Re: Theos-World Re: What Is Happening In America?
Jul 16, 2003 11:01 AM
by Bart Lidofsky
Pendragon wrote:
I always felt the most comfortable when reading the old original edition of
the Theosophist or Lucifer. Just to hold those old volumes in hand, with
their yellowish paper half falling apart, gives you quite a different force.
By not-so-strange coincidence, that was my intention in looking up the
original quote (for some reason, I thought that it wasn't in the CW) in
the Beller Library of the New York Theosophical Society. However, as the
librarian of that library happens to be Michael Gomes, and I needed to
get his permission to look through the old magazines (they have them in
bound collections), I strongly suspect that he would have given me the
information without my having to physically go into them.
I looked up information on the Communards, and found that there are a
lot of parallels between them and many branches of Communism, which is
why Zirkoff substituted the word. I have not looked into the other
mentions of Communism as based in Blavatsky.
In any case, if one looks at the works of Engels, and the works of the
Institute for Marxism aka Institute for Social Research aka The
Frankfurt School, and the writings that led up to the creation of the
latter, it looks like much of what became, in the 1960's, "the New Left"
is based on total fictions; things like a matriarchal society in the
past that lived in total peace, that cultures are invented and imposed
upon people rather than evolving, and that anarchy inevitably leads to
Communism. This is largely based on extreme postmodernist concepts that,
because we cannot perceive reality in an entirely objective manner, then
there is no such thing as objective reality, and that reality is
whatever the majority believes it is (socialist George Orwell took this
point of view to its extreme in his work, "1984").
Note that this is not the case with the entire Communist movement; by
the 1970's, the Soviet Union had largely disavowed the Frankfurt School
philosophies (as did, to a lesser extent, China after Mao Tze-Tung's
death). There are many who would be considered to be on the left, even
the far left, who do not accept this point of view either (notable
examples include activist lawyer Ron Kuby, political humorist Michael
Moore, and past presidential candidate Ralph Nader).
In the Quaker Church, there is a concept that they call "consensus".
They meet together to discuss a problem, and they do not come to a
decision until everybody understands everybody else's point of view.
Note that agreement is not necessary; merely understanding. When one
reaches a point where one has to change the facts in order to justify
one's opinion, or say that the facts are not facts, then one is blocked
in reaching the truth. Also, when a truth is reached from the wrong
direction, it is like creating a skyscraper with no foundation. I have
no problem with criticism of the United States; it is when this
criticism is founded on lies and half-truths that I have a problem. But
once one is willing to start with the conclusion, carefully select the
evidence that leads up to it, ignore any evidence to the contrary, and,
if the evidence does not exist, make it up, then it becomes hard to see
the other's point of view. That, in my opinion, goes against the
principles of Theosophy, as I see them; it is creating a skyscraper with
no foundation. Other's mileage may vary.
Bart Lidofsky
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application