Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00249)

JR Crocker writes:

>Yes. As distasteful as even thinking about this stuff is that
>fact that the membership has been willing to accept increasingly
>unacceptable behaviour has I believe lead some of those in the
>leadership to believe they can now do virtually whatever they
>wish. We probably all want to pay very little attention to
>political goings on but perhaps now and then it is our
>responsibility - as a means of paying our debt to the founders
>an indebtedness I believe most of us feel in some way or
>another - to take care of the organization they began.

This is so well said and I hope that everyone reads it. I
believe that members of the TS indeed have a responsibility to
speak up when they see an injustice and to make an honest effort
to discern the issues and to vote. It is the same responsibility
we have towards the country inwhich we live. We have a
responsibility to vote in National and state elections. I also
believe in the practice civil disobedience when it is clear to us
that our government is perpetuating a moral wrong. As members of
the TS we have the same kind of obligations.

>PS. Jerry ... any suggestions as to what form the exertion of
>will ought to take? I have been recently wrestling with this
>question and as you have a greater grasp of the historical
>context I would very much appreciate the broader perspective
>you might bring to the question. Certainly crises of legitimacy
>- such as the one we are approaching - are nothing new ... how
>might the current membership in your opinion accomplish a
>Headquarters housecleaning without causing yet another schism?

First we need to realize how the system works. The major
power is in the Presidency and in the "inner circle" to whom the
President gets its cues. The Board of Directors per se have
little real power because they only attend two meetings a year
and it takes them the first term in order to even figure out what
is going on. Therefore the Board tends to rubber stamp whatever
the President presents to them.
Second we need to realize that over half of the membership
is unattached to any Lodge therefore they only know what they
are told through the AT and through letters sent out by National.
The only way to bring about the defeat of an undesirable change
is for the membership to network together and to keep each other
informed as to what is going on. Then the informed membership
has to take the responsibility to vote. Only a small minority of
members vote now. So a block of informed voters could be very
effective.
I think that if enough of the membership began to take the
responsibility of keeping themselves informed and by voting we
will be able to win back the Theosophical Society and the
leadership will begin to learn to become responsive to the needs
of the members.
I don't know if the present crises will end in a schism. It
depends upon the strength of the opposition and the determination
of the leaders at National to hold their ground. But if the
present issues pass it will be all the more difficult to oppose
National in the future. Radha has already taken the position
that she can sacrifice sections when they don't play her game
and she has dumped three of them since 1984. If we don't stand
up for ourselves then it will be a matter of time before our
Lodges will be as vulnerable. It seems to me that the
possibility of a schism is worth the risk--considering the
greater risks we will be facing down the road if we don't take a
stand.

Jerry HE
International Theosophist
Member of the human race but getting tired :-

------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins
||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and
CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org
|------------------------------------------