From: Soror Timshel Area: RPSTOVAL To: Gerald Del Campo 12 Jun 92 16:01:00 Subject: DON QUIXOTE UpdReq 93, dude. Amazing - just checked out this part of the BBS for the 1st time, only to find you fighting the endless hoards of Thelemic bitchers and whiners. It's amazing - there are still people out there who expect the perfect magickal order in their perfect white robes, and will complain ENDLESSLY about any deviation from that expectation. People, get with it--any group of two or more people will provide enough political battles and bad policy decisions to keep you in BBS debates for the next century. The OTO was never designed to be a democracy (see Crowley on the subject of Democracy, and see our current political system for proof he was right). In addition, from everything I've seen (which is considerable) the EC and HB are committed, dedicated Thelemites, doing their best to keep the Order going. There's no evil plot to foil your right to be free. I really wish you guys could spend some time (SERVE some time) in some other Magickal Orders I could name - you'd never complain of a lack of freedom again. Keep at it Gerald - if you can stomach it. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Dionysia Marqueza Area: RPSTOVAL To: Soror Timshel 13 Jun 92 11:39:08 Subject: Re: DON QUIXOTE UpdReq 93 Timshelheart... ...you strike several chords with me... T> "... It's amazing - there are still people out there who expect the perfect magickal order in their perfect white robes, and will complain ENDLESSLY about any deviation from that expectation..." I have noted this at many times, in many times, in many places... and have even fallen prey to it myself, a time or three. I find it particularily sad and ironic that it seems to be a common current within the thelemic community: it would seem that an order that purports to stress the importance of individual Will would be anathema to someone who wants standard-issue, homogeneous magick or philosophy. I grant, I perceive part of the "sense" of thelema to be the hope that the individual who fully realizes their Will may therefor be in greater concert with all other's Will within their sphere... but I -don't- see this as everyone doing the same thing, the same way, *all the time*. In mentioning expectation, I feel you have made the precise point. Expectation has so much of the realm of illusion about it: a construct of one's own mind and experience alone... it is not without a certain validity, but I feel that the validity is limited to one's self, and that alone. More and more, when I think about expectation, I am minded of... "... For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is in every way perfect." ...not a bad anthem for magick-users, I think. T > "... --any group of two or more people will provide enough political battles and bad policy decisions to keep you in BBS debates for the next century. The OTO was never designed to be a democracy (see Crowley on the subject of Democracy, and see our current political system for proof he was right). In addition, from everything I've seen (which is considerable) the EC and HB are committed, dedicated Thelemites, doing their best to keep the Order going. There's no evil plot to foil your right to be free. Everso. I see nothing to indicate that being a Magister of -any- sort automaticaly invested one with good sense, people skills or even immunity from stepping in shit. ( A personal note: the present GSG of the Grand Lodge seems to me a remarkable exception to the forgoing... but then, he seems to work diligently that this be so. ) Often, I have found this to be quite the opposite: there is that in arcane pursuit that seems to favor (or predispose, either way,) a certain type of tunnel vision, where mundane (hah!) matters of human society and governance are concerned. Therefor, I feel that -any- magickal community is likely to suffer a greater than ordinary degree of political battles, etc.. Part of the territory, and by no means insurmountable, I feel. One the subject of democracy, the best definition I have found is this: Democracy: four wolves and a lamb voting on a lunch menu. I am of differing minds on the subject: there -is- a certain allure in the idea of people making their own goverment on a basis of consensus... however, I feel that, in most cases, majority rule *sucks*. But then, I am seldom of the majority opinion. Too, I am the end product of families that long held to monarchic and clan forms of government and society... this -does- color my views, I know. Being still a neophyte within the Order, I know rather little of the doings of the Electoral College and Hymenaeus Beta... from what I -have- seen, I have developed a feeling that HB is a very dedicated person, doing the best he can by the Order as a -whole-. Of course, he may err in judgement now and again- he is human, as are we all, and that degree of fallible for it. Why is this so monstrous a thing to some people, I do not know. My experience has been such that I see there to be as much to be learned from error as from perspicasity, if not more... >sigh< ...but I am often considered to be odd in my views, too. Primarily, I see HB as a man who has chosen to serve others, *as best he may* - not perfectly without error, but perfectly with all his will, all his heart. This seems a very thelemic mode of being to me. Would that we could all do so well... Love under Will- not just the Law, it's a damn good idea! Dio 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: David Stein Area: RPSTOVAL To: Edward Wolfe 13 Jun 92 13:49:06 Subject: Re: continuation: Thelema and Politics Sent UpdReq Greetings, Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. -=> Quoting Edward Wolfe to Gerald Del Campo <=- EW> The Electoral College, as the sum of it's parts, is simply damned. EW> To say it is run by a bunch of idiots, would perhaps be an undeserved EW> compliment. If there is one thing our Order does not have, it is a EW> just political body that is genuinely concerned with the precepts of EW> Thelema. EW> GDC> Hmmm. On what experience do you base this grim view of the EC? Do GDC> you know who they are? EW> EW> It is irrelevant who they are, or if I know them. I judge the EW> Electoral College not as individual members or peers, but as the sum EW> total of their collective minds (the ability to carry out the task set EW> to them in an acceptable manner to myself) which is manifested in the EW> form of their judgements. I agree with you on the point of the manner with which you judge a particular thelemic organization upon. But, what experience do you base your quote of "To say it is run by a bunch of idiots, would perhaps be an undeserved compliment" upon? That is a rather strong statement to make without an explanation of your experience with the E.C. to follow. You merely answered the question in terms of how you went about judging the E.C., instead of giving an example of their folly. EW> Ask yourself this: EW> EW> What have they done to further the Law of Thelema? What have YOU done to further the Law of Thelema? An Order of ANY kind is dependant upon it's members completely. You get what you put into it. If you don't do anything, yet complain that nothing is being done, how can you expect any Law to be promulgated with only a few acting governmental authorities pushing it? It all depends on who accepts the Law of Thelema, and who practices what they preach. Whether individually or in an Order such as O.T.O., actions of new initiates will decide upon Thelema's growth in the world. (Sort of like encouraging teenagers, who have just turned 18, to vote.) EW> EW> What have they done to constrict it? Why don't you tell us? EW> These days it is best to learn Thelema not from our "illustrious" EW> Caliph or the Electoral College, but from the honest folk (and truth EW> seekers) that are drawn to the Order by the ideals they believe it to EW> uphold. EW> GDC> You say "These days", but I think it has alway been thus. I still GDC> enquire about your knowledge of our "illustrious leader" and of the GDC> Electoral College. Opinions such as yours can only be taken serious GDC> if one has either experience or knowledge of what he or she GDC> says...care to enlighten me? EW> EW> ****UNTHELEMIC**** ****UNTHELEMIC**** ****UNTHELEMIC**** EW> ****UNTHELEMIC**** EW> [alarm bells and sirens going off] EW> EW> An opinion such as mine, is just that-- An opinion. EW> EW> I needn't justify any of my reasons. An opinion is fine, so long as you let someone either accept or reject it themselves. So far, you have not given any examples which support your rather strong opinion of the E.C. You have, however, critizised them with childlike mannerisms with no examples to back your claim. This, of course, is only MY opinion, of which I am also entitled to. Un-Thelemic? No, I just don't understand where you are coming from. If you would explain your point in a better manner, perhaps my opinion will change (if you would enlighten me,) but you are not required to, that is merely up to you and your own Will. If you want to get a point across, sometimes justifying your reasons is the best path to undertake, as it helps in learning how to communicate with other human beings such as yourself. EW> EW> ***However! EW> EW> Since _you_ have willfully taken it upon yourself to prove me wrong-- EW> EW> It is actually now _your_ perogative to justify _your_ reasons why you EW> feel _my_ judgements of the EC are in error. How might we be able to judge your statements of the E.C. and find them in error without examples of their errors? Where are the examples? EW> In truth, however, it's not the higher ups that have the freedom. EW> It's the lower ranks of the Man of Earth triad. They are not yet EW> "dynamic", and can blend in amongst the ranks, being partially ignored EW> as "just another minerval" (or first, etc). EW> GDC> If you are mistreated or ignored as just another Minerval or First, GDC> perhaps you should check out other OTO bodies, as this seems to me, to GDC> be a local problem. I have not witnessed that kind of behavior where GDC> I was "brought up": it simply is not tolerated. EW> EW> You're probably right. I think he's right too... But how were you mistreated? EW> And being relatively unimportant, they can pretty much be themselves, EW> having no Ego to appease... EW> GDC> This is quite an assumption, considering that 9 out of 10, it is the GDC> Ego that brings candidates to the Order, of course; the drive for GDC> Truth is a big player in the whole process as well. Anyway, my GDC> experience is the reverse of what you say; perhaps travelling a bit to GDC> see how other bodies handle themselves would be a rewarding GDC> experience. EW> EW> Interesting. Indeed, both our perceptions are different/reversed! What's your perception? You failed to mention it! EW> EW> I've only been to a handful of different bodies. I hope to visit more EW> in the near future. EW> It's sad to point out, that even in the Order, _OUR ORDER_, the will EW> of the mass has begun to stifle the will of the individual. However, EW> hope is not lost... Time brings change. Or should, at any rate. How has it stifled the Will of the individual? Mabey it's stifled YOUR Will, but it certainly has not stifled mine! Just because you have a problem with the Order, don't assume that everyone else feels the same way as you do. GDC> Could you explain this? The Order has a responsibility to ALL of its GDC> members. Should the Order allow one or two individuals to destroy the GDC> harmony of the rest of the membership? Do you consider this GDC> UnThelemic? EW> EW> "The Order" is but a lifeless shell. EW> EW> It has no responsibility to anyone. EW> EW> It all comes down to the individual actions of individual members. Exactly! But why didn't you keep this in mind when you came up with what you said earlier? It seems that you are contradicting yourself. The Order doesn't owe you anything. You owe the order, because you joined it. Just like you said, "It all comes down to the individual actions of individual members." EW> Down with the Order! EW> Down with the Electoral College! EW> Down with Protesting(!?) Contradictory? Egotistical? Ignorant? Hypocritical? It's hard to tell, I haven't seen anything that I can perceive as being otherwise from you besides these points... Just my opinion, but until you can prove me otherwise, it'll stay just that. Love is the law, love under will. David Stein 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718