Theos-Talk Archives (November 1996 Message tl00143)

Dear Patrick,

I suggest to stop at this point and not to continue this discussion. This
list is not the best forum to discuss political issues. They should be
addressed, but not on this list, IMO. We saw numerous conflicting views of
Mahatmas, theosophy, the founders, etc. presented on the list; we are
witnessing the rise of other divisive perspectives on theosophy on
this list. All that resulted in sharp divide and promises more splits and
confrontation, which is betrayal of the spirit of theosophy. Right now we
are about to create two (or more) new flavors of theosophy--a Democratic
theosophy and a Republican theosophy. We may end up arguing that God
and Mahatmas are with Democrats or Republicans, as the case may be.

Why not concentrate on what is being done and can be really done to further
the theosophical objectives? Some of those on the list (including you)
are doing WONDERFUL job by disseminating theosophical information on
the Web and elsewhere; this is real, this is going to last, rather than
futile attempts to convert other list participants.

In-depth discussion of theosophical teachings (like the recent discussion
of the Isis Unveiled material) would be another useful activity. That may
be done without screaming, feeling threatened by others' assertions, etc.

Max

On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Patrick Alessandra Jr. wrote:

> Regarding the many problems we see played for us daily, the solution
> based on the writings of the Mahatmas is on the www at:
> http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/ecosolu.html
>
> Some thoughts:
>
> > The next four years of divided government can go two ways,
> > basically the Gingrich way or the Clinton way.
>
>      The Gingcrich way, as those who wisely ignore the popular media
> know, is the right way of sustainable solutions.  The Clinton way is the
> way of centralized dictatorship.  The proof is found in their respective
> legislative proposals.
>      The governmental style emphasized by the Mahatmas is one of maximum
> freedom (the opposite of Clinton's approach).
> See http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/ecosolu.html

<the rest is cut>