Theos-Talk Archives (January 2009 Message tt00510)

Morten, you started this subject.

If you change one letter in it Democrazy
yes than you can see it as masspsychose as every one take that fo sure


Otherwise     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:

Democracy is a form of government in which power is held by " the 
people" under a free electoral system. It is derived from the Greek 
δημοκρατία (Ell-Dimokratia.ogg [dimokratia] (help·info)), "popular 
government"[1] which was coined from δήμος (dēmos), "people" and 
κράτος (kratos), "rule, strength" in the middle of the 5th-4th 
century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some 
Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 
BC.[2]

In political theory, democracy describes a small number of related 
forms of government and also a political philosophy. Even though 
there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy',[3] there 
are two principles that any definition of democracy includes. The 
first principle is that all members of the society have equal access 
to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized 
freedoms and liberties.[4][5][6]

There are several varieties of democracy some of which provide better 
representation and more freedoms for their citizens than others.[7]
[8] However, if any democracy is not carefully legislated to avoid an 
uneven distribution of political power with balances such as the 
separation of powers, then a branch of the system of rule is able to 
accumulate power in a way that is harmful to democracy itself.[9][10]
[11] The "majority rule" is often described as a characteristic 
feature of democracy, but without responsible government it is 
possible for the rights of a minority to be abused by the "tyranny of 
the majority". An essential process in representative democracies are 
competitive elections, that are fair both substantively[12] and 
procedurally[13]. Furthermore, freedom of political expression, 
freedom of speech and freedom of the press are essential so that 
citizens are informed and able to vote in their personal interests.
[14][15]

Popular sovereignty is common but not a universal motivating 
philosophy for establishing a democracy. In some countries, democracy 
is based on the philosophical principle of equal rights. Many people 
use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy, which 
may include additional elements such as political pluralism, equality 
before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress 
of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and 
elements of civil society outside the government. In the United 
States, separation of powers is often cited as a supporting 
attribute, but in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the 
dominant philosophy is parliamentary sovereignty (though in practice 
judicial independence is generally maintained). In other cases, 
"democracy" is used to mean direct democracy. Though the term 
"democracy" is typically used in the context of a political state, 
the principles are also applicable to private organizations and other 
groups.

Democracy has its origins in Ancient Greece.[16][17] However other 
cultures have significantly contributed to the evolution of democracy 
such as Ancient India[18], Ancient Rome[16], Europe[16], and North 
and South America.[19] Democracy has been called the "last form of 
government" and has spread considerably across the globe.[20] 
Suffrage has been expanded in many jurisdictions over time from 
relatively narrow groups (such as wealthy men of a particular ethnic 
group), but still remains a controversial issue with regard to 
disputed territories, areas with significant immigration, and 
countries that exclude certain demographic groups.







--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
theosophy@...> wrote:
>
> Dear friends
> 
> 
> My views are:
> 
> Let me be more precise about the below quote and emphasise the 
following passage
> and compare this with the present day democracies in the western 
part of the world.
> 
> Theosophy and politics:
> "Some vilify the Theosophical Society only because it presumes to 
attempt to do that in which other systems - Church and State 
Christianity pre-eminently - have failed most egregiously"
> .......
> "Will you revile and scoff at the "Sermon on the Mount" because 
your social, political and even religious laws have, so far, not only 
failed to carry out its precepts in their spirit, but even in their 
dead letter? Abolish the oath in Courts, Parliament, Army and 
everywhere, and do as the Quakers do, if you will call yourselves 
Christians. 
> .......
> "Abolish the Courts themselves, for if you would follow the 
Commandments of Christ, you have to give away your coat to him who 
deprives you of your cloak, and turn your left cheek to the bully who 
smites you on the right."
> http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm (H. P. Blavatsky)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M. Sufilight
> 
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Morten Nymann Olesen 
>   To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 7:23 PM
>   Subject: Re: Theos-World Can we see Obama as Hitler in Mass 
Psychosis.
> 
> 
>   Dear friends and all
> 
>   My views are:
> 
>   May I add the following?
> 
>   H. P. Blavatsky wrote in The Key to Theosophy, p. 53-55:
> 
>   "ENQUIRER. This is pure Altruism, I confess. 
> 
>   THEOSOPHIST. It is. And if only one Fellow of the T. S. out of 
ten would practise it ours would be a body of elect indeed. But there
> 
>   54
> 
>   are those among the outsiders who will always refuse to see the 
essential difference between Theosophy and the Theosophical Society, 
the idea and its imperfect embodiment. Such would visit every sin and 
shortcoming of the vehicle, the human body, on the pure spirit which 
sheds thereon its divine light. Is this just to either? They throw 
stones at an association that tries to work up to, and for the 
propagation of, its ideal with most tremendous odds against it. Some 
vilify the Theosophical Society only because it presumes to attempt 
to do that in which other systems - Church and State Christianity pre-
eminently - have failed most egregiously; others because they would 
fain preserve the existing state of things: Pharisees and Sadducees 
in the seat of Moses, and publicans and sinners revelling in high 
places, as under the Roman Empire during its decadence. Fair-minded 
people, at any rate, ought to remember that the man who does all he 
can, does as much as he who has achieved the most, in this world of 
relative possibilities. This is a simple truism, an axiom supported 
for believers in the Gospels by the parable of the talents given by 
their Master: the servant who doubled his two talents was rewarded as 
much as that other fellow-servant who had received five. To every man 
it is given "according to his several ability." 
> 
>   ENQUIRER. Yet it is rather difficult to draw the line of 
demarcation between the abstract and the concrete in this case, as we 
have only the latter to form our judgment by. 
> 
>   THEOSOPHIST. Then why make an exception for the T. S.? Justice, 
like charity, ought to begin at home. Will you revile and scoff at 
the "Sermon on the Mount" because your social, political
> 
>   55
> 
>   and even religious laws have, so far, not only failed to carry 
out its precepts in their spirit, but even in their dead letter? 
Abolish the oath in Courts, Parliament, Army and everywhere, and do 
as the Quakers do, if you will call yourselves Christians. Abolish 
the Courts themselves, for if you would follow the Commandments of 
Christ, you have to give away your coat to him who deprives you of 
your cloak, and turn your left cheek to the bully who smites you on 
the right. "Resist not evil, love your enemies, bless them that curse 
you, do good to them that hate you," for "whosoever shall break one 
of the least of these Commandments and shall teach men so, he shall 
be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven," and "whosoever shall 
say 'Thou fool' shall be in danger of hell fire." And why should you 
judge, if you would not be judged in your turn? Insist that between 
Theosophy and the Theosophical Society there is no difference, and 
forthwith you lay the system of Christianity and its very essence 
open to the same charges, only in a more serious form. "
> 
>   http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm
> 
>   What are your views about the above?
>   Are you disagreeing?
> 
>   M. Sufilight
> 
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: adelasie 
>   To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 4:16 PM
>   Subject: Re: Theos-World Can we see Obama as Hitler in Mass 
Psychosis.
> 
>   Christina,
> 
>   If I understand that your post is serious and that you really 
wish 
>   the list to consider your statements, I must say that your post 
is 
>   evidence of the same blindness and fear that HPB and all great 
>   teachers fought throughout the ages. Humanity has a choice: we 
can 
>   choose to reject progress along the path to enlightennent, to 
turn 
>   away from the Light and plunge ourselves again into future eons 
of 
>   man's inhumanity to man, and to all nature, or we can embrace the 
>   change that is coming and proceed with love and faith, hope and 
>   courage. Theosophy teaches the student to learn to think for 
himself, 
>   and, while you have the right to your opinion, it is important 
that 
>   all other students realize that intellectual manipulation of 
paranoia 
>   and fear-mongering, such as your post consists of, does not 
>   necessarily reflect truth. What it points to the most is the old 
>   saying, "We prefer the familiar darkness to the unfamiliar 
Light." 
> 
>   Theosophhy teaches the that all life is one. There is no them and 
us, 
>   no perpetrator and victim. We are all responsible for the 
conditions 
>   in which we live and for the leaders we have. We are not mindless 
>   automata, being led by some diabolical mastermind. Not unless we 
>   choose to be. This theory you propound is a good example of 
exactly 
>   the kind of thinking it professes to expose. The evidence is 
>   everywhere. Humanity has come to a crossroads and it is time to 
>   choose a new direction. This is why theosophy emerged when it 
did, 
>   why so many Great Souls have been working tirelessly to bring the 
>   realization to all humanity that it is time to be done with greed 
and 
>   selfishness, fear and dispair. 
> 
>   Take courage and take control of your own mind, of your own life. 
>   Look within your own heart if you want to know the truth. It is 
>   always there. Leave fear and anguish behind and step boldly 
forward 
>   into the Light that awaits us all, if we will only embrace it. 
> 
>   Adelaise
> 
>   On 20 Jan 2009 at 12:41, christinaleestemaker wrote:
> 
>   > 
>   > the use of NLP have all to do with it too.
>   > Christina
>   > 
>   > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "adelasie" <adelasie@> wrote:
>   > >
>   > > Christina,
>   > >
>   > > What does all this have to do with theosophy?
>   > >
>   > > Adelasie
>   > >
>   > > On 19 Jan 2009 at 20:53, christinaleestemaker wrote:
>   > >
>   > > >
>   > > > Obama's speeches are a mass of mind-control techniques and 
Neuro-
>   > > > Linguistic-Programming, or NLP, and they are carefully
>   > constructed to
>   > > > implant beliefs and perceptions into the mind of the 
viewer. Click
>   > > > here for a description of his psycho-babble, headed An
>   > Examination of
>   > > > Obama's Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches.
>   >
> 
>   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>    
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>