Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00299)

Dear Ramadoss and Nigel,


Ramadoss writes:

> Since most of the leadership belong to a pre-Internet generation I think 
> they still do not understand Internet - the 800 lb gorilla in the living 
> room -- and how it is not going to go away. With the coming generation 
> growing up in the Internet culture, the organizations are going to be run 
> over by the usage of Internet by the upcoming generation and we may see a 
> totally different "organizational" environment with a total level field 
> with no leader leading the followers just like a bunch of sheep.
I believe that in spite the optimistic predictions, the fate of the 
Internet is still in the process of being determined. I notice that 
some of the very things which make the Internet great are also portents 
for its subversion into something else that is not so great. Its even 
playing field and lack of enforcibility may be ideal for "free speech." 
On the other hand, those same characteristics allow for spamming, 
computer viruses, and trolling in discussion groups. My guess is that 
the likly issue which will bring about the development of technology for 
and the passing of legislation to control the Internet will either be 
public outrage over pronography, or fear about its potential use for 
terrorism. However, the real forces which will put controls over the 
Internet will have to do with corporate interest in its profit potential. 
I also believe that it is a bit idealistic to think that the Internet 
will be the instrument to bring "truth" to the masses. Since, at this 
time, no one controls the rhetoric; truths, half-truths, lies, and 
dis-information indescriminately flows over its bandwaves. It will 
disseminate one brand of propaganda just as easily as another. To 
seperate fact from fiction requires a critical mind and an investimet of 
time for personal research into the issues. Few people have the 
education or training to do this, and even less have the time or 
inclination to do it anyway. Rather, the majority of people determine 
what is true and what is not on the bases of their loyalty to a 
particular group. I have seen ample evidence that TS members as a whole 
are no different than anyone else in this respect. Indeed, the Internet 
is an 800 pound gorilla. But who will tame it? 

Nigel writes:

> Moreover, where the "politics" are sufficiently dishonourable, how 
> does one in good conscience continue to support an organisation which 
> continues to support such hypocrisy, whose motto is "There is no 
> religion higher than Truth. And would one really wish to attract 
> people to such an organisation in the name of Theosophy?
> Best wishes
We wrestled with that one too. The solution we found was to organize 
our own study groups, classes and conferences independently of the 
Organizations. We just study Theosophy without politics. Last year, a 
couple of our members got curious and looked up Theosophy on the 
Internet. They learned about the organizations and camps and decided 
that they were going to go to Far Horizons Theosophical Camp in the 
Sierras. We said "great! You'll love it there." They sent for a 
schedule. To their disappointment, they saw nothing on the schedule 
which they considered "Theosophy." Lots of new age stuff, but they 
didn't care about that. So they ended up not going to the camp. 
Are we as an independent group competing against the Theosophical 
Organizations? Not in my mind. We just do what I believe TSA should 
have been doing all along, and did not want us to do in their 
organization. So, we do it on our own. Those who like what we are dong 
come to us. Those who like what TSA is doing, goes to them. 
Jerry






MKR wrote:

> Noticing the pattern of absence of officials of organizations in maillists 
> one can only come to the conclusion you mentioned.
>
> In addition, there *appears* to be a subtle attempt to ensure that even the 
> followers do not become aware of the maillists which are not controlled 
> (censored) by the organization. Several years ago, when theos-L, the first 
> maillist was launched, I became aware of it through a casual conversation 
> with a theosophist. In those days the search engines were very primitive 
> and were not of much help.
>
> When I inquired the TS organization about the maillist, I could not get any 
> info on theos-l even though the organization was fully aware of theos-l and 
> the subscription details -- like when you are in legal deposition, if you 
> do not ask the right question you will not get the right info even though 
> the responder is fully aware of the information the questioner was seeking. 
> Subsequently during a long distance tele-conversation with a theosophist 
> 2,000 miles away I found the info about theos-l and the kind person faxed 
> me the subscription details.
>
> Since most of the leadership belong to a pre-Internet generation I think 
> they still do not understand Internet - the 800 lb gorilla in the living 
> room -- and how it is not going to go away. With the coming generation 
> growing up in the Internet culture, the organizations are going to be run 
> over by the usage of Internet by the upcoming generation and we may see a 
> totally different "organizational" environment with a total level field 
> with no leader leading the followers just like a bunch of sheep.
>
> The particular Board member who once chose to post a msg here appears to be 
> a newbee. While his ideal intentions are laudable, he cannot not be 
> independent since it appears he is an *employee* of TSA; if he want to be 
> independent it may cost his job. So I do not expect to see him again on 
> this list. But miracles do take place -- who knows.
>
> mkr
>
>
> At 02:50 PM 05/08/05 -0700, Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote:
>
>
> > Providing the average member owns a computer and has an interest in
> > internet discussion groups. Yet, even the minority who do so, are only
> > addressing each other. Notice also, that the Management of the
> > Theosophical organizations do not participate in these discussions. One
> > Board member made a post a few months ago, and we never hear from
> > again. No doubt someone had a talk with him. TSA officials are
> > discouraged from this kind of activity. Their participation would level
> > the playing field--i.e. they would risk losing control of the rhetoric.