The metaphor of the Frontier has sustained itself in the national culture and is invoked in popular entertainment, advertising, political rhetoric and in Americans’ sense of being a uniquely exceptional people. This collectivity of thought has been referred to in academic literature as the “American Myth of the Frontier.” However, Turner and his followers (including politicians, academics, and artists) focused only on the positive aspects of the Frontier in forming the American character and setting the United States on the road to becoming a superpower. Looking at America from a different perspective, we can also identify the darker aspects of the Myth of the Frontier. We can see how the descriptions and justifications that first developed for dealing with Native American tribes have become so deeply entwined in the national Myth that they shape American poli cies to this day. Although “the other” has changed his location, his race, and his cultural identity, he may find his role in the American Myth to be not so different from the role played by Native Americans.
Besides being a physical place that shifted and expanded over time, the Frontier is also a mythic space. It represents that which is to be conquered/controlled, including such things as the Space Frontier, the Science Frontier, and the New Age Spiritual Frontier. Each of these has its specialized frontiersmen who venture out as opportunistic adventurers in unchartered territory, to become hardcore experts at understanding the mysterious “wilderness” waiting to be captured, and to return home as heroes of American Civilization. This is the quintessential American entrepreneurial spirit that fuels its enormous creativity as a nation.
Editor's Note: This Article appears in the book: The Challenge of Eurocentrism: Global Perspectives, Policy, and Prospects, edited By Rajani Kannepalli Kanth

written by Riverine, 2010-03-21 15:39:43
I completely agree with you that NItyananda ought to resign.
The point you made about disseminating a system being of a 'secular' nature is true. While I agree with Sri Sri's answer, I also have my own scepticism re. mass propaganda/propagation of these systems by self-styled gurus. Some of them might be genuine, I do ot deny that but I would certainly not be able to sift them out from the chaff.
The many other lessons that we have to learn and make sure are:
1. Those wh want to give such traditional knowledge to the masses should not elevat themselves to the 'spiritual' realm. They need not become messiahs of god or even godmen. They need not don saffrom robes or sport beards. I do not say 'should not' but it would be better if they were able to identify themselves physically with the common man and be mental leaders.
2. They should respect the idea that a grihasta is just as competent to teach as a brahmachari. hence, they should clarify what category they belong to and what their intents are.
On the other side, many many years ago, when I saw NItyananda's hoardings all over Thiruvannamalai and along the route to Tindivanam it struck me that this guy was bogus. I am not sure if I am right in thinking like that, but such publicity puts me off - they are just the same as Karunanidhi or Jayalalitha, no more. The present accusation seems to corroborate my idea, my first question being: why should an actress 'serve' him in the first place, why not an ordinary woman , why a woman at all?
Unless we lash out at the hypocriy of all these practices, godmen will be what they are, people will be just as vulnerable and the media will have its meat.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|




















Thanks for giving us a deeper insight into what actually transpired though. It is a pity the public never got to see the edited bits, which could perhaps have shown the Guru in a slightly better light !!