|
It's actually quite
disturbing to many that in the eyes of EV and M's
internet spin artists, the victims of Jagdeo's
horrifying abuse are somehow not victims at all,
but they've become instead trading cards in a PR
game that can be viewed with deserved skepticism
and even cynicism, as Maharaji covering his ass by
trashing those who have been hurt the most in this
sordid affair.
Closing one's eyes to the true nature of evil is
certainly nothing new in the world of bullshit
intellectuals. In that sense, someone like Richard
II should know that he doesn't stand alone. It is
in fact the kind of denial Jean-Paul Sartre, author
of the classic existential novel Iron in the
Soul, made famous.
Confronted with hard evidence of the evils of
Stalinism, Sartre and his partner in crime, Simone
de Beauvoir, were unrelenting supporters of the
communist regime, and remained so until
uncontrovertible evidence risked turning their
reputations as champions of freedom into
self-mockery.
Yet revisionism and denial did not die with
Sartre and De Beauvoir. They live on in myriad
incarnations all around us, and here on thre
ex-premie forum in the likes of Richard II, Bjorn,
Catweasle, etc.,anonymous trolls or ghosts as you
like, but each actually revealing in his/her own
way, how knowledge and devotion to m may be more a
matter of 'iron in the soul' than it is of 'that
feeling, that peace, that love'
With each act of denial and obfuscation of the
issues, these people who so willingly reduce
themseves to the ridiculous status of anonymous
cartoon characters, seem to remain blissfully
unaware that through their use of exculpatory
language and callow justifications, they give
succor not only to Maharaji and Jagdeo, but to
sexual offenders everywhere.
All this, in spite of the fact, as Jim put
it:
Maharaji most certainly compromised the security
of premies and their children by dealing secretly
with every Mahatma sex scandal as it arose. Rather
than admit that these guys were just regular human
beings and not to be trusted any more than anyone
else, he lead us to believe that they were 'holy
men' or 'saints'. Their mystique heightened like
this, he could count on major support from them for
his own mystique as Lord. This is obvious and borne
out by the historical record. There is no denying
it.
Now it's quite obvious that if a premie like
Richard II for example, who actually seems quite
intelligent and bright (if not utterly twisted),
seemingly representative of Maharaji's bullshit
intelligentsia (even though it's understandable
that Maharaji mentioned in the same breath as
'intelligentsia' sounds completely oxymoronic)...if
he can't accept the obviousness of Jim's statement,
then we might want to examine-what exactly is
Richard II's problem?
British historian Paul Johnson, who wrote a
scathing examination of the private lives of
celebrated intellectuals, has shown that certain
members of a society's intelligentsia, whose prime
motivation is either ego gratification or
self-publicity will take stands that vitiate
against both logic and their own principles in
orger to advance their socio-economic status. But
the level of cognitive dissonance necessary to bury
one's conscience so completely must require
something more. Of course in the case of someone
like Richard II, we know what that 'something more'
is- a cultic sense of devotion to maharaji and
knowledge. Hence, he chooses the role of Maharaji
apologist for himself.
Now if we were to look for a moment at the way
in which the Hitler and Stalin apologists for
example, who were prominent thinkers, leaders and
champions of freedom in their own societies,
remained so unmoved by mounting evidence of
concentration camps and forced labor gangs, we can
see one of history's more egregious examples of
moral blindness
What's truly amazing is that Maharaji's apologists
have attempted to raise that brand of denial to a
current level of acceptability. Again, all one has
to do is witness their inability to accept certain
basics in the situation, the kind of basics
contained in Jim's statement that I've already
quoted.
But is this repeated incidence of premie
self-delusion an example of a career premie's
attempt to advance his/her status with m and within
his cult? It obviously isn't self publicity since
whoever he is, he's choosing to post
anonymously.
OR, is it just plain heartlessness?
Whatever the answer, it seems that m's legacy of
abuse continues to unfold. This may be the time for
any premie who still considers him/herself a
thinking and caring person to question whether m's
poisoned nipples are worthy of being sucked on till
your last breath?
If the answer to that question is yes, you may
want to check your spiritual barometer for a
malignant condition that should be recognized,
unmistakably, not as knowledge...but as, iron in
the soul.
|