TurquoiseB wrote:
> There is a phenomenon one tends to see on the
> Internet in the so-called spiritual chat groups.
>
Spiritual chat groups?

> And the funny thing, from my point of view, is 
> that the two anti-guru gurus who have set up shop
> at FFL lately have a public act that is the opposite
> of what is really going on. 
>
This is funny: an avowed atheist materialist lurking
on spiritual chat groups and complaining about 
the believer's "Whining" and then flaming the believers
on a spiritual chat group, FFL. It must get really 
lonely sometimes at the bar on the beach at Sitges.

> That phenomenon can be called by many names. So
> far I have been referring to it by its generic
> name, Whining. But in this little essay, I'm 
> going to get a little more specific.
> 
> Have you ever noticed that the people who take
> up the "anti-cult" banner and wave it fiercely
> all over the Internet tend to use the EXACT
> SAME TACTICS AS THE GURUS THEY'RE AGAINST?
> 
> They make unsupported statements and expect 
> everyone to believe them, just because they said
> them. They claim to have special, secret know-
> ledge that they just can't reveal to us just
> yet, but which makes all of their claims OK.
> When someone doesn't *buy* their act, and calls
> them on it, they tend to fly into a rage and
> do everything they can to undermine the critic's
> reputation. 
> 
> In other words, these anti-guru crusaders act
> remarkably like gurus.
> 
> And they don't realize it.
> 
> Like the gurus they rant about, these individuals
> are primarily after one thing more than anything
> else -- attention. They want people to *focus* 
> on them, to consider them "authorities," more
> "knowledgeable" than other people. They want to
> be seen as *wise*, as if the things they are 
> saying are better and more evolved than the things
> the people they're preaching to are saying. They
> want to be seen as more "advanced" or further 
> down the evolutionary road than those poor folks
> they're trying to enlighten about the "real"
> nature of the world and How It All Works.
> 
> Sound familiar?
> 
> And the funny thing, from my point of view, is 
> that the two anti-guru gurus who have set up shop
> at FFL lately have a public act that is the opposite
> of what is really going on. They like to think of
> themselves as having progressed further in their
> quest for knowledge than the other people here on
> FFL, the ones they're so ready and willing to 
> preach to.
> 
> But as I see it, with a very few exceptions among
> the posting population of FFL, the anti-guru gurus 
> are the ones "lagging behind." Both of them are 
> stuck in mindsets that most of the rest of us worked 
> through and dispensed with 30 years ago. Or 20 years 
> ago, or 10. Bottom line is that most of us on this 
> forum really *have* been there done that with the 
> angry Whiner mentality. We went through it for a 
> short time when we were first coming to grips with 
> our own illusions about our respective spiritual 
> paths, and we were probably *just* as whiny back 
> then as Bronte and Angela are now.
> 
> But WE GOT OVER IT, man. 30, 20, or 10 years ago.
> And now when some newbie rolls into town running 
> the same act that we now find laughable in our own
> pasts, all we can do is laugh at them, too.
> 
> When are people going to learn? You don't convert
> anyone to the anti-guru stance by ACTING LIKE
> A GURU. You don't make a case for how intellectual
> you are by ACTING LIKE AN IDIOT. 
> 
> Both Bronte and Angela are *potentially* bright
> people, who might actually have something to say
> if they could ever get past this whiny shit. But
> they don't seem to be in the market *for* getting
> past the whiny shit. Instead, they have chosen to
> roll around in it like a pig rolling in mud. They
> have chosen to rail against the things that offend
> them using the EXACT tactics as the people they
> are railing against. And then they're surprised
> and hurt when we laugh at them?
> 
> Get over it, babes. If you do, there will be some
> interesting people here for you to talk to. Not
> preach to, talk to. There's a difference.
>


Reply via email to