Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00340)

At 01:27 AM 12/15/96 +0000, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jhe@toto.csustan.edu> wrote:

>JRC
>>HQ has for some time gotten away with an enormous number of
>>things that are, IMO, quite corrupt, because they had almost
>>complete control over the means of discussion among the
>>membership. On this list they do not, but the intensity of
>>dissent voiced here is not a negative quality of the list, but
>>rather a symptom of deep dissent within the Society that has no
>>other outlet - and any thought that anyone should restrain the
>>tone or content of their dissent on this list makes me very
>>uncomfortable - as its the only place where dissent can even
>>speak. And that is directly due to the actions of HQ.

>JHE
>If your view expresses anything near a consensus of opinion on
>theos-l, this board has the potential of becoming a significant
>balance to the Wheaton oligarchy.  I hope it is.
>
>I would like to add that the censorship within the Adyar
>(Wheaton) TS goes further than controlling National elections and
>now Lodge assets.  The Organization's control over the
>publications that you mentioned also has a lot to do with what we
>*think* we know about the history of the TS and the ideas it
>promulgated.

I have no information on which to base a definite opinion about any
specifics of the "Wheaton oligarchy" except that I personally think very
highly of one of the ex-national officers who is a member of my lodge, but I
do not see any necessary problem in their publishing some books and not
others.  They have to draw the line somewhere.  Should they publish "Mein
Kampf?"  Or does this imply a misunderstanding of the degree to which they
censor material which is clearly relevant to Theosophy?  Krishnamurti has
been a controversial subject within the TS, but we have his books in our
library and we discuss his ideas at our meetings.  From what I have seen,
they should be _more_ selective about their material, not less.  I cannot
imagine what motive anyone in the TS would have for wanting to use their
power to suppress alternative opinions, except that the material is
considered harmful to Theosophy.  Is it a personal battle?