Re: Johnd's story part 5
Johnd’s story part 5
A Trip to the Mecca of Threat and Pretense
Fall, 1971. As instructed, I watch my bags being taken out to the plane I’m about to board at Los Angeles International Airport. I see them on the baggage lorry and watch as they’re put into the cargo hold. I’m not entirely sure why I have to do this, but it’s what the guy at the Guardian’s Office told me to do. As far as I know, I’m carrying no confidential documents, but I am carrying a couple of packages from the Guardian’s Office, Scientology’s secret service, dedicated to defending the cult and smiting its enemies. I’m on my way to the Apollo to do some special training. The G.O has given me a ‘cover.’ I’m working for ‘Operation Transport Corporation,’ (which I understood to be a real shell corporation chartered in Panama) and I’m on my way to get managerial training on the corporation’s ship, which is in reality scientology’s not so mysterious flagship, the Apollo, floating home of L. Ron Hubbard since 1967.
The ‘cover story’ is a little disturbing as it means there was some sort of problem with identifying myself as a scientologist going to study scientology. I wondered what the problem could be. I assume it’s something to do with keeping activities aboard the ship secret so as not to attract the attention of the enemies of human progress. But the ‘cover’ seems silly and unnecessary. Anybody could penetrate it. I stop the thought process before it goes too far. I’m flying via Madrid to Portugal, a car ride from where the Apollo is docked. When I land in Portugal, a customs official rips open both of the packages I was carrying for the G.O. One appears to contain canned orange juice, the other what looks like a couple of auditing folders. The guy asks me if they are for the ‘capitan.’ I say yes, and he lets me go. I’ve never figured out why I was carrying canned orange juice.
Two guys from the ship meet me at the airport and drive me to the Apollo in a tiny Fiat.
I’ve been sent to ‘Flag’ from Celebrity Centre Los Angeles to do a special pilot course called the Tech Establishment Officer Course. I’m told it’s based on a recent philosophical breakthrough Hubbard has made in the field of management know how. I will be among the first staff members to do the course. When I finish the course I’ll come back to CCLA and implement what I learn. I don’t know why I was chosen for the honor. I’ve only been on staff in the S.O. for a year. I had been doing training in preparation for becoming an auditor. Suddenly I’m on my way to ‘the ship’ to do administrative training. There’s irony in this circumstance, as you shall see.
We arrive at the Apollo and board. I’m shown to what will be my berthing. On the way we pass a scary, scowling officer. Cropped beard, small, lean and in blue. Steely, dictatorial pomp in his gaze. Is he an OT? OTs maybe don’t need to be polite? Is he perceiving my withholds? My recurring doubts? Does he see me as some sort of near wog weakling? My guide quickly introduces me as an arriving student and the officer nods and gives a polite welcome, his demeanor changing somewhat. My guide explains who the officer was and his high rank. I don’t care right now though. I want to get to see what Flag’s vaunted delivery of training and processing looks like. I want to see what happens when scientology is applied to the hilt, as it must be here in the presence of the founder.
The ship is fairly dingy. That doesn’t bother me because I know it’s an old reconditioned ship and it would have been a waste of resources to buy a new one. The berthing is cramped and dorm style. This does bother me. I really don’t like sleeping in the same room with other guys, but I tell myself the course will only take a few weeks. I’m in a daze. Here I am on the ship with Ron. The ship seems unimpressive. I have to room with a bunch of guys. The crew I’ve met so far don’t seem that friendly, in fact there seems to be too much rank, threat and servility. I don’t know what to make of it. What the f(&^. I’ll just do the course and we’ll see what happens. Maybe it’ll all become clear later.
Next day I route onto the TEO course. As I recall, the course room was in an area near the bow of the ship. At times when the ship was underway in big seas, the course room would pitch up and down. Looking back on it, this was really the most enjoyable part of the TEO course—a ride with crashing sound effects.
Briefly, scientology class rooms beyond the introductory level are very different from most classrooms outside of the cult. Instead of listening to a live lecture and asking questions or doing lab work, students sit reading Hubbard’s written works or listening to recorded lectures or doing other prescribed exercises. Instead of a teacher, instructor or professor, the scientology course room has a ‘supervisor,’ whose job it is to observe the students as they study and ensure that they are moving through their course ‘checksheets.’ (A list in order of the things a student must read, hear and do to complete a course.) If a student asks a question about the course materials, he/she is never answered but referred to the appropriate Hubbard reference. In fact it is a serious transgression to answer a student’s question. Any interpretation whatsoever of Hubbard’s materials is a serious and punishable offense. The idea is that scientology students need to learn scientology directly from Hubbard, who is seen as the sole ‘source’ of scientology.
The ‘reasoning’ behind this is a bit sketchy, but let me do my best to explain it. Hubbard claimed that he had been and was the only one capable of developing workable mental/spiritual therapy. Others had made organizational contributions, but no one but Hubbard had been up to uncovering and remedying the hidden causes of what Hubbard saw as the disempowerment of once vastly powerful beings he called ‘thetans.’ (Rhymes with satans.)
This is the rock upon which scientology is built: We were once beings with immense powers of creation and perception. We lost these powers over the millennia through a series of convoluted catastrophes, and as a result now have to endure the pain and fearful uncertainty of human existence. Hubbard was somehow gifted with superior perception and was, despite great danger, able to unravel the fantastically intricate trap in which we thetans were stuck and actually chart a way out. Or rather a way BACK to our native state of total freedom. Others had tried and failed utterly as they just weren’t bright enough. Only Hubbard had succeeded. The result was scientology ‘technology,’ an array of highly directive psychotherapeutic procedures run by a practitioner called an ‘auditor,’ plus a number of ‘confidential’ techniques that one did without an auditor.
Obviously the ‘only way out’ of the trap, ‘the road to total freedom’ was precious beyond reckoning. The procedures had to be applied with absolute fidelity to Hubbard’s instructions. To do otherwise would be to deny freedom to billions of trapped ‘thetans.’
In scientology this central cluster of assertions is repeated over and over: Ron was the only one capable of discovering the cause and remedies of thetans’ downfall. His technology really works, if applied correctly. Failure to correctly apply the tech is equivalent to denying freedom and salvation to others. If you don’t get spectacular results, the technology hasn’t been correctly applied, and the fault lies with someone other than Hubbard, quite possibly you.
If these ideas become ingrained--as they do through constant repetition, and other manipulative means—life actually becomes scary and guilt ridden for the most dedicated scientologists. Failure is of course constant and you tend to either blame yourself or become adept at scapegoating, punishing and threatening others.
From the assertion that Hubbard was the sole source of mental/spiritual betterment and that others were too stupid, it somehow followed that LRH could be the only teacher/lecturer, perhaps because another, stupider being might alter Hubbard’s meaning, misinterpret it or even worse, enter his/her own invariably wrong thinking into the teaching. (I’m not saying that it really follows logically. It is actually contradictory to say that other scientologists, despite the enabling benefits of the ‘tech’ are unable even to teach scientology.) Being a Scientologist meant that you accepted the basic ‘scource’ premise and with it the idea that you got scientology only directly from ‘source.’ (See Hubbard’s long rant in “Keeping Scientology Working,” at
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=9 and elsewhere on the net.) Somehow this idea was also extended to Hubbard’s writings and lectures on mundane administrative aspects of scientology.
Thus free discussion of scientology by scientologists banned as it would involve interpretation. Student questions may be answered only by reference to Hubbard’s writings or recorded lectures. If a student has a question, the supervisor’s stock response is ‘What do your materials state?’
If a student expresses disagreement, seems to be making slow progress, yawns, seems to lose interest, or seems to be sitting there thinking, the supervisor intervenes by asking the student to look for and clear up any ‘misunderstood words.’ If this doesn’t seem to work, the student is sent to a specialist called the ‘word clearer’ who usually puts the student on the ‘e-meter’ and finds ‘misunderstood’ words and gets them defined in a dictionary. The words might be special scientology words or words in the regular language.
This by the way was EXTREMELY effective in my experience, though mostly not in a positive way. It redirects independent thought about the subject inward toward self-correction and thus interrupts the thought process. Also, it is VERY, VERY easy to find misunderstood or partially understood words on people. We have TONS of them. Languages contain hundreds of thousands of words, many words have multiple meanings and meanings change with context, usage and the passage of time. Different people often use words differently. Word meanings are not fixed. You can just about always find ‘misunderstoods.’ That’s the little secret. So, having found and cleared up a definition or two, the student feels a bit brighter of course because he learned something. The student also tends to accept the experience as proof that any deviation from simply learning what the materials say is caused not by confusing materials but by misunderstood words because words are just about always found. The student’s thought process has been effectively halted and suppressed. So a positive activity—learning vocabulary--is turned on its head and made into a thought stopping, introverting activity.
So, picture the course room. Students are seated at tables, reading Hubbard’s materials. They are using ‘demo kits’—bits of odds and ends that the student uses to ‘demonstrate’ in a visible way the often very elusive and invisible subjects of Hubbard’s teachings. Some are doing ‘clay demos,’ modeling key ideas in clay to make them seem to have a basis in reality. They are frequently looking up words. Some students are in pairs doing drills on the specific procedures they will employ when they finish their courses. A student is at the ‘word clearer.’ Other students are giving each other ‘checkouts.’ ( A ‘checkout’ is a specific procedure used to ensure that students understand what Hubbard says and have an idea of how they can apply it in life, without questioning what Hubbard says.) The supervisor is walking around the course room holding a clipboard with pink paper clipped to it. At the start of course time, the supervisor goes around to each students and sets a ‘target’ of how far along on the checksheet the student will get to by the end of course time. This done, she/he prowls the course room until she sees a student perhaps failing to use a demo kit, or a dictionary, doing an improper clay demo, not exactly following Hubbard’s instructions on how drills are done, doing an improper ‘checkout.’ Then she writes up a ‘pink sheet’ and hands it to the student. The pink sheet is an order for the student to restudy Hubbard’s teachings on whatever the student was doing wrong. To put it mildly, it’s a pretty controlled setting. I had seen it before of course, but on the Apollo the experience was much more serious. There was little humor, and to me, lots of implied threat. A sense that I had to get through the course in the expected time or the consequences would be very bad. After all, the future of the universe was at stake.
Imagine also if you will, feeling the taboos and commandments you’ve gradually adopted as a scientologist. No discussion. Refer only to Hubbard’s words. If something doesn’t make sense, look up words, ‘demo’ the idea, finally, think of a possible interpretation that might make sense, but don’t discuss it or ask the supervisor if she thinks it’s right. Don’t sit there thinking. If you have problems with the materials you just can’t resolve, see the word clearer and get reoriented. Keep in mind that Hubbard’s materials are revolutionary and profoundly workable. When you master the materials you will feel a euphoric confidence, as people completing courses pretty routinely testify. Keep negative comments to yourself as these will get you into lengthy study and ‘ethics’ ‘handlings.’
(To be continued)
