Scientology’s Credo of a True Group Member: Part 1

I’ve talked a lot about Scientology’s “us vs. them” mentality. Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard realized early on that in order to keep people in the scam, he had to keep them facing inwards and give them a way to reject outside influences. Hence the Credo of a True Group Member, which he wrote in 1951, shortly after the establishment of Dianetics. (Marty Rathbun and other independent Scientologists also believe in the Credo.)

Scientologists unquestioningly accept the Credo as gospel — but let’s go through it point-by-point and see what it really says. (You can read the original at this Church of Scientology site.)

“1. The successful participant of a group is that participant who closely approximates, in his own activities, the ideal, ethic and rationale of the overall group.”

In other words: Conformity is paramount. In order to be a member of the group, you must mold yourself into the group ideal. This is one reason so many Scientologists sound alike, and often (subconsciosly?) mimic the behaviors of LRH – they emulate his writing style, use the same phrases he wrote into policy (Marty does this all the time), and even disregard the dangers of smoking cigarettes.

“2. The responsibility of the individual for the group as a whole should not be less than the responsibility of the group for the individual.”

This may sound noble, but in fact it’s one of the most dangerous aspects of the Scientology mindset. People ask how well-meaning Scientologists could lock Lisa McPherson in a room and allow her to starve to death. Well, here’s their excuse: The group was “taking responsibility” for the individual. Rather than turn her over to the “evil psychs” who could have helped her, the Scns administered Hubbard’s Introspection Rundown. Hubbard famously said “We’d rather have you dead than incapable.” That’s exactly what happened to Lisa McPherson, thanks to a group of Scientologists following Hubbard’s Credo of a True Group Member and “taking responsibility” for Lisa.

“3. The group member has, as part of his responsibility, the smooth operation of the entire group.”

Again, the idea here is that if one is a member of a group, one must be fully committed to it. This sounds noble, but it just isn’t true. Example: I own an old car. I belong to a few online owner’s groups for that car. I do nothing to contribute to the “smooth operation.” I don’t help run the board. I can’t contribute much knowledge. I just stop in once in a while and ask questions like “How the fuck do you loosen the fucking power steering pump when the fucking bolts are hidden by the fucking air conditioning compressor? Fuck!” (If anything, I’m sowing discord!) Does that mean I’m not a member of the owner’s group? According to LRH, I’m not!

“4. A group member must exert and insist upon his rights and prerogatives as a group member and insist upon the rights and prerogatives of the group as a group and let not these rights be diminished in any way or degree for any excuse or claimed expeditiousness.”

I love this point, because it shows LRH at his most devous. He starts out talking about the group member’s rights, but that’s not really the point he’s making – this is really about the good of the group. The meat in this sammy is that every member must fight for the rights of their group, which Scientologists do with vigor. (Funny that LRH wrote this so early in Scn’s history — he must have known how much controversy his then-fledgeling con was going to cause.) But it’s that first innocent-sounding bit – actually, just the fact that it’s there – that gives us some clue to LRH’s thought process, that he was even then trying to hide his true motivations from his own followers. Sneaky little fucker, wasn’t he?

“5. The member of a true group must exert and practice his right to contribute to the group. And he must insist upon the right of the group to contribute to him. He should recognize that a myriad of group failures will result when either of these contributions is denied as a right. (A welfare state being that state in which the member is not permitted to contribute to the state, but must take contribution from the state.)”

Okay, first, he’s wrong about a welfare state – as far as I know, there is nothing in the welfare system of any country that prohibits members from contributing, or requires them to take benfits. Even the most right-wing conservative knows that, and yet Hubbard spouts off this wee bit of bullshit, and his followers just buy it. Remember when Debbie Cook said she was ignorant of her legal rights until she hired a lawyer? Well, this is why – she just blindly believed in what LRH and Scientology told her.

As for the rest… “exert and practice his right to contribute to the group”??? Fuck me. What LRH is saying is that working for the group is a right that might be denied or taken away if not constantly used. Well, yeah – if you have a job at a company and you don’t do it, you get fired. But that’s not about rights, its about responsibilities – and LRH seems to be trying to get his followers to confuse the two. This is just another way of getting Scientologists to feel obligated to contribute – if they don’t, they’re not exercising their rights! (What a fucking load, but you have admire the genius, or at least the tenacity, of a con artist who could come up with this shit.)

I’m going to stop here, because this article has gone on long enough, and the next to points of the Credo are closely entwined. Tune in tomorrow to see more of how LRH uses the group credo to enforce conformity and supress bad news.


3 responses to “Scientology’s Credo of a True Group Member: Part 1

  1. aaron saxton

    Seems like a lot of give give give to the group and little to oneself.

    I am always amazed at the total lack of individuality in Sea Org Members. They eat the same things, have zero hobbies, zero knowledge of anything else.

    You could literally survey the entire Sea Org on a list of 1,000 questions on topics that have nothing to do with Scientology and the answers will almost be identical.

    just like that OCA they want to be in a precise zone, so it is with the people who all must be duplicated so that their actions are predictable and controllable.

    But independents like Scientologists, like Sea Org Members are absolutely blind to solid facts.

    A great article Caliwog, but it will be auto-rejected by the indis and Scientologists who read it because their brains are set-up to auto reject conflicting facts when one series of facts can not be questioned – and anything in opposition ot them must be wrong.

    Here are some facts that are 100% true, and can not be questioned, and yet, Indi’s ESMBers, Marty, C of S, the Sea Org and Scientologists will all come up with answers that circumvent one thing – they are facts:

    Fact One:

    In 1955, if there were 1,000 Scientologists, and you added 10 every MONTH to Scientology which would equate to 12% growth PER YEAR (1% per month or a mere 0.25% per week – a pinch per LRHs Birthday demanding a whopping 540.00% per week) you would have had 1120 Scientologists by 1956, maintaining the same growth, there would be 750,000 Scientologists today.

    Fact Two:

    If there were a mere 1,000 Scientologists in 1980, and you “5.4xed the stats each week, it would take only 9 weeks to turn every person on Earth into a Scientologist.

    Fact Three:

    If Scientology aimed for a pathetic increase in WDAHs of a mere 1% per month at FSO in 1993 – which were about 1,000 per week, meaning next week it was 1,010, the following week it would be 1020.1 etc. etc. – just 1 PERCENT increase each week (not 100%, just 1% – have I made it very clear??) then how many WDAHs would you have by the year 2000?

    Answer: 37,000 WDAH each week. by 2012 it would be 1.3 Million.

    Fact Four: The Sea Org has since 1970 failed to achieve anything near a 1% growth rate – meaning the world is growing faster than Scientology is “expanding”.

    Fact Five: Despite there being “thousands” of OTs on Earth, after 60 years the “elite” group has failed to apply a simple thing called “condition formulas” with any success – they have never reached power, and have broken every single affluence they have EVER had. It is a fact that the condition formulas CLEARLY DO NOT WORK. How many decades, month by month, week by week, day by day of total failure does it take for them to realize that if they applied the conditions formulae for JUST ONE YEAR the entire planet per statistics would be cleared (9 weeks in fact) and that they actually just do not understand condition formulas at all – because they do not exist.

    Right now some silly indi is reading this thinking “they work!!!!” Really? Get a business going and show me 52 weeks of affluence non stop and I will buy you not just a beer – but a whole damn brewery. Hell, sell in one week 10,000 apples and do a projection of what affluence would do after 52 weeks – you would sell every apple in the world…you see, you just do not know how to think – that gift every human was born with, was striped from you the moment you decided everything LRH says is true.

    I guess this is what you get from a guy who failed at Math and Physics – who then wrote a book which has been changed 54,000 times to take out every falsehood shown by science – and we are going to trust him to know how statistics work – really?

    Yes, facts mean nothing to Scientology thinking people – and as good as an article Caliwog has written it will auto-reject in their warped minds because it contains facts.

    If only Cali you could only up a non-sensical answer, surrounded by ambigious bullshit and belief with generalities, you may just get agreement, but you are too sane, you make too much sense and you hold no appeal to a Scientologist’s mind.

    And for that, we thank you.

    Now, to the Sea Org members, keep blaming the state of Scientology worldwide to “SPs” that seem to have “always been there” and blame your “friends” who are now declared.

    Or, at every event, just ignore last years stats and enjoy the new ones David Miscavige makes up like “Number of Latinos who have heard the sacred word” or “Number of web site hits” which mean nothing.

    Or worse, be like that idiot on ESMB that spoke of reading on-line about all the BS in Scientology ad STILL she went in and tried it. I swear, someone should tell her rat poison is totally OK and then give her a jar. She is living proof education does not equal IQ.

  2. Marty Rugburn

    I have a major Cali Bromance!!! I wait for your insightful posts, Aaron has great experience inside the cult and writes great stuff too. Thanks for all you both do.


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 )

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