|
In Reply to: Re: Berg in it for the money? posted by Ruth on April 13, 2004 at 16:36:27:
that they had no regard for underlings except for how productive they were. Worth was relative to production. And tithing meant his wallet grew as the family grew.
The Penn article does not describe meager digs. And after all, self-proclaimed kings and queens do not live poorly.
How many family throw-aways and burn-outs did you run across during your time in the family? How many breakdowns did you see or know of? How many do you know of that came after leaving?
I see them as psychopathic spiritual serial killers, not to mention the physical effects of the family on some, esp. long termers and children raised in it as chilling to say the least. Wonder what the suicide ratio is in the family compared to society at large? And the rate of depression, ptsd, anxiety disorders?
This is not to say that people can't get better. But some wounds go too deep to heal entirely.
I think Berg and Zerby(is) were very calculating.
