Home

SCNhistory_logo_3_75

* Note from the Milestone Two Crew. Paul Foster has been a supporter of Milestone Two since our inception, and the Scientology History project has our full support and contribution. 

By Paul Foster for the Scientology History project

There’s a quote from the lecture Org Board And Livingness: “If we don’t express the function on the org board, it will be worn unknowingly by everyone.” One of the things left off every org board we know of is the position of historian. And given that it was always left off the org boards, we’ve all been wearing the hat. Perhaps it’s time we put that hat on our collective org board and let someone else wear it.

That was our thought a few months ago, when we decided to inaugurate the Scientology History Project.

With this project, there were a couple of things we wanted to accomplish. First, there are a lot of gaps in most people’s knowledge of the history of Scientology. For example, how many people remember “Tech Correction
Roundup” from 1978? If you came into Scientology some time after that, you may never have heard of it. And how much do you know about how the technology progressed from 1950 to 1960? If you never did the Basics, you
might not have a clue.

So one point of the History Project is to fill in gaps like that. To have a repository of all the little details like that which have gone into the make-up of the subject of Scientology.

The second point to the Scientology History project is to, as far as is possible, run out the group engrams of Scientology. There are quite a number of those. We need to fill in the lost details of those incidents,
and provide a place where people can go and get the truth, so far as we can discover it.

And so we decided to take on these tasks. Naturally, we realized we couldn’t do it alone. We knew we’d need the help of the overall Scientology community. Meantime we could put up a website to hold the information we find,
and get a start on filling in the blanks and fleshing out the whole picture.

And we’ve done that. Our website repository isn’t flashy and it doesn’t have a lot of content at the moment. But we’ll be adding to it day by day, and with your help, getting at the little details and finding time, place, form and event on a lot of points.

You’ll never know most of the people directly involved in this project. That’s by design. First, it keeps us from being unduly influenced by the various sub-groups and personalities in the Field. Second, we’re not in
this for the fortune and fame, if there ever is any. We’re here doing this job because it needs doing, and we happen to be interested in it. Third, it keeps us elusive when it comes to the long arms of the Church of
Scientology. And sooner or later, they’ll probably get around to targeting us. That’s what happens when the bad guys realize you’re standing on the corner telling the truth.

We are not associated with the Church of Scientology in any way. Nor are we associated with any group in the Field, though some of us may be members of Field groups. Although we are Field Scientologists, we operate
independently of both the Field and the Church. You wanted an unbiased history of Scientology? That’s how you get it. At least that’s how you try to be unbiased.

Will there by bias at the History Project? We hope not, and we’ll be trying our best to ensure we start and remain that way. If you suspect otherwise, you’re welcome to let us know.

By the way, it’s worth noting that we are not the “History of L. Ron Hubbard” project, nor the “History of the Church of Scientology” project. We are the “History of Scientology” project. Keep that distinction in mind.

Our main site is http://scnhistory.org , where we have our bylaws, glossary, and other similar material. The history itself is at http://scnhistory.org/history/ . We don’t charge for access and we don’t restrict your use of our content. If you want to quote us in your blog or elsewhere, feel free. You can also link directly to our articles, if that’s your preference. And we have a pretty nifty glossary on the main site, free for your use.

Come visit us, leave a comment if you like, and if you have details about an event, let us know. Above all, please use us as a resource.

 

12 thoughts on “Scn history project

  1. Love this. The way out is the way through. Auditing is a review of personal history. The history of interactions then, logically, would be the way through and the way out, there, on what I suppose many would just call “the third Dynamic.” This does need to be done. It needs to be straightened out, and told. It is unfortunate that many individuals who were church public and left around the time the insanities began are not in contact to tell their stories, but this may offer a window of sanity for them to get back in touch. The events didn’t just interrupt their paths, they affected the auditing and training and perspectives of all those who did not leave the infected Co$.

  2. I don’t buy Rathbrun’s little theory’s about Ron’s tech and ethics being inherently wrong and messing one’s thinking. The guy has got overts and Miscavsage as pope and the modern church are are his products.

    I think a history is an excellent idea. I hope I can contribute.

    • ASHAMAN

      I’m talking way over my head here because I don’t begin to have a large enough sample of cases and fixes, but I suspect there are many individuals with cases which have uncorrected errors on them. There is a responsibility accruing to the PC to talk to his auditor and tell him what’s going on. A MWH is hard to confront, in my experience, but the relief from running one, or a chain of them, is incomparable. Dropping all my educated attempts at elegance in writing: the thing is that overts, withholds, and missed withholds belong in session, not on one’s sleeve. If an individual doesn’t run them out in session, he ends up wearing them. (As some mistakenly do, continuing to suffer.)

      If I make a valuable contribution in my very humble tiny life, I hope it will be in the field of Ethics. Running O/W is ethics repair, tracking history is tracking Ethics. I see all this as admin scales: the actions taken by individuals to implement goals and purposes and deliver products and get ideal scenes and exchange with others. Lana pointed out that Org Rudiments are another piece of Scn tech which, when applied to one’s own personal affairs, is very useful in sorting out where one stands, and improving conditions.

      I’m sure there are other pieces of genuine ethics tech, but it just strikes me “right in the center of my forehead, like a diamond” what an enormous scope Ethics has, and what a tragic waste it would be to not avail oneself of this wealth, oneself, to construct one’s life and living with sound policies FAR into the future.

      (Btw, your reply below to a post which has been deleted is beautiful, exact, and a very sound and distinct viewpoint.)

  3. That’s just nasty. May a stray dog shit on your dining room table, and a seagull crap on your head. You exhibit all the characteristics of someone with absolutely nothing to offer anyone but disparagement – and you’re proud of that. I pity you.

    Lana – I’ve seen many blogs fail utterly for a lack of moderator balls to tell people like this to go shove it. The rest of us try hard to reason things out, and for no other reason than that we actually HAVE something, we suffer abuse from the completely insane.

    • Thank you, Lana, for housecleaning.

      The above reply was to a post which has since been deleted, and is not replying to the topic. If the Mod wishes – Lana, you can delete these two posts of mine, please.

  4. Yeah 1974 was the year I co-audited grades 0 through 4. Pretty good shit.(Even Marty has good things to say about the grades — see “What is Wrong with Scientology”.) I plan on getting OT5 fixed up and completed soon –that’s even better shit. (of course Marty does not like the OT levels. You shouldn’t take them literally he says)

    So I don’t know what your point is, Partz. You’re not going to convince me of your bullshit, I’m an LRH guy, “Standard Tech” all the way. Probably most the folks on this site feel the same. You can upset a few people, I suppose. Please don’t tell me you’re trying to protect us from a “destructive cult”.

    Ron’s tech works. That’s why people pay millions for it. It works. And best of all, you don’t have to do any of it and I can do as much as I want.

  5. Partz, you can’t come to a site like this and spread bullshit (“Scientology developed a destructive cult by 1974. . .”) It’s called “trolling”. There are plenty of places you can go and wallow in your venom with like-minded people

    Just like I can’t go to Mike Rinder’s blog and make some of my comments about Marty Rathbun that I do here. Mike would chop my head off (and has). Mike and Marty are friends. and Mike stands by his friend. So whine all you want about censorship but there’s a line you just can’t step over.

    Back on topic, the History is a great idea. And a true history. I don’t like my history whitewashed.

  6. I’m glad the horrible comment was deleted (which I missed entirely), but I am chuckling myself silly over Nickname’s retort. I do believe that troublemaker was properly shat and crapped upon. 🙂

  7. Can’t wait to see the analysis of LRH’s 1950s letters to the FBI that, ultimately, led to his being given the “appears mental” label.

What is your view?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s