Because of various problems with Blogger, I've copied everything as of November 26, 2012 over to WordPress. The new location is Ask the Scientologist. I am not deleting this blog and will still accept comments and answer questions here too, but any new articles will appear at the WordPress location. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Scientologists: Was LRH Stupid?

That isn't my opinion, that's David Miscavige's opinion. Is Miscavige right? Was LRH really stupid?

Let me clarify.

LRH declared, in "Keeping Scientology Working", that the technology was complete and was as perfect as it was ever going to get. He said don't mess with it, don't change it, and stop others from altering it.

Hubbard, over the years, personally taught many people how to apply the tech. He trained people on how to audit and supervise. He worked out all the training methods and content. When he trained the Flag auditors and supervisors, he declared their training to be "perfect". He personally developed and approved all the auditor training courses, checksheets, etc.

Yet, only a few years after Hubbard's death, Miscavige completely rewrote the technical training - methods and content, and dubbed it the "Golden Age of Tech". He then canceled all the certificates of everyone trained under Hubbard's methods. Even those who had been personally trained by Ron. Personally trained by Ron!

Is this clear enough for you? Miscavige said that L. Ron Hubbard was wrong! Miscavige said that Hubbard's training methods were wrong! He said that all those personally trained by Ron were so poorly trained by Hubbard that they had to retrain from scratch, using the correct, Miscavige methods.

Was Hubbard so stupid and so unobservant that he couldn't train people competently? That's what Miscavige claims in no uncertain terms. What do you think?

How about another example?

For more than thirty years, Hubbard wrote tons of books. The books were reprinted many, many times. Various people have reported working with LRH on getting the reprints exactly right, under Ron's strict guidance. Others have reported seeing copies of the books, marked up with LRH's notes in preparation for a reprint. LRH took great care with his books and their many reprints. To Hubbard, his books were the most important things he had ever produced.

Yet, for the second time after LRH's death, Miscavige has undertaken an extensive rewrite of Hubbard's books, claiming they were wrong, wrong, wrong! Today, you are not allowed to own the original books printed under LRH's directions, you must own the Miscavige versions.

Was Hubbard so stupid and so unobservant that he missed those massive errors, even as he read his own books and noted down corrections and changes he wanted, year after year, decade after decade? Was he so stupid that he allowed significant errors to continue printing after printing after printing? This is what Miscavige claims. Do you think he's correct?

You can't have it both ways. You can't think that LRH was brilliant, but then, at the same time believe that Hubbard was so stupid and so wrong about his own technology, his own training, and his own statements about the people he trained. You can't have it both ways.

You can't believe that Hubbard was a careful, thorough, brilliant writer, but then, at the same time believe that he never, ever checked his own works as they were being printed. Never cared. Never checked his books again when they were reprinted. This is something even the most inexperienced of authors takes pains to do. Was Ron as careless and stupid as Miscavige claims?

You can't have it both ways. If you believe Miscavige, then you must agree with him that Hubbard was abysmally stupid and careless about the things that Ron said were absolutely, vitally, most important: his all-important tech, and his all-important books.

If you are going to go along with Miscavige's massive alterations then you obviously agree with him that Ron was really, really stupid.

And that's what Miscavige wants you to believe.

Think about it.


  1. Scientologists are in a bit of a Catch-22 here.

    If they go along with Miscavige, then LRH is confirmed to be stupid and his technologies quite flawed. They must throw out all that "Hubbard stuff", as wrong. However, all that is "Scientology". What's left? Miscavigology?

    However, if they reject Miscavige's characterization of "Hubbard, the idiot" then they have to reject the Miscavige church.

    Whichever way they go, the direction leads to the inevitable and rapid destruction of the Church of Scientology -- courtesy of Miscavige.

    I think that's a good thing and I do thank Miscavige for bringing it about.

    This would leave people free to learn the truth and to believe and practice exactly as they choose, a perfect result.

  2. Great essay, exactly what I though when the "Basics" came out.
    I would like to personally thank DM for for his actions in raising the ire of so many that it now coming home to roost. Fare Well Scientology, too bad it didn't happen sooner. It would have saved me a lot of time and money.

  3. The only troll willing to talk about it had a near psychological meltdown when I first presented this dilemma, but eventually concluded that LRH simply 'didn't have time' to review Dianetics.

    It was great enturbulation while it lasted though. Poor Val, I've probably done thousands of dollars in damage to her case. :-p

    -Red Pill on Topix

  4. He has been working on the behalf of the psychs since he took over twenty years ago -collapsing the rotten edifice from the inside. Give him hearty credit, landlubbers, it's nearly down.

  5. There are also the point of copyright, the books started coming 50 years ago, and that is the limit in many countries.
    By making small alterations and re-issuing the church can hold their grip for another 50 years.

  6. Yes, copyright control is yet another reason to continually alter the material.

    Apparently, the church lost much of the copyrights on the original material even before the 50 years were up, simply because they forgot to renew. And once copyright is lost, it cannot legally be restored on that original material.

  7. This is a long time favorite line I use to play with Scientology trolls. They dodge it each and every time. Except Val. She decided LRH was simply 'too busy.'

    -Red Pill on Topix

  8. May I ask you something ?
    I would like to know what you think is the truth about Hubbard's and Scientology's stance on Jesus Christ.

    If there is a better place on this site - or anywhere else - to discuss this, please direct me there, no problem.


  9. Best place for questions on this site is Ask a question.

    However, my comment, for what it's worth, is that Hubbard made stuff up. This is an example. I don't know why he made up this particular story, but it's just fiction. It is extremely insulting to Christians -- and they should know Hubbard said it. He also insulted many other religions at other times and they should know that as well. Under the surface, Hubbard was quite bigoted.

    I suppose one could say that that's his problem -- except he indoctrinated Scientologists into that belief. To the degree that Scientologists believe this kind of thing, is the degree that they inherit Hubbard's bigotry. It's not good.

  10. In one of the Basic lectures LRH says that when you really understand Scientology you will not need it anylonger... (sorry cannot recall which lecture, could be the Phoenix).


Comments will be moderated. Have patience, I get around to it pretty quick. As a rule of thumb, I won't approve spam, off-topic, trolling or abusive stuff. The rest is usually OK. Yes, you can disagree with me.