1 - Theosophical Society was
established with apolitical and non-violent peace- building policies.
Firstly, the early Theosophical Society was
established with apolitical and non-violent peace-building policies.
Theosophists
are of necessity the friends of all movements in the world, whether
intellectual or simply practical, for the amelioration of the condition of
mankind. We are the friends of all those who fight against drunkenness, against
cruelty to animals, against injustice to women, against corruption in society
or in government, although we do not meddle in politics. We are the friends of
those who exercise practical charity, who seek to lift a little of the
tremendous weight of misery that is crushing down the poor. (Letter I — 1888
Second Annual Convention — April 22-23, CW 9:247)
In the neo-theosophical period, Annie
Besant makes a conspicuous exception to the apolitical policy (motivated by esoteric
reasons) when she becomes president of the Indian National Congress.
Personally, I think she had an overall positive impact, however, since there is
only one full book (Isaac Lubelsky: Celestial India. Madame Blavatsky and the Birth of Indian Nationalism, Sheffield (UK)/Oaksville (US): Equinox 2012,) (with several articles as well) on the role of
the Theosophical Society in India’s independence movement. It's not bad, but a lot more could be written on the subject. The recent Imagining the East: The Early Theosophical Society (Oxford, 2020) adds some much-needed research and discussion.
My personal view is that the original
policies entail that a writer, lecturer or administrator in a theosophical
organization should refrain from publicly taking active political roles and
expressing partisan political views.
2- Tendency in the mass media
to consider everything in terms of conservative or liberal political leanings.
One problem related to misconceptions, is a marked tendency in the mass media
to consider everything in terms of conservative or liberal political leanings. In
Blavatsky’s case, she gets identified, for better or worse, in right wing and
left wing camps. For example, both Gandhi and certain Nazis have been considered to be
influenced by theosophy. Also, she is targeted in both globalist woke and antifa racist conspiracy theories. To me, that
indicates her views encompass something more complex than simple right or left
wing categories.
In contemporary times, some researchers express surprise to find that certain groups or
protagonists don’t fit into comfortable left wing hippie or right
wing white collar political categories, whereas the alternative
spiritual movement has always been characterized by an individualist ‘salad
bar’ mix of diverse beliefs and practices, so one could ask if that categorizing
tendency is not inherently inadequate. There is also the spiritual-materialist opposition, so a political conflict often involves complex four-way tensions between the spiritual left, the materialist left, the spiritual right, and the materialist right.
3- Occultism and Fascism
connections
With this part we reach the crux of the problem, since most of the
recent volatile political situations with occult connections come from
right-wing factions, related to a general upswing in right-wing political
movements. It’s understandable that there is serious concern with this
situation and I can see how the greater focus on this problem has valid
motivations. The gist of my observations, besides arguing that Blavatsky’s name
need not be dragged through the mud in all this, is to note how the current
coverage of the situation can be counter-productive, mainly due to
over-reliance on outdated political assumptions that do not have the nuances
needed to fully explain the nature of the problem.
I think the main problem is that the current political
situation might have augmented an anti-esoteric stance in political studies. Some esoteric historians have complained of this (Review of Kurlander's Hitler's Monsters) The result tends
to leave the discourse conditioned by the unfortunate agenda set by The Morning of the Magicians. For example, the promotion of the Kurlander book seemed to capitalize on
media sensationalism, which tended to increase misconceptions related to
conspiracy theories, rather than to diminish them. It seems that even Peter
Staudenmaier may have noticed the problem and felt the need write a corrective (The Nazis as occult masters? It’s a good story but not history). Despite much solid effort in the last twenty years in the area of esoteric history, I would say there is still a lot that we simply do not know, and I
think we are far from coming to terms with the legacy of the second world war (For example, a more accurate understanding of Adolf Eichmann only emerged in the mainstream less than ten years ago, thanks to the exceptional historical research of Bettina Stangneth). Progress
has been made, but there’s still work to be done on integrating esoteric
history into mainstream history. Additionally, I haven’t seen much historical
research of the considerable influence of the theosophical movement on the
1960s counter-culture movement, which I think could open up a wider field of
understanding into today’s situation (A lot of that discourse is influenced by Lopez' Prisoners of Shangri-La, which is unsatisfactory to me. I don't know if something better has been written yet).
'It would be
misleading, however, to regard occultism as a generally leftwing, liberal, or
progressive field. Its heterogeneity makes any generalisation impossible.
Right-wing tendencies in the form of racism, anti-Semitism, or nationalism
surged especially at the beginning of the twentieth century. This was a
reflection of broader tendencies within European culture and politics, from
which occultism – and this is the crucial point here – was not isolated. Quite
the contrary, the many shades of occultism formed a prominent and integral part
of avant-garde culture across Europe, and it
is not surprising that they continued to influence especially the most radical
political tendencies of its time. Racism, antisemitism, and related sentiments
had always been commonplace across the left side of the political spectrum,
too, but they were especially radicalised within the identity politics of
rightwing movements. At this point, we simply lack the research to understand
the historical development of politics within these contexts, their obvious
relevance notwithstanding. This especially applies to a comparative perspective
that takes into account the different national contexts, particularly in the
period after World War I.' (229)
'In addition
to this lack of scholarship on the entanglement of esotericism and fascism or
National Socialism, there is a general disinterest in the history of the left
side of the political spectrum. Our knowledge of this milieu, which had been
thriving in the decades around 1900, is especially limited in the German
context, firstly due to the focus on “Nazi occultism,” and secondly, as a
consequence of the far-reaching eradication of political opponents in the Third
Reich. There is, however, valuable scholarship on Russia
and the Soviet Union demonstrating the
relevance of esotericism in Communism. Certainly,
occultism cannot simply be placed on one side of the political spectrum but has
a much more complex history than is often assumed.' (231) (Doesn't Occultism Lead Straight to Fascism? Hermes Explains Thirty Questions about Western Esotericism Amsterdam
University Press 2019)
Recently, scholars in the field of archaeology have
decided to be more vocal in opposing right-wing alternative science conspiracy
theory excesses related to QAnon and the Starseed movements. (Believe in Atlantis?) As with
the Kurlander case, well-intentioned no doubt, but the actual gist of their
arguments about problematic colonialist-influenced sources (which has existed in
the scholarship since the early 1990s, I believe) have been convincingly questioned. (Kenneth Feder is failing on Atlantis. Thorwald C. Franke) Here again, I find that the approach used for the mass media
coverage of such a volatile and sensitive topic creates a sensationalistic
atmosphere that is more alarmist than informative. Julian Strube has written a
recent study, that indicates that the problem is more complex and nuanced than what
has been conveyed in the mass media coverage:
'Moving towards a more complex understanding of esotericism, but also of
related subjects such as religion or “Western culture,” means exploring the
ways in which the history of colonialism is more nuanced than a unilateral act
of appropriation, as Theosophy serves to illustrate. Identities across the
globe, even within the colonial framework characterized by power asymmetries,
have formed through a complex dependency on, and interactions with, the
perceived other. It is crucial to take that “other” into full account, to
investigate it in its own right, specifically if it is subaltern, rather than
delegating it to the margins. The case of “Western esotericism” demonstrates
that these historical complexities can only be grasped through a decentering of
research from its supposed European core.' (Theosophy, Race, & the Study of Esotericism Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Volume 89, Issue 4,
December 2021, Pages 1180–1189)
On a personal level, among my theosophical acquaintances, I have not
found a case of strong right-wing concentration. Rather I have encountered
Theosophists who freely express their political views across a wide political
spectrum, including far left, far right and sadly, I must confess, millenialist
conspiracy theories and even fascist, neo-nazi beliefs (which I directly and publicly object to, when I can).
My own perception is that there is an alternative spiritual demographic
that has been present since the beginning of the twentieth century and that
mainstream historians have had difficulty in perceiving it and quantifying it
adequately. Moreover, traces of occult groups within a political movement
could simply be a sign of politicians noticing a significant demographic and
catering to them to obtain their vote, like they do with any other demographic
group, and using some of their ideas that seem useful to them for propaganda
purposes, without necessarily identifying with them. Politics make strange
bedfellows indeed.
4- Christianity
One point that seems clear enough to me in looking at the major cases
of theosophy influence in politics today, is that it is more akin to a 20th
century neo-theosophy form, and more specifically forms of Christian
neotheosophy or traditionalism. My view is that centuries of ingrained Christian
superstitions and attitudes will take time to change. Blavatsky was dealing with
problems with scientific thought that was still moving away from making research
conform to what was understood as Biblical chronology and was living in a world
where dominant forms of Christianity seemed to be more akin to the rigid,
conservative nature of fundamentalist Christianity.
Moreover, she was working
in an environment where Christianity was dominant in society and showed few obvious signs of decreasing, although scientific thinking was making headway as the main guiding authority. It was only in the twentieth century that
Christianity began a noticeable massive decline and dealing with the loss of stable social values,
albeit rigid, outdated and superstitious, that this entails is still a
relatively new process.
It seems that the theosophical movement is still too new for many, and
the tendency to fall back on the old ingrained Christian attitudes prevails, even though it is mixing in new
forms. So what were seeing in politics is perhaps less an emergence of new
beliefs, but rather a persistence of a fading conservative Christian mentality
with an immature theosophically-influenced covering. A lot of the new age millenialist
currents seem to be based on modified biblical apocalyptic beliefs. At the same
time, the alternative spirituality movement has grown tremendously since Blavatsky’s
time. Time will tell if it continues to thrive while conservative Christian forms
and attitudes continue to decline. The decline of Christianity would probably have been even more pronounced had it not been for televangelism, the considerable success of missionary movements in the twentieth century, and the Pentecostal movement, which itself has mystical tendencies.
5- Repressive,
dismissive attitudes
An underlying theme of this post has been related to problems of
underestimating the role of spiritual beliefs in society. As has been seen in recent
times, because people have strange esoteric beliefs does not mean that they aren’t capable of taking
concerted organized action within socio-political structures; they are active
agents in society and their numbers are considerable. Moreover, it would seem that forms of distorted, diluted, neo/pseudo Theosophy
have motivational power. Apparently, they can give people a sense of greater
direction, healthier living, clearer purpose than the options currently available
to them.
A lot of times, a hyper-mystical
new age attitude indicates a kind of intellectual dissociation that is accompanied with
very materialistic behaviours and pursuits, and often such people can be very competent in mundane affairs. In
certain cases, complicated lawsuits resulted in positive results for religious
freedom, for example, in the Guy and Edna Ballard case, the Supreme Court in
a 5-4 landmark decision held that the question of whether the Ballards believed
their religious claims should not have been submitted to the jury, and remanded
the case back to the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed the fraud conviction.
Interpreting this decision, the Ninth Circuit later found that the Court did
not go so far as to hold that "the validity or veracity of a religious
doctrine cannot be inquired into by a Federal Court." (Cohen
v. United States, 297 F.2d 760 (1962)
Certain tendencies that I’ve noticed that tend to categorize them
strictly in terms of social or intellectual deviance, to sensationalize or
exaggerate their potential danger, excessively focusing on extreme cases
without considering the many peaceful examples can lead to dehumanizing,
scapegoating, marginalizing, and ostracizing attitudes that are ultimately
forms of repression. From a historical perspective, has repression ever worked? Despite
centuries of violent repressions, esoteric movements keep on returning. Blunt
repression is not considered effective at a psychological level; it only
creates a pressure cooker situation of pent-up energy that will re-emerge in
full force. Perhaps it is similar with history. Gary Lachman has written an
interesting recent article on the question of the relation of psychology and
political repression :
'What
does this mean? It may mean that the magical, mythical, spiritual side of the
psyche, that the west has repressed for some time now and which, even with all
the New Age bells and whistles, it still hasn’t integrated in any serious way
into its conscious outlook, is popping up in some unlikely and inconvenient
places. Does this mean that Putin and a revived Holy Russia are the remedy, a
means for the west to regain its soul? No. But it may mean that we need to
throw more light and awareness on a side of the mind and ourselves we have
ignored for too long. Otherwise it will remain a region where the far-right
meet the far-out, leaving we enlightened ones in the dark.' (The Return of the Dark Side)
PS- For a more systematic essay on this question see:
Wouter J. Hanegraaff Esotericism & Democracy: Some Clarifications
