HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965

Remimeo
Sthil Students
Assn/Org Sec
Hat
HCO Sec Hat
Case Sup Hat
Ds of P Hat
Ds of T Hat
Staff Member
Hat
Missions

Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

Note: Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has
cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an
all-out International effort to restore basic Scientology over the
world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL with me off the
lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. "Quickie grades" entered
in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions
which neglect or violate this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting
in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECUTIVES. It is not "entirely a
tech matter" as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2-year slump.
IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it.

SPECIAL MESSAGE

THE FOLLOWING POLICY MEANS WHAT IT SAYS.

IT WAS TRUE IN 1965 WHEN I WROTE IT. IT WAS TRUE IN 1970 WHEN I HAD IT
REISSUED. I AM REISSUING IT NOW, IN 1980, TO AVOID AGAIN SLIPPING BACK
INTO A PERIOD OF OMITTED AND QUICKIED FUNDAMENTAL GRADE CHART ACTIONS
ON CASES, THEREBY DENYING GAINS AND THREATENING THE VIABILITY OF
SCIENTOLOGY AND OF ORGS. SCIENTOLOGY WILL KEEP WORKING ONLY AS LONG AS
YOU DO YOUR PART TO KEEP IT WORKING BY APPLYING THIS POLICY LETTER.

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.

NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN SCIENTOLOGY, ON STAFF OR NOT, THIS POLICY
LETTER HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOU.

ALL LEVELS

K E E P I N G   S C I E N T O L O G Y   W O R K I N G

HCO Sec or Communicator hat check
on all personnel and new personnel
as taken on.

We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly
workable technology.

The only thing now is getting the technology applied.

If you can't get the technology applied then you can't deliver what's
promised. It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology
applied, you can deliver what's promised.

The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no
results". Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results".
Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are "no
results" or "bad results".

Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate
success
is assured if the technology is applied.

So it is the task of the Assoc or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case
Supervisor, the D of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the
correct technology applied.

Getting the correct technology applied consists of:

One:     Having the correct technology.

Two:     Knowing the technology.

Three:   Knowing it is correct.

Four:    Teaching correctly the correct technology.

Five:    Applying the technology.

Six:     Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.

Seven:   Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.

Eight:   Knocking out incorrect applications.

Nine:    Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.

Ten:     Closing the door on incorrect application.

One above has been done.

Two has been achieved by many.

Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in
a proper manner and observing that it works that way.

Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.

Five is consistently accomplished daily.

Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently.

Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.

Eight is not worked on hard enough.

Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not-quite-bright.

Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.

Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog
down in any area.

The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that
it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and
Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button
Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut
off from the fruits of observation. (d) The service facs of people
make them defend themselves against anything they confront, good or
bad, and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the
good and perpetuate the bad.

Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert
to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm
lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group
could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me
of that idea.  Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a
handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long-run value and none
were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions
and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to
"eat crow".

On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of
suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have
resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the
sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane
they will go in accepting unworkable "technology". By actual record
the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human
beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we
could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel
ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point
will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular", "egotistical" and
"undemocratic." It very well may be. But it is also a survival point.
And 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 South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and
democracy has given us inflation and income tax.

Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group
had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it
either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not
discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will
not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say
this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation
or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable—only so
long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful
applications.

The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results
and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are,
appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what
we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad
picture.

We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact—
the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology
but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have
wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that man has never before
evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious
technology he did evolve—psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock
treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.

So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.

So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas
I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself
and a few others to work at this.

Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been
relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth,
N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only
because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they
were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But
ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other
reasons.

The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans
without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in
common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the
bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get
broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an
avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything
decent done.  The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a
hell—and if you were looking for hell and found Earth, it would
certainly serve. War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of
man. Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means
of frying every man, woman and child on the planet. That is Bank. That
is the result of Collective-Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant
things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have
somehow gotten by the Group Idea. For that matter, look how we
ourselves are attacked by "public opinion" media. Yet there is no more
ethical group on this planet than ourselves.

Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and
then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is
only the aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive.

When you don't do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working
for the Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce
incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as
incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea,
and (d) encourage incorrect application.

It's the bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing.
It's the bank that says we must fail.

So just don't play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you
will knock out of your road all the future thorns.

Here's an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere
because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have
Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told
Instructor A that "It didn't work." Instructor A was weak on Three
above and didn't really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So
Instructor A told the Case Supervisor "Process X didn't work on
Preclear C." Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in
Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens
the door to the introduction of "new technology" and to failure.

What happened here? Instructor A didn't jump down Auditor B's throat,
that's all that happened. This is what he should have done: grabbed
the auditor's report and looked it over. When a higher executive on
this case did so she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest
missed: that Process X increased Preclear C's TA to 25 TA divisions
for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed with a
cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went
off running one of Auditor B's own manufacture, which nearly spun
Preclear C. Auditor B's IQ on examination turned out to be about 75.
Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never
invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be
"too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases".

All right, there's an all too typical example. The Instructor should
have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way.
Auditor B: "That Process X didn't work." Instructor A: "What exactly
did you do wrong?" Instant attack. "Where's your auditor's report for
the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you
stopped Process X. What did you do?" Then the Pc wouldn't have come
close to a spin and all four of these would have retained certainty.

In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct
process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review
found that each one (a) had increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned,
and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this
abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process
cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked!

Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more
deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed,
then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated
on every pc that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and
Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases.

Here's an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student
"because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!"
Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. "Of course his
model session is poor but it's just a knack he has" is also included
in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody
at Levels 0 to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found
that this student was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no
instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered
that he  "overcompensated" nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions
beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at "set". So everyone
was about to throw away standard processes and model session because
this one student "got such remarkable TA". They only read the reports
and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in
actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a
rough model session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the
pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and
errors.

I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and
running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course
hours. The Academy students were in a state of electrification on all
these new experiences and weren't quickly brought under control and
the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine
and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another
squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer
resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough Instructor at that moment
could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But
no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.

Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology)
only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension
is not of  Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat
humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.

When people can't get results from what they think is standard
practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The
most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive
in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under Instruction
in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate
examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty
of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because
neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions.
Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures
of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and
his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in
getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That
one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to
anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody
was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.

With what we know now, there is no student we enroll who cannot be
properly trained. As an Instructor, one should be very alert to slow
progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No
system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack
the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual
student, never on a whole class only. He's slow = something is awful
wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don't wait until next week. By
then he's got other messes stuck to him. If you can't graduate them
with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in
such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they contemplate
squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them
and they'll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be
auditing.

When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the
duration of the universe—never permit an "open-minded" approach. If
they're going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're
aboard, and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the
rest of us—win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded
about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have
been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of
panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough
universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers
survive—and even they have a hard time. We'll survive because we are
tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he
becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are
afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don't make students into good
Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes
to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed,
dedicated glare and she'll win and we'll all win. Humor her and we all
die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, "You're here so
you're a Scientologist. Now we're going to make you into an expert
auditor no matter what happens. We'd rather have you dead than
incapable."

Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time
and you see the cross we have to bear.

But we won't have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more
economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things
which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One
to Ten, Keep those in mind and we'll be able to grow. Fast. And as we
grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten,
will make us grow less.

So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High
Priests. It's our possible failure to retain and practice our
technology.

An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity
instances of "unworkability". They must uncover what did happen, what
was run and what was done or not done.

If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making
sure of all the rest.

We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or
something to do for lack of something better.

The whole agonized future of this planet, every man, woman and child
on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years
depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.

This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the
trap now, we may never again have another chance.

Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless
trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now because it seems
unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

Do them and we'll win.

— L. Ron Hubbard
HCOPL 7 February 1965 Keeping Scientology Working

pdf:
http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/images/stories/hcopl/hcopl-ksw1.pdf
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org