From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Subject: FZ Bible STATE OF MAN TAPES 7/9 [x2]
Date: 04 Dec 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <61d2361b235ff729e112a9bea684b455@anonymous.poster>
Sender: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to <squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

STATE OF MAN (SMC) CONGRESS TAPES (1960) 7/9

**************************************************

Contents

SMC-1  1 Jan 60 Opening Lecture
SMC-2  1 Jan 60 Responsibility
SMC-3  1 Jan 60 Overts and Withholds
SMC-4  2 Jan 60 Why People Don't Like You
SMC-5  2 Jan 60 Marriage
SMC-6  2 Jan 60 Group Auditing Session
SMC-7  3 Jan 60 Zones of Control and Responsibility of Governments
SMC-8  3 Jan 60 Create and Confront
SMC-9  3 Jan 60 Your Case
 
We were able to check 4 of these against the old reels.


**************************************************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE 

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians, 
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old 
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.  

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

**************************************************


SMC-7  3 Jan 60 Zones of Control and Responsibility of Governments


Transcript of lecture by L. Ron Hubbard SMC-7   "State of
Man Congress"

ZONES OF CONTROL AND RESPONSIBILITY OF GOVERNMENTS

A lecture given on 3 January 1960

[Clearsound checked against the old reel. No omissions 
were found.]


Hiya!

Well, how are you doing today?

Audience: Fine. Good.

Did you recover?

Audience: Yes.

Did I recover?

Audience: Yes.

That's the wrong auditing question.

Oh, dear. Well, here we are in the third day of this
congress. Looks like congresses are getting longer lately.
Looks like congresses are getting slightly longer lately.
They did get down as far as two days. Over in England they
got down as far as one day. Of course, the next step from
that is no congresses.

Female voice: Oh no, no.

But then, you see, I got processed, you know, and...

Male voice: Good.

.. then they got up to two days, you see, again, and now
they're up to three days, so you'd better - if I keep on
getting processed, you see, why, it'll probably get up to
four- or five-month congresses, so you better...

Well, you all look just fine today. I'm glad you're feeling
well. You're doing all right.

Audience: Yes. Yeah.

It's very funny, you know. You look at a preclear sometime
and he's wondering, and you say, "You're doing all right."
And it makes him feel better, you know?

But don't go so far as to say, "You're doing all right now
because you're Clear." Because Clear has all of a sudden
taken on two different meanings. It has separated itself.
We used to have something called a Release, and that was
somebody who wasn't nuts anymore - wasn't human. But we
actually don't have a - this grade of "a - present-lifetime-
clear-of-overts-withholds." There is no such immediate
statement. And yet that's more or less the intention of
Clear. And you could say "clear of current overts." "Clear
of current overts" is about the best statement that could
be made on the line.

I don't know exactly what we're going to do about this,
except, perhaps, to elect somebody to a Diogenes club. The
idea of a Diogenes club, of course, is not a new one. I
remember there was a Diogenes club back in Athens. And all
the biggest crooks of the place belonged to it. Well,
that's neither here nor there.

Well, you know I'm awfully sorry I didn't bring my notes
today, because today I need them. I need them. There's so
doggone much to tell you about, so very little time to tell
you in, that I'm just going to try to bear on through
without much regard to titles of lectures, that sort of
thing, and let you in on what gen I can or that has been
accumulated. But, I don't know, we might cover a thousandth
of it.

When you put out a culture in a civilization, you've got to
follow it up; you've got to take responsibility for it. And
as long as you have a totally irresponsible government,
you're going to have a world in trouble. When the most
powerful government on Earth is irresponsible to the point
of not taking the responsibility for the people and so
forth that it sends abroad, and in addition to that,
doesn't take responsibility for the culture it exports, the
trouble it steps up, the wars it wins, nothing of the sort,
and just says, "Well, that's all up to them," you're going
to have trouble in the world. That's for sure. That's why I
want you to get interested in the third dynamic.

Now, I'm not saying we could do better. I'm merely saying
we could do something. Now, this isn't - this isn't
advocation of the overthrow of the US Government by force.
I want to make that plain on the record. There has to be a
government there before it could be overthrown. About the
only thing that the US Government gets upset about is being
overthrown by force, and does get upset about that. And I
don't blame them a bit. I remember vividly when I charged
up Bunker Hill - just - what's this all about? I was going 
to withhold that.

No, my overt act against the American government comes
about with killing your favorite general, fellow by the
name of Prescott, in the Battle of Breeds Hill, 1775. I
wasn't even a combatant.

The rebels made the mistake of killing a friend of mine who
was part of the British troops. Well, that's a long story,
but it was an overt act. Every once in a while when I think
of those stories in Time magazine I say, "Well, Ronnie, you
deserved it." All explained - all explained.

Oh, dear. I'm afraid I shocked you a little bit. I'm afraid
I shocked you a little bit. You know, there were other
people in the world besides Americans and British at that
time. Yeah, there were. There were other people in the
world. There were people from Saxony involved. And I was
simply an observer from the Elector of Saxony's government
to tell him whether or not he should send Hessians over.
And I said, "Yes." Of course, that wasn't an overt act
until an old schoolteacher, the life just before this one,
points a finger at me and tells me what bad people the
Hessians were and how horrible it all was, and it upset me.
And I wasn't - I wasn't actually cognizant of the fact that 
I had pulled an overt act right up to that time. Because 
it was my opinion that the Hessian regiments that were
captured and gobbled up by first Benedict Arnold and then
George Washington were the only ironworkers and artisans
the country ever had imported into it. And it was to them
that they owe most of the present industry, you know? But I
- nobody was there to give me the gen on this sort of thing.

No, I didn't have anything to do with either side,
basically, but I did get mad and I've paid for it since, so
I hope you'll forgive me. I wonder how many wars you have
to win for a country in order to pay off an overt act. I'm
working on my third or fourth now.

The only fault you could find today with modern governments
is that they are not taking responsibility. They're just
not taking adequate responsibility. They think by paying
off the aged, by supporting the unemployed and by going in
for other corn-and-games Roman mechamsms that they are
taking responsibility for governing.

None of these governments need overthrowing. None of these
governments actually need very heavy berating. But all of
these governments need an increase of responsibility for
international welfare. The able citizen is the one who
should be supported by a government. That is a lesson
they'd better learn. Because a government cannot govern
unless it governs the people. And basically, the people of
a nation are the people who are doing things, not the
people who have quit.

Socialism, and that sort of thing, apparently, is a matter
of getting more government - it's a method of getting more
government.

Now the American government in 1775 was trying to spread a
message, and therefore deserved better at anybody's hands,
and which was why, basically, anvbody standing on the
outskirts, such as myselt, supported them absolutely
lukewa- supported very lukewarmly a any effort to overthrow
America. And do you realize the people of Earth support,
very lukewarmly, doing anything about a country which is
seeking freedom. You just stand around, and they say,
"Well, do this and that and the other thing for us," and so
you do it very lukewarmly.

You say, "Well, fine. You want fifty-thousand Hessian 
troops? Good. We'll send you - we'll send you several 
hundred."

You do these things internally. Internally, the British
government at that time was absolutely sabotaged. It was
sabotaged by its - the sentiments of its own officers and
people. They said, "Well, there's something to these
people. There's something to this movement on Earth." They
couldn't really get mad, you know? And so they just didn't
whip out their tactical directions and work them down to
the last hump. They said, "Well, these people should get
along one way or the other."

America had a message. And you go up today to the Capitol,
and you'll find that message written all over the statuary.
You'll find it written all over the paintings. And that was
that the common man had worth and that the people of the
world had a right to free determinism, that man had a
higher destiny than that of a slave and it was time he
broke his chains. And you find that all over the Capitol.

Now what's this government doing letting some two-bit bunch
of czarist miscarriages come along and tell it - tell it 
that it has a message of freedom!

These Johnny-come-latelys have no message of freedom! They
have a message of slavery. They say all men are alike and
they're all slaves. The machine must roll. That's just a
new method of obtaining production! That's all. Communism
is as wrong as capitalism. And then they're both wrong.
Somebody who sits back parasitic upon the labors of others
and does absolutely nothing and furnishes no service of
any kind whatsoever - clipping coupons, you know - or 
sitting back being the big commissar with the big red star 
and the hero medal, you know, are likewise parasitic upon 
the labors and sweat of other men.

Both of these systems are wrong, and somebody ought to just
let them go out on the corner someplace and fight it out
the way the troops of World War I were always insisting
that their generals be given clubs and go into an arena and
just hit each other over the head until they decided who'd
won. This was the most prevalent sentiment between 1914 and
1918. War has become unpopular.

But here's this great - here's this great message - this 
great message that was spread around the world at the late 
part of the eighteenth century that the common man was 
worth something and he ought to stnke off his chains and
determine his own destiny. That was a great thing.

Who were the stupid knuckleheads that let that message go
hy the boards, hm? What self-seeking, self-interested
politicians are sitting down here getting what spread,
forgetting that this country is the pioneer of man's future
freedom?

Now, this country has got to take responsibility for it.
That's all. They spread the message. There's no sense in
sitting back now and trying to go into some socialist mess
or in leaning the other way and going into some
capitalistic mad-dogism, either way. Or some fascistic
thing whereby Czar Pixie or somebody raises his noble
scepter and all the space opera boys jump up with their
blast guns or something like that. This is - it's no good.

No, somebody on Earth has got to keep the torch lighted,
and the country that's been nominated by the peoples of
the world is America. Now, I'm here to help make sure it
delivers the goods.

Now, we've got a total - way out in front. All we've got to
do is make some people take some responsibility for some of
the things that this country stands for, and this world
will be free. And that doesn't mean that every government
on Earth ought to be overthrown in favor of the American
government. It simply means that if democracy is going to
go forward, it had better be going forward decently under
the guidance of a responsible nation, and not just dropped
into the soup and every criminal that comes along given
fantastic credence because he's beating the drum for
socialism or communism or spooferism or nihilism or some
other nonsense.

The great message of the world of the last two hundred
years emanated from this country. And it's still emanating
from this country. And this country ought to back it up,
not by overthrowing the governments of Earth, not by
conquest, but simply by a matter of setting an example of
responsibility for its citizens and for its affairs abroad
to such a degree that it demonstrates that democracy
works, and works far, far better than any other type of
political activity. Democracy is not the best political
philosophy in the world; and nearly everyone will agree
that a benevolent monarchy is.

You can - it's very funny, you know. You can get a socialist
and a communist and nihilist and an anarchist and a
capitalist and a royalist and anybody else you want to get
together - a fascist - you can get them all in a room together.
I've actually done this horrible trick, and gotten them all
to agree on a political philosophy. And the political
philosophy they agreed upon, utterly and completely, was a
benevolent monarchy. But they said you can't have a
benevolent monarchy unless you have a benevolent monarch,
and then you cannot guarantee the continuance of that
government as a benevolent monarchy. So therefore that is 
bad.

But actually it's the best form of government. But short of
that, the best form of government is where everybody has a
say in it. Now, that will perpetuate itself, and that
continues on better. It's not the best form of government,
but it's the best workable, practical form.

And all these fellows agreed, and then you should have seen
their faces when they realized they had all agreed
politically. Very, very funny.

Now, I don't mean to tell you anything startling or strange
about this. We have no real vested interest politically. We
have a vested interest in man; all of us are interested in
this. And politics occasionally keep us from recognizing
or realizing our fullest responsibilities in this
particular direction.

One of these fine days we will have to turn around and
clean up politics, because politics can only go astray
where criminals are in political control. And if you have
the answer to criminality, you have the answer to all politics.

Democracy is probably the best political theory, workahly,
that has been introduced over the last twenty-five hundred
years. And the only reason it doesn't work is because you
can elect some startlingly beautiful man whose hair is
silver and whose voice is beautiful and the ladies dive
overboard for him and you find out you've elected one of
the lousiest crooks that anybody - everything ever had
anything to do with. That's happened in American history.

Well, it could only happen, and America could only be
subverted if people in key positions had too much to hide -
who could be blackmailed, who themselves could be turned
into rabid revolutionaries against the better good of their
people by simply not being able to speak clearly and openly
to their people and tell them what they should. No, as long
as you have criminals in governments, you're going to have
trouble. You're going to have lots of trouble.

I'll give you an idea of that. Some people accuse me of
being hepped or sold occasionally on the idea that this
organization has - Scientology organizations have been
bird-dogged by some political group. Now, they've
misunderstood what this is all about.

There are certain political groups which accumulate to
themselves criminals. And wherever you get criminals
sitting in your midst that can't talk, can't be processed,
can't duplicate communication, they scramble all the
communication lines.

You see, because they themselves are withholding to such a
degree, they don't dare duplicate. So something that comes
in to them, they then misduplicate as they hand it down
the line. Because they themselves have something they
mustn't say, they pervert everything that goes past them.
And you have one of those people in an organization, you've
got trouble. You got trouble.

It was very interesting to be able to talk to a very high
official in the British post office system very recently
and give him that succinct datum.

Now, up to that time, I had talked to him occasionally
about writing a manual for the use of his personnel
handling communication systems in the British postal
system. And he didn't think I had anything to say. He
thought he knew all about it, you see?

Funny part of it is, nearly everything I was trying to tell
him about, he in some dim way had noticed himself. And it
all appeared that he knew all this, you see, but he didn't
realize he couldn't articulate it. And this very funny
thing happened, you see? I was sitting there and I tell him
all about this one datum: that you just cannot have a
criminal on your communication lines, because he'll flip
the data because of misduplication. And I just gave it to
him right straight from the shoulder and used Scientology
technology and everything else - which he's not educated in
even vaguely, you know? I just let him have it.

And he sat there, you know? He sat there, "Oh," he says,
"you - you do know something about this, don't you?" And he
said, "We have a fellow in Scotland who is in charge of a
certain department in Scotland and," he said, "it's always
going wrong! Anybody who gives him a complalnt or a message
of any character, he changes before he hands it to anybody
else! And I've noticed this! I know what's wrong with the
man! I - I - how much are those E-Meters you sell?"

So therefore, we have to realize that a government that's
being totally knuckleheaded is a collection of individuals
who are trying their best but aren't able to reach very
well. A government is composed of individuals who
themselves are blocked in various ways because their own
communication lines are chopped up.

Now, we could say at once that the moment a government's
communication lines were cleaned up one way or the other,
that that government would undoubtedly begin to perform at
a much higher level of responsibility than it had been
before. Got the idea? Well, all you'd have to do is to make
sure that every person in government - boy, shades of 1950.
This sound famihar to some of you people?

Female voice: Mm-hm.

All you had to do was make sure that the people in
government were cleared (at least in the limited sense of
current lifetime) to ensure that that government would take
fullest responsibility on all of its communication lines.
Got the idea? So that if any group went about, in a
somewhat soft-voiced fashion, to guarantee the political
integrity or personal integrity of the people in government, 
they would probably be cooperated with 100 percent.

That sounds very daring. It actually isn't daring at all.
It's just nobody knew how to do it. It isn't that the idea
is unacceptable it's that nobody had the gen to make the
idea workable.

They try to do this with their various elections. They say
this man is good and that man is bad, and they tell stories
on each other - the candidates do - and they try to expose 
each other and they try by this method only to have politicians
in there who have fairly clean records, because they know
that if they have a dirty record, that they're liable to be
overthrown. But then, this politician, getting office, then
is unable to guarantee the cleanliness, for instance, of
his police department, his accounts department or other
things; he doesn't know how to go about this.

So as long as you have elected personnel to some degree you
have already dropped out the more crooked or reprehensible
personnel, to some degree there's already a preventer
working on the line.

But what if somebody came along and cleared the rest of the
lines up? Now, what would happen? What would happen to that
government? Be pretty interesting, wouldn't it? Hm?

Well, we can do that today. Now, this is just one of the
things I had to cover; it's not the whole of this immediate
lecture at all. But I just had to tell you about the purity
league gag! This is too good to keep. I - you're very hard to
withhold things from.

Now, I'm out - not outlining this as something we're going 
to do instantly and immediately. I'm simply outlining this 
as something which is a good idea. That is to say, a funny
idea, an idea that would be a little sport.

It would work like this: An auditor in his spare time would
find out in his immediate city, something like that, who
were the more important political figures. Or he would get
hold of a salesman. That's why I wanted you to get some
salesmen into the PE, not because we wanted to teach all
the salesmen in the world - but because it made a good
communication line - but actually because I wanted you to
have some people in your midst who were used to selling and
handling people. See, personnel problem was what that came
up from more than anything else.

All right. Now supposing - supposing this auditor got ahold
of one of these salesmen and he gave them a list of these
men, and he gave him some stationery, you know, and an
address. And across the top of it, it said the Citizens'
Purity League. I just love the title. It's just too corny
for words, see?

And he gets the salesman to go around and call on all these
prorninent civic lenders, you see, and lend their name to
an advisory board of the Citizens' Purity League. And then
you add all those to the stationery, see? It isn't costing
anything so far, you see? What an overt act you know?

And the literature of this Citizens' Purity League - I love
that title. It - just - nothing is that corny! And it says 
that honest people are entitled to an honest government. 
And that's all it stands for, you see? And it says that a
people are entitled to a government or to being governed by
honest men. And everybody will go for this! Good roads,
good weather, naturally! Naturally, a people are entitled
to an honest government, you see? But that's its whole message.

And the Citizens' Purity League, now with all these
advisory committee names, you see, which list every civic
leader in the whole community, writes a letter - and this 
is the department you have to tackle first - to the chief 
of police on this stationery, saying you want to make a
Security Check (give him your literature) on his personnel 
- not on him, on his personnel. You want to check over the 
heads of his departments and things like that, so that you 
can guarantee this sort of thing.

Well now, one of two things happens: Fascism takes place
overnight or he cooperates. See, it gets to be an
open-and-shut proposition. It's either this one or this one
and there's not much in between. But of course he says - he
looks at all these prominent names, and you go in and you
talk to him.

And he says, "Well," he says, "um-hmm-hmm. It's very
unusual-ahern-very unusual request you're making here.
Very unusual request. What do you intend to do?"

"Oh, just talk to these men and check them over from the
standpoint of record, you know, so as to give them a clean
bill of health for this."

And he's thinking all the time usually, you know, about, "I
wonder how much percentage these guys are holding out on
me," you know? "I wonder if there's a crook in the lot here
that's denying me my percentage."

Well, if he refuses, he knows what you're going to do.
You're going to write every single member of your advisory
committee; you're going to say the chief of police refuses
completely to cooperate with any Security Check on his
departmental personnel. Of course, you know what that means
- there'll be a new chief of police in there at once.
Because that's one thing civic leaders are able to do:
change chiefs of police.

So the chances are he'll say, "Well, go ahead. Go ahead."

So, you take - of course, the first one you want is the
vice squad. And you just takes your little E-Meter and you
just check over the vice squad for overts and withhold, and
what you're looking for is unreported crimes by the person.
Well, of course, as soon as the word gets around,
practically everybody in the police department that
couldn't stand a Security Check blows. Pshew! That
mechanism will work right now, see?

So you simply call a meeting of your advisory committee or
write them all a letter - never hold meetings of them - just
write them all a letter in a bulletin and say, "Well, we've
gotten rid of so many people because they had unsavory
reputations and they're being replaced by more reliable
men." And this committee says, "Fine. The Citizens' Purity
League is working beautifully and we are getting a purer
government and three cheers," see?

So that's fine. And it gets up to a point now where you
turn around to the chief of police - it must be the police
department, because that's the department that would be
used to stop you. That must be the first entrance point.
Always the police. They're the point of corruption. They're
the point that a revolution takes place in. Remember that,
always, you see? So if you clean them up first, you can
keep from precipitating something very bad.

Now, these people, of course, arc all very interested now
that the police department has been checked up and - checked
out and everything is very happy in the town of whatever it is.

And you turn around to the chief and you say, "Well now, we
want to check you out."

And he goes through this, "Well, I can tell him - oh, no,
wait a minute now. Oh, no, not that one!" You know, he goes
through this, "My life is an open - um - my life is - uh - 
my life bears inspection. I'm not on any criminal file - 
well, not in this area."

But here's the point: You're not trying to fire these
people. What you're trying to do is get preclears.
Interesting gag, isn't it?

You check over the head of the homicide division and you
find the head of the homicide division has been taking a
little bit of a cut on the side - here, there, something of
this sort. You find this, you don't instantly say, "Well,
this is going to be reported, and you're going to be shot
from guns." You're going to say, "Get your nose clean, son.
It's going to cost you money."

And then the word gets around that you actually charge
people for straightening them up and that "this is a method
of revenue and a gag and a racket." Your answer to that is
instantaneously - instantaneously you say, "What? The people
must be paid to straighten up the dishonesty of men who
should have been honest in the first place. Make those men
pay!"

And everybody will say, "That" - in the advisory committee 
- "that's absolutely right. Absolutely right.  Why should 
the people pay?"

This is just a gag. This is an interesting gag. But some
such operation could open the door to responsible
governments over the whole face of Earth and move away the
specter of overthrow, by violence and criminality, the
peoples of Earth and further degradation of their
liberties as has been going on for the last few centuries.
Would work. Think it over.

Of course, you get the accounts department and you get the
other department and you finally work up to this person or
that person, so forth. You could check - an auditor just
could be kept busy day and night, just doing something like
this and having a ball.

Now, if you started in on a program of this character and
it was successful, you'd have to depend upon the PE
franchises, you'd have to depend on these foundations to
furnish enough people to be trained as auditors to meet the
demand for auditors. So we've even got that side of it
covered if something like this really happened rapidly.

Now, it's not very much to ask people to simply be honest,
whatever their principles are - simply to be honest in
their execution. And simply to demand that honest people
deserve honest men in government roles. That's not very
much to demand.

But you'd change the whole face of Earth. You would. And
you'd make good something they were trying to do in 1775,
which was strike off the chains of the world.

Now, I think it's time somebody took an interest in that
program again. I don't think it ought to be left down here
in the Capitol rotunda, forgotten, while a bunch of fellows
go storming around the world from some other nation,
telling them they're the men that are setting men free.
When did Russia ever set any men free? From what prison
camp? They've still got their prisoners of war from the
last war. And these fellows are allowed to go around the
world and talk with their big mouths and say that they're
the pioneers of freedom? Oh, no. What Corn. It's not true.

So if this Country measured up to its total
responsibilities, it would first have a totally honest
government, at every level, and then would have a total
responsibility for everything it started in the idea which
it fostered out along the line so long ago. Do you agree
with me?

Audience: Yes.

We are not helpless. There is something we can do about it.
We can tell you the wrong thing to do always. That's
nothing. Nothing is the greatest overt act you can commit.
If you don't believe it, run into it sometime in your case.
The times you did nothing: Those were the overt acts.

Well, we needn't be guilty of it in this particular
lifetime, because you've got just as big a share in this 
as I have, as anybody has.

And with your knowinguess goes a certain increased
responsibility. That's a terrible thing, isn't it? You say,
"Well, I want to know more about this." The second you know
more about it, you're more responsible for it. Do you
realize that?

And when you're in my boots and know all about it, and have
since the beginning, you've really got a lot of
responsibility to carry around.

But it's remarkably easy to carry. What's tough to carry is
irresponsibility. That is very tough to carry around. If
you don't believe it, look at your somatics.

Every somatic you have stems and rests, securely founded,
on irresponsibility where responsibility should have been.
I don't wish to threaten you. I'm simply telling you a
technical fact. If you want to get somebody over a sore
leg, you just find out what part of that leg he could be
responsible for - using any form of the Responsibility
command - and he'll have a well leg. Simple as that. Only
it'll stay well, and that's what's important.

Now, in the field of the broader activities of Scientology,
we are more and more accumulating to ourselves
responsibilities in various directions, and we've gotten
almost up to the point where if a natio- international
explosion like war took place and so forth, why, it would
have been, to some slight degree, our fault.

Now, this isn't bigheadedness as far as we're concerned.
It's just that we didn't work quite as fast as we should,
we didn't talk as fast as we should, we weren't quite as
bright and smart and didn't forward our communication lines
quite as rapidly as we should. You get the idea? We're up
into a level where we would share responsibility with
anything of this character.

You can ask yourself right now why things are in such bad
shape in certain zones of the world, and you can - you could
trace it down - if you were concerned with the bad shape of
that particular zone - you could trace it down to the point
where you committed an overt act against that zone and took
it out of your perimeter of control. As simple as that.

You have a thing called zones of control. And actually,
I've given you this lecture backwards. I should have talked
to you about zones of control first and responsibilities of
government second, but I just love this idea of a purity
league. I mean it's just... Please, if you do something
like this, call it the "Purity League," will you? Please?
Nobody will believe the title, see?

Now, zones of control is something you should know
something about, because it will clear up for you a great
deal of difficulty in your future. A zone of control, where
control is positive, contains the minimal overt acts by the
individual. It's very simple, you see: high control, low
overt acts. Got that?

So if you think your greatest overt acts are against the
body you're sitting in, let me call to your attention that
you can still control it, which tclls you that your overt
acts against your own body or your body line must be
minimal compared to your overt acts against other areas
that you don't control. You got that?

So, before, we've had the idea that if a thetan was trapped
someplace, it must be the thing that he had the greatest
overt acts against, you know?

This fellow just can't get out of being a personnel manager
for corporations. No matter how he tries, he can't cease
to be a personnel manager for corporations. He just can't
cease to be this thing. You know? He says, "Well," he says,
"well, I just must have committed so many overt acts, I'm
trying to rectify them by being a personnel manager," or
something of this sort.

No. No, that isn't it. He's staying with his highest zone
of control where he has the least overt acts.

Now, a fellow who has no zones of control left has left no
area in which he has very few overt acts. All areas he's in
contact with have maximal overt acts. Got that?

Now, the bum down on skid row is a demonstration of a
person whose overt acts against all zones and areas are so
great as to deny him control of all zones and areas
including his own body and himself. You see that?

Now, he's running responsibility on all fronts - reverse-wise.
He knows he should be responsible in various zones and
areas, and he'll tell you this! This is - this is his reform
speech. This is what he gives the Salvation Army and people
who try to do things for him, you see? He just runs it off
like mad. And yet he doesn't take control in those areas.
Alcoholics Anonymous are - those people have my respect,
believe me, because how can anybody live with that many
losses? That they stay in and continue to control, to a
marked degree, a zone of almost total irresponsibility of
that character is an attestation of great stick-to-ivity
and great character. And my hat's off to them. That must be
a tough beef.

And to try to talk to somebody who is slipping on his zone
of control of the body into believing he has a wider zone
of control, such as the third dynamic - it's as though he's
being told about elephants with five trunks. He just knows
they don't exist.

Knowledge and control and responsibility all go hand in
glove. These things are all together.

In order to know about something, you must have some
control over it - some slight control - to know about it.
In order to have control over something, you must have
some responsibility for it. In order to be responsible for
it, you must know something about it. And we sort of have a
brand-new triangle, composed of knowledge, control and
responsibility as three corners.

Now we're up into the postulate zone. We're not talking
very much about mechanics, flows, masses - you know, that
sort of thing. We're talking about almost pure think. These
are the considerations people have and, oddly enough, these
considerations are rather easy to change.

Now, the only thing that can hurt anybody is the area where
his control has relapsed. This we see very obviously, that
an automobile will hurt you if you lose control of it. This
is one of those obvious facts, and you could dust it off
that way.

Actually, the fact is a little deeper than this. How did
you lose control of the automobile? That's what's been
unknown. Well, you lost control of the automobile - and this
is the brand-new datum - by overt acts and wilhholds on the
subject of automobiles. Just as easy ... You commit enough
overt acts against automobiles and they can hurt you,
up - right up to the time when you cease to know anything
about automobiles.

Do you know that there are people walking around in the
streets right now - cars pass them all the time - they 
don't know anything about automobiles, they don't see
automobiles, they don't know new models, they don't know
anything about them at all. Do you know that?

They know they have no control of any kind whatsoever ovcr
them. They've ceased to perceive them. Their not-isness
comes about through lessening the overt.

Automobile is a pretty wonderful gimmick. Well, they've
just lessened it right on out of sight. So their
responsibility factor has dropped by their realizing that
they are a menace to automobiles. This sounds very funny,
but they have proven to themselves conclusively that
they're a menace to automobiles; therefore, they ought to
be punished by automobiles and automobiles can hurt them.

But up to the time this mechanism takes place, it is
utterly impossible to be injured by an automobile.

I have a subjective reality on some of this, and so do you.
You know some zone of life - right this minute - you know 
some zone of life that apparently has the power to injure 
you. Let's just think about it for a minute. Do you do you 
know of such a zone?

Well, all right. The exact mechanic is that you committed
overt acts against the terminals representing that zone
that you now don't know about; you've buried them. All you
see is the menace. But the overt acts are there. On a
reciprocal, that area can now do something harmful to you.
And horribly enough, it becomes more harmful the less
responsibility you take for it. You really want to get
caved in, just back off totally from an area.

You want to know why the world could be destroyed? Because
nobody's taking any responsibility for it. You know why
they don't take any responsibility for it? They've got too
many overt acts against it - it and other worlds. So the
world could be destroyed.

You want to prevent the world from being destroyed? Take
responsibility for it. The odd part of it is, if you just
sat down and took responsibility for it and ran out your
overts - just you, see, just one person - ran out your 
overts against it - the very least that would happen is 
when everything else blew up, you would be sitting there 
untouched.

Now, there's the handling of the H-bomb. You know the
country that's liable to get it in the neck from the
H-bomb? Yeah. Who's the only country on Earth with an overt
act with an A-bomb, huh?

Well, somebody better take a little zone of responsibility
here. That was an awfully irresponsible thing to do; the
war was practically won. And they tell you all about how
many thousands of lives it saved amongst the troops, and
explain, explain, justify, justify and justify. My God, the
enemy was practically flat on the back.

They didn't even need to drop the bomb. They told the
people down in Los Alamogordos they were going to have the
Japanese come in and observe it, let them see one bomb
explode, then ask for their surrender. And they didn't do
that. They very dramatically went over and dropped the
bomb! See? Overt act. It's a total nonsensical thing they 
did.

Well, this zone of responsibility and zone of influence is
also, reversely, the zone of injury. When you've dropped
responsibility - when you've dropped responsibility for a
certain zone, it can hurt you.

Now, let's say you've been going along as a father for a
long time and you haven't taken all the responsibility in
certain areas as a father that you should have, you'll get
bit! Don't send to find for some other cause. If it bit you
very hard, you did it. Well, if you did it, you can undid
it. How do you ]ike that? You can! You can undo it.
Anything you've done, you can undo one way or the other -
somewhere on the track, given enough time. Even without
processing, you could undo it.

A lot of you are going forward in life right now, just
hoping you will get an opportunity to undo, oh, Lord knows
what, killing blondes or something. Hoping you get enough
opportunity to unkill battleships or something. Of course,
some of you are out of luck entirely because maybe your
overt acts are against heavy hussars - heavy cavalry, heavy
horse cavalry - and you're trying to undo overt acts against
heavy horse cavalry in an age that doesn't have any. So you
have to become an historical writer.

Zone of influence is terrifically important. You want to
know why we have not influenced further than we have? You
want to know how we could influence further than we do?
Well, the answer is there, with that triangle of knowledge,
control and responsibility. All we have to do to straighten
it out is get off our overts against any area we wish to
control, and we'll control it again. It's very simple - so
idiotically simple that only a very honest man with a very
honest view could grasp the situation, which is probably
our saving grace, you see?

It's the awfulest trigger mechanism you ever saw. It's as
though we've got it totally set up so that if we turn bad,
we can't influence anything very much. It's our sideways
proof of why man is basically good.

And when a man finds out he's harmful to various zones of
influence, he withdraws from them. If he finds that he can
commit overt acts against areas that he really doesn't want
to commit, he'll withdraw. He has to withdraw from those
zones, that's all.

He's protecting them against himself - from himself, you see?
He's protecting others and the other dynamics from his own
influence.

Well, now the second that he gets off his overts, he can
reestablish his control and reassert his responsibility for
those areas which he has previously deserted.

Now, right here on a great big silver platter, you've got
Earth; you've got Earth with a red ribbon around it. But it
tells you very vividly that if you haven't got your overts
against Earth off, and if you have not returned into
beingness your goodwill toward Earth, you won't control it.
And the silver platter is just as bright, but you won't
even be able to touch a single corner of it. You wouldn't
be able to put a finger on the rim unless you had done just
that.

Now, to tell somebody who is hitting the bottom about the
upper dynamics and his control zones on the upper dynamics
of course is not cruelty; you're just simply talking over
his head! You're just talking about something that doesn't
exist!

Now, tell me how many overts most psychologists have
against thetans. That interesting? Now, their overts are
sufficiently great that the basic unit of beingness of the
universe has disappeared to view. They don't even know it
exists anymore. People who are compulsively going along
this line, studying man, condemning him as an animal, all
that sort of thing, why, nothing else is real. Now, Lord
Dunsany - one of the greater writers of, not necessarily 
our time, but one of the greater writers of our immediate
age - he's an awfully clever writer. I mean I love that 
man's work.

The story he tells about the swallows: They go north and
south and they come back, and they roost during a part of
the year near a barnyard. And they tell the hens in the
barnyard about the glories and beauties they've seen: the
Mediterranean, Africa, the north, Scandinavia, you know,
all the beautiful things they've seen. And the hens listen
to them.

One day, why, a hen got out of the barnyard and stumbled
down the road and got across the road and fell into a
ditch, terrible flurry, managed to get back up on the road
and flee in panic and get inside the barnyard again. The
next time the swallows came they were talking about South
Africa and all the other beauties of Earth and so forth.
The hens all stood around contemptuously, said, "We know
all about that. You should hear our hen."

Trying to tell somebody - trying to tell somebody about
something that exists over which he no longer has any
responsibility, against which he has total overt acts, is
just something like the world compared to a flop across 
the barnyard, you see? It doesn't exist, you know?

So you'll find - you'll find, oddly enough, that at first
you will discover yourself talking to a relatively
uninformed audience. That is to say, you - I'm talking
about you now. Talking in the world around you, you'll just
keep talking to people, and they say, "Well, I don't know
anything about that. I couldn't care anything about that.
You mean that's life, and so forth. Well, I - none of my
responsibility. It doesn't have anything to do with me."
Got the idea? I  mean...

You don't have many people listening to you, and this kind
of upsets you. Well, you ought to know why it upsets you:
It upsets you because you knew instinctively all the time 
- you must have known this - you were talking to people
with a God-awful number of overt acts, who had totally
dropped out of responsibility everywhere. And talking to
such people was no fun. There's no way you can sell them on
anything. The only thing you can do is recover to them some
zone of existence. And recovering to them this zone of
existence, you now find them sufficiently responsible to
know about something.

That's how you communicate. Your best method of
communication is simply run a PE Course and get the
fellow's overts and withholds off on the early dynamics.
And you suddenly find yourself talking to somebody who can
control an area.

We have a little Communicator at HCO WW. She's only
sixteen. We use her now as a senior Communicator. Used to
be trouble all the time in the family, but we got all of
her overts off against her family and it's now all going
along smoothly - only she really doesn't know who caused 
all the smoothness to happen in her rather large family. 
She did. But she knows much about it now; she knows a great
deal about it. But she didn't know anything before. All
that happened to her is simply the auditor took off overts
against one or another family members. That's all. And up
came her zone of responsibility, so up came her knowledge.

So if you want to enlarge your communication zone, if you
want to enlarge your zone of control, if you want to
command more of the substance of this planet, if you want
to share more in the game, why, the route is there. Not
through so much a gimmick like the Purity League (But I
hope somebody will do that, you know? If you don't I will,
you know?) but actually by recovering actual zone of
influence.

By recovering a zone of influence, you will be able - very,
very thoroughly - by recovering this zone of influence to
take responsibility for that zone and to guide it right.
And anything you're protesting about going wrong, you have
the power to make go right, providing you get your overts
off against that zone.

Thank you.

[End of lecture.]




