The Theosophical Organization
The Theosophical Society has a directly elected president. The main question asked here is: should that election procedure be changed?
DRAFT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SOCIETY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.
The below poll is based on the proposed amendments: what I consider the most important points out if it. I've followed the order of the document for easier reference. The numbers before each poll question refers to the number on the amendment.
The most important issues seem to have been resolved due to massive unrest among active TS members. I trust the General Council will deal with the others appropriately. This lens is kept up for historical purposes.
Contents at a Glance
- The latest (Okt 8th 2008)
- 6. Quorum: the General Council can decide on things when there are .... people
- 9. The term of the presidency
The latest (Okt 8th 2008)
It seems the proposal this lens is a reaction to will probably not be discussed in the general council meeting this year. That is: in the meetings that takes place in winter 2008/2009.
Instead the issue has been postponed till the general council meeting of the Theosophical Society next year: the winter of 2009/2010.
So, till the proposal is off the table you can all keep letting the people on the general council know your opinion on this page.
6. Quorum: the General Council can decide on things when there are .... people
The current quorum is 5 out of 37 members. This means that the General Council can meet and decide on things when 5 people are present. This is obviously outdated.
So the new proposal states that any meeting of the general council can only go through if the members present plus proxies (people who have given their voting rights to someone else) is a majority.
Should the general council only meet when at leats half it's members are present or have given proxy?
85.1% said : yes
14.9% said : no
total votes 67
So the new proposal states that any meeting of the general council can only go through if the members present plus proxies (people who have given their voting rights to someone else) is a majority.
Should the general council only meet when at leats half it's members are present or have given proxy?
85.1% said : yes
14.9% said : no
total votes 67
9. The term of the presidency
The current term for president of the Theosophical Society is 7 years. The proposal is to have a term of 5 years.
How long should a TS president rule before a new election?
21.2% said 4 years
47% said 5 years
1.5% said 6 years
28.8% said 7 years
1.5% said 10 years
66 people voted. Note that according to the esoteric teachings 7 years is a full cycle. This would be a good reason to stick with 7 years. However the majority went for a shorter term: 5 years (47%) or even 4 years (21.2%). Still, a sizable minority want to keep things as they are 28.8% want to keep the term at 7 years.
How long should a TS president rule before a new election?
21.2% said 4 years
47% said 5 years
1.5% said 6 years
28.8% said 7 years
1.5% said 10 years
66 people voted. Note that according to the esoteric teachings 7 years is a full cycle. This would be a good reason to stick with 7 years. However the majority went for a shorter term: 5 years (47%) or even 4 years (21.2%). Still, a sizable minority want to keep things as they are 28.8% want to keep the term at 7 years.
9. Should there be a maximum of terms a TS president can serve?
How many terms should a TS president serve the TS in maximum?
I asked this question with the basis that the term would stay the same.
65.7% felt that 2 terms, or 14 years, was long enough.
10.4% said 3 terms (21 years)
1.5% said 4 terms (28 years)
22.4% said As long as they get reelected
67 people voted
65.7% felt that 2 terms, or 14 years, was long enough.
10.4% said 3 terms (21 years)
1.5% said 4 terms (28 years)
22.4% said As long as they get reelected
67 people voted
10. The Election Committee should answer to...
The election committee is the committee that organizes the vote for the TS president, counts the votes etc. At present it answers to the executive committee.
Should the election committee answer to the president, the executive council or the general council?
75.4% said The election committee should answer to the general council
19.3% said The election committee should answer to the executive council
5.3% said The election committee should answer to the TS president.
57 people voted
Should the election committee answer to the president, the executive council or the general council?
75.4% said The election committee should answer to the general council
19.3% said The election committee should answer to the executive council
5.3% said The election committee should answer to the TS president.
57 people voted
E-mail as an official way of communication
Should the official business of the TS be conducted partly by e-mail?
96.8% said: Yes, of course. Can't believe they don't yet.
3.2% said: No, it's too uncertain.
Total Votes: 62
3.2% said: No, it's too uncertain.
Total Votes: 62
10 e. The TS president will be voted on by...
This is the stickler point. [Fortunately it seems that this is off the table - May 2009]
The proposal suggest 'Each General Secretary shall thereafter consult his Governing Body before casting his vote, but vote according to his own judgement.
Each member of the General Council shall vote for one of the candidates on the voting list and send his vote to the Secretary of the Election Committee by e-mail, air mail or other expeditious means.'
Which means the general secretaries would decide who the next president of the Theosophical Society should be.
So I asked:
Who should decide who the next president of the Theosophical Society should be?
87% said: The members: by direct vote (as current)
13% said: The general secretaries
Total Votes: 69
The proposal suggest 'Each General Secretary shall thereafter consult his Governing Body before casting his vote, but vote according to his own judgement.
Each member of the General Council shall vote for one of the candidates on the voting list and send his vote to the Secretary of the Election Committee by e-mail, air mail or other expeditious means.'
Which means the general secretaries would decide who the next president of the Theosophical Society should be.
So I asked:
Who should decide who the next president of the Theosophical Society should be?
87% said: The members: by direct vote (as current)
13% said: The general secretaries
Total Votes: 69
Should we be better informed about the candidates of the election?
The reason given in the proposal for the election change is that the general membership knows too little about the candidates to be able to make an informed decision. Instead of changing that, the proposal is to give the members less power.
What do you think?
Should there be more information about the candidates and their policy positions given to members?
90.6% said: Yes, please. Let's see a real election with online information etc.
4.7% said: No, members know enough to make a decision.
4.7%said: No, members don't need to be involved in deciding who the TS President should be.
Total Votes: 64
What do you think?
Should there be more information about the candidates and their policy positions given to members?
90.6% said: Yes, please. Let's see a real election with online information etc.
4.7% said: No, members know enough to make a decision.
4.7%said: No, members don't need to be involved in deciding who the TS President should be.
Total Votes: 64
12 / 13 The executive committee
At present the general council has veto power over the question who the treasurer of the TS should be. The proposal is to also give them veto power over who the secretary should be.
What do you think?
Should the secretary of the executive council be approved by the general council ?
90% said: Yes, the secretary is too important an official to just be appointed by the president
10% said: No, let the president deal with that kind of stuff.
Total Votes: 60
What do you think?
Should the secretary of the executive council be approved by the general council ?
90% said: Yes, the secretary is too important an official to just be appointed by the president
10% said: No, let the president deal with that kind of stuff.
Total Votes: 60
If you could vote for the president of the Theosophical Society again, who would you vote for?
John Algeo drafted this proposal. In light of that fact, some of you might feel differently about who should be president of the Theosophical Society.
If you could vote again, who would you vote for?
57.4% said: John Algeo: he's still the man for the job
42.6% said: Radha Burnier: she was right to run again
Total Votes: 61
If you could vote again, who would you vote for?
57.4% said: John Algeo: he's still the man for the job
42.6% said: Radha Burnier: she was right to run again
Total Votes: 61
How about P. Krishna?
Radha Burnier's preferred candidate for the presidency was P. Krishna. He turned her down because of personal reasons and not knowing enough about theosophy. If you could vote for him, would you?
In a choice between John Algeo and P. Krishna, who would you vote for today?
32.7% said: P. Krishna
67.3% said: John Algeo
Total Votes: 52
In a choice between John Algeo and P. Krishna, who would you vote for today?
32.7% said: P. Krishna
67.3% said: John Algeo
Total Votes: 52
So, what do you think about all of this?
submit
-
Reply
- spirituality spirituality Oct 15, 2008 @ 2:41 am
- The problems with indirect voting are clear, I think. The US has several times elected a president that did not get the majority of the vote, but instead got a majority of the voting men (or whatever they're called).
I don't see why we should have a system like that in the TS. It doesn't even work very well for the USA.
It would also complicate things. It would mean that each country would have to appoint (or something) someone to represent each candidate - and then people would vote for them. Sounds like more administrative nonsense to me, and I don't see what problem it solves. I mean - is it really a problem that John didn't get elected?
Seriously!
-
Reply
- Dan Noga Dan Noga Oct 14, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
- As Rajiv mentioned, in the USA, the citizens do get a right to vote, but I would like to point out that it is not a direct majority vote, as is the case with the TS currently. It is a representative vote, which is passed through the electoral college. Something similar can be done with the TS: Have every member vote within their section; count the votes on a country-by-country basis; whichever candidate wins the majority in that country, gets the vote of that country's General Secretary. This way, everybody gets to vote, but the vast population differences from one country to the next do not bring too much inequity into the picture. This seems to be a suitable compromise to me.
-
Reply
- Michele Michele Oct 7, 2008 @ 11:51 pm
- The President to be able to run indefinately if elected is not progressive in my mind. They can remain with us as a highly respected elder and advisor on a board or council. One blogger wrote that it took 2-3 years to receive a reply from Adyar. That is very disappointing when our objective is to form a nucleus of Universal Brotherhood. I feel strongly that the voting rights need to remain the same, with the members and majority. Transparency is an absolute, non-negotiable item. I firmly believe the International President should reside at Adyar. I am an American TS member, and feel strongly that Adyar is our sacred center. When Ms Joy Mills was Vice President, she resided at Adyar. I agree, that anyone who would like to run for President should make themselves available for members to get to know them, home and abroad. A true sacrifice is complete selflessness, or what is the point. If one's health cannot allow for relocation, they should not seek the office. Namaste.
-
Reply
- Rajiv Gupta Rajiv Gupta Oct 5, 2008 @ 9:00 am
- Also I would like to add that in a democracy like in US and India, all have equal rights to elect or vote, and it is the duty of the contestant to reach out to the people. So the question of a few deciding the IP of TS does not simply arise.
A seven year term as decide earlier and accepted by the Mahatmas should remain. Similarly any IP can be elected for any number of times if the members so desire, why should there be any restriction?
-
Reply
- Rajiv Gupta Rajiv Gupta Oct 5, 2008 @ 8:48 am
- I've been a member of the TS since 1989. I'd like to bring to notice a simple fact - that Indian members are being viewed as one unit, whereas the reality is that india is a very big country, with multiple cultures, traditions, religions and languages, having members from different backgrounds and even different physical types; so to group them into one unit is not correct. If Dr.J.Algeo or any other worthy member were to make tours into different indian TS centres and interact with the members (like Dr.R.Burnier), surely that member will have support which Dr.R.Burnier enjoys (even though she carries a Swiss passport-as far as I know from the details given in the Theosophist).
We, in India, would all like to meet Dr. Algeo or any other member who aspires to be IP and see his leadership and other spiritual qualities and not just judge on the basis of some intellectual articles. I'm sure it is easy now to tour India as compared to the days of Col. Olcott.
-
Reply
- J Sri Ram J Sri Ram Oct 1, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
- The Society must be run in a more transparent and holistic way. I believe that to unify humankind we must unify ourselves first, our organization second, and our world third. Change will only come from the outside when change comes from within, and it is obvious that the recent election has created a want for power and influence by some that has inhibited Theosophy from being a part of the Society. There is entirely too much energy being spent on non-Theosophical issues both in the mail and on the internet. Why, in this time of instant global communication would we sacrifice the power of democracy to a few insiders? Makes no sense. If the Americans think the Indian section is too strong go find more members. Maybe some Theosophical teachings and less politics would help us find a better way forward.
-
Reply
- Clare Clare Sep 30, 2008 @ 4:09 am
- Thank you for raising these issues, Katinke
-
Reply
- Dan Noga Dan Noga Sep 29, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
- I agree that the rules need to be changed, but I do think that a simple popular vote is unfair. Some say the proposed changes would "punish India" for having more members, but it could be argued that present conditions punish smaller countries for not having as many members as India. The implication by some seems to be that India is doing something right when it comes to membership, whereas other sections are doing something wrong. That statement is a simple generalization that is far removed from the reality of things. Other factors that play into the difference in membership numbers from one section to the next would include cultural differences, the population of the country in question, economic conditions, etc. Is it a mere coincidence that India not only has the greatest number of members, but is also the most populous country represented by a section? That is not the only determining factor, but it matters and there is nothing any General Secretary can do to change that.
-
Reply
- Konstantin Zaitzev Konstantin Zaitzev Sep 28, 2008 @ 2:28 am
- International leadership is also responsible for the current state of affairs with membership. I wrote to Adyar fot the first time in 1993, got the reply in 1995 or even 1996 and suucceeded to join only in 2005. With such style of work it is no wonder that unattached membership doesn't grow and new section don't form. In Russia the theosophical literature is sold not worse (if not better) than in the USA, while we have 20 members only. TS needs a good anti-crisis manager.
-
Reply
- Jupiter Jupiter Sep 28, 2008 @ 1:12 am
- Konstantin is right on the money. Sections outside India need to work to increase the membership instead of whining and trying take away our voting rights. While membership in India grew, in rest of the world it took a nose dive. Sections are autonomous and hence the leaders in these countries are responsible for this sorry state and not International leadership, rules or management techniques or technology. In the USA, during the last decades, the membership dropped by 50% according to some. One of the leaders during this downturn in USA was Algeo. The current situation in the USA is equally sorry with very poor member retention. No one is talking about this issue. Leaders need to step back and look at the immediate more serious problem before possibly destroying the society.
-
Reply
- spirituality spirituality Sep 26, 2008 @ 2:53 am
- Fay: I'm afraid this IS serious. I only put this online and put up this poll when I had it from several sources.
I share your sentiment though: I couldn't believe it either.
-
Reply
- Fay van Ierlant Fay van Ierlant Sep 26, 2008 @ 2:13 am
- This can't be serious.
The first object being overruled by powergames.
-
Reply
- Sandra Wilson Sandra Wilson Sep 26, 2008 @ 2:06 am
- Polls do not show up!
I think the membership should vote for their IP. We have so much technology these days, we should be able to organize something appropriate.
No proxies - they should be got rid of. they are open to too much manipulation by special interest groups and individuals. Council members should have their travel paid to get to the meeting, or the meeting should be blogged on the internet, etc. Every member internationally should be able to vote via the net. Presidential appointments should be limited to three successive tenures, whatever their length. Some rules seem archaic, like having a name supported by twelve others before it goes on the voting slip. Although it seems that the suggested amendments are endeavoring to get rid of Big Brother, the thinking behind some of them seems no better than what is trying to be changed. All I can say is think long and hard. You guys don't want to end up with another system which is really no better than what you already have.
-
Reply
- Gwendolyn Gwendolyn Sep 25, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
- Although I disagree with removing the direct election, I do think term limits are absolutely appropriate and the quorum needs to be fixed. This kind of thing is always a problem...the danger of the group that is local totally dominating the society to the neglect of the rest of the members. You could say the same thing about Wheaton, where we can't vote, but have to send proxies. Who has the luxury of getting off work to travel and go to the annual meeting? It means that those who happen to live close to Wheaton and the wealthy members of the community have a stronger voice and most others are silent. This is a problem nationally and internationally.
-
Reply
- spirituality spirituality Sep 25, 2008 @ 11:56 am
- Konstantin: yes, I'm pretty sure the proposal is meant to make sure the Indian vote isn't too strong. However, this merely means that the Indian section gets punished for being the largest (by far).
Steven: I'm not sure Blavatsky would agree with you. She did spend quite a lot of time on organizational matters, and when she didn't she was happy that Olcott was around to handle that stuff for her.
-
Reply
- Konstantin Zaitzev Konstantin Zaitzev Sep 25, 2008 @ 10:14 am
- Though I'm for direct voting, I think that the rationale of the above proposal is that otherwise the Indian Section will decide everything, as it has almost half of total membership. (Consolidated voting of another half, though it is the little bigger, is scarcely possible, as the members are scattered around the world). Yet the better decision would be to raise membership in other countries! I did not vote here, as it writes: Loading poll. Please Wait...
-
Reply
- Lex Willem van Rijn Lex Willem van Rijn Sep 25, 2008 @ 10:00 am
- I am not stunned. I feel that the period that someone can continue tot stay president of the TS should be limited. It might be a good idee to limit the term to five years and to limit the number of possible uninterupted terms to three.
I prefer direct selection of the president by all members.
-
Reply
- Erica L. Georgiades Erica L. Georgiades Sep 25, 2008 @ 9:07 am
- I am also stunned. I hope the council will be wise enough to make the right decisions. To mantain the members' right to vote for International President is one of them.
-
Reply
- Erica L. Georgiades Erica L. Georgiades Sep 25, 2008 @ 9:07 am
- I am also stunned. I hope the council will be wise enough to make the right decisions. To mantain the members' right to vote for International President is one of them.
-
Reply
- Steven Levey Steven Levey Sep 25, 2008 @ 7:36 am
- I was a member years ago and left for the ULT, so my opinion might be discounted. Regardless though, my feelings are that the Society's situation is nothing when compared to the internal situation within all of us, and who rules that seems far more important than any Society's leadership, regardless of its name. Perhaps this is why the ULT puts more emphasis on the internal state of each student than upon anything else. To my mind, after nearly 40 yrs of studying HPB's writings as a reflection of the Mahatma's in the world, I think that she would find this emphasis an agreeable one. After all, history quite obviously reveals the dogmatic state of the T.S., which leaves students on their own in any case. In fact from this point of view, the T.S. is a block to Theosophical thought as long as it is, really, just another organization where the best of intentions have given way to small mindedness.
- Load More
More theosophy
-
Theosophical Society - theosophy
-
The cool thing about the Theosophical Society is that it is a great place to learn about religion, philosophy, science and metaphysics - without having to commit to any dogmas. Each member can remain in whatever religion they choose - as long as they...
-
Jiddu Krishnamurti, world teacher
-
Jiddu Krishnamurti was famous in his lifetime for first being raised as a 'world teacher' and then renouncing the organisation founded in his honor. Paradoxically he spent the rest of his life teaching all over the world: lecturing, talking to people...
-
Annie Besant, teacher, lecturer, secularist and theosophist...
-
Minister's wife, student of medicine, raised a prophet, reformer, secularist and more. Annie Besant (1847-1933) was many things in her lifetime - and living in the 19th and early 20th century, all of those things were revolutionary for a woman to be...
-
Mme Blavatsky : Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
-
Blavatsky compared the science of her day, studied the world religions and came up with her own synthesis, which she called 'theosophy', or ancient wisdom.
-
Theosophy Blogs & Forums: religious and interfaith debate
-
The latest from theosophists online. Find out what theosophical blogs have updated recently, what the theosophical forums are talking about etc.
by spirituality
I've been a member of the Theosophical Society since 1994. I've been a lodge secretary and chair. I've hosted a large website about theosophy and gene... (more)
