Theos-Talk Archives (March 1998 Message tl00170)

Hey all,

There was much of value in Ed's post, but I concur with Doss that
there is something wrong with keeping silent all that time and
then leaving while saying that the discussion should have been
something other than what it was.  This relates to my recent post
stimulated by simultaneous "Why don't *all of you* change the
subject to something *I* want to talk about" posts on two
different lists.

Theosophical politics is not my favorite subject by any means,
but many TSA members feel that there is something desperately
wrong in the section, a huge gap between the leadership and
member concerns.  It's a fine idea to work against letting one's
anger take over, but as Cayce said "A person who is never angry
isn't worth much, but one who is not in control of his anger is
worth even less."  Some kinds of injustice, hypocrisy,
manipulation, arrogance, evasiveness, and outright deception by
leadership *require* an angry reaction from the membership if
things are ever going to change.  It seems healthier to me to
look into all the facts, decide if the above terms characterize
the situation, allow oneself to feel anger about them, but then
*contructively channel* that energy into making TSA a more worthy
instrument of our collective will.

The more the leadership (and Ed is definitely in that camp by all
accounts I've heard) dismisses member concerns as subjective,
personal, inconsequential, the more members will conclude that
they are talking to a stone wall.  That's not what we elect board
or officers to be.

Cheers,
Paul