Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00388)

Alexis:

[writing to JRC]

Your personal reply to JRC below leave me a bit puzzled.

>That is wonderful! I thank you very much your deep knowledged
>of the subject has made it perfectly clear what the real situation
>on this list is.

JRC did post some interesting trivia on Chinese history, but it
had very little to do with my original post where I used the
term in the "subject" line, with reference to your project to
insure that there would be nothing religious in any future
theosophical group.

>It is a honor to be slandered with a person like you for company.

A mutual flattery club? And "slandered"? Where do you get this
ideas from???

>Keep in there buddy, I'm getting all sorts of private messages that
>tell me we five are not alone, and that there are some very nice
>folks out there who agree with what we've been saying.

You seem to be drawing up "battle lines", a us-versus-them grouping
of people on theos-l. I don't see any such lines of demarcation,
except along certain issues like the controversial nature of psychic
development and disagreement on if there are definite doctrines to
theosophy. I don't think that you have an exclusive claim to the
sympathies of "nice people".

>When I made it clear I was thinking of removing myself from this
>list, they all came on asking me to stay on as they found what I had
>to say valuable and helpful.

But your not *the only valuable person*, nor your favorite group of
writers. We're all valuable to the people that appreciate what we're
writing.

>That goes double for you from me. You are the only member of the
>"five" who can really deal with some of the folks who coin epithets
>like "Gang of Four".

You have an unfortunate tendency to use quite strong, negative
language in dealing with people you don't agree with. I'd disagree
that JRC is able to "deal with some of the folks who coin epithets",
but I have experienced some long, angry blasts from him. Some of
them I've taken time to respond to, but I've always tried to be
even-handed with him, and not simply dismiss much of what he says
as nonsense, or using the even stronger language that you're inclined
to use. I always try to allow his views, which I consider most
definitely wrong, a right to peacefully coexist on theos-l, a right
to exist in mutual tolerance. He has continually failed to acknowledge
my posts in that regard, always asserting his views but never responding
to any suggestion of mutual tolerance.

It would be nice if your "group" would practice the same Universal
Brotherhood on theos-l that you speak so highly of in the abstract.
(And by practicing it, I don't mean a snappy reply from JRC saying,
"Radha's mean to T.S. members, so the T.S. has no brotherhood, so
that's the pot calling the kettle black, so shut up, you fool!" That
would simply be an evasion of practicing Universal Brotherhood, and
tend to reveal that there was no real intention of practicing it
in the first place.

How can you expect me, or people reading your postings, to maintain
a respectful attitude toward you and what you say, when you let
your words get careless, become hurtful, and sound like you're trying
to pick a fight? I don't think that is your intention, but the words
you use are definitely provocative.

In peace,

Eldon