(Section 15 of Part 3 – Why I Left the Church)

A lot of good people have expressed a lot of dedication in hopes of making a better world through their support of the IAS.  I wish I could say that I agreed with this but I don’t.

There is nothing written or said by LRH that sets any precedent for the IAS.  It is not a practice of standard admin that fits the original purpose of the church, not to mention the fact that a whole shift of emphasis has occurred in the church, from helping individuals through auditing and training, to raising enormous sums of money in exchange for no service delivered.

When people in the church attempt to use LRH policy to guide the conduct of the IAS, the only HCO PLs they have to go by are policies on the HASI (the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International), which was the membership group of the church when LRH was still around.  There are no policies by LRH that mention the IAS or any membership group that requires that millions of dollars be raised to protect Scientology.  The IAS is assumed to be standard (since it does in fact exist regardless of whether it should or not) and then it is assumed that the HASI references cover the IAS.

To give a little bit of history of the HASI here are a few references:

Hubbard Association of Scientologists International, the company which operates all Scientology organizations over the world and Saint Hill.” – (LRH – HCO PL 20 Feb 65 Appointments and Programs)

This organization was put together by myself first as the HAS and then there was a flaw in its incorporation papers (which flaw is just simply an attorney’s foolishness – he didn’t state accurately whether it was a profit or non-profit corporation).  In order to get over that we organized the HASI.  In other words changed its name to Hubbard Association of Scientologists International.” – (LRH – 8th American Advanced Clinical Course Lectures: 4 Oct 54 – “Introduction: Organization of Scientology)

Note: I am assuming, based on my own logic, that “HAS” above stands for “Hubbard Association of Scientologists”, rather than “HCO Area Secretary”.

The purpose of the organization was simply to have a central point of dissemination, where the materials of Dianetics and Scientology could be put out without any great turmoil, turbulence, vias, and to train people in the subject who wanted training, and to give people help and information, who wanted help and information.  That is what the HAS was formed to do.” – (LRH – London Public Lecture Series: 8 Oct 55 “Goals of Dianetics and Scientology”)

The cost is £10 sterling or $30 US.  The entire fee is paid into the HCO book account and buys advertising for Scientology books and pays book bills.” – (LRH – HCO PL 22 March 65 Current Promotion and Org Program Summary Membership Rundown, Section “International Annual Membership” – OEC Vol 6, page 805)

Another note:  No, I’m not trying to imply that all membership fees should all still be $30 after 46 years of inflation.  But compare that to $50,000 just for IAS Patron status, which has now become one of the lower statuses, and it is way out of proportion.  The main point, though, is what this paragraph says to do with the membership money once it is received.

Now here is a quote from the HASI Articles of Incorporation of May 10, 1954:

To establish a religious fellowship association for the research into the spirit and the human soul and the use and dissemination of findings.

To employ, hire and train persons to teach and conduct classes; to publish and have published books, articles, letters, papers, magazines and other periodicals; to acquire, by purchase, gift, devise or bequest, or any other lawful means, and to hold, mortgage, lease, sell or convey property, both real and personal.”

I looked in OEC Volumes 6 & 7 to see if there was any precedent for having levels of membership above annual and lifetime memberships, for raising millions of dollars independent of auditing and training fees or booksale prices, for prioritizing fund raising over the sale and delivery of services, and I found nothing.

I’m not saying that there has to be a specific LRH reference for every single microscopic action that anyone ever takes.  However, there are some basic principles (in the subject of policy) which serve as overall guides to be applied by people who have an overall conceptual understanding of them.  The actions they take are based on those concepts and are taken to forward the overall purpose, for the church to exist in the first place.


But the orgs are being used to raise money, which is not obtained in exchange for service rendered, and that is not part of the above-stated ONLY reason orgs exist.

You may say, well, the money is needed to defend Scientology, otherwise there would be no Scientology.

I have a few responses to that.

First, I think that we are just taking someone’s word for it that we need to donate a lot of money as a priority over selling and delivering auditing and training.  Fundraising has become more of a priority in the church these days than actually delivering the services which orgs were put there for in the first place.  I remember in the last couple of years, when I was working in the church, there was at least one major fundraiser of some sort just about every week quite in addition to the daily fundraising required.

If all the attention now put on fundraising, were put on promotion, sales and delivery of high-quality service, more people would want to be in the org more often.  If the concentration was focused on ensuring people were consistently getting major life wins and that the org environment was a safe one (one where just walking in the org didn’t make one immediately an inescapable target of fundraisers), THAT would be a far more effective way to unite, advance, support and protect the religion of Scientology.  More and more people would want to get involved and any enemy’s impact would lessen considerably just from that.

I ask you, if you are in favor of doing it LRH’s way (if you aren’t, then that’s another subject), then why would you support the IAS, which is not based on any LRH policy?  Do you think that LRH, in his foolishness, overlooked the fact that we need to raise hundreds of millions of dollars just to keep Scientology operating in a safe environment?  Do you think that he didn’t have the ability to predict what would be happening in the world 25 years after his death so that he wouldn’t know what we would be up against?  If the answer to these questions is yes, that’s one thing.  But, don’t just pretend that you have the full faith and support of LRH’s tech and policies if you are not even asking yourself if this is the kind of thing LRH would have ever ordered or recommended.

Here is something LRH does say, concerning where your fees for auditing and training are supposed to go:

So a portion of your fee is spent on patching up the damage done, keeping going in spite of attacks and nullifying the actions against the West of a very choice lot of bad hats. If we didn’t have the documentary evidence I wouldn’t dare mention it.”

It costs money to bring cases up to US Supreme Court level as we have. The legal defense expenses we have in a dozen countries is not small.

So a portion of your fees goes to keeping the subject available to you and to the world.

We work very hard to keep tech being done well.  It is nothing for us to put two people on a fast plane and send them half around the world to straighten up the Case Supervision and auditing in an area so you can have confidence in the service you get.

It is routine to send the highest class people we have to handle “ARC Breaks of Long Duration” in the field or on admin lines or to see they get handled.

Your fee supports a long and complex set of communication lines by which tech and admin can be cared for rapidly.

A portion of your fee just the other day began a survey of a backward country to introduce high speed educational processes to bring their people quickly from the stone age up to present time. The “Peace Corps” was also there on cushy government funds building houses for a big construction company at a nice profit. But we, unsupported, began the effective work actually needed there to help the people.

A tiny bit of your fee neated up an area ruined for Americans by the American Navy.

Small parts of your fee heal up a lot of things over the world.

But the biggest part of your fee stays right in your area. It is used to make training and processing and data available to the next fellow first by keeping the org there and second by letting him know about it and third by making as sure as possible that the training and processing he gets is standard and effective.

Your fee keeps the nearest org alive and functioning and the environment safe.

It is not easy to do, hit repeatedly as we are.

Gradually little by little we are taking the pressure off our orgs. Gradually surely and certainly the bad hats and losing their own power in the world.

If we had the fantastic sums appropriated to “mental health” (and put largely in their own pockets or used to try to crush anyone else) we would make a lot lot lot more progress. As we wouldn’t also have to fight the lies that money buys into press and government.

But we don’t have appropriations. They are given only to those who deal in death, it seems.

So little by little, using the fees you give us for your service, your training and your processing, we create little by little areas of sanity.

And as these areas spread out, releasing and Clearing the community, if we continue to be alert and competent, perhaps those areas will meet one country, one continent to the next and we will have a cleaner, saner world.

Your fee is supporting and continuing the greatest hope that man had ever had and the orgs and people vital to its survival and increase.

Your fee does what it takes to get the job done.

Thank you. – (LRH – from The Auditor 51, 1970 What Your Fees Buy)

The above reference is now seen to be titled “What Your Donations Buy”, but the original title was apparently “What Your Fees Buy”.  I saw a copy of it from the time it was published.

All legal activities, expansion activities, reform activities, building activities and dissemination activities are supposed to be paid for with fees for services, not straight donations.  LRH wrote plenty of policies about how to raise money for the church.  There is no LRH policy that I have ever seen anywhere which authorizes straight donations for anything in the church of Scientology.  I think that there are enough OEC / FEBC grads around for at least one of them to speak up about this violation, as it is the most obvious glaring policy violation that exists.

And to repeat:

SOLVE IT WITH SCIENTOLOGY” [Title of section being quoted from this HCO PL ]

If the org slumps during this period, don’t engage in ‘fund raising’ or ‘selling postcards’ or borrowing money.

Just make more income with Scientology.

It’s a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology. It has always failed.”

For orgs, as well as pcs ‘Solve It With Scientology’.

Every time I myself have sought to solve finance or personnel in other ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience that org solvency lies in more Scientology, not patented combs or fund-raising barbecues.” (HCO PL 24 Feb 64 II Org Programming; OEC Vol 7, p. 930)

Next...Where Does All That Money Go?

5 thoughts on “The IAS

  1. The Oracle says:

    “In other words changed its name to Hubbard Association of Scientologists International.”

    Did you notice Miscavige dropped “Hubbard” and replaced it with “International”.

    I was also taken aback that your wife as a class lV Org staff was posted as an IAS reg. Also Class lV Org staff are posted these days as fundraisers for real estate for Int Management. Not only is Flag bypassing the Orgs, which are in danger since Miscavige wiped out the mission network, they are also using class lV Org staff to work directly for the Sea Org.

  2. davefagen says:

    My wife being a reg was the first step to us leaving.

  3. Anonymous says:

    The IAS, I understand, raises 200 million per year in donations.

    How can one keep working so hard when one cannot keep his own money.

  4. Ralph Hilton says:

    You said: “Note: I am assuming, based on my own logic, that “HAS” above stands for “Hubbard Association of Scientologists”, rather than “HCO Area Secretary”. ”
    I think LRH meant HCO Area Sec when he said “HAS”. The hat of the HAS is establishing the org and he was wearing that hat in his actions.

  5. davefagen says:

    Well, I meant it means “Hubbard Association of Scientologists” in THAT context.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s