Note: This tape has two different dates, original reel as “The Second Dynamic” given on the 2nd April 1955 and new reel “On the Second Dynamic” given on the 6th of April 1955. The content is the same.

Good evening. Thank you. This evening we have a very, very important subject to discuss, and I'm very glad to see such a nice audience. I had an inspiration. There's a subject that we have never talked about as a single lecture, totally devoted to that subject. In Dianetics and Scientology we call it the second dynamic. And in view of the fact that this has some bearing upon you being here, and in view of the fact that it has in the past has influenced to some degree, the behavior of the human race, and in view of the fact that psychotherapy when it really got going, actually got going on the second dynamic, I think personally, in spite of what you may think, believe that there is something to the second dynamic, and believe that we should say something about it.

Now, normally when people think about talking about the second dynamic, they think about four letter words. But I don't know any. All the time I was, when I was in college I was part of a regiment of marines. I was a first sergeant. It was a marine reserve company, twentieth regiment, which did a very good account of itself in World War II. But in those days it was a marine corps reserve. And it was the thing to do for people on the campus, who were anybody, to be part of this company. Well actually, this didn't mean it was any less marine corps. And up to the time I had associated with marines, I thought I knew something about the second dynamic. Well now, this isn't the type of education which I'm trying to forward to you tonight. We can go into that later.

The second dynamic is called the second dynamic, and let's get right down to business now, it's called the second dynamic for one reason. It's part of the dynamics of Dianetics and of Scientology. And there are eight of these dynamics in Scientology, the first four of them belong actually, most pertinently, to Dianetics. And the first four are talked about in Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health, published in 1950. Those four actually occupy man's fixed attention more than anything else, but the remaining four of course are there also, and shouldn't be neglected.

The first four dynamics are one, the dynamic of self. This we call the first dynamic refers to the individual as himself, as an individual. And it includes what Freud called his alter-ego, but no other people. Now that is to say, an individual plus his clothes, plus his reading matter, plus his room, you know, plus his car. I'm speaking now of course of American society. We couldn't omit the car as part of the first dynamic. You know, it's a tremendous, tremendous difference.

I knew a fellow one time, he was a very, very svelte fellow, he was very smooth, he was very personable, very quiet. And he drove a Cadillac at that time, you see? And he went broke and he got a Ford. And after that he was a pretty agitated fellow all the time. Of course he never attributed it to his car, but his car moved him in space all the time and was actually part of his dynamic, first dynamic. So we take an individual plus his immediate possessions. Those things which he says, "This is mine. Hands off, bud!" And some people include the wife in on the second, I mean first dynamics, instead of the second dynamic. It, when you see an individual including his wife or a wife including her husband, in on her first dynamic, we don't have a second dynamic. Interesting point to remember in processing preclears and assaying the human race.

Alright. So much for the first dynamic. That's just the individual. And this breaks down in numbers of ways. We've found out that the individual, the I in the society, is not one at all. And it wasn't until we got into Scientology we found out what we were processing when we were processing the first dynamic. We separated out all the chaff and the old shoes and numerous other things, wives and… By the way, do you know that some men have children also as part of the first dynamic? Their children are part of the first dynamic, and so forth? Well after we'd separated all these things off of the individual, only a Scientologist can appreciate this joke, we had nothing left.

Now here, here then, we moved immediately into the, the second dynamic. We just considered this first dynamic the individual and those things immediately appertaining to him. And the second dynamic was divided into two parts. And the first part of the second dynamic was the sexual act, which was as itself, for itself, the sexual act. That is, sensation, pleasure, so forth, and pain and other things people get out of it. And the second part of the second dynamic was children, care and raising of. So the second dynamic actually being two, also has two parts. And these two parts are the sexual act and children.

Children are not inseparable from sex. You'll find, just a passing comment which we may touch upon later and maybe I'll forget it, is the child who is born to a sexually frigid couple whose second dynamic is very, very poor. Let us say they say, "Well you know, sex. Well I've gotten all of my ideas from sex. You know, from the book that they put out when I was a young girl. It's what every young girl should know." You find this poor kid getting kicked around, but thoroughly.

In other words, detest sex, detest the child. Now the second dynamic can get obsessive on the subject too, so can the love of children become obsessive. I've sometimes noted this in the German nation, that the love of children was actually not very rational or factual. It was just sort of compulsive or obsessive. One moment they say, "Ah, der kinder. Ach, magnificent. Horrible. Beat his head off!" Just like that. I mean, that was Hitlerian philosophy with regard to children. "Youth, youth, youth, we must perpetrate youth. Mow 'em down." You can see that Hitler's treatment of youth was slightly aberrated. You, there's something aberrated about it. But Hitler on the sexual front, wasn't there at all.

In fact, there were stories that went around which possibly was Allied propaganda. But having known several gentlemen of this ilk, they do become aberrated. He was responsible for wiping out an entire generation of German youth. Just like that, bluuugh. And yet children were wonderful. You know? He was sexually just that aberrated as far as the act itself was concerned. So there's a coordination in this second dynamic, between these two things. And when you find one of them bad, you'll find the other one of them off-beat too.

Alright, the third dynamic was the dynamic of groups. And this was man's effort to survive as a group. Now a group could be the Kiwanis Club or it could be a company in the army, or it could be the army, or it could be a nation. It didn't matter what size this group was, it was simply a collection of individuals. And by banding together into such a collection of individuals, man saw survival.

Alright, let's go up to the fourth dynamic and discover that this is man's urge toward survival. Each one of these dynamics could simply mean an urge toward survival as. And this fourth dynamic was man's urge to survive as mankind. And that is all of man, because they are men, seek to survive as men and for men. As people get more and more aberrated and less and less responsible, we find them falling away from the fourth dynamic. To this day, if you were to be asked suddenly, "Alright, what are you doing to preserve man on Earth?" You might search quite a little while to find something very active that you were doing. Of course that isn't true in Dianetics and Scientology, we are doing something very active.

But the ordinary individual out here, you drive into a service station, service station attendant comes up, remember this individual's a man, he has four dynamics. One, two, three, four. And that fourth dynamic is still a dynamic, his urge toward survival as a man. And we ask him, we say, "Alright, son, what have you done today to secure man's survival here on Earth?" And he'll say, "Huh?" You could say to him, "What have you done today to secure the survival of the Standard Oil Company?" And he'd say, "Oh, huh, not very much, but had a good day. I gypped a couple of customers and got a couple of bucks in it. I've been here…" You know, he did do something on a third dynamic. And you'd say, "Well now what have you done on the second dynamic lately?" He'd say, "Well, confidentially…" And you'd say, "What have you done for yourself today?" "Well, that's a big subject." See? What have you done or you felt today, see, would be the biggest of the subject.

That is, we come back down from that fourth 'til we're conscious on the third, just barely conscious on the third. And then pretty darn conscious on the second, both parts of it, one way or the other, and then tremendously conscious on the first. Well what do you know, as an individual becomes less and less alert, he becomes more and more aware on the lower dynamics progressively, until at last we have the individual only totally aware on the first dynamic. He says, "My greatest awareness is, I am. This is the greatest awareness which I have." And he has no awareness of we are.

Such an individual trying to get any pleasure out of sex, it forms a very interesting picture. You'd hardly call it an interesting sensation. Sex is a dual act. And the individual experiencing sexual pleasure and so on, actually experiences it to the degree that he, his partner experiences pleasure in this act. Otherwise, he's just experiencing the first dynamic. And finally he gets to be forty or something, and has things that the medical profession; medical profession's always inventing new maladies. And they've invented something called the male climacteric. We knew about the menopause, but the male climacteric has been invented recently by the medical profession, to assist in the sale of drugs by Parke, Lilly, Abbott and other companies we don't talk about.

And he gets up to the male climacteric and he says, "Sex, no good, no good. Can't do anything about it any more," so on. "Well maybe if I took," then he goes around to the doctor, you see. "Maybe if I took the doctor's advice," he goes around to the doctor. And the doctor says, "Well I tell you, confidentially, what you need Mr. Jones, is a little shot. And this stuff is very cheap. It's very cheap. It only costs twenty dollars a bottle. And you use up a bottle a week. And the amount of stock I have in Parke Davis has nothing to do with my recommendation."

Well the individual goes along on this stuff for several weeks, several months, several years, and the hypnotic effect of the doctor's suggestion wears off. The doctor's very cognizant of the fact that very often we can give somebody a suggestion and he then acts on the suggestion. You see, the doctor's very cognizant of this. He knows that in many cases it is this which cures the patient. You see, the mental suggestion. Why does he say in several cases or many cases? Why, why does he say in this minority mental suggestion is what effects the cure? Is it the drug that's doing the rest of it? That's what you're led to assume. You see?

Some people aren't as suggestible as others, and they don't get well. You get how that would be, and this would immediately establish the same ratio as the drug working or not working. Some people are not as suggestible as others. Does U-235 or whatever they're shooting people with now to cure the second dynamic, does this stuff work? Well, it works about to the degree that the individual is suggestible. What's happened to this individual? He's fallen back on the first dynamic. See, he's come off the second dynamic. Mankind and so forth, that's all drifted down. Any real or sincere interest which he has in any of these dynamics has dwindled to the first dynamic, and now at about forty, out goes the second dynamic, too.

Well, is he going to be made well by a few little shots? No. But he could be made well by extending his interest out into the society so that these dynamics are operative again. Now, the odd part of it is, is after he gets back to the first dynamic, he deserts the first dynamic and becomes obsessive on the second dynamic. And after he's gotten quite obsessive on the second dynamic, he's liable to drift off that and become obsessive on the third dynamic. And having drifted off obsessiveness on the third dynamic, you see, failed a few more times, he now becomes very obsessive on the fourth dynamic. You know?

Here we have again, this fellow I was talking to you a little while ago. You've probably forgotten him. But his name's Hitler. And Adolph Schickelgruber. And Adolph got up to a point where he loved the human race to such a degree that he was willing to kill every single one of them in order to guarantee their future happiness. This is German propaganda if you lived it at the time. This is Mein Kampf. My battle. His, all these, all of these great dictators have done the course I've just mentioned to you.

Now get, get the complete path. This is the true path. They start out, you see, and they've got these first four dynamics, they're just all operating fine, you know, they're right in there pitching on all four dynamics, about so tall, and they just say, "Oh man, the four dynamics," and, "Man, man, he's nice. Chinese, Negro, it doesn't matter, it's man. Man is man." And it's fine, and then they drift off and they finally find out that the hottentots,not so good. Of course there's just a little something wrong with the igloots. And the customs of, of the taterdactiles, that tribe that lives on the upper banks of the remergoderdamerung, very barbaric customs. See what he's doing? Falling away from the fourth dynamic. He's taught this in school. He's taught to fall away from the fourth dynamic and fall into the third dynamic, which is rah-rah-rah, flag. Third dynamic.

Alright, so he gets in there and he gets rah-rah-rah, flag, so that any time anybody says flag, he says, rah-rah-rah. Now I'm not running down loyalty or group spirit or anything of the sort, but I would say there's a little something wrong in getting everybody hypnotized to believe that nationalism is the cure for anything. Nationalism invented a couple of hundred years ago, a rather new experiment. Hasn't worked out. Lot's of barriers. You get a national, a state embraces, usually one of these big national states, embraces so many kinds of people, except here in the United States. We can understand nationalism here in the United States, it works. You see? More or less all the same people. Get the idea?

We do have a couple of minority groups, colored people. They don't come quite off as good as they should. But we're all one nation and we're a nation and we travel here and there in good transportation, good communication, our television programs emanate out there from Los Angeles and New York City and, well it's just American. It's American. You go here, it's American, there it's American. These days you couldn't even find somebody to talk with a hillbilly accent to cast him in Hollywood. Couldn't be done. Fellow would have to fake it up, he'd have to look at some of the older pictures.

In other words, nationalism is working in the United States. But let's regard China as a nation. I've gone fifty miles in China, and found an entirely different language being spoken. Entirely different language. So you happily say to somebody with your newly acquired knowledge of very poor workman Chinese, your brand new acquired knowledge. You were in this town for several days, you finally found out just exactly how you ask for things and you say grandly with this new, you say, "Give me a cup of tea, son." And the fellow looks at you and says, "Gob gob walla walla geduk. Wag wag, wack." Another language.

You talk to some of these Northern Chinese, you talk to them, you talk up to them. Great big people. And then you go down around Hong Kong and you talk to these people down in Hong Kong. And you find a big man down in Hong Kong talking. Completely dissimilar peoples. Some of the Chinese races, there are very many races in China. Some of these races are so dark that you would swear that they were from Africa. And some of these races are so light and so little slant-eyed that you would say, "Well, I wonder where these Americans came from?" It's a very, very astonishing thing. Here is a nation which doesn't talk one language, which doesn't have good communication, which doesn't have any of the things that you would say a nation. And somebody comes along and says, "Rah-rah-rah, new flag." And then we read in the newspapers, China has now gone communistic. China is now in the throws of a communistic revolution.

So we go over to one of these towns and we say, "Hey, how do you boys like communism?" "What?" "How do you like communism? How do you like your new government? You know? Your new government? The hot stuff that's going on up in Peking, you know, red star, all that sort of thing. How you like that?" "Oh they got another government in Peking? Oh, is that so? Say by the way, I have some new lilies down here, wouldn't you like some? Come down and take a look at them." Let's talk about something interesting. China's been cut to ribbons and called a nation for so many years that they've gotten bored with the whole idea. It is not a nation, not even vaguely. Nor is Russia a nation, not even vaguely. There are so many languages talked in Russia that they can't even have a decent revolution.

Very recently we have had several revolutions attempted in Russia. The Ukraine tried to revolt some little time ago, and we didn't read about it because the Russians didn't brag about it. But we were rather, be rather astonished if we understood the people of the Ukraine and the difference they might have between themselves and the people around Stalingrad. They talk a different tongue, they don't have transportation in common, or anything of the sort.

So actually, you're not looking at a third dynamic manifestation when you're looking at most of the nations on Earth, you're looking at a, a very small third here plus a third, plus a third, plus a third, plus, plus, plus, plus, plus a third. You see? And here are all these small third dynamics united together by some political boundary which we call then, a nation. Well it's not like that in this country. We're a group. We're Americans.

But to say we're Chinese and then mean anything, this would be a silly statement. Similarly, Russia. Even France. Don't try to make yourself understood in Southern France. If you took high school French don't try to make yourself understood in Paris, either, you'll, they'll go away. Talk English, our boys have been over there and taught them how to talk. But you have these very vast differences, very vast differences in one part of the country and another. Well that third dynamic then actually embraces anything as large as a nation or any segment of the nation, which we call the group. So after we've broken down to any degree, the fourth dynamic, we are then dealing with third dynamics, aren't we until, with this enormous strata of organizations, until we're right straight down there with the basic group of mankind, which is the family. And the family actually fits just to the upper end of the second dynamic. That's a family. That's the basic group of man.

Now we don't care whether there were eight wives and one husband or eight husbands and one wife, and these plus the children constituted a family. Monogamy does not mean family. A family is simply a group for the purpose of sexual pleasure and the rearing of children and mutual economic advantages amongst ourselves. You know, a small group. Therefore, we have this actual group, it's an actual group, the group of the family. The race wouldn't be anywhere without the family. We have this actual group in opposition to all these enormous number of third dynamics. See? Nationalism, rah-rah-rah, now countyism, stateism, cityism, you know, let's all get together and be the western hemisphere, the western nations, the United Nations representing all nation except all those nations they don't represent. Groups, groups, groups. Here you have this, and there's an enormous amount of turmoil and misunderstanding amongst these groups because none of them actually are solidly a natural element.

All the white people of Earth, the Caucasian races, are not bound together in one group, and the Caucasian race is not even split up into unit groups. Did you realize that? There are Caucasians all over the world. You go into India and you'll find a certain strata of the populace is Caucasian. Probably whiter than we are. We look here and there, we say well alright, stick the black race, that's an easy race. Oh, I'm sorry, but they don't split up into a natural group either, that has anything whatsoever to do with nations, states, counties, or any boundary. You see? Here are all the black people, the colored people who are here in America and all the colored people who are in the Middle East and all the colored people who are in Africa, and we find no national boundary encompassing this natural line.

In other words, the racial group is cut up by natural boundaries, so therefore we have an artificiality so introduced here, that we actually cannot study the third dynamic worth a nickel. So opposing all these artificial boundaries we have this second dynamic, and it is the only thing real, as far as most of the men on Earth are concerned. They have drifted down from that fourth dynamic. They can't even think in terms of that fourth dynamic. They have drifted down from the fourth dynamic and they still remain to some degree, in some section of the third dynamic, but it's not really real. The club, the lodge, yeah, we'd like to go to the club, we've joined an organization, wear a pin, it's all set, it's all nothing, really, against that sort of thing, most fellows would tell you. But when it's real, it's the family.

It's the family in which they were raised, it's the family they themselves were raised in. And that's real. The ambitions and goals of the individual members of that family are real ambitions and real goals. The worries and concerns, the personality quirks of parts of that family are completely real to the individual. So much so that he is found to be, under processing, sharing all of these quirks all through the family. You see, it's very tightly knit as a group. So much so that the race of China depends for it's good government, upon the family unit.

The way China is conquered, it's organized into families. And there are something like ten families organized into a unit, and then there are a hundred of these ten family units, and so forth. It's a certain system that they use over there, so that the Communists can come in and tap some fellow on the shoulder and say, "You tell all of your families they're Communists now." Fellow says, "Alright, but what do I tell them? What do I say is Communism?" "Well, share the land and work together and be nice, you know, and pay so much in terms of revenue," And fellow says, "Well you're just talking about government. You're just talking about the way things go." "That's right. Now you just tell everybody that. Get in line, you're all Communists now."

And so they tell those family units and those family leaders tell the smaller units, tell the smaller units, tell the smaller units, and you've finally got the individual family, a small family working out on a farm and they say, "Well, according to the boss of our block of families, why we're Communists. That's what we are." You, this is idiocy, isn't it? I mean, you, you come along and you try to have a political discussion with him, and he would say, "Well what is government? Oh, are you talking about my father?"

Now here is an old nation which has been run across many times in many political furors, and this old nation has finally come up against the only reality of government which it could really grasp, which is families. And the obedience of the child in this society, and the allegiance of the child, is either divorced from or adhered to, his family, so that we do not have a juvenile delinquency problem really, on the third dynamic. We have one on the second. You see how this would be, juvenile delinquency?

If the individual is encompassed in a government which he considers real, and that government told him to be a good boy, to stand by his friends, to study hard, to be nice to old people, you know, and the various things which make a civilization a fact. If he was as well indoctrinated into it and satisfied with that policy and was not immediately and constantly driven out of the family bosom, we do not have a bad citizen, we have a good citizen. He goes along in life and he's fairly successful, he gets along fine, he hasn't that many aberrations.

Sure, maybe the old man was a little tough on him sometimes, and maybe things didn't go too well, maybe they were broke once in a while, but his individual is as good a citizen as he is well governed. Get that. But what governs him? Mama and papa, that's what governs him. And when this has been a bad government, we have a bad citizen. And when papa and mama don't know how to run 8-C, we have aberration.

I broke a case the other morning. A fellow came staggering up to the door and he's you know, staggering up and he said, "I'm restimulated." I didn't have any time to fool around with him, I wanted to get some sleep. I was busy. And so I asked him, asked him, just to give you a very rough resume of this, I asked him which member of his family would he least object to running 8-C on him. This fellow was a Scientologist, so that this made sense. Just with this particular technique of directing him here and there, to touch various things. Which member would he least mind. And he thought it over and thought it over. And this was a brand new view to him, you know, which member of his family would he least mind?

"Oh, well, that's easy. Father." Father would be the best one to run 8-C on him. That's fine. Well who would he most mind as an auditor, out of that outfit? And he said, "Ho, my mother. Oh, how horrible. Just the idea of my mother directing me through the steps of 8-C would be more than I could possibly tolerate." I said, "You're sure about this? You sure you wouldn't mind your father running 8-C on you?" Long comm lag. He says, "Have my father run 8-C on me? No. No, because it would all be so vague there would be no wall and it wouldn't matter whether or not I went over and touched it or not. Or was there any wall there? It'd just be sort of vague and what's the use? At least my mother would have given me a good, swift kick if I hadn't walked over to the wall. Of course she would have forgotten what she'd asked me to do just before I got to the wall, but at least she would have gotten some motion into it."

And I said, "Well you're sure your father would be the worst one and your mother would be the best one, then?" "Oh, no, not, no. My older sister. No, no. My older sister, I couldn't stand to have her run 8-C on me. The idea of my older sister hurting, what are you trying to do to me?" I just kept asking him this question back and forth, and he kept changing his mind one way or the other, and all of a sudden he said, "You know, you know, it's too bad my family didn't know something about Scientology. We'd have been a lot happier." And he was totally out of restimulation, felt perfectly relaxed. Why? Because the machinery of this preclear was matched up to each one of these people. And his machinery was directing him this way and directing him that way.

His father was represented in the preclear's anatomy as a sort of a machine that vaguely told him he didn't have any place to go anyhow, and why go there, but if he was going to go he might as well, well what's the use? And the other machine that's, is representing his mother in his anatomy saying, "You've got to get over there and do that now, I, something else now, but no, something else," you see? And we just threw these machi; and his older sister represented as somebody who would nag at him and be very catty about the whole thing. And if he did do something, be completely contemptuous of it, you know, and say, "Well, I guess you think you're pretty smart now."

So he had this little critical machine which was going, cheep, cheep, up here. And we just simply separated out this machinery on the basis of how bad these people would have been at 8-C, and the preclear of course, was momentarily free of this machinery. Still seems to be free of it after a week or so. I wanted to go back to bed, myself. But he left. It was about seven o'clock in the morning. Auditor's Code says you shouldn't start auditing until eight. That's what I told him.

Well now, here is a problem then, on the second dynamic. The second dynamic as a nation falls to pieces, as a group becomes less and less capable of government of the individual. We find the family coming more and more to the fore as a single directive control. Now to; answer me this. What is a nation doing blaming the family for not raising a better boy or a better girl? What does a police judge down here mean by leaning across this big parapet he calls a bench, and saying to somebody, I never sat on one, did you? I don't know why they call it the bench.

Anyway, he's saying, "And if you had been a better mother your boy would not have murdered that fellow last night." They, they do that every once in a while, it's a habit. He's a representative of the state. If that state were anything like a true group, if that state had any real affinity or governing potential, it wouldn't be driven, these individuals wouldn't be driven down to this point where the only government they would know anything about, would be that they got from their father and mother.

So when we have a third dynamic, dynamic sitting back and saying, "No responsibility, no responsibility, it's all you second dynamic, you know, you fathers and mothers. And you've got to straighten out everything and we're not going to help you any, we're going to tax hell out of you." We get this picture of a very sloppy government. So that actually today as in most times of unrest or upset, we have the second dynamic as the biggest government of the individual. Interesting, isn't it?

The individual is restrained or guided in life by the government in which he was raised. And we keep reading in the newspapers about the tremendous importance of Russia, you know, and the tremendous importance of the big decision that was just made in the senate yesterday. And we don't read anyplace over here, where fathers are now going to be permitted a little bit better allowance for having that many kids. We don't read that. And how fathers and mothers are invited to this center to get a little bit more know how. You don't read much of that.

Russia puts a lot of that out, by the way. They say, "All fathers and mothers should come in here and get wised up." I don't read Russian, but Russian reads very funny these days. The old Czarist politeness of orders, the enormous ponderousness of great dignity, is now totally missing in the Russian military scene, I mean the governmental scene. What's the difference? And, and it's, "Yuse guys had better get in here before we liquidate the lot of yuse." Well, anyway, fathers and mothers are supposed to go in, but they're supposed to learn how they're supposed to teach Communism to the kid. That's what they're supposed to learn. They just both go into the government propaganda line hand out.

This is sound, if you wanted to make a huge third dynamic work. We do not have a problem in the United States, of making the third dynamic, the U.S. nation work, because we as a nation of people more or less gathered together under the same comm lines, but toward the same goals, don't have any problem really, in making the nation work. If we had a little bit more of a problem making the nation work, maybe we wouldn't have dumped all the responsibility in the world on the head of the second dynamic.

Alright, where, where do we find aberration? Well it looks to me, in a nation that doesn't have very high toned national excitements, where it doesn't have enormous national interests for the individual, that the second dynamic and the first dynamic are made to work together, one against the other, back and forth, as the actual action of living. This is the action of life and living. The first dynamic banging against the second dynamic.

Now after a soldier's been to war and has been part of a very, very closely knit working together, "We're all going to get shot or we're all going to win," sort of a spirit, after he's been mixed up with a third dynamic as represented, no matter how poorly, by military company or regiment, he's gotten this third dynamic sort of untapped. Now he starts running on three dynamics, when he starts, you know? But the nation which he saved is running on two dynamics. And he's running on three dynamics. Now this starts to look silly to him. He doesn't know quite what's wrong, but he thinks things ought to be organized a little bit better. And he thinks a lot of things, but the main part of it is, is he's had a taste of a third dynamic.

Now you really could take a nation and make a good, solid third dynamic, you really could. But you would have to give people something to look forward to, not a tour of duty in the army. You'd have to give very large national goals as to what the nation was actually trying to do to the rest of the peoples on Earth, or what they meant toward the rest of the peoples on Earth.

In other words, it would really have to be lined up here, pretty close. You know, one, two, three, four, five, six. And these points my dear little boy, you are going to memorize immediately after your geography lesson, and that's us. See? And then really stick with it and really do these things. This would be quite a picture, wouldn't it? Well we're not doing that at this time, we kind of swim along in the second dynamic and our population is knocking against the first and the second dynamic. So these two working together make most of the adventure, most of the adventure which people experience.

There's the adventure of self, runs down the street, barks his toe, falls down, skins his shin. See? Adventure. He raises up suddenly and hits his head on the roof of the car. Adventure. He goes in, takes a nice shirt. He knows it's a nice shirt 'cause it's just been to the laundry, out of the laundry packet, and it's still got ink all over it. Adventure. I don't care how minute these adventures are, but something's happening, isn't it? He finds there's a knock in his motor, and that's more serious than having a murmur in his heart, in this society. And that's fine, he's got something to think about, something to worry about, something to produce randomity in action, concerning it.

He goes in, he can take a whole bunch of pills, you know, pills. He puts them in, you know, bubbles in the glass or something of the sort, and he takes that and it's supposed to do something. Adventure. He goes down and sees the doctor and says, "Solve me." Doctor can't and he really develops something to be solved, so he goes and sees a Scientologist. And he says, "I betcha you can't solve me." People are getting superstitious about Scientology. "Bet you can't solve me." That's an adventure.

But on the second dynamic we have a great many more adventures of considerable moment, many of them. If you don't think the second dynamic is adventurous, you should process somebody on his first wedding. Of course, when I say first wedding, I'm talking about modern American civilization. Weddings. You should process him on his first wedding. I mean the man, you know, the bride's supposed to be nervous. Well, you find out this individual's been in a state of shock all the years since, see? You turn on terror charges and everything else. Didn't matter, he went up before the Justice of the Peace and the Justice of the Peace hit his stamp and said, "OK kid, you're married. Ten bucks." Didn't matter how informal this thing was, we've still got a shock case.

Alright, now that is, that adventure into the very solid second dynamic, is pretty aberrative. Pretty darned aberrative, because he's not accustomed to adventures on the second dynamic. When he's walking up and down the hospital hall waiting for the word, whether or not he's the father of twins, triplets or an idiot, he's undergoing lots of stress. See? But these by and large, are adventures. When he was very young and the girl down the street which was kind of a tomboy, took him out back of the barn, that's another adventure.

We have all manner of adventures connected with this action. Son comes home, sets his bag down kind of sheepishly in the, just inside the living room door so that he can sort of pick it up and run. And dad's sitting there at the supper table, he says, "Well you, son," he says, "Gee, I didn't know it was Easter Vacation already." The son says, "It's not. I was expelled." It's an adventure. There's action, action, action here on the first and second dynamics, so that it's more then, than just a bunch of sensation that we're talking about, if we're talking about the, the sexual act, the begetting of children, the holding together and raising of a family, and the management of the group which those two things represent. And we're talking about a lot more then than what Freud meant when he said that nasty word that shocked the whole of late Victorian Europe, libido theory.

Freud walked on, we don't know with what intent but he certainly created an effect in 1894 when he said, "Any and every aberration which you have is directly attributable to the hidden bestial sexual impulses which you have buried in that nasty little unconscious mind of yours. And if it weren't for the fact that a huge and automatic sensor, not under your control either fortunately, stood between you and that horrible beast, god help us all! And if we psychoanalysts can just drill for oil deeply enough in your cranium we will finally come up with a small, hairy beast that even you will be horrified to behold." The libido theory.

Now he really had people a little shocked. But what they were shocked about was that all this was going to get uncovered at last. They hadn't thought it was important before this time. She said, "After all, on my marriage night my husband was absolutely satisfied that I was a virgin and he's been satisfied ever since. And now this; you mean to get well, to get well I've, I've, you mean I've got to tell some, some…" No, psychoanalysis has never been popular. In the sixty years more or less, sixty-one years since the release of the libido theory, we have it dwindling, actually, rather than advancing. The theory is more of less the same, and so on.

The newest thing that was added to this was added to it just the other day in Scientology, and that is the fact that any cut communication line is aberrative. Where you look for an aberration, look for a cut communication line to cure it. Naturally we understand then, if we are thoroughly inhibited on the second dynamic as far as speech is concerned, if one, we cannot say anything about our sexual peccadillos; if two, we cannot say anything about our sexual misadventures, they are different than peccadillos. Our sexual misadventures we can say nothing about those. If we mustn't tell the wife about Gertie, if we mustn't tell the husband about Bill who after all, was a perfectly good guy, too.

If we mustn't tell mama and papa about the strange urges that come over us and if there's some mystic thing called a god, called the devil; you know, hardly anybody ever thinks of the devil as a god, but he's god. This god standing back there ready to snatch us away to hellfire in case we step out of line on this second dynamic, if this is the case, then, then the number of cut communication lines add up to an enormous number of cut communication lines, don't they? And if an individual is as sane as he has connected or consecutive or free communication lines, a few more cut communication lines aren't going to do him any good. You see this?

Now there's enough cut communication lines already, without knocking out all the four letter words in the language. You see that? So we even make the language associated with much of the second dynamic, hidden. But let's look how much further the second dynamic is cut on a communication line. Actually, there are many, many things talked over between husband and wife which never reach the neighbors. You ever thought of that? Just that. Simple, isn't it? They go to a bridge party or something, you know, and, and they can't make nothing out everybody there, so they come home and do it. You know, they say, "Did you hear that big blowhard, the husband says, "telling me about that tarpon he caught. The man wouldn't know a tarpon from a minnow." And the wife says, "It, actually, it was his wife's hat. It gives to laugh. Probably cost seventy-five dollars, too, damn her!"

You know, here are cut communication lines. Here are two people who are out of association, now on the third dynamic, and they're communicating between themselves with, consequently, a certain amount of cut line. They're saying things which they don't want repeated outside this. And then they start getting little ones. And little pitchers have big ears. And these ears will fan, and these jaws will wag. And so, papa and mama go to this party and they come home and papa says, "I actually think he's a drunken swine." Little Willy, flap, flap, flap. Right down the street flap, flap, flap. And things get cool on the social front.

So little Willy is told, "Willy, if you ever again under any circumstances, open your big yap on what we say to each other or what goes on in this house, we will spank your little bottom 'til you won't be able to sit down for two months." Little Willy is impressed. He also has a cut communication line. But he doesn't know quite how the communication line should be cut. So usual course of action is just never to mention anything that goes on in the family, then he's safe. You see? Just never say anything. You know?

Daddy comes home, he gives mom a nice diamond bracelet and a bunch of flowers. Little Willy says, "Gee, you know that was pretty nice." But in talking to his friends he doesn't mention it, not even vaguely. Be alright to say something about it, but he doesn't mention it. In other words, his lines get cut around the perimeter of the family pretty thoroughly, don't they? Well, there's nothing really wrong with this, except he isn't differentiating what he should be quite about and what he should be noisy about. You see, he isn't differentiating, because nobody can trust his censorship which was what Herr Sigmund, Doctor Freud was mostly concerned with. Because nobody can actually trust his censorship, they have to totally censor. You get the idea?

This is the, you know, if you can't trust somebody's judgement to let this go and not let that go, then the best thing to do if you're really upset about it, is just shut the works. The other solution rarely occurs to the family. And that's be sufficiently high toned so you don't say and do things that won't stand repeating. Only this solution almost never occurs to man, because he's not that wide open on his comm lines.

Alright, so here you have, here you have the second dynamic moving in on the communication lines and cutting them up further than four letter words. Four letter words we, we know, you see, positively and completely that people shouldn't go around using these four letter words. We, we know that. Nobody should do that. There are certain parts of the body and certain actions which bodies do, which are not mentioned or described in polite company. Of course if the company's really polite, such as Park Avenue and so forth, this is all we talk about. But, but in midly polite company, why, we just don't mention these things.

Alright, it's not just that that is a communication block right here, you see, not just that that is a communication block. It's actually the organization of the family itself, it's hopes, it's actions and so on. The family considers itself a small fortress and it depends upon silence, more than anything else, to get it along in the world, when all that will ever get it along in the world is a gift of gab.

Now let's take a look then, and see that there's no real difference between falling out here on the second dynamic, and falling out as ones' self from communication. When the preclear comes in to you and he says, "You know I have horrible phobias and I don't know half the time whether I'm coming or going," why look on the second dynamic? You're looking at the most cut communication lines you ever saw in your life. This fellow's just come in and told you, "I cannot communicate with a perfectly ordinary phobia." See? "I can't communicate." When he starts to complain about something or says, "I cannot communicate," I mean when he says, "This is bothering me," he's simply saying to you, "I can't communicate with this," that's all. You get the idea?

So the individual can fall out of communication on the second dynamic and go out of communication on the first dynamic, just as easy as can be. Where they really get to a child however, is on the second dynamic. And this is normally where you find lines being cut. But they are not the lines which Sigmund Freud thought were, should be cut, or were being cut. There wasn't some nasty little experience down here someplace. All we had to do was go snip, just like that, and bing, we have a person who is in perfectly good condition.

He never did this, by the way, he just said it could be done. He just kept saying psychoanalysis did this. It never has done this, because it isn't just one line to one incident that is cut. It's all lines one might have on whatever dynamic, to the entire environment. You see? And it's the degree that these lines are cut which makes aberration and separation in the society. You see this? An individual is as well as he can communicate with anything. Does this mean then immediately, that an individual should go around and use four letter words? No. The people who use four letter words are so inhibited on the subject of sex that they've got to talk about it. Neat, isn't it? It's flipped on them.

Alright, as far as communication lines are concerned, the society is thought to be very, very stern on the subject, the thought that the society doesn't quite like this or that kind of communication. Well I'll let you in on a little secret. There are two things punishable in this universe. Two things. These are the only two crimes that this universe really punishes. And any other subordinate order of crime is based upon one or the other of these two crimes. So we could categorize all crimes under these two crimes. And one is being there. That's a crime. You're punished for being there.

Actually this reacts so thoroughly upon a child that just being scolded he thinks basically everything that's being said to him is just this, "You shouldn't be here. You shouldn't be here. You are not wanted, you should scram. We do not want you in the family, you are being exiled." Actually, this isn't what's being said to him, what they're saying to him is, "Willy, if you break one more cream pitcher I don't know what I'm going to do with you. This is my mother's cream pitcher." That's what's being said to him, but the interpretation, the basic interpretation he thinks is being said to him is simply, "We do not want you, run, beat it, scram, we, you're through, you're not personable enough. You were there. See? It's, you're there, you're there. That's no good. Disappear, damn you!" You get the idea?

Alright, so that's one crime and there's one crime that if anything, is even worse than this. That's communicating. Being there and communicating is unforgivable, but communicating all by itself is a crime. What's wrong? Communicating. And we look over the law. We have a thing called the law, I think we still do. I heard there was understood the other day there was a judge, he's located in some back county I think in South Dakota, and he settled a case with no taint of bribe or influence or anything of the sort. And he settled it according to the laws of the state, not his own whims. I heard about this. I think it was the case of a lost car key or something like that. Fella had lost a car key and he was suing for its return and it was returned. The judge adjudicated the whole thing right straight out. Of course this lonely case shouldn't give us the whole picture.

Now the law dramatizes this so that if you come in and make a clean statement of exactly what you have done, you know, "I chopped down the cherry tree, ma, with my own little hatchet," the law says, "He communicated. Off with his head." About the only way an individual is safe under law is no communication. If he just refuses to communicate and never says anything, sooner or later he'll get off. This is so pertinent that the Magna Carta and other things like this always have some little flavor of this in it, the Constitution and Bill Of Rights for instance, had this. A man may, doesn't have to testify against himself.

So here we have communication as the crime, and it's the only crime there is. And you wonder why people are sometimes nasty to you. You walk up to them and you say, "Well how are you Joe? You're not feeling so good, there's something I could, you know, tell you about," or something of this sort. The fellow, "Noaaw, wraau, gruu!" You say, "What have I said, what have I possibly said that could get this individual upset?" Oh, you, you're just getting too deep in the significance. You said. You understand? That's the crime. And besides, you compounded crimes, you see, you were there and you said something. Unforgivable! It's something that must not be done in this universe. So let's look at the second dynamic.

Here we could have a whole cult erected upon the fact that there must be no sex. In other words, this is the dirtiest, meanest, rottenest trick than an individual ever did. Do you know what horrible crime sex is? Well I can tell you with no slightest trouble whatsoever. An individual communicates in such a way that he goes up the genetic line and appears in the future. So he can be there at a future date. Isn't that a horrible thing? So we sure as the devil better cut that line, we'd better cut that one but good. An individual communicates with another individual and as a result thereof, somewhere up the track is another thereness. Somebody's going to be up the track into the future and he's going to be communicating from there, the first thing you know. And we can't get our hands on him to strangle him! So the best thing to do is to cut it all off by saying, "Sex is evil."

And so, if you can cut enough lines on sex, if you can cut sex enough to pieces, if you can get people upset enough or worried enough, if you can get youth believing that by simple sexual acts they can go crazy, no evidence of this at all by the way, we then you see, have accomplished the purpose of severing the most basic communication of all. We would have destroyed the whole human race. This is the goal of the nuclear physicist, not the goal of the common citizen. So where sex is frowned upon, where it is knocked around, you generally find an impulse to destroy, wipe out or obliterate, not to construct or go forward. This doesn't mean that promiscuous sex should be something entered upon immediately, because I personally like to know whether or not my kids are my kids. Makes a difference. Of course, I'm luckier than most, I have red hair.

Well, the only aberrative thing could not be considered to be the second dynamic. The only aberrative thing could be considered to be a cut communication line. This line could be cut on the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth or seventh or eighth dynamics, and would be equally aberrative. It just happens that this time and this place, we happen to have fallen away to where individuals are living for their adventures on the first and second dynamic only. And so we find most of the crimes of the world are on the first or second dynamic. If they were any higher than that, they'd be on the fifth or sixth dynamic. You understand?

Very well. I do not think that the second dynamic should be entirely abolished. I do not stand upon a platform of shooting all men or executing all women. But I do believe that some of the people who would like to should be restrained. Sex is a wonderful subject, I could talk about it for a long time and often have. So thank you very much, and good night.