Should I donate for an ideal org? | | Print | |
Friday, 16 October 2009 17:20 |
REFERENCES:We own a tremendous amount of property. We own a tremendous amount of material, and so forth. And it keeps growing. But that’s not important. When buildings get important to us, for God’s sake, some of you born revolutionists, will you please blow up central headquarters. If someone had put some HE [high explosives] under the Vatican long ago, Catholicism might still be going. Don’t get interested in real estate. Don’t get interested in the masses of buildings, because that’s not important.
The way to spoil an org image is of course to subdue or kill what successful Scientology orgs have always been noted for – a happy, friendly, busy atmosphere. So the use of heavy ethics to produce image compliance is murderous. Pride is the primary reason for good appearance. Fighting to obtain and improve a suitable image is inevitably quite a task. If the org had lots of money it could buy its image. But without lots of money the image has to be gradually built. Cleanliness and neatness are the primary building blocks to respect in most societies.
Never seek a subsidy for what you are doing as at once you or any subsidized office will cease to promote to the public individuals. You throw out anything or anyone who is working to make you get a subsidy or who demands a subsidy to operate an office, as there goes your public contact. It ceases to have a point as there’s no dependence on the public individual so he ceases to be served. Subsidy is a fine way to fail and always leads to a dead end. A subsidized office ceases to promote as it no longer depends on doing (3) Dissemination – accumulation of the identities of the persons and (4) Salesmanship – offering those identities something they will buy for its daily bread. So it is useless in the scheme of things and, not serving, becomes dangerous.
Find bigger, poshier quarters to handle the flow when it rises. – L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 16 May 1969 COURSE ADMINISTRATION |