Mike Rinder posted an article on his blog today that Karen DeLacarriere gave to him from “The Outer Banks”, a super-secret Facebook group that I was joined into without my permission, and then kicked out of because it’s only for the “Key Players”.
The guy who kicked me out, Ronn Stacy, told me this three times while he was kicking me out. “It’s only for the Key Players, Alanzo”
I was fully humiliated.
Anyway, Ronn Stacy said that he was in the Church of Scientology for 40 years. That’s a long time to be thinking with Scientology. So I have an idea that the “key players” in the Outer Banks Facebook group are, in large part, Scientology “independents” and those whose minds and lives have been fully fucked over by spending too much time in Scientology, and who now have nowhere else to go.
It’s not a pretty sight, and while they may not believe me, I do not feel good for them. There is a point where all of your self-esteem and sense of self-identity has become so wrapped up in Scientology and the status that you attained there, and thinking and reasoning with it, that you feel that you can not just start over from scratch. It’s too late.
But maybe not. People do experience a resurgence after Scientology, no matter how long they have been in. There is a rekindling of purpose from studying REAL philosophy like Plato, and learning about REAL science and REAL logic, even. You CAN continue to make progress spiritually after Scientology because, well, wherever you go, there you are.
I hope that Ronn Stacy and Haydn James and the other “key players” in the Scientology Independent Movement find their footing, and keep walking on the purpose line that originally got them into Scientology in the first place, such a long time ago.
And while I’ve dealt with enough Scientology “Independents” to know that the overwhelming majority do not think I have anything valuable to say to them, as always, I will say it anyway:
Here’s Haydn’s article:
Scientology Independent Haydn James wrote this article on why Scientology has not yet cleared the planet:
“As you know I am pro the tech. I sat down one day to do a dispassionate evaluation of Scientology the subject and its operation past and present. The most sensible way to look forward being to analyze the past or making the same mistakes is guaranteed. This essay comes from just a part of it. It is not meant to laud or disparage anything or anyone but it does put a great many things into perspective. Haydn James
This is a part of an evaluation I did recently into Scientology expansion or lack of it.” [Hadyn James]
“When my wife and I were assigned from the Int base to a tiny, failing org in the UK (Birmingham) in late 1990, we managed to build a successful org over the next 15 years and we also got a chance to study the public, those that came into Scientology and those that didn’t.
After a couple of years of trying everything and failing miserably to get the org off the ground we came across some policies that seemed to lay out the scene we were running into. Their use became a key part of the success but also, in studying out the scene further, provided some amazing insight into the percentage of the population for whom Scientology was real.
There are LRH policies from 1965 too long to quote here (HCO PL 22 March, 1965 CURRENT PROMOTION AND ORG PROGRAM SUMMARY MEMBERSHIP RUNDOWN and HCO PL 7 April 1965 BOOK INCOME) that state: Scientology was planned, geared and rigged for those that could reach for, read a book and reach further for services. It was all meant to be a test of reach (or to put it another way, a test of interest or reality).
Then there was a LRH Publications Org Issue which stated: “It takes 25 book sales to make one Scientologist.”
The pubs org used to pound into us, “It takes 25 book sales to make one Scientologist!”
By direct observation and action over many years this proved to be totally true. Only one in twenty five book buyers (people who bought a book out of genuine interest and were not just forced to buy one) would become Scientologists. That’s four percent of those with enough interest in Scientology to reach for and buy a book.
Of course far from everyone bought Scientology basic books. I know that in advertising circles a response to an ad campaign would be considered phenomenal if it was a small percentage of the population. So if you really advertised the key LRH books, the best you could hope to achieve in any given town in terms of making Scientologists would be a small percent of four percent of the population.
To give perspective, let’s just say the best response to an ad campaign you could get was three percent of the population. In a town like Birmingham, England which had a population of one and a half million people, if the perfect book ad campaign was put together, with perfect buttons, that reached the whole population enough times to get the message across, you would get three percent of the population buying a book. In other words it would result in 45,000 book buyers. Per the proven rules, of those, only 2400 would become actual Scientologists (four percent). That’s it, 1800 actual Scientologists from a town of 1.5 million people. So, take away all the control, effort and heavy sales, the percentage of the population that are truly interested, when exposed to Scientology, is a fraction of one percent.
I can’t say my calculation is accurate but my facts and observations are over many years. Any way you want to cut it the percentage of the population truly interested in Scientology is a small percentage of a small percentage.
By the way, the guys that had real interest were obvious, you couldn’t keep them out of the org, they came in clutching their books, reaching hard for service. And, in my experience their reality on Scientology was so strong that in most cases no amount of negative press etc. could dull their reach. That has proved true right up to the present.
But of course there were other types of people that made their way into Scientology.
Out of org desperation many were press ganged into doing something but left right away or sometime later, a sort of org revolving door, eventually they became just a name in central files.
There were people who had little reality on Scientology as a whole and had no desire to do the bridge but who had strong reality on a particular personal problem. They came in to get their problem handled and when it was handled they left. They might return a few years later with another problem and they might not but that’s how it went with them. Some, a few of them, returned so many times they eventually reached for the bridge.
Then there were the friends, spouses, kids and family of Scientologists who got roped into it one way or another. But it became clear, just because someone was a friend of, married to a Scientologist or born to one did not mean they had any strong reality on it or real interest in it, not at all. In fact the odds suggest they wouldn’t though some did of course.
So, what you might call the Scientology community of any given org was made up of four different categories of people and only one of them had a real reality on Scientology. And they were in a minority.
Our conclusions even at that time were: 1. The vast majority of people don’t have a strong reality on Scientology. The percentage that do is miniscule, a fraction of one percent. That’s just the way it is. 2. Don’t try to force square pegs into round holes, it only causes trouble for all concerned.
I am not sure why this is the way it is, it certainly has nothing to do with income bracket, IQ, education level or anything else I could see, but nothing then or since has convinced us otherwise.
The people for whom Scientology is really real is a very small minority indeed.
Here’s my response, which Mike posted on his blog this morning:
October 3, 2015 at 9:22 am
Hayden James wrote:
“…The people for whom Scientology is really real is a very small minority indeed.”
The author of the above article begins with the assumption that the claims that Hubbard made for Scientology are real, and that too few human beings are aware enough to get the results from it that Hubbard said they would.
The author is using Hubbard’s implanted reasoning that it’s not Scientology that is the reason Scientology doesn’t work, it’s dumb old homo sap.
Ironically, even within the Scientology mindset, this conclusion is called a “service facsimile”. It is making one’s self right and others wrong, and justifying for the failures of Scientology.
If the author could just step outside of the Scientology Mindset, he could see that his is an analysis which shows that people read the books, took the courses, and Scientology did not work for the overwhelming majority of those who tried it. Then they left.
End of story.
You can’t evaluate Scientology using Scientology to evaluate it. You have to step outside of all the Scientology assumptions and fixed ideas and logic, and see Scientology from different angles which do not exist within Scientology. Only then can you find the proper context for Scientology, and can see Scientology for what it really is.
I would ask Haydn to study hypnosis from sources other than L Ron Hubbard. To study Mao and Stalin and how they got people to adhere to their ideologies and how they controlled their populations. To read some of the basics from the subject of social psychology. And I would ask Haydn James to do all of this without using Scientology to think with while he does it.
Only then will he be able to accurately evaluate the subject of Scientology and why it failed.