Author: Hubbard, L. R.
Document date: 1967, 5 November
Document title: Critics of Scientology
Document type: Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin
Book title: The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology
Location: Los Angeles
Publisher: Bridge Publications, Inc.
Description: Scientologists learn very quickly that people who criticize Hubbard or Scientology have crimes. The critic label justifies Scientologists' fair game actions against them pursuant to this bulletin and the Suppressive Person doctrine in general. In this bulletin, Hubbard instructs on how to adopt a savage interrogator attitude toward critics.
(Originally issued as an article in Ability 199 on 5 Nov. 67. Issued as an HCOB on 27 Aug. 87.)
If Aunt Ermiltrude each night went through your change purse and extracted divers coins without your knowledge, and then if she found you had joined a group that could discover secrets, her immediate and passionate reaction would be to damn the group and you as well.
If the wife was stepping out with your best friend behind your back, and one day she found you had thoughts of joining a group that taught you people’s motives and reactions and made you understand them, she would throw a mad-dog fit to prevent your progress.
If a government were busy making capital out of people’s ignorance of economics and world affairs and was playing a double game and a group came along and started to make its people smarter and more knowledgeable of true motives, that government would try to shoot every member of that group on sight.
If a group of “scientists” were knowingly raising the number of insane to get more appropriation and “treatment” fees and somebody came along with the real answer, that group would move heaven and earth to protect its billions of rake-off.
And so individuals, governments and “scientists” attack Scientology.
It’s as simple as that. We do not treat the sick or the insane. We break no laws. We do more good in any ten minutes of this planet’s time than the combined efforts of all social ministries on Earth to better mankind.
Stated that way, however, it looks pretty hopeless and even dangerous to be a Scientologist.
Except it is totally hopeless and fatal not to be a Scientologist.
Those who are not Scientologists are left in complete ignorance of the motives of the dishonest. And they have no chance of personal immortality. It is as simple as that. It is better to be endangered but with a chance than to be condemned utterly and without one.
Those who criticize one for being a Scientologist or make snide remarks cannot stand a personal survey of past actions or motive. This happens to be a fortunate fact for us. The criminal abhors daylight. And we are the daylight.
Now, get this as a technical fact, not a hopeful idea. Every time we have investigated the background of a critic of Scientology, we have found crimes for which that person or group could be imprisoned under existing law. We do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts. Over and over we prove this.
Politician A stands up on his hind legs in a parliament and brays for a condemnation of Scientology. When we look him over we find crimes–embezzled funds, moral lapses, a thirst for young boys–sordid stuff.
Wife B howls at her husband for attending a Scientology group. We look her up and find she had a baby he didn’t know about.
Two things operate here. Criminals hate anything that helps anyone, instinctively. And just as instinctively a criminal fights anything that may disclose his past.
Now, as criminals only compose about 20 percent of the race, we are on the side of the majority. This is quite true. In one country we have almost exactly 100 Scientologists for every member and supporter of psychiatry. They make the noise because they are afraid. But we have more general influence and more votes.
The way we handle the situation now is simplicity itself and we are winning.
We are slowly and carefully teaching the unholy a lesson. It is as follows: “We are not a law enforcement agency. BUT we will become interested in the crimes of people who seek to stop us. If you oppose Scientology we promptly look up–and will find and expose–your crimes. If you leave us alone we will leave you alone.”
It’s very simple. Even a fool can grasp that.
And don’t underrate our ability to carry it out.
Our business is helping people to lead better lives. We even help those who have committed crimes, for we are not here to punish. But those who try to make life hard for us are at once at risk.
We are only interested in doing our job. And we are only interested in the crimes of those who try to prevent us from doing our work. There is no good reason to oppose Scientology. In our game everybody wins.
And we have this technical fact–those who oppose us have crimes to hide. It’s perhaps merely lucky that this is true. But it is true. And we handle opposition well only when we use it.
Try it on your next critic. Like everything else in Scientology, it works.
GEORGE: Gwen. if you don’t drop Scientology I’m going to leave you.
GWEN: (savagely) George! What have you been doing?
GEORGE: What do you mean?
GWEN: Out with it. Women? Theft? Murder? What crime have you committed?
GEORGE: (weakly) Oh. nothing like that.
GWEN: What then?
GEORGE: I’ve been holding back on my pay. . . .
If you, the criticized, are savage enough and insistent enough in your demand for the crime, you’ll get the text, meter or no meter.
Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist. Because they do.
Life will suddenly become much more interesting–and you’ll become much less suppressed!1
Hubbard, L. R. (1967, 5 November). Critics of Scientology. (Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin). Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. VIII, pp. 129-130). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.