As a farewell present to the ars community I herewith would like to present to you a chapter and a bit from my 1995 book on scientology. The chapter has been expanded a little bit to include more information and comes under a separate post entitled "Scientology or democracy?". May I ask you to please respect the copyright on it and DO NOT retranslate it into any other language, including German - if you want it in German buy my book which was released as a pocket book a few days ago by HERDER Verlag, book # 4572, entitled "Scientology".

Tom Voltz


"To hell with this society. We are building a new one."
L. Ron Hubbard

Scientologists will accuse me of having chosen a heretical title for this chapter. I wish it were so. After all Scientology has marked differences with Buddhism which it so often claims to be its spiritual forerunner. The path of Buddhism leads the individual to enlightenment. Scientology on the other hand does not trust its «freeing» theories and practices but also prescribes its concept of a «saved world» in many different areas.

Scientology's understanding of democracy

In view of the current discussion about Scientology it is quite appropriate to take a closer look at Scientology's understanding of democracy - that type of political system which only makes it possible for Scientology to be active. At this point I cannot but extensively quote L. Ron Hubbard, as otherwise no reader will believe what L. Ron Hubbard has to say about the subject and where our society will end up if Scientology's leaders had it their way:
"The reason a democracy [...] caves in lies in its extending its privileges of membership to those who seek to destroy it.

"The idiocy of doing so is plain. When a person announces he is no longer part of a group, he has rejected the group. He has also rejected its codes and rules. Of course he has also rejected the protection to which he was entitled as a group member.

"Democracy always faces this problem and so far never solved it. The Constitution of the US permits people to refuse to testify if it would incriminate them (5th Amendment). Yet it sits by in courts letting people who are pledged to overthrow the government yet use their privilege to invoke the 5th Amendment. Idiocy is the right word for it. It does not make sense to extend the protection of the group to the person seeking to destroy the group. That's like encouraging a disease.

"If a group member rejects the group, he rejects everything about the group and no further question about that. Certainly there is no question in his or her mind of salvaging or helping the group. Why should the group then seek to extend its protection over him unless it wants to defy its first right: that of survival."

"So, in Scientology, anyone who rejects Scientology also rejects, knowingly or unknowingly, the protection and benefit of Scientology and the companionship of Scientologists. If the person never was a member of the group or if the person had been a member of it, the result is the same."

(HCO PL 17 March 1965, Organisational Suppressive Acts)

If Scientology had the power I have no doubt that they would eliminate the 5th Amendment and replace it with their enforced Sec Checks, as described by their Founder in a bulletin and where he says the subject would not even need to speak. Just strap the E-meter electrodes to him and ask him in ways to get yes or no responses from the meter.

In the above quote we recognise obvious black-and-white-thinking. No grey areas in between. Let us suppose someone leaves his party. That party is the CDU [German: Christian Democratic Union]. No longer member of the party does he now also reject democracy and Christian thought? Has he now automatically become an enemy of the nation? Most probably not. And if he would now join the SPD [Social Democratic Party], will his former colleagues now treat him like a leper, a traitor? Well, in their first stages of pain and anger they may. After a while however they will again in political debate and rivalry work towards a better and more just democracy. After all the person showed his colours, his state of mind and he did not hide the change in his political opinions. By no means has he rejected democracy. (This of course excepts those politicians who have a totally different agenda anyway and are paid lobbyists.)

Hubbard in other places as well philosophises in black-and-white concepts:

"There are two types of behaviour-that calculated to be constructive and that calculated to be disastrous.

"These are the two dominant behaviour patterns. There are people then who are trying to build things up and others who are trying to tear things down.

"And there are no other types. Actually there aren't even shades of grey."

(Hubbard article of 2. April 1964, Two Types of People)


In his book Introduction to Scientology Ethics L. Ron Hubbard writes:
"I have observed that man cannot be trusted with justice."

(From: Introduction to Scientology Ethics)

In other words: Today's nations need scientological enlightenment. The above sentence however also many other comments by L. Ron Hubbard have created in many a scientologist a level of suspicion against the constitutionally governed state and its legal system which from my point of view exceeds the limit. - And the vicious circle is that with each court case Scientology looses that conviction gets strengthened in the minds of the scientologists. And Scientology looses a lot of its cases.

That the legal system should be used in its own and peculiar way was introduced by L. Ron Hubbard in 1955:

"The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. [...] The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorised, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly."

(Hubbard Article on Dissemination, Technical Bulletins, 1976 edition, page 157)

What does this have to do with justice? Where is the realisation that Scientology itself might break the law? It comes as no surprise that the impression is made that Scientology wants to subjugate the whole world. And indeed L. Ron Hubbard has his very own understanding of justice:

"The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that, then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN. And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN. Don't ever let them have any other thought than that Scientology takes all of its objectives.

(Hubbard Article on Dissemination, Technical Bulletins, 1976 edition, page 157)

Psychological warfare at its best. It's called diversionary operation. I suspect in this way Scientology also used journalist and writer Omar Garrison when he wrote the books "The Hidden Story of Scientology" and "Playing Dirty". Ruining people is another part of it. A person who has successfully been "ruined utterly" by Scientology is easier to be shut up for good. It is easier to present to the public and the media that such a person should not be trusted anyway. What Hubbard probably failed to consider is that you can pull that trick only so and so often, after which the outside view will become a fixed pattern with its originators being visible in bright daylight.

I strongly recommend a study of Hubbard's 25, March 1976 policy "A new Hope for Justice", where he characterises current justice with statements such as "Justice apparantley cannot be trusted in the hands of men" or like this:

"Who is Public Enemy #1? the FBI! Its obvious target is every opinion leader and public-spirited group in America! ... In the name of "justice" and even calling themselves Justice Department they practice every conceivable perversion of injustice. With their terror tools, preferring lies to fact, they have created a police state in which no man, woman or child or even a politician are safe, either from downstats [people failing to work hard or long enough] or the FBI."

The reader may laugh or may say Hubbard was crazy, no one would take such statements seriously. Again I must say, that the average scientologist DOEs take such statements to be pure fact, the result of a clear view of a superior person.

What could we expect from justice under the control of Scientology? Examples are provided in this book.


"I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self- abnegation has filled the Southeast Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax."

(Hubbard Article of 7 February, 1965, Keeping Scientology Working)

These sentences can be found in Hubbard's article "Keeping Scientology Working, published in 1965 and re-issued by Hubbard in 1980 with the following additional note at the beginning: "What I say in these pages has always been true, it holds true today, it will still hold true in the year 2000 and it will continue to hold true from there on out." This article is amust read for every scientologist at the beginning of every major course. It is the first article of the course material. I think Hubbard here expresses quite clearly what he thinks of democracy. - Let us not forget: When Germany awoke after WW II many Germans said they had read "Mein Kampf" but that they had shrugged it off to some degree, not believing Hitler really had meant what he had written, including his reasons why Jews should be annihilated.

In 1966 he says:

"There is no democracy being practised in the world anywhere today. And as far as I know there never has been any democracy, and even in ancient Greece there was no democracy."

(Hubbard taped lecture of 1 November, 1966, Government and Organization)

It's a grim world we live in. It needs to get a radical clean up, or should I say clearing? As Hubbard outlines in his article of 9 July 1980, corrected an re-issued for typo reasons on 20, October 1985:

"It must be noted ... that promiscuity, perversion, sadism, free love, homosexuality and other irregular practices fall far below an acceptable level of ethics. A society which falls into this category can be expected to abuse sex, be promiscuous, to misuse and maltreat children and to act, in short, much in the way current cultres are acting ... A society which reaches this level is on its way out of history, as went the Greeks, as went the Romans, as goes modern Europe and American culture ..."

Want to find the above quote in the original? Good luck. It only appeared when the article was first released and can be found in "Staff Volume 0" as published by Scientology in 1986. Later it obviously became victim of a major cleaning operation of articles containing anything potentially compromising to the image of the organisation.

The above is a good example to show where Hubbard mixes observation and moral judgement which in the eyes of the average scientologist is viewed as scientific observation and conclusion. Is there no way out of this terrible condition, current societies are in? Obviously our governments and our educational systems don't work anymore.

Don't worry, Hubbard has the resolution all figured out: Scientology's Political Officer!


On February 13, 1996 Hubbard publishes an article entitled: POLITICS. And here we have him talking plain text:
"Now and then you hear me speak derisively of governments and ideologies- including democracy.

"If, by seeing I criticise an ideology, anyone seeks to believe I embrace its opposite, he has failed to get the point. [...] A democracy or a communism would be a huge joke in an insane asylum. Well, isn't it? [...] No political system applied to a colony of monkeys would have anything to govern but monkeys. That's plain, certainly.

L. Ron Hubbard here by no means attacks a specific political system, much more he announces our world to be one big insane asylum. At the same time he notes that all people (of course I assume he excepts scientologists) are apes. From this superior point of view he also is able to classify, to stress, how individual nations in the world differ from each other and which might be better than another. In Hubbard's world the yardstick is rather simple:

"The only difference in existing systems of politics is their relative values in giving the individual a chance to develop and receive a higher level of personal sanity and ability. That rules out any system which witch hunts, freezes opportunity or suppresses the right to improve by any workable system or suppresses a workable system.

"Watching the US and Australia fight Scientology with blind fury while supporting oppressive mental and religious practices proves that democracy, applied to and used by people [deviated from reason], is far from an ideal activity and is only democracy [deviated from reason]."

Now we know how Scientology deals with politics! Criticism of Scientology is blind hate. And so the Germany government too is full of such hate and therefor has to accept that Scientology in full page ads in major US newspapers compares the government to the Nazis of the Third Reich - Heretically I could recommend to the scientologists another ad where Scientology would ask: "What is the difference between the government of Germany and the government of Iraq?" The Scientology answer would be: "The Iraqi government does not persecute Scientologists!" (Omitting that there are not Scientologists in Iraq.) Scientology's radical language, I may have overdone it a bit, in the eyes of the uninformed reader creates emotions and in this specific case pushes aversion against a people, in this case the Germany.

With the following explanations Hubbard, without noting it, shows the absurdity of Scientology. It seems no one in Scientology has to this date noted it:

"Every human has in common with every other human the same reactive bank [subconscious] . This is the most they have in common.

"The reactive bank-unconscious mind, whatever you care to call it- suppresses all decent impulses and enforces the bad ones.

" Therefore a democracy is a collective-think of reactive banks. [...]

"Any human group is likely to elect only those who will kill them. That's concluded from actual 1950 experiments."

Which actual "experiments" he refers to is not revealed by L. Ron Hubbard. Maybe he refers to the beginnings of Dianetics, where psychologists who at first showed some friendliness towards his ideas turned away from him. In Scientology itself there is extreme collective-think. Declarations coming "from above" are blindly being believed by the majority.

And as democracy is collective-think on the level of the subconscious it of course is an unusable political system. Exception: a Scientology democracy. And such a system should be put into practice:

"Scientology gives us our first chance to have a real democracy. [...]

"So we can conclude on actual evidence that the first true democracy will emerge when we have freed each individual of the more vicious reactive impulses. Such beings can reason, can agree on decent and practical measures and be depended upon to evolve beneficial measures.

"Until we have done that we will continue to be critical of human "democracy"- and any other political philosophy advanced upon man as a cure for his ills."

And thus it is obvious: True democracy is not possible without Scientology. Current democracies, by apes and for apes, simply accommodate Scientology in that they permit the organisation to exist and work.

The major unanswered question however is: Once the whole world has become scientological, Earth will also have been introduced to Scientology's system of control and management. And I really can not see what would differentiate this from a totalitarian regime. Only L. Ron Hubbard's writings would be valid, everything else would have to be forbidden because it would be «suppressive». People of different opinion would be thrown out of the (scientological) country, might have to go to Alaska or to Siberia or be sent to the Sahara until they are rehabilitated (or dead) ...

While on June 14, 1965 L. Ron Hubbard wrote that all comments attacking any political group or ideology were null and void, as we shall see he nevertheless continued to express his political ambitions after that date.

Dear Mr. Hubbard, I am tempted to say, how come Scientology continues to publish all the just quoted articles as valid policy of your so-called church? Why have they not been cancelled? Does the one sentence of cancellation of all statements concerning politics only exist to have something to show to critics?

After all, two years later L. Ron Hubbard in the spirit of a political statement wrote:

"Democracy is only possible in a nation of clears - and even they can make mistakes."

(Hubbard article of 2. November 1970, The Theory of Scientology Organisations)


On October 9, 1962 L. Ron Hubbard held a lecture entitled "Future Org Trends". That lecture, published again in 1991, deals with the future of the world. To put Scientology in the right light, Hubbard at the beginning in a generalising manner hits:
"Now, Scientology would go the way of many other good things unless some thought is put upon its future. Buddhism went its way, collectively, and actually wound up enslaving people. Bum show. The East, the paralysis of the East, the fatalism of the East, and so forth, are as attributable to Buddhism as to any other single item. I don't know what Gautama Siddhartha said, but I sure know that people have been saying since, "If you just sat and regarded your navel for enough Years and did nothing, you would become part of nirvana." And nirvana, as far as I can figure out, is the GPM."

GPM means "Goals-problems-mass" and is a new word creation and in Scientology's own dictionary is defined as follows: "the goal pointed one way, the opposing forces point exactly opposite ... where these two forces have perpetually met, a mental mass is created." L. Ron Hubbard further writes, that such masses can "cause psychosomatic effects, e.g. illness, pain or feelings of ... tiredness."

And so L. Ron Hubbard explains the Buddhist concept of nirvana as being nothing else than a condition where the Buddhist is caught in never-ending spiritual tiredness.

Zen-Buddhism and Lamaism do not fare better in this lecture by Hubbard. It is rather interesting, or, better, rather sad: A few years after he proclaims Scientology's "religious background" as being Buddhism and praised it as the bringer of civilisation he now declasses it to being a philosophy which only produces turbulence of the soul.

These institutions which are now no longer acceptable in his 1962 lecture are now being replaced by Scientology in the form of a vision he has for it in 1970:

"About 1970 - might look very much like this: The basic building block would be the district office. [...] Its influence is in terms of, oh, ten thousand people - no greater than that. But that is your basic building block. [Here follows a detailed description of that organization.] Now, there'd be money all over the place, as far as I can see. And n the Central Organization - just looking a bit further ahead than that - there'll be a political officer. You want to know what happens when you clear everybody in that neighbourhood, the only thing that center can become used for is a political center. Because by the time you've done all this, you are the government ...

"I'm just giving you a little glimpse of 1970. And it looks to me like a world that someone could walk down the street in. The situation between us now and that then is far closer together than you might think at this present moment. It's just within an ace of coming true."

(Hubbard taped lecture 9 January 1962, Future Org Trends)

Once the world is Clear - a nation, a state, a city or a village - the Scientology-organisation in the area becomes its government! And once this has taken place the only policy accepted as valid is Scientology policy. You may say that such change of law would require a democratic vote. And democratic it would be. And the people, now all scientologists, would cheerfully so vote. It would not be the first time in history, that democracy would find its end in such a way.


Another vision of political life is presented by Hubbard on November 1, 1966 in his lecture entitled "Government and Organization". If Scientology has sufficient influence upon a government, says Hubbard, the future representatives most probably will only be accepted as candidates for election after they have reached a specific level of Scientology enlightenment. In addition anyone would have the right to review the written protocols of the scientological therapy sessions, so that one knows whom one is about to elect. The "vitreous" member of parliament, vitreous down to the most intimate detail. Says Hubbard:
"Now, this then is probably the direction government will go under Scientology, if Scientology has much influence upon government."

And that Scientology indeed might plan taking over or infiltrating government became clear in 1963 when L. Ron Hubbard separated Scientology into five levels. the last one reads:


Scientology applied on a high level to social, political and scientific problems."

(Hubbard article of 30 July, 1963, Current Planning)

Now that is fairly general so we should also note the following and rather specific instruction given to Scientology's Department of Government Affairs, today called Office of Special Affairs:

"Bringing continuous pressure to bear on governments to create pro-Scientology legislation and to discourage anti-Scientology legislation of groups opposing Scientology ....... Examining the purpose and action of this post, it should become apparent at once that we have here in actuality the equivalent of a Ministry of Propaganda and Security, using old-time political terms. .....the action of bringing about a pro-Scientology government consists of making a friend of the most highly placed government person one can reach, even placing Scientologists in domestic and clerical posts close to him and seeing to it that Scientology resolves his troubles and case."

(HCO PL 13. March 1961, Department of Official Affairs)

It remains to be asked to which degree the current US administration has been subjected to these hubbardian orders. Celebrities with an open door to the White House may have had considerable influence in introducing Scientology's top public relations personnel in high places. Those however who suffered from the organisation, those who were driven into bankruptcy either through excessive "donations" or through Scientology's litigation practices, those who spent years in the healing process from the psychological damage inflicted upon them, all those do not have a lobby in Washington. Their voices go unheard, while at the same time Scientology continues to promote it can heal all psychosomatic illnesses, eliminate any mental or spiritual problems, and really is the best thing which ever happened to mankind. Does it take another raid at the various Scientology headquarters to unearth the dark sides of this questionable organisation and to once again reveal what is really happening behind the scenes?


So exclaimed L. Ron Hubbard. He also introduced his 10-step-plan to world domination. The reader may think this is pure fantasy. If it were the case the lecture "International City" by Hubbard would not be part of today's "religious" curriculum, part of the advanced Saint HIll Special Briefing Course. Here are the steps to world domination as outlined at length by Hubbard in his hour long lecture:

STEP 1: To persuade all governments to turn over all atomic weapons as well as the control of atomic manufacturing to the United Nations.

STEP 2: To convince the United Nations and all governments of the world that they select a site for and construct an "International City". Hubbard says this should be in North Africa on the Mediterranean coast as this would provide for sufficient land reserves for unlimited expansion. International City in the desert, Ghaddafi as the host?

STEP 3: Persuade all governments to remove their capitals to International City. This should include all aspects of government, the presidents, the members of cabinet, congresses, parliaments, etc. And, says Hubbard "prohibit a secondary capital or even a communication relay centre within the country itself."

STEP 4: Step for is for each government now relocated to establish all necessary communication links to the local states and provinces.

STEP 5: Step five is the complete remodelling of the United Nations. Says Hubbard "basing its member-delegates on a formula comprised of land value - land area and value, production and construction value and population figures ..." Power to the people or power to those whose highest ethical values are those of money and materialism?

STEP 6: And then, so that the UN will keep control of everything, Hubbard suggests that no treaties of mutual assistance (such as the one Britain had with Poland in the 30s) should be permitted any country.

STEP 7: Next the UN should have a small and powerful armed force, while at the same time all other armies would have to be abolished. As the UN would have the only army with an atomic arsenal they could then force any local government to better not start attempting to build these nasty things again.

STEP 8: This step then establishes the UN as the only actual government on earth: "Persuade the United Nations and national governments that the activities of the United Nations and national government should be limited to ... And then we limit what a national government should be up to."

STEP 9: What would Hubbard get out of all of this? Here it comes: "And then of course you eventually would find that they wouldn't want psychiatrists in International City. They have political use. ... And about all I would ask would simply be a monopoly on all mental healing done inside the boundaries of International City. ... "

STEP 10: The final result: "And the next thing you know, they're all members of a [Scientology introductory] course and you got the planet. But that point won't go into in the original release. It's nothing hidden, it simply makes it somewhat incredible."

I think this shows the problem you have with any government which is too centralised. It takes a handful of people at the right positions who then can play with the rest as they desire. As a side-note: Today's version of the lecture as it is presented on the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course has been manipulated, and amongst others the following has been edited: "... a lot of Scientologists might be able to make capital out of such an idea, they might be able to have some fun with it one way or the other." - Today's taped lecture goes like this: "... a lot of Scientologists might be able to have some fun with it one way or the other." There you have one of the "good" reasons for "Clearsound Technology"(tm).

Now the reader may believe that Hubbard was talking science fiction and that indeed no sensible person would ever consider the above to be a real plan or idea. If such readers would however know the inside talks amongst scientologists, their frames of mind, then he or she would rather quickly come to realise the sincerity with which such visions by their founder are being taken. The fanatical adherence to Hubbard's words, only understandable to those who ever were part of it, leaves no doubt that none of his thoughts or visions are considered mere ideas. They MUST be followed. It is "standard technology". Scientology plans on a long-term basis, as ridiculous as some of their future world dominance plans may sound.

The above quoted lecture was held on March, 24, 1964. In 1995 an internal Scientology publication (The Auditor, issue 284, ca. August 1995) printed excerpts of a speech held by one of the senior executives of Scientology aboard their ship. He announced "never before released" information about a soon to come scientological therapy, called Super Power. During the speech he quoted L. Ron Hubbard: "You've always had the idea of clearing the planet, right? All right, this is how we'll do it. First we clean up all the staff with Super Power and then we use it to clean up the public. And then we clean up the government. And that's how we'll clear the planet."

Don Drader is the president of WISE International, the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises, that part of Scientology which is responsible for the introduction of Hubbard's ideas to the business world and which hides the fact that their management courses are in fact "religious teaching" - or is it the other way around? In his editorial message of issue #41 of their magazine "Prosperity", released in spring 1997, Mr. Drader states: "In WISE we are engaged in a campaign to get LRH administrative tech standardly into use in every business, community and government on the planet."


If Scientology could gain influence as it pleases, then I fear the result would be that the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government would be controlled centrally. Hubbard policies would gain the status of the Law. This could of course be justified quite easily by a declaration by the then active Scientology management:
"The best form of government, says Hubbard, is that of a benign monarch. L.Ron Hubbard was a loving and caring man. We, the spiritual heirs to L. Ron Hubbard desire to practise this thought. Therefor Hubbard's policies from this day on are valid laws for our nation.

"As a first step we shall introduce what our founder wrote in 1950 in his book Dianetics, The modern Science of mental Health: "Perhaps at some distant date only the unaberrated person will be granted civil rights before law. Perhaps the goal will be reached at some future time when only the unaberrated person can attain toand benefit from citizenship. These are desirable goals." And therefor all US citizens shall report to their nearest Scientology organisation to receive (or not) a confirmation of his/her rights before the law. Those who are not Clear yet - in other words still aberrated - shall receive a grace period of 12 months. After that period they shall lose their civil rights unless they have attained the state of Clear.

"We might as well announce the next steps in our plan of freedom for this planet: In accordance with the book Science of Survival all citizens shall undergo a so called "test-of emotional-tone". Those, whose emotional level is found on the scale to be at 1.1 shall be dealt with according to this writing by our beloved founder L. Ron Hubbard: "No social order which desires to survive dares overlook its stratum of 1.1's. No social order will survive which does not remove these people from its midst." As we want to be a successful and surviving nation we shall provide special housing in Alaska to those citizens found to be at 1.1 on the scale. Proper rehabilitation opportunity will be provided for the approximately 6.5 million US suppressive persons, two and a half percent of our citizens."

So that there is no misunderstanding: Except for the two Hubbard quotes the above declaration is fiction. - Today.

How worthless democracy really is to scientology can be seen in practice within Scientology today. Seeming adherence but actual ignorance: A scientology association is formed and differentiates between active members and passive members. Active members are those who are employees of the organisation, the consuming (and paying) scientologist only has the status of a passive member. The president of the association (and other functionaries) can only be elected by the active member, the employee. At the Hamburg, Germany, Scientology organisation the statutes read: "At the occasion of the membership assembly the ordinary member has a full voting right. The extraordinary member have a consulting vote." Also: "The membership assembly may pass decisions no matter how many members are present." "Ordinary members are such persons who actively and with success work on a full-time basis for the goals of the association," - with which the statutes refer to the employees.

Seeming democracy also in another area: "An extraordinary assembly of the members of the association can be called for by the board, if at least one fourth of the ordinary members [the employees] presents the board with such a request." - I call this seeming democracy as no employee of a Scientology organisation has even the slightest chance to call together one quarter of his fellow employees in order to effect a change in any matter with would be contrary to what the top management of Scientology says. At such a point Scientology ethics policy covering "mutiny" would be activated. Not to speak of the average, consuming and paying scientologist. He has no say whatsoever.

On an international level I note: The "International Association of Scientologists", where every scientologist has to be a member should he desire to obtain services (except for minor introductory ones), has a delegate for each country. How these delegates are being appointed is a mystery. We members never received an invitation to become candidates. I suspect there is an internal policy which reads pretty much like this: That person is the delegate who leads the biggest organisation of the country. And the founding fathers of that organisation by no means were "a couple of dedicated scientologists" as Scientology public relations like to portrait - they were high and highest ranking executives of Scientology. Note: In an effort to rebut the above as it appeared in the original edition of my book, Swiss Scientology sent copies of invitations to IAS delegate elections to the press. However, these invitations were dated a few years back and also showed that they had only been displayed on the local org's student notice board. Anyone who was not an active student at the time was left clueless - which of course included many IAS members.

Some time ago I talked with a long time and dedicated scientologist and he recommendingly said: If I had the intention of pushing something through or if I was planning something where I would experience strong opposition from the international management of Scientology, then it would be wiser for me to forget my plan or intention and go and do something else ... the same scientologist also was convinced that the introduction of the hubbardian world of thought in all spheres of politics and society would be a blessing for mankind.

True, Scientology does not have its own political party. In fact they don't need one. It is far more advantageous for them to find individuals, make them into scientologists and let those scientologists then influence the political process. Those who know what Scientology really stands for will consider the political visions by L. Ron Hubbard with horror.

Now if you still have doubts about the true intentions of Scientology and the scope of influence they desire to achieve then you just might be the same type of person as several of the old Germans I asked during a research project why they never had read Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" where Hitler had already stated in plain text what he thought about the Jews and what he would do with them and with others. "Oh, but we did read it," was the answer, "however we never thought this was meant to be taken seriously." They learned the lesson, or so I hope.

As a final side note: CATS, Citizens for an Alternative Tax System, which promotes abolishing all income tax and only levying sales tax, is based upon an early Hubbard article where he outlines precisely that plan and vision.

The above is an excerpt from and an expansion to chapters of the book "Scientology with(out) an end", by author Tom Voltz, published in 1995 in Germany and Switzerland. The book excerpt is copyright © Walter Verlag, Zürich/Düsseldorf, additions and translation is copyright (c) Tom Voltz.

Webbed with permission from Tom Voltz.

[ Main Scientology page ]