Posted by J.H. [JH] on April 05, 1999 at 18:22:34 {6.uz.4vynMHSG.vl05doHR5JhS9/hc}:
In Reply to: *****Opinion About Reform posted by Kinsman on April 05, 1999 at 16:28:04:
Kinsman,
: You and others are of a differing opinion and that is fine. ...I just hate to see such efforts among JW's �discouraged� and sometimes even belittled, simply due to the bleakness of their situation. The comparison I gave, of course does not match in every respect, but IMO the point is made and the illustrative comparison
Point taken. I will surely not discourage those who work for positive reform. But neither do I think it is correct to hide my opinion about matters, or pretend that reform is very likely in the overseeable future.
I do think that we will see quite a bit of change in the WTS/JWs over the next decade. I think the loss of members and external pressure will accomplish some necessary changes. It is a possibility that this might open for the first ever liberal takeover in the WTS organization. Not a big one, but it's there.
I've been reading a bit of literature about the situation in Soviet/Russia lately, and some more similarities struck me. In Russia, nobody had a single original political idea after around 1920. The leaders had experienced a massive brain drain after Stalin's purges and the need for ideological correctness discouraged all independent thought. The industry, the economy and even the military was (and is) messed up beyond belief. Even now, the Russian leaders only know how to fight for power; they know nothing about how to actually run a country. Gorbatchev, who was a lawyer with no understanding of economics, was extremely naive in many respects. He saw the need for reform, but he had no idea what direction the country should take.
I don't think it is neccessary to point out semilarities here. The WTS is more and more run by lawyers. Some are no doubt "liberal" in the sense that they see the need for change. But I don't believe these kings of mediocrity are actually able to run the organization in any real sense. They have no understanding of how people react. They know nothing of theology. They have no ability to motivate the rank and file. And their response to criticism and crisis is, as we have seen, totally pathetic. Example: a full-page ad in the New York Times to persuade the French authorities; don't they understand that France is run from Paris?
But, still, some of those clowns may end up starting a process they don't understand, and some reform could be
accomplished.