Well, we arrive now to the last lecture of this congress. And the usual thing for a last lecture at a congress is to give you more technical data.

Now, to tell you where we're going from here if you want to go there — that's the main point here — is I don't think anybody in Australia would go anyplace unless they wanted to go there. Isn't that true?

Audience: Yeah. Yep. Yes.

The one continent left that hasn't been totally steamrolled by machine age and so forth, is Australia. That's fairly obvious, many spots.

Your future in Australia is very definitely in your hands and nobody else's. There isn't anybody can do anything that people don't want to do or go where people don't want to go, as I've already said.

But Australia today is pretty well on the road toward a much higher plane, Scientologically. I have seen tremendous advances here in the past half year and I think you have too.

And Scientology advances tend to go by the square of time. They don't go on a smooth, simple climbing curve. They start going this way — rather easy.

As Scientologists become more able, so does its dissemination become easier. Very often people will tell you in organizations, „Well, we'll go better as soon as we represent it in ourselves better.“ And I think that is a very definite fact

Now, in 1950 I pulled off the organizational lines. I simply turned my back on organizations. I said, „That's it. We will go as far as Dianetics works. And we won't go any further than that. And with all the ballyhoo in the world, with all of the tremendous billboards in the world, with all of the TV time and everything else, we won't go any further and we won't go any faster than the subject works. And therefore from here on out my main concentration is solely on research, investigation and getting better results.“ And that was my goal way back in 1950.

And I've stuck to that very heavily and any organization that occurred up to 1957 was purely incidental. That make you understand a little bit better what's happened here in Australia?

Because I found out — I found out that it would go as far as it worked. And it was my job to make it work better! And by the fall of 1957 I was willing to give a considerable amount of time to organizations, communication lines, keeping people better informed, getting a better standardization in Central Organizations, making Central Organizations work better for one reason only: We had made our first MEST Clears, made by somebody other than myself And now I knew we had a show on the road. And there are some people right in this room that are MEST Clears. It's not a remote fact. It can happen and actually can happen with the exact processes that the first MEST Clears in 1957 were made by.

Now, 1957, therefore, was a kickoff as far as organizations were concerned. Up to that time I didn't even have my own communication lines organized at all. Stuff just landed on me from any part of the world and got handled or didn't get handled to the degree that I had time to spare from research and investigation. And that wasn't much time to spare, let me assure you. Because — it's been calculated that if the Ford Foundation or some vast organization had taken over Dianetics and Scientology research, they would have finished it in 2080 A.D. at a cost of twenty million dollars a year — something on that order.

The research which we have could never have been bought, not by any existing research organization. It had to be done economically and it had to be done as well as it could be. And it's been a rather tremendous job because it's been bucking the line of the unknown the whole way. It isn't as if anybody had ever been out along the line and marked any blazes on the trees. It was straight across the middle of the desert with no tracks whatsoever.

That sounds like an exaggeration because you look at some of the old Vedic hymns and you look at this and you look at that and you'll find pieces of Scientology. Yes, but how many other pieces do you find in them? How many other pieces that had no part of the puzzle whatsoever!

You're told in Lamanism that man is a separate soul and that he can exteriorize. And you're told at the same time that all he has to do is totally introvert and sit in one place and supermeditate and spin himself in 100 percent and he will go out the bottom! And that's twice as important as the fact he could exteriorize. On every hand you had data, data, data.

You can pick up today a book like somebody — one of the more advanced modern thinkers like Krishnamurti. Pick it up, read all about time. I've had somebody do this, you know. I've made them do it! And they read all about time and it's paragraph by paragraph by paragraph. And then all of a sudden they read a paragraph and, „You see? You say that in Scientology, too.“ And I say, „Go on. Read the next paragraph.“

And so they read the next paragraph and they find that „all pebbles on the beach are timeless eons which congealed bluapul“ has the same meaning and the same importance as this true fact he's just said, you see.

And then now read the next paragraph and the next paragraph and turn the page and read the next and the next and the next. And where else in all that garbage do you find another true fact? And who is to tell anybody that in that garbage there was a true fact? And that's been „knowledge.“ It's been like a tremendous chute of water and you had to pick out the right drop. How were you going to pick out the right drop?

Been an awful lot of smart men trying to pick out the right drop for an awful long time — my hat's off to them because it's been a rough deal.

Now, I don't say that this was — means anything particular with regard to I'm bright or stupid or more introspective or something or other than they are. But, I will say this: that picking out the right drop, picking out the key data which led to freedom was far more important than getting the right letter answered. Far more important than handling the vastly horrible problems of somebody in lower upper Chicago. You got the idea?

Because getting the right facts in the right order done right, of course, solved all the problems in upper lower Chicago, too! So, in this case it was definitely the cart was put behind the horse.

And we could have been beating — as a matter of fact, in early 1951 I was offered a national TV program in the United States by a very well-known sponsor. And one of the reasons people here and there are so darned mad at me — and here and there they're awful mad at me — is that I would never play their game. I went along my way and did the job that I thought had to be done. And that outfit to this day practically spits every time they mention my name! It cost them about 75,000 dollars to line this thing up, and they had it all lined up and all I had to do was walk in front of the TV camera and take up people's problems on a national broadcast basis.

I just had to take up people's problems and look nice and say witty things and so forth. And why wouldn't I? Well, that fifteen minutes, of course, would require a couple of hours of going to and from the studio and doing this and doing that. And it was just time we didn't have. It was time that couldn't be afforded. There it is. We never put on a TV program. One couldn't do it; he couldn't do that much work.

I've barely been able to do the job I have done. And whether I have done it poorly or well, time will tell. Of course, there's always more job to be done.

But at this particular time I hope you'll forgive my occasional inattentions, my seeming to be way off someplace else and — when you yourself knew it was all going to the devil and there was no interest paid to it whatsoever.

Now, I tell you why. Now, I tell you why HASI Melbourne could just sit down here and spin. People had tried to drag it out and straighten it up and so forth, but unless I'd put in full administrative time, made organization very solid, made it groove right straight down the line, put a lot of time in on training personnel and so forth, what else could it do but try to get along the way it did? And that it survived at all is a tremendous tribute to the people who are running it.

But in running it, they themselves learned something that I didn't have to teach them. They themselves learned a certain amount of independence rather than a total dependence on Ron. Now, that's valuable. And I think it would be better understood here in Australia than in anyplace else in the world, wouldn't it?

Audience: Yes.

Scientology organizations here in Australia are particularly strong because they have survived in spite of it all, even though they have yet to be as well known or as well appreciated as they will be. Right now there isn't a franchise holder, much less a large organization here in Australia, that isn't doing a splendid job right here at this moment that I am tremendously proud of. And they've done it practically off their own cuff and I'm real proud of that.

There's a great deal to be known and done organizationally and administratively, but I want you to understand and I want to tell you here at this congress that it is not any part of any plan I have or ever will have to own and control the actions of people.

The actions of people, fitted into an organizational framework, themselves shake into their best efficiency. There are certain things that have been learned by Scientology organizations — learned the hard way over the years. And fellows who really can run organizations are the first one to recognize that these lessons are valuable. And they put them into effect and they carry on and they win with them not because they'll be sacked if they don't, but because it makes good sense.

There's even an old Sec ED, Secretarial Executive Directive (which is an order to an organization put out by myself) that says: when a Sec ED violates good sense, why, follow the good sense and to hell with the Sec ED.

Now, that doesn't look very much like we're trying to own and control large sections of Earth.

We are in the perilous condition, however, of inheriting large sections of Earth if we don't look out. And that is my main difficulty, if you please, administratively — is try not to put great big barbwire fences around pieces and things and say, „Well, everybody else keep off.“ That's the hard thing to do.

But a long time ago an ethical problem occurred. It was a very interesting problem. This will amuse you because I don't think I've ever told anybody this before generally. Oh, a few people on the inside know this.

But up until July of 1950, in all the first months of burst and bang in the United States, I used to tell everybody with a perfectly straight face that Dianetics was the product of a number of fellows and I was their spokesman, in an effort to get them and it off of my back and keep from inheriting the administrative burden, because I didn't have any idea of wanting to be „the famous person.“

In the first place I had had enough already to know that it was a snare and a delusion.

Perhaps if at that time I hadn't ever commanded ships or expeditions, if I'd never seen my name in print I might not have had quite as cleareyed a view of what fame means. But it's a bubble, it's nothing, it's froth. Well, it — and you go down and you write a movie and of course you're famous, right away. I mean, everybody seeks you out, you know, and they — all the young writers that want to write movies and all the movie actresses that want parts and — ah! The next thing you know, you just — many people do, they just lose their heads and that's it.

But if you've lived in that kind of an operating climate for any period of time at all and been here and there and done this and that, you eventually find out that the essential thing is to do your job! Not to be known for doing it. It's a big difference, you know.

Sometimes in an organization we find somebody who is totally overlooked. Person's doing his job, doing his job well. No randomity in that person's vicinity and somebody who makes some randomity and apparently has a lot more noise around him, and so forth, gets promoted and that person doesn't. This one we have to look out for too.

The fellow who does his job well is the only person who will ever help others or do anything for anybody and himself included. Doesn't matter how well he's known.

But at the end of July 1950, a terrible thing had occurred: The Communist Party had elected me out. In the first place we had our biggest ARC break in 1947 when I was writing, as a member of the Authors League of America, stories which would not fit themselves into the framework required by the officers and directors of the Authors League of America which was 100 percent, almost, Communist Party card-carrying members! And they said I was a fascist! And I have even been hung in effigy long before Dianetics as a fascist. I was a popular butt of the communists because I wouldn't write stories totally calculated to stir up racial minority difficulties in America! I just wrote stories to be entertaining and that was no longer the fashion.

And you'll think this is a strange statement for me to make because that's a big organization. But they've already long since had my resignation.

Now, these people in the early days of Dianetics said, „We can use Dianetics.“ They were all my friends. Everywhere I looked, every writer I knew who had ever been a member of the Communist Party was right there alongside of me pumping my hand, saying, „Good going, Ron. We knew you had it in you.“ I kept asking these fellows, „Why are you so interested in me?“

„Oh, well, you're very famous. You're very brilliant! You're very this.“ Yeah, yeah, yeah.

We had the potential of an organization the influence of which could be used by another interest! And when they finally got it through their thick skulls in October of 1950 that I didn't care to have Dianetics and Scientology covertly used by any other organization on Earth for their own special purposes, Dianetics and Scientology in the public presses had it.

Anything you see today in the public presses stems from that period and similar periods when people have walked up to me and said, „You've got awfully nice organizations. You have a tremendous appeal to the public. You represent things very well and you're very clever and very famous, too. And we'd be very glad to subsidize you very nicely. Don't you want some money.? How about some more money, huh? It's — money, money, checks? What do you want? What do you want?“ so forth.

And I'd said, „You flatter me. You flatter me. You flatter all of us. But we've got this far on our own hooks and we're going to get the rest of the way the same way! There, sir, is the door.“

The fate of any piece of knowledge man has ever been able to learn about himself, his society or this universe has sooner or later become subservient to some special interest with a curve on it to make more slaves. And this is one time when as long as I've got words in my mouth and breath in my thetan — this is one time when that curve isn't going to happen. And that's all I want your help in. We want to make sure that what we know never comes to serve some special interest for the subjugation of man.

The only reason you ever see me let my name go up on doors in organizations and that sort of thing is because I had learned by August of 1950 that unless I was willing to take ownership for it, it would go all agley. And all that name stands for is „This is the best we know at this time.“ That's all that name stands for. It doesn't stand for me or how famous I want to be or anything else, but that is „The best we know at this time will be released through this particular organization,“ and that's the only thing it can say. It doesn't even mean possibly that it would be a better organization than others, but it'd certainly say that the ethical standards are maintained at whatever cost and the technical knowledge that is available, is available, little of it pulled back, none of it hidden. The facts are yours.

Because in the final analysis, to whom does Dianetics and Scientology belong but to you? Because it is about you. It is too intimate a thing to be owned by another person.

All Dianetics and Scientology attempts to do is to undo the magic spell which has made people less than they want to be. And to do that it requires that some truth be known. And that the central and principal truths of man be known, merely as truths — not as pitches and curves to serve some different reason or purpose. And that information is its own best protector.

If it is itself, if it is what is known, if it is what has been learned, then it undoes its own spells. And the only possible excuse we have for training anybody, for processing anybody is that Dianetics and Scientology will undo Dianetics and Scientology. And that's the first time known in the history of man that a subject, if it ever curved down, could also go up — that a subject undid itself And that would be true knowledge.

Only true knowledge can undo the spells laid by true knowledge.

For instance, I know a half a dozen processes by which you could run out Ron. See? Just like that! And of course we had two ACC Instructors over here that when we were assessing people in the last ACC — we were assessing people madly (last US ACC) to find out what was the most likely present time button they had. We found out that, oh, maybe, I don't know, 30 percent of them, something like that — came up with „Ron,“ you see, as a — as a valence that they had been overwhumped by.

So, they very busily started to work running out „Ron“ as a valence and it didn't run out because it wasn't there. It undid itself so fast that you wouldn't have called it a valence. Except, of course, they would ask somebody „Ron?“ And then somebody would think of something they had thought about me or done to me and they'd get a little overt on the line or some darned fool thing like that and it'd go snip. So, they'd say, „Good! Well, that's a valence.“ It didn't run!

If I started telling you large stacks of lies and all kinds of things and giving you big pitches and curves (which I would never do), yeah, I'd be a valence all right. I'd be one to reckon with. A horrible valence. Because in the guise of truth, you would have lies. Therefore, I have to be pretty careful what I tell people. I do. Not that I'm important.

But, any time truth is put out, it has to be put out on a clean line. And it is itself and real truth runs itself out.

Knowing who you are — you knowing who you are, knowing what you are and knowing what you're capable of, are to that degree masters of your own destiny, not slaves of somebody else's destiny. And don't you ever think you have to do something because — merely because I told you the truth sometime or another. You have no obligation on this line of any kind whatsoever. You owe me nothing. That's the way it is. It isn't that you should or did or anything of this sort.

But in August of 1950 I had to take responsibility for the fact that I was developing this information, I was putting it together and I was putting it out. And I found out the second I took my name off of it, we got a lot of lies on the line. We got people jumping up and putting a twist on it and a personal pitch and a curve and that sort of thing.

And we find out now, over the period of years, that rightly or wrongly if I sign a bulletin, then people think that's the right bulletin. And if somebody else signs a bulletin, why, they say, „Well, maybe that's the right bulletin.“

And that doesn't mean a thing beyond this one thing: that we have identified source and therefore can run it out very easily.

We must never let what we know get into a state whereby it itself is a tremendous number of „now-I'm-supposed-to's.“

For instance, you have never read from me a code of right conduct. That's the obvious one, isn't it? Somebody is writing a great deal and he's writing on the line, he's writing research materials and he's writing about you. Well, obviously the right thing to put on the line would be a code of right conduct, wouldn't it? Hm? Oh, yeah?

I'll call to your attention that that's probably the first thing that any philosopher in past ages ever thought of — was a code of right conduct. And the reason the communist had a China to break up, and the reason China never got up is because a fellow by the name of Confucius who could write not that I have anything comparable magnitude to that — but this fellow laid down a code of right conduct! And this was what you did.

Now, it's like saying, „Always sit on the back of a vehicle.“ And somebody invents one that has to be driven from the front. Times change. Times change. „Now-I'm-supposed-to's“ change. Social conditions change. We are here wrapped up in the present moment in a machine age. It's not the age of a philosopher. That age has passed. Men no longer have leisure to think. Most of the scientific thinking done today is done by ENIACs, UNIVACs and other peculiar electronic equipment!

I went into a large laboratory not too long ago where they had one of the biggest electronic brains in the world. A friend of mine said, „You've just got to come to see our electronic brain.“ And I said, „I'll be very happy to come to see your electronic brain.“ And I went up. He said, „You'll be very interested that it has neuroses.“

We looked at this thing — I looked at it — and we fed it answers and that sort of thing. I did a terrible thing with that electronic brain — I gave it a neuroses.

He said — a lot of the engineers around there — said, „This is Hubbard, you know.“ And, „Dianetics and Scientology fellow,“ and so forth. „I'll show him the electronic brain. Maybe he can ask it some complicated question, you know, test how good the thing is,“ so on. „Go ahead, Ron. Go ahead. Go ahead.“

So, I wrote down „two times two equals question mark“ and fed it to the machine. That was it. It didn't develop a neurosis, it went psychotic!

I had fellows explaining to me carefully that the machine could not accept a double datum only. It could only accept five-digital problems, not two-factoral problems. And I'd wronged their machine.

I said, „Well, isn't it horrible that it knew the answer to anything complicated but not anything simple? Well, can't this machine think out anything simple like you can?“

„Oh, that machine is much brighter than we are!“ They were convinced of this. I never did break this down with them. I asked them patiently various questions like, „Who built the machine?“ And I swear they thought it arrived there by spontaneous mechanization.

I said, „Who has to dream up the problems to feed it to the machine?“ I thought I had them there, but I didn't. They opened the door and showed me the other machine.

Well, it's a machine age. It's certainly no place for a philosopher, no place for a person to try to look closely into the problems of man because the problems of man are quite unimportant. Man is quite unimportant. Man after all, is just a cogwheel in the big machine, isn't he?

Well, if man's a cogwheel in the big machine, I suppose someday we will have a society where a great many machines produce for a great many machines. And nobody will be troubled with any people around. And apparently on present trend that's the way it will go.

But as man develops more and more ability in using force in the society — as more and more force is at his command and control, his own force is less. He gets to a point finally where, well, war is not a matter of grappling a fellow man or something like that, war is a matter of going in and doing a calculation, feeding it to a machine, which then feeds the problem to another machine, which then feeds the answer out into some kind of an endless belt which touches off a guided missile and which arrives then in the right locale — boom.

But it certainly didn't take much to — force to write the equation down on a piece of paper and feed it to the machine in the first place.

Man becomes, unfortunately, incapable of making correct decisions to the degree that he is incapable of confronting force. If a man cannot handle or confront force, a man is then dependent upon force to give him his decisions. And at last, why, it just adds up to „That nation which has the most force is the rightest nation.“ Of course, that's not true at all.

It's not even true that that nation which has the most machines is the best nation. Only people would have us think so these days. They say, „It's a great country. Nobody ever lifts a finger in it.“ It doesn't sound to me like a very industrious or healthy people.

And as we look over our future society we are unfortunately looking at space opera. Now there are some amongst you who have never read or contacted science fiction. I'm afraid this is a minority.

Any one of you sooner or later has collided with some science fiction where the great machines clank around the great machines, and the plot is mainly evolved by what tricky gimmick the hero had up his sleeve that untrickies the gimmick that the other villain had up his sleeve, where the whole solution to the civilization hangs on whether or not somebody got the right whatnots in the test tube.

Science fiction is very interesting and I'd be the last man to run it down having written a couple of million words of it myself.

But very few science fiction writers except those who have gotten smart enough to move on into Scientology — and they have, by the way — you see their plots consistently and continually now taken out of History of Man and other Dianetics and Scientology sources. They get somebody and get an E-Meter and start plowing up and down the line. There are several people doing this. That's right.

Read a costume historical the other day that came right out of somebody's reactive bank. They'd actually — actually had E- Metered it out — and it was line by line, paragraph by paragraph, right out of something some pc had told them. They'd actually picked up a plot back in 1750 and so forth, because here and there they skidded and used one of our terms.

What most science fiction writers do not realize is that space opera is a recurrent phenomenon in man's past. Certainly this is not an original statement. No less a personage than Henry Ford said that if you emptied all the seas of the world in the bottom of one of them at least you would find railroad tracks from a billion years ago.

It's pretty obvious that man comes up to civilized peaks and then they drop off and then he rises to new civilization peaks and they drop off and so forth. What we know that's different about this is that he repeats his whole cycle over long periods of time. And he's moving right now up into a space opera cycle. Space opera, of course, is the slang term that writers use to say „rather corny space stories.“

These patterns of civilization come about when man, himself less and less powerful, builds more and more powerful gimmicks and gadgets and builds gimmicks and gadgets up to a point where they are capable of totally overwhelming whole societies. And then the whole thing blows up and something or other happens and they start it all in again. And they go through the various barbaric periods and, oh, stone ages and so on, build it on up again and here they go again into the machine age. And then they get into space opera and they start shooting rockets up to the nearest moons and having stuff whiz around Earth and build spaceships with men in them, and then helmets and space.

It's very funny that all you've got to say to one of these space opera bent people, so on, is, „I want you to think of something now. Would you mind thinking of something?“ He's busy doing something of the sort, you know, with rockets, you know, or missiles or something like that. And you say, „Think of a cracked space helmet.“

Now, why does he get a headache at that moment? Yet he inevitably does. He's been through it all before.

How do we know what is modern? Why do we all agree on what's modern if we haven't seen it? We have. We've seen it all — we've seen a modernistic society before and that's the point it reached, and so forth, and there's where it goes.

Well, these societies move on up into space opera. Of course, it's an interim solution to the society to turn the tensions of governments to outer space, and say, „There's a solar system out there. Go out and conquer it and stop slapping each other up down here.“ That's one of the first big solutions that is handed out to them and that solution was handed out to the governments. And we helped hand it to them within the last three years. We were trying real hard — bringing pressure to bear on the subject and more and more money has finally gotten appropriated in this direction. And the next thing you'll know there will be experimental stations on Venus. I hope the space command doesn't mind.

But, the course of existence of every one of these space opera societies has been the newer, brighter and shinier it got, the more degraded and hypnotized its people became! And while it went up, its people went out through the bottom.

A sailor of the future in a space fleet: He's sitting in some low dive, swilling yak or whatever he's drinking. Press gang, government warrants come along. They say, „Greetings. You're hereby recruited.“ And they take him along and they put him on board a spaceship, and his indoctrination is being tied down to a bunk. And they shoot him in the arm with some hypnotic drug and a speaker opens up over his head and says, „You are a torpedo man second class.“ Tells him all the duties — „You mustn't associate with officers. You can't escape from the hull. You mustn't exteriorize. Yik-yak, yik-yak, yik-yak.“ Give him all the rules and regulations, lay it in as a total valence and „now-I'm- supposed-to.“ And you've got a sailor.

Get their officers the same way. Only they in officers' quarters are told they're an officer — they're a second officer. They'll never be any … It's all done, you know. Man becomes the machine.

And after a while there's every place to go and everything to do but nobody to do it because nobody cares anymore what they do, because there are no people left. And that is the way these societies go. They don't necessarily just blow themselves up.

Well, I know this and I'm sure there are those amongst us who have a good subjective reality on this. Don't you?

Audience: Yes.

And this time let's be different!

Think of the wonderful thing it would be to have a society totally capable of all scientific developments and thingumbobs and doingnesses and everything else and have at the same time people with judgment, courage and decency enough to handle them! Wouldn't that be wonderful?

Audience: Yes.

Well, are you with me in doing that?

Audience: Yes.

Well, we have made very, very good progress over the period of about, actually, twelve years or thereabouts of direct research, in the public view about nine years; abroad and so forth, the view looks about seven or eight years old. Over this period of time we've made considerable progress. Over the last two years we've made considerable progress. Over the last six months we've made enormous progress. We're getting better faster. We're getting more able to get where we want to go quicker.

And I don't think the future will require that we put many billboards alongside the superhighways nor very much on the TV stations or much literature in people's hands because I'm looking in the very, very near future to Scientologists themselves representing in themselves such tremendous gains and advantages that people look at them and say, „Well, that's a Scientologist, of course!“ And that is the best dissemination program we could have. Isn't it?

Audience: Yes.

Well, my interest is in you. My interest is in the future and my view of the present here in Australia is that it is a very good one. And internationally we have a very good view.

I would feel today that if any organization had ever lived through the fire and gotten its chance — if any body of people had ever gotten its chance, this one has.

Today we hear occasionally from very uninformed sources — oh, occasional newspaper (quote) stories (unquote). These things are kickbacks from yesterday. Actually there was never a word of truth in any of the stories they wrote, any „scandals“ (unquote) that they ever dug up. Ha!

It was my lot never to be interviewed by a single reporter about anything from any source until 1955 in England when one re- interviewed me and talked to me and then went back and wrote a very favorable story.

Of recent times, the only place in the world where we're hearing any (quote) „bad press“ and so forth is here in Australia. This is a very remarkable thing because they're beating a dead horse. This has all gone, disappeared, there wasn't anything to it. But it's the duplicate program that was launched against Dianetics in the United States in 1950. They're even using the same facts - „facts“!

Only this time, unfortunately, the program is going up against organizations that are hanging together because they think it's a good idea. They're going up against Scientologists that are hard to fool. They're going up against processes which can be demonstrated to individuals as highly workable on which they can get very good subjective reality in a very short space of time. They got the wrong target. Just like they got the wrong dope.

If they wanted to dig up something scandalous, I could have found them something scandalous. It was probably very truthful. Probably could have found all manner of horrible scandals for them. I'm sure I could have. I don't know why they keep on digging up the same ones, unless they're just not creative! But I don't even feel abashed about those things anymore. They aren't — they're more to be pitied than censored.

Because if we start censoring the press and jumping around, why, we'd wind up by curtailing communication and pressing everything into this and that. Let them talk. Let them talk. Maybe they'll talk themselves into some sense someday.

Communication will never hurt us but suppression of it will. That's for sure. They can't see anything bad enough to turn anybody against us. But they run a terrible risk — that which you resist …

The only reason I'd feel bad at all about any of the — some of the press stories and so forth I see coming out — if it's made any of you feel bad or made any of you upset. They certainly haven't any effect on me anymore. I've read them all before and I've seen the guys that wrote them before, now writing little favorable mentions.

The great opponent of Dianetics in the United States was Time magazine and you would have thought Time magazine had been personally insulted and assaulted and called by name the day that book was published in the United States — Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. It was called upon as a committee of one to right this great wrong and to suppress that creation. Time magazine in the next two years gave me personally more space than it gave the president of the United States. And although all of its stories in its early instances were wrong and bad and upside down and twisted and snarling and all of that sort of thing — we got the full collection back in Washington. We made them send them to us.

And they finally got up to a point where now when the medical profession adopts little pieces of Dianetics — as they are doing today — they adopt this and adopt that, and they adopt the effects of birth on children, and they adopt prenatals, and they adopt parental relationships, and they're creeping up on the more elementary and less valuable parts of Book One at a great rate. And in creeping up on these things, they have quite fairly begun to mention consistently, „As Dianeticist, L. Ron Hubbard, told us years ago, so-and-so of Cornell Medical College has discovered…“

And I — although one time — one time they sarcastically said they had had many nominations for me as Man of the Year — and they had had, but they, of course, thought this was very bad. I suppose one of these days, why, they will just have to flip — only it would be too pat if they asked me to be an honorary editor.

But that is the course of these attacks. All you have to do is — is ho-hum it and carry on one way or the other.

We had, however, learned a great deal about such attacks and we find out they are basically initiated by people who have things that they themselves never want discovered. And they get so worried about these things being discovered that they'll attack anybody as soon as they feel he is on the real line.

If anybody in the world thought we were fakes and it was a lot of bunk, they would never attack us for a minute. Look around you and you'll find all kinds of palmists and fortunetellers and thingamabobs and cults and anything you want to mention. And nobody's busy attacking them. They only attack the real McCoy.

And whenever we are attacked it must be from some source that feels we know what we're talking about, and that that constitutes a fantastic menace to their future security because we could find out. And that is something that they must not permit us to do.

If you were to say to anybody who suddenly attacked you for being a Scientologist, in a quiet, patient voice — I don't advise you to do this because it's a dirty trick — but if you were to say in a quiet, patient voice — he says, „Oh, that stuff. I understand you're interested in that stuff. What do you mean going along that line? That's a lot of bunk! That's already been blown up for a long time.“ If you just said in a quiet voice, „What is it you don't want found out?“ You'd get a reaction on the other end.

The symptoms of future success are marked by the critics. That we are succeeding here in Australia, that we've already got a show on the road — not that we're just starting one — that we're already winning is signalized by the fact that there are some people around who don't want us to win.

And if nobody was criticizing us at all, I would feel very upset and wondering what you were doing wrong.

I'm very proud of what you are doing and of all areas in the world — and there are plenty of them — the one I'm proudest of and the one that I believe is most capable of a long-term success is Australia.

I'm very proud to have been here today and yesterday and talked to you. I hope to see you again. And thank you very much for coming to this congress. You have done me a great honor. And I hope to see a lot more of you.

And so for now, goodbye.