' invention of a clobovitor is a horrible invention and that's a terrible thing, that clobovitor, and somebody ought to shoot Bill Sykes for inventing the clobovitor. And then they rush to court to defend their own. They don't even need anybody attacking, they go to court to defend their own. It's kind of a game. As a matter of fact I laugh about it, I laugh about it considerably. It's a funny game, this business of patenting everything in sight.

The best way of handling this is out-creativeness. Just out-create. And that was the basic game and it's a much better game. Somebody invents a clobovitor, invent a super-clobovitor. Of course this could be a criticism but — or early it wasn't considered a criticism. You invented a super-clobovitor and you said, "Look at that." And he said, "Naaay," and he had to invent a super-super-clobovitor and this way we got all kinds of complications. But nobody was going around knocking everybody in the head.

Now, your best bet in processing, in handling this counter-creativeness and so on, easily your best bet in processing, is just to handle the process as I said, of Confronting. Now, there's various curves and significances and other things you can do with Confronting. As a matter of fact some of them are quite amusing, some of them are quite interesting, some are quite valuable.

For instance, Dick Halpern just turned one in. He says, "How about `Look around here and find an effect'?" Taken probably from the old group command. All right.

Now, "Look around here and find an effect," well, that's interesting as a process, isn't it? You'd go flickety-flacking into most of the source-points around in the bank, wouldn't you? It's quite workable as a process, very interesting process.

See, I'm trying to teach you people to think in Scientology, not parrot in it, got the idea? I'm trying to teach you to think in it.

How about, "What effect would you be willing to confront?" See, that's another version.

How about run — this one, by the way, is, this one's awful — already tested it. I never will know why it doesn't work but it just doesn't work. Is, "What source-point could you confront?" That's another breed of cat entirely.

But, anyway, here we've got confrontingness, in whatever form, simple or complicated, as being a solution for counter-creativeness because if you can learn to confront your own overt acts and confront the results of your own destructiveness, you'll eventually come to be able to confront the results of your own creativeness and your creation would be totally rehabilitated again and you would have won, and your pc would have won.

Thank you.