|
|
|
I think that Rennie is very special case, because he is in the business himself of spiritual self-promotion and also he played a short-lived but very public role in promoting GM.
Nevertheless there are probably a lot of people like him, who don't seem to want to take a critical look at their lives and want to paint it all in rosey colors. It probably has more to do with how they want to see their own lives than with anything involving the cult. It is more of a general situation. I know lots of people who never want to say or think anything bad about their families for example, even though their family history has obviously taken its toll on them. Of course this behavior ends up being a hindrance to growing and getting over it. They develop weird patterns of destructive behavior that they can't get a handle on. I can think of lots of people I know like that. Sometimes it is as simple as never wanting to take responsibility for anything. Other times their behaviour is much worse.
But there are all types of other people as well. I was never really angry about my involvement for example. I never really thought about it too much. Just kind of blanked it out. I'm glad I took a second look at it as a result of EPO and the forums, but if I hadn't I don't think it would have mattered so much. I imagine this category of people is really large with ex-premies, and you are probably right in saying that these are the people who didn't lose much because of their involvement. I had lots of people I knew, some whom I myself brought to knowledge, others who got involved at the same time. None of them moved into the ashram and none were involved for too long. I think they all look at it as the folly of youth. There is also the aspect that they find it embarassing and don't like to talk about it. I was certainly in the category as well. Most people don't like to admit they were stupid enough to join a cult. It's an ugly stigma. I usually turn it around and make a joke about it, before the joke gets turned on me. Kind of like the fat person who makes a joke about themselves before someone else has the chance to.
I just want to add, that of all the people I am thinking of in the preceding paragraph, I'm the only one who moved into the ashram and took everything so seriously. And probably not coincidentally, I'm the only one posting on this forum now. I know that at least some of the others I know have taken a look here.
And getting back to Rennie, I don't think he lost much because of his involvement either. As far as I know, he wasn't around that long.
Modified by aunt bea at Thu, Mar 02, 2006, 13:54:52
|
|
|
|
Personally I think that the amount of harm depends highly on the degree of involvement at the moment of disillusionment. By the degree of involvement I mean to include social networks via the cult, intellectual convictions related to the cult belief system, having had beautiful mystical experiences, using the cult or guru for psychological support (e.g. "Guru is the father", "My Love is like a thousand mothers" ), donations to the cult, devotion to the leader, time spent, duration of involvement, and having alternatives for the cult readily available. I've italicized and bolded it because in my opinion (for what it's worth) you stated it well. It's as simple as that, and as complicated as each of us are as individuals, who also bring our own baggage to any cult then leave with more. I think Rennie Davis is/was too in love with himself to get too attached to M.
|
|
|
|
Hi Cynthia, I am happy that you agree with what I wrote. I forgot to mention that trust is important. "Public falls from grace by spiritual gurus are relatively infrequent but, given the intense personal trust and the total faith of the follower, any strong suspicion or clear evidence of deceit or wrongdoing on the part of the guru can provoke or threaten trauma for many people and prolonged public polemics." by Brian Steel, former follower of SSB. Another aspect that I forgot is identity.You cannot go to something different only because it is more attractive if being a follower of a certain guru is part of your identity. Andries
Related link: Brian Steel's introduction to the SSB controversy
|
|
|
|
"The question why some people leave in
disillusionment and anger and feel harmed and have problems with the
transition to a life without the cult and why other people leave
unscathed has been asked many times."
You're begging the question here Andries.
People leave cults either in disillusionment, or they just drift away through lack of involvement or they move on to something that attracts them more. There is no necessary connection between leaving in disillusionment and leaving with anger. There is no necessary connection between leaving in disillusionment and feeling harmed. There is no necessary connection between leaving in disillusionment and having problems with the transition to a life without the cult. There is no necessary connection between leaving with anger and having problems with the transition to a life without the cult.
These connections are often made by cult members wishing to denigrate the ex-cult members criticising the cult activities and leaders and members as ad hominem attacks on cult critics.
Surely the single most common denominator amongst those ex-cult members who publicly criticise the cults they were members of is their high moral and ethical standards of truth. Everyone who leaves a cult because of disillusionment believes (correctly or otherwise) that their cult's propaganda is untruthful and cult membership can be harmful and those who feel strongly enough about truth will act on that knowledge.
Modified by Ocker at Thu, Mar 02, 2006, 15:00:31
|
|
|
|
I suggest the commonest criterion is time spent in the cult. I regard myself as having gotten off very lightly compared with almost anyone posting here, as I got out after just three years, and that was now thirty years ago. I went years without even thinking about M. Rennie also walked pretty quickly--I guess the absence of Martians at Millennium made him suspicious. Neville B
|
|
|
