Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00225)

Coherence writes:

>There is a misconception about ULT stated here that needs to be
>cleared up. The ULT is an Association of students. There is no
>legal entity called ULT hence no officers bylaws government.
>Each Lodge and study group is independent and autonomous and
>generally run by older students who assume the responsibility
>for its functioning. The ULT is not a democracy but the views
>and council of as many students as possible are taken into
>consideration. This generally applies to convenient meeting
>times administrative matters building maintenance etc. for
>the efficient functioning of the group.
>
>I try to think of the ULT as a combination of the concept of a
>Family and a Bridge Club. Families are run by older figures who
>are given authority by virtue of their position but opinions
>are sought. In a bridge club there is no official
>organization but various members take responsibility for its
>functioning. As the bridge club agrees that when they assemble
>they will play bridge the ULT students agree that when they
>assemble they will study HPB Judge and Crosbie.

This is about as fair of a description of how ULT works that
I have seen. I was active with the Los Angeles ULT for about
fifteen years until we moved out of the area but still in
contact with some of the associates. ULT is indeed more of a
federation of students than a formal organization but an inner
structure does indeed exist and downplaying the importance of
that structure is in MHO unrealistic. Decisions have to be made
concerning the upkeep of the building organizing of office help
paying the day to day expenses of telephones office machinery
postage etc. Though there are no officers for ULT there is a
board of directors for Theosophy Company which is a bonified
Organization responsible for the publications. They are also
responsible for the assets used by ULT associates and for the
production of ~Theosophy~ magazine. That board has a
chairperson who also has more than a little influence concerning
the organizations of classes and the scheduling of speakers.
Though ULT is founded upon some very high ideals weakness in
human nature requires that the implementation of these ideals
require some compromises by giving the Board and individuals some
responsibilities therefore powers that gives some justification
to Paul's observation of a "cryptocracy."

>The anonymity issue is merely an attempt to stick to ideas and
>teaching rather than personalities. Therefore there are no
>"leaders" officially recognized as such.

Yet everyone involved in ULT knows who these "leaders" are.
I remember when Joe Pope came to Los Angeles on a visit. He was
scheduled to speak at one of the night gatherings.
True to form an announcement of the topic was sent out but not
the speaker. It made no difference. The word got around that
Joe Pope would be speaking that night and he got a much larger
audience than what was usual.

>When writing ULT
>students do not sign their name so that the ideas come through
>and the reader is not biased by the personality of the author.
>It is not a secret society where the governance is hidden
>secret or mysterious in any way and certainly is not a
>"cryptocracy".

Yes and this is a real headache for us historians.

>Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it
>does--people are involved. But the method of operation
>minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert
>its attention from its mission.

I would say that ULT has had its share of "politics" that
have diverted attention from its mission from time to time but
on the whole I must agree that ULT is structured in such a way
that more energy can be directed to the real work. In many ways
it is much more efficient and focused than Adyar.

>Witness the current "lengthy" discussion of political events on
>this List taking up time and space better utilized by the
>discussion of the ideas and teaching of Theosophy.
>
>I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other
>organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles
>gossip etc. be moved to a separate board.
>
>Does anyone else agree?

Because of the evident failure of the Adyar TS to keep its
membership properly informed and involved in decisions affecting
member's and Lodge's rights I think this electronic forum is a
godsend and may have the eventual effect of making a more
democratic organization out of it. Since this board is open to
all theosophical students regardless of affiliation or none I
can see the wisdom of putting the current discussion on a
separate Board. On the other hand if we create a new board
every time a subject of limited popularity arises we will soon
have our one forum fragmenting into more and more little ones.
Perhaps another and more productive way of looking at this
would be to allow the diversity of subjects to continue on this
forum. Though a ULT associate has no personal investment in
Adyar politics I think there is still much to be learned
concerning organizational dynamics that may help to create a
better Organizational structure that will be to everyone's
benefit.

Jerry HE
Member Theosophy International
Associate ULT
Member Theosophical Society Adyar
Member Theosophical Society Pasadena