|
|
|
1. Legalism
2. Whataboutery
3. Trivialisation of testimony
4. Accusatoryness
5. Deflectionism
I feel like I’ve met Thinking somewhere before, but even the familiarity is a drag into a mire of avoidance and distraction.
If TPRF gets an enquiry from a major news organisation asking about the now public allegations of abuse – is TPRF simply going to reply that an adult playing with a child’s penis is just a common cultural practice and honestly there’s nothing to see here ? Is the major news organisation not going get the view of some celebrity psychologist to say just how profoundly damaging such a practice is ? Or ask a celeb lawyer what does or does not constitute an assault when a parent engages in what the media clearly understands to be “inappropriate touching” : https://www.michiganmedicine.org/health-lab/7-ways-talk-your-child-about-good-and-bad-touch
As much as they may want to, Prem’s apologists are not going to be able to easily deflect this into a pharisaic debate; what Hans Rawat has brought forward is a profound moral criticism of the individual who sits at the heart of a notionally philosophical and educational enterprise. The criticism is no longer about cars and planes and wealth, nor about abusive former associates or disgruntled ex employees, what Hans has revealed goes to the very character at the heart of the whole Rawat operation.
The question now is whether Prem is a safe person for anyone to be in contact with ? No longer is it just a question of whether the belief system is safe or the practices safe, the question now relates to actual physical safety of anyone coming into contact with Prem or those who have been influenced or encouraged by Prem. Of course it may that Prem is to all intents and purposes ‘safe’ and that there are no untoward influences in his support organisations that pose danger to children or other vulnerable people. But the certainty of safety now has to be established and Prem's supporters and followers, especially those in positions of public responsibility have to be prepared to address the questions openly and honestly. The legal bullies and $1,000 a day reputation managers aren't going to able to shut this down without incurring even worse reputational harm to Rawat and everything associated with him.
Modified by Nik at Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 11:03:06
|
