--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We had an excellent writing program our first year at MIU. They > really emphasized it and taught me the mantra "writing is rewriting". > > Of course I know who you are talking about. If you are trying to say > that because MIU had some good educational programs then the movement > should be excused from any other coercive behavior, then you are > expressing a feature of dysfunctional relationships.
No, I am not saying that at all. I myself am critical of the movement for all the wrong things they do, as you know from reading my posts, and am for open discussion of these things. What I'm saying is: he should go ahead and criticize the movement all he wants but since the movement helped him in such a fundamental way, it would be nice if he acknowledged that along with the negative. But since we're on the topic of this particular person (who I am being sensitive about actually naming in light of the recent disclosure of the name of John Hagelin's student paramour and the flap that has been causing the person who named names) I would also add that this person's TM "story" -- that is, how he came to TM and innocently became indoctrinated -- which I have read online is full of alot of bunk. This particular person IN HIS FIRST SEVERAL MONTHS AT MIU in '75 was in close contact with fundamentalist Christians who were ex-TMers and who were actively working against the TMO and TM. And he received reams of documents about all the secrets of TM and all the negative accusations about the alleged cult dangers of TM. He knew it all. But when you read his story, it comes across that NONE of this was known to him and yet he was somehow slowly and unknowingly brainwashed into the TM cult. But the opposite was true: this person had FULL disclosure from the get-go. But when he left the movement he painted a much different picture. And this was dishonest. > In a personal > setting loving someone doesn't give you any rights for abuse. > > No group is all bad or all good. Even the most undisputed cults have > some good especially in their into courses. That is not the point. > > I don't suppose you ever met with families desperate to have contact > with their kids who had disappeared into a group, so you may not > imagine the emotional cost to a family. His work is about > reconnecting families with lost kids. It was not an attack on the > movement. If the movement took it as an attack it might have been > because the shoe fit a bit too much. Identifying cult tactics in a > group should have been an invitation to knock it off. But the > antidote is information, and now that the information is available, > people can make their own choices. That is a good thing IMO. > > Now with the Rajas in the open and TM involvement dying off, the whole > cult topic is kinda dead concerning TM. But there are other vibrant > and much more dangerous groups now and the information of how people's > beliefs change in a social setting is important knowledge. The 19 > hijackers were well educated men. How did they adapt a belief in > suicide? These are important questions and thought reform theory > helps us understand. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > So you are the product of MUM's writing department huh? I'd say the > > > university has bigger problems than Haglein banging the student body. > > > > > > [snip] > > > > I went to MIU at the same time as Curtis. > > > > There is someone whom we both went to MIU with who then became a well- > > known militant ex-TMer who was virtually illiterate when he first came > > to MIU as a teenager for our freshman class. He could not correctly > > spell any word larger than three letters nor put together a sentence on > > paper. And that's not hype, that's fact. > > > > Yet to his credit (alot of hard work, determination, and persistence) > > he overcame his handicap...to the point where he was literate enough > > that he became a writer of sorts: HE DOCUMENTED THROUGH HIS WRITING HIS > > HORRIBLE EXPERIENCE WITH THE TM "CULT". > > > > Yet it was MIU that enabled him to become literate. This individual > > didn't overcome his illiteracy by himself. Because it was the staff and > > faculty of MIU that worked with him so that he overcame his illiteracy. > > > > Funny, isn't it; MIU provided the very education and skills that > > enabled this person to have the very petard he most eagerly and > > willingly employed against MIU, Maharishi, and the TMO. > > > > Fine. Free speech and all; he's entitled to express his opinions and > > views against the Movement. But I'd like to see him at the same time > > give MIU credit for giving him a chance in the first place by accepting > > an obviously unqualified person as a student as well as then working > > with him so that he became literate. And please don't anyone counter > > by saying that MIU did it for their own interests because they were > > desperately in need of students and would have accepted anyone. This > > person enrolled in the fall of 1975, the year that MIU had over 350 > > students enrolled and, if anything, they couldn't keep up with the > > overflow. > > >
