26 April, 2014

Culture Clash - Rulers versus the Ruled

My mini-clash

When I worked for the church, I went through a "hatting" program that was very extensive. Hatting is the process of bringing an employee up to speed on the administrative aspects of his job - paperwork - legal requirements - etc. It was considered important for every staff member to be familiar with the pattern of the entire organization and all the standard processes for handling things such as communication between staff members, technical goofs on post, ethical lapses and how to report them, basics of how to handle the public.

In my new job at a medium-sized electronics and engineering firm, they also have a staff hatting program. The founder of this company was very interested in getting as many employees as possible to buy into the goals and values of the company. He thought this would make better, more effective, happier employees. He also decided to make his company employee-owned. So we are all actually employee-owners. There are a lot of parallels here to how the church is run and managed.

But the current vision of what it means to train an employee at my company is far inferior to what we did at my church. For one thing, LRH wrote extensive hatting materials for church staff members. The founder of my current firm made no such effort. So the training department relies on third-party materials that seem to fit the company vision. But of course, those materials cannot cover details peculiar to our particular company or industry. So these materials, for many reasons, come up short.

I wanted to know how "my" company was organized. So I asked my supervisor where I could get an organization chart for the company. "Oh, you meant a command chart," he replied. No, I meant an organization chart. It didn't even need to have names on it. Just the pattern of the organization. So I could see how the various individual actions that result in production were grouped together. He couldn't find such a chart. But he found someone in HR (Human Resources - the division that hires and fires) that was willing to show me what she had. She arranged for me to meet her in her office, and when I arrived she had for me a legal size piece of paper with boxes full of names and lines drawn between them. This was better than nothing, but when I described what I was hoping for, she didn't seem to understand what I was talking about. I asked her why something like this was not available to the staff, and she told me, basically, that the way Manufacturing is organized is considered a company trade secret.

Understanding the clash

I pulled back, trying to understand what was happening here.

I knew I would run into something like this. But where did it come from? Why was everyone so complacent about it?

I decided to analyze the situation in terms of the rulers and the ruled. There was also, broadly speaking, a third group involved. These could be called the advisers. Both the rulers and the ruled sought guidance from this third group.

To reiterate some basic assumptions:

I use what I call "The Model"which assumes an individual is a spirit animating a body through a mind.

The way people respond to various situations is largely determined by where they sit on the Tone Scale. This is an experimentally-derived scale developed by LRH as a tool for diagnosis and analysis. People down the scale identify more with physicality. People up the scale identify more with true spirituality.

While people tend to park themselves on the Tone Scale due to whatever material in their case is the most active, they can also be educated to approach certain subjects with certain responses typical of a certain Tone Scale position.

This is particularly true of the the subject of management (ruling) and being managed (being ruled). A higher-toned approach would prefer that the ruled be well-informed, as they could be trusted to assist management assuming they had adequate data to operate on.  A lower-toned approach would prefer ignorant workers, as all well-educated workers do is rise up and try to overthrow existing management.

The higher-toned approach corresponds to the vision of the Founders of the United States. A lower-toned approach corresponds with the European ruling classes they were trying to free themselves from.

I call the higher-toned approach "rule of thought" because it assumes that in the end reason will prevail. I call the lower-toned approach "rule by force" because it assumes people would be inactive if they were not "motivated" by some physical threat.

Why does Rule by Force dominate?

One might better ask: Why would anyone want to rule over others to begin with?

A game consists of FREEDOM, BARRIERS and PURPOSES.
This is a scientific fact, not merely an observation.

(LRH: Scientology: Fundamentals of Thought, p54)

The fact that games exist is a fundamental reason that life looks interesting to people. Games work when all the players agree on the three elements listed above. If an individual or group is not willing to agree on these points, they become an enemy to the game. Such individuals or groups must somehow be guarded against, and ejected if they try to crash a game. Most individuals playing these games, by experience, feel ill-equipped to play the role of "umpire."  They ask, appoint, demand - even plead - with those who for some reason feel more capable to be the umpires in the game.

And thus arises the role of "manager" or "ruler." It is not an easy role to assume. In order to coax some people to take this role, they usually have to be rewarded with some form of higher status or special privileges.

Is this role needed? Most, by experience, would answer "yes." Can this role be abused? Of course it can. Can this role be secretly subverted? Yes, it can.

For reasons that are mostly technical (case-related) certain beings find themselves simply unable to play the games that most agree are acceptable and worthwhile. These aren't necessarily low-power beings. They are just beings who can't get along with people. They play their own games, and in most places these games are known as "crime." These games are secretive, destructive, and often violent. They are often aimed at replacing management, as good managers are a real problem for the criminals. And so management gets pounded down into resorting to force against the criminals. And this results in "rule of force" being taught as the winning way to be a manager.

What about the advisers?

In times lost in the mists of antiquity, we hear of magicians advising kings.

Though today this setup seems a bit fanciful, the fact is that it is still the basic arrangement.

A more careful study of history than most are willing to stomach reveals that the role of "adviser" on earth probably originated off-planet in the form of various ET groups interfering with Earth for their various own purposes (games).

From the viewpoint of an earth human, the ET was certainly on the level of a magician, if not a god, for no other reason than that ET could fly through the air in ships.

ET also had superior weapons and all kinds of mind-control technologies - per numerous reports based on human memory and the stories about ET left behind on earth.

The fact that we (earth beings) were also capable of having these technologies and abilities was something that most of us simply did not consider, and of which few - if any - ETs were willing to inform us. However, for various reasons, certain earth people thought that they could duplicate the "magic" of the ET and use it themselves for various purposes. These individuals created "secret societies" of all kinds to protect the "sacred knowledge," both from attacks from ETs and from ruling classes created by ETs to manage things on earth. These societies included the "Magi" (magicians) and many others. Many of them actually cultivated considerable psychic abilities amongst themselves. They knew that if they lowered themselves to ruling positions, the temptation to resort to force would destroy their abilities. So they became the advisers of earth rulers.

These advisers knew that thought was actually superior to force in any situation, but did not have the technical horsepower to effect force directly through thought. Thus, though they counseled the managers to defer to thought whenever possible, they could not eliminate the habit to use force on people, and the basic management distrust of the worker.

We can include among these advisers the great religious names on earth. The Buddha - a very real person, certainly preached the rule of thought. Jesus - whoever that really was - was likely greatly influenced by Buddhism and simply adapted its teachings to the situation he found in the Middle East at that time. And so the list goes on. The concept of "rule of thought" was kept alive in Europe during the Dark Ages by various monastic orders, and then burst forth during the Renaissance as "science." Of course, scientists were often used by rulers to help them design better weapons. Not all scientists even thought that "rule of thought" was workable. The connection to the ancient ET technologies had been lost as academia expanded into the population. "Rule of thought" persisted, but was weakened.

And so civilization on earth went down-tone-scale, and some criminals were able to take advantage of the situation and infiltrate various governmental and academic institutions.

Today on earth we have many managers listening to criminals posing as advisers. The message is rather appealing to them in that it certainly includes a basic distrust for the free individual. It ramps up secrecy big-time and couches what it can't keep secret in a "double speak" language so profoundly confused as to just barely communicate anything at all. But meanwhile, the ruled - a bit more uptone than the rulers due to their dislike for playing that role - are suffering greatly. And nothing can be done about this situation apart from trying to educate the ruled up to the point where they are able to postulate new games that will begin to work for them again.

Is all lost?

There are many today quite convinced that Earth has had it. That before the end of this century we will be back in the stone ages using clubs, axes and bows and arrows. If humanity survives on earth at all.

Certain segments of the ruling groups - call them "factions" if you will - have re-discovered the ET connection to earth (since by many reports they visited here in person after we blew up Hiroshima, if not earlier than that). The public are discovering this, too. And some of these factions seem to be making an effort to use various ET-related stories to gain support for certain actions or policies that have yet to be publicly implemented.

There are a LOT of stories!

Some of them seem very hopeful.

But I doubt them.

How has any ET group been able to avoid the mechanism that is taking down Earth?

If anything, wouldn't they be more susceptible to these mechanisms than we are?

According to LRH research, all the most active ET societies of the past were heavily into mind control to spur action and prevent revolt. Their attempts at conquest in order to keep their games alive seem almost mindless in their disrespect for the sovereignty of the individual. And their willingness to artfully lie rivals anything we have seen thus far from criminals here on earth.

However, there is always the possibility that a "new" group has arisen in this universe and is making its way forward. A group composed of individuals well up the Tone Scale who are perfectly willing to be ruled or rulers as the need requires. And very able at both roles. Only by going up Tone Scale could any individual or group rise above our current situation. And this would be very hard on an individual alone, so it is almost certainly a group that has accomplished this together - if such a group exists.

For those of us not privy to the details of current exopolitics, we can at least search out technologies here on earth designed to elevate individuals on the Tone Scale, and use them to the greatest extent we are able.

There will always be better games to play; we just have to invent them.