Theos-Talk Archives (July 2008 Message tt00112)

Having been in the Indian and US environment, I find people in India are
generally not known to be extrovert and talkative in a group setting. Mostly
they tend to be quiet and low key and not much given to little talk. On the
other hand, in the USA, people tend to be outgoing and try to introduce
themselves and engage in a conversation. So one's interaction with others
seems to be a function of the environment. My 0.02.

mkr

On 7/11/08, Cass Silva <silva_cass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>   Unfortunately Paul, the gods do not intervene with mans political
> machinations.  One has to have a certain amount of arrogance to believe that
> they are the best leader of any organization.  I met Radha Burnier in
> Melbourne some 15 years ago now.  I was unexpectedly invited by a senior
> member of the organization to attend an afternoon tea at a nearby Hotel
> arranged for Radha.  She never made one attempt to speak with me.  This left
> the lasting impression on me that she is not interested in the rank and
> file.  I have no dilemma with her or Algeo leading the TS in the same way I
> couldn't care less which Pope got elected.  This to me is a simple case of
> power.
> Cass
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: kpauljohnson <kpauljohnson@yahoo.com <kpauljohnson%40yahoo.com>>
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, 12 July, 2008 5:38:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Dynasty subverting Democracy
>
> Chuck,
>
> I've been thinking about this and decided Radha was as fated by
> heredity to be in her position as any monarch, and that is not an
> enviable hand to have been dealt in one's life. Yes, she could have
> chosen not to run in 1980, but with Krishnamurti telling you to run
> and if you're seriously worried about the direction Aunt Rukmini will
> take the TS, what would you do?
>
> It's unfair to talk about arrogance on Radha's part without having
> met her and having heard people say she can be very pleasant
> company. But there is an inherent arrogance about thinking you're in
> a position for life because of tradition. Likewise, Charles Thomas
> Cayce is a very nice and good man who got dragged into a role by
> heredity that he didn't have a whole lot of choice about accepting.
> But he managed to end the Cayce dynasty without dying, which is very
> much to his credit. I hope he is enjoying his retirement.
>
> Paul
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, Drpsionic@.. . wrote:
> >
> > Dynasties ultimately end because they die off.? The problem with
> the TS is that because Theosophists live for so damned long it takes
> a while for it to happen.
> >
> > Chuck the Heretic
> >
> >
> > http://www.geocitie s.com/c_cosimano
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: kpauljohnson <kpauljohnson@ ...>
> > To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
> > Sent: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 6:42 am
> > Subject: Theos-World Dynasty subverting Democracy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hey,
> >
> > One passage in Betty's article really strikes me as worth
> discussing
> > here. "Other longtime friends and supporters of Radha urged her to
> > step down, but she expressed her wish to stay in office for life.
> > Although lifetime service in the office of president has been in
> our
> > history, it is not necessarily a healthy practice, as it allows the
> > possibility of an autocratic leadership instead of a transparent
> > democracy."
> >
> > The only edit I'd suggest is to replace "allows the possibility"
> > to "ensures the inevitability" -- but then I can trash the entire
> > leadership history of the TS with no qualms, whereas in Betty's
> > position I can see a need for a certain evasiveness :) But at least
> > she gestures in the general direction of the elephant in the room.
> >
> > I started the primary season without any strong feelings
> for/against
> > any of the Democratic candidates, but almost daily had reason to
> move
> > towards an "anyone but Clinton" position. Why? Mainly because Bill
> > Clinton constantly made it evident that he saw a Hillary nomination
> > as a restoration of a dynasty-- while also giving people reason to
> > dread such a development. Needless to add, hope I never live to see
> > another Bush darken the doorway of the White House and the history
> of
> > the world. An idiot like Dubya would never have had a chance if his
> > last name had been Smith. But India has had the same problem, an
> > ostensible democracy where people repeatedly installed the
> > Nehru/Gandhi dynasty because the popular imagination was still
> stuck
> > in the era of the maharajas. And the TS dynastic corruption of
> > democracy is arguably worse than either of the above examples, as
> for
> > 50 the last 57 years the presidency is in hands of a father and
> > daughter. I'd like to think the overwhelming Indian vote for Radha
> > was about rejecting Algeo, but surely it is all about blindly
> > supporting dynasty.
> >
> > So now we know that Radha basically feels entitled by TS history to
> a
> > lifetime tenure regardless of her health or the effect on the
> > Society. (Assuming the Betty is correct, and she said something
> > along these lines the only time we had a personal conversation, in
> > Maryland in 1999.) But what evidence is there that John Algeo is
> any
> > less arrogant or entitled-feeling, or wouldn't hang on to the age
> of
> > 110 if given the chance? None AFAIK.
> >
> > BTW, the ARE finally moved away from dynasty, after leadership
> > passing from Edgar to Hugh Lynn to Charles Thomas over a 70 year
> > span. There is finally a non-Cayce in charge, and no Cayce heir
> > apparent in sight looking for a restoration. Are there any young
> > Shastrys or Algeos waiting in the wings to run the TS throughout
> this
> > century? I gather not, so perhaps the curse of dynastic corruption
> > of [ALLEGED] TS democracy will be lifted within our lifetimes.
> >
> > PJ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
> Start at the new Yahoo!7 for a better online experience. www.yahoo7.com.au
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]