Home

hubbard

By Lana M

I think there is one LRH reference that cannot be promoted too much, cannot be repeated too often, and cannot be overrun.

We have published this LRH reference twice in the past, but the last time was over a year ago — so time to remind ourselves of an important datum:

INVALIDATION AND THE GOOD AUDITOR

“It was discovered in the Sea Organisation that proven high calibre good standard Class VIII auditors suddenly without any apparent reason ceased to be able to audit well, made gross goofs and backed off from auditing completely.

“Its source was traced back to INVALIDATION.

“The cases on whom it occurred were handled very speedily, very simply with ASTOUNDING RESULTS.

“The remedy was simply asking them in 2 way comm who had told them they couldn’t audit. No meter, no complications, just very simple 2 way comm.

“One of the cases was in fact handled in a room full of people. This case was black in the face and most adamantly refused to audit and ARC broken to the extent that she PHYSICALLY WALKED AWAY from the idea.

“The question was simply asked “WHO told you you couldn’t audit?”, or “that your auditing wasn’t any good?” “Nobody did.” “OK. WHO told you your auditing wasn’t any good?” Sudden misemotion “you all did” … “OK WHO?” … BRIGHTENS …says a name. “OK … did somebody at some earlier stage tell you you couldn’t audit?” “No…but sos and so told me that I wasn’t doing any good in such and such…ooooooh..line charge…my mother always told me that I couldn’t do…bla bla bla…” Very bright now, still slightly hesitant..”OK..when is ALWAYS?”…”When I was 6”…BINGO.

“Back to auditing, and … getting “WELL DONES”, and pc’s WINNING, auditor getting STANDARD sessions and STANDARD results.

“And that is ALL there is to it. We are talking here about the Class VIII auditor giving this assist and the Class VIII auditor receiving it. Scientologists of this calibre and standard of training can be expected to have the awareness and ability to bring these results about.

“The length it took for these actions was from about 3 to 5 minutes.

“The Class VIII auditor is an outstanding target for invalidation. BEWARE!!

“The actions described above were done virtually off the cuff by a Class VIII auditor on other Class VIII’s, and were done when the INVALIDATION factor was isolated as the common denominator.” 

LRH HCOB 12 December 1968 from the Class VIII Course

39 thoughts on “Said it before, will say it again

  1. Beautiful ❤️
    When I was auditing at the FSO, and I started seeing Executives invalidating some auditors, I knew something is going very wrongly in the organization. That was the beginning of the end for me, in 2005-6.

    • RC:

      In my org (in the mid-70s) the idea of invalidating an auditor was strictly forbidden, with ghastly penalties if you did. If someone did do it, they were candidates for a Comm Ev. At the least, any off-handed comment in that direction would have yielded an Ethics interview.

      In your case (FSO) what would it say about Flag if execs seriously questioned the ability of some auditors? Just think of it, the top Tech org in the world, and the execs are going around with this kind of thinking. It’s like an open admission that your Tech team sucks and somehow these people managed to get through the system and into the HGC. And, “Gee whiz that’s too bad, and what a great scam we’re pulling on people who come here for their auditing. Ha ha ha. Suckers!” Utter contempt for the public, for the Tech, for the whole system.

      Paul

      • That was also back in the day when auditors were also considered the most valuable beings on the planet which was also enforced by the HCOPL Auditors and the PAB Open Channel.

        Personally I think inval started when untrained or poorly trained personnel started assuming exec posts who considered they “knew best” and who thought they could with the use of heavy “ethics” “administrate” the planet to clear.

          • It just wasn’t as predominant back then as it is now. Just one of those BIs that one would have to look for to notice.

            Back then the rightnesses out numbered the wrongnesses.

            Now it seems that has reversed.

        • Ha! “Adminstrate” to Clear.

          I’m on a study of a book by Tillman Vetter on the earliest Buddhist methodologies and part of the system included the standards of conduct for those working to attain release – i.e., the “ethics” code. One school split off as it wanted a stiffer more extensive list of “now-you’re-supposed-to’s”. It appears over the years that rather than provide a channel to effective practice, the code of conduct became an end in itself.

          Perhaps some of those same beings are “at it again” and missing the point.

          Auditors, auditing, the training necessary to get a session underway and accomplishing the actual aims – these people, the Auditors, wow, what an incredible ethic that is all of itself.

          Thanks Auditors 🙂

          • ” It appears over the years that rather than provide a channel to effective practice, the code of conduct became an end in itself.

            Perhaps some of those same beings are “at it again” and missing the point.”

            I’d say that was a very astute observation.

            Personally even back in the ’70’s I ran into the occasional individual who was more fascinated with admin then tech.

            Lest we forget Greta who seems agog about “ethics” but not so much by the actual technology.

            True there are many who want to be auditors who when they sign up on staff end up on some admin post.

            I myself ended up in that position but managed to developed some “work arounds” where I ended up getting my tech training anyway 😉

            But then there were others who had no real interest in helping others (technically defined as “lunatics”) or who were failures as actual auditors (probably lack of A,R or C or all three) who ended up being ‘kicked upstairs”.

            Personally I noticed the difference in EOs or MAAs who were actually competent auditors themselves and those who weren’t.

            The ones who weren’t thought of ethics as the end all in itself while those who were auditors saw rightfully saw it as what was needed to get tech in.

            Personally I think when the fixation was directed toward donations and MEST in general that the orgs began to appeal to those soulless elites with big bucks who’s only interests were self aggrandizement and status which became the beginning of the end for the organization itself.

            • And then there were those who saw the need for third dynamic auditing and became OECs/FEBCs because that’s what they wanted to do, not because they were failed auditors. And while the best execs (IMO) were both tech-trained auditors and FEBC grads, I always appreciated a good sane executive who cleared the way for auditing to get done. That majorly changed with the change in op basis by DM’s Int Mgmt and crew.

              • I never was on a tech post and really enjoyed learning and applying LRH’S management tech at several different echelons. Was never kicked upstairs to my knowledge, and made many friends along the way. It is wonderful to now be on the SHSBC and auditing too. Best of both worlds. 🙂

                • I agree, we need all sides of the Bridge (Tech, Admin, auditing) to really make it out. I’m through most of my OEC – just a couple of vols left – but I can’t wait to finish as there is so much data in there, from a different perspective. It amazes me how the old man held so many perspectives across the dynamics.

                  But to the point, without good execs keeping the org there and the bodies moving through and students signed up for courses and the crap off the lines of the auditors, no one would have made it here. Auditing is definitely is a team activity, a third dynamic action as Ron says.

              • Personally the only execs that I had any respect for had auditor training.

                I don’t understand how you expect someone to audit on the third if they haven’t audited on the first?

                Also I wasn’t talking about people who had trained and were competent auditors that wanted to play a bigger game.

                Ron fit that category and so did many that I met in the GO as well as in other Departments and Divisions.

                Also as far as I’m concerned Miscavige was just the embodiment of an Authoritarian trend which started before he seized power and was the reason why he was able to do so.

                • Hey Robin,

                  Yeh, we all have our viewpoints on execs. And yep, some were a-holes, for sure (or as you put it, lunatics); but most I found were there along the same purpose line of helping others and so I got along with them fine as I communicated along this purpose line and their reality and thus built up the affinity and comm. As I said to Lana, without the execs and other staff there keeping the lines flowing and the orgs/missions open, no auditor would have made it. However, as has been pointed out, key posts should have been VIIIs, regardless if the ED/CO was or not.

                  RV: “I don’t understand how you expect someone to audit on the third if they haven’t audited on the first?”

                  Easy, Admin Tech is a different tech – it’s own tech with it’s own procedures and results. Works like a charm when properly applied, just like tech tech.

                  RV: “Also I wasn’t talking about people who had trained and were competent auditors that wanted to play a bigger game.”

                  I understand. But even those well-trained execs who weren’t auditors could also be good execs. They weren’t all “kicked upstairs”.

                  Re your view on DM, yes, it’s well-known. Perhaps you could provide a link to the thread in which you most discuss it? That way, people new here could avail themselves of your theory.

                  That said, it’s a good viewpoint on what occurred.

                  Cheers 🙂

                  • “Easy, Admin Tech is a different tech – it’s own tech with it’s own procedures and results. Works like a charm when properly applied, just like tech tech.”

                    True to an extent but the fact is that admin tech was developed from basic Dianetic and Scientology tech going back to Ron’s discussions on Group Dianetics forward to the structure of the current Org Board which is based on various levels of the Grade Chart and the awareness characteristics the individual attains at each level as discussed in various briefings to Org staff at SH.

                    Thus as far as I’m concerned any executive who doesn’t avail themselves of the auditing tech which as each check sheet says is vital to understanding life then that exec to a greater or lesser degree will suffer from out basics.

                    Just as any auditor who doesn’t have an understanding of basic admin as given in the Staff Statuses.

                    Note also that as part of the Reform Code that Ron gave various levels of ethics protection known as Green, Blue and Gold star to those staff who were not only admin trained but tech trained as well.

                    Like you say there were some good execs who were not tech trained but in many ways they operated like Lieutenant Colonel Blake did in relation to Radar O’Reilly.

                    Regarding Miscavige there are probably many comments I’ve made that would be hard to tabulate so I’ll just give anyone new a link to my blog:

                    https://spyontology.wordpress.com

                    • “Thus as far as I’m concerned any executive who doesn’t avail themselves of the auditing tech which as each check sheet says is vital to understanding life then that exec to a greater or lesser degree will suffer from out basics.

                      Just as any auditor who doesn’t have an understanding of basic admin as given in the Staff Statuses.”

                      Yup. Except it’s not just the basics as contained in the Staff Statuses. If someone believes they will make it on just tech training itself, that’s as insular a view as those that think auditing itself will suffice to bring them out of the trap. Admin tech – and by this I mean at least the OEC Course – is vital to one’s eternity. So really, you could switch “exec” in your comment above to an “auditor” who doesn’t avail themselves of the OEC and you’d be just as correct.

                      🙂

                    • “True to an extent but the fact is that admin tech was developed from basic Dianetic and Scientology tech going back to Ron’s discussions on Group Dianetics forward to the structure of the current Org Board which is based on various levels of the Grade Chart and the awareness characteristics the individual attains at each level as discussed in various briefings to Org staff at SH.”

                      Well, if I remember correctly (and Lana or Jim can correct me on this if I recollect wrongly), Ron says somewhere that his Admin Tech was gleaned from old civilizations way down the track. Might have connections as you say, but that’s not its genesis. AFAIK

                    • He actually talks about this in the lecture “The Org Board and Livingness” but the fact is that if you look at the Org board itself you will see that each department has an awareness characteristic which is associated to it and that each of them align with the Grade Chart.

                      So whatever the basis of the original Org Board is. The fact is that it was fully integrated and aligned with the Scientology Grade Chart.

                      I believe he makes this point on his lecture on the Grade Chart he gave at SH.

                      As far as the importance of the Org Board and Admin in relation to the Tech of Auditing he makes this clear in the RED How to Raise Stats which is probably why Missions or Franchises and Field Groups can make it even when their Admin literally sucks.

                      I mean we’re not just talking “hey you Org Boards” but more like “WTF???? Org Boards”.

                      Still many of these Franchise holders and Field Groups eventually come to the dawning realization that some admin structure has to put in.

                      Again Ron discusses this in the HCOB on Dianetic Groups.

                      In other words getting admin in is very important but not as important as having and delivering the tech itself.

                    • Well I expect immediate compliance M2, M4 (never mind I heard that GAT II canceled that) star rate (you can skip the M9 cause I’m in magnanimous mood) with smiley pictures taken by the MC (that’s Miscavige’s Com which replaced the LC under the Straightup and Vertical Screw up of the Tech or SVST for short) of whatever references I tossed out 🙂

            • So true, RV. I remember reading somewhere that a fully hatted Ethics Officer was supposed to be a Class IV Auditor and OTIII in addition to his post hatting.
              Even then they were only supposed to be on post for 6 months at a time after which they were to receive search and discovery auditing to check for any PTSness that may have occurred as a result of handling entheta for 6 months.
              However, only saw this idea actually applied once in over 40 years.

              • Very true ESP.

                In fact there is a policy regarding this factor in the OEC that I’ll have to dig up.

                IMHO this is exactly what caused the downfall of the GO and led directly to Orgs being infiltrated by various individuals like for example Miscavige who’s objective was to seize control of the Organization and corrupt it.

  2. Absolutely bang on, Lana “Invalidation”, of course spreads like wildfire, via those ‘untouchable’ suppressive elements, given free reign in any spheres of activity.

    It’s always about domination, control and denigration of the targeted individual/s. (seen as a threat, to the perpetrator/s)

    Not being willing/able to confront him/her, via some severe counter-measure, just invites further victimization.

    Obviously, would-be ‘dictators’ necessarily need to be neutralized, way before they seize control of an area, if wholesale destruction of productive, well intentioned people is to be averted. 🙂

  3. Here’s my opportunity to validate a Class VIII auditor.

    While I was sort of in the church, an AOLA tour visited my local org. They had with them a Class VIII, New OT VIII who was delivering C/S 53s or whatever else they do on those tours.

    I received a C/S 53. Her TRs were so perfect that I had none of my attention on her as a person, but, instead, had nearly all of my attention on the session itself. I don’t recall her having to give anything to me again during the entire session (i.e. flubless).

    The indication she gave me almost felt like a win on its own because it was the right indicator for me at that time. It was relevant to my situation.

    (Then someone from the AOLA tour escorted me to the front door of the org and told me to never come back…)

          • Yes that unfortunately pretty much sums up the level of “History” taught in most schools these days.

            BTW I always tease my wife who happens to be British that it is the basic reason why she can’t get a good “cuppa” here in the US 🙂

            I remember going to get some coffee from some place in Glendale and telling the barista that it was December 7 today who stared at be blankly.

            So I told him that it was what got the US involved in WW II.

            At which point the guy said against who the Vietnamese?

            Which is when I shook my head paid for my coffee and left.

      • My best guess is that DM eventually realized he could save money and time (in training) by replacing the well-trained Scientologists in the church with quickie trained non-Scientologists.

        Why only recruit crew who are Expanded Grade IV completions when anyone can wear a SO uniform? Why do the Class VIII course when you can listen to the tapes at your desk? Why do the SHSBC when any Class V can study the Class IX course? Why clear staff and crew or have them go up the Bridge at all if anyone can attempt to do the same posts without it? (At the very least, their names can fill empty slots on the org board.)

        DM is cheapifying Scientology technology into the ground.

        • Personally I doubt that Miscavige himself ever “realized” anything since he is totally lacking in cognitive skills.

          No doubt someone “advised” him that the Golden Age of Tech would be a way of saving the Church of as he said in one of his telepromted speeches that it eliminated the need for having a “gazillion technically trained specialists” which basically became the group think of the uninformed mob at the Church.

          • I was thinking the other day what DM was trying to accomplish (regardless of who is/was running him), and I realized that DM wants a cookie-cutter Bridge that all one had to do is get the pc/student onto the first step and then “everyone” would do the same steps, for the same amount of time, in the same order, at the same cost, etc., and all staff would have to do is collect money from them as they passed “GO” again and again and again. No work, just have the collection plate out.

            He’s trying to use Fordism production methods on Scientology and is trying to create a production line like Ford’s factories. The problem is, it won’t work as each case has to be programmed and audited individually, as itself; each student needs to be handled as an individual and their MUs kept cleaned. Fordism won’t work when you’re dealing with live beings. Same reason Skype won’t get the full results and thus is unworkable.

            • Well “by Ford” you’re talking about the Brave New World of “Scientology” these days and the reason it “doesn’t work”.

              It “doesn’t work” because it is not being applied since the cookie cutter, one size fits all isn’t part of the actual technology.

  4. Hi Lana,

    Please do keep posting this periodically. It is needed!

    What Ron says in this HCOB applies to all auditors, but I also noted how he particularly mentioned CLASS VIII Auditors as a target of inval.
    I have noticed in my area that the COS has “shut down” quite a few Class VIIIs and forbade them to audit. In fact there are probably more VIIIs in this situation than there are auditing.
    This is so very destructive because people who have done this course even if not the illusory “perfect” are the best. I have observed that for decades they have been and are the islands of sanity in orgs, tech-wise, since Ron first developed this course.
    And this invalidation is happening in an era when the COS is not even producing Class VI’s much less Class VIIIs !

    However, it also makes sense that they might be a target for just that same reason. They are a threat to anyone who doesn’t want the Tech to be disseminated, applied, or taught!
    In addition to “not invalidating” them, we need to really get behind these skilled people and let them know how much we appreciate them.

    The attitude that I think is most appropriate in dealing with this invalidation of auditors is well expressed in these two excerpts from one of my favorite movies, Major League:


    and

    Of course in this second excerpt I would rather see DM left standing naked……On second thought for our own sakes we’ll leave him his thong.

    • “Now you try to hold the fort on your lonely only. All by your little lonesome. Or with just maybe one other or two other VIIIs in the great big swarming organization, which is very busy, and people tearing in and out of the place, and people with their little ant-like two cent opinions based on data that is so cheap as to not be comparable to any coin on the planet. Including a Milroy, which I don’t think would buy one corner of one cigarette paper.

      Their opinions aren’t worth shucks. Tech goes out. And you stand there flat footed and let tech go out. And let me tell you, you’re gonna have more trouble than you can cope with with a regiment of marines.

      Tech goes out, all of a sudden ethics starts going in. When ethics starts going in hard it very often goes in incorrectly. The next thing you know, tech, if not put in right at that time, why, a surfeit of ethics tends to start carrying the organization down instead of bringing it back up.

      So your steps and actions, if the organization is in turmoil, if the administration is bad, if people are not doing what they’re supposed to be doing, if it’s all sort of mucky and mucked-up and you hear people around and they’re going, “Nya nya nya nya nya nya, and nya, nya nya nya nya nya”, well just don’t order everybody to be sec checked. To hell with that. But all that it is, is that tech is out. Tech is out, man. How to get it in? That is your problem. How do you get it in?

      The solution is put in ethics like a ton of bricks. And then follow right along behind it with good, standard tech! And put it in hard! And what do you know? The ethics come right off of it. Ethics will not lift itself out. All ethics will do is hold the fort while you’re getting tech in. If you don’t hold the fort at all, you won’t get any tech in. I can tell you that by experience.

      Oh, you can be charming, you can be persuasive, you can give them talks, you can do everything you want to, put their hands … hold their hands while they’re auditing the pc. And you ain’t gonna get there, because the environment is inadequately filled with challenge. Man thrives on challenge. One of the reasons why it’s dangerous to have an AO in a California climate. The only challenge in it is smog. [laughter] No slur on California. I’m very fond of California. But the net result of this is, I’m trying to teach you a lesson which is just as standard as standard tech. It’s how do you apply the technology which you-uns got to the area in which you gonna operate.

      You gonna walk home, everybody’s gonna be very glad to see you, gonna put you on a pedestal, “You’re a great guy. You know your stuff.” You graduated and so on. You’re a Class VIII! Great! They’re gonna agree with everything you say. Next thing you’re gonna hear is invitations to squirrel. “Well, Bessy Ann, yes. What about her case? You know? We could have her in specially and you can audit her, and we’ve never been able to crack her case. You know, we’ve done all the usual things. You know, you’re gonna tell us now that it’s solved by the usual things. We’ve tried all those. We’ve done all those. And can’t we get in Bessy Ann? We can get a lot of money if you can audit her. And we’ve advertised every place that you’re going to audit specially for us.” [laughter]. “In fact we have one psychotic pc whose brother owns the steel mill, see, and we’ve got that all lined up for you.”

      Well how do you extricate yourself from such traps and get the show on the road? Well, you will assume unto yourself some ethics presence of some kind or another. Now the wrong way to assume it is to give them, try to teach them a Class VIII course in the next five minutes after arrival. Or to impress them with what you now know. They know you know it anyhow. You don’t have to tell ’em. What you have to do is an ethics presence. So you have to point out to the people in your immediate vicinity if ethics is out in the area, that ethics is out. And that ethics has to be put in so that you can help put tech in. And you
      do the maximum you can in order to do so.

      Now some EC that is very enthusiastic about making some bucks, but not enthusiastic about running any standard tech, which they may consider a waste of time or something of this sort, may louse it up a little bit. But that’s a job endangerment chit, because you as a Class VIII are being counted on to get tech in in your area. So it’s a job endangerment, isn’t it? So therefore you’re gonna have the terrible problem of, the EC will figure that you are now above them, the Executive Council figures you are now above them so therefore you ought to be stepped on, put you in your place. You’re even liable to get in a condition where you get a whole long series of ethics conditions assigned to you because you put up a small argument on the subject that you wouldn’t process the brother of the steel mill.

      The way you solve that, the way you solve that is to insist that ethics goes in, and goes in correctly. Because a Class VIII has to know a great deal about ethics. You have to insist that ethics goes in, and you say, “Ethics is necessary to go in so that we can get tech in, and then we’re going to go get tech in.” Now right now I see that when pcs report for sessions the auditors are seldom there. They wander in a half an hour from now. Or don’t appear at all, or something. Well that’s an immediate and automatic condition of nonexistence, with conditions enforced. Guy isn’t there, non-existence.” LRH (Class VIII Tape #13, Ethics And Case Supervision)

  5. “And you ain’t gonna get there, because the environment is inadequately filled with challenge. Man thrives on challenge. One of the reasons why it’s dangerous to have an AO in a California climate. The only challenge in it is smog. [laughter] No slur on California. I’m very fond of California.”

    Other then the occasional earthquake, flash flood, fires that pretty much sums it up 😉

    Thanx for posting this Chris.

    Damn good lecture!

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