Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00321)

Daniel,

After twenty years, in most cases, I couldn't even tell you "exactly" 
what my words were, let alone someone else's. Further, I think you have 
been around the TS long enough to have at least intuited that when an 
action is taken against an activity, lodge, individual etc. the 
officially stated reasons rarely have much to do with what is really 
going on. In the TS information travels through what is called "the 
Theosophical grapevine." It is not recorded in the journals, and 
questions aimed at tracing the source of the information typically 
brings the answer: "I heard it on good authority." Even that inner 
group meeting at Lake Geneva I mentioned in an earlier post is not 
documented in any way. There was no written announcement of that 
meeting, no notes were taken, no tape recorder was running. Even at the 
level of the National Board, those who attend those meetings are told 
not to discuss what goes on. "Privacy" is given as the reason. But 
there is more to it than that. Much is discussed and done which does 
not show up in the official minutes. I know this from corroborating 
statements from several different Board members of the past. Though 
there are occasional leaks. Ever since the days of Besant, the mode for 
maintaining control has been passive aggressive. Few members are aware 
of this, unless they happen to get caught up in one of the currents. 
Even then, they often don't get it. If you are interested in how these 
things work, you have to look at the underlying process. Published 
official statements and "talking points" never reveal the true 
complexities. I am not suggesting conspiracy theories. I'm trying to 
describe how the political side of any institution which has to deal 
with a large voting membership works to maintain power. The TS is no 
exception. 
--j




Daniel H. Caldwell wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> You wrote:
>
> =============================================
> Also keep in mind that because of conversations 
> I have had with John Algeo, Joy Mills and Shirley 
> Nicholson, I was already perfectly aware of their 
> attitudes towards the Networking movement.
> =============================================
>
> Did they ever specifically say why they were
> AGAINST the Networking movement? 
> And exactly what were John Algeo's words that
> lead non-Adyar members to come to the conclusion
> you have stated?
>
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links