TM -a proper critique

Joan Bakewell writing in the Independent in the wake of the Maharisihi's death does some nice assessment of TM. She hints at the possibility that it is really money for old rope (ie that the fees are exorbitant for a set of techniques which seem to be no different in principle from all sorts of other schools of spirituality in all sorts of faith traditions. And at the end she explores a much more important critique imho. Joan Bakewell: Meditation is more than flower-power indulgence: "Transcendental meditation imagines a world where everyone is so spiritually calm and at peace that wars become redundant. That is to suppose that tyrants and despots will be chilling out too. Whereas, we know full well they would welcome a meek and submissive population as being so much easier to subjugate to their will. The dangers of universal quietism is that it would abandon all the outrage we bring to our sense of injustice. There is a proper place for anger at the state of the world, for resistance to the forces of oppression. But meditation can help temper the anger."
The only thing I would really want to add to the critique she makes is that TM has tended to try hard to make out it is non-religious, whereas it is quite clearly a kind of Hindu entryist enterprise. I suspect that the main reason it can get away with it is the relative hospitality these traditions of Hinduism have towards a diversity of viewpoints -within limits, of course. It may be worth considering too the role that TM may have played in the turn to the East arising in the flower-power era which is still with us to some extent. Possibly being part of the same cultural wave that sees massive growth in attendances at Buddhist retreat centres in Britain.