And this is the sixth of March, l972. This is a lecture to Establishment Officers. The overall title of it, F/Ning Staff Members.

The work of the Establishment Officer is nothing if it does not result in production. Why not? Well, from the staff member's viewpoint it would immediately put him in poverty, from his morale point of view it'll immediately put him in apathy. Now, there's been so much talk during the last hundred and ten years, actually, actually so much talk since the Comte de Saint-Simon opened his face back in France in the earlier part of the nineteenth century and put his and everybody else's foot in it. He said, "The whole of society should be geared to its lowest member." Those are the famous words of the Comte de Saint-Simon. Now, very often they call him Saint-Simon as though he's a saint or something, actually he was a renegade Napoleonic officer who, after he kicked the bucket sometime around 1849 or something like this, all the rest of his people were rounded up and thrown in the local hoosegow. They were very out something or other.

There's an earlier one sometime in the eighteenth century of somebody talking about communes, but it's not really the beginning of this era of the reward of the downstat. But that began an historical, well, it began a history of a continuing encroachment into the world of production of the downstat. He became more and more and more important, and eventually the weight of him became overwhelming and he started to wreck economic patterns, bring on major recessions and so forth, he had a ball. Now, the idiocy of this, if you were to go down on skid row and watch somebody there who is on canned heat and who can barely get up from the bench and who only scrounges a quarter to buy himself another can of canned heat. You know what canned heat is, don't you? There it comes close to being the lowliest member of society. So we should obviously all go bum quarters on the street to eat canned heat, according to the Comte de Saint-Simon.

This movement was carried forward by a nut named Marx, who is deified by the British with a chair in the British Museum marked with his plate, "Marx sat here." You know, it's not George Washington sat here in England, it's Marx sat here. And I'm not being unduly harsh along in this line, because I believe that the people who are out of luck should be cared for, but I do not believe that they have the right to crash everything in sight. And the trouble with them is they can't produce and they are unhappy. They share with the criminal the peculiarity that they can't work, they are a problem in psychotherapy, not a problem in politics or economics. Wrong field, entirely, completely the wrong field.

This movement moved forward until there were riots of nihilism. Everything that they had in France was exported to Russia because Russia thought that was civilization, and the ballet and out-2D and all this other stuff. And so in Russia, in the Russian universities, a movement known as the Nihilists - nihilism means nothingness - the movement could be best described as wreck everything, make nothing out of everything. Now, some nihilist will tell me, "Oh no, there are techniques by which you make nothing out of everything, oh yes there are," but that's a psychotic technology. That was hand in glove with the original, well, that was actually came up to a big build up and then eased off into anarchy, another political philosophy that said there should be no government, with which I agree heartily. But not because there couldn't be a government, but because there isn't.

And the Nihilist gave birth you might say, in the universities of Russia, to the anarchist. And there was a sort of a little revolt against the anarchist within his own ranks and the communist came into view.

Somebody must have read Plato's Republic; I didn't think they taught them to read in Russian universities, you see, I'm charitable; and Plato's Republic which was apparently, I don't know the connection but there must be one, has to do with Licergis's Sparta, and this is all ancient political philosophy, and very shortly after this fellow Licergis built up Sparta, he hung them by the way. I think he told them, I think it was he, who said that they would carry on this philosophy of communing until he came back, and the elders of Sparta all agreed to do that, and then he left and never bothered to return, so they were hung with it. The effect of this, the immediate effect on this, was for Spartan arms and conquest to do a considerable resurgence and take the, a lot of territory, but it wasn't too long thereafter, not too long thereafter, that the cows and sheep were grazing on the streets of Sparta. It was a gone area. The Spartans were the last of the Dorians and they wound up in a spin of communism and then spun on out of history. A very, very failing philosophy. Now, maybe I am shortening it up too much and giving you too much simplicity, but this isn't a talk on political philosophy, this is a talk on downstatism.

Now marching forward, the Fabian Society, such people as George Bernard Shaw and so on, with such people, was formed in England and it was just down the road from Marx's headquarters. Marx jumped up someplace in Germany and he couldn't make it at anything he ever did, he couldn't work and he couldn't produce in any way, shape or form, and he dramatized his name. German money is named marks and Marx hated money, he never could make any, and he was finally rammed around all over the place, just to give you a thumbnail sketch, wound up in England and a rich man's son by the name of Engels shelled out some bucks to him, some pounds in order to carry on, and he sat down in the British Museum, and with this vast panorama of the activities of life before him from his chair in the British Museum, he dreamed up the rest of it. People do not know that the pattern of Marxist Communism is medieval Germany, and he deified medieval Germany and even says so in his textbooks. You can't read much of his material but when you; that is to say it's hard to read. Any Germanic type think is with the nouns and verbs all hindside to. But this boy idealized in his works, medieval Germany. Medieval Germany, the medieval state, was the totalitarian state where all commerce was regulated by the state.

Now, he substituted the harsh, eat them all up, throw them in the prison, off with their heads Germanic Teuton idea of civilized treatment, for that he substituted the word state, and that is the basic evolution of this thing called Communism as done by Marx.

There are other types of communism than Marxist communism, but his is the one that's prevalent. So the ideal he would have there is that the state is run as a total being which has the power of life and death over everyone in it, and who regulates all of their commerce and all of their actions. And this is called in later days, totalitarianism. Now, don't be fooled by people who tell you well, there's communism and fascism and they were at war. There is no faintest difference between communism and fascism. Fascism is a word employed by the communists to mask the fact that the Fascist, so-called Fascist, was in actual fact National Socialism. And all that National Socialism is is a type of communism. There is no difference between the philosophy of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, there's no difference between that basic philosophy in Germany or Russia. Nazi means National Socialist de, and it's just a shortened term for National Socialism, Na-zi. And this is super totalitarianism and they've long since ceased to be able to reward the downstat.

Now this is the world, however, we live in, where totalitarianism is the encroaching thing. Most of the things which you hear in terms of political philosophy, personnel handling and so forth, are said to make a further advance toward totalitarianism. If you reward downstats adequately and sufficiently, if you can get labor unions to raise their wages high enough, if you can cut back production enough, one day it all crashes. And then the capitalistic system is gone and in its place is a moneyless, exhangeless, total dictatorship. Now, I'm not talking through my hat. We have had occasion to study this considerably.

You are therefore doing establishment actions into the teeth of the propaganda which is continuously put out by the totalitarianist.

For instance, in the United States with inflating currency, they are trying to cut it down to a four hour day and and a three day week, but look, inflation is caused by lack of production. Too much production without enough money to buy the produce is what causes a depression, but that usually follows too much money released without enough produce. You haven't got enough production, so the money doesn't cover the produce. The vaulting, sky-rocketing condition of money with regard to production right now is criminal. There's practically no production in keeping with the amount of money which is being turned out by the printing presses, regardless with, of what excuse. So actually, organizations are moving into the teeth of money which is lessening in value, money is cheaper and cheaper and cheaper and cheaper, and there's more and more and more of it that buys less and less and less. Along with that comes this totally outpoint propaganda that one ought to have a three day work week and four hours a day, and there ought to be fantastic quantities of welfare so that over fifty percent of the nation's expense and so forth is placed on welfare. Not to make anybody well, not to provide medical treatment for them, not really, although some of them go in that direction. So you're into an era of welfarism as I talk to you. The propaganda is actually there to make more and more and more money for less and less and less produce so that you get a crash of the capitalist system so that another system can be substituted.

That system is called socialism and this is the basic pattern of conquest of socialism, originates with the Fabian Society in 1883.

We notice the great popularity of Shaw these days, George Bernard Shaw, My Fair Lady and so forth. He was their principal author and he wrote their basic planning; their basic philosopher was Hegel.

And you wonder well, why if Russia and Germany have the same philosophy, then why did they go to war? According to Hegel, that all these socialists follow, the mental health of the people depends exclusively on their having wars. Now, you say that's too incredible, yeah well, I've got it, I've got it in blocks, blocked out print right square in the middle of a textbook, quoted liberally by the socialist, they quote that phrase. So if they can cause enough war that causes enough expense, then that will be the end of the capitalistic system and there will be no medium of exchange. To hell with the capitalist system. I think my great-grandfather owned about half of the state of Nebraska as a skinflint banker and he died unmourned by the whole state. I do not hold with the banker capitalism. But a medium of exchange, to eradicate a medium of exchange totally eradicates freedom. Now you have total slavery because the guy has only himself, he can buy nothing. Now, this is how Russia tries to operate.

If you ever had to work out an organization in the middle of a totalitarianism which no longer had a capitalistic background, there would be an element missing which you would find very difficult to get over and that is this element called exchange. In Russia they're picked up and thrown in jail for selling a spare, a spare pair of their shoes. They're known as a capitalist. Now, this gets pretty weird. How do you get over this? Now, there's the direction the world is going. Therefore organizations which run on this basis will be the order of the day. Democracy is on its way out, been on its way out for some time. I think it really exited from the world when they killed god knows how many men on how many muddy battlefields in World War I to make the world safe for it. It not only was made not safe for it, it set up the world for totalitarianism. Democracy depends exclusively on the informedness of the individual citizen. But regardless of all of this, this is the way the world is going.

Now, let's just look at the isness of the situation. You as Establishment Officers deal with the isness of the situation. Now, what can you establish and how can you establish it in the teeth of money buys very little no matter how much there is of it, and you have no basic exchange? Now, that is a problem which I am afraid you will be facing somewhere up the line out in the society. Remember this. Regardless of whether there is money, there must be exchange. Now, that exchange factor can be such that the individual on his post only has a product when that product can be exchanged at least with some other part of the org. There must be an exchange, in exchange for what he produces he gets what he gets. Now, this doesn't happen to mean necessarily on an individual basis as his hat, as a post in that department. He has no right to the services of any other part of the org unless he himself is producing on that post something which goes to some other part of the org. Do you follow me?

It isn't enough for him then to pile up a whole bunch of paper in front of him. Let's take a finished test. Now, that test is of use to others, and because that test is being done and somebody's doing tests, two things would have to happen. They would have to be needed and wanted by others and they would have to be of such a character as to be useful to others, and when they're useful to somebody else then it is a product, and when it is of no use to anybody else, it is not a product. So two things can happen. The fellow can be producing something which he thinks or hopes might be useful to somebody else but isn't, or he is doing it in such a way that it is of no use to anybody else. Now, the first one is sold by salesmanship. Maybe this thing is of use to somebody else but they don't know about it. Supposing you had an organization that knew nothing of the use of tests. Your Test I/C just goes on and turns out tests, turns out tests, turns out tests, turns out tests, there's all kinds of tests sitting around, but there's nobody using these things.

Well, what's missing is the PR and advertisement of the post. In other words the first formula of non-existence has not been met. Find a comm line, find out what's needed and wanted and produce it. Now, any post will be in non-existence, any department will be in non-existence, any division will be in non-existence and any org will be in non-existence, providing they don't solve that. And any civilization will be in non-existence unless that's solved.

I am fascinated with all the trouble they have with balance of payments. You know what that is don't you, that's England pays to get so many goods and transfers so much money to the country that, or so much goods or something like that. Well, that's fine except, and this is where the capitalist takes his finger off his number, he's always getting in there and making himself a fool so that he sets himself up as a clay pigeon for the communist. England cannot transfer machinery it makes for apples it uses. You say, "Well, yeah, it's obvious they do." No they don't. That has to go through an exchange of gold and that's why they have to have paper gold these days. The machinery it exports, value of that has to be procured from a world bank, a bunch of fat cats sitting around that don't know anywhere near as much about economics as an office boy but they sure know how to lick it up. That nation that received this machinery has got to go to a central bank and there get gold so that it can transfer its balance of payment debt to England. Do you follow? It can only pay that in gold. Now England, when it buys apples, has to go through an international bank exchange, get gold and transfer it to the country from which it bought machinery. That is why all this concentration on gold. Now, do you follow this now? Do you follow this?

Here you've got two countries who could be exchanging directly who are exchanging through a middle man. The middle man is the international banker. He's making capitalism very unpopular, so people can be sold on the idea that he ought to be eradicated. Then what would you get, what would you get? You would get apples going to North Umbria or Ballawogville in return for the coconuts made in Ballawogville for the apples. But the difficulty is of the barter system, it's the item is not interchangeable. Now whenever you get a crucial failure, you drop into the barter system. You do not drop into further Keansian economics, you drop into the barter system and it's dropped directly, so that money has to represent something, money has to represent something of which there is some. That sounds very elementary, but very true. If there's no gold, there will be eventually no real money.

So economics can get so fouled up that although you have plenty of service in the org, the economic system of the surrounding community is such that you don't get any exchange. Then you would be in the barter system. So you do have an answer, when all goes to hell you've still got some kind of a barter system. Now, it's basically some kind of a barter system that's working in an org, but usually it comes back in terms of money, just the appropriation of running a department is a contribution, just the fact that money, the org puts out money for the fellow to run tests, is a contribution. But as long as that is the limit of your action and as long as all your exchange is inside the organization, you'll go broke. So there must be an exchange with another public.

Now the Sea Org, and I'll show you how rough this can be, the Sea Org slipped up on this in that it was exchanging with Scientology orgs. But that was exchanging within the same body or type or class of public, and we started to go broke because the Scientology orgs were not adequately exchanging with the public around them. And that's when you saw me put in the paid completions stat. Things have started to look better ever since because it forces them to produce something they can exchange for money. A lot of them became very dishonest and started processing only staff to get a paid completions stat. They have not yet learned this idea of exchange.

Now, you may or may not have followed me all the way through that, but it's very, very important to you for this reason: You can have an org that is so busy exchanging all of its products internally, it'll go broke while being beautifully established, gorgeously established, broke. And then it no longer has the money or the goods with which to maintain its establishment and you have failed, you have failed at that point as an Establishment Officer. Why? Because you are the FP committees. You as the FP committee have to demand, before you can make an allocation or expenditure, an estimate of what is going to be made and that is defined to you as exchange. And if you have this function as an Establishment Officer, then it will keep your establishment on a sensible pattern by which you can then exchange something between the organization and the division and so on which you're busy organizing, and another public, another public.

Now, if you're all on an FP, it's got to be an outside public, it's got to be a non-Scientology public really, or it's got to be the field Scientology public. It can't be the org public. And right now this is so little known that there are several orgs getting a paid completions stat by processing their staff members. It's impossible, it's not paid. To that degree, the stat is falsified. For a long time I tried to trace why do we have a high paid completions stat in orgs and a low GI. And when you do an investigation you actually have to learn how to think like an idiot, because you're just going down and finding the widest, biggest outpoint, the why is really the biggest outpoint which then explains all other outpoints, that you can do something about. And that is really what a why is if you want to give it a reverse look. That's why your investigations are always outpoint, outpoint, outpoint. If you continuously be logical, you're going to wind up with a logical why and that's never the why. The logical why is called reasonableness. So what was this difference? Yeah, you have to learn to think like an idiot to do evaluations because it's always some idiocy. That's why the outpoints are really a description of idiocy and that's why you count them. Half the time a person cannot loosen his wits up enough from being logical to get a sufficiently, to see the illogic that is the outpoint. He's too, he's just stuck on being thinking only in a rational, reasonable pattern. To get anyplace, you've got to be able to think in an illogical pattern, then you can do evaluations bang, bang, bang.

So there you are, you're doing FP. You find, and the first thing you find out nobody in the FP committee is hatted, that's a usual step, that's the usual why that is given repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly. When you do this there are two steps to FP. One is making sure that the org buys the necessities which it needs to produce, and the other one is make sure there is going to be enough coming in to cover subsequent FPs. And that FP which you're busy doing has got to buy something, it's got to buy something, it's got to buy future income, and the guiding rule of an FP is covered in exchange. You're not going to FP anything for a division that isn't producing anything that anybody can use, I don't care how beautifully they have their front door painted. So you really FP by stats, to get stats, and the guiding principle of FP is of course exchange, and unless you know something about exchange...

You're putting these facilities here, the reason you're establishing something here, is so that it will produce something which will then exchange with another group which has and produces something you need in order to keep on going. And you can just shake the economics out of the whole thing beyond that. You can shake bankers and capitalism and money and totalitarianism and every other damn thing as long as you keep that in mind. There is a way to get through this. Exchange. The org is going to give this factory so many hours of processing in exchange for; barter. And you can have an economic system go all to hell and you could still operate if you know that. But in any event, it's exchange. What do you need to operate? Well, right now that's easy, it's money.

Supposing it wasn't money. Well, you would need this to operate and that to operate, you'd probably need state support in some fashion or another. You'd need so many, so many OKs on so many shoe, food, bread coupons or something like that. Now, we're moving into the future with orgs and there's many an economic curve being thrown at the society at this particular time, so don't get caught flat-footed. Be quick on your feet. It always takes five times as much to operate as you think it will. After you've FPed and think you have your cash/bills ratio all straight and everything is fine, then what do you find? Somebody has hidden a great many bills in a mouse hole someplace and they drag them forth proudly and you find out that you're another ten thousand dollars down that you never dreamed of.

Now, put all this together and what do you get? You get an Establishment Officer is establishing something which produces something that will exchange for what you need in order to establish, and you've said everything there is to say about it. If you can think in those terms then you would be a very smart operator.

Now you talk about outpoints, what would you think of a Treasury Department 7 that would never get out statements in such a way as to get in any money, when that was all you were dependent on and you weren't doing a cash business? What would you think of that? They even had orders to write persuasive letters and to add it up in such a way that the individual who leaves the org without paying his bill or something like that can be tagged with it personally, so that's a forcer on him to go ahead and make the org run and things like this. Supposing orders have been issued to this extent and they have all been neglected and it won't get out effective statements so as to make effective collections. What would you think of an activity which had innumerable Field Staff Members who are quite capable of collecting money and never bothered to look in the personnel files, old ethics files and so forth, to find a million and a half dollars worth of freeloaders to collect. It isn't that freeloaders don't pay, it's the fact they're never billed.

The majority of businesses that go broke in the United States go broke because they don't send out statements. You say well, that's idiocy. That's right. All errors are idiocy. They, businesses that they check over and so forth, they find out that they never send out any bills. We have a set of attorneys right now in Panama and those birds have never sent an effective bill, and I suddenly found out to my horror we hadn't paid them anything ever. They never seemed to bill, or if they bill they sent the stuff to a wrong address and they never followed it up. So that nobody found out they hadn't been paid. Just a simple matter of names and addresses, elementary, not a matter of money at all.

Now supposing you had, supposing then you had a Treasury Division that did this. Now what would you do as an Esto, what would you do as an Esto conference? You found you were having a hell of a time with FP, that people were economizing on you all over the place, and they were telling you that you couldn't have this and you couldn't have that, and you desperately know the crew needed uniforms. What would you do? Would you just say isn't it terrible those finance people won't give us this money? Because that's normally what's done. I've even heard of somebody in an org saying, "Well, Ron doesn't pay me very much." That's the wildest thing I ever heard. When that came in through to me, I wrote him a long letter and told him the facts of life. He makes his own pay. But what would you do? The answer is too logical to be viewed. You would make more money. How do you make more money? You make sure that the divisions are established in such a way that they produce something which can be exchanged with the society around them, and you make sure that if the org has earned a great deal of money, it gets collected. You don't sit there and worry about the difficulties you're having with FP.

Now, you'll find some mad ones come along these lines. We have a mad one right now that is in progress. A management organization by policy must be supported by the service organization to which it is attached. Why? If it's any damn good as a management organization, the service organization to which it is attached will be able to make enough money. And if it's not good enough as a management organization to do that, it has no business hanging on somebody else's heels to hell and gone on the other side of the world. Right? So the policy worked out, and it was worked out over years, and we found out definitely that a management organization of a continent or something like that had to be supported by the service organization to which is was attached. If that didn't happen, all was lost. But what do you know? Very few people ever got this fact. Why? There was nobody there to check out the policy letter. And that condition exists right at this present moment.

By all means, run an economical organization, there is no point in wasting money, but you get any group or body that sits together and you ask them about finance, they always come up with a wrong action. We'll economize. It is the inevitable answer. It's the wrong formula. They're in emergency so they try to run affluence. You see, it's inevitably, continuously the wrong answer. An organization must never be run by either a lawyer or an accountant.

They will both try to move into the field of management and they will both try to tell you what to do, and they are the two types of individuals who are not qualified to run an organization. Why? Because their think is wrong. The lawyer's think is caution, the accountant's think is just the money he sees on the ledger in front of him. He does not envision making money, he envisions money in, money out and when he sees these two figures they are concrete facts to him, everything else is airy-fairy and he isn't in the management know enough. So he looks over here and he sees, "Well, we made this much in the last quarter and therefore we will only be able to spend this much in the next quarter." Well, that's all sensible and that's true and that's safe, but my god can you go broke that way.

Neither one of them ever have, I've had a, I've had a lawyer for instance stop an organization, shut its doors; he was the head of an organization; for ten days one time and you know, the org never caught up with it - to find out if it was legal. The answer, kiddies, is to make more money. Then is the time when you hat the living Jesus out of all the Product Officers in sight. Then is the time when you hat the living daylights out of the registrar, you hat the living daylights out of Division Six, and you get in there and you look into seven and you say, "Let's get hatted, let's get producing, let's get those statements correct. Oh, you don't have any name for Mrs. Glutz now? How about going to the CF folder and finding her last known address?" You get busy, you get busy establishing the living Christ out of every one of those terminals who regulates exchange. The answer is make more money and the establishment's answer is hat them, find their whys on them personally, pull the rug out from underneath all the illogics they're sitting on and get them in there working, working, sweat. Provide a sponge on their desks, see they get a bowl of water to mop up the sweat, but get them working. And that's how you handle an organization's deficits.

So you do FP committee and you make sure that they do have the necessities in order to be able to do this, and then at that moment you are told by the AG and the FBO that they are very sorry, but your allocation this month will only be one third of the vital running expense line, and that you will have to cut down, and that is the statement that will come back to you. You cut down, you're going to get less income. You start not paying staff and your morale starts going out through the bottom. Do you know that I have one of the jobs, one of my hats is making sure staffs get paid? You'd be surprised, because every time they run a deficit they say, well, in fact it's just been across my desk today, just suddenly realized it, once again; it's just periodic; it is so easy to say, "Oh well, cut the staff's pay, don't pay the staff." That simple, you don't have to think. That'd require no strain, no strain on the brain. We don't have to wake up, get the attention spanned, look over things, get busy, no, "Cut the staff pay," and that cuts the rug out from underneath you.

Now you'll have morale factors, now you'll have this, now you'll have that, now you'll have other things, so if pay can't be cut, if the staff is actually going forward and doing its job, there is another area that can be hit, is their food. And if you're running a, if you're feeding your staff and taking care of them, why their food can be cut. If you can't cut their food too much, you can always eradicate uniforms. Do you see? It goes from this to that to the other thing, and you're trying to put together a nice bright, brassy organization. If you've got a project force working, don't let it have any paint. If you let it have some paint, don't let it have any scrapers. All of their work is wasted, they'll just stand around or they just paint over the rust and it's no good at all. You got it? Now, the answer kiddies is make more money.

I by the way had a, let me tell you a little anecdote. I had a bad experience with this one time. I told the wrong man, I told my father this one time, I got tired of all of his talking about me and money and so forth, he knew nothing about money and he knew nothing about me, been a naval officer all of his life. I was often making a month what he made in a year. I don't know, the unreality of people is gorgeous. And he told me that once too often and I was just out of hospital, it was at the end of the war, and my temper was rather short. And I turned on him and I said, "Look," I said, "Don't go telling me this anymore, I've listened to it most of my life and it's not true," I said, "Look at yourself. You've been making money all of your life, you haven't got anything to show for it, you spend your money like a drunken sailor. Now, why don't you make more money?" So he did. He got ahold of my yacht and sold it. And having done that, he sold my ranch, well anyway, he made more money.

So it doesn't always work that the message goes through straight, but it is the answer, it is the answer. If you have hatted according to policy and not hatted off a lot of squirrel, offbeat actions; if you have made sure that you don't have using policy to stop; they can do that by the way by always applying the wrong policy letter. All you've got to do is take the policy letter that applies to A and instead of following that, find another one that really doesn't really apply to A but find something in it that can be construed as to apply to this and they say, "Well, you see we can't do that." Policy was designed to tell people things they could do and when it tells them not to do something, it's trying to put edges on the channel so they won't go off of it. But what channel? The channel of doing something right. When you say this is a high crime PL it means we've had enough of it, it's been too prevalent, this why is big enough and prevalent enough and has been in the past to become a policy why, so don't. But that doesn't stop anybody from going down the main channel.

Now, if a fellow doesn't know the policy that gives him the main channel and only knows the policy that tells him to stop, then you will get people using policy to stop. Do you follow? There is always policy that tells them how to go on the channel. If they only specialize in stop, that's terrible. Well, there's one thing that you must know that any group of thetans can get best agreement on a stop, they will most readily agree on a stop, that's any group of thetans. It's one of the reasons democracies don't work. That's what you know as group think. That's a very funny one and that's how they all get sort of frozen. If you're not able to put in the public lines and if you can't get a student into and out of an org, you know then that you have a group think and it's a stop think. They don't know the ways to do things and they've only agreed on the ways to stop things. So you want to get a lot of do policies going right away. You'll see that, you've seen it in the past, you can't fire somebody, can't finish the guy up on his course, he always gets recircled in some way and so forth. It's just an unhattedness, the guys don't know the purpose of the thing.

Now at that point, you are facing people who don't know anything about exchange, that they have to have something to exchange. For instance an auditor in there every day auditing, thinks he is producing by giving hours of auditing. No, those are the actions of production, he hasn't produced yet. He will only produce when he's done the program, and in any org where you have auditors only putting in hours and if you go and open a few folders and find out that they're full of unfinished programs, then you know they have the wrong idea of production, so you get them together and you explain what production is. It's a finished pc. How finished? That whole cycle. Now, you know you can get scattered pcs, scattered all through an org and the org starts caving in, and everybody you talk to is half way through and has been half way through or a quarter of the way through or an eighth of the way through his program, for the last year. You go and get somebody who was sick and you find out that he was red-tabbed eight months ago. Nobody has finished the program. There's no production think in that HGC.

Naturally, it's only a finished pc that you could exchange with something. What do you exchange it with? Well, even if you were just exchanging it with the org, the org is counting on the HGC to put this guy in some kind of shape, and it isn't the session that puts somebody in shape, it's the program. Auditors, day by day, they say, "Look, look how busy we are, look how busy we are, look how busy we are, our hours are up, our hours are up," and they can push their hours up without any exchange at all. And then they finally get the whole field and so forth.

There is one org right now that just got through telexing us, telling us how Flag was missing data and, we hear that every now and then, and along with the same statement will come some horrendous outpoint. They were the guys sending the data, don't you see, so Flag, if Flag is missing data or Flag is misinformed, they did it, so they're just complaining about themselves. But the point I'm making here is we said that this person, I'll give you a rough paraphrase of it, "What are you doing with five hundred and seventy-six hours of processing backlogged?" we said to this ED.

And this ED sent it back, "Flag has been misinformed, the data's incorrect," very protesty, very make-wrong, I'm right, very service fac. "It isn't five hundred and seventy-six hours, it's five hundred and seventy-six pcs, and they are not backlogged. There are a hundred and six of them in medical on medical lines, there's two hundred and one of them on ethics lines, and the remainder are on cramming lines," or something. He'd never believe it, see?

He could work all day and all night and have nightmares all day and all night, and you'd never come up with an outpoint like that. But this is, this is sent to us as a refutation of our villainous accusation that they were backlogged. And sure enough, they never seem to be able to make their targets, and they never make their stats and their GDSes are pretty down and cash is bad. Now do you see why I'm talking to you about exchange? And they haven't exchanged a damn one of those products with society. So not having exchanged it, even they are now backlogged all the money they've been paid, they really still owe it because they never delivered anything for it. Five hundred and seventy-six pcs be damned, they're probably backlogged in terms of owing the society really, some huge amount. Maybe their last year's income. Christo. God help us all. In other words, we thought it was a little situation, it's not, it's a fantastic situation. So they've been sitting there not exchanging anything with the society and then they wonder why their stats are down and why their picked on and so forth. They just don't understand exchange.

Now, there's an Executive Series on this subject which I wrote for your use, and it talks about exchange and it talks about economics and so on, I wrote a little in the Executive Series, and it's very important. But it shows up in such a thing as the HGC or the staff staff auditors don't even exchange a product with the rest of the org. So you're busy supporting these staff staff auditors? You're giving them the service and the room to audit people so they can do what? So they can make the whole org one quarter done on urgent programs. Well then, they've backlogged the whole org because they never produced a product. Just as a blown student is not a product, so is an incomplete program not a product. Now, we're not now talking about the advance program of taking the guy all the way from Dianetics to OT6. We're just talking about just that, usually a red sheet or what you call a tip program right in the front of that folder, and you look in those staff, the staff staff auditors' lines and look at the crew being audited and what do you find? They're not done. And then another program has to be written to fill in the fact that that wasn't done and then that's done, and then another one has to be done to fill in the gaps of the second program that didn't get done, and then the fourth program gets written. Oh, you think it's not true? You go down and you look at some folders and you will see where it has happened.

Now, I catch up on this with a person getting sick. When a person gets sick I send for his folder and this is usually what I find. A person has an accident or a person is very upset and is trying to blow or something like this, I send for his folder. And what do I find? I find program done to handle the case eight or nine months stale-dated with one third of the program done, the rest of it stale-dated. So that in a Scientology organization is what accounts for your illness and injury, in the largest number of factors. The staff staff auditor does not take the case, hell, other people are coming in and saying, "This guy is, this guy's got to be audited right now and this guy." Well, have an assist auditor is the way to get around that, he's just an assist auditor. He gives touch assists and runs out the last automobile accident and the delivery and something something something. Just an assist auditor, that's all he does, it's usually one of the better word clearers who's also assigned the double hat of assist auditor. And when the guy is fed into staff staff auditing on a staff member, get it done. It goes right on down the rest of the program and it is done and then he's a finished product, that's it. And then gradually one by one by one, why, you make it, then you'll all of a sudden have a functional audited staff. But this other thing, beuff.

Now, this works on courses. The guy's been programmed for this, that and the other thing, you start checking around and you find out person after person has course after course that they never completed. And every one of these incomplete courses is an incomplete cycle of action, and you'll eventually get up to about four incomplete courses and then suddenly, what do you collide with? You collide with a fellow that doesn't study any more. Do you know that you could take your raw Dianetic students or 0 to IV students in an academy that were showing tendencies to blow, just check up on how many courses they had not finished before they ever got into that org or Scientology, and you would blow a lot of charge on them? Incomplete cycles of action. And this is not a product, and the guy can become so incomplete and so not a product that he can't be made into a product until you've remedied it. Am I making sense? That's a product, finished, exchangeable.

Now, because orgs are paid before they deliver the service, an Esto is walking uphill against this, because people can keep saying, "Well we're paid, we're paid, we're paid, we're paid, we're paid, we're paid," and not deliver the full service. So you have to safeguard against it. The promise of a book is not a delivered book, a book is not a product until it is fully printed, promoted, and in the public's hands, then it's a product because exchange has to do with it. Right? So you get back to establishment, what are you doing? You'd better establish something that finishes things, and you'd better hat people to finish things, otherwise your joys of FP will mostly be sorrows. But you're in a position to really push an org into production providing they know what a product is.

Now, just as an aside, just as I think of it, the wrong way to hat is from the bottom up. The wrong way to post an org board is from the bottom up. You start posting org boards from the bottom up, you're in trouble. Well, you start hatting from the bottom up, you're in trouble. And you can hat and hat and hat and hat in the lower echelons without really producing any marked change in production, because your production is being regulated from the top. It's what the top tolerates. So you post an org board always from the top and if there's only one person in the boat, he's the captain. More small boat wrecks because the guy thinks he's a deck hand or something. And you hat from the top down, you always hat from the top down, and that's very difficult because he right away thinks that you should be hatting the lower ones because he knows that's the why. And although it's very true that it may also be the why, you had better hat from the top down because if the fellow cannot play the piano, that is to say regulate the division, why, he won't get it producing. And so your hatting actions and your FP actions, your exchange actions and all these other actions, will mostly go to waste. They can be beautifully misused. You don't specialize for the next year, however, in just hatting the senior. The cycle of you hat, you hat a bit and get him to produce and then hat him some more and get him to produce, is just run all the way up and down.

Now, you are running a long term program and it's entirely different than an auditing program, because you hat him a little bit and get him working, and hat him a little bit and get him working, and hat him a little bit more and get him working, and hat him a little bit more and get him working. You are not ever going to be able to finish a finished product and then say, "There he is on post," because there is a thing called on the job training, and you're doing mostly on the job training. Therefore it's only just that an Esto do the bulk of his actions as on the job training. Definition of an Esto, somebody who does without sleep so that he can study during his sleeping hours in order to know all the answers for his working hours. That's a definition. Alright.

Now, I've talked to you a lot about exchange and you say, "Well, it doesn't have much to do with Scientology," and we have here on Scientology 8-8008 on page one, we have the factors. And the factors mostly concern exchange, probably've never realized that before. Before the beginning was a cause and the entire purpose of the cause, the creation of an effect. In the beginning and forever is the decision, the decision is to be. Let's assume a viewpoint and so on, and number seven is "And from the viewpoint to the dimension points there are connection and interchange. Thus new dimension points are made and there is communication." Exchange. The truth of the whole thing is that a thetan does what he does so that he can exchange, and if a thetan can't exchange anything, he gets very miserable and very unhappy and that is one of the reasons why production is the basis of morale, elementary. So therefore when I talk to you about exchange, I'm talking to you really about the factors and if you want to look into those, study it over, you'll see that it all fits. It's the way life runs.

Now, we've got here various definitions which I've already defined for you, but an established thing, I've already defined establishing something means that it's been put there so that it is capable and does produce high volume, high quality production with an absence of dev-t. So when you get to a point where you say that is established, you know when you have made it. The guy can do a high volume, high quality product and he doesn't do it in such a way as to create dev-t. Now that tells you when you have established something. And a product, I've already said to you what it is, is it's a finished, high quality service or thing in the hands of the being or group it serves as an exchange for a valuable. Tells you right away that a lot of services, that a lot of surveys could be run which would give you a false answer.

It's, "What do you think is nice?" let's survey the public and find out, "What do you really like and what do you think is nice?" and so forth, and then miss the boat. They don't tell you anything they would think would be valuable enough that they would be willing to give value for the receipt of. So a survey that is really a survey tells you the exchangability of what they really like. What do they consider valuable enough to exchange something for? So the consideration of being willing to give something to receive this produced thing is really the test of a well produced, well promoted, well sold thing. It isn't just some thing. Somebody'll say, "Yeah well, these paper dolly Rolls Royces are, are fine," but they wouldn't pay anything for them. They like them, but they wouldn't pay anything for them. In other words, it's not an exchange value. So all surveys are really valid when they establish what a person will give up something valuable in exchange for. "What will you really, what would you give for happiness?" supposing the guy says happiness, "How much would you pay for happiness?" Guy's liable to say, "Huh, paying, I won't pay anything for happiness." Well then, you'd better survey in such a way to find out what he would pay something for. Of course people do pay things for happiness, but I'm just giving you an example.

There's the exchange factor back of that. So when is a post established? When the post is able to produce an exchange factor. He's not established. You can take that all the way down in the org. Actually, a good janitor who produces a high quality and high volume of service, he's got an exchange going with the org, the org's perfectly willing to give him valuables in return for that. Do you follow? You can go around to staff and so forth, "How do you think the janitor takes care of the place?" "Oh, I think he does a great job." And you've got an established janitor. Go around the org, "What do you think of the janitor?" "Oh god, if he just messes up these papers on my desk just one more time I'll report him," you haven't got an exchange factor. Get the test? Alright. They don't want to exchange a valuable for it. And you'll find out you won't be able to get it in, either. Alright.

A program is the bridge between establishment and production, that's what bridges it over, that tells you the direction it's got to be established. Now, you could just establish something, you could establish the prettiest receptionist you ever wanted to see, all beautifully dressed up and all, sitting there and all nice and clean and not even chewing chewing gum and so forth, very nice looking, that didn't produce any receptions, didn't know where to send anybody and people left the org in droves. It doesn't produce anything. So how would you know you had a receptionist? No dev-t, that's an easy test, but how about the production? Are those people cheered up happily, happily, happily and routed in all directions that they, to the right terminal every time, wham wham wham, and the right routing form is whipped out and the person's name put on it, and all ARC and there's no friction on the line, and there's no waiting, and zim zing zing zing zing, and if the person's also answering the phone or something like that, do they sound all right and so forth? In other words, are people willing to pay for this receptionist? Now, that'd be quite a receptionist.

Now, you set yourself up a task of if there was a coin box here and it said on it; don't do this; and it said on this, "Put your one dollar fee for having been well-receptioned in this box," would it collect any dollars? Now boy, you've really hatted a receptionist if it would. See what your test would be? And you never heard of anybody tipping a receptionist or an elevator operator or something like that. But if you established one to a point where people tried to, boy you've got it made. See how exchange fits in? Well now, what is she going to reception? Well, there could be a program of when so-and-so and such-and-such comes in, they are so-and-so, they are receptioned. That would tell her what she receptions, that's what she specializes in.

The reception at the London org once wasn't hatted, a hundred and twenty-five people crowded in the matter of about an hour, and she shoved them all out the front door. They ran a health crusade handout program and people stormed into the org like mad, and they wanted to know all about it, and it was a failed crusade because only two of them signed up for major services. It never occurred to anybody to give them the standard minor services. Now the program, which wasn't ever written for this, did not include the reception and what she was supposed to do. It wasn't that she acted like an idiot, she actually did but she went into a total panic. Small office, she saw a hundred and twenty-five people, she thinks she's being stormed, it puts her back into on the track when they lynched her, and so no program included the receptioning of the response expected from this. What do you do with them? It would be gen in the receptionist onto the disposal of the people who were calling back for this, and have her give them a waffle waffle and a tupple pup to report at the wingle ding at such-and-such hours. Program is the bridge between the establishment and the production.

Now, she may be established as a receptionist, but nobody programmed her as to what to do with these gents. Do you see that? It was a special change of pace, it was a hell of a change of pace went on there. They'd been getting one person a day or three people a day or something like this, and all of a sudden in an hour or an hour and a quarter or something like that, she had a hundred and twenty-five people come in, blurrraom, she didn't know what to do with them and so on and that was it, and she pushed them all out into the street and, "Go away," and closed the door in terror. Now, she might have been an established receptionist, but you couldn't establish a receptionist for every possible contingency or emergency.

Now all of a sudden, we say we're going to run triples or something on pcs, we're going to triple up their grades or we're going to do something like that, but nobody's ever told the auditors. Now, they'd have to be specially genned in and they'd have to be brought into cramming, and they would have to be told how you triple things, and be checked out on the bulletins and do a bit of a drill or two, if this was the coming thing. Otherwise they wouldn't know, they would come from the registrar, they would go down to the HGC, tech services would try to assign and wouldn't have any auditors because none of them were qualified to run triples. And that is the explanation that came back as to why triples weren't delivered. "We didn't have any auditors trained to run them." But two weeks before that program went out, all the bulletins were forwarded to HGCs to check out on the auditors in order to do this. But there was no Establishment Officer there to make sure it was done. Program.

Now you say the Establishment Officer, well, it should be the Program Officer. No, the Program Officer would alert the Establishment Officer as to what program was in progress and what checkouts would have to be done. The Establishment Officer would just have to make sure that the lines and actions and personnel existed in order to do the check-out rather than check them out himself. But he'd have to make sure that that existed. Otherwise you could establish and establish and establish and establish and you would never wind up with a product because there's no bridge, because the product shifts, the product changes, various things happen, but if these things are never written up and if there's nobody around establishing an org on which those things can then be put in, so you can establish a basic post and then there's a further establishment on a program. The Establishment Officer has to make sure that that program can be checked, out whether he checks it out or not.

You'd have to get somebody, let us say, into admin cramming to check out something or other, something or other, you know, some program comes along. Program says, "Make sure that all executives are checked out on something or other, something or other, something or other," and it's up to that moment that the Establishment Officer conference has got to say, "Is there anybody there to do it?" "No, we haven't had any admin cramming, as a matter of fact there hasn't been a tech cramming here for some time." "Oh my god, where the hell is he?" "Let's disestablish division six so that we can establish division five," this kind of think in desperation. Do you see? So that there's basic establishment and there's the establishment so something can roll as a production. And that bridge point is the Program Officer, and he can come around and tell the Esto what he wants.

In this way, establishment merges over into production, merges over into exchange. Now, that is how it is done. OK?

Thank you.