[May be re-distributed for non-commercial purposes]

INTRODUCTION:

A frequent allegation lobbied against the critics of Scientology by the Church of Scientology is that they are Nazis, attacking the religious freedom of Scientologists. This led me to have a look at the writings of Adolf Hitler, to familiarise myself with them in the same way that I am familiar with the writings of L. Ron Hubbard. I found, upon reading Hitler's writings, a chill as I noted the similarities in the various statements between the two men. This is a PRELIMINARY report, the subject needs in-depth research and investigation, and I believe there is enough material here for a whole book.

Both Hubbard and Hitler believed in a "super" race - the difference being that Hitler believed the Master race could be achieved through genetic control and breeding, while Hubbard believed it could be achieved by processing out the reactive mind; both men made their initial money by writing books; both men acquired large mansions from where they operated; both men had contempt for the "mass" of humanity; both men believed that they were the saviours of the master race, and each devised a means towards acheiving the survival of the human race - Hitler, concentrating on the German people, and operating politically, Hubbard, concentrating on liberating thetans from the Marcab conspiracy, and operating spiritually. Both men had a goal : Hitler, to bring about the survival of the Master race, the Aryans; Hubbard, to bring about spiritual freedom of thetans, by turning them into Operating Thetans.

And both men created organisations to ensure the furthering of their respective goals - Hitler created the National Socialist Party, Hubbard created the Church of Scientology. Each saw their way as THE way, and employed "the end justifies the means" to achieve their goal. The Nazis were fighting for the German race; the Church of Scientology is fighting to protect "spiritual freedom". This report does not concern itself with analysing the intentions or correctness of the stated goals of L. Ron Hubbard and Adolf Hitler - rather, it concerns itself SOLELY with the "ends justifies the means" mechanism of ACHIEVING a goal.

JUSTIFICATION FOR LEADERSHIP:

Both Hitler and Hubbard believed that they were exceptional individuals, who were gifted way above the average human, and had the vision and ability and therefore, the right to lead, autocratically. They both believed they were able to see things that the average human could not.

Hitler: "Most people have no imagination. They can only imagine the future in terms of their own petty experience. The creative genius always stands outside the circle of the experts. I have the gift of reducing all problems to the simplest foundations." (1)

Hubbard: "In all the years I have engaged in research I have kept my comm lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea...our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways, I could not have discovered it either." (2)

There are numerous other quotes from both authros to further substantiate this similarity, but since this is a preliminary report, the quotes will be kept to single ones for now.

HUMANITY AS A GROUP

Both Hitler and Hubbard, in their different ways, appeared to have the same scorn for the "masses", looking out at the masses as inane, stupid, animal-like.

Hitler: "So it is only natural that when the capable intelligences of a nation, which are always in a minority, are regarded only as of the same value as all the rest, then genius, capacity, the value of personality are slowly subjected to the majority, and this process is then falsely named the rule of the people. For this is not the rule of the people, but in reality, the rule of stupidity, of mediocrity, of half-heartedness, of cowardice, of weakness and of inadequacy". (3)

Hubbard: "The common denominator of the group is the reactive bank...so, constructive ideas are *individual* and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise *above* an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a hell." (4)

This kind of disdain for the group, of course, leads logically, to a rejection in principle of democracy as a political system - since the underlying assumption is that people as a group are incapable of being rational as a group. Both the National Socialist party, and the Church of Scientology are hierarchical organisations, where autocratic rule is accepted, and any majority petitions, or voting by majority, are not acceptable policy. Management is "top-down".

ON DEMOCRACY:

This topic alone, is sufficient for a whole book, comparing the principles of democracy, as espoused by writers such as Thomas Jefferson, Alexis de tocqueville, and many others, with the views of Hitler, Hubbard, and many others, on the subject. For now, the overlap in Hubbard and Hitlers' views will be identified:

Hitler: "Thus democracy will in practice lead to the destruction of a people's true values. And this also serves to explain how it is that people with a great past from the time when they surrender themselves to the unlimited, democratic rule of the masses slowly lose their former position; for the outstanding achievements of individuals which they still possess of which could be produced in all spheres of life are now rendered practically ineffective through the oppression of mere numbers. " (7)

Hubbard: "As we could have gotten along without suggestions then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular", "egotistical" and "undemocratic". It may very well be. But it is also a survival point. And I don't see that popular measures, self- abnegation and democracy have done anything for man but push him further into the mud...democracy has given us inflation and income tax." (8)

ON THE NEED TO BE RUTHLESS

Again, the issue of concern, is not whether Scientology genuinely offers people a means to spiritual freedom, or not - but rather, the WAY in which it is presented to the world. A goal can be creative, or it can be destructive, but in either case, is it justified, is it acceptable to us, as human beings, to condone and accept systems which do not operate democratically?

Taking this rejection of democracy one step further, we now look at both Hubbard's and Hitler's need to be ruthless, as the means of overcoming a threat to their (and humanity's) survival.

Hitler: "We must be ruthless. We must regain our clear conscience to ruthlessness. Only thus shall we purge our people of their softness and sentimental philistinism. We have no more time for fine sentiments. We must compel our people to greatness if they are to fulfil their historic mission." (5)

Hubbard: "Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organisations in history have been tough, dedicated organisations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of pantywaiste dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive - and even they have a hard time. We'll survive becuase we are tough and dedicated. " (6)

In both cases, Hubbard and Hitler are talking about survival, and both see it as being under threat. Thus, the need to be ruthless is justified.

THERE IS MUCH MORE

There is just so much more to investigate - among other things, the fact that Hubbard named a "conspiracy of World Bankers", among whom were named Rockefeller, in his RJ 67; while Hitler spoke often of the "Jewish conspiracy of World bankers" ; Hitler said that money was just something that represented confidence in an idea; Hubbard said that Money is an "idea backed by confidence"; Hitler set up his inner elite in the Party to keep dossiers of crimes, misdemeanours, and wrong-doings on EACH other - as a means of securing loyalty, and each SS officer was a control and check on the other; Hubbard ensured that senior executives in the Church are Sec-checked regularly, and records of these are kept in pc folders; Hitler said that in a propaganda war, one NEVER admits when the enemy is right about something; Hubbard said "Never defend, only counter-attack handles"... it goes on and on.

Should anything prevent me from pursuing this research further, I have left enough clues for others to follow it up. I would urge us to do so, for I believe we have the root of the problem here - the issue is not whether Scientology leads to spiritual freedom or not - the issue is that one man, and a group of his followers, believe it does, as is their right - but does that right then extend to ensuring the "survival" of their religion by the policies used against its critics? Why is it that mere criticism is seen as an attack on "spiritual freedom"? Should the Church ever make a public statement that it supports the right of any individual to publically criticize, analyse and evaluate its policies and actions, WITHOUT FEAR OF ANY REPERCUSSIONS, I believe we will have come a very, very long way in addressing the essence of the problem.

REFERENCES:

1. Rauschning, Hermann. "Hitler speaks: A series of political conversations with Adolf Hitler on his real aims." London: Thornton Butterworth Ltd, 1940. p. 18.

2. Hubbard, L. Ron. "Keeping Scientology Working Series 1". HCO Policy Letter of 7 February 1965.

3. Baynes, Ed. "The speeches of Adolf Hitler", London, Chatham House, 1941. p. 784

4. KSW

5. Rauschning, op cit. p. 26

6. KSW

7. Rauschning, op cit. p. 785

8. KSW

9. Rauschning, op cit p. 528 - 529

RECOMMENDED FURTHER READING:

Hubbard, L. Ron. Organisation Executive Course Vol 0 - Basic Staff Hat.

Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf.