Up for discussion is The Code of Honor, formulated by L. Ron Hubbard in 1954.

What is good and right about this code of conduct. What is wrong or flawed?

“No one expects the Code of Honor to be closely and tightly followed.

An ethical code cannot be enforced. Any effort to enforce the Code of Honor would bring it into the level of a moral code. It cannot be enforced simply because it is a way of life which can exist as a way of life only as long as it is not enforced. Any other use but self-determined use of the Code of Honor would, as any Scientologist could quickly see, produce a considerable deterioration in a person. Therefore its use is a luxury use, and which is done solely on self-determined action, providing one sees eye to eye with the Code of Honor.”

1. Never desert a comrade in need, in danger or in trouble.
2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.
3. Never desert a group to which you owe your support.
4. Never disparage yourself or minimize your strength or power.
5. Never need praise, approval or sympathy.
6. Never compromise with your own reality.
7. Never permit your affinity to be alloyed.
8. Do not give or receive communication unless you yourself desire it.
9. Your self-determinism and your honor are more important than your immediate life.
10. Your integrity to yourself is more important than your body.
11. Never regret yesterday. Life is in you today and you make your tomorrow.
12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.
13. Don’t desire to be liked or admired.
14. Be your own adviser, keep your own counsel and select your own decisions.
15. Be true to your own goals.

Let the comments roll.

Much has been written on the Net about Scientology Ethics. Many has been hurt by its implementation. But here I would like to draw your attention to one simple little quiz. Although you may not know much of Scientology or speak or read Scientologeese, you should be able to have a crack at this.

Background: There are three major parts of Scientology; Ethics, Tech and Admin. Ethics is a subject devoted to keep the person on the straight and narrow and true to himself. Tech is the main body of Scientology knowledge and deals with the improvement of a person’s abilities through training and counseling (auditing). Admin is the policies directed at the running of Scientology organizations. The purpose of Ethics is to make it possible for Tech to be effective. Admin is intended to make it possible for an organization to deliver Tech.

The policy called “Ethics Review” includes a summary of the various steps intended to ensure a person is ethical. You may find a few things questionable about this gradient list of ethics pressure, but I see one major flaw. I wonder if you can find it. After some comments by you readers, I will add my take.

Quiz: Find one major thing wrong in the following:

LEVELS OF ETHICS ACTIONS
Ethics actions in degree of severity are as follows:

1. Noticing something non-optimum without mentioning it but only inspecting it silently.
2. Noticing something non-optimum and commenting on it to the person.
3. Requesting information by Ethics personnel.
4. Requesting information and inferring there is a disciplinary potential in the situation.
5. Talking to somebody about another derogatorily.
6. Talking to the person derogatorily.
7. Investigating in person by Ethics.
8. Reporting on a post condition to Ethics.
9. Reporting on a person to Ethics.
10. Investigating a person by interrogating others about him.
11. Asking others for evidence about a person.
12. Publishing an interrogatory about a person that points out omissions or commissions of Ethics offenses.
13. Assigning a lowered condition by limited publication.
14. Assigning a lowered condition by broad publication.
15. Investigating a person thoroughly in his or her own area.
16. Interrogation stated to be leading to a Court of Ethics.
17. Interrogation in a Court of Ethics.
18. Sentencing in a Court of Ethics.
19. Suspending a Court of Ethics sentence.
20. Carrying out a Court of Ethics discipline.
21. Suspension or loss of time.
22. A Committee of Evidence ordered.
23. A Committee of Evidence publicly ordered.
24. Holding a Committee of Evidence.
25. Findings by a Committee of Evidence.
26. Submitting findings of a Committee of Evidence for approval.
27. Waiting for the findings to be passed on or carried into effect.
28. Suspending findings for a period for review.
29. Modifying findings.
30. Carrying findings into effect.
31. Publishing findings.
32. Demotion.
33. Loss of Certificates or awards.
34. Denial of auditing or training by a Comm Ev for a considerable period of time.
35. Dismissal.
36. Expulsion from Scientology.

And to add some flare, here’s the wonderful Karen introducing how Ethics is done by the Church of Scientology:

This one deserves a rerun (link to original post by Jeff Hawkins)

Non-Scientologist: So, tell me about Scientology.

Scientologist: Well, it’s a religious philosophy which contains tools that anyone can use to improve their life. These are workable tools that have been proven to be uniformly successful if they are applied correctly.

Non-Scientologist: OK, but forgive me if I question your statement about being uniformly successful. I’ve seen some disturbing things online. Apparently the head of Scientology is a sociopath who is physically and verbally abusive to his staff, many staff are treated no better than slaves, the organizations put incredible pressure on their members to come up with more and more money, people are forced to disconnect from their families, the Scientology organizations are failing, emptying out, and there are a lot of defections, including top level OTs. There have even been OT suicides. That doesn’t seem to indicate uniform success.

Scientologist: Well, you have to understand that people running the Church are not correctly applying Scientology. They’ve altered the technology. What they are doing is not Scientology.

Non-Scientologist: I’m sorry, you’re saying that Scientology doesn’t apply Scientology?

Scientologist: No. the official Church doesn’t apply Scientology.

Non-Scientologist: I see. Well, if alteration of the technology is such a major problem, maybe Hubbard should have warned people about it. Maybe he should have written an issue alerting them to the dangers of altering the technology, and had every Scientologist read it at the beginning of every course. And maybe he should have set up a part of the organization as a sort of Quality Control to police this sort of thing.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did those things.

Non-Scientologist: Oh. Well, then, why didn’t that work?

Scientologist: Well, that’s because people have misunderstoods. They can’t duplicate what they are reading. They even have something called Crashing Misunderstoods.

Non-Scientologist: I see. That sounds like a serious block. Maybe Hubbard should have written something warning people about the importance of understanding words. Maybe he should have developed a technology of how to study, and how to handle these “Crashing Misunderstoods.”

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. It’s called Study Tech.

Non-Scientologist: OK. Well, why didn’t that work?

Scientologist: Well, people don’t apply it! They don’t clear their words. They’re out-ethics! They are just blinded by their own overts –transgressions – and they have withholds.

Non-Scientologist: Well, I can understand that could be a problem. Hubbard should have invented a technology of ethics to help people be more ethical and disciplined. And maybe he should have directed some of his counseling techniques to help people become more honest and ethical.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. There’s a whole book on Ethics and a lot of auditing procedures to address that.

Non-Scientologist: OK, well, why don’t people apply that?

Scientologist: It’s hard to get anything standard done in orgs these days! The Orgs are a mess! They are off-purpose, more interested in money than really helping people. They are understaffed and harassed and insolvent and desperate!

Non-Scientologist: Sure, I can see how that would be a problem. Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of organization; how to keep organizations on-purpose and functioning properly. Maybe he should have written up all of their duties in detail so they know exactly what they should be doing.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did do that. It’s been published in ten big volumes.

Non-Scientologist: Well, then, why doesn’t that work?

Scientologist: Staff don’t have time to study it. There’s too few of them and they are desperate. They can’t make enough on staff so they have to moonlight. There are just not enough public in the orgs!

Non-Scientologist: Oh, I see. Well, then, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of how to promote and market Scientology. Maybe he should have provided drills telling people how to effectively disseminate Scientology.

Scientologist: Well, actually he did do that.

Non-Scientologist: Ok, why isn’t that used?

Scientologist: You don’t understand! Scientology has terrible PR. It’s hard to disseminate to people because Scientology is so disliked in society.

Non-Scientologist: That is definitely a problem! Maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of Public Relations so staff could learn how to create a good public image and good relations with the public.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that.

Non-Scientologist: Then why is there a problem?

Scientologist: Nothing standard can get done in the Church! The whole of the Church of Scientology has been taken over by Suppressive Persons. They are perverting the tech! They are destroying the Church! Everyone is PTS to them!

Non-Scientologist: Goodness, that sounds serious! Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to show people how to spot Suppressive Persons, and how to handle them once you’ve spotted them, so you don’t go PTS.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that too.

Non-Scientologist: Oh! Well, then, why doesn’t that work?

Scientologist: There are so many other factors I haven’t even mentioned! These Suppressives overwhelm people! They use implant technology!

Non-Scientologist: Well, why didn’t Hubbard develop some advanced techniques to give people freedom from being overwhelmed and proof them up against the effects of these implants?

Scientologist: He did! He did! But you don’t understand! This is Planet Earth. It’s a crazy place! You can’t get technology correctly applied when you have people who are not rational, who are stupid, who are not sane, who are low on the Tone Scale, who are aberrated…

Non-Scientologist: Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to make people rational, sane and intelligent, to raise them on the Tone Scale, to get rid of aberration…

Oh wait. Isn’t that what Scientology is supposed to do?

Summary

OK, this is a fictional, contrived conversation. But how many of these explanations have you heard in real life? And how often have you seen this kind of circular logic?

In my opinion, the most basic of Scientology’s system flaws is that Scientologists are trained not to see system flaws. Even when failure is obvious to everyone else, fundamentalist Scientologists will refuse to inspect the system. They will interpret all failure as individual failure. They become experts in explaining away failure.

Doctrinaire Scientologists can neither see nor correct systemic flaws, and thus Scientology is incapable of correcting itself.

And maybe we’re getting closer to a real Why.

Backdrop: Article on Tony Ortega’s blog and my blog post titled, “WTF? OMG! BBQ!”

When this news reached the main Independent Scientologists Facebook group, all hell broke lose. Even before the comments to Ortega’s piled up good.

Without any more data, without any due process. Brian was promptly proclaimed guilty. Not only that, but within minutes, a lynch mob gathered and called Brian anything from “traitor” and “slime boy” to “degraded being” and “sociopath”. He had clearly and intentionally back-stabbed every Indie Scientologist. Clear as day!

Ortega’s view of this was taken as fact, and Indie Scientologists instantly cried out for “Disconnection!”

What happened to “innocent until proven guilty”?

Then I dared to ask for known and public facts in the case, specifically, “Did his declaration contain anything that wasn’t already public knowledge”. And instead of answering my simple question (with a number of repetitions), I was lambasted for daring to ask such a question. I was immediately seen to be defending Brian. I was on his side and a suspect guilty by association.

I know Brian from before. In 2011, he moved to Norway for a few months to work with me. Before Scientology, he was a basketball star and successful business person. When he came to Norway, his spirit and abilities was broken. I understand that he wants nothing more to do with Scientology. Our working together didn’t work out, and I haven’t been in contact with him for more than a year until now.

I talked to Brian a couple of hours following the online onslaught. Although he didn’t say much, I got that he did not intentionally want to betray anyone. Others that actually talk to him would conclude the same. He was a fool to sign the declaration, and I told Brian personally that I thought he was hopelessly naive to think that the Church wouldn’t double-cross him. After all, this is one of the most insidious, creepy organizations in the Western World.

I never supported him signing the declaration. I think he was stupid to do so.

I withhold judgment until facts are on the table. I still don’t have all the facts as to how and why Brian signed the declaration. Even if Brian is proven to have intentionally back-stabbed others, it still does not vindicate a lynch mob that cried “guilty!” right off the bat.

Indie Scientologists started to plaster his Facebook wall with horrible accusations to the point where Brian had to take down his FB account. And it went viral. He was accused on more and more channels, labeling him worse and worse. E-mails containing character assassinations were even sent to his family. He was completely shattered to the point were I was seriously worried about the guy.

When I see a group react in such a way to such a serious result, I decided to leave the group.

And all this went down in a group of Scientologists – the most ethical people with the best ethics and justice systems known to man, the most enlightened and mentally balanced people, those with the best communications training on the planet. Or so the legend goes.

From this and other recent events, I concluded that Scientology tends to corrupt what it touches. The results, the products, tell the tale.

I talked to a few of the Indie Scientologists from the FB group back-channel after I left. They agreed that the group got out of hand, and agreed that it quickly became a lynch mob. And no one in the group lifted a finger to handle this KKK. That is cowardice of the same shade we see in the Church where every Scientologists observe shit happening but very few dare to say anything.

Moral: Never interrupt a good lynch mob with facts. Or: Fuck this cult think.

I suspect that then the truth comes out about what really happened in the process between Brian and the Church, it would shake the foundations of the Church of Scientology.