Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00674)

>To: liesel@dreamscape.com
>Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:20:38 +0300
>From: Kay Ziatz <Kay_Ziatz@p4.f360.n5020.z2.fidonet.org>
>Reply-To: Kay Ziatz <Kay_Ziatz@p4.f360.n5020.z2.fidonet.org>
>Subject: re: Yours of 18/VI
>
>Hello!
> l > yesterday and today. So maybe they'll tell me tomorrow.
>You may not harry. Anyway, it will take time for me to know how to
>transfer
>the money. Our financial system isn't so developed yet as in USA ;)
>
> l > We have a small library a few blocks from my house, which
>Do you provide theosophical book for this library?
>I think schoolboys may be more perceptive for theosophical ideas because
>they have less prejudices and "gestalts".
>
> l > They haven't caught on to Theosophy from you as yet.
>I don't try still to force the process. Some theosophists here think
>that books like "Secret doctrine" & "Mahatma letters" should be leaved as
>"service documentation" for private use, and when we talk to people we
>try to use more common books like Bible or Bhagavad-gita, giving them
>a theosophical interpretation. Here's a strong prejudice against theosophy
>and reaction of some people to the name of Blavatsky is similiar to bull's
>reaction to a red muleta. But the same people accept these teachings when
>we speal it out as our own opinion.
>
> l > better, if the workers didn't have someone standing over them to tell
>Bailey writes that one of Mahatmas is monitoring & directing workers move-
>ment. Also she writes that Communism, Socialism and Democracy are three
>different aspects of one thing and they should come to compromise.
>
> l > I think Lenin was too Machiavellian, and
>I know very little of Machiavelli. BTW, here in Moscow recently opened a
>little monument to him. Anyway, Lenin's theory & praxis didn't match.
>In USSR state played main role in all affairs, but in his basic work
>"State & revolution" Lenin wrote that communism and state are incompatible
>things. "State is an apparatus for exploating one class by another" (Thus
>said Marx or Lenin - i forgot). But it's a wrong idea that Lenin was a
>good man and Stalin spoiled his work. I've recently read in newspaper that
>a quantity of Lenin's victims were 3 times greater than Pol-Pot's in Cam-
>bodia. He ordered to close all theaters. Full cultural life was restored
>in early Stalin times (1924-30). After a war 1941-45 Stalin changed ideo-
>logy to national-socialist. He prohibited jazz, etc. So in 1949-85 young
>people were angry mostly not because of lack of meal and human rights
>breaking, but because of constant campaigns against jazz, rock'n'roll,
>hard rock, jeans, etc. The only bonus was that ugly contemporary archi-
>tecture penetrated to USSR only after 1960, althrough it practiced ab-
>road since 1920's.
>
> l> was altogether crazy. Looks like Yeltsin is going to make it. He's
>already
> l> negotiating with L (I forget ihis name ... the man who came in third.)
>You mean general Lebedh? Most people here think that it's very good
>alliance.
>I think american TV & papers draw him as dangerous nationalist, but he's
>not. I've seen some american TV programms - they remind soviet TV of
>70s-80s.
>I don't mean the style, althrough sometimes it similiar, too, but a prin-
>ciple of information filtering. I don't know about domestic TV services, i
>mean big networks like CNN. Returning to Lebedh - his economical programme
>was most liberal of all: state will not rule economy, it has only to
>collect
>taxes & provide security. Lebedh stopped war conflict in Moldavia. It was
>only success of all similiar conflicts - in Yugoslavia, Chechnia, etc.
>It's true - maybe Lebedh is very simple man, (have you seen TV series
>"Sledge Hammer"?) Yes, he's patriot, but he's not a nationalist. We
>hope that he could decrease corruption. In first two days of this partner-
>ship four most odious people were displaced - minister of defence, chief
>of KGB, chief of security councel and chief of presidents bodyguards. I
>know many people in the west apologize Gorbachov, but what have he done?
>Suppose, you live in USA, it's still superpower, but it's not all right
>with economy (like before Reagan, but a bit worse). New president comes
>and after his rule California declares independence, in Texas begins war,
>meal products desappear, Canada and Mexico join Warsaw pact. All foreign
>markets lost, USA converts to a 3-rd world country. How do you think,
>will people be grateful? :)  Of course, he introduced some freedoms
>and human rights, but it doesn't matter to paisants, workers, etc.
>My chief and other people in my workingplace voted for Lebedh, because
>they hate Yeltzin & Gorbachov for decreasing scientific programms support.
>They dont wanna return of communists, too. Who remains? Nazi Zhirinovsky?
>(Yavlinsky isn't very popular for splitting democrates).
>
>Oh, i have to end my long letter because now 2.40 a.m. & i wanna sleep...