| If you had to explain why Prem Rawat has been so successful at rebranding what would you say? |
|  |
|
|
Post Reply |
Forum |
|
|
|
If anyone wants to take a stab at the question? When is the last time he got real bad press? Why is that? Why doesn't his past dog him more?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Susan.
Clearly the truth of the proposition depends how you define successful?
Internet searches that combine Prem Rawat with say BBC, Reuters, ABC or other major news providers don't seem to furnish much or anything in the way of past articles. I think that - in a real world sense - he flies so far below the radar that it is not so much that his rebranding has been successful as he is too insignificant and uninteresting for any journalist to invest time in -- his brand is only of interest to very few. Unfortunately that does mean that - in the guise of programs like PEP - he can sneak his way into a few of the more obscure areas of public life and claim plaudits while escaping any serious scrutiny. Prison authorities probably welcome anyone they can get?
I suppose the question is - are there many 'new' premies and has anything changed with respect to the moribund levels of propagation in the noughties? If so then maybe rebranding has been successful - I am not aware of any evidence either way - but the pictures of events always seem to be dominated by the same demographic? (and I am sure that pictures are chosen to include the maximum number of youngsters possible -- my friend's wife always complains that whenever he succeeds in dragging her into an audio fair she always ends up in the publicity photos of the event -- because she is always the only woman in there).
Modified by tommo at Wed, Nov 08, 2023, 08:13:40
|
|
|
|
Hi Tim,
I drafted a reply to Susan this morning and when I returned to it this evening (usually to start over) I read your post:
"he is too insignificant and uninteresting for any journalist to invest time in -- his brand is only of interest to a very few"
Here's my draft from this morning: _____________________________________________________________________
A wild stab...
As well-known as he was to us, the Krishna-crowned boy god was practically invisible on the world stage. Consequently, the revisionism was only visible and successful from the insider perspective of premies. The global public never noticed him in the first place and therefore never had a "before and after" comparison.
When and if anyone notices him now, he simply doesn't stand out enough to make an impression. He's just another one of those do-gooder motivational types who doesn't stand out in a crowd of so many of them.
Short answer: he's irrelevant. ______________________________________________________________________
Very close to what you said! 
Modified by lakeshore at Wed, Nov 08, 2023, 17:07:24
|
|
|
|
But also answers, why.... he's still flying literally, all over the world, living in great wealth, used to be god, and no one cares but his ex followers that he's blamed everyone but himself for that ridiculous notion he was the Lord of the Universe, even as he screamed at us demanding devotion?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cl8HvzyKLak/
Maybe he is just the cannibal that never ate our neighbors.
|
|
|
|
yeah, it's odd isn't it. why didn't he get into trouble for such lies. We can't help but think that but then I turn it around and start wondering why we were taught not to lie so sternly when we were growing up.
I mean why weren't we being taught to watch out for liars instead. There was a bit of education - watch out for people trying to sell you the Brooklyn bridge but that's just the tip of the iceberg isn't it.
|
|
|
|
I think logical reasoning and some sort of education about coercive control should be in all schools. Seems that is less likely to happen, than even 10 years ago.
|
|
|
|
yes, it's such a surprise to me - as you get older and more understanding about our species it just amazes me how ignorantly we are brought up, and I think that in itself speaks volumes to the success of lying.
It's a big mess isn't it, Susan.
|
|
|
|
The most famous speaker you haven't heard of Sara Sidner said?
Could it be like this?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/willyakowicz/2019/05/15/keith-raniere-the-leader-of-the-nxivm-sex-cult/?sh=6176d15835a9
Forbes is proud they did an article on him in 2003.
I wonder, truly, if he had not started literally branded women, if he'd still be insignificant too.
How many people went to NXVIM workshops
"Since then, an estimated 18,000 people enrolled in the group's workshops, including its “Executive Success Programs.”
"At its height, NXIVM had 700 active members"
source of 700 Wikipedia and we all know how reliable that is about cults...
Modified by Susan at Wed, Nov 08, 2023, 21:58:42
|
|
|
|
Prem Rawat has certainly been much more successful than Raniere but who would care about KR if rich and successful women hadn't had menages and been humilated and branded with hot irons?
Maharishi was much richer and more successful than PR but after the Beatles couldn't get a lot of publicity no matter how bizarre his ideas were because there was no branding, drinking Kool-Aid etc, there was no overt scandal.
There has to be scandal for the media to become interested.
Prem never stopped revisioning and re-educating his premies into pwks but it was of no interest to outsiders. He might be the most successful brain washer on the planet. For 50 years he's bludgeoned His premies with bullshit and it has become more delicious to them. He's been herding them like cattle down the Bullshit Trail to Bullshit Gulch and every now and then a steer will grow balls and say "God I can't stand the smell and the sound of his bullshit anymore" and drop out. From Bullshit Gulch its not a long trek to the end of the trail where the herd will finish up, one by one leaving the greatest cowboy of them all alone in the dust standing on tiptoes keeping a stiff upper lip and his chin up to keep his mouth up out of the merde. He will sing his swansong, "La merde ...
|
|
|
