56 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 10, 2019
Scientologists International for want of
evidence, prosecutions against fifteen individual
Scientologists were withdrawn.23
Efforts were also made at the Commonwealth
level to stifle the dissemination of Scientology
material24 and to deny the entry of known
adherents to Australia, which was a tangible
disadvantage for anyone concerned.25 However,
it seems feasible to suggest that rather than
curbing the potential growth of Scientology,
governmental attempts at suppression might
have had an enervating, galvanizing effect. This
unintended consequence was mooted by a critic
who said the original ban in Victoria: “Probably
did Scientology more good than harm. It
provided free publicity, and because it had the
trappings of a witch-hunt, made Scientology the
underdog, gaining Hubbard much needed
support … [I]t was impossible to ban
Scientology. The followers in Victoria simply
changed their name to the ‘Church of the New
Faith’ and carried on where they had left off.”26
Governmental crackdowns certainly provided
the Church with campaigning opportunities,
including demonstrations and petitions,27 which
were duly reported. Campaigns to repeal anti-
Scientology legislation also resulted in the
production of some classic polemics,28 if not
personally written by L. Ron Hubbard, then
certainly true to an injunction attributed to the
founder to attack rather than defend,29 making a
23 “Hubbard group’s conviction quashed,” The West Australian, 4
December 1969, p. 1.
24 “50 books of cult seized,” The Advertiser, 18 September 1968, p.
10.
25 Cited in S. Mutch, From “Cult” to “Religion,” p. 52.
26 J. Atack, A Piece of Blue Sky: Scientology, Dianetics, and L. Ron
Hubbard Exposed, New York, 1990, p. 159–160.
27 F. Knight, New York ignores protest against “Hitler in
Australia,” The Australian, 30 July 1969, p. 7 J. Cannon,
“Australia, ‘land of intolerance,’” The Herald, 16 November 1972,
p. 5.
28 Church of Scientology of California, Kangaroo Court: An
Investigation Into the Conduct of the Board of Inquiry Into
Scientology: Melbourne, Australia, East Grinstead, 1967 Church
of Scientology, Whatever Happened to Adelaide. A Report on the
Select Committee on the Scientology (Prohibition) Act to the
Government and People of South Australia, Perth, 1972.
29 ”If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or
any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against
them to cause them to sue for peace … Don’t ever defend, always
attack” (R. Miller, Bare-Faced Mmessiah: The True Story of L.
Ron Hubbard, London, 1987, p. 241).
unique contribution to the primary literature on
lobbying campaigns.
Mistrust of Government and
Discrimination
Another explanation for low census numbers is
that due to an apprehension of political and
public hostility, a proportion of Scientologists
might be reluctant to disclose their faith to a
government survey.30 This idea can be linked to
the effects of political opposition to the group, as
the history of attempted suppression could have
generated mistrust of governmental intentions.
Apprehension might be particularly acute when
it relates to the potential government misuse of
private, confidential information contained in a
census.
In addition, political opposition could have
found some resonance in the wider community,
possibly resulting in an increase in
discrimination alleged against individual
Scientologists. Researchers note with unstinting
approval a 1984 report of the New South Wales
(NSW) Anti-Discrimination Board, which
“reports, in an unprejudiced way … the Church
of Scientology as a case study of Australian
intolerance and prejudice toward minority
religions.”31 The researchers also note a 1998
report of the Australian Human Rights and
Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC),
which explored “the large group of submissions
received from members of the Church who
complained of vilification and harassment,” and
cited claims by a Scientologist that “despite the
gradual recognition and tolerance of the group in
Australia over the last thirty years, many still
experience intolerance and discrimination.”32
Judging by the large number of submissions
from Scientologists, it seems that any
apprehension Scientologists might then have had
in divulging personal details to the Australian
30 “Taking into account the level of hostility that the Church has
experienced over the years in Australia …, we might expect a
certain number of Scientologists who are not willing to reveal their
religion for a governmental census” (A. Possamai, A. Possamai-
Inesedy, “Scientology Down Under,” in J. R. Lewis [ed.], op. cit.,
p. 346).
31 Ibidem, p. 353 (emphasis added).
32 Ibidem.
Scientologists International for want of
evidence, prosecutions against fifteen individual
Scientologists were withdrawn.23
Efforts were also made at the Commonwealth
level to stifle the dissemination of Scientology
material24 and to deny the entry of known
adherents to Australia, which was a tangible
disadvantage for anyone concerned.25 However,
it seems feasible to suggest that rather than
curbing the potential growth of Scientology,
governmental attempts at suppression might
have had an enervating, galvanizing effect. This
unintended consequence was mooted by a critic
who said the original ban in Victoria: “Probably
did Scientology more good than harm. It
provided free publicity, and because it had the
trappings of a witch-hunt, made Scientology the
underdog, gaining Hubbard much needed
support … [I]t was impossible to ban
Scientology. The followers in Victoria simply
changed their name to the ‘Church of the New
Faith’ and carried on where they had left off.”26
Governmental crackdowns certainly provided
the Church with campaigning opportunities,
including demonstrations and petitions,27 which
were duly reported. Campaigns to repeal anti-
Scientology legislation also resulted in the
production of some classic polemics,28 if not
personally written by L. Ron Hubbard, then
certainly true to an injunction attributed to the
founder to attack rather than defend,29 making a
23 “Hubbard group’s conviction quashed,” The West Australian, 4
December 1969, p. 1.
24 “50 books of cult seized,” The Advertiser, 18 September 1968, p.
10.
25 Cited in S. Mutch, From “Cult” to “Religion,” p. 52.
26 J. Atack, A Piece of Blue Sky: Scientology, Dianetics, and L. Ron
Hubbard Exposed, New York, 1990, p. 159–160.
27 F. Knight, New York ignores protest against “Hitler in
Australia,” The Australian, 30 July 1969, p. 7 J. Cannon,
“Australia, ‘land of intolerance,’” The Herald, 16 November 1972,
p. 5.
28 Church of Scientology of California, Kangaroo Court: An
Investigation Into the Conduct of the Board of Inquiry Into
Scientology: Melbourne, Australia, East Grinstead, 1967 Church
of Scientology, Whatever Happened to Adelaide. A Report on the
Select Committee on the Scientology (Prohibition) Act to the
Government and People of South Australia, Perth, 1972.
29 ”If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or
any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against
them to cause them to sue for peace … Don’t ever defend, always
attack” (R. Miller, Bare-Faced Mmessiah: The True Story of L.
Ron Hubbard, London, 1987, p. 241).
unique contribution to the primary literature on
lobbying campaigns.
Mistrust of Government and
Discrimination
Another explanation for low census numbers is
that due to an apprehension of political and
public hostility, a proportion of Scientologists
might be reluctant to disclose their faith to a
government survey.30 This idea can be linked to
the effects of political opposition to the group, as
the history of attempted suppression could have
generated mistrust of governmental intentions.
Apprehension might be particularly acute when
it relates to the potential government misuse of
private, confidential information contained in a
census.
In addition, political opposition could have
found some resonance in the wider community,
possibly resulting in an increase in
discrimination alleged against individual
Scientologists. Researchers note with unstinting
approval a 1984 report of the New South Wales
(NSW) Anti-Discrimination Board, which
“reports, in an unprejudiced way … the Church
of Scientology as a case study of Australian
intolerance and prejudice toward minority
religions.”31 The researchers also note a 1998
report of the Australian Human Rights and
Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC),
which explored “the large group of submissions
received from members of the Church who
complained of vilification and harassment,” and
cited claims by a Scientologist that “despite the
gradual recognition and tolerance of the group in
Australia over the last thirty years, many still
experience intolerance and discrimination.”32
Judging by the large number of submissions
from Scientologists, it seems that any
apprehension Scientologists might then have had
in divulging personal details to the Australian
30 “Taking into account the level of hostility that the Church has
experienced over the years in Australia …, we might expect a
certain number of Scientologists who are not willing to reveal their
religion for a governmental census” (A. Possamai, A. Possamai-
Inesedy, “Scientology Down Under,” in J. R. Lewis [ed.], op. cit.,
p. 346).
31 Ibidem, p. 353 (emphasis added).
32 Ibidem.
