OFF TOPIC: A Word about Us as Contributors

Some readers have commented that they are confused by differences between the viewpoints of our various contributors.

I've been meaning to post something about our editorial policies for some time. Unfortunately, despite diligent work on our Mission Statement, we don't have formal editorial guidelines to share with you yet. But I can give you some idea of what we're about.

Some of us think meditation is a bad idea. Some of us continue to meditate. Some think the TM Org must be destroyed to end its damaging effects. At least one of us believes the organization could be reformed. At least one of us believes that it is desirable to resurrect what the Maharishi's master, Guru Dev, once taught. At least one of us believe that Guru Dev, as it is possible to know him, is for all intents and purposes a mythical figure whose mind is unknowable.

Our lack of agreement goes on and on.

In point of fact, this post can't really be said to be written on behalf of the other editors at all. This is my take on what we are trying to achieve. There's a good chance that my fellow editors disagree with some or all of what you are reading.

Our grand strategy could be termed "planned disorganization." Each author here has total freedom to post whatever she or he wants – without interference from any other author. What keeps the contents of TM-Free Blog from disintegrating into total chaos is what we have in general agreement: The policies, practices, and actions of the TM Org and the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi are dangerous and destructive.

Now, I have great difficulty managing disagreement and confrontation. I think this has to do with my TM Org experiences as well as my upbringing. I'm an adult child of an alcoholic. Confrontation -- albeit one-sided -- was a large part of my childhood.

I think that's why striving for respectful disagreement is so important to me. I believe that it's an issue that cult members in general, and former TMers in particular, need to work through.

I also think that we tend to have difficulty agreeing. For myself, I resent so strongly what we used to call "group consciousness" and "coherence" in the TM Org that I have trouble being in groups that agree too much. I can get the heebie-jeebies just attending church with my sainted Irish Catholic mother.

I'm reasonably certain that at least part of my motivation for founding trancenet.net, instead of working more closely with Mike Doughney on his excellent minet.org, had to do with my need to strike out on my own, develop my independence. I think it's quite possible that other former cult members have trouble collaborating for some of these reasons. I'm really proud that we TM-Free editors are working through our issues with collaboration so gracefully.

We editors don't speak with one voice. We may from time to time disagree on some points, while remaining united in believing the TM Org is disastrously wrong.

I think allowing ourselves to avoid collaborating because we disagreed would be to continue to give the TM Org way too much power over us. I also think it's one of the reasons that cults experience relatively little criticism. We critics, with the possible exception of TM-Free Blog, remain too disorganized because collaboration is difficult for us.

I strongly believe it will be healthy for our Blog and for us as individuals to disagree! I think our readers will gain from our role modeling that we can disagree yet remain friends and work on a project together because we focus on the few things we agree on.

We can show our little corner of the world that we can discuss and disagree without recreating the wasteland of alt.meditation.transcendental (the Usenet news group).

One last note. Some have questioned contributors' tone on the Blog. Specifically, they question "bitterness" and "anger."

I believe anger is a valuable feeling. Like any feeling, God, Nature, or Whoever put it there for a reason. And, like any feeling, it can be perverted. Love, generally considered a "positive" feeling, can easily become obsession in its perverted form.

Anger is there to tell us something is not right. Generally we get angry because we are in pain, because we fear being placed in pain, or because of frustration. All those seem operative and appropriate among Transcendental Meditation critics.

Anger is the feeling that gives us the strength to change. My favorite example is the civil rights movement of the 60s. African Americans recognized injustice -- and got angry. They channeled their anger as an energy to effect change. And the result, while not perfect, offered a greater measure of freedom for all Americans.

Our anger at the Movement, if not overindulged can work similar wonders.