|
|
|
"While writing this I am watching National Geographic TV that seems to feature charismatic leaders, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, General Patton."
It's funny you said that because in all accounts of history that I read (or watch on TV) the greatest weight of knowledge and valid information is given to those who knew the subject, i.e., through first hand accounts, relationships, letters, memoirs, and other observations about the subject -- even of spouses, lovers and enemies!
That's not true of the many so-called sociologists of NRMs. David V. Barrett for one, who recently published The New Believers, a tome about NRMs, and indeed covered Rawat/DLM/EV in his book, only asked current followers (dated quite currently, too) to contribute to his section on Rawat. Not one ex-premie to my knowledge was interviewed for his book and it was published only a couple of years ago, well after there was EPO and ex-premie forums. Barrett could have interviewed Mike Finch! Wow, think of that.
So now I have to wonder about the credibility of Introvigne (the founder and president of CESNUR), Barrett, Melton. When did they ever bother to talk to any former followers of Rawat? Yet, they get so much notice and have far too much influence on how people view cults, in particular.
So much for credibility of those academic researchers! They only seem to be interested in one side of the story.
Modified by Cynthia at Thu, Dec 30, 2004, 10:06:15
|
