In relation to DK a reader says:
“In my view either DK is lacking common sense in this particular area or there are a lot of missing pieces I have not read or he has left out.”
JJ: I believe the statement below is one of concern to you:
“National material assets and the needed commodities will all be provided for under an entirely new system. – Private enterprise will still exist, but will be regulated; the great public utilities, the major material resources and the sources of planetary wealth – iron, steel, oil and wheat, for instance – will be owned in the first place by a governing, controlling international group; they will, however, be prepared for international consumption by national groups chosen by the people and under international direction.”
I personally think that DK’s wisdom and light he presents in the Bailey books is unsurpassed, but even though he is an earned authority when it comes down to principles I do not accept him carte blanche on all matters, especially in matters of government.
I think the reader is correct on both points here. Let me cover the second one first concerning the possibility of missing pieces.
Yes, there are missing pieces. No one can give an entire philosophy in a paragraph. If you read this with a socialist filters one would think he supports the old style Soviet central control. I have carefully studied all his writings and this is just not the case. Also, he wrote during an important part of history approx 1920-1949 and during this time period made numerous comments on current events and endeavors. This is particularly important to examine to get an idea of how such a teacher reacts to proven dangers of the time. Such an examination gives us a clearer idea than any talk of theory about the true sensibilities of the man.
(1) The most important thing he did was encourage resistance toward Hitler at any cost from the beginning.
(2) He supported the Atlantic Charter and Four Freedoms espoused during World War II. The text is at the end of this post.
(3) He was against pacifism when freedom was at stake.
(4) He supported nuclear energy for the generation of power.
(5) He was against the Soviet style state control.
(6) He was supportive of the U.N. but against the inclusion of tyrannical and abusive governments.
(7) He foresaw that the establishment of Israel would create much tension and many problems in the Middle East.
During the 30 years he communicated with Alice A. Bailey he did not seem to make one call in relation to current events that ran contrary to the principle of freedom or common sense.
Here is what he said about Democracy:
“Government by a true democracy. This again will be made possible through a right use of the systems of education and by a steady training of the people to recognise the finer values, the more correct point of view, the higher idealism, and the spirit of synthesis and of cooperative unity. Cooperative unity differs from an enforced unity in that the subjective spirit and the objective form are functioning towards one recognised end. Today, such a thing as a true democracy is unknown, and the mass of the people in the democratic countries are as much at the mercy of the politicians and of the financial forces as are the people under the rule of dictatorships, enlightened or unenlightened. These latter might be regarded as selfish idealists. But I would have you here note the word ‘idealist’! When, however, the world has in it more truly awakened people and more thinking men and women, we shall see a purification of the political field taking place, and a cleansing of our processes of representation instituted, as well as a more exacting accounting required from the people of those whom they have chosen to put in authority. There must eventually be a closer tie-up between the educational system, the legal system and the government, but it will all be directed to an effort to work out the best ideals of the thinkers of the day. This period does not lie so far ahead as you might imagine, particularly if the first move in this direction is made by the New Group of World Servers.”
Externalization of the Hierarchy, Pg 52-53
A particularly encouraging statement is: “When, however, the world has in it more truly awakened people and more thinking men and women, we shall see a purification of the political field taking place, and a cleansing of our processes of representation instituted, as well as a more exacting accounting required from the people of those whom they have chosen to put in authority.”
It is interesting that he supports “a more exacting accounting” of those who shall lead us.
In speaking of dictatorships he says that the “animating principle is not one of the new age ideals.”
If we then put together a complete picture of DK’s endorsement we get a picture of a teacher who exercises wisdom and supports free will and freedom.
That said, what about the reader’s other point – that DK seems to be lacking common sense in his views of an international group controlling and regulating distribution of resources?
I think he may have a point here despite the fact that DK has an excellent track record and is a Master of Wisdom.
First, just because he is a master does not mean he is perfect. All of us, great or small, develop excellence in those areas where we focus attention and may have lack in areas where our attention is not.
Secondly, DK indicates that he prefers the Eastern world and has had only a few incarnations in the West and was not that enamored with western ways. This fact may have caused him to have an ingrained bias against western private enterprise and to lean toward a more strongly centralized system.
Whatever the case, the student will always get in trouble, even with the words of Christ himself, if he interprets in a black and white manner without attempting to understand for himself the principles at play.
This is what we will do next in this series – that is, we will examine DK’s controversial quote and look at the principle behind it.
We’ll end this post by including the Atlantic Charter and the Four Freedoms endorsed by DK.
THE EIGHT POINTS OF THE ATLANTIC CHARTER
August 14, 1941
The President of the United States of America, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the Prime Minister, Mr. Churchill, representing his Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom, being met together, deem it right to make known certain common principles in the national policies of their respective countries on which they base their hopes for a better future for the world.
First, their countries seek no aggrandizement, territorial or other;
Second, they desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned;
Third, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self-government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them;
Fourth, they will endeavour, with due respect for their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all States, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity;
Fifth, they desire to bring about the fullest collaboration between all nations in the economic field with the object of securing, for all, improved labour standards, economic advancement and social security.
Sixth, after the final destruction of the Nazi tyranny, they hope to see established a peace which will afford to all nations the means of dwelling in safety within their own boundaries, and which will afford assurance that all the men in all the lands may live out their lives in freedom from fear and want;
Seventh, such a peace should enable all men to traverse the high seas and oceans without hindrance;
Eighth, they believe that all the nations of the world, for realistic as well as spiritual reasons, must come to the abandonment of the use of force. Since no future peace can be maintained if land, sea or air armaments continue to be employed by nations which threaten, or may threaten, aggression outside of their frontiers, they believe, pending the establishment of a wider and permanent system of general security, that the disarmament of such nations is essential. They will likewise aid and encourage all other practicable measures which will lighten for peace-loving peoples the crushing burden of armaments.
THE FOUR FREEDOMS
January 6, 1941
In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression-everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way-everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want-which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants-everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear-which, translated into world terms, means a worldwide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbour-anywhere in the world.
“An education isn’t how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It’s being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don’t.” Anatole France (1844 – 1924)
May 7, 2004
Copyright by J J Dewey
JJ’s Amazon page HERE