Well, going to give you a talk about the practical processes of clearing — emphasis is on practical.

Of course, to do anything you don't have to have any theory. Ha-ha-ha. It's an old American truism. If you want to organize the government, you don't need any theory of government, just go ahead and build it up, bureau after bureau after bureau. Mess it all up. You don't need any theory.

Beware of these guys that tell you they only want the practical aspect of something because these people don't want to know what they're doing. And they'll never get there with clearing. I don't think you could train a monkey to talk and get him to clear a preclear. I realize that in this time and age, in this Western barbarian culture, that this is the thing to do. You don't have to know anything about an army or the theory of war or theory of weapons to fight a war. Not necessary. All Congress knows how to do is appropriate money. Something goes wrong, all that the administration knows how to do is hire more people. So you get eight skintillion bucks being thrown down the pork barrel, and you get nine-tenths of the population eventually employed by the government.

These are not bitter words. That's what socialism is. It's an ineptitude of government which results in a total employment of the population. That's all it is. England has learned that the hard way. You don't have to know what you're doing, just hire some more men. All right.

Now, let's look at an analogy here. Psychiatry's answer was use more force, be more outrageous, utilize more brutality and, finally, frighten somebody into getting into some kind of a state. Evidently that's the theory they work on. But not having analyzed the theory, they don't know what theory they're working on. Wonderful! You just sail off into the blue and do. You don't need a purpose — just do.

Well, I can assure you that in Scientology all you have to do is go through a few motions, say a few right words and you've made it. Is that true?

Audience: No.

Boy, that certainly isn't true at all.

A basic definition of an auditor — this isn't the definition of an auditor — but a basic definition of an auditor would be as follows: "Somebody who is willing to make somebody better."

So this is woven at once into the theory of clearing. At once we get this as a take-off point — not the take-off point, but certainly one of them.

The next, we have to have on deck certain skills — definite skills which go before the action of clearing — skills on the part of the auditor. And those are contained in the TRs. But you understand nothing could be totally contained in a drill.

There is also this matter of being willing to clear somebody. I suppose you could have drilled Torquemada on TR 0 to 10, and I suppose you could have made him letter-perfect. But when he got all through, he couldn't have cleared anybody. It's really not very esoteric, but there has to be a will there.

Well, if a will exists, then an understanding would exist, and I'm afraid we take that on automatic. There must be some will to clear somebody, some willingness to do so, and in that wise, then, we would of course have an understanding, to some degree, of where we were going. And I'm afraid without that we couldn't get very far. Now, it's fortunate for us that we have willing people who are not afraid to do this thing. If we did not have that thing, I do not think it would be possible. But fortunately, also for us, man is not totally unretrievable. You always find in his ranks, one way or the other, somebody who can be fished upstairs.

But a society which has gone totally one — "only one" — a society which is totally caved-in, a society where communication doesn't exist would find this action of clearing impossible. Such a society does exist right here on Earth, the society of cats. You can't imagine cats clearing cats, can you? And there you have, though, a thetan plus body. Every cat is out for every cat — himself, and no other cats if you please.

So that one of the basic requisites to clearing is communication — articulate communication. And when a race sinks below that, clearing becomes impossible.

So there is a point of no return. And that point of no return is willingness, understanding and communication. Those things must still exist.

Now, the odd part of it is that these can be restored to a marked degree, but it still takes one person, at least, who wants to. We still must jump off from somebody. So if we don't have that somebody, we haven't got it at all, even though the techniques and skills would exist to perform it.

Now, as far as the basic theory is concerned, one has to know the parts of the beast. Now, that information, there, is extremely difficult to come by — to know the essential parts of the problem. Any time you take a large and complicated problem, you will find that if you isolate its parts you have moved it well toward solution. It took us a long time to find out if there was anything else there besides the four universes we have articulated: the thetan, the mind, the body, the physical universe. Took us a long time. Was there anything else there?

Well, the Negro in Africa bedeviled by his witch doctors, very worried, if you please, about spirits and demons and devils, would have added numerous parts to this thing called "thetan." Numerous parts would have been added: two or three hundred different types of thetan. Quite interesting. And right there he would have bogged down in a complexity which would have left him clawing to windward ever afterward. He wouldn't have made it. Because he was so terrified of numerous types of thetan and so afraid that he would run into some of them, that the whole theory he would have developed thereafter would have been one of defense.

So we get another prerequisite, and that is a certain amount of courage. And even though you have some doubt as to the good sense of freeing a thetan because he might do most anything — even in the face of that doubt, you would have to be able to carry forward and carry on the action. And it requires courage.

The prerequisites, then, of clearing are actually a counting of the parts, a willingness to understand behavior, some method of understanding it — a great many training drills, a willingness to free somebody or clear somebody and therefore an understanding of somebody. And we get these things, and we can carry on and we can do very, very well thereafter.

But to merely enumerate a number of processes, such as the Tibetans did, is to make a fatal error. And the reason why you don't have cleared Dalai Lamas who can turn communist hordes and herd them out, is because they haven't made it in "Lama." They haven't made it. Nearly all of their processes are "only one" processes — as you can look at them — nearly all of them are. One of the first things they do is to put a fellow on self-audit — one of the first things they do, and therefore they fail.

Now, I wonder if you realize that you can put a preclear onto self-audit in a session? There's one symptom of it, just one symptom that is very detectable: He mutters the auditing command after you give it to him. In other words, you say, "Get the idea of making that wall connect with you."

And he says, "Get the idea of making that wall connect with me — yes."

You know what your proper response is at that moment? Your proper response is, "I will repeat the auditing command." Any time he muttered a command after you — "I will repeat the auditing command: Get the idea of making that wall connect with you." And after a while, he'll come back into session. But he's out of session.

So we have another prerequisite, is the willingness to control somebody, as a specialized willingness. Without control we don't get any progress.

The first mistake the Tibetan made was that one. And we shouldn't do likewise.

There are many, many interesting things, you know, about Lamanism. They were the squirrels of Buddhism. And they developed a tremendous methodology, and all of which was very arduous and took ninety-nine years. It was a very lucky thing they did because they probably kept a lot of things alive that wouldn't have been kept alive otherwise. But as far as their approach to processing is concerned it was unreal, because they violated this factor of control. Well, people get to a certain degraded level and they're no longer willing to control other people.

A very great oddity here, an oddity that practically everybody on Earth has backwards: They think that the French Revolution took place because the French aristocracy had become more and more cruel and didactic and greedy. Everybody is taught that in his school. They think the Russian Revolution took place because the Russian aristocracy kept putting their thumbs down, down, down, ruining everybody. Those two, and many others like them, are not true. Continuous force and pressure against a population does not bring about revolution. This just practically throws all of the fancy arguments of the communist and the socialist and so forth, into the wastebasket. They say a ruling regime becomes tougher and tougher and meaner and meaner and eventually the people revolt.

Right here in America we had a revolution — a regrettable revolution. It took at least 50 percent of the producing population of this country and dispensed with them. It's quite remarkable. The crime of those people was that they had given their word and continued to keep it. And the raw Red revolutionary went ahead and, in the name of liberty, did all sorts of wild atrocities.

Now, there's nothing wrong with a revolution. Jefferson said one ought to take place every twenty-five years as a normal course of human events. And I don't know but what I agree with him. But let's take a good, solid look at the facts of the revolution, and we'll find out that every oppressive order passed against the American Colonies by the government of George III had been, at the time of the outbreak, rescinded. That's pretty wild. That's very contrary to everybody's history but Woodrow Wilson and Irving — Washington Irving's. It's when a government gets soft that it is revolted against, and only then. Governments that are tough do not get revolted against. And there's evidently no saturation point of how tough they can be, but there is a relationship to how tough they have been and how soft they become.

I have a wonderful encyclopedia. It was actually the last edition of the nineteenth century. Modern encyclopedias are written for people who are already experts. This one wasn't. A wonderful encyclopedia. And there you read the whole history of the Russian Revolution — unwitting to any writer. Because this encyclopedia was the last edition of the nineteenth century, and then it was a recompiled edition (added into it again) and then has yearbooks on top of it (germane to that edition), we get a look, there, of about thirty-five to forty years of history. And we get articles there at first talking about nihilism, communism and so forth, and how silly it all was; how it was just a spontaneous outbreak in the universities about 1862 or '65. And people began to talk about this, and there must be a revolution against the Russian czar, and things all had to change. And this spontaneous outburst continued along.

And as we read these articles consecutively, each written contemporary with the fact, you see, and with no recourse to the last article written, we find that this sort of thing took place: The university students said things had to change. They savagely laid down a pattern of how they had to change. Certain reforms were being urged violently. The secret police became very, very active and arrested a great many of them. And as the years went on, they arrested fewer and fewer of them and let them go quicker and quicker. And finally by 1905 we find, astonishingly, that the czar of the Russias had put into action in Russia every single reform proposed by the nihilists and the communists. Every single reform that they had advocated had then taken place except one: There must be a raw Red revolution.

And facing this pressure in the population, we got a continual weakening, an increasing reasonability on the part of the czarist government until it was so weak that in the middle of a war it could be revolted against.

And the United States, today, finds itself in trouble. Why?

Because Nicholas began to use patty-cake. Yes, we say, these things they had in Russia were pretty grim. They were pretty grim. They did need reform. There's no doubt about that. But that, at the same time, did not license the czar to become very weak and very sloppy. It didn't license him to use very bad control. Come off of cruelty, yes. Come off of unreasonability, yes. But come off of control? No!

And you'll find the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the Early American Revolution all took place because the governments were no longer willing to control the people. And the people slopped all over the place, tore everything up and threw it all away.

Although we have it here in America that the American Revolution was a great and noble activity, and there's no doubt about the fact that its aims were noble and that they did come out with, perhaps, a better form of government. There's no doubt about this. And I'm not decrying that. But I am saying definitely that the slaughter, the retardation, the destruction of property was all regrettable, and took place only because control was pulled off. And the reactive banks of the people went mad. You can change a government while remaining in control of the people. That's possible. But destruction, chaos, confusion results when you try to effect change by releasing all control. And chaos only occurs when standard control lines are dropped — reasonable control lines. We care nothing about the cruelty involved in it. That is a detriment to control, as we already know.

Revolutions occur when control is relaxed, not when rulers get cruel. It is very remarkable to read the history of the Constantinople governments — very remarkable — and find that only those that were violently cruel were able to govern at all. Cruelty and control were unfortunately mixed up and confused and identified one with another. There is no reason to identify the two.

We find that order and change, orderliness and a minimum of chaos and destruction can take place only when control is continued to be exerted. And that chaos and destruction only occur when control is relaxed totally; and we get a total reasonability and we get a total withdrawal from confrontingness and let the reactive bank go mad, then we find out that we have destruction, we do not have change.

So control is part of this problem. And where an auditor is unwilling to exert control, again we get a failure to clear.

Quite remarkable that there would be this many prerequisites to this thing called Clear. But you could no more take a psychologist over here — I think it's 4th Avenue South East, they have their headquarters. That's a joke — you wouldn't understand it unless you were a native to the town — it's the red-light district. Anyway.

The psychologist over here could be asked to nominate the best psychologist in the business, and we could take this man and without bringing him up on the prerequisites which I have just given you, give him the processes to clear somebody, and we would probably get the most messed-up, caved-in, knocked-about preclear you had ever confronted. You can just see this now. You can just see this guy: No training as an auditor, no familiarity with the drills, no cognizance of the communication formula — nothing — trying to use these techniques. You can imagine him running CCH 0, and he's given the points of CCH 0 to run. Well, about where would he go on the subject of help? What would he do with this? But we know definitely that when he got to SCS this boy would get sick at his stomach.

We haven't been able to take on a new auditor in the HGC and set him to running SCS without having, for a few days, a sick auditor yet. Unless he's run it tremendously in classes or in his own practice, he always gets sick.

Why? He just can't confront that direct a control.

Now, you take a seasoned Scientologist: He confronts some new method of control, he's not likely to flip his lid. But even some of these, when they started running SCS, became pretty queasy. They said, "What is going on?"

And this psychologist that we got in and gave him the magic formula — the psychologist we got in starts to run SCS. Hah! He'll decide at this point there's something wrong with the whole thing and quit because it'll make him feel bad.

You take some new students without giving them a gradient scale of Upper Indoc, without giving them any gradient scales into SCS and just put them at once and immediately on running SCS on a body — nyaaah.

Now, let's move up to Connectedness. In the first place, this fellow wouldn't be able to see the theory of Connectedness, he wouldn't be able to see why. He wouldn't know anything about association or anything like that. He wouldn't see any reason why it had to be repeated over and over. He'd consider that it was idiotic.

Where we get this reaction, mainly, is they have several times picked up some Scientology child. He'd been picked up someplace or another. And of course the kid will always start to audit the psychiatrist or the psychologist. He will. I mean, these kids are quite remarkable. And the story that always comes back is they started to audit the psychiatrist, and they tell him all about it and they try to sell them and give them the word. It's quite remarkable. And we have the psychologist or psychiatrist spin in on all this. It's a recurrent story. I think it's happened four or five times. Then we find out what happened to the kid and we go get him. Very remarkable. He leaves chaos behind him.

They think that this is childish. They think this is a stupid thing. They have all sorts of things to say about as simple a process as Connectedness. They see no reason why it should be run. They get no connection with Connectedness in any way, shape or form. They don't know why that would make anybody well. In the first place, their theory tells them that it was their little sister's sexual peccadillos at the age of three that made them ill. See, that's their rationale. And this isn't, certainly, getting at any sexual peccadillos — that's where they want to get. Doesn't get them there. It's liable to restimulate them, though, because there is Connectedness connected with it.

But you see how far adrift they'd go? There would be no reason for them to persist at all. And their own inability to communicate and the duplication factor would arrest them from continuing the process. Here'd be another slaughter. And we haven't even gotten up to the main course.

I'm sure they would have stopped at any of the three basic processes. And then, when they got into the mock-up, they would become so fascinated or so disgusted or so something-or-other with the idea that somebody was actually looking at a mental image picture, which they all know is " in people's imagination." I don't know why that cancels it all out. I've gone over this with them several times.

What is this thing, imagination? What is it analogous to that it is a derogatory? You know? I've tried to sort it out. They say, "Well, it couldn't be any good because it's in his imagination." I've tried to find out where the imagination was located and so forth.

Matter of fact, I practically spun about three psychologists just cross-questioning them in this serious fashion.

Well, they wouldn't have gotten a mock-up, they wouldn't have been able to see why anybody kept anything from going away because they know you have to give everything away. In other words, they would know better than any one of these processes. Right? They'd know better than any of them.

It is basically, you might say, the discipline — the theory, the discipline and the administration of the process which makes a Clear. And none of them are less important than another.

Now, therefore, you couldn't have this sort of a situation: We write down the formula to make a Clear and we send it in to the US government for application to improve scientific research. That's totally impossible. We could even say it requires a certain discipline. But who there has enough ability to control to make sure the discipline sticks?

I have watched interservice discipline and service discipline just going boo-boo-boo. At the end of World War II, I remember that sergeants were now supposed to be "big brothers." Yes, they were supposed to be big brothers to the troops. I don't know what officers were supposed to be. But the whole idea of discipline had caved in. It'd gotten all mixed up with cruelty and caste systems, and there were lots of things bad, and "all control was bad," and it had become a dirty word and so on. And this factor itself has to be rehabilitated before you could do anything. In other words, you could no more hand this over to somebody who wasn't going to go the whole limit of theory, discipline and process and have him get anywhere with it than you could hand the Eskimos Einstein's formulas and have them build an atomic bomb. Just wouldn't happen — wouldn't happen. It'd require tremendous willingness to go all the way through it. Yes, the data is all there; it's all written down. But it'd have to be followed. Maybe then a Clear could be made, but I doubt it. I doubt it.

So you see what you're up against when you depend on anybody else's ideas or opinion of Scientology or clearing. It's a weird — weird picture, isn't it? In other words, you're in a branch of science that is self-contained.

So there must be something about clearing that goes up this way: It must require a little understanding on the fellow's part and a little bit of discipline on the fellow's part, and then considerable willingness to follow a process. That must be a requisite, too, on the part of the preclear. But fortunately much less so. We can take almost any preclear and clear him, but where are we going to get the auditor to do it? And that is the crux of the situation.

This material will probably never wander out of the perimeter of the organizations that now have it, no matter how many centuries elapse. The only liability about it is that somewhere up the track, why, the organization itself goes soft and is unwilling to exert enough control to train a student, you see, and they get onto an E-therapy or they go on to self-audit or they do something, and all of a sudden they won't have the result anymore. But thanks to Gutenberg and magnetic tapes and that sort of thing, the data doesn't get lost. But there's still that liability exists. You'd no longer get a possibility of clearing: that would be wiped out when the other basics were wiped out.

Sometimes some people make me awfully mad: some squirrel, somebody who really doesn't mean us well, anyhow, will sail in from Keokuk or North Umbrige, and he'll say — he'll say, "Well, pretty poor people, you know, you have in Scientology, and they're no good, and it's all bad over there, and of course you couldn't expect anything to happen." And I don't just get mad, I claw them. They don't find out, maybe, for a couple of hours they've been clawed, but they look down and they're bleeding. That's a very dangerous thing for them to do, but a lot of them do it. I say "a lot of them," it happens on the average of maybe once a month. Somebody comes in and tries to tell me how bad Scientologists are. Of course, he doesn't get anyplace with this.

In the first place, the data is contrary to this. The data is quite contrary. First place, such a person, you ask them how bad doctors are, you ask them how bad anything else is, you ask them how bad plumbers are, you ask them how bad anything else is and they'll tell you they're all bad, too. So it looks like they're just stuck on "it's all bad." Has nothing to do with Scientologists.

But wiping that out, aside, I already know, you see, that Scientologists probably are amongst the top 10 percent of the intellectuals on Earth, which is quite interesting. I mean, they're way upstairs. Well maybe, as you meet somebody from South Umbrige, and he says he's an auditor, and he's standing on his head and going mad and into trances or something of the sort — and maybe you say, "Good god, what kind of condition is the human race in?"

Well, what kind of condition is it in? It doesn't step sideways from the fact that you're actually rubbing elbows with an upper crust. This is already — and that, rather than our dissemination labors, this is not flattery, this happens to be fact. Something for you to remember, sometime or another, when you say, "My god, how can they do that bad over in San Francisco?" or something of the sort, you know? "What are those auditors doing, that they've got everything messed up?" Something for you to remember. The facts of the case are that dissemination is held up on this little interesting facet: that there aren't very many people to be disseminated to. Think of that once in a while.

You get this fellow, he's a cigar salesman, he lives next door to you and so forth. And you start to talk to him about the mind and the world around him, and he says, "Well, I never worry about that," or "Isn't it all in their imagination?" or something of the sort. And he starts running off this way. And you find out that he treats a game of golf the same way, and the family life's the same way, and it's all sort of automatic, and he's not alive, anyhow. And uhh.

You say, "Why haven't I ever been able to sell that guy Scientology?" Well, it'd be a miracle if you could. You got an answer now; you could process him up to a point where he could put his little toe or his little finger on the bottom rung of the ladder from the middle of which you started. That's not flattery, it happens to be true. In other words, you were already flying pretty fine; you were already alive; you had enough sense to know that you could be sick. A lot of people don't ever find that out. You knew you could be better. That's — be quite a cognition to a lot of people. You see?

So our future course along this line is pretty well forecast. Before you get any dissemination, you'll have to process. You'll have to process before you train. I'm just lucky. You didn't have to be processed before you were trained. See? I was already profiting from the fact that there were quite a few people around — relatively speaking — there were quite a few people around, a tiny percentage compared to the world's population, but they still made up several thousand people on Earth who didn't have to be processed before they could be trained. You understand? Who still were well enough up such a ladder that it didn't require any special preparation.

Well, our ability to disseminate is pretty good — pretty darn good. Organizations, perhaps, leave a lot to be desired. They'll all be cleared in about six months, by the way. We're on that project, puppy to the root right now. But they perhaps leave a lot to be desired if you regard it from the standpoint that they're not communicating very far; they're not communicating very widely. But they're communicating almost to zenith. Truth of the matter is if I can't communicate widely and if the organizations that exist can't communicate widely, it's because there's nobody there. That's an awful thing, but it'll sometime explain to you why you're not able to get the whole town you're in, up and cheering. There would be low comprehension on the subject you are trying to address them about. Sad fact, but it's a fact. Now there, therefore, weren't many that you could communicate with or disseminate to. There were not many. Now, I'm sure that I'm not talking beyond your own experience.

But this is the problem that will have to be solved before tremendously wide dissemination takes place. You see, there are two ways of solving this problem, and earlier organizations have always taken the easier way: You simply put up a tremendous mock-up that overawed and overwhelmped everybody, and they all went into a slave state and you got a priesthood. You get that as the old-tried pattern. Well, we're not doing that. All those old patterns lost, too, in numerous respects.

But we've got to get around this one: And this one is not, at this moment, solved. But it's not very important. And that is, how do you process them before you tell them anything? See? But that is the thing that is going to get everything over the top. See? You have to build people up to a level of willingness, control, understanding, in order to tell them anything about it. You go down here to the Navy Department, you go down to the Army, you go down to the AEC, and you're not talking there to guys that are whammo — right straight up on top, willing to accept this and that. These guys are leery; they're superstitious. They're superstitious as any cannibal. They talk the same language you talk; they evidently wear the same type of clothes you wear; there are a lot of similarities, they were born in the same country. But these are the things that are missing: they're not willing to help somebody else — one of the first things missing, now. They themselves have so many present time problems they couldn't think about anybody else's present time problems. They don't think there's any help for it at all. They consider themselves in some sort of a monotonous rut, and if they're lucky and keep their heads down, somehow or other they'll survive it. They've got an answer, their total stable data.

And you'll find out as you audit preclears that the trouble with him is, is every one of his thoughts becomes a stable datum — every thought he thinks becomes the next moment's stable datum — automatic postulation. One of the reasons his mock-ups aren't going well is because he thought one time that his mock-ups wouldn't go well. Of course, as you make thoughts themselves persist — "Keep it from going away" — one of the reasons you run "Keep it from going away" and "Put a thought into it," is you're getting the persistence of thought, the persistence of thought, the persistence of thought. And all of a sudden all these old stable data are no longer holding, and he is able now to change his mind. Well, this is axiomatic; this is way back when, we're talking about this.

But these people you run into are stable data: They're a long concatenation of now-I'm-supposed-to. And they never get off the treadmill of now-I'm-supposed-to. And their now-I'm-supposed-to's does not include listening to you better them. It's kind of a grim look. All right.

So we cannot take a phrenologist, and without putting him up to a point where he can experience, have him use Clear processes and get Clears. Nor, beyond a certain strata in a society, can we educate before we clear. Therefore, it is necessary that clearing have some finite number of hours. For heaven sakes, less than two hundred and seventy-five hours! And I would say that would probably be the absolute maximum on a case from scratch, today — come very close to being an absolute maximum, from scratch. You know, unconscious or crazy or something. And certainly it ought to be doable in seventy-five hours on people that are walking around and not running into trees. And on a Scientologist who's already had a lot of processing, one sort or another, we ought to be able to get by in about fifty. We ought to, if we're good. Now, I can't give you any more time estimate than that: that's a pretty good guesstimate. Figures will tell.

Therefore, when we say Clear Procedure, when we say "these processes," we're taking for granted an existing strata with certain preconceptions. We're taking for granted that there'll be somebody willing to use them right; taking for granted that somebody will be willing to control somebody; taking for granted all sorts of things, aren't we? And if that strata exists, if it only numbers one or two or twenty or forty, we can, however, take off from Clear Procedure and make some people who could understand, then.

Now, this is the hump that has been crossed with considerable precision here, in the last few months. We have gotten up to a point of where we could, with some positiveness, actually increase somebody's understanding. And we could certainly crack through, with old CCH, somebody on a basis of control, and get him up to a point of where he was willing to be processed one way or the other.

There's numerous things that we could do about this, and these are almost as important as knowing how to clear somebody by technique.

Now, you'll find practically all the processes needful listed in the book Clear Procedure, of recent publication. Nearly all of these necessary techniques are there. The training processes are in the HAS Manual — all those little training drills. Now, they actually become part of clearing because they appertain to the auditor. We have to go back to Scientology: 8-8008, however, to get a lot of the basic theory.

And some work will have to be done by me, now, to consolidate basic theory and bring it all up to date to a level of parity of one kind or another. It'll be quite a job. For instance, the most there is about exteriorization is in the Philadelphia lectures of 1952. That's the most there is about exteriorization. Sixty-four hours of lecture, there. And I think the tapes are practically in rags right this minute.

The procedure, then, is not enough. The discipline is a necessary part of the application. And the auditor certainly, before he was even trained as an auditor, had to be in good enough shape to know that he could be trained.

I think we just caught this as it was going down the spout. I think if there had been much of a fumble on this line, maybe another four or five years, even, from now, why, I think we would have had it. I think we would have had it.

We have the government, newspapers, larger agencies in various countries totally obsessed with the idea of producing a total effect upon each individual citizen. You should, by the way to some degree, stop feeling bad about our state of missiles or our — the state of atomics, since there is a great deal of good news. But this sort of trick is being run on each individual person in the world today: They're giving him a total effect, and they know that the total effect can only contain bad news, so they never publish anything but the bad news. And of course they publish this in an exaggeration — it isn't that bad.

It's quite remarkable that as you go upscale the pretext becomes thinner and thinner. I mean, it's easier and easier to see through this thing. You pick up a newspaper, what are they trying to do to you? Is there any real concern of yours that somebody slaughtered, with considerable glee and so on, some little girl over in Hoosegow County or something? Well, if you trace this back very carefully, you find out it probably didn't happen in the first place. The newspapers are less and less trustworthy as to their journalism. But they're simply making an effort to make an effect. Oh yeah, there are horrible things that go on in Earth, but there isn't any reason you should read only those. There are some other things going on too. Let's take an average.

Total effect on others is what's being run today. And they use atomics to do it. They use almost any media. Look at the advertisements that you get, the patent medicine ads that you see on TV and so forth. You mean you've got to create a total cold in every citizen just so a drug company can show a profit at the end of the year? I mean, doesn't seem reasonable to me. And yet they're trying to do that.

Now, look at the character of modern acting. Look at the character of modern acting as represented on TV. That is modern acting — unfortunately. They have combined New York stage technique, evidently, with the standard that they think they should have — and that's total emotionalism. And this total emotionalism is — I don't know, the characters walk on at the beginning and they scream, sob and agonize straight on through to the end. And when they're all too apathetic to agonize anymore, that's the end of the picture. It's rather fantastic. I mean, they think they have to do this to produce an effect on their audiences? Well, the truth of the matter is, is they're not producing any real effect. The magic wears out after a while. What will they do when the magic wears out? Well, I don't know — that's their problem. We hope by that time, we'll have gotten to them and cleared them.

Clear Procedure, the exact steps — very easy to enumerate: CCH 0 in which you clear help and goals and problems and other things. Making very sure that you clear the fellow's present time problem before you go on with processing, as the only thing that'll hold him up in processing is that he feels he ought to be out of the auditing room and doing something else all the time he's being audited. Therefore, he's not in-session; therefore, he doesn't get audited. So a present time problem becomes the most important of the CCH 0 steps. This should be checked every session.

We move upstairs in this, and we get on many cases, now, a basic control process which is old TR 5, modified to "You make that body sit in that chair." Now, you probably thought in this Unit that was just a drill, and because you hadn't done TR 5 when you went through a Comm Course, why, you thought that you were doing it then. But that is not true. We had a case in the HGC a few days ago — I looked at his results, I heard what was going on, the auditor told me (or on a via he told me), "We cannot really get E-Meter readings on him because he writhes around so much during the session." Yet for about ten auditing days he hadn't got any sufficient result and he wasn't getting there. We put the case back onto "You make that body sit in that chair," and flattened it, even though it took three or four days. And now the case is singing along very nicely toward Clear, you see? Basically there was a control there that was missing. Any upper control was incomprehensible to the auditor — I mean, to the preclear. The preclear couldn't understand any higher level of control than just make a body sit in that chair, which was a good process.

So we'd go on to that process as a probable. See, that's not an absolute. But we, for sure, would go on to SCS. And then we would go on to Connectedness.

Now, they're having trouble in England right now trying to flatten SCS. Director of Processing over there is tearing his hair thin. He's even given up a night course that he was also running and so forth because he's having an awful time trying to corral this one. I keep telling him he doesn't have to run it for twenty-five hours, and he keeps saying that it is impossible to abandon the process and go on to another one because the process just won't flatten. And he's too good an auditor to go off and leave it unflat. Well, now, we don't quite know how arduously he's running it; we don't know what's being demanded of this process; we don't know what is meant by "flat." That is to say, we don't know what he means by "flat." Be a waste of time to run it for twenty-five hours in most cases, but conceivably it could be run that long.

Then we would go up to Connectedness, which is the basic association process, which is the basic process for Trio and for all other of these processes of one kind or another.

And then we would go into what is called, in Clear Procedure, Step 6, which we clear up the fellow's field and then have him mock up something that he could mock up on six sides of the body and keep it from going away. That is to say, mock up something and put it on six sides of the body and keep it from going away. Well, a prerequisite is he'd have to be able to see it and he would have to have some certainty that he was doing it. And then have him mock up a series of six.

Then we go on to mocking up things and holding them still on six sides of the body.

And when we get that procedure flat with six things, why, we go on to six things and make them more solid: Mock them up on six sides of the body and make each one a little more solid. We flatten each one before we go on to the next one.

Now, the whole process could very easily be finished off with another process — merely a return to Connectedness. We could go back to Connectedness. If we thought we were trying to finish the case off smoothly and that we didn't want to take him any further toward OT, and we considered that he was Clear on the prerequisites — I mean, not the prerequisites, but the test I gave you yesterday — we considered he was Clear, we just wanted to level it off and make him feel cheerful and so on, why, we would finish it up with Connectedness. We would turn right back to Connectedness. They really lap up Connectedness after they get the bank straightened out. Of course, you realize you're going on to OT when you start to run Connectedness again.

Now, you don't go over and over and over these steps like we have done when some just start at the bottom and go up to the top again on all these steps, you know: SCS and Connectedness, and then Step 6 and then SCS and Connectedness to Step 6 — we don't do that. But — because we get them up to a point where the preclear is under control. The only criteria of running the early steps; the preclear is under control. He, of course, has to have an auditor to be under control; he has to have a source for control. So "Find the auditor" is part of that. There has to be a place for him to be controlled in, so that's the auditing room. And there has to be something there to be controlled, and that's the preclear. So he has to be sort of assembled, and this thing has to be set up before it can go on.

Well, once you get to Step 6, checking each session of course, still, for PT problem and clearing it where necessary, you just keep on running Step 6, see, over and over and over with Mock-ups and Keep It from Going Away and Hold It Still and Make It More Solid. Of all of this, the main random point is clearing the field, but that's not too hard to do either. You mock up a terminal of the same thing, or substance of the field, and have him push it into the body. If he has a black field, you have him mock up black terminals and push them into the body. Keep on auditing him even though he goes anaten.

It isn't enough, however, don't you see, to have just a set of nice procedures. It's quite miraculous to have those; it's taken an awful long time to get them, let me assure you. This is about as nicely balanced a regimen as you ever saw. Balancing a feather on the end of your nose is nothing compared to the task of sorting out the exact intensive you're using to clear people from all of the other possible intensives. But this one is it. There's eight thousand reasons why it is it. They all cross-check, but then they'd have to because it's a pretty complicated activity, clearing. But it looks simple on the surface.

The thing where you'd get fooled the fastest, the thing where somebody in the public would get fooled the fastest, is in believing that it was enough to have the processes. There are a great many requisites to that. The basic of them was to be smart enough in the first place to take up Dianetics and Scientology. And for that, I thank you.