Daniel Caldwell Revealed?
Feb 14, 2006 07:55 AM
by carlosaveline cardoso aveline
Dear friend sin Theos-talk,
I would like to underline these final, tought-provoking
paragraphs in the latest text by Paul Johnson on
the real activities Daniel Caldwell seem to have been
making in the last years.
And this was the man who wanted to be been as
an honest editor on Helena Blavatsky?
But Daniel has the floor. Perhaps he will show us he is
innocent, or not-guilty (we can discuss that later).
Daniel? Will you tell us something?
Paul has my sincere congratulations.
Carlos Cardoso Aveline, from Brasília, Brazil.
Although I let my membership in the Adyar TS expire in 1996, two
years later I renewed it for a year when invited to participate in a
reformist effort called the Association of Concerned Theosophists.
ACT's focus was using the TS electoral system to counter the personal
autocracy of John Algeo and bring more freedom and openness to the
American Section. A notable feature of Green's online activity was
his complete disdain for critics of the Adyar TS, especially the
Association of Concerned Theosophists. He presented himself as
Australian, residing in Sydney, and was overtly disdainful of
Leadbeater and other post-Blavatskian figures in Theosophical
history, as well as of me:
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199808/tt00044.html
Look for his contemptuous, dismissive remarks to others like Richard
Ihle or John Crocker to get a feel for the function of his presence
at the time in Theosophical online discussion.
Another pattern of Green's postings was evident trolling, that is
stirring up antagonism, as evident in this exchange with Frank
Reitemeyer, designed to get *me* attacked:
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199906/tt00048.html
Caldwell and Green were/are both equally intent on creating
antagonism and trying to direct others' hostility toward targets
other than themselves. I have been the most frequent "beneficiary"
of such treatment from Caldwell, who has delighted in stirring up
fundamentalist Theosophists into rage against my books. But at least
that is straightforward, whereas when "Green" posted seemingly
favorable remarks about my books, in truth "he" was dishonestly
stirring up anger towards me and insuring that harsh reactions would
ensue directed not at him but at me. Caldwell befriended the ULT and
was lionized as a hero by them (some of them) as a great scholar and
ultimate rebutter-- while Green was furiously attacking them, that
helped created a paranoid and contentious atmosphere online which
served the purposes of no one but... ???
Who gains from all this? That's the big question,
Paul
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
From: "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World David Green and me
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:24:15 -0000
Dear friends,
My first post on David Green focused on his attacks on the ULT. But
another group disliked by Wheaton and Adyar was also the focus of his
contempt, a short-lived reform group to which I belonged in 1998.
Not long after I wrote a rebuttal to Daniel Caldwell's "House of
Cards" attack on my books that appeared on Professor David Lane's
website, I received an invitation from David Green to have it also
published on his Critical History website. He told me he was a
student writing a paper, not a Theosophist, and taking mainly a
critical view of the subject. For almost ten years now his site has
hosted material written by me, which I find discomfiting now in light
of the apparent fictitiousness of his persona. My online publisher
is a phantom, at best.
Although I let my membership in the Adyar TS expire in 1996, two
years later I renewed it for a year when invited to participate in a
reformist effort called the Association of Concerned Theosophists.
ACT's focus was using the TS electoral system to counter the personal
autocracy of John Algeo and bring more freedom and openness to the
American Section. A notable feature of Green's online activity was
his complete disdain for critics of the Adyar TS, especially the
Association of Concerned Theosophists. He presented himself as
Australian, residing in Sydney, and was overtly disdainful of
Leadbeater and other post-Blavatskian figures in Theosophical
history, as well as of me:
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199808/tt00044.html
Look for his contemptuous, dismissive remarks to others like Richard
Ihle or John Crocker to get a feel for the function of his presence
at the time in Theosophical online discussion.
Another pattern of Green's postings was evident trolling, that is
stirring up antagonism, as evident in this exchange with Frank
Reitemeyer, designed to get *me* attacked:
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199906/tt00048.html
Caldwell and Green were/are both equally intent on creating
antagonism and trying to direct others' hostility toward targets
other than themselves. I have been the most frequent "beneficiary"
of such treatment from Caldwell, who has delighted in stirring up
fundamentalist Theosophists into rage against my books. But at least
that is straightforward, whereas when "Green" posted seemingly
favorable remarks about my books, in truth "he" was dishonestly
stirring up anger towards me and insuring that harsh reactions would
ensue directed not at him but at me. Caldwell befriended the ULT and
was lionized as a hero by them (some of them) as a great scholar and
ultimate rebutter-- while Green was furiously attacking them, that
helped created a paranoid and contentious atmosphere online which
served the purposes of no one but... ???
Who gains from all this? That's the big question,
Paul
next: what about Terry Hobbes?
Yahoo! Groups Links
_________________________________________________________________
Seja um dos primeiros a testar o novo Windows Live Mail Beta.Acesse
http://www.ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
