A Brief Clarification | Why I Wrote These Last Pieces

Karen#1

Well-known member
I want to be clear about why I’ve been writing these last pieces.
I’m not trying to retell personal stories for their own sake, and I’m not trying to pile on outrage. I’ve already shared much of what happened to me. I could continue doing that indefinitely. There are plenty of stories left.
But stories alone don’t explain why nothing ever changed.
What I’ve been trying to do instead is step back and describe the system as it actually exists and why it behaves the way it does. Once you look at the structure, the continuity, and the incentives, the stagnation stops being mysterious.
Nothing changed after we all left because change was never the objective.
That realization only fully settled for me years later, after distance, perspective, and conversations with people who stayed far longer than I did. What confirmed it was not one shocking revelation, but the opposite. The consistency. The repetition. The predictability.
These pieces are not about revisiting harm. They’re about explaining why exposure, criticism, lawsuits, and public pressure never produced reform, at least from my own perspective, which I admit could be flawed. But let’s be clear: what looks like dysfunction is actually design.
Anything else I might write from here would be additional stories, additional texture, additional firsthand detail. Those have value, and I may still share them.
But the core point doesn’t change.
Once you understand what was built, why it was built, and what it was designed to preserve, the rest falls into place.
And that, more than anything, is what I wanted readers to see.
What David Miscavige may take from this, however, is something else entirely: that these pieces reflect a deeper, increasingly coherent understanding of the system he depends on—one that does not need noise, outrage, or confrontation to be effective.

READ MORE

 
What I’ve been trying to do instead is step back and describe the system as it actually exists and why it behaves the way it does. Once you look at the structure, the continuity, and the incentives, the stagnation stops being mysterious.
Nothing changed after we all left because change was never the objective.

I've harped on this many time sin my own posts.

Scientology is built as a system of control over members. Hubbard, out of his own narcissism, paranoia and megalomania, added his "every change will be for the worse, It is all perfect now because I made it so" KSW spiel on top of it.

That makes the system very resistant to change. I'm in agreemnet with Tom on this part.


But it does not make the system resistant to pressure. The system is not flexible enough to deal with it. Apply enough pressure and it will not bend, it will brake, it will snap in two.

Get rid of the tax exemption, cause enough financial loss via dmaages in lawsuits and Davey will lose his footing and the people underneath him will gain enough power to remove him.

Apply enough external strain on them that they will run out of SeaOrg workhours trying to contain, monitor and counteract all of it. They are already out of SO work hours, which is why OSA does duch a poor job at monitoring us and why they suddenly need to rely on external contractors for everything.

They do not have the manpower. They have the money, so they rely more and mor eon private investigators, contractors, external lawyers etc. Remmove the money and the've got nothing.

Here is where I disagree with Tom.
 
Yes, it is a 'system'. A corporate money egregore which creates de-individuation instead of strong individuals. Some intelligent insights on Purpose.. This is a study of the collective, turning into a devouring beast, and it going fully pathological. The egregore cannot exist without the created enemy, and may become a type of possession. A collective hallucination arises.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top