return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Re: More on news Article.
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
RE: Rainbow Gathering (somewhat off-topic)
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
RE: Rainbow Gathering (somewhat off-topic)
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By snell netshel.net
RE: (For Ray) teacher training and eurythmy
By lschelly jackrouse.com
RE: Westfall
By lschelly jackrouse.com
Federal judge will try Waldorf school case
By snell netshel.net
Re: more on naming victims
By steve premofine.com
Luke Schelly post on tuition contracts
By momof2gals mindspring.com
On Rainbow Family again.
By irisspringflower yahoo.com
Re: naming victims
By Gary GoodWinter.com
RE: Westfall
By canndw netzero.net
RE: On Rainbow Family again.
By canndw netzero.net
RE: On Rainbow Family again.
By snell netshel.net
Re: naming victims
By alice javanet.com
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Rainbow Family. To David, Debra, and all
By irisspringflower yahoo.com
Nothing has changed since 1994!
By irisspringflower yahoo.com
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By rbc supranet.com
letter to The Union
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Rainbow Family. To Iris
By firefly tpg.com.au
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By Rechomba cs.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:16:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: More on news Article.
) David: I will vouch for the reputation of
) Hartsbrook as a strong,
) well-established Waldorf school in the Northeast.
)
)
) David
So what and according to whom? "Strong" and
"well-established" are adjectives that by themselves
supply no evidence as to what is being done in the
school. Actually, what you write supports Alice's
statements, particularly as concerns the power of
those allied with that school to make other people
feel powerless.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:26:36 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Rainbow Gathering (somewhat off-topic)
The Waldorf people I know here are heavily involved in
the the Rainbow Family and New Ageism. Before we
moved to this area and before we had ever heard of WE,
my daughter, friends of ours and I had horrific
problems with the Rainbow Family. I have a close
friend who was close to the inner core of the RF for
many years and knows firsthand the type of people they
are. I know they have no boundaries, particularly
concerning sex and children. Our first serious
confrontations with the Waldorf community here had to
do with an adult male covertly engaging in sexual
abuse of children. Most of his victims are Waldorf
students. The ranks closed rapidly and the Waldorf
students were told by their parents that they could
not socialize with my daughter, who was the only child
to speak about what this man was doing.
The Federal Register has published reports by the U.S.
Forestry Service detailing some of what happens during
the RF gatherings. I can get the cites for those if
anyone is interested. Most of the Waldorf people I
know here go to these gatherings; this past year it
appears that even more of them went to the Montana
gathering.
DK
--- David Cann (canndw netzero.net) wrote:
) Sorry, folks, for the multiple, identical messages.
)
) David
)
) David Cann wrote:
) Iris Springflower has written fairly frequently on
) this list about
) waldorf school families in her area being part of
) the "Rainbow family"
) and attending "Rainbow gatherings". I had heard of
) Rainbow Gatherings,
) but really didn't know much about them. I found
) this article about the
) latest Gathering
)
) http://www.reason.com/0102/fe.sm.take.html
)
) to be informative, showing the Rainbows neither too
) positively nor
) negatively (my opinion). Within the article is the
) Rainbow's web site
) address ("unofficial", of course, since they purport
) to be a leaderless
) group) for those who may be interested.
)
)
____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You
) Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:35:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Rainbow Gathering (somewhat off-topic)
) http://www.reason.com/0102/fe.sm.take.html
)
) to be informative, showing the Rainbows neither too
) positively nor
) negatively (my opinion). Within the article is the
) Rainbow's web site
) address ("unofficial", of course, since they purport
) to be a leaderless
) group) for those who may be interested.
First of all, RF is not off-topic. Does anyone on
this list know of the Waldorf School that was opened
by a RF group. My understanding is that it is located
perhaps in British Columbia, but I cannot be certain
of that. Also, notice how this article is quite clear
that marijuana is openly used, including as a barter
item. This is an illegal drug and those who use it
are committing illegal acts, but the RF holds itself
above the law. This is absolutely the very same
attitude I have found in this Waldorf community and it
is this attitude that allows Waldorfers to believe
they can use public funds for parochial, school
purposes.
DK
)
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:39:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
Yes I am a lawyer. Who are you to decide who is a
lawyer and who is not? If you want to know more about
my lawyering, you may contact me offlist.
DK
--- Steve Premo (steve premofine.com) wrote:
) On 30 Jan 2001, at 16:37, Lisa Ercolano wrote:
)
) ) In a post explaining her views on the publishing
) of the names of victims of
) ) sexual assault/rape/incest, etc., Deborah Kelly
) says:
) )
) ) ((I have never met a victim of
) ) abuse who wanted her or his name kept a secret and
) I
) ) have worked with and known many victims.))
) )
) ) Lisa here: I find that very interesting, Deborah.
) Can you perhaps tell me a
) ) little about *why* the victims did not want their
) names kept secret? I know
) ) you are a lawyer ...
)
) Deborah is not a lawyer. She said she was a lawyer,
) and then mentioned
) that she was not licensed, which means she's not a
) lawyer. She does help
) people with administrative hearings, which means she
) might be some sort of
) paralegal.
)
) Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
) "There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
) that distinction is not difficult to make." -
) Superman
) http://www.premofine.com
)
)
____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You
) Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:52:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
--- Lisa Ercolano (momof2gals mindspring.com) wrote:
) Lisa here: I find that very interesting, Deborah.
) Can you perhaps tell me a
) little about *why* the victims did not want their
) names kept secret?
Why would they unless they feared retaliation or felt
they were responsible for being assaulted? Otherwise
I don't understand why anyone would be concerned with
what other people, especially bigots, would think
about her or him.
I know
) you are a lawyer and thus have worked with the
) victims of sexual assault,
) etc. in a different manner than have most of us, so
) perhaps you could take a
) moment and give us some insight about that view.
You assert that this policy protects
) the perpetrator. I am
) not sure I understand this statement .... My view --
) and that of most
) journalists and most victims I have spoken with --
) is that victims do not
) want to become victims again by having their names
) dragged through the mud.
How does this policy not protect the perpetrator and
how does it protect the victim? What sort of
community drags a victim's name "through the mud" and
why would anyone have anything to do with such a
community. It sounds like a thoroughly despicable
group of people to me. Is this what is done in
Waldorf schools? Are children threatened with
retaliation if they speak about what is being done to
them?
) (It's sad, but we all know that there are numerous
) folks out there who like
) to blame the *victims* of these crimes, rather than
) admit that such a thing
) could happen to almost anyone.)
Why do you post this in parentheses? Isn't this the
crux of the problem?
) I have known several rape victims and incest
) survivors in my personal
) life, and not a single one would have wanted me or
) anyone else to publish
) her name in an internet post or a newspaper or other
) periodical.
Why? Did everyone they know blame them for being
assaulted and battered? It's okay for people in the
community wherein the assualt occurred to know the
victim's name and bandy it about, but there is
something wrong with strangers with no ties to the
community (and therefore with perhaps a more objective
stance) knowing know the victim's name. This is not
logical.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:00:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
--- Alice Klinge (alice javanet.com) wrote:
) I want to second that idea. I believe, Deborah,
) that you need to
) explore your response to this. I know it is not
) easy to admit mistakes,
) but I believe that is the only way for us to heal no
) matter how
) well-intentioned we may be.
What do you mean by "heal?" This has become a catch
phrase in the New Age movement and all of the Waldorf
people around here I know describe themselves as
"healers." In fact, many of them make money off of
it.
) I well know what kind of stigma is around sexuality
) and children.
What stigma? Every child I know who has been sexually
or otherwise abused and who has come forward with the
information, has been told to shut up and they do not
respect the adults who are telling them to shut up.
It
) may not matter who is the perpetrator and who is the
) victim. It is
) difficult as humans not to change the way we look at
) people after such a
) thing. It is human nature.
No it is not. You cannot speak for any other human
first of all. Secondly, not every culture shares the
mores and views of the dominant culture.
Thus, we need to protect
) the confidentiality
) of victims, particularly children, no matter what.
) thanks, [Alice]
There never was any confidentiality.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:24:40 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
)Yes I am a lawyer. Who are you to decide who is a
)lawyer and who is not? If you want to know more about
)my lawyering, you may contact me offlist.
)
What kind of a lawyer are you, Deborah? Are you practicing currently? Do
you work with sexually abused kids?
-ds
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 2001 11:35:35 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE: (For Ray) teacher training and eurythmy
From: Rechomba cs.com
)As a builder and woodworker, I enjoyed your post Luke.
)Thanks,
)Ray
Your welcome. I am a woodworker wannabe.
Some day....
Luke
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 2001 12:13:56 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE: Westfall
)From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
)At 7:54 PM -0800 1/30/01, David Cann wrote:
)I (David Cann) wrote:
)Dan, am I correct when I guess that what you call a "waldorf child =
custody
)case" is a divorce case where a child's waldorf education is a =
contentious
)issue between the parents?
)
)...and Dan replied:
) Yes, we get calls about these cases often.
)
)David: Could you put a number to that, please? One a week? a month? =
a
)year? More? Fewer? Involving how many different schools? On this =
list,
)we've heard from Newpaul and Christopher Yavelow on this subject in my =
four
)(maybe five) years here, so that's two.
)
)Dan answered
)I get one every couple of months. Never been the same school. No, I
)won't give details.
For another perspective. As someone who has been on our schools =
finance committee for the last six years or so and has had to deal with =
divirce cases and families splitting up, I have seen adults *use* a =
child's school in a custody case for their own purposes. One parent =
enrolls a child in a private school to show that they are "more =
concerned" about the child than the other adult, and (more likely than =
not) want the spouse to pay at least half of the cost. It has happened =
that, once the courts have decided a monthly payment, the child is =
withdrawn. Its all quite sad.
In the past, our schools fairly relaxed tuition policies made us a =
likely target. Several other private schools in the area have had this =
problem too. We learned from our mistakes. We began to recognize tell =
tale signs.
Our tuiton contracts are much more professional and legally binding =
than they used to be. We also have hired more proffessional book =
keepers/business managers to keep the school aware of where we stand with =
parents (financially speaking). Most parents are quite pleased to see =
the school take its financial responsibilties to a more proffessional =
level.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:22:39 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Federal judge will try Waldorf school case
The Union
Western Nevada County
Federal judge will try Waldorf school case
By Kerana M. Todorov - Wed, Jan 31, 2001
A federal judge could decide this spring whether the Twin Ridges Elementary
School District and the Sacramento Unified School District taught religion,
violating the U.S. Constitution.
The non-jury trial will start March 19 in Sacramento, a federal judge ruled
Monday. The trial is expected to last four weeks.
The People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools - or PLANS - filed suit in
1998 in U.S. District Court against Twin Ridges and the Sacramento Unified
School District.
The plaintiffs allege that students at Yuba River Charter School on Bitney
Springs Road and at John Morse School in south Sacramento were taught a
religion called anthroposophy. Anthroposophy was inspired by Rudolf
Steiner, the founder of the first Waldorf school in 1919, they said. The
two schools mentioned in the suit follow Waldorf-inspired teaching methods,
the plaintiffs said.
Yuba River Charter School now has about 240 students in kindergarten
through eighth grade.
"Our goal is to put Waldorf back in the private sector, where it belongs,"
said PLANS President Debra Snell, the parent of a former Yuba River Charter
School student.
PLANS will ask that all the Waldorf-inspired schools sponsored by Twin
Ridges Elementary School District and Sacramento Unified School District be
closed, Snell said.
Michelle Cannon, a Sacramento attorney representing the two districts, said
the schools are simply teaching a method that integrates subjects such as
music, painting and gardening with traditional classes like reading and
mathematics. It is not religion, Cannon said.
"It's just another way to teach kids," she said.
The trial will be in two phases.
The judge will first determine whether the teaching methods constitute a
religion. In a second phase, the judge will rule whether the schools were
actually religious.
****
This is my feedback to the author:
Dear Kerana,
Your article is technically wrong.
The judge will first decide:
*If Anthroposophy is a religion,* NOT "whether the teaching methods
constitute a religion." PLANS says public Waldorf schools *promote*
Anthroposophy, a New Age religion. Waldorf proponents say "Anthroposophy is
not a religion." This is the core of the lawsuit.
If the judge rules that Anthroposophy is a religion, THEN he will decide if
public Waldorf schools are legal. The Waldorf teacher training programs are
Anthroposophical semminaries, with no core academics in the entire teacher
training program. It is all Anthroposophy, all the time. Anthroposophy
*informs* Waldorf curriculum.
To quote Yuba River public school teachers:
"Waldorf schools are the child of Anthroposophy."
Yep, I have that in writing and it has been submitted into evidence.
Best,
Debra
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:25:49 -0800
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
On 31 Jan 2001, at 6:39, Deborah Kelly wrote:
) Who are you to decide who is a lawyer and who is not? If you want to
) know more about my lawyering, you may contact me offlist.
Me? I don't decide who is a lawyer and who is not. That is a function of
the state bar, which administers the bar exam. You take the bar exam, you
pass, you're a lawyer.
I do look forward to hearing from you offlist about your lawyering.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:43:09 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Luke Schelly post on tuition contracts
In a post discussing how some divorcing parents *use* their child as a pawn
between them, and how that sometimes plays out in Waldorf schools, Luke
Schelly says:
(( Our tuiton contracts are much more professional and legally binding than
they used to be.))
Lisa: Luke, could you give a few more details about your school's contract,
please? (If you could tell us the name of the school and where it is, I
would also appreciate it.)
Basically, I am most interested in what your school's contract promises
that the school will provide in exchange for the contractee's money.
Does it spell out, in detail, that the child will be educated in a safe
and nurturing environment, etc? Does it promise that the child will get an
education at all?
Or does it merely state that the child is to be enrolled and that
tuition is to be paid in the amount of $XXXX a year, and then sets out the
circumstances under which that contract can be broken and by whom?
I ask because I truly am interested. In my opinion, the contract offered
(and signed by us, for several years) at our former W. school left much to
be desired. (Of course, as I had never signed a private school contract
before this, I had nothing to compare it to.)
The contract basically said that our child would be enrolled and that we
would pay a certain amount over a certain period of time.
What a different document that one was compared to the contract we
signed this year at our younger girl's private school (non-WS)!
That document lays out, in detail, what the school promises, as well as
what they are asking parents to promise (besides money.) Mentioned are: an
education in a safe and nurturing environment; an atmosphere of academic
rigor and tolerance for others; development of critical thinking skills, and
so in, in that vein. In return, we promised to support our child, monitor
her homework and projects, etc.
* One last thing: does your school offer tuition insurance?
OUr WS did not. Our new school does, as do most other high quality
private schools.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:27:13 -0800 (PST)
From: iris springflower (irisspringflower yahoo.com)
Subject: On Rainbow Family again.
David. I was with the RF for 12 years! I tried to
speak out against child sexual abuse and rape there at
their gatherings. Some people were supportive,
especially young women who were targets of sexual
harrassment at gatherings. BUT I was told outright by
the long ter members of Tthe RF to "Stop talking about
rape and abbuse" and that "it's negative" to talk
openly about these subjects. A few other RF men took
me aside privately and told me SICKENING statements
such as "Incest is natural" and "the little girls like
(sex with adults)it."
Go to the law enforcement agencies who have to deal
every year with thefts, rapes, and other such crimes
in the nearby small towns where the Rainbows gather.
Go to the local hospitals who wil tell you about the
drug overdoses. At the gatherings themselves, many
drug "freak outs" ar dealt with privately and never
come to the attention of authorities. I have seen
victims of date rape at the gatherings who were told
to BE QUIET about the rapes and to not go to outside
authorities about them., (bad press?). The last place
the RF had their national gathering, in Montana, left
many of the local residents picking up the BILL out of
their property taxes for the price of all the social
services, sanitation, etc., that their county had to
spend dealing with the Rainbow Gathering! This
happens every year!
All other groups who hold large events in the National
Forests take RESPONSIBILITY and pay insurance fees and
sign legal permits to show that they will be
responsible for their actions. WHY is The RF "exempt"
from this?
The Rainbow Family will say they bring money into
local area businesses, but they forget to mention the
large amount of shoplifting that is done by many RF
people. Then there was the scene I witessed at my
last RF I went to before I quit. The Rf people set up
a public shower where people get naked and others wash
them off in public. Well, there was a 12 year old
girl in a bathing suit who wanted to take a shower,
but didn't want to strip naked in front of the fifty
plus men, women, and children waiting in line. So she
said no. Well, the guys who were hosing people off
PRESSURED her, taunted her, and in my opinion, made
fun of her to "Take off your bathing suit"! I
WITNESSED this! I doubt this incident and others like
it will get in the newspaper articles about The RF.
The girl was strong enough to not listen to them. She
walked away. No shower.
WHY do you think, David, that those guys wanted so
much for her to strip naked in front of them and the
whole crowd?
I can go on with other incidents that would never get
into the newspapers. Like the developmentally
disabled young man who had staph infection sores all
over his body in the 1986 National Gathering. His
caretakers, a Rainbow couple made him sleep under
their schoolbus mbile home "with the dogs". It was
raining.
Shall I go on? I think it will take a book and I
don't have the time to write it.
I believe, just as with WE, the EX-MEMBERS of any
group would have truths that the groups, whether they
be The RF, We, or the Moonies would rather NOT the
media (who can be shown only the "positive" aspects of
the group) or the general public know about. Things
like covered-up suicide attempts, sexual abuse, and
other incidents. If anyone here is well versed on
mind control techniques, it isn't easy for the victims
within a group to just go to the legal authorities and
report the crimes which happened to them within the
group.
For correct information abbout The RF, contact law
enforcement agencies in the areas where the RF
gathers. THEY will tell you the facts.
Anyway, this is my take on this subject. That's all I
wish to post on it now. Sorry for any typos. I am
trying my best here.
Best Wishes, Iris
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:28:38 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
Deborah Kelly wrote:
) You cannot speak for any other human
) first of all.
Oh......I see....but it's OK for YOU to speak for sexual assault victims who you
know (or know of), without their permission?
...Gary
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31-Jan-2001 19:18:52 GMT
From: David Cann (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Westfall
I, too, have seen financial manifestations of divorce through my role
(currently treasurer and, before that, finance chair) in the waldorf
school. We have had noncustodial parents who refuse to pay toward
child's tuition. But I have never had anything even remotely close
(that I am aware of) to what Dan calls a "waldorf custody case", where a
parent is dead-set against his/her child even attending the waldorf
school at all, while the other parent is adamantly FOR it.
David
Luke Schelly:
For another perspective. As someone who has been on our schools finance
committee for the last six years or so and has had to deal with divirce
cases and families splitting up, I have seen adults *use* a child's
school in a custody case for their own purposes. One parent enrolls a
child in a private school to show that they are "more concerned" about
the child than the other adult, and (more likely than not) want the
spouse to pay at least half of the cost. It has happened that, once the
courts have decided a monthly payment, the child is withdrawn. Its all
quite sad.
In the past, our schools fairly relaxed tuition policies made us a
likely target. Several other private schools in the area have had this
problem too. We learned from our mistakes. We began to recognize tell
tale signs.
Our tuiton contracts are much more professional and legally binding than
they used to be. We also have hired more proffessional book
keepers/business managers to keep the school aware of where we stand
with parents (financially speaking). Most parents are quite pleased to
see the school take its financial responsibilties to a more
proffessional level.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31-Jan-2001 19:33:21 GMT
From: David Cann (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: On Rainbow Family again.
I did not intend to express support for the Rainbow family, just pass
along an article describing it in some detail, since I didn't know much
about it.
iris springflower wrote:
) David. I was with the RF for 12 years!
(rest snipped)
David: While I have no reason to disbelieve Deborah and Iris about
Rainbow Ramily members being associated with their waldorf school, I
have never heard it mentioned at our local school. The constant
referrals on this list to RF members and waldorf supporters as
synonymous groups is, in my opinion, not generally true. I am sure it's
not true hereabouts.
David
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:59:06 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: RE: On Rainbow Family again.
)I did not intend to express support for the Rainbow family, just pass
)along an article describing it in some detail, since I didn't know much
)about it.
)
)iris springflower wrote:
)) David. I was with the RF for 12 years!
)(rest snipped)
)
)David: While I have no reason to disbelieve Deborah and Iris about
)Rainbow Ramily members being associated with their waldorf school, I
)have never heard it mentioned at our local school. The constant
)referrals on this list to RF members and waldorf supporters as
)synonymous groups is, in my opinion, not generally true. I am sure it's
)not true hereabouts.
)
)David
[Debra]
The same is true for our area, David. The RF members don't seem to live
around here. Frankly, I hope they never do.
However, the New Agers certainly hang out around our Waldorf school in
heavy doses.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:46:34 -0400
From: alice (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
Deborah Kelly wrote:
)
) --- Alice Klinge (alice javanet.com) wrote:
) ) I want to second that idea. I believe, Deborah,
) ) that you need to
) ) explore your response to this. I know it is not
) ) easy to admit mistakes,
) ) but I believe that is the only way for us to heal no
) ) matter how
) ) well-intentioned we may be.
)
) What do you mean by "heal?" This has become a catch
) phrase in the New Age movement and all of the Waldorf
) people around here I know describe themselves as
) "healers." In fact, many of them make money off of
) it.
[Alice]
\I am new to this kind of "debate" but I will try and clarify my point.
I think that you were wrong about revealing the name of this girl. I
believe that others thought so too. As they expressed this, it seemed
that your responses were defensive in nature. We are talking about a
girl here (isn't that correct?) - one with an unusual name and possibly
a terrible psychic burden to bear. Why would you want to us to know who
she is?
I am talking about healing so that you could release your defense
when you receive feedback about this from others who presumably
generally support you and your ideas...
I am not clear why you are lumping the concept of "healing" with
cynical, mercenarial suspicions..
) ) I well know what kind of stigma is around sexuality
) ) and children.
)
) What stigma? Every child I know who has been sexually
) or otherwise abused and who has come forward with the
) information, has been told to shut up and they do not
) respect the adults who are telling them to shut up.
[Alice responds]
Excuse me, I was referring to what my family has been through. Even
though we haven't done anything wrong, we are shunned by this
community. Their judgement is enough to create social pain and hurt for
us. I did NOT shut up about this, and I have been told in many ways to
shut up. Are you telling me that I cannot express how this experience
has effected my world view? And my view of vicimization?
) It
) ) may not matter who is the perpetrator and who is the
) ) victim. It is
) ) difficult as humans not to change the way we look at
) ) people after such a
) ) thing. It is human nature.
)
) No it is not. You cannot speak for any other human
) first of all. Secondly, not every culture shares the
) mores and views of the dominant culture.
) [Alice responds] I do not wish to debate from an anthropological or cultural perspective. I thought we were hear to state our hard won truths to exchange information about these educational/institutional philosophical phenomena. I do think that I may speak for my children. Then I am curious how you can speak for this girl?
we need to protect
) ) the confidentiality
) ) of victims, particularly children, no matter what.
) ) thanks, [Alice]
)
) There never was any confidentiality.
) [Alice responds]
I still think that not naming victims is an important rule.
Tell the story, support the victims, find the evidence..
But none of us have any right to socially expose a victim WITHOUT THEIR
CONSENT.
[Alice]
) DK
)
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 00:12:31 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
Peter Staudenmaier wrote, commenting on:
=
) ) RUDOLF STEINER AN ACTIVE OPPONENT OF ANTI-SEMITISM
) Many of the claims advanced in this apologia are obviously inaccurate; =
to
) chose just one, the notion that Steiner was "a convinced liberal" is
) absurd. Steiner condemned liberalism because it was supposedly incapabl=
e of
) grasping "the cultural mission which is the duty of the Germans in Aust=
ria"
) (Collected Essays on Cultural History, GA 31, p. 112; the press release=
) Sune translated quotes the very same volume twice).
The author of the text has the following comments:
**********************************************************
In an article in Deutschen Wochenschrift 13 July 1888 on 'Papacy and
liberalism' Steiner wrote:
'The barometer of progress in the development of humanity is its view of
freedom, and the practical realization of this view.'
He thereby expressed the basic view that he consequently held until his
death. It also expresses his agreement with the view of Hegel on the
nature of world history as a progress in the consciousness of freedom,
and the end goal of this history in not only the consciousness of but
the reality of spiritual freedom.
In the article, Steiner also expresses his unambiguous support for 'the
liberal principle as the essence of modern culture.' =
He wrote in connection with this:
*****************************************************
'It is our conviction, that the present time is characterized by an
advance [in freedom] that is as important that brought about by the
teachings of Christ: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in
Christ Jesus." =
Just as then the equal value of all people before God and his kind was
recognized, the conviction has become ever more established during the
last centuries, that our task not could consist in submitting to the
precepts of an external authority, and that everything that we believe
and that gives direction our actions should have its origin solely in
the light of reason in our soul. =
To only hold that for true, to which our own thinking forces us, and
only move in such social and governmental forms that we give to ourself,
that is the great basic principle of our time.'
****************************************************
This is
=AD a plea for Christianity, whose nature according to Steiner consisted
in the overcoming of the principle of race in favour of the principle of
equality of all people before God and his kind,
=AD a recognition of moral autonomy as the highest stage of moral
development, and also
=AD raises the principle of democracy to the same level of meaning and
importance as the Christian revolution.
But Steiner's unconditional support for the principle of liberalism in
culture did not stop him from criticizing pretence liberalism or wrongly
applied liberalism. He for example criticized market liberalism and
Manchester capitalism as a transfer and application of the principle of
liberty to and in an area where it only can result in damages.
His criticism of liberalism is a criticism of those who have betrayed
the spirit of liberalism, being the basic principle of cultural life,
while still thinking of themselves as its true representatives.
) But to my mind the most
) interesting paragraph here is the last: =
) ) The many evidences in Steiner's work of his active opposition against=
) ) the anti-Semitism show that all other statements on issues related to=
) ) Judaism (especially in lectures), must be read in the context of his=
) ) opposition against racism and anti-Semitism. (14) In view of his
) ) expressed, public, permanent and partly polemic dissociations from su=
ch
) ) ideologies contrary interpretations are not possible to uphold.
) =
) This presents a difficult logical problem: how can Steiner's antisemiti=
c
) statements be read in a non-antisemitic context? This problem becomes e=
ven
) more acute when you realize that a number of the statements quoted here=
are
) taken from plainly antisemitic articles and lectures.
The so called logical problem demonstrates the inconsistency in the
argumentation of those who accuse Steiner of anti-Semitism. It arises by
attributing anti-Semitism to something that not is anti-Semitic.
Those who consider Steiner to be anti-Semitic must explain where the
anti-Semitism in such sentences 'The Jews need Europe and Europe needs
the Jews' lies. How can an essay be anti-Semitic, in which Steiner
explicitly defends the existence of the Jews in Europe? I would call
such an essay pro-Semitic. When such sentences are found in an essay,
any reader must ask him- or herself how the author can be labelled as
anti-Semite. One must ask oneself how the two positions; the one that
expresses support for the existence of the Jews in Europe, and the other
that ascertains the ceasing of Jewry as nationality, can be united with
one another.
The solution lies in the concept of assimilation, that Steiner supported
together with the majority of the European Jews. In the discussion in
Germany one used to transcribe the concept of assimilation with the
concept of 'the destruction of Jewry'. Already Theodor Herzl did that in
his 'The Jewish state' in 1896. Steiner's remarks in the essay on
Hamerling expresses liberal Jewish positions. Most Jewish authors
supported Jewish assimilation during the 1880s' and 90s' and rejected a
separate Jewish state of its own. That is something one know, if one has
aquainted oneself somewhat with the history of Jewry during the 19th
century or the history of Zionism.
Laqueurs writes on the time in his 'Geschichte des Zionismus' (The
history of Zionism):
****************************************************
'But the spirit of the time was still basically optimistic, and one
generally believed that the attraction of anti-Semitism would be limited
to the backward parts of society, especially those who had suffered from
the effects of industrialism. The reaction against enlightenment and
liberalism, the new cult of violence and of anti-Humanism were
considered as transitory cultural diseases [...] =
The anti-Semites who had divided into several factions lost much of
their political influence after 1895, even if it continued in smaller
groups, who fought bitterly against one another [...]
There was also no reason why the German and Austrian Jews should
consider their situation as especially troubling. In Russia and Rumania
the situation for the Jews were incomparably worse: Since 1881 Eastern
Europe was haunted by a wave of pogroms. Even in France, where the
number of Jews was smaller than in Germany, their situation was much
more unsafe. =
The French anti-Semitic movement arose already before Marr, St=F6cker and=
D=FChring. It was strongly developed and had greater influence. In fact,
it was a pioneer of the modern anti-Jewish ideology; the German and
russian anti-Semites imported the greater parts of their ideas from
Paris.'
****************************************************
When Raphael Loewenfels in 1893, the foundation year of the Central
Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith, wrote that no educated
Jew was prepared to leave his beloved mother country (literally ('father
country') for a country far away, where his forefathers had lived
inconceivably long ago, he according to Laqueurs expressed 'not the
opinion of one individual', but 'the conviction of very many Jews'.
Anyone who calls Steiner's support of assimilation as 'anti-Semitic'
does two things:
- he slanders the majority of the Jews at the end of the 19th century as
being anti-Semites and
- shows his complete ignorance of Jewish history during the time.
) I'd like to ask Sune
) what he makes of this press release quoting Steiner's sentence "The Jew=
s
) need Europe and Europe needs the Jews" from Steiner's review of Hamerli=
ng's
) book Homunkulus. You indicated that you were familiar with that review;=
I'd
) like to know whether you think this sentence is presented in context in=
the
) piece you've translated for us. I'd also like to know if you agree that=
) Steiner's rejection of "the Jewish way of thinking" in the same review
) refers to "the belief in an abstract monotheism and a ethics of moral
) precepts and duties, deduced from revelation."
To what else should it refer?
************************************************************
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:55:14 -0800 (PST)
From: iris springflower (irisspringflower yahoo.com)
Subject: Rainbow Family. To David, Debra, and all
WOW! David and Debra, I am so GLAD your Waldorf
schools aren't at all touched by The Rainbow Family!
Then, what's happenening here is that the local RF
organizers who live here are networking with the
WEpeople through the food cooperatives and also
through the New Age businesses and social gatherings
and inviting the Waldorf people to their gatherings.
The RF gives it's "Peace, Love, & Healing" message to
the WE and New Age people, who "take the ait" so to
say. I guess some find what they are looking for at
the Rainbow gatherings. Others may find that their
new sleeping bag gets stolen one day and ask around
for it and be told that "We're all Family here. We
share everything, Brother (or Sister). It's only a
material thing you lost."
The RF goes to the Alternative Culture places to
recruit and invite people to their gatherings. The WE
people in this area are Alternative lifestyle/New
Agers mostly and would not deny this.
I understand what you are saying that Anthroposophy /
Waldorf are NOT connected with The Rainbow Family as
the same organation. That's true. The Hare Khrishna
group regularly has a camp at Rainbow Gatherings. So
do the Wiccans and many other groups.
Eclectic would be the correct word for it. Some would
use the word "Multi-cultic".
By the way, I have also met many Alternative Lifestyle
people who have LEFT The RF, without giving up their
lifestyle. They usually got ripped-off or had some
other bad experience at Rainbow Gatherings and were
QUITE ANGRY with The RF. One WE guy here who is
involed in the local Alternative culture here let a
Rainbow guy stay at his home and the RF guy ran up
thousands in long distance calls then left his host to
pay for it! Happens all the time! Now this local guy
will warn people about The Rf.
A friend of mine let a Rf couple who had a little girl
stay at her house out of compassion for their little
girl. They CHOSE to travel with the girl (rootless).
ANyway, my friend noticed them coming back with STOLEN
property from local businesses and even bathing suits
from the Viroqua pool. Plus videos and books from
local libraries that the couple didn't plan to return.
Electronics too. So she confronted them about it.
These "peaceful"Rainbow people BEAT her up in front of
their daughter! They hurt her very badly. There is a
warrent out for their arrest if they ever return to
this state and they ARE long-time Rf members.
I am not saying "All Rainbow people are bad". Hey, I
was a member of the group myself for 12 years and back
then, I was one of The RF's strongest defenders! I
was being hurt by people during that time and watching
others getting hurt, but I liken it to an abused wife
who still stays with her abusive husband because of
her fear or losing the "good" parts of the
relationship, and the fear of being alone. It took a
LOT for me to leave The RF. You see, that 12 year old
girl I posted about earlier is now almost 19. She is
my DAUGHTER! I watched as those RF men tried to make
her take off her bathing suit in front of fifty plus
people! I walked away from that scene with her. She
and I left that gathering together! NEVER to return to
the RF! My (now 24 year old) son left The RF too. I
won't tell you what some of them tried to do to him
after he refused to take LSD! We DON'T take illegal
drugs! Some of them call me a "traitor" now and I do
ask that you please keep my name WITHIN this list
concerning all I am disclosing. Why did I take my
kidas there in the first place? Easy, the POSITIVE
newspaper articles and The RF's own literature says
that The RF LOVES CHILDREN AND PUTS CHILDREN FIRST.
They invite famillies with children, ESPECIALLY, to
join. Teenagers are very welcome also. SO you read
one of the glowing newspaper articles about The RF
that has pictures of happy children in the woods and
you are led to believe that it's a healthy,
back-to-nature, and loving place for kids. ANYONE can
believe this! I used to place pro-RF flyers on the
food coops and the alternative bookstores and the
natural foods restaurants bulletin boards. Those are
the places to find the people who would be more likely
to attend Rainbow Gatherings. The Waldorf schools are
a great target population for this! People looking
for alternatives...people critical of the Established
Order...Lots of families with CHILDREN and young teens
means a good family image.
I am VERY SORRY now that I did that, but back then,
like the abused wife who DEFENDS her abusive husband,
no matter how much he hurts her, I did that. I REALLY
BELIEVED I was helping to make the world a better
place! I didn't believe anyone was going to be hurt.
I TRUSTED The RF COMPLETELY! The Rf was "My
Family". It brings CHILLS up my spine to think of it
now. I have a LOT of REGRETS.
My kids and I have a close, wonderful relationship
now. They both call me a "good Mom".
Best Wishes, Iris (please don't flame me for
disclosing this. Of course some RF members may come
hurt me in some way or do WORSE to me for disclosing
this. That's why I prefer this to stay on this list.)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:17:22 -0800 (PST)
From: iris springflower (irisspringflower yahoo.com)
Subject: Nothing has changed since 1994!
Hi. The last post I worte here got me "inspired" to
go search the Web and I found The RF's current message
board. So I read some of their posts (past few days).
One big thread is about how to deal with the theft
and violence at their gatherings. Of course, not all
of their members are theives, sexual offenders, etc.
There are also people who really believe The Rf IS
about peace, love, and healing.
Anyway, a guy posted there that he has attended the
Rainbow Gatherings of the past four years and he has
seen an INCREASE in theft and violence each year that
he attends. He asked the others what do do to stop
this. He sounded genuinely concerned about the thefts
and growing amount of violence at the RF gatherings.
They said, "Talk about it in Council (within the
group):, "Plan better gatherings", "Camp with your
friends in communities. DON'T camp by yourself." NOT
one person mentioned going to the outside law
enforcement authorities to REPORT the violence and
theft. It hasn't changed since I left the group in
1994! Same old garbage. Well, at least I just found
out that the amount of theft and violence has grown
since I left. Not one of the RF members on their
message board DENIED the fact of the thefts and
violence. They all agreed it happens at their
gatherings. Oh, one person posted a long post BLAMING
THE MAINSTREAM SOCIETY for the theives and violent
perpetrators at their gatherings. Another guy blamed
the FBI!
I don't think the local WE people here will stop
attending RF gatherings because of this, huh? After
all, they all camp together when they attend Rainbow
gatherings. I SECOND Deborah Kelly's posts on the RF
topic. Now I need to take a REST from it. This is
bringing up painful memories.
Best Wishes, Iris
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:33:25 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
looks like I'll have to hold off on that post about Hegel....
I was hoping Sune would tell us his own thoughts on the questions I posed
to him, but I guess I'll have to make do with his anonymous stand-in.
That's a shame; Sune is considerably brighter than this person. I must
admit at the outset that I have little patience for people, especially
those who are not on this list themselves and thus remain unaccountable,
who deliberately misrepresent texts that are available only in German. It
is of little use to argue back and forth about writings that most of you
don't have access to, but I don't know what else to do in a case like this.
That said, my replies are below.
) ) Many of the claims advanced in this apologia are obviously inaccurate;
)) to chose just one, the notion that Steiner was "a convinced liberal" is
) ) absurd. Steiner condemned liberalism because it was supposedly
)) incapable of grasping "the cultural mission which is the duty of the
)) Germans in Austria" (Collected Essays on Cultural History, GA 31,
)) p. 112; the press release Sune translated quotes the very same volume
)) twice).
)
)
) The author of the text has the following comments:
)
) **********************************************************
)
) In an article in Deutschen Wochenschrift 13 July 1888 on 'Papacy and
) liberalism' Steiner wrote:
)
) 'The barometer of progress in the development of humanity is its view of
) freedom, and the practical realization of this view.'
This sentence has nothing to do with liberalism. The article is a rejection
of both catholicism and liberalism, not a championing of the one over the
other. Throughout the article Steiner refers disparagingly to
"pseudo-liberalism" and has nothing good to say about it. I have no idea
how our anonymous author got the idea that this article is a defense of
liberalism.
) He thereby expressed the basic view that he consequently held until his
) death. It also expresses his agreement with the view of Hegel on the
) nature of world history as a progress in the consciousness of freedom,
) and the end goal of this history in not only the consciousness of but
) the reality of spiritual freedom.
Perhaps our anonymous author also thinks Hegel was a liberal.....
) In the article, Steiner also expresses his unambiguous support for 'the
) liberal principle as the essence of modern culture.'
No, he doesn't. The full sentence reads: "Nor can it be denied that the
liberal principle has been correctly identified [in Pope Leo's encyclical]
as the essence of modern culture." Steiner does not express any kind of
support, ambiguous, unambiguous, or otherwise, for "the liberal principle"
here, he merely notes that in his opinion the pope has diagnosed
contemporary European culture accurately. Perhaps our anonymous author
could share with the rest of us the secret decoder ring he used while
reading this article; he surely has come up with a creative interpretation
of Steiner's text.
) He wrote in connection with this:
)
) *****************************************************
)
) 'It is our conviction, that the present time is characterized by an
) advance [in freedom] that is as important that brought about by the
) teachings of Christ: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
) bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in
) Christ Jesus."
)
) Just as then the equal value of all people before God and his kind was
) recognized, the conviction has become ever more established during the
) last centuries, that our task not could consist in submitting to the
) precepts of an external authority, and that everything that we believe
) and that gives direction our actions should have its origin solely in
) the light of reason in our soul.
)
) To only hold that for true, to which our own thinking forces us, and
) only move in such social and governmental forms that we give to ourself,
) that is the great basic principle of our time.'
Try as I might, I cannot find any reference to liberalism anywhere in this
passage. Did anyone else spot one?
) This is
)
) ‚ a plea for Christianity, whose nature according to Steiner consisted
) in the overcoming of the principle of race in favour of the principle of
) equality of all people before God and his kind,
)
) ‚ a recognition of moral autonomy as the highest stage of moral
) development, and also
)
) ‚ raises the principle of democracy to the same level of meaning and
) importance as the Christian revolution.
Perhaps my original comment, which supposedly occasioned this anonymous
treatise, wasn't sufficiently clear. I said that it is absurd to describe
Steiner as "a convinced liberal". I said nothing about Steiner's views on
christianity, moral autonomy, or democracy (although now that these issues
have been raised, I am happy to say that the above description of Steiner's
views is a caricature). Liberalism has a very specific meaning in late 19th
century Austrian culture, and that meaning is unrelated to questions of
christianity etc. This ought to be obvious from the fact that liberals of
the era included christians and non-christians, supporters and opponents of
moral autonomy theories, and people with widely divergent conceptions of
democracy. Thus I fail to see what any of this has to do with my comment.
) But Steiner's unconditional support for the principle of liberalism in
) culture did not stop him from criticizing pretence liberalism or wrongly
) applied liberalism.
"Did not stop him"? All he does in the cited article is criticize actually
existing liberalism (and make fun of the pope) for five straight pages.
Steiner does make exactly one oblique reference to "true liberalism" in
this article, but that reference is quite puzzling. It seems to be a
positive reference, suggesting that Steiner approved of true liberalism,
but the same sentence goes on to equate this "true liberalism" with a
"truly state-socialist" society, leaving me, at least, rather confused. I
await our anonymous author's brilliant analysis of Steiner's theory of
truly liberal state socialism.
) He for example criticized market liberalism and
) Manchester capitalism as a transfer and application of the principle of
) liberty to and in an area where it only can result in damages.
)
) His criticism of liberalism is a criticism of those who have betrayed
) the spirit of liberalism, being the basic principle of cultural life,
) while still thinking of themselves as its true representatives.
I assume that this is a backhanded admission that Steiner did indeed
denounce actual liberals and liberalism at every opportunity. There must be
over two dozen references to liberalism in the volume that includes "Papacy
and Liberalism" (volume 31 of the collected works, the same one I excerpted
a few days ago), every one of them negative. Our anonymous author seems to
be suggesting that, while Steiner unequivocally condemned what everyone
else called liberalism, he somehow had an alternative vision of liberalism
in the back of his mind. Aside from the fact that this hypothesis is made
up out of thin air, it wouldn't really reflect very well on Steiner even if
it were true. It would make as much sense for me to declare myself the
defender of "true anthroposophy" while spending all my time criticizing
everyone else who call themselves anthroposophists.
) ) But to my mind the most
) ) interesting paragraph here is the last:
) ) ) The many evidences in Steiner's work of his active opposition against
) ) ) the anti-Semitism show that all other statements on issues related to
) ) ) Judaism (especially in lectures), must be read in the context of his
) ) ) opposition against racism and anti-Semitism. (14) In view of his
) ) ) expressed, public, permanent and partly polemic dissociations from
) ) ) such ideologies contrary interpretations are not possible to uphold.
) )
) ) This presents a difficult logical problem: how can Steiner's
) ) antisemitic statements be read in a non-antisemitic context? This
) ) problem becomes even more acute when you realize that a number
) ) of the statements quoted here are
) ) taken from plainly antisemitic articles and lectures.
)
) The so called logical problem demonstrates the inconsistency in the
) argumentation of those who accuse Steiner of anti-Semitism. It arises by
) attributing anti-Semitism to something that not is anti-Semitic.
Well, gosh, yes, that certainly would be a foolish error. Let's see if I
made this error:
) Those who consider Steiner to be anti-Semitic must explain where the
) anti-Semitism in such sentences 'The Jews need Europe and Europe needs
) the Jews' lies.
I didn't say the above sentence is antisemitic in itself, I said it is
taken from an antisemitic article. The article in question is Steiner's
review of a book by Robert Hamerling. The quoted sentence is part of
Steiner's paraphrase of Hamerling's narrative (which might best be
described for now as a spoof of Zionism before Zionism had even been
created), in which the Jews who had left Europe return after crucifying
their former leader. There are two possible ways to understand Steiner's
paraphrase of Hamerling: either he agrees with Hamerling's views or he
rejects them. Our anonymous author obviously believes that Steiner endorsed
Hamerling's view that the Jews need Europe and Europe needs the Jews. And I
agree; Steiner's review of Hamerling is 100% positive, indeed adulatory. He
clearly endorses the book he is reviewing. And that's where the problem
begins. Steiner's very next sentence after the one quoted above explains
that Jews are "completely incapable of running their own country", which is
why they "need Europe". And why does Europe need the Jews? Because, as
Hamerling's book helpfully explains, without Jews the stock markets had to
close, the newspapers had no reporters, and there weren't enough doctors
(although art and poetry had blossomed in the absence of the Jewish critics
who had previously suffocated German culture). These are just some of the
views that Steiner's text endorses; Hamerling's book also says that the
"Jewish essence" is materialistic, artificial, and not really human; that
the Jews want to found a Jewish state which will "eventually cover the
whole world"; and that Jews are rootless, parasitic moneylenders with no
culture of their own.
) How can an essay be anti-Semitic, in which Steiner
) explicitly defends the existence of the Jews in Europe? I would call
) such an essay pro-Semitic.
It is difficult to understand how a glowing review of an antisemitic book
can count as "pro-Semitic". But perhaps our anonymous author has never
bothered to read Hamerling's book (though that wouldn't really explain
much, since Steiner's review gives a detailed and accurate account of its
vile contents). But even if we excised all of the parts of Steiner's essay
that deal directly with Hamerling's text, we'd still be left with the
following: Steiner places antisemites and Jews on the same moral level (p.
148); he ridicules "oversensitive Jews" who have failed to appreciate
Hamerling's literary genius (ibid.); and he ends the review with a
repugnant five-page attack on unnamed Jewish critics of Hamerling which
contrasts the latter's "productive spiritual work" with his critics'
spiritual infertility, one of the most well-worn tropes of 19th century
German antisemitism. Steiner goes on to flatly disqualify Jewish critics
from writing about Hamerling's work because they are "necessarily
prejudiced" and incapable of "an objective evaluation of the book" (p.
153). This is what our anonymous author calls a pro-Semitic essay.
) When such sentences are found in an essay,
) any reader must ask him- or herself how the author can be labelled as
) anti-Semite.
According to the logic invoked here, the most infamous antisemitic
politician of Steiner's time, Karl Lueger, could not be labelled an
antisemite. Lueger famously declared in 1886: "As God is my witness, I
recognize no differences of faith; Christians and Jews are the same to me."
He went on to become mayor of Vienna on a rabidly antisemitic platform, and
was one of Hitler's heroes. In fairness to Lueger, his antisemitism was
largely tactical, whereas Steiner held deep convictions about the
relationship between Jews and Jewishness and his beloved German culture.
) One must ask oneself how the two positions; the one that
) expresses support for the existence of the Jews in Europe, and the other
) that ascertains the ceasing of Jewry as nationality, can be united with
) one another.
)
) The solution lies in the concept of assimilation, that Steiner supported
) together with the majority of the European Jews.
I'm not so fond of debates where each participant accuses the other of
total ignorance, so I don't really know what to say in response to the
claim that "the majority of European Jews" supported assimilation in 1888,
except that it is at odds with the entirety of existing scholarship on
European Jewry.
) In the discussion in
) Germany one used to transcribe the concept of assimilation with the
) concept of 'the destruction of Jewry'. Already Theodor Herzl did that in
) his 'The Jewish state' in 1896. Steiner's remarks in the essay on
) Hamerling expresses liberal Jewish positions.
Uh, no. Steiner's essay on Hamerling attacks one prominent liberal Jew in
particular, Daniel Spitzer, without naming him (though he made it quite
clear to his readers exactly who he meant), and explicitly rejects *all*
specifically "Jewish positions", liberal or otherwise.
) Most Jewish authors
) supported Jewish assimilation during the 1880s' and 90s' and rejected a
) separate Jewish state of its own. That is something one know, if one has
) aquainted oneself somewhat with the history of Jewry during the 19th
) century or the history of Zionism.
That would probably be the case if one acquainted oneself with this history
by relying entirely on antisemitic tracts, many of which did indeed argue
that the only choices were assimilation and Zionism. Our anonymous author
apparently cannot conceive of the possibility of a thriving Jewish culture
within and alongside gentile cultures. In any case, what Steiner advocated
was not assimilation in the standard sociological sense, but rather the
Jews' "complete disappearance into the German spirit", in the words of his
buddy Jacobowski. Steiner fervently wished "that Jewry as a people would
simply cease to exist" (Steiner, Geschichte der Menschheit, Dornach 1968,
p. 189). He wanted those Jews he considered culturally 'eligible', so to
speak, to become Germans pure and simple with no trace of Jewishness, and
he wanted all other Jews to just go away.
) Laqueurs writes on the time in his 'Geschichte des Zionismus' (The
) history of Zionism):
)
) ****************************************************
)
) 'But the spirit of the time was still basically optimistic, and one
) generally believed that the attraction of anti-Semitism would be limited
) to the backward parts of society, especially those who had suffered from
) the effects of industrialism. The reaction against enlightenment and
) liberalism, the new cult of violence and of anti-Humanism were
) considered as transitory cultural diseases [...]
)
) The anti-Semites who had divided into several factions lost much of
) their political influence after 1895, even if it continued in smaller
) groups, who fought bitterly against one another [...]
)
) There was also no reason why the German and Austrian Jews should
) consider their situation as especially troubling. In Russia and Rumania
) the situation for the Jews were incomparably worse: Since 1881 Eastern
) Europe was haunted by a wave of pogroms. Even in France, where the
) number of Jews was smaller than in Germany, their situation was much
) more unsafe.
)
) The French anti-Semitic movement arose already before Marr, St–cker and
) D¸hring. It was strongly developed and had greater influence. In fact,
) it was a pioneer of the modern anti-Jewish ideology; the German and
) russian anti-Semites imported the greater parts of their ideas from
) Paris.'
Once again, I fail to find anything in these passages to support the point
our anonymous author is trying to make. Laqueur says nothing here to back
up the claim that "the majority of the European Jews" supported
assimilation, much less that the only two alternatives available at the
time were assimilation or Zionism. Laqueur's book, one of the standard
histories of Zionism, actually goes to some lengths to describe the
incredible ideological variety among European Jews on the question of their
relationship to gentile society. Our anonymous author seems to apply his
creative method of interpretation to all texts, not just Steiner's.
) ****************************************************
)
) When Raphael Loewenfels in 1893, the foundation year of the Central
) Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith, wrote that no educated
) Jew was prepared to leave his beloved mother country (literally ('father
) country') for a country far away, where his forefathers had lived
) inconceivably long ago, he according to Laqueurs expressed 'not the
) opinion of one individual', but 'the conviction of very many Jews'.
Yes, the Zentralverein did indeed promote staying in Germany. But staying
in Germany *as Jews* is radically different from "complete
disappearance into the German spirit". Also, the suggestion that the
Zentralverein represented a majority of Jews, even in Germany, is very
wide of the mark; it had next to no support among 'Ostjuden' (Jews from
Eastern Europe living in Germany), and even among 'Westjuden' it struggled
to maintain its profile.
) Anyone who calls Steiner's support of assimilation as 'anti-Semitic'
) does two things:
)
) - he slanders the majority of the Jews at the end of the 19th century as
) being anti-Semites and
)
) - shows his complete ignorance of Jewish history during the time.
I think I'll have to leave it up to readers of this exchange to decide
which one of us is ignorant of the history of German Jewry. As for slander,
I take it our anonymous author means that I have slandered
pro-assimilationist Jews. While I don't think that my skeptical stance
toward assimilationist ideology counts as slander (it has, after all, been
gruesomely confirmed by Germany's twentieth century history), that stance
has relatively little to do with my analysis of Steiner's antisemitism. As
I have tried to explain, Steiner did not support assimilation in the sense
that most pro-assimilationist German Jews understood that term. Rather,
under the influence of Jacobowski, Steiner for a brief period promoted a
sort of super-patriotic overreaction to antisemitism whereby German Jews
would prove themselves more German than their detractors. I think that this
conclusion is unavoidable for anyone who has had an opportunity to read the
half-dozen articles on antisemitism that Steiner wrote in 1901 immediately
after Jacobowski's death. If I have time this weekend I will try to pull
together a summary/analysis of those pieces.
) ) I'd like to ask Sune
) ) what he makes of this press release quoting Steiner's sentence "The
) ) Jews need Europe and Europe needs the Jews" from Steiner's review
) ) of Hamerling's book Homunkulus. You indicated that you were familiar
) ) with that review; I'd like to know whether you think this sentence is
) ) presented in context in the piece you've translated for us. I'd also
) ) like to know if you agree that Steiner's rejection of "the Jewish way
) ) of thinking" in the same review refers to "the belief in an abstract
) ) monotheism and a ethics of moral precepts and duties, deduced from
) ) revelation."
)
) To what else should it refer?
There is no mention of monotheism or of revelation-based morality in
Steiner's review of Hamerling or in Hamerling's book itself. Monotheism and
revelation-based morality are, on the other hand, distinguishing
characteristics of Judaism as a religion. That Steiner did *not* have
Judaism as a religion in mind is obvious from the full passage: "Jewry as
such has long since outlived its time; it has no more justification within
the modern life of peoples, and the fact that it continues to exist is a
mistake of world history whose consequences are unavoidable. We do not mean
the forms of the Jewish religion alone, but above all the spirit of Jewry,
the Jewish way of thinking." (GA 32, p. 152) This is a crystal clear
rejection of the right to existence of the *Jewish people*; it quite
explicitly does not refer to "the Jewish religion only". What Hamerling,
and by extension Steiner, meant by "the Jewish way of thinking" is obvious
from Hamerling's book, which is in large part built around the proposition
that "Jewish sensibility and Jewish essence" are "akin to homunculism",
Hamerling's term for all that is rotten in modern culture -- materialism,
greed, power-seeking, artificiality, spiritual barenness. Steiner's
celebratory review of Hamerling endorses this view of Jewishness, and
recommends it to his readers as "objective". Sune had indicated he was
familiar with this review, and Sune's anonymous partner has been quoting
from it as a model "pro-Semitic text". This is the sort of thing that
passes for "opposition to antisemitism" among anthroposophists. It would
have been better if contemporary anthros had continued to ignore Steiner's
hostility to Jews instead of trying to whitewash it.
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 19:04:07 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: letter to The Union
Dear Editor,
Your article about our lawsuit got several important facts wrong.
We do allege that the schools teach religion, but that is not the
only thing they do that violates the constitution. For example, the
teacher training at Anthroposophical seminaries is also an
impermissable entanglement with religion.
Now that the judge has split the trial, the first phase beginning
March 19, determining whether Anthroposophy is a religion for
Establishment Clause purposes, is estimated to last about one week.
This phase has nothing to do with the schools.
Should the judge find that Anthroposophy is a religion, then in the
second phase of the trial it will be decided whether the school
districts' activities (including teacher training, teaching methods,
classroom and extracurricular activities) include Anthroposophy or
are entangled with Anthroposophy.
Sincerely, Dan Dugan
Secretary, PLANS, Inc.
290 Napoleon St. #E
San Francisco, CA 94124
(415) 821-9776
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 18:41:00 +1100
From: "firefly mail" (firefly tpg.com.au)
Subject: Re: Rainbow Family. To Iris
Dear Iris,
My heart goes out to you for the obvious pain you have experienced with
these groups. I find it all pretty remarkable and am quite relieved that the
Steiner school my son attends here in Sydney, Australia is able to embrace
and accommodate children from all backgrounds without forcing it's
philosophies down our throats. Naturally many of the kids come from
'alternative' families but most I have met seem to have a good grasp on
reality & are hardworking individuals.
My son's school reflects the cultural diversity of our country and racism is
not an issue as far as I can see. I think his school is a progressive one
and although I find some of the practices (eurythmy) odd for the most part
is is providing quality education. Academic kids are encouraged and the
results of the HSC (final year of high school exams) in recent years would
indicate they are successfully combing 'waldorf & mainstream'. Kids have
achieved 99% and they have gone right through from Kindergarten. Just out of
interest all the kids wear uniform until Year 11 & 12 when it is optional.
Another option is for less academic but obviously talented children is to
work on a major project in their final year. These projects are evaluated by
senior academics from universities & colleges and if successful the students
are offered a place in a course of their choice.
I was quite concerned with the Steiner system, because I really didn't know
much about it until I joined this list. I sent my son along because I liked
the school environment (11 hectares of virgin bushland and only 15 minutes
from the CBD) and I was impressed by the dedication of the teachers &
parents. Of course there are some odd bods & beansprout jargon around but
for the most part the high school is a stimulating & interesting learning
environment.
I have met a lot of my son's school friends over the past 6 months and am
pleased to see that they are articulate & well balanced kids. There have
been unique challenges for the teachers getting used to kids from mainstream
schools but they seem to have put their heart & soul into it. Apart from the
school curriculum the kids participate in a wide variety of life skills as
well as fun stuff like abseiling, windsurfing & regular sports.
I wish you well,
regards Deb
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 04:03:21 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
In a message dated 1/31/01 6:14:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
) n an article in Deutschen Wochenschrift 13 July 1888 on 'Papacy and
) liberalism' Steiner wrote:
)
) 'The barometer of progress in the development of humanity is its view of
) freedom, and the practical realization of this view.'
Sune:
) He thereby expressed the basic view that he consequently held until his
) death. It also expresses his agreement with the view of Hegel on the
) nature of world history as a progress in the consciousness of freedom,
) and the end goal of this history in not only the consciousness of but
) the reality of spiritual freedom.
)
Interesting. Lets define Hegel's unusual concept of "freedom". We must first
present his metaphysics. Although Hegel is perhaps the most difficult
philosopher to understand, I'll give it my best shot (granted, in a
simplified nutshell). Bear with me Sune....
Hegel held that the only reality is the whole, or as he puts it: the
"Absolute". It is not that the multiplicity of things (matter) are illusory;
rather things are greater or lesser real depending on how they are perceived
as elements of the whole.The perception of duality and sepateness are the
illusions of irrational thought.
Reason, accd to Hegel, is the logical activity of concious realization
that the whole is real. He devised an interesting form of logic called the
dialectic consisting of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. For example: the
statement "Reality is Life" is the thesis. Life, however, implies death. One
would then say that "Reality is death" (antithesis). Considering that all
that exists is the whole, this won't do either, so one says that "Reality is
life and death". An apparent synthesis, but this statement implies the life
and death of something. One then says "Reality is the life and death of
everything". Still this implies time which, in turn, means a beginning, a
becoming and an end. Then we are back to sepateness and duality...ad
infinitum.
The whole idea, so to speak, is that through this form of logic, a
statement which qualifies the whole is by it's very nature contradictory. One
must rationally expand the statement to include greater numbers of qualifying
statements regarding reality which, ultimately, leads to the synthesis which
Hegel called the "Absolute Idea".
The Absolute Idea or "Spirit" is similar to the intellectual god of
Aristotle in that it is Thought Thinking Thought or the Idea contemplating
itself (what else is there since their is nothing other than the unity/whole
of all things?).
For some unknown reason known only by Hegel (and Steiner!), he applied
this dialectic process to the evolution of Spirit. Spirit incarnates to
become Pure Spirit again. Why is _the_question (as the saying goes: The
universe is in the process of learning Hegel). For Hegel, Spirit (the
Absolute Whole) "separates itself" into opposites of Spirit and matter. The
evolution of Spirit in this physical plane from an imperfect (incarnate) to
perfect state happens in the east to west development of
civilizations/nations of human history beginning with China then the
Greco-Roman, Germany (being German himself, he thought the germans were _the_
spiritually enlightened) and finally America. Every era, or "epoch", of
civilization served to carry the spiritual torch at it's particular stage in
the dialectic.
Here we come to "freedom". Accd to Hegel, the Spirit is the rational Will
that guides human history for the purpose of it's own self-realization as
absolute truth.The individual who, through dialectical logic, "knows" both
the reality of the whole and the process of the self-determination of spirit
becomes "free" subjectively (the object being the Absolute).It is the unity
of the Universal and subjective Will that is the spiritual reality of
humanity.
Keep in mind that reality is the whole and not the multiplicity of it's
parts. Just as an organ is a part of the body (organism), so is the
individual a part of the state. Hegel's view of the state is the "Divine
Idea" manifest on earth in the form of human will. It is the rational,
Universal Will which realizes itself as object, by humans, freely.Hence, the
only spirituality humanity possesses is through the state. We participate in
the spiritual whole as "subject" and "object" in the state which is the
embodiment of the Absolute. Accd to Hegel, the individual is insignificant
outside the State just as an organ is separate from the body. As the purpose
of the organ is to serve the body (the whole), so is the individual to serve
the state.
The liberal concept of the state (Locke) in which it provides for and
protects the endeavors of individuals is dismissed by Hegel. He asserts that
the individual exists, metaphysically, for the state. His concept of
individual freedom amounts to the priviledge/right to obey the Law.
It is not surprising that Hegel advocated monarchy as a spiritual form of
government. Or that he held as heroes the likes of Ceasar and Napoleon.
If Steiner was a big fan of Hegel's concept of "spiritual freedom", then I
must rethink Plato's philosopher king.
Ray
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 146
-- Topica Digest --
RE: More on news Article.
By canndw netzero.net
Re: More on news Article.
By alice javanet.com
Re: naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
RE: Westfall
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By steve premofine.com
RE: Luke Schelly post on tuition contracts
By canndw netzero.net
Re: more on naming victims
By snell netshel.net
Re: naming victims
By alice javanet.com
contracts/was Luke Schelly's post on contracts
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: naming victims
By winters_diana hotmail.com
The unfounded allegations on 'Hess' adherence to anthroposophy'
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By asf peakpeak.com
tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
By momof2gals mindspring.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1-Feb-2001 12:50:45 GMT
From: David Cann (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: More on news Article.
--------------------------------------
David: I will vouch for the reputation of Hartsbrook as a strong,
well-established Waldorf school in the Northeast.
Deborah Kelly: So what and according to whom? "Strong" and
"well-established" are adjectives that by themselves supply no evidence
as to what is being done in the school. Actually, what you write
supports Alice's statements, particularly as concerns the power of those
allied with that school to make other people feel powerless.
---------------------------------------
I used "strong" to describe a full-sized (K-8), fully-enrolled (grades
classes of twenty or more in general), full curriculum (all usual
waldorf school subjects taught), financially stable school. Purely my
defintion, although it's consistent with how I've heard other waldorf
folks use the term.
I used "well-established" to mean that this "strength" (see above) has
been true for more than just a few years.
NB: under these definitions, my school would be considered neither
"strong" nor "well-established". But I think it's a good school, and I
think that we could, in time, become a strong, well-established school
ourselves, while remaining a good school.
Agreed that this description does not predict what occurs in the school
on a day-to-day basis.
I do not know enough about Alice's situation (or her school) to either
support or refute it, and I did not offer the above email in an attempt
to do either.
However, Hartsbrook was one of the first waldorf schools I learned about
that had a history of success (or "strength") without being adjacent to
a major city, and I've often used it as a mental model of "success" for
my school. Many key players in Waldorf on the US East Coast are, or
were, associated with that school. Hearing about Alice's pain and anger
towards this school was a shock to me.
As for "so what", well, we all have to decide that for ourselves.
David
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 10:52:46 -0400
From: alice (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: More on news Article.
David Cann wrote:
)snip(
) However, Hartsbrook was one of the first waldorf schools I learned about
) that had a history of success (or "strength") without being adjacent to
) a major city, and I've often used it as a mental model of "success" for
) my school. Many key players in Waldorf on the US East Coast are, or
) were, associated with that school. Hearing about Alice's pain and anger
) towards this school was a shock to me.
)
) As for "so what", well, we all have to decide that for ourselves.
)
) David
)
)[Alice responds]
I can't tell you how much of a shock all of this has been for us, too.
I will tell you that after this happened to us, I found out there is a
local group of families who meet monthly for support called "THe Fallen
Angels" - families who are trying to figure out harmful experiences that
have happened to their children while at the school.
Some of these involve learning disabilities/differences and other's
involve severe bullying by the children and lack of teacher supervision.
One story is about a pre-school teacher - a leader in this community -
washing out a child's mouth with soap- making him spit the word "penis"
into the sink after he said it in class...(she is still teaching - the
family left.....)
I was very surprised at the variety and severity of what had happened to
these conscious, concerned parents... and the cover-ups seem
particularly disturbing as in our case. They have used the
mandated-reporting confidentiality part to tell any other concerned
parent that they will not speak about it. Then I brought my lawyer, and
now all of the faculty is under a "gag order" because of their fear of
liability. Except that because they refuse to resolve this, that would
propel me to sue them by wanting the truth to come out..
My question is, is it worth it- will they attack my children as they
already have? How low would they go to protect themselves? It seems
clear that they are willing to sacrifice the well-being of any number of
individual children and families to defend one another's actions.
I consider them ethically challenged, disturbed and blinded by their
dogma.
My son was sitting in the row in front of his persecutor-teacher at the
concert last night.(next to one of his classmates...) I wonder what
kind of energetic influence she had on his vulnerable little
spirit.....I was trying to imagine a force field between them and if she
had touched him, I was prepared to leap between.
Does she imagine that we are "fine"?????
-AK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:17:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
I will abide by the list rule of not naming specific
people. (If I had to do again I would name the
perpetrator rather than the victim, which is what I
meant by "inadvertently." Of course, that amounts to
covertly naming the victim.) We clearly come from
completely different cultures and belief systems. I
understand what you are saying, but you have no
understanding of what I have been saying, so it is
therefore an impasse. It has, however, become clear
to me that what you speak of as "confidentiality" also
allows for the community to wiggle out of their
responsibility to our children.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:19:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Westfall
--- David Cann (canndw netzero.net) wrote:
) I, too, have seen financial manifestations of
) divorce through my role
) (currently treasurer and, before that, finance
) chair) in the waldorf
) school. We have had noncustodial parents who refuse
) to pay toward
) child's tuition. But I have never had anything even
) remotely close
) (that I am aware of) to what Dan calls a "waldorf
) custody case", where a
) parent is dead-set against his/her child even
) attending the waldorf
) school at all, while the other parent is adamantly
) FOR it.
)
) David
)
There is a local family where this was a central
divorce issue.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:27:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
--- Steve Premo (steve premofine.com) wrote:
) Me? I don't decide who is a lawyer and who is not.
) That is a function of
) the state bar, which administers the bar exam. You
) take the bar exam, you
) pass, you're a lawyer.
That is not how it happens. It concerns me that on a
list dedicated to uncovering the truth, that this is
the type of thinking going on. I have used much of
the Steiner, etal. information from this list to
inform others. I have also read some of Steiner's
books ordered through interlibrary loans frankly to
double check that information, and have found this
list's quotes of Steiner, Finser, etc. to be accurate.
Uncovering WE is a serious proposition for me I know
and I assume that people are making attempts at
accuracy.
DK
DK
) I do look forward to hearing from you offlist about
) your lawyering.
)
) Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
) "There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
) that distinction is not difficult to make." -
) Superman
) http://www.premofine.com
)
)
____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You
) Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 09:10:37 -0800
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
On 1 Feb 2001, at 8:27, Deborah Kelly wrote:
) --- Steve Premo (steve premofine.com) wrote:
) ) Me? I don't decide who is a lawyer and who is not.
) ) That is a function of
) ) the state bar, which administers the bar exam. You
) ) take the bar exam, you
) ) pass, you're a lawyer.
)
) That is not how it happens.
True. It's a little more complicated. The state bar tends to have other
requirements in addition to passing the bar, such as good moral character.
Someone who has passed the bar can still be disqualified on that basis.
As a lawyer, I'm well aware of what it takes to become one. The only
caveat is that I'm a California lawyer, and Wisconsin may have different
rules about becoming a lawyer. For example, in California the State Bar
administers the bar exam and decides who may be admitted to the practice
of law. In some states, I believe that is a function of the state
government. But I think that in all states, unless you've passed the bar
exam and whatever other requirements they have, you're not a lawyer.
) It concerns me that on a
) list dedicated to uncovering the truth, that this is
) the type of thinking going on.
What type of thinking? If I am mistaken, please enlighten me.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1-Feb-2001 17:14:37 GMT
From: David Cann (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Luke Schelly post on tuition contracts
I had planned to re-read our contract before responding, but forgot to
last night. As I remember it, though, it's closer to Lisa's waldorf
school contract than to her new school's contract. We were lucky enough
to have a teacher with administrative experience at two large waldorf
schools arrive, and she has helped us improve our contracts and
enrollment process quite a lot the past few years.
My first impression in reading Lisa's description of the enrollment
contract at the non-WS is that it's so subjective so as to be of little
help should disagreements arise. As such, it struck me more as a
statement of principles (or, more cynically, as a marketing tool) rather
than as a substantive part of the contract. Since Lisa only synopsized
the contract, there well could be additional verbiage that clarifies the
language and establishes clearer procedures, so I stand open to
correction by Lisa (or by others who have seen these longer documents).
This is just my first impression of what she said. After all, my school
strives to provide the same things ("supportive
environment"..."rigor"..."critical thinking") that Lisa details, the
difference is in the means and the measurement, and I don't see how
writing these goals in the contract (without showing HOW they can be
accomplished) is enforceable in any manner.
As for tuition insurance, we don't offer it, but it has been a point of
discussion here. At a business manager/finance meeting I attended at
Sunbridge last year, several of the schools in attendance had some sort
of tuition insurance. Some that I've spoken with think it's great,
others think it's ridiculously expensive and a burden to impose on the
families. As we get larger, though, it may well become necessary;
tracking all those payments gets awfully difficult.
I asked a friend whose children attend a nearby non-Waldorf school, who
said it's optional there and costs something like $300.
David
Lisa Ercolano said:
)
Luke, could you give a few more details about your school's contract,
please? (If you could tell us the name of the school and where it is, I
would also appreciate it.)
Basically, I am most interested in what your school's contract promises
that the school will provide in exchange for the contractee's money.
Does it spell out, in detail, that the child will be educated in a safe
and nurturing environment, etc? Does it promise that the child will get
an education at all?
Or does it merely state that the child is to be enrolled and that
tuition is to be paid in the amount of $XXXX a year, and then sets out
the circumstances under which that contract can be broken and by whom?
I ask because I truly am interested. In my opinion, the contract offered
(and signed by us, for several years) at our former W. school left much
to be desired. (Of course, as I had never signed a private school
contract before this, I had nothing to compare it to.)
The contract basically said that our child would be enrolled and that we
would pay a certain amount over a certain period of time.
What a different document that one was compared to the contract we
signed this year at our younger girl's private school (non-WS)! That
document lays out, in detail, what the school promises, as well as what
they are asking parents to promise (besides money.) Mentioned are: an
education in a safe and nurturing environment; an atmosphere of academic
rigor and tolerance for others; development of critical thinking skills,
and so in, in that vein. In return, we promised to support our child,
monitor her homework and projects, etc.
* One last thing: does your school offer tuition insurance? OUr WS did
not. Our new school does, as do most other high quality private schools.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 09:26:07 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
)--- Steve Premo (steve premofine.com) wrote:
)) Me? I don't decide who is a lawyer and who is not.
)) That is a function of
)) the state bar, which administers the bar exam. You
)) take the bar exam, you
)) pass, you're a lawyer.
)
[DK]
)That is not how it happens.
[Debra]
How does it happen, then? I'm really curious now. Steve is a practicing
lawyer who may not have had to take that hard state bar test. I've always
wanted to be a lawyer. How else does one become a lawyer? Can you practice
law without taking that test? I think I'd be a good lawyer, but don't have
a lot of time to get my law degree. Is there still hope for me?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:10:32 -0400
From: alice (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
Deborah Kelly wrote:
)
) I will abide by the list rule of not naming specific
) people. (If I had to do again I would name the
) perpetrator rather than the victim, which is what I
) meant by "inadvertently." Of course, that amounts to
) covertly naming the victim.) We clearly come from
) completely different cultures and belief systems. I
) understand what you are saying, but you have no
) understanding of what I have been saying, so it is
) therefore an impasse. It has, however, become clear
) to me that what you speak of as "confidentiality" also
) allows for the community to wiggle out of their
) responsibility to our children.
)
) DK
[ALice responds]
I am sorry to imagine that you believe that I have no understanding of
what you have been saying. I have printed out your Tue. Jan.30 listing
in which you state your ideas about abuse victims and
confidentiality. I usually think it must be me when there is a
communication difference - what you refer to as an impasse. I hope to
re-read what you stated to better understand you.
I believe that it is very personal to be abused - the deepest kind of
personal, which defines what "abuse" is...
Tell me, would it change your opinion of me to tell you I was raped at
eighteen?
AK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:42:21 -0500
From: momof2gals mindspring.com
Subject: contracts/was Luke Schelly's post on contracts
David et al:
I will post more details on the (what I think is) a very good contract
tonight, when I have it in front of me.
However, regarding tuition insurance, well, in this neck of the woods,
a family pays about $50 or so for the tuition insurance FOR A YEAR. It
is not ridiculously expensive, and provides surety for both parties in
cases where a child must leave the school for any number of reasons --
the school, that it will get tuition promised, and the family, who
will not have to pay tuition for a school the child is not attending.
The four or five most highly regarded college preparatory private
schools that offer K-12 education in my area (and many more) offer
tuition insurance. And with tuitions in the $13K and up range, even if
the tuition was $300, it would still be worth it.
As to the details offered on the contract that I admire being a
"marketing tool," I agree and disagree. Yes, I certainly was impressed
when I saw the contract, esp. after comparing it to the barebones one
we signed at Waldorf (the pledged, essentially, nothing but that we
would pay tuition.) However, I did not even *see* the contract until
my child was accepted at the school; in other words, we had already
thoroughly researched the school, visited it, interviewed teachers,
alumnae and administrators, and our daughter had visited, been tested
and interviewed, etc., before we saw it. So the contents of the
contract had *nothing* to do with our wanting our daughter to do
there.
The fact that the points mentioned in the contract dovetailed with our
own goals for our child's education was basically just reinforcement
that we had chosen the right place.
Lisa
waldorf-critics topica.com wrote:
) I had planned to re-read our contract before responding, but forgot
to
last night. As I remember it, though, it's closer to Lisa's waldorf
school contract than to her new school's contract. We were lucky
enough
to have a teacher with administrative experience at two large waldorf
schools arrive, and she has helped us improve our contracts and
enrollment process quite a lot the past few years.
My first impression in reading Lisa's description of the enrollment
contract at the non-WS is that it's so subjective so as to be of
little
help should disagreements arise. As such, it struck me more as a
statement of principles (or, more cynically, as a marketing tool)
rather
than as a substantive part of the contract. Since Lisa only
synopsized
the contract, there well could be additional verbiage that clarifies
the
language and establishes clearer procedures, so I stand open to
correction by Lisa (or by others who have seen these longer
documents).
This is just my first impression of what she said. After all, my
school
strives to provide the same things ("supportive
environment"..."rigor"..."critical thinking") that Lisa details, the
difference is in the means and the measurement, and I don't see how
writing these goals in the contract (without showing HOW they can be
accomplished) is enforceable in any manner.
As for tuition insurance, we don't offer it, but it has been a point
of
discussion here. At a business manager/finance meeting I attended at
Sunbridge last year, several of the schools in attendance had some
sort
of tuition insurance. Some that I've spoken with think it's great,
others think it's ridiculously expensive and a burden to impose on the
families. As we get larger, though, it may well become necessary;
tracking all those payments gets awfully difficult.
I asked a friend whose children attend a nearby non-Waldorf school,
who
said it's optional there and costs something like $300.
David
Lisa Ercolano said:
)
Luke, could you give a few more details about your school's contract,
please? (If you could tell us the name of the school and where it is,
I
would also appreciate it.)
Basically, I am most interested in what your school's contract
promises
that the school will provide in exchange for the contractee's money.
Does it spell out, in detail, that the child will be educated in a
safe
and nurturing environment, etc? Does it promise that the child will
get
an education at all?
Or does it merely state that the child is to be enrolled and that
tuition is to be paid in the amount of $XXXX a year, and then sets out
the circumstances under which that contract can be broken and by whom?
I ask because I truly am interested. In my opinion, the contract
offered
(and signed by us, for several years) at our former W. school left
much
to be desired. (Of course, as I had never signed a private school
contract before this, I had nothing to compare it to.)
The contract basically said that our child would be enrolled and that
we
would pay a certain amount over a certain period of time.
What a different document that one was compared to the contract we
signed this year at our younger girl's private school (non-WS)! That
document lays out, in detail, what the school promises, as well as
what
they are asking parents to promise (besides money.) Mentioned are: an
education in a safe and nurturing environment; an atmosphere of
academic
rigor and tolerance for others; development of critical thinking
skills,
and so in, in that vein. In return, we promised to support our child,
monitor her homework and projects, etc.
* One last thing: does your school offer tuition insurance? OUr WS
did
not. Our new school does, as do most other high quality private
schools.
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Ch
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 19:42:38 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
[Deborah:]
)It has, however, become clear to me that what you speak of as
) )"confidentiality" also allows for the community to wiggle out of their
)responsibility to our children.
Deborah, it is true that the community sometimes wiggles out of its
responsibility to children, but in talking about very personal and painful
things in this girl's life **without her permission** you are not fulfilling
some "responsibility" to her. You are gossiping about her. The "without her
permission" part seems to repeatedly escape you.
I would like to ask you to consider whether you think, if this little girl
knew you had talked about this here, or if she found out 10 years from now,
she would feel that you had fulfilled a "responsibility" to her. She's a
real person, I think to you she's just an abstract example of victimization.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:30:35 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: The unfounded allegations on 'Hess' adherence to anthroposophy'
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:46:54 -0600, Peter Staudenmaier posted 20 kb on this =
Hess thing, of which I am getting tired. More than enough has been said. =
In the end, it's pretty simple. =20
1. The degrees with which anthroposophy was rejected differed amongst =
nationalsocialists. Other groups (foremost communists, BTW) were clearly =
higher on their hate list, and some of the products (bio-dynamic food, =
Waldorf schools etc.) did sometimes appeal to people like Hess, in =
particular since the hate ideals of nationalsocialism had very little of =
practical value to offer itself in farming and education, for example.
2. Hess was more favourably inclined to practical enterprises that grew out =
of anthroposophy than most other Nazis.
3. There is absolutely no evidence that Hess ever read anything by Steiner. =
Of course I also cannot prove that Hess never did. Without any evidence, =
I am not inclined to consider Hess an anthroposophist. The fact that he =
supported bio-dynamic farming etc. at times against more vigilant =
hard-liners does not make him an anthroposophist. If Peter S. alleges =
otherwise, so be it. He has no real evidence and thus has to produce 20 kB =
long postings to make it look like he must have something somewhere.
3. But we have made slight progress: Instead of "being an anthroposophist", =
Peter S. is now willing to say:
) (or: was drawn to anthroposophy,depending on how broadly one uses the =
term).
Yes, he was "drawn to anthroposophy" in that he liked bio-dynamic =
vegetables and some of the practices of Waldorf education, however not the =
underlying principles. Ilse Hess may not be a reliable source as far as =
the war crimes are concerned (that doesn't surprise me), but that doesn't =
mean that everything she said should be disregarded.
P. St.: )Hess (...) grasped onto any number of esoteric worldviews in the =
course of his life. One of those was anthroposophy. Nothing is "alleged" in =
that statement.
It is completely alleged, Peter! There is no evidence for "grasping onto =
anthroposophy as an esoteric worldview". You simply cannot deduce that =
from a certain sympathy he seems to have had towards bio-dynamic farming =
and other "products" of anthroposophy.
P. St.: )Hauer's claim to fame on the question of Hess and anthro is that =
he insisted Hess's flight to Britain was somehow induced by the occult =
machinations of anthroposophists. In stark contrast to that ridiculous =
myth, I attribute Hess's flight to his mistaken belief in the possibility =
of a separate peace with the British, a goal which Hess believed Hitler =
shared
We agree.
)What, pray tell, are the similarities that you see between Hauer's line =
and my own?
Both you and Hauer make claims that you do not back up. You may differ =
with regard to the motivation of Hess's airplane trip, but you agree with =
Hauer that Hess was influenced by anthroposophy. Neither of you have any =
evidence. Both of you insist anyway with too many kilobytes of =
irrelevancies.
P. St. )The only thing that distinguished biodynamic cultivation in the =
Third Reich from plain old organic farming was the"worldview" attached to =
it;
That is false. Ever heard of bio-dynamic preparations BD farmers spray in =
their fields?
P. St. ) it is impossible to promote biodynamics without at the very least =
implicitly promoting anthroposophy,
This is the core of Peter S.'s arguments. If this last line is true, you =
can conclude that Hess promoted anthroposophy, and thus is an =
anthroposophist. Sound logic, isn't it?!
The fact are very simple: yes, Hess did eat and like bio-dynamic food =
(undisputed).
)From this, Staudenmaier concludes that Hess was an anthroposophist. Logic: =
see above.
I suppose you can stretch the meaning of words without bounds. But =
somewhere along the line, meaning snaps. You be the judge.
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 20:04:44 -0700
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
This post is disturbing enough to shake me out of lurkdom for a bit.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
Sune quotes a text:
The author of the text has the following comments:
**********************************************************
In an article in Deutschen Wochenschrift 13 July 1888 on 'Papacy and
liberalism' Steiner wrote:
'The barometer of progress in the development of humanity is its view of
freedom, and the practical realization of this view.'
In the article, Steiner also expresses his unambiguous support for 'the
liberal principle as the essence of modern culture.'
He wrote in connection with this:
*****************************************************
'It is our conviction, that the present time is characterized by an
advance [in freedom] that is as important that brought about by the
teachings of Christ: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in
Christ Jesus."
And what if you don't believe that Jesus is the Christ or deserves that
level of devotion? Are you respected as an equal then?
Just as then the equal value of all people before God and his kind was
recognized, the conviction has become ever more established during the
last centuries, that our task not could consist in submitting to the
precepts of an external authority, and that everything that we believe
and that gives direction our actions should have its origin solely in
the light of reason in our soul.
And if your soul for one reason or another does not subscribe to Christian
beliefs or teachings, do your actions have equal value to those who claim to
be highly Christian inspired?
To only hold that for true, to which our own thinking forces us, and
only move in such social and governmental forms that we give to ourself,
that is the great basic principle of our time.'
****************************************************
This is
‚ a plea for Christianity, whose nature according to Steiner consisted
in the overcoming of the principle of race in favour of the principle of
equality of all people before God and his kind,
What principle of race needs to be overcome? I don't think there is any.
Steiner certainly had strange ideas of racial differences. To me racial
principles like Steiner's don't just need to be overcome, they need to be
identified for the fraudulent concepts they are to begin with.
Sune or the auther goes on to talk about why Steiner is not antisemitic:
The solution lies in the concept of assimilation, that Steiner supported
together with the majority of the European Jews.
When Raphael Loewenfels in 1893, the foundation year of the Central
Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith, wrote that no educated
Jew was prepared to leave his beloved mother country (literally ('father
country') for a country far away, where his forefathers had lived
inconceivably long ago, he according to Laqueurs expressed 'not the
opinion of one individual', but 'the conviction of very many Jews'.
Anyone who calls Steiner's support of assimilation as 'anti-Semitic'
does two things:
- he slanders the majority of the Jews at the end of the 19th century as
being anti-Semites and
I assure you that the majority of Jews at the end of the 19th century did
not believe in assimilation. I am frankly amazed that you are under this
impression. In those days especially things were quite the opposite. Jewish
families struggled against assimilation. When children intermarried,
parents mourned them as if they were dead. Didn't you see Fiddler on the
Roof?
- shows his complete ignorance of Jewish history during the time.
see my last comment. Just who is being ignorant here?
This argument is both weak and offensive. A position held by someone within
a group has a very different valence than the same position by someone
outside the group. For example when a Black person in this country might
say "We African Americans must work harder to move upward in our society."
That means one thing. When a white person says "African Americans must work
harder to move upward in society.", it leans towards racism.
I frankly tire of hearing people of one religion prescribing what people of
other religions should be doing. This represents a provincial backwardness
as far I am concerned, not a higher level of consciousness.
I don't know how virulant an antisemite Steiner was or wasn't, but I do know
that
I would never adopt as my spiritual guide a gentleman who is as
unsophisticated in multicultural issues as he was.
Alan S. Fine MD
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:08:36 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
In a post about her former school, Alice says:
((I can't tell you how much of a shock all of this has been for us, too.
I will tell you that after this happened to us, I found out there is a
local group of families who meet monthly for support called "THe Fallen
Angels" - families who are trying to figure out harmful experiences that
have happened to their children while at the school.))
Lisa here: Well, Alice, please let the other "Fallen Angels" know that they
may find some support and information on the Waldorf survivors list.
It is simply amazing to me how a school that supposedly is respected for
being strong and established (and upon whom others may model their
programs!) can continue with that reputation when the teachers, etc. carry
on as you described.
Washing a small child's mouth out with soap, just for saying the word
"penis?" Washing a child's mouth out with soap is a violent and abusive act.
If *any* teacher did it to one of my children, I would be calling an
attorney faster than you can say "etheric body!" (g)
A normal adult would simply laugh (in my opinion) or at least smile (and
try not to laugh) if she/he heard a preschool/kindergarten child say
"penis." How full of anger and weird ideas about human sexuality that
soap-wielding teacher must be!
And the fact that there is an actual *group* of parents of former
students who feel they have somehow been ill-used also is disturbing.
Has anyone contacted the local child protection people about these
goings on? Has anyone tried calling a reporter at a local newspaper or
television station?
Such behavior on the part of teachers certain bears scrutiny, and the
fact that a "group" of former parents who allege these things gives at least
*some* credence to their claims.
Why isn't anyone doing anything about this, or if they are, what is
being done!!!!?????
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 147
-- Topica Digest --
Re: naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Re: more on naming victims
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Washing a child's mouth out with soap IS indeed abuse
By irisspringflower yahoo.com
Re: Washing a child's mouth out with soap IS indeed abuse
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: more on naming victims
By steve premofine.com
Re: naming victims
By alice javanet.com
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By hardorp gmx.net
PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
By Rechomba cs.com
Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
By Speckraybill aol.com
Teacher qualification
By canndw netzero.net
Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
By canndw netzero.net
Re: Teacher qualification
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By Rechomba cs.com
Re: The unfounded allegations on 'Hess' adherence to anthroposophy'
By Rechomba cs.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 06:17:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
--- Alice Klinge (alice javanet.com) wrote:
) Tell me, would it change your opinion of me to tell
) you I was raped at
) eighteen?
)
) AK
I don't have an opinion of you. I don't know you, so
how could I? And so what? Isn't this why Waldorf
people and others get away with pushing their agendas?
I cannot understand why people worry about others'
opinions, particularly when it's to the detriment of
their children. I especially cannot fathom why anyone
would be concerned with the opinion of unapologetic
bigots such as WE adherents, Anthroposophists. It is
disconcerting how the dominant culture pushes
adherence to politeness at the expense of confronting
destructive activities. It is quite clear how the
various holocausts in human history happened - the
Inquisition lasted over 400 years. Why?
My daughter and I face increased destructive pressure
in this community in large part because of our
confrontation of the Waldorf group and it will only
get more intense because I will not back off. What
sort of adults stand by and watch this happen to a
child and her mother? What sort of adults stand by
and allow children to be harmed, repeatedly? Why
would anyone keep a child in an environment so clearly
destructive as a Waldorf school, rationalizing that
there is some good education in there somewhere?
Cowardice is inexcusable and I wonder why more adults
don't consider why the nursing home industry is
booming? Children do not forget those who hurt them,
including those who stood by while they were being
hurt.
DK
)
____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You
) Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 06:19:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
Find the law school closest to you and ask them. Each
state has different requirements.
DK
Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) wrote:
) )That is not how it happens.
)
) [Debra]
)
) How does it happen, then? I'm really curious now.
) Steve is a practicing
) lawyer who may not have had to take that hard state
) bar test. I've always
) wanted to be a lawyer. How else does one become a
) lawyer? Can you practice
) law without taking that test? I think I'd be a good
) lawyer, but don't have
) a lot of time to get my law degree. Is there still
) hope for me?
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You
) Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 06:28:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
--- Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) wrote:
) What kind of a lawyer are you, Deborah? Are you
) practicing currently? Do
) you work with sexually abused kids?
) -ds
)
The good kind. Yes. Yes.
DK
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 08:10:47 -0800 (PST)
From: iris springflower (irisspringflower yahoo.com)
Subject: Washing a child's mouth out with soap IS indeed abuse
Hi ALl. I am on many e-mail lists for abuse
survivors, since I am a survivor of childhod/tenage/
and adulthood abuse. I can't name anyody, but there
was a recent thread on one list about parents (or
anyone in authority and who held power over children)
washing out children's mouths with soap. People
posted about their own personal TRAUMA from the above
action, along with beatings, etc.
We all agreed that to wash a child's mouth out with
soap, for ANY reason IS child abuse and DOES leave the
child with long-term serious psychological
aftereffects that reach into adulthood. I NEVER would
do such abuse to a child, no matter WHAT the child
said! For ANYONE , parent, teacher, or other
authority to do this is horrendous! In public
schools, isn't it true that teachers who would wash
out children's mouths with soap would face legal
action against them?
Best Wishes, Iris
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 16:21:46 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Washing a child's mouth out with soap IS indeed abuse
[Iris wrote:]
)In public schools, isn't it true that teachers who would wash
)out children's mouths with soap would face legal
)action against them?
In the US, it depends where you live. Corporal punishment is legal some
places and not others. For instance it is legal in my state but not in my
city. Corporal punishment is alive and well many places in the US, and I'm
afraid the trend is increasingly in favor of it, and I'm afraid our new
president, who has a strong interest in conservative education "reforms,"
will aid and abet this trend, giving teachers more leeway to do what they
think they must do to maintain order.
If anyone at school ever laid a finger on my child he would be out that day
and never go back.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 09:00:28 -0800
From: "Steve Premo" (steve premofine.com)
Subject: Re: more on naming victims
On 2 Feb 2001, at 6:28, Deborah Kelly wrote:
) --- Debra Snell (snell netshel.net) wrote:
) ) What kind of a lawyer are you, Deborah? Are you
) ) practicing currently? Do
) ) you work with sexually abused kids?
) ) -ds
) )
) The good kind. Yes. Yes.
I must admit here that I was mistaken about the bar exam being required to
practice law in Wisconsin. Another way to become a lawyer in that state
is through what's called the "Diploma Privilege."
Graduates of the University of Wisconsin and Marquette University Law
Schools may practice law where the school directs certification of the
student's legal competence to the Wisconsin Board of Bar Examiners, which
then investigates the character and fitness of the student and certifies
the student's character, competence, and fitness to the court. The
student is then admitted to the practice of law.
Of course, the result of that is a license to practice law, which Deborah
has stated that she does not have. I still do not understand how she is
entitled to practice law, but I apologize for my mistake about the bar
exam being a requirement for admission to the Wisconsin bar.
Steve Premo -- Santa Cruz, California
"There is a right and a wrong in the Universe and
that distinction is not difficult to make." - Superman
http://www.premofine.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 15:57:56 -0400
From: alice (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: naming victims
Deborah Kelly wrote:
)
) --- Alice Klinge (alice javanet.com) wrote:
) ) Tell me, would it change your opinion of me to tell
) ) you I was raped at
) ) eighteen?
) )
) ) AK
)
) I don't have an opinion of you. I don't know you, so
) how could I? And so what? Isn't this why Waldorf
) people and others get away with pushing their agendas?
) I cannot understand why people worry about others'
) opinions, particularly when it's to the detriment of
) their children. I especially cannot fathom why anyone
) would be concerned with the opinion of unapologetic
) bigots such as WE adherents, Anthroposophists. It is
) disconcerting how the dominant culture pushes
) adherence to politeness at the expense of confronting
) destructive activities. It is quite clear how the
) various holocausts in human history happened - the
) Inquisition lasted over 400 years. Why?
)
) My daughter and I face increased destructive pressure
) in this community in large part because of our
) confrontation of the Waldorf group and it will only
) get more intense because I will not back off. What
) sort of adults stand by and watch this happen to a
) child and her mother? What sort of adults stand by
) and allow children to be harmed, repeatedly? Why
) would anyone keep a child in an environment so clearly
) destructive as a Waldorf school, rationalizing that
) there is some good education in there somewhere?
) Cowardice is inexcusable and I wonder why more adults
) don't consider why the nursing home industry is
) booming? Children do not forget those who hurt them,
) including those who stood by while they were being
) hurt.
)
) DK
[Alice writes]
Some of us try and balance courage and compassion.
I hope you can find the support you need to help you.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:10:01 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 20:04:44 -0700
"Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
responded to Sune Nordwall:
)I assure you that the majority of Jews at the end of the 19th century did =
not believe in assimilation. I am frankly amazed that you are under this =
impression. In those days especially things were quite the opposite. =
Jewish families struggled against assimilation. When children =
intermarried,
parents mourned them as if they were dead. Didn't you see Fiddler on =
theRoof?
Alan, the fiddler on the roof (Anatevka) is not set in Germany or Austria! =
We obviously have to differentiate here. In Poland, for example, there =
were huge Jewish ghettos. Not so in Germany, however. Which is not to say =
that everybody there believed in assimilation. The Zionist movement =
existed there as well. But the majority of people of Jewish descent were =
not Zionists. When children intermarried,
parents certainly didn't mourn them as if they were dead! Look at long =
Island, New York, today. The population was about 60 Jewish when I lived =
there. Most of my Jewish friends were assimilated in the sense that they =
were completely part of the culture, in fact they defined the culture to a =
great extent. But it was primarily American culture, not a separate Jewish =
culture. American culture with a Jewish element. I could easily get rye =
bread, for example - probably due to the many German-Jewish immigrants from =
the 30's. And people intermarry all the time! That's the way it was in =
Germany before Hitler came along and divided people along ethnic lines in a =
way totally against the natural development of culture development in =
Germany.
)I frankly tire of hearing people of one religion prescribing what people =
of other religions should be doing.
I agree with that. But Sune didn't do that: he was describing historical =
facts that tend to be overlooked or are simply not known.
Like the fact that there was a lot more antisemitism in France and Russia =
at the end of the 19th century than in Germany, until the beast came along =
and changed the course of history.
Best regards,
Detlef Hardorp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:02:40 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
Sarina McDonald wrote:
) This man (Dr Barry
) Westfall) is frightening and I would not trust his opinions on
) education - *any* education - without giving his motives and past work
) a long, hard look.
Judging from the way the moderator of the list and the initiator(?) of
both PLANS and PLANS' site quotes a letter by Mr Westfall
(http://www.bradley.edu/academics/ehs/ete/westfall.html), three years
after he wrote it, it seems PLANS' has a quite high opinion of his way
of looking at education and of understanding and judging on the
difference between 'good' education,
- 'a solidly "behaviorist" dominated secondary curriculum' (law and
order and a teaching based on 'an eye for an eye')(?() and 'bad'
education;
- 'feminist-inspired "feel good," "touchy feely" kind of education' that
according to him are the reasons 'why males are running away from it all
[public school teaching] by the thousands' and make 'misguided and angry
MALE adolescents [...] take rifles to their classrooms [...] to solve
their self-esteem needs', that feminist 'extremists' have deprived them
of.
How long has PLANS' recommended Mr Westfall, who describes himself as 'a
naturally suspicious and paranoid German-American' and as an 'expert
witness' on education and especially Waldorf education, about which he
himself says in the quoted mail 'Not that I have ever claimed to be an
expert on any of it'?
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 00:15:42 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
I wrote:
) Judging from the way the moderator of the list and the initiator(?) of
) both PLANS and PLANS' site quotes a letter by Mr Westfall
) (http://www.bradley.edu/academics/ehs/ete/westfall.html), three years
) after he wrote it
See that it only is clear from the mail by the moderator that only the
actual happening and the meeting with the female Waldorf teacher that Mr
Westfall describes from his perspective took place three year ago, not
necessarily that he wrote the quoted mail three years ago.
If that however is the case, it hints at PLANS having been in contact
with him and possibly used and recommended his 'expertise' on education
for at least three years.
Is that the case?
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:30:29 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
In a message dated 2/1/01 8:08:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
momof2gals mindspring.com writes:
) A normal adult would simply laugh (in my opinion) or at least smile (and
) try not to laugh) if she/he heard a preschool/kindergarten child say
) "penis." How full of anger and weird ideas about human sexuality that
) soap-wielding teacher must be!
Precisely. To go to such "disciplinary" measures as soap mouth wash displays
not only a repressed sexuality but also a distinct lack of creativity if
one_did_ take offense, for whatever bizarre, victorian reason, to the word
"penis". Perhaps this has more to do with "premature awakening" of the
child's sexuality (we must think of their souls!).
As an aside, my 5yr old daughter is in the habit now of spelling and
pronouncing words backwards for the fun of it. Recently she informed us that
I have a penis (we commended her for being so astute). She then spelled it
backwards and pronounced "sinep" as "snip" which caused my wife to bust out
laughing and me to cross my legs! Of course she then proceeded to run around
the house shouting "SNIP PENIS" over and over.....
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:29:29 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
--part1_51.6f1e272.27acb8f9_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/02/2001 3:31:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Rechomba cs.com writes:
) A normal adult would simply laugh (in my opinion) or at least smile (and
) ) try not to laugh) if she/he heard a preschool/kindergarten child say
) ) "penis." How full of anger and weird ideas about human sexuality that
) ) soap-wielding teacher must be!
)
) Precisely. To go to such "disciplinary" measures as soap mouth wash
) displays
) not only a repressed sexuality but also a distinct lack of creativity if
) one_did_ take offense, for whatever bizarre, victorian reason, to the word
) "penis". Perhaps this has more to do with "premature awakening" of the
) child's sexuality (we must think of their souls!).
)
)
Good grief! Would someone actually punish a child for correctly naming a
body part? Both my sons have always referred to their penis as "penis" as
that is the correct name for it.
Paula
--part1_51.6f1e272.27acb8f9_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/02/2001 3:31:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)Rechomba cs.com writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")A normal adult would simply laugh (in my opinion) or at least smile (and
(BR)> try not to laugh) if she/he heard a preschool/kindergarten child say
(BR)> "penis." How full of anger and weird ideas about human sexuality that
(BR)> soap-wielding teacher must be!
(BR)
(BR)Precisely. To go to such "disciplinary" measures as soap mouth wash
(BR)displays
(BR)not only a repressed sexuality but also a distinct lack of creativity if
(BR)one_did_ take offense, for whatever bizarre, victorian reason, to the word
(BR)"penis". Perhaps this has more to do with "premature awakening" of the
(BR)child's sexuality (we must think of their souls!).
(BR)
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)Good grief! Would someone actually punish a child for correctly naming a
(BR)body part? Both my sons have always referred to their penis as "penis" as
(BR)that is the correct name for it.
(BR)
(BR)Paula
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_51.6f1e272.27acb8f9_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 23:22:51 -0500
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Teacher qualification
The subject of teacher qualifications comes up on this list from time to
time. This article, copied from the Providence Journal website
(www.projo.com) today, grabbed my attention as to what can happen when one's
"qualifications" to teach take precedence over one's ability to teach.
Please note that this has nothing directly to do with Waldorf education, so
feel free to skip it.
David
-------------------------------
Grade-A teacher deep-sixed by certification woes
By NICOLE GESUALDO, Journal Staff Writer
WEST GREENWICH -- Jeanne DiBella decided early last fall that she didn't
want to take calculus. The senior switched into a finite-math class taught
by Paul DiPadua, a new arrival to Exeter-West Greenwich High School.
With her new teacher, Jeanne, 17, saw the practical side of mathematics. She
learned about the stock market and the connections between math and physics.
She also learned how DiPadua had used math in his former engineering job.
In DiPadua's classroom, math made sense.
"He was one of the best teachers I ever had," Jeanne said.
Today, however, will be DiPadua's last day. According to the state
Department of Education, DiPadua's teacher training -- which he took through
the State of Connecticut's fast-track program -- is incomplete and does not
qualify him to teach in Rhode Island.
If DiPadua wanted to keep his Exeter-West Greenwich position, the state
said, he would have to take additional education classes. Instead, DiPadua
chose to return to his old job, as an electrical engineer at Newport's Naval
Undersea Warfare Center, where he had worked for 11 years.
The regional high school, a community of 600 students, is feeling the
twofold effects of DiPadua's departure. His students, shocked that the
popular math teacher is leaving in midyear, papered the school this week
with farewell posters. Administrators are scrambling to find a qualified
replacement teacher for the math department, which has the highest turnover
rate of all.
It's becoming difficult to find math teachers who are both talented and
unemployed, administrators say. High-tech industries lure math- and
science-trained college graduates into corporate and research jobs, which
offer higher salaries than teaching positions. As a result, Supt. Robert
Hicks said, it's hard to find mathematics majors who want to teach.
"We'll take math teachers wherever we can get them, if they're good," he
said.
This summer, when DiPadua was hired, Exeter-West Greenwich was grappling
with another shortage of math teachers. One teacher had taken a leave of
absence and another had resigned. The district had a tough time finding
suitable applicants for the two open spots.
"It was not a deep field," Hicks said. "[DiPadua] was the only person we
found the first time out that we felt was qualified."
While DiPadua does not have a degree in education, he came to the district
with an extensive math and engineering background. He earned a bachelor of
science degree in electrical engineering from Merrimack College, in North
Andover, Mass., where he minored in math, and a master's degree in business
administration from the University of New Haven.
DiPadua had decided a few years back that he wanted to leave his engineering
job to teach. In 1998, he began a fast-track training course run by the
Connecticut Department of Education. The program prepared professionals --
who already had a background in the fundamentals of at least one subject --
in the basics of classroom teaching.
(Rhode Island is developing a similar program, but it's not expected to come
off the drawing board before this summer.
DiPadua completed six months of intensive training through the Connecticut
program. His next step, according to the program track, was to teach for at
least 90 days in a Connecticut school. Instead, DiPadua, of Exeter, applied
for his first job, in the Exeter-West Greenwich district.
Hicks said DiPadua was a real find. The district persuaded the Rhode Island
Department of Education to give DiPadua an emergency teaching certificate,
which allowed him one year to teach in the state and to get himself a
permanent certificate.
DiPadua -- his students call him "Mr. D" or "Big D" -- met with success from
the very beginning of the year, his students said.
"He's the only math teacher I ever understood," said senior Jessica Kelley,
17.
DiPadua tried to get his students involved in teaching, students said. The
students would each take a chapter of material, learn it themselves and find
ways to convey it to their peers.
Students said DiPadua also showed them how math can be useful in their own
lives. He gave examples from his own stock portfolio and told them how to
determine the value of investments. He also showed videotapes about
submarines, which he worked on in Newport, and discussed how math is an
integral part of engineering.
"Everybody always says, 'Oh, we won't need this in the future,' " said
Courtney Amaral, 17, a senior. "He shows us, and he told us, that we will."
DiPadua's students found out only recently that he would be leaving.
Because DiPadua didn't teach for 90 days in Connecticut before looking for a
job in this state, Rhode Island considers his training incomplete, said
Susan Lusi, an assistant education commissioner. Lusi said DiPadua could
either complete the 90 days across the state border, earning a Connecticut
teaching certificate that Rhode Island would then accept, or take classes
toward a Rhode Island certificate.
DiPadua declined both those options. He said he believes that his
Connecticut training is sufficient.
"It's one of the top programs in the country," DiPadua said. "I was very
proud of the program, and Rhode Island doesn't even recognize it, which
upsets me."
Recently, DiPadua said, his supervisors at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center
made him a great offer. If he returned to work by the end of January, he
could have his old job back with a 10 percent raise.
DiPadua decided to return to his government post. On Monday, a substitute
teacher will take over his classes.
"Even a week or two ago, I thought I'd be a teacher for the next 25 years,"
DiPadua said. "My heart says I'd rather be here with the kids."
Hicks said the search for a replacement teacher will be difficult. Starting
immediately, he said, the district will advertise in educational journals
and inquire with local colleges about their December graduates.
"This sort of hit us of all of a sudden," Hicks said.
He also said the district is trying to establish more continuity in the math
department, where only two of the five teachers have spent more than three
years at the school.
"Math has been a challenging department for us," Hicks said. "It just seems
to have had maternity leaves and illnesses. It is the department in our
school that has had the most turnover."
The district doesn't know when DiPadua's spot might be filled, Hicks said.
In the interim, he said, it will rely on the substitute teacher, who does
have a math background and is close to being certified.
Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 23:27:01 -0500
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: tolerance for abuse at Waldorf?
Lisa Ercolano wrote, paraphrasing my words from an earlier post:
It is simply amazing to me how a school that supposedly is respected for
being strong and established (and upon whom others may model their
programs!) can continue with that reputation when the teachers, etc. carry
on as you described (allegation of washing mouths out with soap)...
David: Despite Lisa's liberal use of some of my words in making the above
statements, I did NOT say we model our program after that school, or ny
school in particular. We have never, to my knowledge, discussed program
with them, although I remember attending an administration meeting that
included people from that school.
David
Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 23:27:50 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Teacher qualification
--part1_d5.1e0f62a.27ace2c6_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/02/2001 8:22:19 PM Pacific Standard Time,
canndw netzero.net writes:
) The subject of teacher qualifications comes up on this list from time to
) time. This article, copied from the Providence Journal website
) (www.projo.com) today, grabbed my attention as to what can happen when one's
) "qualifications" to teach take precedence over one's ability to teach.
)
)
There is a major difference between this man's situation and the situation
that I have seen when the "teacher" had neither the ability NOR the
credentials (any credentials.......)
Paula
--part1_d5.1e0f62a.27ace2c6_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/02/2001 8:22:19 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)canndw netzero.net writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")The subject of teacher qualifications comes up on this list from time to
(BR)time. This article, copied from the Providence Journal website
(BR)(www.projo.com) today, grabbed my attention as to what can happen when one's
(BR)"qualifications" to teach take precedence over one's ability to teach.
(BR)
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)There is a major difference between this man's situation and the situation
(BR)that I have seen when the "teacher" had neither the ability NOR the
(BR)credentials (any credentials.......)
(BR)
(BR)Paula(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_d5.1e0f62a.27ace2c6_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 00:48:27 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
In a message dated 2/1/01 2:51:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, rbc supranet.com
writes:
Anonymous:
) ) He thereby expressed the basic view that he consequently held until his
) ) death. It also expresses his agreement with the view of Hegel on the
) ) nature of world history as a progress in the consciousness of freedom,
) ) and the end goal of this history in not only the consciousness of but
) ) the reality of spiritual freedom.
Peter:
) Perhaps our anonymous author also thinks Hegel was a liberal.....
Perhaps this anonymous author also thinks Hobbes and Machiavelli, whom Hegel
praised for their political theories, were liberals.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 02:07:10 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: The unfounded allegations on 'Hess' adherence to anthroposophy'
In a message dated 2/1/01 6:38:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, hardorp gmx.net
writes:
) P. St. )The only thing that distinguished biodynamic cultivation in the =
) Third Reich from plain old organic farming was the"worldview" attached to =
) it;
Detlef:
) That is false. Ever heard of bio-dynamic preparations BD farmers spray in
=
) their fields?
I don't see your point. Assuming that you suggest if one were to place BD
mixes under a microscope one would find plain old composted cow manure, then
yes I agree. Yet biodynamics claim that there is much more supersensibly
present in the mixes that do not show up through physical observation: cosmic
forces. The mix process, stuffing cow horns with manure, burying it for an
astrologically specific number of days, placing it in a drum of water and
stirring it clockwise for a specific amount of time, creating chaos, stir
counterclockwise and so on, is undeniably based on anthroposophical beliefs.
But this is one small aspect of BD agricuture. Everything is done with an
anthro reason.
BTW: I have employed BD methods in the past and found no significant
difference with regular organics. I simply find BD preparations,
specifically, to be a waist of time.
) P. St. ) it is impossible to promote biodynamics without at the very least
=
) implicitly promoting anthroposophy,
)
) This is the core of Peter S.'s arguments. If this last line is true, you =
) can conclude that Hess promoted anthroposophy, and thus is an =
) anthroposophist. Sound logic, isn't it?!
Your straw man seems so lonely out of context. Perhaps some red herrings
would be nice to keep him company.
Ray
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 148
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By alice javanet.com
Re: Teacher qualification
By canndw netzero.net
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By asf peakpeak.com
Re: Teacher qualification
By Speckraybill aol.com
link about pseudoscience
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: link about pseudoscience
By Rechomba cs.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 10:42:54 -0400
From: alice (alice javanet.com)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
Detlef Hardorp wrote:
)
) On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 20:04:44 -0700
) "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
) responded to Sune Nordwall:
)
) )I assure you that the majority of Jews at the end of the 19th century did not believe in assimilation. I am frankly amazed that you are under this impression. In those days especially things were quite the opposite. Jewish families struggled against assimilation. When children intermarried,
) parents mourned them as if they were dead. Didn't you see Fiddler on theRoof?
)
) Alan, the fiddler on the roof (Anatevka) is not set in Germany or Austria! We obviously have to differentiate here. In Poland, for example, there were huge Jewish ghettos. Not so in Germany, however. Which is not to say that everybody there believed in assimilation. The Zionist movement existed there as well. But the majority of people of Jewish descent were not Zionists. When children intermarried,
)
)
) )I frankly tire of hearing people of one religion prescribing what people of other religions should be doing.
)
) I agree with that. But Sune didn't do that: he was describing historical facts that tend to be overlooked or are simply not known.
)
) Like the fact that there was a lot more antisemitism in France and Russia at the end of the 19th century than in Germany, until the beast came along and changed the course of history.
)
) Best regards,
) Detlef Hardorp
[alice comments and questions]
How does this relate to what I remember reading as part of the reason
why the Holocaust was accepted by the German population was that the
Jews had become "better" Germans than Christian Germans? (ie. supported
their values better- their definition of "success" ) That the German
Jews had great loyalty to their country even as they were being
slaughtered..
I am wondering how to apply this to the anthroposophical structure of a
Waldorf community. The way the population identifies with the dominant
culture vs. the religious-based subculture. Who is in/ who is out and
what kind of tolerance there is for anyone who threatens or questions
the dogma.
I am also wondering about using spirituality as a basis for power. It
seems that this philosophy/religion attracts not just the passive
believer but the intellectual seeker. I had a W teacher tell me that
she was so grateful for anthroposophy - it was either this or years of
psychotherapy.
AK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:54:09 -0500
From: "David Cann" (canndw netzero.net)
Subject: Re: Teacher qualification
I said:
The subject of teacher qualifications comes up on this list from time to
time. This article, copied from the Providence Journal website
(www.projo.com) today, grabbed my attention as to what can happen when one's
"qualifications" to teach take precedence over one's ability to teach.
and Paula responded:
There is a major difference between this man's situation and the situation
that I have seen when the "teacher" had neither the ability NOR the
credentials (any credentials.......)
David again: I'm not comparing this to anything. I'm just pointing out
what a overemphasis on "credentials" can lead to.
I would also like to point out that the school system involved (where our
waldorf school resides) is a pretty darned good one. Not too many small
rural high schools offer calculus around here. One of our teachers is
considering relocating to this school district should she and her husband
decide to send their son to a public high school after eighth grade next
year.
David
Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:32:24 -0700
From: "Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
----- Original Message -----
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
To: (waldorf-critics topica.com)
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 20:04:44 -0700
"Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
responded to Sune Nordwall:
Detlef compares the situation of Jewish intermarriage Germany to New York
today:
When children intermarried,
parents certainly didn't mourn them as if they were dead! Look at long
Island, New York, today. The population was about 60 Jewish when I lived
there. Most of my Jewish friends were assimilated in the sense that they
were completely part of the culture, in fact they defined the culture to a
great extent. But it was primarily American culture, not a separate Jewish
culture. American culture with a Jewish element. I could easily get rye
bread, for example - probably due to the many German-Jewish immigrants from
the 30's. And people intermarry all the time! That's the way it was in
Germany before Hitler came along and divided people along ethnic lines in a
way totally against the natural development of culture development in
Germany
I respond:
This comparison ignores the key issue. There were many in pre WWII Germany
who subscribed to the notion that Aryan race and Christian spirituality and
culture were of a higher nature than the Jewish people and culture. For
those who believed in this nonsense (and I think Steiner was one of them),
the Jewish element presented a problem as it risked tainting the racial,
cultural, and spiritual Aryan German element. Now in this setting Steiner
may have been considered liberal, because he says that this problem could be
solved by having the Jews assimilate, and would not deteriorate the high
position or the mission of the German volk. However the entire idea of
assimilation in this context is an attempt to deal with a mythical problem
that is generated only by beliefs that are racist and Aryan supremist.
Intermarriage should be a product of people meeting and falling in love.
There should be no racial or cultural imperatives. People may intermarry or
may not depending solely on their choice. Supporting this type of freedom
is true liberalism in my view.
Alan S. Fine
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 20:45:00 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Teacher qualification
--part1_a8.10a866dd.27ae0e1c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/03/2001 9:57:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
canndw netzero.net writes:
) I would also like to point out that the school system involved (where our
) waldorf school resides) is a pretty darned good one.
Consider yourself fortunate!
Paula
--part1_a8.10a866dd.27ae0e1c_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/03/2001 9:57:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)canndw netzero.net writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")I would also like to point out that the school system involved (where our
(BR)waldorf school resides) is a pretty darned good one. (/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)Consider yourself fortunate!
(BR)
(BR)Paula
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_a8.10a866dd.27ae0e1c_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 21:17:57 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: link about pseudoscience
Some of you may already know about this resource, but I just stumbled upon
it yesterday.
It is called "JunkScience.com," and it is a Web site devoted to debunking
pseudo-science, rumors connected to science, badly done research, etc. I
have not explored it thoroughly, but it would be intriguing to know what the
editor of the site thinks of the "research" being done by Anthroposophical
(so-called) "scientists' and doctors.
I may do a search for some of the names I have seen on this list,
particularly research about the heart not pumping blood, etc.
Here's the link:
http://www.junkscience.com/
Happy debunking!
Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 00:55:39 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: link about pseudoscience
Just read some of the site's articles. Thankyou so much Lisa.
Ray
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 149
-- Topica Digest --
Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
By hardorp gmx.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 15:17:21 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Rudolf Steiner an active opponent of anti-Semitism
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:32:24 -0700
"Alan S. Fine MD" (asf peakpeak.com)
wrote:
)There were many in pre WWII Germany
who subscribed to the notion that Aryan race and Christian spirituality and =
culture were of a higher nature than the Jewish people and culture. For =
those who believed in this nonsense (and I think Steiner was one of them), =
the Jewish element presented a problem as it risked tainting the racial, =
cultural, and spiritual Aryan German element.
Sorry, Alan, but you totally misrepresent Steiner. He does NOT say that =
"Aryan race and Christian spirituality and culture were of a higher nature =
than the Jewish people and culture".
As for Steiner's concept of the "aryan race": this _included_ the Semitic =
peoples (and Arabs). According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was actually =
born out of Semitic peoples! This is about as far away from Hitler's =
concept as you can get. As I have pointed out over and over again on this =
list, Steiner used the term "aryan race" as a name for the development of =
modern Asio-Indo-European culture per se (as did others at the time as =
well, until the NS monster attached their vile meaning to the term, - we =
have yet to break this spell).
Alan writes: )Intermarriage should be a product of people meeting and =
falling in love.
There should be no racial or cultural imperatives. People may intermarry or
may not depending solely on their choice. Supporting this type of freedom
is true liberalism in my view.
Steiner's position on intermarriage was identical to yours. Read the last =
chapter "Individuality and Genus" in his book "The Philosophy of Freedom": =
racial or cultural imperatives must yield to individuals finding their own =
way. That's the signature of our modern age - as opposed to the middle =
ages, or even a century earlier. He also champions women's liberation in =
that chapter in no uncertain terms. Even many of Steiner's contemporaries =
were not ready to stand up for freedom of the individual as unequivocally =
as Steiner did. Steiner was a herald of a new epoch based on individuality =
(in spite of the fact that many "critics" on this list are constantly =
trying to "prove" the opposite).
And, yes, Steiner sometimes did put down various religious traditions, =
including the Christian and the Jewish tradition, because their position =
wasn't liberal enough for him: individuals are to yield to racial or =
cultural or religious imperatives according to many religious and cultural =
traditions. Steiner saw these traditions as having been justified in the =
past, but no longer today! That is the gist of the supposedly =
"anti-Semitic" statements so gleefully posted to this list again and again. =
They're not anti-Semitic, they're anti-traditionalist: they're liberal!
Dan: how about posting the chapter "Individuality and Genus" chapter from =
Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom for a change? This is, after all, =
Steiner's most important work, upon which everything else is based! And it =
shows Steiner's position on these issues very clearly.
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 150
-- Topica Digest --
unsubscribe
By deborah_kelly yahoo.com
Father of Atlantis
By d.gower home.com
Re: naming victims
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
"Aryans" and "Semites"
By rbc supranet.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:59:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com)
Subject: unsubscribe
Please unsubscribe me from the critics list.
I appreciate the information I have gotten from this
list. Some of it (the Steiner quotes) has become part
of one of the civil rights cases on which I am
working. I am also much clearer as to the connections
between New Age and WE as a result of this list.
Deborah
__________________________________________________
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:59:06 -0500
From: "David E. Gower" (d.gower home.com)
Subject: Father of Atlantis
http://www.discoveringarchaeology.com/articles/011701-atlantis.shtml
Interesting article on one of the major markers in the history of the belief
in Atlantis.
*****************************************************************
Copyright February, 2001(c) by David E. Gower. All Rights
Reserved. No Reproduction by any means, including electronic,
without express written permission from the author. All fair use
citation of this material must include proper attribution and
this notice of copyright.
Contact: d.gower home.com
_!_
_______(_)_______
"Keep looking around. There's always something you've missed."
--- Australian Aviation Magazine
*****************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:29:29 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: naming victims
Hi all,
I was ill for a while and missed a bunch of discussion.
Maybe that's why I am so confused by the following.
But I feel the need to try to get a little clarification
because it comes across so strangely.
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Deborah Kelly (deborah_kelly yahoo.com) wrote:
)--- Alice Klinge (alice javanet.com) wrote:
) ) Tell me, would it change your opinion of me to tell
) ) you I was raped at
) ) eighteen?
) )
) ) AK
Deborah:
)I don't have an opinion of you. I don't know you, so
)how could I?
Chris:
OK, that makes some sense, although I missed much of
the discussion that led to this coming up in the first place.
Deborah:
) And so what? Isn't this why Waldorf
)people and others get away with pushing their agendas?
) I cannot understand why people worry about others'
)opinions, particularly when it's to the detriment of
)their children. I especially cannot fathom why anyone
)would be concerned with the opinion of unapologetic
)bigots such as WE adherents, Anthroposophists.
Chris:
Now I know this has something to do with keeping the
confidentiality of victims of assault or abuse. Deborah,
are you expressing here a difficulty understanding why
*victims* would wish to maintain anonymity or why
*other* folks would wish to maintain victims' anonymity?
Like the parents of child victims, perhaps? Or something else?
Deborah:
) It is
)disconcerting how the dominant culture pushes
)adherence to politeness at the expense of confronting
)destructive activities. It is quite clear how the
)various holocausts in human history happened - the
)Inquisition lasted over 400 years. Why?
Chris:
The implication of these two sentences would *appear*
to be that you believe that an excess of politeness led to
the longevity of the Inquisition as well as various holocausts.
But that seems very unlikely to actually be your position,
so I'm pretty sure that I am not understanding something
about what you are saying. Could you elaborate?
BTW, I disagree with you on the notion that contemporary
dominant culture "pushes adherence to politeness". I'd
tend to argue quite the reverse, in fact, that politeness in
virtually all forms has been de-emphasized, even denigrated,
in a broad range of ways and for a broad range of situations.
I am frequently disappointed in my expectation that even
the most basic courtesies will be extended to me.
Of course, I'm not sure that we mean the same thing by
"politeness" either. It sounds to me like you might be talking
more about a fear of shame or perhaps an unwillingness to
tackle difficult issues publicly rather than courtesy in speech
and action.
Deborah:
)My daughter and I face increased destructive pressure
)in this community in large part because of our
)confrontation of the Waldorf group and it will only
)get more intense because I will not back off. What
)sort of adults stand by and watch this happen to a
)child and her mother? What sort of adults stand by
)and allow children to be harmed, repeatedly? Why
)would anyone keep a child in an environment so clearly
)destructive as a Waldorf school, rationalizing that
)there is some good education in there somewhere?
Chris:
These questions resonate for me. Whenever a child is
being harmed and the adults around her do nothing the
question "Why?" is both inescapable and painful.
Deborah:
)Cowardice is inexcusable and I wonder why more adults
)don't consider why the nursing home industry is
)booming? Children do not forget those who hurt them,
)including those who stood by while they were being
)hurt.
Chris:
I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical flourish or if you actually
believe there is a link between child abuse and the growth
of the proportion of our elderly citizens who end up in nursing
homes. The center I work for has done a tremendous amount
of research into nursing home care and what leads to it and I
can assure you that there is no evidence of any such link that
I am aware of. The weakening of inter-generational bonds is
certainly a factor, but there are a lot of causes for that.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 15:38:21 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
On Sat, 03 Feb 2001, Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
)Sarina McDonald wrote:
)
) ) This man (Dr Barry
) ) Westfall) is frightening and I would not trust his opinions on
) ) education - *any* education - without giving his motives and past work
) ) a long, hard look.
[Sorry to quote Sune quoting Sarina, but I don't have the original]
I took a look at the letter by Barry Westfall and I have to agree with
Sarina that he has such a patently political and biased agenda that he's
pushing that he has very little credibility as a source.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 22:57:23 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: PLANS' 'expert' on Waldorf education
Chris wrote:
) I took a look at the letter by Barry Westfall and I have to agree with
) Sarina that he has such a patently political and biased agenda that he's
) pushing that he has very little credibility as a source.
He's the only pedagogical 'expert' witness on waldorf education the
moderator - as far as I know of - has mentioned. That DD mentions him at
this time on the list hints (possibly) at PLANS having considered him as
an 'expert' witness in the second part of the the up'n coming trial.
In the mail DD quoted he mentions his 'standard testimoney against
Waldorf'. How about putting it on the list, DD?
Is it well-argued and interesting? Anything that would be educative and
usable for the critics on the list? A good summary of waldorf education
from a critics' perspective and to waldorf schools to learn from?
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:32:57 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Detlef Hardorp wrote:
) As for Steiner's concept of the "aryan race": this _included_ the Semitic
) peoples (and Arabs). According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was actually
) born out of Semitic peoples! This is about as far away from Hitler's
) concept as you can get. As I have pointed out over and over again on
) this list, Steiner used the term "aryan race" as a name for the
) development of modern Asio-Indo-European culture per se (as did others at
) the time as well, until the NS monster attached their vile meaning to the
) term, - we have yet to break this spell).
Sometimes I get the feeling that Detlef and and the rest of us are talking
about two different people named Rudolf Steiner. The Steiner that I mean,
the one who wrote Aus der Akasha-Chronik (which I think is called Cosmic
Memory in English) and Outline of Occult Science, did not teach that
Semitic peoples were part of the Aryan race. He taught, as Blavatsky had
before him, that the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth
(Atlantean) root-race. The Aryans, on the other hand, are the fifth and
current root-race, according to Steiner, and the hitherto existing
sub-races of this fifth root-race (Indian, Persian, Egyptian-Chaldean,
Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic) do not include the Semites, who are
rather a leftover remnant of a superceded root-race. This racial typology
has been affirmed many times by later anthroposophists; for example, A.P.
Shepherd's book A Scientist of the Invisible: An Introduction to the Life
and Work of Rudolf Steiner (London 1954) recapitulates Steiner's teachings
in chapter ten, "The Origin and Destiny of Man". Shepherd uses the terms
"stages", "periods" and "races" interchangeably, and writes that humankind
is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels." (p.
103) Although Shepherd doesn't use the term "sub-race", he does use
"Germanic peoples" and "Germanic races" interchangeably to refer to the
dominant group in "the fifth epoch of post-Atlantean civilisation, the
epoch we live in" (p. 110).
Another of Steiner's disciples, Ernst Uehli, expanded on Steiner's
teachings about "Aryans" and "Semites". In 1926 Uehli published a book on
"Nordic-Germanic Mythology" and dedicated it to the recently deceased
Steiner, who is quoted and referred to constantly throughout the book.
Uehli uses the terms "root races" and "Aryan" repeatedly (Ernst Uehli,
Nordisch-Germanische Mythologie als Mysteriengeschichte, Stuttgart
1965, 134-144; I'm told that an English translation exists). But Uehli
doesn't content himself with simply repeating the anthroposophist
orthodoxy on root races and Aryan superiority; he constructs a grand
historical-evolutionary-racial narrative in which the two rival forces,
separated throughout the millennia by their fundamentally different
racial makeup, are "the Semitic and the Aryan peoples" (ibid. 144).
But whereas "the early Germans were a people of nature" and thus
pure and strong, "the Jews succumbed to Ahriman" (ibid. 147;
"Ahriman" is the anthroposophist term for demonic forces that promote
materialism). Alongside the world-historical struggle between the
nature-loving Aryans and the materialistic and diabolical Jews, Uehli notes
that there are still a few "primitive peoples that are dying out" as a
result of cosmic necessity, since they are nothing more than the "decadent
remnants" of an earlier root race (ibid. 135). These views are not an
obsolote part of anthroposophy's past; in the year 2000 Uehli's works were
still part of the officially recommended curriculum for Waldorf teachers in
both Germany and the United States. In Germany this fact sparked yet
another public scandal around anthroposophist racism when another book of
Uehli's, this one about Atlantis and evidently even more offensive
than the one I've quoted, was brought to public attention last year. The
German federal family ministry responded by putting the book on its index
of racist literature.
I'm not sure I understand what Detlef means by "breaking the spell" in
his last sentence above, but it sounds like he's hoping that someday we'll
be able to put all that nasty Nazi stuff behind us and start talking
unselfconsciously about the "Aryan race" again. But it wasn't the Nazis who
gave the notion of an "Aryan race" its vile meaning; the term had that
meaning for decades before the Nazis emerged in the early 1920's, and it is
inextricable from its racist ideological context, Nazis or no Nazis. It is
also utterly meaningless anthropologically, since the term "Aryan race" is
based on a conflation of linguistic and biological concepts and refers to
nothing in the real world. Why anthroposophists would want to preserve this
term, and continue teaching it in their schools, remains a mystery to me.
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 07:46:45 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative6/02/01 0:25rbc supranet.com
) Detlef Hardorp wrote:
)
)) As for Steiner's concept of the "aryan race": this _included_ the Semitic
)) peoples (and Arabs). According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was actually
)) born out of Semitic peoples! This is about as far away from Hitler's
)) concept as you can get. As I have pointed out over and over again on
)) this list, Steiner used the term "aryan race" as a name for the
)) development of modern Asio-Indo-European culture per se (as did others at
)) the time as well, until the NS monster attached their vile meaning to the
)) term, - we have yet to break this spell).
)
) Sometimes I get the feeling that Detlef and and the rest of us are talking
) about two different people named Rudolf Steiner. The Steiner that I mean,
) the one who wrote Aus der Akasha-Chronik (which I think is called Cosmic
) Memory in English) and Outline of Occult Science, did not teach that
) Semitic peoples were part of the Aryan race. He taught, as Blavatsky had
) before him, that the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth
) (Atlantean) root-race. The Aryans, on the other hand, are the fifth and
) current root-race, according to Steiner, and the hitherto existing
) sub-races of this fifth root-race (Indian, Persian, Egyptian-Chaldean,
) Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic) do not include the Semites, who are
) rather a leftover remnant of a superceded root-race. This racial typology
) has been affirmed many times by later anthroposophists; for example, A.P.
) Shepherd's book A Scientist of the Invisible: An Introduction to the Life
) and Work of Rudolf Steiner (London 1954) recapitulates Steiner's teachings
) in chapter ten, "The Origin and Destiny of Man". Shepherd uses the terms
) "stages", "periods" and "races" interchangeably, and writes that humankind
) is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels." (p.
) 103) Although Shepherd doesn't use the term "sub-race", he does use
) "Germanic peoples" and "Germanic races" interchangeably to refer to the
) dominant group in "the fifth epoch of post-Atlantean civilisation, the
) epoch we live in" (p. 110).
) Another of Steiner's disciples, Ernst Uehli, expanded on Steiner's
) teachings about "Aryans" and "Semites". In 1926 Uehli published a book on
) "Nordic-Germanic Mythology" and dedicated it to the recently deceased
) Steiner, who is quoted and referred to constantly throughout the book.
) Uehli uses the terms "root races" and "Aryan" repeatedly (Ernst Uehli,
) Nordisch-Germanische Mythologie als Mysteriengeschichte, Stuttgart
) 1965, 134-144; I'm told that an English translation exists). But Uehli
) doesn't content himself with simply repeating the anthroposophist
) orthodoxy on root races and Aryan superiority; he constructs a grand
) historical-evolutionary-racial narrative in which the two rival forces,
) separated throughout the millennia by their fundamentally different
) racial makeup, are "the Semitic and the Aryan peoples" (ibid. 144).
) But whereas "the early Germans were a people of nature" and thus
) pure and strong, "the Jews succumbed to Ahriman" (ibid. 147;
) "Ahriman" is the anthroposophist term for demonic forces that promote
) materialism). Alongside the world-historical struggle between the
) nature-loving Aryans and the materialistic and diabolical Jews, Uehli notes
) that there are still a few "primitive peoples that are dying out" as a
) result of cosmic necessity, since they are nothing more than the "decadent
) remnants" of an earlier root race (ibid. 135). These views are not an
) obsolote part of anthroposophy's past; in the year 2000 Uehli's works were
) still part of the officially recommended curriculum for Waldorf teachers in
) both Germany and the United States. In Germany this fact sparked yet
) another public scandal around anthroposophist racism when another book of
) Uehli's, this one about Atlantis and evidently even more offensive
) than the one I've quoted, was brought to public attention last year. The
) German federal family ministry responded by putting the book on its index
) of racist literature.
) I'm not sure I understand what Detlef means by "breaking the spell" in
) his last sentence above, but it sounds like he's hoping that someday we'll
) be able to put all that nasty Nazi stuff behind us and start talking
) unselfconsciously about the "Aryan race" again. But it wasn't the Nazis who
) gave the notion of an "Aryan race" its vile meaning; the term had that
) meaning for decades before the Nazis emerged in the early 1920's, and it is
) inextricable from its racist ideological context, Nazis or no Nazis. It is
) also utterly meaningless anthropologically, since the term "Aryan race" is
) based on a conflation of linguistic and biological concepts and refers to
) nothing in the real world. Why anthroposophists would want to preserve this
) term, and continue teaching it in their schools, remains a mystery to me.
)
) Peter Staudenmaier
)
We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor do we
have problems with it...
Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
koala.
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 151
-- Topica Digest --
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By winters_diana hotmail.com
old discussion I
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition
By dan dandugan.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition
By snell netshel.net
apology to koala
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: apology to koala
By koala noos.fr
Re: apology to koala
By snell netshel.net
Anthroposophy as religion
By TTirrell1 aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:49:03 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
koala noos.fr wrote:
) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor do we
) have problems with it...
)
) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
)
) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
)
) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
)
) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
)
) koala.
What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and Sub-Races??? And
Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness (paraphrased)???
...Gary
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:10:12 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
--part1_6e.78ac116.27b16dd4_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
koala noos.fr writes:
)
We who?
Paula
--part1_6e.78ac116.27b16dd4_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)koala noos.fr writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")We don't care about races Sir(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)We who?
(BR)
(BR)Paula
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_6e.78ac116.27b16dd4_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:56:36 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
) CE MESSAGE EST AU FORMAT MIME. Comme votre lecteur de courrier ne comprend pas
ce format, il se peut que tout ou partie de ce message soit illisible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064323398_1722372_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 16:10Speckraybill aol.com
In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
koala noos.fr writes:
)We don't care about races Sir
We who?
Paula
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...
koala.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064323398_1722372_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(TITLE)Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 16:10Speckraybill aol.com=
(BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")(FONT FACE=3D"Book Antiqua")In a message da=
ted 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, (BR)
koala noos.fr writes: (BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT=
FACE=3D"Arial")>We don't care about races Sir(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(FONT FACE=3D"Book Antiqua")(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")We who? (BR)
(BR)
Paula (BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...(BR=
)
(BR)
koala.(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
--MS_Mac_OE_3064323398_1722372_MIME_Part--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:05:26 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Gary Bonhiver6/02/01 15:49Gary GoodWinter.com
) koala noos.fr wrote:
)=20
)) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor d=
o we
)) have problems with it...
))=20
)) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
))=20
)) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
))=20
)) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
))=20
)) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
)) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
)) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
))=20
)) koala.
)=20
) What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and Sub-Races?=
??
) And
) Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness
) (paraphrased)???
)=20
) ...Gary
)=20
What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'in=E9galit=E9 des races humaines" ?
Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
exist.=20
The crock.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:36:18 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Hello...
I am confused by the conversation that started when "koala" jumped into the
dialogue between Detlef and Peter. In koala's original post, it wasn't clear
to me whether koala was responding to Detlef or to Peter when he/she
referred to "people like you" who categorize people by classification, etc.
Koala, were you answering Detlef, or Peter's response to Detlef?
(It seems to me that it is Steiner who was obsessed with classifying people
by racial characteristics, and Steiner who needed enlightening that races
don't actually even exist.)
Steiner's defenders don't seem to notice that he started from a flawed
premise, trying to solve the "problem" of race, and they are happy he made
pronouncements about "overcoming" race and the importance of unity etc. But
if the premise is racist, because the problem doesn't exist, then the
solutions are suspect too.
Diana
)Gary Bonhiver6/02/01 15:49Gary GoodWinter.com
)
) ) koala noos.fr wrote:
) )
) )) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor
)do we
) )) have problems with it...
) ))
) )) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
) ))
) )) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
) ))
) )) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides
)!
) ))
) )) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
) )) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
) )) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
) ))
) )) koala.
) )
) ) What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and
)Sub-Races???
) ) And
) ) Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness
) ) (paraphrased)???
) )
) ) ...Gary
) )
)What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'inČgalitČ des races humaines" ?
)Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
)
) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
)
) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
)exist.
)
)
)
)The crock.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:58:37 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
In a message dated 02/06/2001 7:56:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
writes:
(( We don't care about races Sir
))
Obviously you are speaking for some group (unless, of course, the "we" is
indicative of multiple personalities.....). I was curious to know for whom
you spoke.
Paula
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 18:18:22 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Diana Winters6/02/01 17:44winters_diana hotmail.com
)=20
) Hello...
) I am confused by the conversation that started when "koala" jumped into t=
he
) dialogue between Detlef and Peter. In koala's original post, it wasn't cl=
ear
) to me whether koala was responding to Detlef or to Peter when he/she
) referred to "people like you" who categorize people by classification, et=
c.
) Koala, were you answering Detlef, or Peter's response to Detlef?
I didn't check the names, I admit... The topic is simply outmoded for good =
!
When will we start to love the human "race" without those "dictinctions"
which anyway don't exist.
The fact that scientists had to prove it, is simply because some moroans
needed some justifications for problems usually "normal" people don't have
when they communicate with each other... Instead of killing their fellow
man.
)=20
) (It seems to me that it is Steiner who was obsessed with classifying peop=
le
) by racial characteristics, and Steiner who needed enlightening that races
) don't actually even exist.)
Very accurate.
)=20
) Steiner's defenders don't seem to notice that he started from a flawed
) premise, trying to solve the "problem" of race, and they are happy he mad=
e
) pronouncements about "overcoming" race and the importance of unity etc. B=
ut
) if the premise is racist, because the problem doesn't exist, then the
) solutions are suspect too.
) Diana
Thank you. We often confuse culture and race... People writing treatises
about those subjects usually have psychological problems as to their
inferiority complex, and have to solve their problem of inferiority with
dubious theories scientists who'd be better doing something else (and who
would certainly prefer be doing something else) have to denounce
scientifically, whereas a simple psychological councelling would do the sam=
e
effect without devastating consequences...
I often heard terrorists bombing shops speaking about the superiority of th=
e
white race (because it is supposed to be in danger) and therefore justifyin=
g
their action as a fight to defend the race, their race (not the one against
themselves of course... ) - it is one example among many others.
But if they were really superior (which is what they claim to be), they
wouldn't need to bomb anything. They wouldn't feel unsecure about anything.
Therefore their superiority, and their obsession about it, only proove one
thing: that they are really afraid to be inferior, or at least afraid to
admit it. Their own eyes is their own culpability, not the ones of the
others... just their own eyes they project on other people's eyes...
Speaking about the origins of man is one thing. Speaking about the supposed
races is another thing that has to be cured with a psychiatrist !
koala.
)=20
)=20
)=20
)) Gary Bonhiver6/02/01 15:49Gary GoodWinter.com
))=20
))) koala noos.fr wrote:
)))=20
)))) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor
)) do we
)))) have problems with it...
))))=20
)))) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
))))=20
)))) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
))))=20
)))) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides
)) !
))))=20
)))) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
)))) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
)))) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
))))=20
)))) koala.
)))=20
))) What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and
)) Sub-Races???
))) And
))) Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness
))) (paraphrased)???
)))=20
))) ...Gary
)))=20
)) What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'in=E9galit=E9 des races humaines" ?
)) Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
))=20
)) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
))=20
)) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
)) exist.
))=20
))=20
))=20
)) The crock.
)=20
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 18:29:21 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 17:59Speckraybill aol.com
) In a message dated 02/06/2001 7:56:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
) writes:
)
) (( We don't care about races Sir
)))
) Obviously you are speaking for some group (unless, of course, the "we" is
) indicative of multiple personalities.....). I was curious to know for whom
) you spoke.
likewise.
)
) Paula
)
The humane group.
koala.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:29:27 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
--part1_85.685a252.27b18e77_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re: Koala's last post in response to Diana
Thank you for the clarification! Now, this makes some sense. I was confused
as well.
Paula
--part1_85.685a252.27b18e77_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")Re: Koala's last post in response to Diana
(BR)
(BR)Thank you for the clarification! Now, this makes some sense. I was confused
(BR)as well.
(BR)
(BR)Paula
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_85.685a252.27b18e77_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:31:48 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
--part1_ea.10ffef7a.27b18f04_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/06/2001 9:29:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
writes:
)
) likewise.
)
I speak for me. I don't think anyone else would give me permission!
) The humane group.
)
)
Glad to hear it. Obviously not anthro.
--part1_ea.10ffef7a.27b18f04_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/06/2001 9:29:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
(BR)writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")
(BR)likewise.
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)I speak for me. I don't think anyone else would give me permission!
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")The humane group.
(BR)
(BR)koala(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0") Glad to hear it. Obviously not anthro.
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_ea.10ffef7a.27b18f04_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 18:38:19 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
) CE MESSAGE EST AU FORMAT MIME. Comme votre lecteur de courrier ne comprend pas
ce format, il se peut que tout ou partie de ce message soit illisible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064329500_2089432_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 18:32Speckraybill aol.com
In a message dated 02/06/2001 9:29:05 AM Pacific Standard Time,
koala noos.fr
writes:
likewise.
I speak for me. I don't think anyone else would give me permission!
The humane group.
koala
Glad to hear it. Obviously not anthro.
Oh, no !!
No hard feelings at all... Sorry for the confusion.
koala.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064329500_2089432_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(TITLE)Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY)
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 18:32Speckraybill aol.com(BR)
(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT FACE=3D"Book Antiqua")In a message dated 02/06/2001 9:29:05=
AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr (BR)
writes: (BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
likewise. (BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)(BR)
I speak for me. I don't think anyone else would give me permission! (=
BR)
(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(FONT SIZE=3D"2")The humane group. (BR)
(BR)
koala(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(FONT FACE=3D"Book Antiqua") Glad to hear it. Obviously n=
ot anthro. (BR)
(BR)
Oh, no !! (BR)
(BR)
No hard feelings at all... Sorry for the confusion.(BR)
(BR)
koala.(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
--MS_Mac_OE_3064329500_2089432_MIME_Part--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:50:26 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
"koala,"
I think this is coming clearer, but let's cut to the chase. Are you
criticizing Steiner's racial theories? That's what I'm getting out of this.
But because you quoted Peter Staudenmaier's whole post, people thought you
were criticizing Peter's views, see what I mean?
[I wrote:]
)In koala's original post, it wasn't clear to me whether koala was
) )responding to Detlef or to Peter when he/she referred to "people like
) )you" who categorize people by classification, etc.
[koala:]
)I didn't check the names, I admit... The topic is simply outmoded for )good
)! When will we start to love the human "race" without those )"dictinctions"
)which anyway don't exist.
[I wrote:]
)It seems to me that it is Steiner who was obsessed with classifying )people
)by racial characteristics, and Steiner who needed enlightening )that races
)don't actually even exist.
[koala:]
)Very accurate.
)People writing treatises about those subjects usually have )psychological
)problems as to their inferiority complex,
I'm still not clear whether you're criticizing Steiner and his adherents, or
maybe all of us because we're even discussing Steiner! Are you an
anthroposophist?
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 14:21:25 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
) THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064314085_115384_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
I thought "you" (meaning, I am guessing, Anthros) did not believe in what
materialistic science has proven or not proven!
What happened to that awful Ahriman, embodied in the world of materialistic
science?
I guess science (that is, *real*, evidence-based science) is to be called
upon when "spiritual" science doesn't suit ...
----------
From: koala noos.fr
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Date: Tue, Feb 6, 2001, 11:56 AM
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 16:10Speckraybill aol.com
In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
koala noos.fr writes:
)We don't care about races Sir
We who?
Paula
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...
koala.
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
--MS_Mac_OE_3064314085_115384_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(TITLE)Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#FFFFFF")
I thought "you" (meaning, I am guessing, Anthros) did not believe=
in what materialistic science has proven or not proven!(BR)
(BR)
What happened to that awful Ahriman, embodied in the world of materialistic=
science?(BR)
(BR)
I guess science (that is, *real*, evidence-based science) is to be called u=
pon when "spiritual" science doesn't suit ...(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
----------(BR)
From: koala noos.fr(BR)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com(BR)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(BR)
Date: Tue, Feb 6, 2001, 11:56 AM(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01(/U)(/FONT)=
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000") 16:10Speckraybill aol.com(BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM=
Pacific Standard Time, (BR)
(/FONT)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)koala noos.fr(/U)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR=3D"#00808=
0") writes: (BR)
(BR)
(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT=
FACE=3D"Arial")>We don't care about races Sir(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")We who? (BR)
(BR)
Paula (BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...(BR=
)
(BR)
koala.(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)____________________________________________________________(B=
R)
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.(BR)
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01(/U)(/FONT) (BR=
)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
--MS_Mac_OE_3064314085_115384_MIME_Part--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 22:30:08 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Diana Winters6/02/01 18:52winters_diana hotmail.com
)
) "koala,"
)
) I think this is coming clearer, but let's cut to the chase. Are you
) criticizing Steiner's racial theories?
Yes of course ! There is no race anyway...
) That's what I'm getting out of this.
) But because you quoted Peter Staudenmaier's whole post, people thought you
) were criticizing Peter's views, see what I mean?
My apology then. I browse the posts rapidly. if that was not Peter's point
of view, then I am sorry that I misunderstood the post and its intent.
That old debate between Aryans and Semites gets on my nerves. How long are
we going to hear that crap ?
...Although we are also here to criticize Steiner...
)
) [I wrote:]
))) In koala's original post, it wasn't clear to me whether koala was
))) responding to Detlef or to Peter when he/she referred to "people like
))) you" who categorize people by classification, etc.
)
) [koala:]
)) I didn't check the names, I admit... The topic is simply outmoded for )good
)) ! When will we start to love the human "race" without those )"dictinctions"
)) which anyway don't exist.
)
) [I wrote:]
)) It seems to me that it is Steiner who was obsessed with classifying )people
)) by racial characteristics, and Steiner who needed enlightening )that races
)) don't actually even exist.
)
) [koala:]
)) Very accurate.
)
)) People writing treatises about those subjects usually have )psychological
)) problems as to their inferiority complex,
)
) I'm still not clear whether you're criticizing Steiner and his adherents, or
) maybe all of us because we're even discussing Steiner! Are you an
) anthroposophist?
)Diana
No I am not anthroposophist. I was criticizing Steiner and his adherents and
not all of you because you are discussing Steiner.
koala.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 22:20:29 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
) CE MESSAGE EST AU FORMAT MIME. Comme votre lecteur de courrier ne comprend pas
ce format, il se peut que tout ou partie de ce message soit illisible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064342831_2891209_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Lisa Ercolano6/02/01 20:21momof2gals mindspring.com
I thought "you" (meaning, I am guessing, Anthros) did not believe in what
materialistic science has proven or not proven!
I am not Anthros, sorry ! And I am new to this list, and french. I am not
New Age either.
What happened to that awful Ahriman, embodied in the world of materialistic
science?
Misunderstanding, I am sure about me... What do I have to see with Ahriman ?
(although I read about that in books by Steiner, but don't believe in it...)
May I say one thing for the better understanding of those posts, it is usual
to answer at the end of the post, and to use different colors (setting of
your browser). Otherwise, after many answers and posts, it is absolutly
impossible to manage the debate or discussion and to know who agrees with
whom...
I guess science (that is, *real*, evidence-based science) is to be called
upon when "spiritual" science doesn't suit ...
Certainly.
koala.
----------
From: koala noos.fr
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Date: Tue, Feb 6, 2001, 11:56 AM
Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01 16:10Speckraybill aol.com
In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
koala noos.fr writes:
)We don't care about races Sir
We who?
Paula
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...
koala.
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
--MS_Mac_OE_3064342831_2891209_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(TITLE)Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")Lisa Ercolano6/02/01 20:21momof2gals mindspring.com(B=
R)
(BR)
(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")I thought "you" (meaning=
, I am guessing, Anthros) did not believe in what materialistic science has =
proven or not proven!(BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
I am not Anthros, sorry ! And I am new to this list, and french. I am not N=
ew Age either.(BR)
(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")What happened to that awful Ahriman, embodied in the =
world of materialistic science?(BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)Misunderstanding, I am sure about me... What do I have to see with A=
hriman ? (although I read about that in books by Steiner, but don't believe =
in it...)(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")(BR)
(/FONT)May I say one thing for the better understanding of those posts, it =
is usual to answer at the end of the post, and to use different colors (sett=
ing of your browser). Otherwise, after many answers and posts, it is absolut=
ly impossible to manage the debate or discussion and to know who agrees with=
whom...(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")(BR)
I guess science (that is, *real*, evidence-based science) is to be called u=
pon when "spiritual" science doesn't suit ...(BR)
(BR)
(/FONT)Certainly.(BR)
(BR)
koala.(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")(BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
(BR)
----------(BR)
From: koala noos.fr(BR)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com(BR)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"(BR)
Date: Tue, Feb 6, 2001, 11:56 AM(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)Speckraybill aol.com6/02/01(/U)(/FONT)=
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000") 16:10Speckraybill aol.com(BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")In a message dated 02/05/2001 10:47:53 PM=
Pacific Standard Time, (BR)
(/FONT)(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)koala noos.fr(/U)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR=3D"#00808=
0") writes: (BR)
(BR)
(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT COLOR=3D"#008080")(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT=
FACE=3D"Arial")>We don't care about races Sir(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(/FONT)(/BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")(FONT FACE=3D"Arial")(BR)
(/FONT)(/FONT)(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#FF0000")We who? (BR)
(BR)
Paula (BR)
(/FONT)(BR)
You I hope... And the scientists who proved it for the sake of us all...(BR=
)
(BR)
koala.(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)____________________________________________________________(B=
R)
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.(BR)
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01(/U)(/FONT) (BR=
)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)____________________________________________________________(B=
R)
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.(BR)
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.(BR)
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01 (BR)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)(BR)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
--MS_Mac_OE_3064342831_2891209_MIME_Part--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 01:34:47 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
[I asked:]
)Are you criticizing Steiner's racial theories?
[koala]
)Yes of course ! There is no race anyway...
)No I am not anthroposophist. I was criticizing Steiner and his )adherents
)and not all of you because you are discussing Steiner.
Got it. Thanks.
Dianaa
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 03:07:48 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: old discussion I
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote, reintroducing an age old discussion
on this list:
) Sometimes I get the feeling that Detlef and and the rest of us are talking
) about two different people named Rudolf Steiner.
Interesting technique:
Writing as if everybody on the list but Detlef agreed with you in your
understanding and view of Steiner (which is quite untrue).
Where did you learn that?
If some name is missing between 'and' and 'and', it still remains an
untrue statement in its implications.
) The Steiner that I mean,
) the one who wrote Aus der Akasha-Chronik (which I think is called Cosmic
) Memory in English) and Outline of Occult Science, did not teach that
) Semitic peoples were part of the Aryan race.
Another interesting untrue between the lines statement:
You write (implicitely) as if Steiner not only in 'Cosmic memory'
(1904), but also in 'Occult Science - an outline' (1909) should have
expressed anything about the 'Aryan race'. That is not the case.
In 1909 Steiner was leaving the 'race'-terminology of the theosophical
tradition behind as an inadequate way of describing the patterns of
evolution after 'Atlantean' time, that to my understanding corresponds
to the time from the beginning of Tertiary to the end of the last
glacial age.
Steiner 1909:
*The concept of race in a proper sense was only useful at the old
Atlantis. Therefore we have, as we count with a real evolution of
humanity, not used the concept of race for the post-Atlantean time. We
don't speak of an Indian race and so on, as it isn't proper any more. We
speak of an Old Indian cultural epoch, of an Old Persian cultural epoch
and so on.
It would have completely no sense if we were to speak of that we in our
time were preparing for a sixth 'race'. If we in our time still see
remains of the old Atlantean differences, remaining old group
soulishness, so that you still can speak of a differentiation into races
- what is preparing itself for the sixth epoch consists specifically in
getting rid of and leaving behind that which is 'racial character'. That
is the important thing.*
[4 December 1909, in: The deeper secrets of the development of humanity
in the light of the gospels (GA 117)]
Also, as far as I'm aware of, Steiner in 'Occult science - an outline'
(1909) (don't have it at hand at the moment), that constitutes his own
basic description of what is covered in 'The secret doctrine' by
Blavatsky, describes the origin and evolution of mankind without ever
using the classificatory theosophical terms 'root races' or 'subraces'
or the at his time common classificatory term of 'races'.
)From the beginning in separating from the theosophical tradition during
the period c. 1909-1912, developing 'anthroposophy', he stopped using
the simplified and not proper concept and theosophical terminology of
'root races, 'subraces' and 'races'.
Steiner from the same lecture as above:
*It is completely understandable that every movement has its child
diseases and that one at the beginning of the theosophical movement
described what it is about as if the evolution of the Earth so to speak
was differentiated into seven epochs - they were called 'main races'
('root races' My comment. S.N.) - and that every 'root race' was
differentiated into seven 'sub-races', and that everything would repeat
itself that way for ever, so that you for ever could speak of seven
'races' and seven 'sub-races'. But one has to overcome this child
disease and become clear about that the concept of race ceases to have
any meaning/importance specifically in our time*
[4 December 1909, in: The deeper secrets of the development of humanity
in the light of the gospels (GA 117)]
) He taught, as Blavatsky had
) before him, that the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth
) (Atlantean) root-race.
Today the language of now 100 years ago stands out as very strange and
partly upsetting.
I think one has to be aware of how very differently the term 'race' in
the compositions as 'root races' and 'sub-races' was and still is used
in a simplified way in the theosophical tradition from the way it is
used today and in anthroposophy, to understand what you very shortly
summarize as:
) the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth
) (Atlantean) root-race.
'ROOT RACES' - NOT IN ANY SENSE GENERALLY A BIOLOGICAL TERM
(I tried to clarify my understanding of this concept in a posting on
'Confusion, somewhat dissolved?' Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:39:15 -070 to this
list. It said about:)
The use of the concept of 'root-race' in the theosophical tradition is,
I think, to us today very confusing, having basically _exceptionally_
little to do with what today is meant with 'race' in any biological or
present day sense.
The term 'root race' in the theosophical tradition is used to describe
what (as I understand it) is the basic stages in the development of _our
whole solar system_.
The first of these stages - 'Polaria' - was (my present understanding)
when our whole solar system constituted one quite uniform 'gasball', not
yet having differentiated into the Sun and the planets. It ended (to my
understanding) with the out-separation of Saturn as a planetary body in
its first form in our present solar system.
The second of these 'root races - 'Hyperborea' - constituted the
following _time_ of constriction of the gas ball that was to become our
sun up to the time when it had contracted so much that our Earth (and
moon, constituting one body) separated out of the further contracting
sun-gas-ball.
The third 'root race' - 'Lemuria' - constituted the _time_ from the
beginning of pre-Cambrium up to the end of Crataegus, with the
separation of the moon from the Earth - according to the esoteric
tradition - taking place somewhere during the end of this period, that
was the age of the Sauriers, completely dominated by them.
The fourth 'root race' (in theosophical terminology) - 'Atlantis' - to
my understanding corresponds in qualitative terms to the _period_ from
the beginning of Tertiary up to the end of the last glacial epoch. As it
is a description of cosmic evolution from a human-centered perspective,
referring to _all_ of humanity during this time, where man during the
beginning of Lemuria hardly can be understood to have an external form
or density recognizable as 'human', only in stages becoming so dense as
to start leaving paleontological traces from the beginning of
'Atlantis'.
I think this shows one has to understand the concept of 'root race'
completely differently from the first impression of the mere word at
first may make one associate it to, basically only meaning 'group of
humans' and _at all stages_ referring to _all of humanity_.
'Lemuria' is as a name related to the 'lemurians' (group of animals
found around the Indian Ocean). 'Atlantis' is a name related to
something that still exists as a reminiscence in the name 'Atlantic
Ocean', and 'Aryan' related to the still very little understood group of
Central Asians, out of which the Indo-European (~'Aryan') cultures have
developed, that have somewhat dominated the development of human culture
since the last glacial age.
Steiner loose and very broad way, common in his time, of using the term
'Aryan' has very little to do with the way it was later used, limited
and perverted by Hitler and the nazis to mean 'white, blonde and
blue-eyed Germans'.
The way the term was used generally in Steiner's time is described by a
Swedish Encyclopedia from 1924 (Nordisk Familjebok). I have described it
a number of times on this list before. It says (in translation):
"Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is the name of those
inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language belonging to the
group of Indo-European languages. The word Aryan was earlier and is
partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
Persians.
In this broad sense the word is used by for example Viktor Rydberg
(famous Swedish author at that time, my comment S.N.) ... The word Aryan
is derived from the Sanskrit word arya meaning noble, of noble origin.
With this is also connected the word Iran (Eran)."
A Norwegian Encyclopedia from 1959 (Gyldendals Konversationslexicon)
says (in translation):
"Aryans: Common name for those peoples who speak the Indian and Iranian
languages. It was originally a name of honor for those peoples belonging
the Indian cultural world. At present it is used as a term for all those
who speak Indo-European languages, which is somewhat misleading.
It is completely wrong to do, as the Nazi race theorists did, to let
Aryan stand as something opposite to Jews, which is a religious
category, or to mix Aryans with racial terms like for example the Nordic
race. This mixing of linguistic, religious and antropological
criterions, made the Germans try to exterminate the single people that
with any scientific right could call themselves Aryan in Europe, namely
the Gypsies, who speak an Indian language."
ON COSMIC MEMORY, 'Semites' and 'Aryans':
'Cosmic memory', comprising 20 lectures held 1904-08 in different
cities, can be found in full at http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/ as
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_index.html
The index for the the lecture series can be found at
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/docindex.html
With a search engine at
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/dosearch.html it is possible
to search the lecture series for every mention of single words.
Searching for 'aryan', 'aryans', 'semite' and 'semites' leads to two
lectures in the series:
- http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c03.html on 'Our
Atlantean Ancestors'. It mentions 'aryan' 6 times, 'aryans' 5 times,
'semite' 3 times and 'semites' 3 times.
- http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c04.html on
'Transition of the Fourth into the Fifth Root Race'. It mentions them
respectively 1 time, 0 time, 1 time and 1 time.
What does Steiner have to say in the first of the mentioned lectures on
the relation between 'semites' and 'aryans':
He describes the pattern of the development during 'Atlantean' time as
characterised by the development of 7 'races', used not in our present
sense, and not directly related to what he in 1910 described as the
formation of what during at least the first part of this century were
considered to 5 main races or groups of people of mankind. Already this
shows that he used the term in a very general, wide and fluid sense, as
a descriptive more than a classificatory term.
It is also clear from the description that he did not use the term to
describe any sort of hierarchical order between them, but out of a
temporal-organic perspective and focussing on some basic inner
qualities, developed by the different groups, like memory, language, the
development of personality, and thinking.
He describes the development of personality and personal power among
what he calls the 'Ur-Turanians', dominating the fourth period of
Atlantean times and how it often was used 'in order to satisfy their
selfish wishes and desires. But used in such a manner, these powers
destroy each other in their reciprocal effects.'
He continues describing how this was restricted through the development
of thinking among what he terms the 'Ur-Semites', developing as a fifth
central dominant culture during Atlantean times, that the theosophical
tradition called a 'subrace' of Atlantis for which Steiner stopped using
the 'sub-race' concept and terminology about 1909:
Steiner (http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c03.html) :
'Such a destructive effect could only be halted through the development
of a higher faculty in man. This was the faculty of thought. Logical
thinking has a restraining effect on selfish personal wishes. The origin
of logical thinking must be sought among the fifth subrace, the Primal
Semites. Men began to go beyond a mere remembrance of the past and to
compare different experiences. The faculty of judgment developed. Wishes
and appetites were regulated in accordance with this faculty of
judgment. One began to calculate, to combine. One learned to work with
thoughts.
If previously one had abandoned oneself to every desire, now one first
asked whether thought could approve this desire. While the men of the
fourth subrace rushed wildly toward the satisfaction of their appetites,
those of the fifth began to listen to an inner voice. This inner voice
checks the appetites, although it cannot destroy the claims of the
selfish personality.
Thus the fifth subrace transferred the impulses for action to within the
human being. Man wishes to come to terms within himself as to what he
must or must not do. But what thus was won within, with respect to the
faculty of thought, was lost with respect to the control of external
natural forces. With this combining thought mentioned above, one can
master only the forces of the mineral world, not the life force. The
fifth subrace therefore developed thought at the expense of control of
the life force. But it was just through this that it produced the germ
of the further development of mankind.
New personality, self-love, even complete selfishness could grow freely;
for thought alone which works wholly within, and can no longer give
direct orders to nature, is not capable of producing such devastating
effects as the previously misused powers. From this fifth subrace the
most gifted part was selected which survived the decline of the fourth
root race and formed the germ of the fifth, the Aryan race, whose
mission is the complete development of the thinking faculty.'
He then continues describing the sixth dominating culture of 'Atlantis':
'The men of the sixth subrace, the Akkadians, developed the faculty of
thought even further than the fifth. They differed from the so-called
Primal Semites in that they employed this faculty in a more
comprehensive sense than the former. ...'
)From this it is clear that Steiner held the complete development of
thinking, as being the mission of the 'Aryan race',
(with which he referred to the _Indo-European_ cultures that arouse out
of the today still not more fully understood Central-Asian group and
culture that called themselves 'Aryans' in the Vedic scriptures)
to have its origin in the group of 'Ur-Semites' during Atlantean time,
and that the 'Aryans', developed their culture out of the most developed
Ur-Semites of 'Atlantis', that were most developed, not because they
_were_ 'clairvoyant', but because they had developed something that was
_not_ clairvoyance, namely thinking, and had _lost_ the clairvoyance of
the earlier cultures of 'Atlantis', making them the most developed
'Atlanteans', constituting the seed culture out of which the dominating
cultures after 'Atlantis' have developed.
It also shows clearly how far from the truth it is to ascribe any sort
of nostalgia for any lost clairvoyance of the past and our present
cultural development as a sort of decay, as at times is argued on this
list.
(Answer continued in a second posting tomorrow.)
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:46:25 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition
The following finding will be voted on by the Chico Unified School
District board of education tonight (February 6):
-Dan Dugan
***
In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition Factual Findings
Pursuant to Education Code section 47605(d), the Chico Unified School
District Board of Education ("Board") hereby makes the following
findings in regards to the above-referenced charter petition.
1. On December 6, 2000, a petition for the establishment of a
charter school was submitted to the Chico Unified School District
("CUSD") pursuant to Education Code section 47605.
2. The name of the prospective charter school is the "Blue Oak
Charter School" ("Blue Oak").
3. The petition was introduced, discussed and debated at the Board's
regular meeting of December 6, 2000. A public hearing, as required by
Education Code section 47605(b), was timely held at a Board special
meeting on January 4, 2001.
4. On January 17, 2001, the Boardd, at a duly noticed portion of its
regular meeting, and following approximately two hours of debate and
discussion with charter proponents, voted to deny the charter
petition. The Board further directed staff to prepare findings as
required by Education Code section 47605(b), consistent with the
Board's discussion.
5. The Board finds that the curriculum to be used by the school is
sectarian and therefore in violation of Education Code section
47605(d). Specifically:
a. Blue Oak school intends to use the "Waldorf" method of teaching.
b. The first Waldorf school was created in Germany by Rudolf
Steiner (1861 to 1925) in 1919.
c. Prior to creating the Waldorf School, Steiner developed a
"spiritual science" known as "Anthroposophy." Anthroposophy is a
world-wide spiritual movement, based upon Steiner's work.
d. Based upon certain of the materials presented to the Board, it
appears that Anthroposophy is a religion as commonly apprehended; at
the very least, it appears that there is a significant question as to
whether Anthroposophy is a religion. Steiner has described
Anthroposophy as a science of the spirit, and a path of knowledge
that can lead the spiritual in the human being to the spiritual in
the universe. Fundamental to all of his work is the view that the
human being is composed of body, soul and spirit, and that the Christ
event is key to the unfolding of human history and the achievement of
human freedom.
e. Waldorf education is based on the spiritual-scientific research
of Rudolf Steiner. Specifically, the Waldorf method is based upon the
"education of the whole child," a concept that has its roots in
anthroposophy.
f. The Waldorf method of education cannot be made secular because
it is either based upon or inextricably interconnected and linked
with Anthroposophy. More specifically, Waldorf education depends on a
pedagogy based upon Steiner's Anthroposophical-based understanding of
a child's development.
g. The Board understands that the Blue Oak proponents argue that
the Waldorf method is based only generally upon Steiner's child
development model; however, that child development model is
apparently based upon religious (Anthroposophical) tenets. The
materials before the Board strongly suggest that the Waldorf method
and the assumptions thereof cannot be understood except by reference
to Anthroposophy.
h. Moreover, the Charter application states specifically that
"[t]he Blue Oak Charter School, based on the Waldorf method, is
committed to the education of the whole child..." (Charter
Application, p. 1) (See also, id., at p. 2.)
i. The application also states that teacher hiring "[p]reference
will be given to those who hold a teaching certificate from a
recognized Waldorf Teacher Training College..." (Charter Application,
p. 13.) Such colleges, as understood by the Board, are firmly
grounded in the work of Steiner. The following is from the Rudolf
Steiner College in Fair Oaks, California: "Waldorf education balances
artistic, academic and practical work educating the whole child, hand
and heart as well as mind. Its innovative methodology and
developmentally-oriented curriculum, permeated with the arts, address
the child's changing consciousness as it unfolds, stage by stage.
Imagination and creativity are cultivated as well as cognitive growth
and a sense of responsibility for the earth and its inhabitants.
Steiner's detailed psychology of child development, described early
in the 20th century, has been supported by modern research in
education and neuropsychology. Through Waldorf education, Steiner
hoped that young people would develop the capacities of soul and
intellect and the strength of will that would prepare them to meet
the challenges of their own time and the future."
j. In addition, the petition states that "[t]eachers hired without
Waldorf Methods training or background will participate in ongoing
training in Waldorf Methods or other training which the school finds
valuable to enhance it's [sic] educational program."
6. The Board believes that, based upon the above, the methodology of
Waldorf education is based upon Steiner's child development model
which is, itself, based upon anthroposophy. Therefore, public funding
of this curriculum does constitute an advancement of religion as
would be perceived by a student at the proposed charter school.
Dated: _______________ By: _________________________
President, CUSD Board
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 21:52:53 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Koala, in light of your many clarifying posts following my challenge to you, I
apologize for targeting you. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that you were an
anthroposophist attempting to minimize or deflect discussion of Steiner's theories
on race.
Welcome to the list!
...Gary
koala noos.fr wrote:
) Gary Bonhiver6/02/01 15:49Gary GoodWinter.com
)
) ) koala noos.fr wrote:
) )
) )) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor do we
) )) have problems with it...
) ))
) )) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
) ))
) )) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
) ))
) )) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
) ))
) )) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
) )) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
) )) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
) ))
) )) koala.
) )
) ) What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and Sub-Races???
) ) And
) ) Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness
) ) (paraphrased)???
) )
) ) ...Gary
) )
) What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'inČgalitČ des races humaines" ?
) Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
)
) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
)
) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
) exist.
)
) The crock.
)
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:41:08 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition
)The following finding will be voted on by the Chico Unified School
)District board of education tonight (February 6):
)
)-Dan Dugan
)
)***
)
)In Re: Blue Oak Charter School Petition Factual Findings
)
What a good feeling to know that there is an awake school board out there!
Go Chico!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 00:03:05 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: apology to koala
Koala,
I apologize for calling you an "anthroposophist" based on my
misunderstanding or the arguments "Aryans and Semites."
Things got confusing for me when you jumped in between Peter and Detlef, and
it was difficult to tell from which vantage point you came.
Thank you for clearing things up. YES, we ARE here to criticize Steiner!!
Cheers,
Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 06:05:38 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Gary Bonhiver7/02/01 3:54Gary GoodWinter.com
) Koala, in light of your many clarifying posts following my challenge to y=
ou, I
) apologize for targeting you. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that you=
were
) an
) anthroposophist attempting to minimize or deflect discussion of Steiner's
) theories
) on race.
)=20
) Welcome to the list!
)=20
) ...Gary
No hard feelings Gary.
Maybe the word "we", taken in its acceptation as "one", was the main
problem. I thought (as a french) "we" might be very similar to "one",
meaning not "we" as a group, but as the common sense... Well, I still
believe there is a common sense...
Sorry.
koala.
)=20
) koala noos.fr wrote:
)=20
)) Gary Bonhiver6/02/01 15:49Gary GoodWinter.com
))=20
))) koala noos.fr wrote:
)))=20
)))) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor=
do
)))) we
)))) have problems with it...
))))=20
)))) Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
))))=20
)))) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
))))=20
)))) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides=
!
))))=20
)))) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
)))) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
)))) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
))))=20
)))) koala.
)))=20
))) What a crock! What about Steiner's treatise on Root Races and Sub-Race=
s???
))) And
))) Herr Docktor's statement about Jews outliving their usefullness
))) (paraphrased)???
)))=20
))) ...Gary
)))=20
)) What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'in=E9galit=E9 des races humaines" ?
)) Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
))=20
)) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
))=20
)) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
)) exist.
))=20
)) The crock.
))=20
)) ____________________________________________________________
)) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
)) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
)) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)=20
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)=20
)=20
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 06:38:03 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: apology to koala
Lisa Ercolano7/02/01 6:02momof2gals mindspring.com
) Koala,
)
) I apologize for calling you an "anthroposophist" based on my
) misunderstanding or the arguments "Aryans and Semites."
Thank you. No problem at all. I overreacted or answered too quickly perhaps.
I never ask myself such questions as:
"to which race does he or she belong ?"
nor did I ever question the origins of man in terms of races, and am glad
not to have those reflexes. I am appalled by medias which give too much
coverage to it; although it might still be a problem of societies (and the
aim of medias being to reflect about those problems), I would even be
gladder if such topics were solved once and for all, that is to say never to
speak of races anymore ! Speaking of races always meaning unfortunately
speaking of figures, or of death tolls !
)
) Things got confusing for me when you jumped in between Peter and Detlef, and
) it was difficult to tell from which vantage point you came.
As I told you, this is a very sensitive topic with dubious justifications
most of the time. The subject matter (or subject line, am I correct ?) in
2001 often makes me overreact. Althought this is a discussion list about
Steiner, I shouldn't have gotten into that kind of discussion... It is
logical to speak about it as to criticize Steiner's point of view. My
question would be: how can we still discuss about those things in 2001 ?
)
) Thank you for clearing things up. YES, we ARE here to criticize Steiner!!
Glad to hear it. Then I would have to go to my cellar again in order to dig
up those books I didnt want to speak about anymore...
)
)
) Cheers,
)Lisa.
Regards.
Serge.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 22:33:49 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: apology to koala
Koala wrote:
))Glad to hear it. Then I would have to go to my cellar again in order to dig
)up those books I didnt want to speak about anymore...
Debra here:
Interesting. You sound like an Anthroposophy survivor. What is your story?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 06:58:39 EST
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
Subject: Anthroposophy as religion
--part1_16.87fb9ce.27b2926f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I recently read somewhere about an entity which classifies different
religions, and which classifies anthroposophy as a religion. Does anyone have
any information on this subject?
Terry
--part1_16.87fb9ce.27b2926f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Bookman Old Style" LANG="0")I recently read somewhere about an entity which classifies different
(BR)religions, and which classifies anthroposophy as a religion. Does anyone have
(BR)any information on this subject?
(BR)
(BR)Terry(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_16.87fb9ce.27b2926f_boundary--
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 152
-- Topica Digest --
Re: old discussion I
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Assumptions
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Re: Assumptions
By koala noos.fr
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: old discussion I
By rbc supranet.com
RE: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By lschelly jackrouse.com
Chico board is tonight (Wed)
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: old discussion I
By snell netshel.net
Re: old discussion I
By koala noos.fr
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:04:56 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001, Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
)Today the language of now 100 years ago stands out as very strange and
)partly upsetting.
)
)I think one has to be aware of how very differently the term 'race' in
)the compositions as 'root races' and 'sub-races' was and still is used
)in a simplified way in the theosophical tradition from the way it is
)used today and in anthroposophy, to understand what you very shortly
)summarize as:
)
) ) the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth
) ) (Atlantean) root-race.
)
)
)'ROOT RACES' - NOT IN ANY SENSE GENERALLY A BIOLOGICAL TERM
)
)(I tried to clarify my understanding of this concept in a posting on
)'Confusion, somewhat dissolved?' Tue, 24 Oct 2000 05:39:15 -070 to this
)list. It said about:)
)
)The use of the concept of 'root-race' in the theosophical tradition is,
)I think, to us today very confusing, having basically _exceptionally_
)little to do with what today is meant with 'race' in any biological or
)present day sense.
)
)The term 'root race' in the theosophical tradition is used to describe
)what (as I understand it) is the basic stages in the development of _our
)whole solar system_.
)
)The first of these stages - 'Polaria' - was (my present understanding)
)when our whole solar system constituted one quite uniform 'gasball', not
)yet having differentiated into the Sun and the planets. It ended (to my
)understanding) with the out-separation of Saturn as a planetary body in
)its first form in our present solar system.
)
)The second of these 'root races - 'Hyperborea' - constituted the
)following _time_ of constriction of the gas ball that was to become our
)sun up to the time when it had contracted so much that our Earth (and
)moon, constituting one body) separated out of the further contracting
)sun-gas-ball.
)
)The third 'root race' - 'Lemuria' - constituted the _time_ from the
)beginning of pre-Cambrium up to the end of Crataegus, with the
)separation of the moon from the Earth - according to the esoteric
)tradition - taking place somewhere during the end of this period, that
)was the age of the Sauriers, completely dominated by them.
)
)The fourth 'root race' (in theosophical terminology) - 'Atlantis' - to
)my understanding corresponds in qualitative terms to the _period_ from
)the beginning of Tertiary up to the end of the last glacial epoch. As it
)is a description of cosmic evolution from a human-centered perspective,
)referring to _all_ of humanity during this time, where man during the
)beginning of Lemuria hardly can be understood to have an external form
)or density recognizable as 'human', only in stages becoming so dense as
)to start leaving paleontological traces from the beginning of
)'Atlantis'.
Chris:
This is a very peculiar set of beliefs that makes little sense and appears
to have no possibility for substantiation. Do you have any theosophical
references that might shed any further light on how and why they thought
this way?
Also, it is clear from the Steiner lectures that you provided a link to
(below), that Steiner and anthroposophical doctrine do not see the
process of evolution occurring in quite the same way. Do you know
why Steiner used the same terminology and the same names for his
root races?
Sune:
)I think this shows one has to understand the concept of 'root race'
)completely differently from the first impression of the mere word at
)first may make one associate it to, basically only meaning 'group of
)humans' and _at all stages_ referring to _all of humanity_.
Chris:
Well, not quite all of humanity. Steiner, at least, is clear in the
Cosmic Memory lectures that certain "savage tribes" and
"degenerate" remnants of both Atlanteans and even Lemurians
persist into our own, Aryan, age.
Sune:
)'Lemuria' is as a name related to the 'lemurians' (group of animals
)found around the Indian Ocean).
Chris:
These fascinating creatures are called just "lemurs" in English, FYI.
Sune:
)'Atlantis' is a name related to
)something that still exists as a reminiscence in the name 'Atlantic
)Ocean',
Chris:
Which derives in turn from Plato's fable about an island of the same name.
Sune:
) and 'Aryan' related to the still very little understood group of
)Central Asians, out of which the Indo-European (~'Aryan') cultures have
)developed, that have somewhat dominated the development of human culture
)since the last glacial age.
Chris:
Well, one really mustn't forget the Chinese.
Sune:
)Steiner loose and very broad way, common in his time, of using the term
)'Aryan' has very little to do with the way it was later used, limited
)and perverted by Hitler and the nazis to mean 'white, blonde and
)blue-eyed Germans'.
Chris:
I think that you may want to examine this assumption some. I agree that
in the Cosmic Memory lectures, for example, he is using the term to cover
a pretty broad range of "modern" humanity. But terms are not chosen at
random. By the early years of the 20th century the very racist sense and
usage of the term "Aryan" was very much alive and well in nationalist
intellectual circles. And it seems very clear that Steiner was not just
familiar with, but was at least for a while active in those circles. So I
think one must at least question why he chose the term Aryan and just
what he could reasonably expect his audience to understand by it.
Sune:
)The way the term was used generally in Steiner's time is described by a
)Swedish Encyclopedia from 1924 (Nordisk Familjebok). I have described it
)a number of times on this list before. It says (in translation):
)
)"Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is the name of those
)inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language belonging to the
)group of Indo-European languages. The word Aryan was earlier and is
)partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
)peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
)Persians.
Chris:
Even today I do not think that an encyclopedia would define Aryan
any differently. No encyclopedia writer is going to grant intellectual
vomit produced by racist ninnies the dignity of inclusion in the definition
of a term.
Sune:
)In this broad sense the word is used by for example Viktor Rydberg
)(famous Swedish author at that time, my comment S.N.) ... The word Aryan
)is derived from the Sanskrit word arya meaning noble, of noble origin.
)With this is also connected the word Iran (Eran)."
)
)A Norwegian Encyclopedia from 1959 (Gyldendals Konversationslexicon)
)says (in translation):
)
)"Aryans: Common name for those peoples who speak the Indian and Iranian
)languages. It was originally a name of honor for those peoples belonging
)the Indian cultural world. At present it is used as a term for all those
)who speak Indo-European languages, which is somewhat misleading.
)
)It is completely wrong to do, as the Nazi race theorists did, to let
)Aryan stand as something opposite to Jews, which is a religious
)category, or to mix Aryans with racial terms like for example the Nordic
)race. This mixing of linguistic, religious and antropological
)criterions, made the Germans try to exterminate the single people that
)with any scientific right could call themselves Aryan in Europe, namely
)the Gypsies, who speak an Indian language."
Chris:
I respect that these post-war Norwegians undertook to confront the
recent Nazi past head-on. I would be very curious to see if that
disclaimer survives in current versions of the encyclopedia, as
memories of the Nazi time have faded.
Sune:
)ON COSMIC MEMORY, 'Semites' and 'Aryans':
)
)'Cosmic memory', comprising 20 lectures held 1904-08 in different
)cities, can be found in full at http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/ as
)http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_index.html
)
)The index for the the lecture series can be found at
)http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/docindex.html
)
)With a search engine at
)http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/dosearch.html it is possible
)to search the lecture series for every mention of single words.
)
)Searching for 'aryan', 'aryans', 'semite' and 'semites' leads to two
)lectures in the series:
)
)- http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c03.html on 'Our
)Atlantean Ancestors'. It mentions 'aryan' 6 times, 'aryans' 5 times,
)'semite' 3 times and 'semites' 3 times.
)
)- http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c04.html on
)'Transition of the Fourth into the Fifth Root Race'. It mentions them
)respectively 1 time, 0 time, 1 time and 1 time.
Chris:
Thanks for the links. I followed them and read the two lectures above.
I don't believe a word of it, but it's rather more interesting and less stodgy
than the other Steiner I've read. He actually waxes a tad lyrical in his
flights of fancy about the differences between the various Lemurian and
Atlantean sub-races, not to mention Atlantean technology.
Would I be correct in assuming that Steiner's source for all this information
about the deep past and the various alternative forms of humanity that
thrived in it was based entirely on spiritual revelation?
Sune:
)What does Steiner have to say in the first of the mentioned lectures on
)the relation between 'semites' and 'aryans':
)
)He describes the pattern of the development during 'Atlantean' time as
)characterised by the development of 7 'races', used not in our present
)sense, and not directly related to what he in 1910 described as the
)formation of what during at least the first part of this century were
)considered to 5 main races or groups of people of mankind. Already this
)shows that he used the term in a very general, wide and fluid sense, as
)a descriptive more than a classificatory term.
Chris:
Well, no, "race" as he used it in those lectures did not have our present
sense. In fact, it meant something rather more profound. The different
Atlantean sub-races were substantively different in nature and capabilities.
The differences are closer to species differences (in an evolutionary sense)
than modern notions of racial differences within a single human species.
Can't say that his usage seems particularly "fluid" to me, and it is most
emphatically classificatory in nature.
Sune:
)It is also clear from the description that he did not use the term to
)describe any sort of hierarchical order between them, but out of a
)temporal-organic perspective and focussing on some basic inner
)qualities, developed by the different groups, like memory, language, the
)development of personality, and thinking.
Chris:
Yes, very fundamental aspects of being human that varied in significant
ways between races. Um, "temporal-organic perspective"? Is that
similar to the evolutionary metaphor I used above?
Sune:
)He describes the development of personality and personal power among
)what he calls the 'Ur-Turanians', dominating the fourth period of
)Atlantean times and how it often was used 'in order to satisfy their
)selfish wishes and desires. But used in such a manner, these powers
)destroy each other in their reciprocal effects.'
)
)He continues describing how this was restricted through the development
)of thinking among what he terms the 'Ur-Semites', developing as a fifth
)central dominant culture during Atlantean times, that the theosophical
)tradition called a 'subrace' of Atlantis for which Steiner stopped using
)the 'sub-race' concept and terminology about 1909:
)
)Steiner (http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA011/CM/GA011_c03.html) :
)
)'Such a destructive effect could only be halted through the development
)of a higher faculty in man. This was the faculty of thought. Logical
)thinking has a restraining effect on selfish personal wishes. The origin
)of logical thinking must be sought among the fifth subrace, the Primal
)Semites. Men began to go beyond a mere remembrance of the past and to
)compare different experiences. The faculty of judgment developed. Wishes
)and appetites were regulated in accordance with this faculty of
)judgment. One began to calculate, to combine. One learned to work with
)thoughts.
)
)If previously one had abandoned oneself to every desire, now one first
)asked whether thought could approve this desire. While the men of the
)fourth subrace rushed wildly toward the satisfaction of their appetites,
)those of the fifth began to listen to an inner voice. This inner voice
)checks the appetites, although it cannot destroy the claims of the
)selfish personality.
)
)Thus the fifth subrace transferred the impulses for action to within the
)human being. Man wishes to come to terms within himself as to what he
)must or must not do. But what thus was won within, with respect to the
)faculty of thought, was lost with respect to the control of external
)natural forces. With this combining thought mentioned above, one can
)master only the forces of the mineral world, not the life force. The
)fifth subrace therefore developed thought at the expense of control of
)the life force. But it was just through this that it produced the germ
)of the further development of mankind.
)
)New personality, self-love, even complete selfishness could grow freely;
)for thought alone which works wholly within, and can no longer give
)direct orders to nature, is not capable of producing such devastating
)effects as the previously misused powers. From this fifth subrace the
)most gifted part was selected which survived the decline of the fourth
)root race and formed the germ of the fifth, the Aryan race, whose
)mission is the complete development of the thinking faculty.'
)
)He then continues describing the sixth dominating culture of 'Atlantis':
)
)'The men of the sixth subrace, the Akkadians, developed the faculty of
)thought even further than the fifth. They differed from the so-called
)Primal Semites in that they employed this faculty in a more
)comprehensive sense than the former. ...'
Chris:
Although, interestingly, the Aryan root-race developed from the most
advanced of the fifth Atlantean sub-race, the Primal Semites, rather
than from the Akkadians or the Mongols (the seventh Atlantean
sub-race), both of which degenerated, leaving devolved descendants
one can still find in Asia. No racism?
Sune:
) )From this it is clear that Steiner held the complete development of
)thinking, as being the mission of the 'Aryan race',
Chris:
Well, it wasn't clear to me from the excerpts you quoted (which is why
I read the lectures in the first place), but having done so I agree with
you. That is what Steiner expresses in these lectures as the mission of
the Aryan race.
Sune:
)(with which he referred to the _Indo-European_ cultures that arouse out
)of the today still not more fully understood Central-Asian group and
)culture that called themselves 'Aryans' in the Vedic scriptures)
Chris:
This assertion is not supported by the Cosmic Memory lectures
(at least not 3 and 4). If you found support for it in one of the
other lectures, could you direct me to that? The Aryans did arise
from the most advanced of the Primal Semites as you indicate
below, but I did not see any reference to the Iranian or Vedic
connection in there.
Sune:
)to have its origin in the group of 'Ur-Semites' during Atlantean time,
)and that the 'Aryans', developed their culture out of the most developed
)Ur-Semites of 'Atlantis', that were most developed, not because they
)_were_ 'clairvoyant', but because they had developed something that was
)_not_ clairvoyance, namely thinking, and had _lost_ the clairvoyance of
)the earlier cultures of 'Atlantis', making them the most developed
)'Atlanteans', constituting the seed culture out of which the dominating
)cultures after 'Atlantis' have developed.
)
)It also shows clearly how far from the truth it is to ascribe any sort
)of nostalgia for any lost clairvoyance of the past and our present
)cultural development as a sort of decay, as at times is argued on this
)list.
Chris:
No, the Cosmic Memory lectures seem to present a fairly optimistic
perspective of steady upward progress through the various races.
That doesn't, of course, preclude racism. What Steiner really meant
by the term Aryan is very important. And I find the idea that he
could reasonably expect his audience (defined by time, place and
class) to have a very broad, fluid, inclusive and benign understanding
of the term to be a very difficult one to credit.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:16:19 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Assumptions
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001, "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com) wrote:
)Koala, in light of your many clarifying posts following my challenge to you, I
)apologize for targeting you. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that you
)were an
)anthroposophist attempting to minimize or deflect discussion of Steiner's
)theories
)on race.
Chris:
Yes, I found this whole thread a bit depressing. Quite a few critics
made the same assumption and began lobbing rhetorical counterattacks
without ever trying to determine if their initial conclusion was correct.
Koala is obviously not a native English speaker and his initial posts
were terse and confusing. I was baffled how folks concluded he was
an anthroposophist since I couldn't really figure out *what* he was
trying to say. There is a strong emotional and intellectual divide on this
list between critics and anthroposophists (few as they are). That is
natural given the nature of the subject. But I don't think that the fact
of such a divide necessitates a black-and-white view in which every
contributor must be in one camp or the other, nor do I think it justifies
a shoot-first-and-ask-questions later approach to discussion.
BTW, I do not mean to target Gary or anyone else in particular. It's
an easy trap to fall into and I just hate to see it happen.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 18:03:14 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: Assumptions
Chris Brostrup-Jensen7/02/01 17:16c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
) On Tue, 06 Feb 2001, "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com) wrote:
)
)) Koala, in light of your many clarifying posts following my challenge to you,
)) I
)) apologize for targeting you. I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that you
)) were an
)) anthroposophist attempting to minimize or deflect discussion of Steiner's
)) theories
)) on race.
)
) Chris:
) Yes, I found this whole thread a bit depressing. Quite a few critics
) made the same assumption and began lobbing rhetorical counterattacks
) without ever trying to determine if their initial conclusion was correct.
) Koala is obviously not a native English speaker and his initial posts
) were terse and confusing. I was baffled how folks concluded he was
) an anthroposophist since I couldn't really figure out *what* he was
) trying to say.
Well, then I don't realize it, sorry.
It was a bit blunt I agree.
To summarize: you need names to divide, and you need to define races in
order to practice genocides. But, once again, maybe my english is full of
many meaning or spelling mistakes.
I am mostly interested in what unite people (and certainly not against each
other) and not in what divide or classify them.
koala.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:59:08 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Terry wrote
)I recently read somewhere about an entity which classifies different
)religions, and which classifies anthroposophy as a religion. Does anyone ha=
ve
)any information on this subject?
Yes, its quite understandable that anthroposophy gets classified as a
religion as interest in the spiritual realities of life in general,
and especially the spiritual potentials of man, is a central issue in
anthroposophy.
To me, and some of my friends and colleagues, anthroposophy is an art
of living and a lifelong scientific endeavor.
Best wishes
Per Hallstrom
Teacher at the teacher training courses at Rudolf Steinerseminar in
J=E4rna, Sweden
and
member of the board of the Swedish co-workers union for employees at
self-governing, anthroposophical enterprises.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:38:32 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
I didn't understand most of Sune's post (perhaps it will become clearer
when he finishes it tomorrow), and Chris already responded quite ably to
the parts I did understand. But there is one further matter that I think is
crucial. Sune wrote:
) Steiner loose and very broad way, common in his time, of using the term
) 'Aryan' has very little to do with the way it was later used, limited
) and perverted by Hitler and the nazis to mean 'white, blonde and
) blue-eyed Germans'.
I think that all three parts of that sentence are mistaken. It is not the
case that Steiner's notion of an "Aryan race" was common in his time, it is
not the case that his use of the term was radically different from the Nazi
version, and it is not the case that the Nazis used the term to refer only
to Germans, of any complexion. On the first point, Sune adds:
) The way the term was used generally in Steiner's time is described by a
) Swedish Encyclopedia from 1924 (Nordisk Familjebok). I have described it
) a number of times on this list before. It says (in translation):
)
) "Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is the name of those
) inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language belonging to the
) group of Indo-European languages.
That is not a description of the "Aryan race", but of the aryan language
group. The encyclopedia entry continues:
) The word Aryan was earlier and is
) partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
) peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
) Persians.
That is somewhat closer to the "racial" use of the term "Aryan", but even
if that is indeed what the encyclopedia is getting at, it seems to me that
the caveats "earlier" and "partly" rather undermine Sune's point that
"racial" usages were common in Steiner's day. Such usages were indeed
common in theosophical circles and among racist groups, but not among
people who were aware of and concerned about racial prejudice (and I hasten
to add that many in this latter group did make copious use of other racial
concepts and racial typologies; but they didn't use the obviously
fraudulent notion of an "Aryan race"). As early as the 1890's, both
linguists and anthropologists derided the idea of an "Aryan race"; if
Steiner hadn't been so contemptuous of "materialistic science" he might
have become aware of how scornfully most researchers treated these "racial"
perversions of Max Mueller's work. In other words, Steiner bought into a
fanciful terminology that his more perspicacious contemporaries rejected.
On the second and third points, Nazi "racial theorists" such as
Guenther, Darre, Rosenberg, etc. often argued among themselves over the
precise boundaries of the "Aryan race", but none of them restricted it to
Germans. Indeed, the Nazis frequently used "Aryan" in a remarkably
expansive way, and the unofficial Nazi consensus on the term was not all
that different in several significant ways from the anthroposophist
understanding, as the debates between the anthroposophist Karutz and the
Nazi "racial theorists" show. These ideological parallels are not an ex
post facto invention of critics of anthroposophy, they are a fact of
history. I still don't understand why contemporary anthroposophists keep
trying to rehabilitate and explain away Steiner's fables about the "Aryan
race" rather than simply rejecting these fables as both fallacious and
pernicious. Is that really too much to ask?
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: 7 Feb 2001 20:13:57 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Koala posted several posts:
)We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor =
do we
)have problems with it...
I believe Debroah Kelly would disagree with you here. Not speaking about =
it doesn't mean you don't have problems with it.
)Genocides pick up exactly where you left over.
Where is it that you think people left off?
)And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
This may be a true statement, but doesn't logically follow in the reverse =
(that poeple preoccupied with race practice genocide) which is where your =
comment is directed. That would make racial historians or someone like =
Martin Luther likely to prctice genocide, which is false.
)I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
Sorry, one does not lead to the other.
) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
)intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
)classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
I am sorry to inform you but the world isn't simple. Your statement =
rings with that familiar strain of intolerance. How bold of you to =
announce what the world cares about and what it doesn't. It seems many =
minorities care about race. The U.S government cares about race. The =
census dept. cares about race. The medical community cares about race. =
The scientific community cares about race.
and later:
)Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:05:26 +0100
)From: (koala noos.fr)
)Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
)What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'in=3DE9galit=3DE9 des races =
humaines" ?
)Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
What kind of usefullness are you talkking about? They are very useful in =
showing the state of thinking of the western world in an historical =
perspective. I am not sure you could argue that they ever had much more =
usefullness other than that.
) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
I don't have a problem with Jews, Do you have a problem with people who =
have an interest in the idea of race?
) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races =
don't
)exist.
Once again I think Deb Kelly would disagree. (not that i agreed with her =
on much of anything else)
A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you. =
Apparently the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. =
(If you want I will type it out for you)
How do you explain that hospitals recommend performing different tests =
during your prenatal visits *depending on the race of the parents*?
How do you explain the different illnesses that one race is more =
susceptiple to than another?
I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this one.
I think a more tenable position is that in the past, what people in every =
day society (and even scientists of the day) based the distinction of =
races on (skin color, hair type, physical size) turns out not to be =
nearly as reliable or precise as the modern ways which scientists =
understand the concept of races. (bloodtypes, genetic makeup, amino =
acids, and enzymes). (A curious note that is very fluid based.) And =
that race, as a concept, is and has been intermingled between culture and =
biology for so long that it is hard to seperate the two, in any casual =
way, when reviewing history.
welcome to the forum.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:30:57 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Chico board is tonight (Wed)
I was mistaken on the date, the "findings" will be voted on by the
Chico board tonight, Wednesday Feb. 7.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 02:58:10 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
[Per Hallstrom wrote:]
)Yes, its quite understandable that anthroposophy gets classified as a
)religion as interest in the spiritual realities of life in general,
)and especially the spiritual potentials of man, is a central issue in
)anthroposophy.
You say it's "understandable," but you apparently find it misguided? So a
worldview which makes many pronouncements about the "spiritual realities of
life" and the "spiritual potentials of man (sic)" is *not* religious? What
would it take to make it religious? You must have pretty tight criteria.
)To me, and some of my friends and colleagues, anthroposophy is an art of
)living and a lifelong scientific endeavor.
Yes, many people find their religion offers them help with the "art of
living." Not so many consider their religion a "scientific" endeavor,
strictly speaking, I suppose, yet in the sense of being the best source of
knowledge, the deepest truths, probably most religious people do get
something similar to what you are describing out of their religion.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:31:31 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
Peter wrote:
) I still don't understand why contemporary anthroposophists keep
)trying to rehabilitate and explain away Steiner's fables about the "Aryan
)race" rather than simply rejecting these fables as both fallacious and
)pernicious. Is that really too much to ask?
)
Debra here:
I think it is too much to ask, Peter. You see, if Anthroposophists admit
that Steiner was wrong in any area, they must then question other areas of
Steiner's beliefs. If Anthros say he was racist then maybe they will have
to consider if he was really clairvoyant. If he didn't have clairvoyant
abilities, then maybe his child development model isn't correct.
It's about holding up the whole house of cards, Peter. If one card folds,
the whole movement may fall.
Debra
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:06:08 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
Debra Snell8/02/01 6:45snell netshel.net
) Peter wrote:
)
)) I still don't understand why contemporary anthroposophists keep
)) trying to rehabilitate and explain away Steiner's fables about the "Aryan
)) race" rather than simply rejecting these fables as both fallacious and
)) pernicious. Is that really too much to ask?
))
)
) Debra here:
)
) I think it is too much to ask, Peter. You see, if Anthroposophists admit
) that Steiner was wrong in any area, they must then question other areas of
) Steiner's beliefs. If Anthros say he was racist then maybe they will have
) to consider if he was really clairvoyant. If he didn't have clairvoyant
) abilities, then maybe his child development model isn't correct.
)
) It's about holding up the whole house of cards, Peter. If one card folds,
) the whole movement may fall.
)
) Debra
Very good point.
koala.
)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:02:15 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Diana wrote:
)...So a world view which makes many pronouncements about the
)"spiritual realities of life" and the "spiritual potentials of man
)(sic)" is *not* religious?
No, it does not have to be.
As this is one of the core issues if you want to understand what
anthroposophy is, Rudolph Steiner started out writing about it,
rather thoroughly, in a couple of books, before he went on, in other
books, to relate what he meant to have as experience of the spiritual
dimensions.
)Yes, many people find their religion offers them help with the "art
)of living." Not so many consider their religion a "scientific"
)endeavor, strictly speaking, I suppose, yet in the sense of being
)the best source of knowledge, the deepest truths, probably most
)religious people do get something similar to what you are describing
)out of their religion.
By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
Per Hallstrom
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 10:28:57 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Luke Schelly8/02/01 2:15lschelly jackrouse.com
) Koala posted several posts:
)=20
)) We don't care about races Sir. Therefore, we don't speak about it, nor d=
o we
)) have problems with it...
)=20
) I believe Debroah Kelly would disagree with you here.
I don't know Deborah Kelly and her opinions. Therefore I don't understand
what it implies. Too new on the list.
) Not speaking about it
) doesn't mean you don't have problems with it.
Yes. But the reverse statement certainly implies that you are preoccupied
with it. We name what we use or what we want to use. If you are never ill,
chances are you (the people) will never name an organ.
There are certain languages in the world that are great to analyze meanings=
:
the french langage translates "illness" into "maladie" (which could be
translated as "badly said").
)=20
)) Genocides pick up exactly where you left (over).
Correction: I meant "left off" of course, this is an english mistake.
)=20
) Where is it that you think people left off?
At the end of the thread I read, the debate between Detlef (was I right ?)
and Peter (am I correct ?).
)=20
)) And people practicing genocides preoccupy mainly about races.
)=20
) This may be a true statement, but doesn't logically follow in the reverse
) (that poeple preoccupied with race practice genocide) which is where your
) comment is directed.
First, I didn't speak of the reverse situation and I don't know why you are
so focused on the reverse situation. This is a prerequisite. To practice
genocide, you have to speak about races or "supposed" races at first,
whereas you decide to subscribe to racist ideas or not, without actually
killing on your own or not.
I have a book called "les racines occultistes du nazismes" (a litteral
translation would be "The occult roots of nazism" by Nicholas
Goodrick-Clarke), and it prooves very accurately the influences of theosoph=
y
(Mrs Blavatsky) and anthroposophy upon nazism.
Real knowledge is distorted mainly by people who don't know about what the=
y
are talking about, and therefore leads the world to its catastrophe. The
reason why certain knowledges have to be occulted is obvious when we look
back at the history of this century.
) That would make racial historians or someone like Martin
) Luther likely to prctice genocide, which is false.
Creating the false pattern or assumption is the origin of the ills.
On the other hand when history creates the situation (see" Les bourreaux
volontaires de Hitler" -"Hitler's willing executionners. Ordinary germans
and the Holocaust" by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen"-), people obsessed with race
don't move either, even if they don't kill. The environment is there to
create the worse thing that ever happened in the history of the world.
)=20
)=20
)) I never thought about races. Therefore I will never practice genocides !
)=20
) Sorry, one does not lead to the other.
Sorry to say that it is entirely true. If I don't think about race how can =
I
possibly think about genocides ?
Do you know any other reason apart race that leads to genocides ?
I didn't say that if I was thinking about it, I would automaticaly practic=
e
genocide, but I mostly have to think about it because you think about it,
and too much in my sense.
I didn't say that because some people think about race, they necessarily
kill other people. What we don't understand is repeated. What is not
understood inside reappear outside (basic psychoanalysis). But they will
never move when it comes to know whether it is true or not, and what is tru=
e
doesn't kill. You can never kill in the name of something you never believe=
d
in. And if some kill because of something you never believed in,then you
have to say it.
You have to distinguish two things that there are many people (like me righ=
t
now for instance) who have to speak about races or supposed problems about
races, characteristics (which anyway were socially acquired) just because
they have to answer to people suffering from delusions who build theories
about it which at a certain point become dangerous, and that one has to
intellectualize in order to try to show the people preoccupied by it that
they are mistaken.=20
Once again, as I stated earlier in another post, I am sure the energy we
devote to those inaccurate silly problems and theories could be far more
useful if it was used for something else, something more positive anyway.
)=20
)) Everything would be very simple if there was not people like you
)) intellectualizing about categorizing people by classifications and sub
)) classifications about things the world doesn't care about.
)=20
) I am sorry to inform you but the world isn't simple.
Common grounds. If you were focusing exclusively on what you feel, you
wouldn't say that. Intellectuals are not simple as long as they have to
build theories history will necessarily proove wrong, and in general after
many killings.
) Your statement rings
) with that familiar strain of intolerance.
Do we have to be tolerant with nazism ? Would Tolerance be tolerating those
who kill, according to political parties theories and "philosophies" withou=
t
doing anything against it ? I am against the death penalty anyway (this is
not the purpose of this list), but I am for the conviction of those who
kill. =20
) How bold of you to announce what
) the world cares about and what it doesn't.
Yes, I am bold. The world doesn't care to kill other people. There are more
important issues.
) It seems many minorities care
) about race.
Ask yourself why in the first place. Which ones ? How are those minorities
created ? And if they are minorities, does it mean necessarily that the
philosophy they endorse is right ? KKK cares about races, so what ?
)The U.S government cares about race.
Never interpretated the US government like that. The US government deals
with issues about cultural communities, not races.
They certainly have to care about clans (like the KKK for instance) that
make races an issue, but that doesn't necessarily mean they admit there are
races. They admit there are people trying to define something which actuall=
y
doesn't exist in order to make an issue out of it, instead of seeing which
is the problem that they have with their own level of being and the way the=
y
question it with wrong assertions.
)The census dept. cares
) about race.
That would mean that the census departement confuses cultural communities
with races: portoricans, japanese, africans, indians are no race Sir, revis=
e
your classics !
) The medical community cares about race. The scientific community
) cares about race.
No. Sorry. They don't care about it in a racist way. And if they were
speaking too often about it, I would wonder about the seriousness of the
medical community you are talking about.
As I said earlier, they mostly have to care about it in order to contradic=
t
false assumptions that have been made about it. Caring about races never
cured anyone.
Answering scientifically to those people who care too much about races, or
at least dubious theories that have been built by esotericists without any
scientific ground and who act (still nowadays) as a plague for real
thinkers, is, I hope so, a way to cure them.
)=20
) and later:
)=20
)) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:05:26 +0100
)) From: (koala noos.fr)
)) Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
)=20
)=20
)) What about Gobineau and his "Essai sur l'in=3DE9galit=3DE9 des races humaine=
s" ?
)) Those books outlived their usefulness, this is for sure !
)=20
) What kind of usefullness are you talkking about? They are very useful in
) showing the state of thinking of the western world in an historical
) perspective. I am not sure you could argue that they ever had much more
) usefullness other than that.
If it was useful, it would be in the sense that they show to which resorts
we have to go in order to kill each other. There is no possible
justification, no matter whether it takes hundred of pages or not. The only
interest in it would be to show dramatically how ignorant we are.
If I say the Earth is flat, sure that the historical perspective is
interesting. But the fact you still focuse on it nowadays as a possibility
is really deprived of any historical perspective.
)=20
)) Do you have a problem with jews, I don't have a problem with jews...
)=20
) I don't have a problem with Jews, Do you have a problem with people who h=
ave
) an interest in the idea of race?
Very good point, at least on an intellectual level (see Bruno Bettelheim "l=
e
coeur conscient"; a litteral translation would be "the conscious heart").
=20
Now that we are practicing philosophy, do you have a problem with "people
who have a problem with people with an interest in the idea of race" ?
Can you see where one can go ?
That all debate sucks. Try to get to topics that will make you get off the
ground. Race debates will never allow that.
Is your heart conscious right now ?
Mine is a bit upset, I admit. Sorry for my overreaction. I still don't know
whether it is "authorized" on this list or not...
)=20
)) As I said we don't care because it is a scientific fact that races don't
)) exist.
)=20
)=20
) Once again I think Deb Kelly would disagree. (not that i agreed with her =
on
) much of anything else)
I don't know her. She left the list apparently. Therefore I don't know of
her opinions. Is she a reference (at least for you certainly).
)=20
) A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
) Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you. Appare=
ntly
) the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. (If you want=
I
) will type it out for you)
With pleasure. And I will type or email you with the articles I have got
from the french scientific community, including the Nobel prize, Mr Fran=E7oi=
s
Jacob.
But I will add this: instead of exchanging quotations about books and
encyclopedias, what do you "feel" really ? Do you see what I mean ?
The real debate is this one: when you go to see someone else, whether he is
from whatever communities, from whatever color, from whatever social status=
,
do you have to resort to such classifications ? Do you have to think about
what is pure or supposed impure, or a race of any kind and any definition ?
Don't you think that what makes the woman you love is her "supposed"
defaults (that assertion therefore annilihates the only idea of "default").
Do you have to make her fit a classification, no matter which one it is ?
You will certainly laugh about the defaults of the woman you love and find
that it is what makes her loveable, whereas you don't laugh about race
definitions.
You have to answer to that question, not me.
Do you have to explain why you love somebody by classifications ?
) How do you explain that hospitals recommend performing different tests du=
ring
) your prenatal visits *depending on the race of the parents*?
They must be confusing races, culture and communities, along with you. Neve=
r
heard of such things.
) How do you explain the different illnesses that one race is more suscepti=
ple
) to than another?
Come on, this is irrelevant. You have a scenario in your mind, something yo=
u
cling on to, and you want absolutly to stick to it and your ego, whereas yo=
u
should simply let it go...The only way to verify this scenario is just to
speak about the articles that confort your theory, and not about the other
ones which contradict the ones you quote...
If you were living in Africa, surely you'll have more illnesses due to the
sun !
) I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
What you are really certain of, doesn't make you a scientific .
We don't care about your beliefs Sir. Sorry if it is a bit rude.
Now if I apply the same philosophical concepts, you have the possibility to
answer that it is also my case !
) I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this one.
I am fairly certain that it is. Extreme right wing always try to denounce
those theories with a false air of scientificity, otherwise they don't have
a business they could tap into.
)=20
) I think a more tenable position is that in the past, what people in every=
day
) society (and even scientists of the day) based the distinction of races o=
n
) (skin color, hair type, physical size) turns out not to be nearly as rel=
iable
) or precise as the modern ways which scientists understand the concept of
) races. (bloodtypes, genetic makeup, amino acids, and enzymes).
Once again, this is your problem and I think a psychological one. I have no
comment about that. Do you think nazi theories were reliable ? Because they
tended to be scientifically proven ?
) (A curious=20
) note that is very fluid based.) And that race, as a concept, is and has =
been
) intermingled between culture and biology for so long that it is hard to
) seperate the two, in any casual way, when reviewing history.
It is you who makes it hard to separate the two. And you do it on purpose,
although this is a heavily repressed memory of yours.
)=20
) welcome to the forum.
Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
koala.
Please, notify me with any english meaning mistakes that I could be possibl=
y
making.
Once again, sorry about that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
)=20
)=20
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 153
-- Topica Digest --
Re: old discussion I
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Is anthroposophy a religion?
By winters_diana hotmail.com
"Aryans" and "Semites"
By hardorp gmx.net
Uehli book not indexed
By hardorp gmx.net
old discussion I
By hardorp gmx.net
Assumptions
By hardorp gmx.net
old discussion I
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: old discussion I
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Chico board finds Waldorf charter is sectarian
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By Rechomba cs.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Rechomba cs.com
old discussion II
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By dan dandugan.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Rechomba cs.com
criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By dan dandugan.com
Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By paixs yahoo.com.br
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By TTirrell1 aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 12:10:58 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
[Peter wrote:]
)I still don't understand why contemporary anthroposophists keep )trying to
)rehabilitate and explain away Steiner's fables about the )"Aryan race"
)rather than simply rejecting these fables as both )fallacious and
)pernicious. Is that really too much to ask?
It's too much to ask because it's a *religion*. It's "revealed" truth. It's
the whole package or nothing, an anthroposophist can't go picking and
choosing which parts make sense and which don't. If it were just somebody's
theory, there would be no problem chucking out the outdated parts or the
parts that clearly make trouble. If it doesn't make sense, they go on trying
to get more spiritual, meditate more, until it does make sense. Or else they
pretend it makes sense, for fear of ostracism.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 12:46:29 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
[I wrote:]
))...So a world view which makes many pronouncements about the
))"spiritual realities of life" and the "spiritual potentials of man
))(sic)" is *not* religious?
[Per Hallstrom:]
)No, it does not have to be.
)As this is one of the core issues if you want to understand what
)anthroposophy is, Rudolph Steiner started out writing about it,
)rather thoroughly, in a couple of books, before he went on, in other
)books, to relate what he meant to have as experience of the spiritual
)dimensions.
Thank you for the advice. I don't know which books you're recommending, but
I've read all the Steiner I care to read. I know that you assume a critic of
anthroposophy can't possibly have read or studied enough to understand
properly as you do. It is a typical anthroposophist retort, as is referring
to Steiner to defend Steiner. I consider anthroposophy to be a religion
using terms and criteria that most people would use, and the fact that
anthroposophists consider themselves above such worldly debates doesn't
change it. It is the usual response - we have knowledge you don't have, we
have understanding you don't have, we have undergone a spiritual journey to
get here, we are insiders and you are outsiders - and it is of course one of
the things that makes a religion a religion!
[PH:]
)By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
)methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
)the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
This reification of "thinking" is one of the things I find scariest about
anthroposophy - this idea that by observing your own mental processes (or
Steiner's, really; it seems actually to be a process of trying to get the
contents of your own mind to match Steiner's), you are somehow getting to
some objective reality about the world.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:55:57 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Is anthroposophy a religion?
I realize that whether anthroposophy is a religion is going to be addressed
in PLANS' court case, because of the denials of Waldorf educators. It's
really baffling why this should even be in dispute.
Here's the definition of "religion" from the Random House College
Dictionary, easiest to hand at the moment:
"1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or
agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances and often
having a moral code for the conduct of human affairs. 2. a specific and
institutionalized set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a
number of persons or sects; the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
[italics on those two because they are examples; DM] 3. the body of persons
or institutions adhering to a set of religious beliefs and practices: a
world council of religions [italics on the latter, another example; DM] 4. a
deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices: to get
religion [ital] 5. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion
[ital] 6. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith. 7.
a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting
prejudice [ital] 8. religions, Archaic. religious rites. 9. Archaic, strict
faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow [ital]"
Which of these definitions does anthroposophy *not* meet? For definitions
1-3 it seems indisputable to me.
Arguments can be made for most of the other definitions, too (e.g., many
Waldorf teachers approach their teaching as if they were "entering religion"
the way a nun or monk does, and new converts to Waldorf certainly often act
as if they have just "gotten religion.")
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:28:53 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: "Aryans" and "Semites"
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:32:57 -0600
Peter Staudenmaier disputed my reading of Steiner concerning "Aryans" and =
"Semites". This posting has three parts:
I. what I wrote
II. what Peter S. wrote
III. my disputation
I.=20
WHAT I HAD WRITTEN:=20
)) As for Steiner's concept of the "aryan race": this _included_ the =
Semitic) peoples (and Arabs). According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was =
actually) born out of Semitic peoples! This is about as far away from =
Hitler's
) concept as you can get. As I have pointed out over and over again on
) this list, Steiner used the term "aryan race" as a name for the
) development of modern Asio-Indo-European culture per se (as did others =
at) the time as well, until the NS monster attached their vile meaning to =
the) term, - we have yet to break this spell).
II.=20
PETER S. RESPONDED:
)Sometimes I get the feeling that Detlef and and the rest of us are talking =
about two different people named Rudolf Steiner. The Steiner that I =
mean,the one who wrote Aus der Akasha-Chronik (which I think is called =
Cosmic Memory in English) and Outline of Occult Science, did not teach that
Semitic peoples were part of the aryan race. He taught, as Blavatsky had =
before him, that the Ur-Semites were the fifth sub-race of the fourth =
(Atlantean) root-race. The aryans, on the other hand, are the fifth and =
current root-race, according to Steiner, and the hitherto existing
sub-races of this fifth root-race (Indian, Persian, =
Egyptian-Chaldean,Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic) do not include the =
Semites, who are
rather a leftover remnant of a superceded root-race.
III. =20
MY DISPUTATION:
Peter Staudenmaier has read quite a bit of Steiner attentively. Most of =
what he wrote is correct. Only some of the claims above are false. And =
his conclusions are way off. Let's have a closer look at the kernel of =
Peter S.'s argument:
)[Steiner] taught, as Blavatsky had before him, that the Ur-Semites were =
the fifth sub-race of the fourth (Atlantean) root-race. The aryans, on the =
other hand, are the fifth and current root-race, according to Steiner,
DH: These two sentences are correct. Missing, however, is what Steiner =
says about how one grew out of the other. In the very first chapter of =
"Aus der Akasha-Chronik", he writes:
"Out of this fifth [Atlantean] sub-race the most gifted were chosen, and =
these survived the demise of the fourth root-race and formed the germ for =
the fifth, the aryan root-race."
In the bible, the demise is the great flood, and Noah leads the chosen few =
into the future - the age of civilization as we know it. "God's chosen =
people" are the Jews (according to the old testament), we are talking about =
the Semitic roots of the civilization that came thereafter, and to which =
the early Steiner referred to with the misnomer "root-race" (indeed taken =
from Blavatsky), calling it the "aryan" root-race (also after Blavatsky). =
Steiner often puts the word "race" between apostrophes, because - this he =
states explicitly in "Aus der Akasha-Chronik" - it is a badly chosen term, =
since what is meant really has nothing to do with race at all in any of the =
usual senses of the word. Later (also in "Aus der Akasha-Chronik") he =
speaks of a "childhood illness" of anthroposophy to have used such =
theosophical vocabulary early on - and stops using it. No more root- or =
subraces, no more aryan, but great periods of civilization with cultural =
epochs, and simply "the fifth cultural epoch" - without the word "aryan".
Thus my sentence:=20
))"According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was actually born out of Semitic =
peoples!"
The Steiner that I mean is the one who wrote Aus der Akasha-Chronik (I can =
recommend reading what he actually writes) and Outline of Occult Science, =
did indeed write that the "aryan root-race" are rooted in the Semitic =
peoples. They also _include_ the Semitic peoples: read on.
Peter S. continues:
) and the hitherto existing sub-races of this fifth root-race (Indian, =
Persian, Egyptian-Chaldean,Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic) do not include =
the Semites, who are
rather a leftover remnant of a superceded root-race.
DH: Mr. Staudenmaier has still not understood what Steiner (and Blavatsky, =
BTW) meant with the "fifth root-race"! The "fifth root-race" is the TIME =
PERIOD in which falls the development of Indian, Persian, =
Egyptian-Chaldean,Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic civilization, which =
Steiner thinks are important. But it certainly includes the Semitic =
peoples! As shown above, Steiner agrees with Blavatsky (and with the =
bible) that the roots of modern civilization (i.e. the "fifth or aryan =
root-race" in Blavatsky's language) were Semitic. Not a "remnant of a =
superceded root-race", as Peter S. writes, but the _germ_ ("Keim" is the =
original German word) for what comes. And when it's there: according to =
Steiner, THE pivotal event of our post-Atlantean age happens within the =
Semitic civilisation during the Greco-Roman period (namely the coming of =
Jesus Christ).
This gives some more background to my statement Peter S. disputes:
)) As for Steiner's concept of the "aryan race": this _included_ the =
Semitic) peoples (and Arabs). According to Steiner, the "aryan race" was =
actually) born out of Semitic peoples! This is about as far away from =
Hitler's
) concept as you can get. As I have pointed out over and over again on
) this list, Steiner used the term "aryan race" as a name for the
) development of modern Asio-Indo-European culture per se (as did others =
at) the time as well, until the NS monster attached their vile meaning to =
the) term, - we have yet to break this spell).
Peter S. has read all this as well, even in the original. Yet he does not =
seem to be able - or wanting - to get these ideas straight in his head. =
This shows an astounding capacity of prejudice to override facts that don't =
fit the preconcieved ideas of a "racial typology" that Peter S. is fighting =
so hard against, even when it's not there.
There is someone in Germany by the name of Peter Bierl who shares the same =
ability to convolute straight thinking through prejudice. He has even =
written a book on the subject, with over a thousand footnotes. Well =
researched details, but totally missing the point when it comes to the core =
of his arguments. And totally contradicting the facts of what Steiner =
actually says.
Bierl and Staudenmaier share the same political ideology - they are both =
radical "left"-wing, anti-capitalist fighters, with the same kind of =
blinders and desire to stigmatize through unabashed desinformation.
Epilogue:
Peter S.: )I'm not sure I understand what Detlef means by "breaking the =
spell" in his last sentence above, but it sounds like he's hoping that =
someday we'll be able to put all that nasty Nazi stuff behind us and start =
talking unselfconsciously about the "aryan race" again.
D.H.: No, I don't mean that. I was hoping that Nazi propaganda may one day =
stop blinding us about the fact that certain words had different meanings =
before the Nazis misused them. Although this misused obviously has a =
history itself and didn't appear with Hitler out of nowhere, it did not =
dominate meaning until Hitler cast his spell - as, for example, with regard =
to the meaning of word "Aryan".
These words have been poisoned none the less and are no longer fit for use. =
But this spell shouldn't lead us to misinterpret the time prior to the NS =
era in light of the later NS ideology, as is often done.
)It is also utterly meaningless anthropologically, since the term "aryan =
race" is based on a conflation of linguistic and biological concepts and =
refers to nothing in the real world.
Steiner thought likewise and stopped using the term very early on (not =
having used it much before that either!). How about following Steiner's =
lead, everybody ...
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:29:09 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Uehli book not indexed
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:32:57 -0600
Peter Staudenmaier added some comments on books by Ernst Uehli. I agree =
with Peter S. that Uehli's "Atlantis and Ice Age Art" book, written in the =
30's, contains pretty stupid and simplistic statements that are indeed =
racist. Here I just want to correct two details:
)in the year 2000 Uehli's works were still part of the officially =
recommended curriculum for Waldorf teachers in both Germany and the United =
States.=20
That is incorrect. In Germany, it was simply on a list of hundreds and =
hundreds of books that could be used by teachers, compiled by teachers =
without anyone acting as a moderator: much like an unmoderated email list. =
This list of bibliographic references was printed and circulated by the =
Federation of German Waldorf schools with the disclaimer in the preface =
that they do NOT vouch for the content of any of the books on the list.
Still, it should not have been on such a list. One reason that nobody =
seems to have noticed the problem is that the book - which is primarily on =
Ice Age Art - was practically not read by anybody anymore. Once on a =
list, it just got copied onto new lists. The disputed content certainly =
wasn't taught anywhere. But that's not an excuse. Such a book doesn't =
deserve to be published in the first place. The publisher who decided to =
reprint it died some years ago. The publishing house took it off the =
market right away, and it was obviously immediately struck off the list of =
books mentioned above.
)The German federal family ministry responded by putting the book on its =
index of racist literature.=20
=20
This is also not true: it was NOT put on any index by the government, in =
spite of (badly researched) reports to the contrary in the German press. =
There was an _application_ to put it on the index. This application was =
turned down by the federal family ministry (the book having been taken off =
the market anyway).
Again, I just wanted to set the record straight on two details. The bottom =
line here is: book publishers and Waldorf teachers should arouse themselves =
from their deep, uncritical sleep. Before books get put on lists like =
this, somebody responsible should take a critical look at the content.
In their noble attempt at collegial leadership, Waldorf schools are =
sometimes affected by the disease that nobody ends up being responsible. =
This can (rightly) drive parents crazy. Education towards creativity and =
responsibility - and these are the main ideals of Steiner Waldorf education =
- cannot be seriously pursued without clearly defining who is responsible =
for what. An amorphous "college of teachers" won't do, because =
responsibility must primarily be based on the individual - otherwise nobody =
ends up being responsible. And that would be irresponsible.
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:32:17 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: old discussion I
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:04:56 -0500
Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
wrote=20
)By the early years of the 20th century the very racist sense andusage of =
the term "Aryan" was very much alive and well in nationalist intellectual =
circles. And it seems very clear that Steiner was not just familiar with, =
but was at least for a while active in those circles.
D.H.: This is simply not true. I challenge you to name one "nationalist =
intellectual circle" in which Steiner was active. Steiner emphatically =
destested nationalism all his life. Yes, he did think that German culture =
had an important role to play - but not a nationalistic role!
)So Ithink one must at least question why he chose the term Aryan and just =
what he could reasonably expect his audience to understand by it.
D.H.: This is very simple: he used the term a bit (and probably less than =
most of his contemporaries!) as long as he was using theosophical =
vocabulary (early on in his life), and exactly in the way the dictionary =
defines it today (quoted from a post of Peter S.):
) The word Aryan was earlier and is
) partly also today used as a term describing all the Indo-European
) peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also Hindus and
) Persians.=20
Then he stopped using it more or less altogether, because it probably did =
not escape him how the term began to be misused my racist circles.
)Chris:
Although, interestingly, the Aryan root-race developed from the most
advanced of the fifth Atlantean sub-race, the Primal Semites, rather
than from the Akkadians or the Mongols (the seventh Atlantean
sub-race), both of which degenerated, leaving devolved descendants
one can still find in Asia. No racism?
D.H.: Maybe. Remember that is he taling about _cultures_ here. It was =
common to sometimes speak of cultures as "races" in those days (one prime =
example: Cecil Rhodes speaking of the "British race"). People talk about =
"the rise and fall of the Roman empire" all the time. Cannot cultures =
devolve, degenerate, loose their importance? Is it racism to make such =
claims, be it the Mongolean civilization or the Roman? Clearly, the height =
of Chinese and Mongolian civilization lies in a far distant past. Latin =
actually died out as a language, and with it the Cesars and all the =
decadence of late Roman culture! Am I a racist in making such claims?
[Sune, quoting a dictionary]: )"Aryans or Aryan people (also Indo-Aryan) is =
the name of those)inhabitants of India and Iran that speak a language =
belonging to the)group of Indo-European languages. The word Aryan was =
earlier and is)partly also today used as a term describing all the =
Indo-European)peoples, not only Germans, Slavs, Romans and so on but also =
Hindus and)Persians.
)Chris:
Even today I do not think that an encyclopedia would define Aryan
any differently. No encyclopedia writer is going to grant intellectual =
vomit produced by racist ninnies the dignity of inclusion in the definition =
of a term.
Well put, Chris! Returning to lexical meanings can be meaningful indeed =
...
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:32:33 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Assumptions
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 18:03:14 +0100
(koala noos.fr) wrote
)I am mostly interested in what unite people (and certainly not against =
each other) and not in what divide or classify them.
Well put. By the way: that is _exactly_ what Steiner was interested in. =
Sune could probably dig up umteen quotes to this effect by Steiner. They =
tend to get ignored on this list, however.
Detlef Hardorp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:32:42 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: old discussion I
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:38:32 -0600
Peter Staudenmaier wrote
)It is not the case that Steiner's notion of an "Aryan race" was common in =
his time, it is not the case that his use of the term was radically =
different from the Nazi version, and it is not the case that the Nazis used =
the term to refer only
to Germans, of any complexion.
I add: it is not the case that Peter Staudenmaier has any healthy relation =
or any sense for what is true or what is false. This is perverse.
)As early as the 1890's, both linguists and anthropologists derided the =
idea of an "Aryan race"
D.H.: Well, Steiner joined them not much later. His early use of the =
terminology is due to the fact that he is talking (and writing) for =
theosophists in their language! He regrets it later, and distances himself =
clearly form this root-race vocabulary. Calls it a "childhood disease". =
Stop ignoring the facts, Peter!
Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 15:36:47 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
Detlef Hardorp wrote:
) Cannot cultures devolve, degenerate, loose their importance? Is it racism to make such claims, be it the Mongolean civilization or the Roman? Clearly, the height of Chinese and Mongolian civilization lies in a far distant past. Latin actually died out as a language, and with it the Cesars and all the decadence of late Roman culture! Am I a racist in making such claims?
Absolutely you are racist in making those claims!
Who the hell are YOU to judge that today's Chinese culture is any LESS vibrant, LESS IMPORTANT than that of the past?
Please define for us what you and/or Steiner consider "the height" of a civilization/culture/people, and also what constitutes "the decline" of a civilization/culture/people...
...Gary
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:06:56 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Chico board finds Waldorf charter is sectarian
Chico Enterprise-Record February 8, 2001
Charter school's fate sealed; trustees find Waldorf-inspired
curriculum is sectarian
By JOHN MICHAEL - Staff Writer
Chico Unified School District's Board of Education sealed the fate of
Blue Oak Charter School Wednesday by declaring the Waldorf-inspired
curriculum of the school would promote religion in the classroom.
Further, trustees determined an intermediate grade student would
believe the school was advancing a religion.
The 4-1 vote fulfills a state law that requires school districts to
adopt specific findings before denying a charter school petition.
Trustee Steve O'Bryan dissented, saying he "in good conscience could
not support the findings."
The board denied the charter Jan.17, but did not make the required
findings until Wednesday.
"The Board finds the curriculum to be used by the school is
sectarian," the adopted findings state. "The Waldorf method of
education cannot be made secular because it is either based upon or
inextricably interconnected and linked with anthroposophy."
"These findings are will not sustain a legal challenge down the
road," attorney Evanne O'Donnell said on behalf of the Blue Oak
steering committee. "There is no basis to call (anthroposophy) a
religion."
Anthroposophy refers to the spiritual philosophies of Waldorf
education founder Rudolf Steiner.
However, a San Francisco-based group opposed to publicly funded
Waldorf schools convinced the school board that anthroposophy is a
thinly disguised religion.
Steiner also pioneered concepts of the education and development of
the whole child that would form the core of the curriculum at Blue
Oak.
Trustees said they believe Steiner's "whole child" concepts are
firmly rooted in anthroposophy.
However, O'Donnell pointedly reminded the board that references to
the development of the whole child are found throughout public
education.
Shasta School provides parents of kindergarten students with a
pamphlet that states one of the goals of the school curriculum is the
"growth of the whole child," O'Donnell said.
At times, the board's findings appear contradictory.
While declaring the school sectarian, the board appeared less sure
anthroposophy really is a religion: "it appears than anthroposophy is
a religion as commonly apprehended; at the very least, it appears
that there is significant question as to whether anthroposphy is a
religion."
In the end, a majority of the board was not convinced anthroposophy
could be kept out of the classroom.
"I think it has religious ties," President Scott Schofield said. "I
just can't get all of my questions answered. I still have doubts
about it."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:36:56 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
In a message dated 2/8/01 3:00:53 AM Eastern Standard Time,
per.hallstrom work.utfors.se writes:
) By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
) methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
) the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
)
) Per Hallstrom
)
Please elaborate. I have no idea what you are talking about.
Thanks,
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:19:48 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
In a message dated 2/8/01 1:30:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, hardorp gmx.net
writes:
Detlef writes:
) Bierl and Staudenmaier share the same political ideology - they are both =
) radical "left"-wing, anti-capitalist fighters, with the same kind of =
) blinders and desire to stigmatize through unabashed desinformation.
)
Smear!
Although I find your posts very informative and generally well argued, this
persistence of yours for categorizing leftists is somewhat....amusing,
particularly when you bring up Steiner's last chapter in the Philosophy of
Freedom. Hardly becoming of someone who professes individualism yet
generalizes, hastily and with prejudice, the politics of those one finds
offensive. Besides, it just bad logic.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 01:03:21 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: old discussion II
Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative wrote:
(this answer continuing from 'old discussion I')
) The Aryans, on the other hand, are the fifth and
) current root-race, according to Steiner,
see mail 'old discussion I', sent yesterday.
) and the hitherto existing
) sub-races of this fifth root-race (Indian, Persian, Egyptian-Chaldean,
) Greco-Roman, and Nordic-Germanic)
see Steiner's view (quoted in 'old discussion I') from at least 1909,
that any concept of 'sub-races' misses the point in describing cultural
stages after 'Atlantis'.
He argued that view in a number of lectures, among others in 30 May
1908 (GA 103), in 4 Dec 1909 (GA 117) and in 20 June 1911 (GA 133) and
stopped using the theosophical improper terminology of 'root races' and
'sub races' before writing 'Occult science - an outline' in 1909 and
before holding the lectures on 'The mission of folk souls' in relation
to Nordic mythology in 1910, that you grossly misrepresent in your
article at the site of PLANS.
Actually reading it , one sees that its basic perspective on Nordic
mythology is quite different from the way you imply it to be in your
article, using the lecture series to imply that they should show a
inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
What they show is the opposite. As I showed in a posting on Fri 18 Feb
last year (15:39) and have repeated also later on this list:
'The main specific relation to 'Nordic mythology' in the series of
lectures on single Folk spirits ... has to do (final, 11th lecture) with
a specific character in this mythology; Widar, as someone who points the
way to the future experience of the Christ that is present in any
meeting between people when they gather together in the spirit of what
Paul said: 'Not I, but Christ in me', the one who pointed to that in us
that has nothing to do if we are 'Jews or Greeks', that is: that in us
that has _nothing_ to do with to which nation we belong.'
When speaking to theosophical audiences and in theosophical contexts, he
at first used their traditional terminology of 'root races' and 'sub
races', as that were the terms used in the theosophical tradition,
leaving it after a few years with the argument that they were incorrect
and immature concepts in describing the nature of human evolution.
) do not include the Semites, who are
) rather a leftover remnant of a superceded root-race.
I think you are quite wrong.
His view was that the Semitic culture belonged to the basic culture that
he in different contexts characterized as the Egyptian (classical term)
or Egyptian-Chaldean-Babylonean cultural epoch, developing from about
3 000 B.C. to the 8th century B.C. in the area of 'the fertile half
moon'(?).
See a lecture on the Apocalypse 14 June 1906
(http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/EsoCosmo/19060614p01.html) - the
last of 18 lectures held at a Theosophical Conference in Paris.
In the lecture he characterizes the first four of a number of cultural
periods following a long term pattern since the last glacial age that
ended some 9 000 years ago, in a simplified way as:
'1. Pre-Vedic civilization in the south of Asia and in India - the
beginning of Aryan culture.'
(using the common habit of naming something out of its _birth_ context
and 'Aryan' was the name, according to the Vedic scriptures, that the
still not quite understood Central Asian group used for itself, that was
the birth culture out of which all the indo-european cultures have
developed, and that now via the imperialism, that grew out of the
peoples of Western Europe; Holland, GB, France, Spain and Portugal
starting at the end of the middle ages and that now ever more is
dominating the world, except maybe China.)
'2. The epoch of Zoroaster, comprising the civilization of ancient
Persia.
3. Egyptian civilization (including the Chaldean and Semitic). The first
germs of Christianity were laid down in this epoch among the Hebrew
peoples.
4. Graeco-Roman civilization, the era of the birth of Christianity.'
It is the same classical civilizations that are described at many
standard historical sites.
He then describes our present cultural epoch with:
'5. A new epoch commenced at the time of the migrations of the peoples
and of the invasions. The heritage of the Graeco-Roman civilization was
taken over by the races of the North: the Celts, the Germanic peoples
and the Slavs. We ourselves are living in this epoch.'
As Detlef has argued, including the Semitic civilization in the row of
'Aryan' cultures shows Steiner used the term 'Aryan' not as a term
referring to 'white, blond and blue-eyed Germans', or 'germanic
peoples', or any other narrow sense argued by critics on this list, but
in the very wide sense of as a 'name' for the whole period of cultural
development following the last glacial age, during which human culture
develops through a number of phases up to a time far in the future, when
this cultural development (if it continues to follow its present
implicit basic long term pattern) will lead over to other types of
development.
) This racial typology
) has been affirmed many times by later anthroposophists; for example, A.P.
) Shepherd's book A Scientist of the Invisible: An Introduction to the Life
) and Work of Rudolf Steiner (London 1954) recapitulates Steiner's teachings
) in chapter ten, "The Origin and Destiny of Man". Shepherd uses the terms
) "stages", "periods" and "races" interchangeably,
Your way of referring and describing it gives me the impression that you
have read it very quickly and not understood what you have read on more
than a very general and unspecific word-level.
) and writes that humankind
) is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels." (p.
) 103)
I have closely read the corresponding pages of the Swedish translation
of the book by Shepherd and don't find what you quote as that humankind
is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels."
) Although Shepherd doesn't use the term "sub-race", he does use
) "Germanic peoples" and "Germanic races" interchangeably to refer to the
) dominant group in "the fifth epoch of post-Atlantean civilisation, the
) epoch we live in" (p. 110).
He mentions 'Germanic peoples' twice and 'germanic races' once on the
one page describing the 'fifth post-Atlantean cultural epoch.
At http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/cultures.htm I have tried to discuss
the nature of what in an anthroposophical perspective can be considered
to be the present 'cultural epoch'. It mentions 'teutonic' as a possible
answer that I thought I had read once in a lecture by Steiner, if one
were to use a term on the basis of an origin in some group of people of
the European peoples.
When writing to the Archives at Goetheanum asking about it, it turned
out Steiner in no place registered used the word 'teutonic' for the
present cultural epoch, it possibly being a way of translating
'germanic' into English.
At http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/history/teutons.htm I've tried to
understand who the 'teutons' were, at times having seen them mentioned
and not understanding the term.
What he writes is (in translation from Swedish):
'The fifth post-Atlantean cultural epoch, in which we now live,
constitutes the third stage in the soul development of the human 'I'. It
started in the 15th century within that European culture that had arisen
when the germanic peoples had inundated and gradually absorbed the
Greek-Roman culture. Those germanic races were descendants of Atlantic
peoples, that had remained completely untouched by the post-Atlantean
cultures. They had preserved a wholehearted belief in the spiritual
world and in many cases still had the old form of clairvoyance.
There existed several different mystery cults among them. Some of them
were, as the mysteries of the East, directed at solving the riddle that
lies in the spiritual being of man, and in the myths - that during all
ages have been the way the mysteries have spoken to ordinary people -
there are several parallels to asian and greek mystery wisdom. But these
races were robust and strongly individualistic and had, probably because
of the hard climate got their attention and their energy directed at
the physical world, that they tried to master and use.
There also existed among them other mystery cults, that sought the
spiritual behind the natural phenomena, and they were deeply engaged in
them and through them sought to greater power over the physical world.
There hence existed among the germanic peoples two different streams.
One came from the mysteries that explored the human spirit, and also
those people who were not clairvoyant were deeply dedicated to those
mysteries, especially in regard to life after death.
The other stream came from the nature mysteries, through which the
thoughts and will of man were directed at revealing and mastering the
secrets of the earth. Christianity strongly appealed to their feelings
and awoke great reverence, but the cleft remained, which for among other
reasons becomes clear from the intellectual power in the arian heretics
and the constant conflict between the emperor and the pope, as also the
opposition by the church against the alchemists and later against the
new intellectual age.'
Not much of any heroization that your mentioning of it may imply.
) Another of Steiner's disciples, Ernst Uehli, expanded on Steiner's
) teachings about "Aryans" and "Semites".
I think Uehli has very little on his feet in view of what can be found
in 'Cosmic Memory' on the issue. Detlef has commented well on this and
the rest of your post, I think.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:52:54 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Per Hallstrom, you said,
)By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
)methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
)the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
Well, Per, using the "method of natural science" on Anthroposophy
would be very helpful--Steiner's fantasies would be demolished in a
trice. I look forward your publications.
P.S. if you want respect, don't use the word "science" unless you
really mean it.
-Dan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:06:27 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
In a message dated 2/7/01 8:15:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lschelly jackrouse.com writes:
) A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
) Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you.
) Apparently the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. (If
) you want I will type it out for you)
Please do.
) How do you explain that hospitals recommend performing different tests
) during your prenatal visits *depending on the race of the parents*?
) How do you explain the different illnesses that one race is more
susceptiple
) to than another?
African americans have an _apparently_ slight genetic predisposition to
lower birth weight and higher mortality rates, sicle cell anemia, asthma,
prostate cancer and diabetes . One must also factor in the fact that AA's
receive a lower standard of medical care even when all variables are equal.
Income is a factor as well. It would be interesting to know what world
statistics are for blacks in mixed countries and predominantly black
countries.
) I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
) I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this one.
Actually, the debate continues.
Accd to the American Anthropological Assc, 94% of physical/genetic variations
happen within "racial" groups and not between them thus blurring any "race"
lines drawn in the scientific sand. They argue that "race" is a social
construction.
) I think a more tenable position is that in the past, what people in every
) day society (and even scientists of the day) based the distinction of races
) on (skin color, hair type, physical size) turns out not to be nearly as
) reliable or precise as the modern ways which scientists understand the
) concept of races. (bloodtypes, genetic makeup, amino acids, and enzymes).
(A
) curious note that is very fluid based.)
The 19th century model of "race" was based on polygenisis, phrenology and
later a reliance on social darwinism (based on the former) all of which was
firmly rooted in socio-political power hierarchies. The trend has been to
apply the latest technology to give legitimacy to the existence of "races".
Recently it has been bloodtypes, genomes and MRI studies. They are as
substantive and tenable as the theories advanced in the previous century.
And that race, as a concept, is and
) has been intermingled between culture and biology for so long that it is
hard
) to seperate the two, in any casual way, when reviewing history.
Once you get beyond the dog chasing its tail, it's quite easy.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 23:14:07 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/08/world/08SPAI.html
February 8, 2001
15 Scientologists on Trial in Spain
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
MADRID, Feb. 7: Fifteen Scientologists went on trial in Madrid today on
charges ranging from illegal detention to tax fraud, but the United
States-based international president of the movement, Heber Jentzsch,
failed to show up.
The prosecution has called for jail terms of between three months and
eight years for the 15 Spanish defendants, who face charges including
the illegal detention of an individual, causing actual bodily harm,
threats and tax fraud. The prosecutor has called for a 56-year prison
sentence for Mr. Jentzsch.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 09:55:37 GMT
From: Sune Nordwall (sune.nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
The moderator put an article from NY Times on a trial
against 15 scinetologists in Spain on the list.
Could you explain the more specific criteria you use in
considering the article to be on-topic on this list?
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological
cell biology, EU and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:53:30 -0200
From: "CP" (paixs yahoo.com.br)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
) In a message dated 2/7/01 8:15:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, )
lschelly jackrouse.com writes:
)
) ) A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
) ) Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you. )
Apparently the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. (If
) ) you want I will type it out for you)
) ) How do you explain that hospitals recommend performing different tests
) ) during your prenatal visits *depending on the race of the parents*?
) ) How do you explain the different illnesses that one race is more )
susceptiple ) to than another?
Clara:
We could argue that those facts can be related to any number of factors -
environmental, cultural - until the opposite is proven. For example,
Japanese women are less prone to breast cancer. Because of their race? No,
because they eat plenty of raw fish. Etc.
But this is not a very fertile discussion. Since those facts are still under
scientific investigation, any of us can take any side.
What I really would like to understand is how come some people do not see
that even engaging in this kind of argument (=races as biological fact, thus
humanity divided into races) is racist.
With so many interesting things to think about in the world today, why are
you so focused on debating races? CanĄt you realize that this perspective is
an inheritance of the past, of a time when categorizing people (according to
race, but also creed, or any other arbritary cirteria) into different groups
was an instrument of dominance?
CanĄt you realize that if human beings want to, they can create any form of
complex theorical justification for their wish to submit others? CanĄt you
see that you may be immersed in this kind of ideology, and became unable to
realize even the premises of your arguments are unnacceptable?
The Arabs, during the middle ages, when they met the barbarian Europeans,
were amazed at their lack of culture, refinement and intelligence. The main
theory to explain those facts used to be, that white people up there do not
get enough sunlight, which makes them stupid and underdeveloped.
Now that its the Arabs and all dark people who are considered stupid and
underdeveloped by the white, the argument is many times used in reverse
form. It is often said that people who live in hot climates are lazy,
unspiritual, etc.
It all depends on your point of view; any explanation can be provided, and
it will fit accordingly into the dominant thinking system of a culture (be
it 11th century Arab culture, be it 21st century pretensely "scientific"
culture).
It is up to each of us wether we want to fall into this trap or not.
Clara
) African americans have an _apparently_ slight genetic predisposition to
) lower birth weight and higher mortality rates, sicle cell anemia, asthma,
) prostate cancer and diabetes . One must also factor in the fact that AA's
) receive a lower standard of medical care even when all variables are
equal.
) Income is a factor as well. It would be interesting to know what world
) statistics are for blacks in mixed countries and predominantly black
) countries.
)
)
) ) I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
) ) I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this
one.
)
) Actually, the debate continues.
) Accd to the American Anthropological Assc, 94% of physical/genetic
variations
) happen within "racial" groups and not between them thus blurring any
"race"
) lines drawn in the scientific sand. They argue that "race" is a social
) construction.
)
)
)
) ) I think a more tenable position is that in the past, what people in
every
) ) day society (and even scientists of the day) based the distinction of
races
) ) on (skin color, hair type, physical size) turns out not to be nearly as
) ) reliable or precise as the modern ways which scientists understand the
) ) concept of races. (bloodtypes, genetic makeup, amino acids, and
enzymes).
) (A
) ) curious note that is very fluid based.)
)
) The 19th century model of "race" was based on polygenisis, phrenology and
) later a reliance on social darwinism (based on the former) all of which
was
) firmly rooted in socio-political power hierarchies. The trend has been to
) apply the latest technology to give legitimacy to the existence of
"races".
) Recently it has been bloodtypes, genomes and MRI studies. They are as
) substantive and tenable as the theories advanced in the previous century.
)
) And that race, as a concept, is and
) ) has been intermingled between culture and biology for so long that it is
) hard
) ) to seperate the two, in any casual way, when reviewing history.
)
) Once you get beyond the dog chasing its tail, it's quite easy.
) Ray
)
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 06:59:42 EST
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
--part1_b9.b4ad15f.27b535ae_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Recently I wrote to ask about Anthroposophy as a religion. Only Per Hallstrom
responded directly to my inquiry. Others seemed to be just continuing some
internal debate with each other.
I am the father of a five year old girl who's mother enrolled her in the
Waldorf School in Lexington MA. Over the course of the past several months I
have become increasingly alarmed that the "school" is actually some kind of
relgious cult, more interested in concerning themselves with my daughter's
spiritual development!
This concerns me because 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with
my child's spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development without my
knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would be so deceptive and
manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda without being up-front
about that agenda.
As a new-comer to this list, it would be helpful to me if others would also
reveal their bias.
And again, are their objective/neutral entities which have designated
Anthroposophy as a religion?
Thanks,
Terry
--part1_b9.b4ad15f.27b535ae_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Bookman Old Style" LANG="0")Recently I wrote to ask about Anthroposophy as a religion. Only Per Hallstrom
(BR)responded directly to my inquiry. Others seemed to be just continuing some
(BR)internal debate with each other.
(BR)
(BR)I am the father of a five year old girl who's mother enrolled her in the
(BR)Waldorf School in Lexington MA. Over the course of the past several months I
(BR)have become increasingly alarmed that the "school" is actually some kind of
(BR)relgious cult, more interested in concerning themselves with my daughter's
(BR)spiritual development!
(BR)
(BR)This concerns me because 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with
(BR)my child's spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
(BR)undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development without my
(BR)knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would be so deceptive and
(BR)manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda without being up-front
(BR)about that agenda.
(BR)
(BR)As a new-comer to this list, it would be helpful to me if others would also
(BR)reveal their bias.
(BR)
(BR)And again, are their objective/neutral entities which have designated
(BR)Anthroposophy as a religion?
(BR)
(BR)Thanks,
(BR)Terry
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_b9.b4ad15f.27b535ae_boundary--
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 154
-- Topica Digest --
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By koala noos.fr
Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: old discussion I
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Re: old discussion I
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
Re: old discussion I
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: old discussion II
By c_brostrup-jensen brown.edu
RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By lschelly jackrouse.com
RE: oops didnot delete digest format
By lschelly jackrouse.com
RE:"Aryans" and "Semites"
By lschelly jackrouse.com
Re: old discussion I
By hardorp gmx.net
to Terry -- what Waldorf is
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Up-front school
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Up-front school
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: Up-front school
By Speckraybill aol.com
FW: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By lschelly jackrouse.com
Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By rbc supranet.com
Re: old discussion II
By rbc supranet.com
Re: old discussion I
By rbc supranet.com
Re: old discussion I
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: old discussion I
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By dan dandugan.com
RE: oops didnot delete digest format
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Up-front school
By TTirrell1 aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 14:49:57 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Clara Paix9/02/01 12:29paixs yahoo.com.br
)) In a message dated 2/7/01 8:15:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, )
) lschelly jackrouse.com writes:
))=20
))) A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
))) Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you. )
))) Apparently the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. =
(If
))) you want I will type it out for you)
))) How do you explain that hospitals recommend performing different tests
))) during your prenatal visits *depending on the race of the parents*?
))) How do you explain the different illnesses that one race is more )
))) susceptiple ) to than another?
)=20
) Clara:
) We could argue that those facts can be related to any number of factors -
) environmental, cultural - until the opposite is proven. For example,
) Japanese women are less prone to breast cancer. Because of their race? No=
,
) because they eat plenty of raw fish. Etc.
Of course. That is obvious.
)=20
) But this is not a very fertile discussion. Since those facts are still un=
der
) scientific investigation, any of us can take any side.
)=20
) What I really would like to understand is how come some people do not see
) that even engaging in this kind of argument (=3Draces as biological fact, t=
hus
) humanity divided into races) is racist.
That is a fact they will never understand apparently.
No racial theories have ever served any other purpose than serving racist
theories, which means to establish a hierarchy between people, or a
distinction, and afterwards a definition of superiority and inferiority
according to the "supposed" race. People never wrote treaties about races t=
o
make people love each other !
)=20
) With so many interesting things to think about in the world today, why ar=
e
) you so focused on debating races?
Talking about fighting poverty would be a more fertile debate...
) Can=B4t you realize that this perspective is
) an inheritance of the past, of a time when categorizing people (according=
to
) race, but also creed, or any other arbritary cirteria) into different gro=
ups
) was an instrument of dominance?
)=20
) Can=B4t you realize that if human beings want to, they can create any form =
of
) complex theorical justification for their wish to submit others? Can=B4t yo=
u
) see that you may be immersed in this kind of ideology, and became unable =
to
) realize even the premises of your arguments are unnacceptable?
That is why I say they think of things I never think about; the cause, like
the answer are psychological and not scientific. Creating criteria on a
broader basis make them think this is an important issue whereas nobody
cares about anymore... That makes them think they belong to something that
is more important, that they have become more important according to which
"supposed" race they are descending from, and not according to what they do
everyday to change the world. Easy way not to pay certain people as well.
)=20
) The Arabs, during the middle ages, when they met the barbarian Europeans,
) were amazed at their lack of culture, refinement and intelligence. The ma=
in
) theory to explain those facts used to be, that white people up there do n=
ot
) get enough sunlight, which makes them stupid and underdeveloped.
)=20
) Now that its the Arabs and all dark people who are considered stupid and
) underdeveloped by the white, the argument is many times used in reverse
) form. It is often said that people who live in hot climates are lazy,
) unspiritual, etc.
I can tell you for sure that all the people I know that went to Africa told
me that it is so hot there that you have to sleep more because working unde=
r
such climates is very hard. Send any european claiming that races exist
there, you'll immediatly see them as lazy as the people they despise
according to their so called classification.
)=20
) It all depends on your point of view; any explanation can be provided, an=
d
) it will fit accordingly into the dominant thinking system of a culture (b=
e
) it 11th century Arab culture, be it 21st century pretensely "scientific"
) culture).
)=20
) It is up to each of us wether we want to fall into this trap or not.
)=20
) Clara
)=20
)=20
)=20
)) African americans have an _apparently_ slight genetic predisposition to
)) lower birth weight and higher mortality rates, sicle cell anemia, asthma=
,
)) prostate cancer and diabetes . One must also factor in the fact that AA'=
s
)) receive a lower standard of medical care even when all variables are
)) equal.
)) Income is a factor as well. It would be interesting to know what world
)) statistics are for blacks in mixed countries and predominantly black
)) countries.
))=20
))=20
))) I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
))) I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this
))) one.
))=20
)) Actually, the debate continues.
)) Accd to the American Anthropological Assc, 94% of physical/genetic
)) variations
)) happen within "racial" groups and not between them thus blurring any
)) "race"
)) lines drawn in the scientific sand. They argue that "race" is a social
)) construction.
))=20
))=20
))=20
))) I think a more tenable position is that in the past, what people in
))) every
))) day society (and even scientists of the day) based the distinction of
))) races
))) on (skin color, hair type, physical size) turns out not to be nearly a=
s
))) reliable or precise as the modern ways which scientists understand the
))) concept of races. (bloodtypes, genetic makeup, amino acids, and
))) enzymes).
))) (A
))) curious note that is very fluid based.)
))=20
)) The 19th century model of "race" was based on polygenisis, phrenology an=
d
)) later a reliance on social darwinism (based on the former) all of which
)) was
)) firmly rooted in socio-political power hierarchies. The trend has been t=
o
)) apply the latest technology to give legitimacy to the existence of
)) "races".
)) Recently it has been bloodtypes, genomes and MRI studies. They are as
)) substantive and tenable as the theories advanced in the previous century=
.
))=20
))) And that race, as a concept, is and
))) has been intermingled between culture and biology for so long that it i=
s
))) hard
))) to seperate the two, in any casual way, when reviewing history.
))=20
)) Once you get beyond the dog chasing its tail, it's quite easy.
)) Ray
))=20
)) ____________________________________________________________
)) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
)) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
)) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)=20
)=20
) _________________________________________________________
) Do You Yahoo!?
) Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
)=20
)=20
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)=20
)=20
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:59:23 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
--part1_16.89a7bb9.27b551bb_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/09/2001 2:36:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
)
) The moderator put an article from NY Times on a trial
) against 15 scinetologists in Spain on the list.
)
) Could you explain the more specific criteria you use in
) considering the article to be on-topic on this list?
)
)
)
I don't find it any more off-topic than some of the other stuff that appears
here from time to time. Besides, looking at the two cults (reading and what
I have heard from members of both cults), there are a bunch of similarities.
I will grant you that I have not heard of anthros kidnapping and
detaining--yet.
--part1_16.89a7bb9.27b551bb_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/09/2001 2:36:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")
(BR)The moderator put an article from NY Times on a trial
(BR)against 15 scinetologists in Spain on the list.
(BR)
(BR)Could you explain the more specific criteria you use in
(BR)considering the article to be on-topic on this list?
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)I don't find it any more off-topic than some of the other stuff that appears
(BR)here from time to time. Besides, looking at the two cults (reading and what
(BR)I have heard from members of both cults), there are a bunch of similarities.
(BR)I will grant you that I have not heard of anthros kidnapping and
(BR)detaining--yet.
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_16.89a7bb9.27b551bb_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 14:34:41 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
[Terry wrote:]
)Recently I wrote to ask about Anthroposophy as a religion. Only Per
) )Hallstrom responded directly to my inquiry. Others seemed to be just
) )continuing some internal debate with each other.
Hi, Terry,
I can't find your original post now, but I'm sorry if you felt your question
was ignored. If you ask a question here about anthroposophy and religion, in
an abstract way, then yes, you have stepped into the middle of a
long-running (about 6 years) debate, with lots of people with entrenched
positions. But if you give personal details, as you have done now, I'm sure
you will get more personal responses.
)I am the father of a five year old girl who's mother enrolled her in )the
)Waldorf School in Lexington MA. Over the course of the past )several months
)I have become increasingly alarmed that the "school" is )actually some kind
)of relgious cult, more interested in concerning )themselves with my
)daughter's spiritual development!
)This concerns me because 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with
)my child's spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
)undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development without
)my knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would be so deceptive
)and manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda without being
)up-front about that agenda.
)As a new-comer to this list, it would be helpful to me if others would
) )also reveal their bias.
My bias is that I had a child in Waldorf for three years, and worked as a
kindergarten assistant at the school for much of that time and was very
involved with the school. I saw a number of disturbing things going on, but
to answer your specific concerns, IMO they are certainly very concerned with
your child's spiritual development (they think her karma led her to the
Waldorf school) and you are right to feel alarmed that you weren't informed
upfront of what their religious agenda is.
As for whether they are a cult, also a long-running and inflamed discussion
here. My personal opinion is that to enroll your child in Waldorf is not
exactly the same thing as joining a cult, but there is certainly cult-like
behavior in Waldorf. They protest that they are not even a religious sect,
yet really they ought to settle for the neutral label "religious sect." It's
in the secrecy and deception that they broach a line between "religious" and
"cult-like."
)And again, are their objective/neutral entities which have designated
)Anthroposophy as a religion?
I believe there are religious scholars who classify anthroposophy as a
religion. This is definitely much discussion of this in the list archives,
though I can't give you a more precise reference. Perhaps search under John
Morehead's name, or maybe Dan can quickly reference this. This was why I
posted the dictionary definition of "religion," however; I figured that was
pretty objective and neutral.
Welcome to the list, and will try to answer any more specific concerns you
have.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:57:12 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
--part1_b7.b4fc4c7.27b55f48_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/09/2001 6:30:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
writes:
) I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
) ))) I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this
) ))) one.
)
Even if some method of sorting and typing people according to DNA patterns
could be accomplished, what is the point in doing so? The only time I see
any value in recognizing someone's ancestry is when there is a high incidence
of a certain disease (that screening for and detecting as early as possible
will enhance that person's quality of life according to THEIR definitions).
This should never be forced on anyone though, as I have seen done in the
past, but offered. Maybe in the future, the cost and methods of screenings
will be such that there will be no need to "target at risk populations" in an
effort to avoid unnecessary costs and invasive procedures. One example, in
my state, is the Infant Metabolic Screening program. With 4-5 drops of
blood, every infant is screened for a variety of endocrine and metabolic
disorders, as well as hemoglobinopathies that previously would have been
"targeted screenings" based on race or ethnic background.
--part1_b7.b4fc4c7.27b55f48_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/09/2001 6:30:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, koala noos.fr
(BR)writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")I am fairly certain you can establish race through DNA testing.
(BR)>>> I am fairly certain the scientific community is not with you on this
(BR)>>> one.
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)Even if some method of sorting and typing people according to DNA patterns
(BR)could be accomplished, what is the point in doing so? The only time I see
(BR)any value in recognizing someone's ancestry is when there is a high incidence
(BR)of a certain disease (that screening for and detecting as early as possible
(BR)will enhance that person's quality of life according to THEIR definitions).
(BR)This should never be forced on anyone though, as I have seen done in the
(BR)past, but offered. Maybe in the future, the cost and methods of screenings
(BR)will be such that there will be no need to "target at risk populations" in an
(BR)effort to avoid unnecessary costs and invasive procedures. One example, in
(BR)my state, is the Infant Metabolic Screening program. With 4-5 drops of
(BR)blood, every infant is screened for a variety of endocrine and metabolic
(BR)disorders, as well as hemoglobinopathies that previously would have been
(BR)"targeted screenings" based on race or ethnic background.
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_b7.b4fc4c7.27b55f48_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:48:06 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net) wrote:
)On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:04:56 -0500
)Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
)wrote=20
)
) )By the early years of the 20th century the very racist sense andusage of =
)the term "Aryan" was very much alive and well in nationalist intellectual =
)circles. And it seems very clear that Steiner was not just familiar with, =
)but was at least for a while active in those circles.
)
)D.H.: This is simply not true. I challenge you to name one "nationalist =
)intellectual circle" in which Steiner was active. Steiner emphatically =
)destested nationalism all his life. Yes, he did think that German culture =
)had an important role to play - but not a nationalistic role!
[Chris]
I was relying here on Peter Staudenmaier's description of Steiner's
involvement with the German nationalist movement in Austria in the
1890s. He laid out that involvement (including Steiner's writing for
various nationalist papers and publications) in some detail. Since
no one challenged or disputed his information, I took it to be
reasonably reliable. If you feel he was wrong I would be interested
to hear your perspective on it.
) )So Ithink one must at least question why he chose the term Aryan and just =
)what he could reasonably expect his audience to understand by it.
)
)D.H.: This is very simple: he used the term a bit (and probably less than =
)most of his contemporaries!) as long as he was using theosophical =
)vocabulary (early on in his life), and exactly in the way the dictionary =
)defines it today (quoted from a post of Peter S.):
[Chris]
I may be misunderstanding something, but it seems to me that you have
described two *different* ways of using the term here. I do not see how
one can view the theosophical use of the term and the modern dictionary
definition as the same thing. If I am understanding you and Sune correctly,
you are saying that the theosophists used the term to cover an entire
(immense) "cultural epoch" covering everything from the last glaciation
to the present day.
Which raises another question, actually. If the "Aryan race" is really a
term for the "cultural epoch" which covers all of known recorded
history, then just where *do* the Chinese and other East Asian
civilizations fit in? They do not seem to get mentioned in any of
the lists of "sub-races" ( or "sub-epochs"?) under the Aryan
umbrella, but they have a history as ancient, complex and accomplished
as anything produced by or during any of the Aryan epochs. Could
you clarify where East Asian (or African or American for that matter)
cultures fit into this framework? Or perhaps point us at a source which
does?
) )Chris:
)Although, interestingly, the Aryan root-race developed from the most
)advanced of the fifth Atlantean sub-race, the Primal Semites, rather
)than from the Akkadians or the Mongols (the seventh Atlantean
)sub-race), both of which degenerated, leaving devolved descendants
)one can still find in Asia. No racism?
)
)D.H.: Maybe. Remember that is he taling about _cultures_ here. It was =
)common to sometimes speak of cultures as "races" in those days (one prime =
)example: Cecil Rhodes speaking of the "British race"). People talk about =
)"the rise and fall of the Roman empire" all the time. Cannot cultures =
)devolve, degenerate, loose their importance? Is it racism to make such =
)claims, be it the Mongolean civilization or the Roman? Clearly, the height =
)of Chinese and Mongolian civilization lies in a far distant past. Latin =
)actually died out as a language, and with it the Cesars and all the =
)decadence of late Roman culture! Am I a racist in making such claims?
[Chris]
I read those Cosmic Memory lectures rather carefully and I saw no
evidence whatsoever that Steiner was talking about cultures. He
talked about each group of people as having fundamental differences
in nature and ability. As I noted in my response to Sune, the only
analogy I can make to the kind of differences he was talking about
would be species differences.
I would disagree that Cecil Rhodes meant "British culture" when he
said "British race". He meant race. He was speaking in a time and
context where mystical significance was accorded by many to
national characters and to "blood" and lineage. In the US at this time
the Irish were considered a separate (and inferior) race. Steiner's
rather vicious and shocking comments about the French after WW1
fit into this same mold of seeing nations (in the sense of peoples,
not political entities) as distinct races with distinct characters.
I am also troubled by Steiner's use of the term "degeneration". One
does not normally speak of the "degeneration" of the Roman people
when discussing the decline and fall of their empire. That would seem
to imply that modern Italians are something less than their Roman
forebears. Of course, that could be a matter of translation and the
changing meaning of words. Precise communication across time and
language is a tricky business. Still, the word does bother me and if
a modern person used it in English I would certainly see a racist
character to that.
I would also agree with Gary (I think it was) who took issue with
your characterization of Chinese culture as past its height. The
relative power of the Chinese state is less now than it was at other
points in history and the relative advantage of Chinese science and
technology is also less now, but that is all in relative terms. I rather
suspect that most Chinese would rather be alive now than during
the Sung period!
Thanks, Detlef, for taking the time and energy to respond to my
rather verbose post. I (and I'm sure others on the list) rely rather
heavily, maybe even a tad unfairly, on you and Sune to argue and
explicate the pro-Steiner/anthroposophical viewpoint.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:59:29 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net) wrote:
)On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:38:32 -0600
)Peter Staudenmaier wrote
)
) )As early as the 1890's, both linguists and anthropologists derided the =
)idea of an "Aryan race"
)
)D.H.: Well, Steiner joined them not much later. His early use of the =
)terminology is due to the fact that he is talking (and writing) for =
)theosophists in their language! He regrets it later, and distances himself =
)clearly form this root-race vocabulary. Calls it a "childhood disease". =
)Stop ignoring the facts, Peter!
[Chris]
I was quite struck by that phrase, "childhood illness", used by Steiner to
describe his use of the theosophical race language in early anthroposophical
writings. A childhood illness, even more in Steiner's day than now, is
essentially
an act of God. It happens to one through no fault of one's own other than
the simple human act of associating with others who are infected. There
is no element of individual choice or responsibility involved. One can, of
course, read too much into a simple choice of words, but I find it very
intriguing that Steiner chose the metaphor of childhood illness to describe
this choice. It suggests again an inability to face head-on the
possibility and
implications of personal error.
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 16:36:06 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
[Chris]
)I was quite struck by that phrase, "childhood illness", used by Steiner to
)describe his use of the theosophical race language in early
)anthroposophical writings. A childhood illness, even more in )Steiner's
)day than now, is essentially an act of God. It happens to )one through no
)fault of one's own other than the simple human act of )associating with
)others who are infected.
)There is no element of individual choice or responsibility involved.
What an interesting point, Chris. Steiner's (and present-day Waldorf
educators') stance toward vaccination would be relevant - opposed to
vaccination because you shouldn't be preventing "acts of God," or in
anthroposophic terms, karma. The childhood illnesses are not only "not your
fault," and not avoidable, but actually seen as useful, strengthening,
necessary for future strong development. If your theory is a "childhood
illness," you wouldn't want to ever refute it. I agree the choice of
terminology is not a coincidence!
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 12:04:14 -0500
From: Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
On Fri, 09 Feb 2001, Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se) wrote:
)He argued that view in a number of lectures, among others in 30 May
)1908 (GA 103), in 4 Dec 1909 (GA 117) and in 20 June 1911 (GA 133) and
)stopped using the theosophical improper terminology of 'root races' and
)'sub races' before writing 'Occult science - an outline' in 1909 and
)before holding the lectures on 'The mission of folk souls' in relation
)to Nordic mythology in 1910, that you grossly misrepresent in your
)article at the site of PLANS.
[Chris]
I'd be interested in seeing those lectures. Do you have an online
reference for those?
[Sune]
)His view was that the Semitic culture belonged to the basic culture that
)he in different contexts characterized as the Egyptian (classical term)
)or Egyptian-Chaldean-Babylonean cultural epoch, developing from about
)3 000 B.C. to the 8th century B.C. in the area of 'the fertile half
)moon'(?).
[Chris]
In English we use the expression "Fertile Crescent". Crescent is a
term that describes the shape of the moon when it is near to being
"new", i.e. fully occluded by the Earth.
[Sune]
)See a lecture on the Apocalypse 14 June 1906
)(http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/EsoCosmo/19060614p01.html) - the
)last of 18 lectures held at a Theosophical Conference in Paris.
)
)In the lecture he characterizes the first four of a number of cultural
)periods following a long term pattern since the last glacial age that
)ended some 9 000 years ago, in a simplified way as:
)
)'1. Pre-Vedic civilization in the south of Asia and in India - the
)beginning of Aryan culture.'
)
)(using the common habit of naming something out of its _birth_ context
)and 'Aryan' was the name, according to the Vedic scriptures, that the
)still not quite understood Central Asian group used for itself, that was
)the birth culture out of which all the indo-european cultures have
)developed, and that now via the imperialism, that grew out of the
)peoples of Western Europe; Holland, GB, France, Spain and Portugal
)starting at the end of the middle ages and that now ever more is
)dominating the world, except maybe China.)
)
)'2. The epoch of Zoroaster, comprising the civilization of ancient
)Persia.
)
)3. Egyptian civilization (including the Chaldean and Semitic). The first
)germs of Christianity were laid down in this epoch among the Hebrew
)peoples.
[Chris]
My years in undergraduate history courses compel me to point out that
at least in terms of time Steiner has reversed the Persians and the
Egyptians. As you note above, Egyptian civilization was the politically
and economically dominant one throughout the Mediterranean and
western Asian world from somewhere between 2500 and 3000 BC
for the next two millennia. Zoroaster lived in the 6th century BC,
which also marked the beginning of the period of Persian dominance
in this part of the world.
I can't help but wonder if Steiner reversed these two because that
makes the sequence fit more comfortably into the conceptual
framework of a steady westward march of civilization.
[Sune]
)4. Graeco-Roman civilization, the era of the birth of Christianity.'
)
)It is the same classical civilizations that are described at many
)standard historical sites.
[Chris]
Well, I'm not sure most folks would lump the various Semitic
and Levantine cultures (not to mention the Chaldeans) in with
the Egyptians. I'm very puzzled by the absence of the Sumerians
as well as the fascinating and mysterious Indus River culture that
flourished at the same time as the Egyptians. And, of course,
the magnificent tapestry of Chinese history is off the radar. How
does the rise of Islam and the vigorous, far-flung Arab civilization
it inspired fit into the picture?
[Sune]
)He then describes our present cultural epoch with:
)
)'5. A new epoch commenced at the time of the migrations of the peoples
)and of the invasions. The heritage of the Graeco-Roman civilization was
)taken over by the races of the North: the Celts, the Germanic peoples
)and the Slavs. We ourselves are living in this epoch.'
[Chris]
I read the lecture you took this from. There is an interesting passage in
which Steiner talks about an important transformation that will occur,
apparently in the next (sixth) post-Atlantean epoch:
[Steiner]
)Humanity will then divide into two races. Just as today we see rocks or
)animals, in that future age we shall encounter beings who are wholly evil,
)wholly ugly. In our time it is only the clairvoyant who is able to see
)moral goodness or moral ugliness in human beings. But when man's very
)features express his karma, human beings will divide into groups of
)themselves, according to the stream to which they manifestly belong,
)according to whether the lower nature has been conquered or whether it has
)conquered the Spirit. This differentiation is beginning to operate little
)by little. When we derive understanding of the future from the past, and
)strive to realise the ideal of this future, its plan begins to unfold
)before us. A new race will come into being to be the link between the man
)of the present and the spiritual man of the future.
[Chris]
Here again Steiner returns to the idea of races, this time explicitly
differentiated
on an exclusively moral basis. It seems to me that anyone who can believe that
elements of character can effectively create new races can not help but believe
that races have inherent characteristics and natures (including moral and
intellectual
ones). This is a key building block of almost any set of racist
beliefs. It is, at a
minimum, a very troubling and problematic way of looking at human development.
[Sune, discussing a book by A. P. Shepherd]
)What he writes is (in translation from Swedish):
)
)'The fifth post-Atlantean cultural epoch, in which we now live,
)constitutes the third stage in the soul development of the human 'I'. It
)started in the 15th century within that European culture that had arisen
)when the germanic peoples had inundated and gradually absorbed the
)Greek-Roman culture. Those germanic races were descendants of Atlantic
)peoples, that had remained completely untouched by the post-Atlantean
)cultures. They had preserved a wholehearted belief in the spiritual
)world and in many cases still had the old form of clairvoyance.
[Chris]
Whoa! So the Germanic peoples of northeastern Europe were not
part of the post-Atlantean (that is to say Aryan) cultural stream at
all?! Where did these "Atlantic peoples" (although the German
tribes were really much more Baltic than Atlantic in origin) come
from, then, if not the Atlanteans? I presume that "the old form of
clairvoyance" refers to the Atlantean way of intuitively understanding
natural forces. Perhaps this makes the Germans remnants of the
old Atlantean culture that had simply stagnated or degenerated
through the 10,000 years of post-Atlantean development? Is
Shepherd's perspective considered reasonably "mainstream"
within anthroposophical circles?
[Sune, quoting Shepherd]
)There existed several different mystery cults among them. Some of them
)were, as the mysteries of the East, directed at solving the riddle that
)lies in the spiritual being of man, and in the myths - that during all
)ages have been the way the mysteries have spoken to ordinary people -
)there are several parallels to asian and greek mystery wisdom. But these
)races were robust and strongly individualistic and had, probably because
)of the hard climate got their attention and their energy directed at
)the physical world, that they tried to master and use.
[Chris]
Here it is again, the language of race. Now the Germans and Celts
are races, and those races have distinct characteristic attributes,
both physically and in terms of character or nature. This is the
racist lie. Environment can shape culture, of course. But Shepherd
quite explicitly does not use the language of culture; he uses race.
Why? Does that add explanatory power? No. Is there some
collection of historical evidence to suggest that these are inherent,
rather than cultural, characteristics? No. Is it because he has
racist beliefs about people and how they differ?
Chris Brostrup-Jensen
------------------------------
Date: 9 Feb 2001 14:19:19 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:55:57 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Is anthroposophy a religion?
)I realize that whether anthroposophy is a religion is going to be =
addressed
)in PLANS' court case, because of the denials of Waldorf educators. It's
)really baffling why this should even be in dispute.
)Here's the definition of "religion" from the Random House College
)Dictionary, easiest to hand at the moment:
)
)"1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
)universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or =
)agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances and often
)having a moral code for the conduct of human affairs. 2. a specific and
)institutionalized set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by =
a
)number of persons or sects; the Christian religion; the Buddhist =
religion.
)[italics on those two because they are examples; DM] 3. the body of =
persons
)or institutions adhering to a set of religious beliefs and practices: a
)world council of religions [italics on the latter, another example; DM] =
4. a
)deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices: to =
get
)religion [ital] 5. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter =
religion
)[ital] 6. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith. =
7.
)a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of =
fighting
)prejudice [ital] 8. religions, Archaic. religious rites. 9. Archaic, =
strict
)faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow [ital]"
)
)Which of these definitions does anthroposophy *not* meet?
My two cents off the top of my head
What else meets these definitions?
It seems just about every social development organization which follow =
codes that are not based in verified scientic facts fit this definition.
Public education is one (fits def 1 and 2)
Is it a verifiable scientific fact that children have to learn what they =
learn at your public school?. No, it is an agreement among a group who =
believe that they do. Is the child development model of your school =
based on verifiable scientific facts or a set of beliefs of a social =
organization as to what is important? The Chico Board is being =
hypocritcal in my estimation.
Your government is another. (Also fits def 1 and 2) Is it a verifiable =
fact that all men are created *equal*? No, it seems more likely that all =
humans are created *individual* (leaving aside the idea of cloning). The =
ever increasing accuracy of genetics seems to show that. It is a several =
hundred year old religious concept that we believe all men are created =
equal. "Equal oppurtunity for all" is an extension of this religious =
misunderstanding; where the motto might more aptly be "individual =
oppurtunity for all". Equal and individual may seem quite related in =
general; but when extended to policy and action can become something =
quite different.
An understanding of people as equal may not see the need for women or =
minorities to recieve different medical treatment for afflictions related =
to them. A white male establishmnet may have already entrenched what the =
idea of equal is such that womens health is less than it should be. A =
perspective that started with the possible scientific fact that all =
people are created individual would not be as likely to fall into one =
size fits all ideas. A government structured about the individual may =
not be thought to be workable or desirable, but that just shows how =
people choose to not follow the scientific facts in favor of a belief of =
somethng else.
IMO, once you start down the road of organizing society based on =
verifiable scientific facts, you quickly run out of guidance, because =
science has not been structured for that purpose. You also may not like =
the realities of what it suggests. It *may* be a scientific fact that =
killing or disease serves to provide a greater possibilty for the human =
race to sustain itself over long periods of time, but I doubt that people =
would want to follow it.
FYI
Heres the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia =
Britannica:
anthroposophy,
philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the =
ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf =
Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who postulated a =
spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but fully accessible only =
to the faculties of knowledge latent in all human beings. He regarded =
human beings as having originally participated in the spiritual process =
of the world through a dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed =
that an enhanced consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he =
attempted to develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of =
the senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in =
1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches around the =
world.
Is every philosophy a religion?
------------------------------
Date: 9 Feb 2001 14:25:28 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE: oops didnot delete digest format
I think I forgot to delete the rest of the digest format when I posted my =
last post. Please delete it if you are going to respond to my post.
Sorry
------------------------------
Date: 9 Feb 2001 14:28:03 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: RE:"Aryans" and "Semites"
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:06:27 EST
From: Rechomba cs.com
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
In a message dated 2/7/01 8:15:56 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lschelly jackrouse.com writes:
) A scietific fact eh?... I must have missed that one.
) Certainly the 1996 encyclopedia Britanica doesn't agree with you.
) Apparently the scientific community thinks there are about nine races. =
(If
) you want I will type it out for you)
Please do.
I am in the process. I am the worlds slowest typist
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:34:35 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
On Thu, 08 Feb 2001 15:36:47 -0500
"Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
)Detlef Hardorp wrote:
)) Cannot cultures devolve, degenerate, loose their importance? Is it =
racism to make such claims, be it the Mongolean civilization or the Roman? =
Clearly, the height of Chinese and Mongolian civilization lies in a far =
distant past. Latin actually died out as a language, and with it the =
Ceasars and all the decadence of late Roman culture! Am I a racist in =
making such claims?
Mr. Bonhiver: )Absolutely you are racist in making those claims!
)Who the hell are YOU to judge that today's Chinese culture is any LESS =
vibrant, LESS IMPORTANT than that of the past?
Mr. Bonhiver, please tone down your hostility a bit. I always thought that =
people are entitled to form opinions about things, including the vibrancy =
of Chinese Culture. I happened to have studied a bit of Chines philosophy =
as an undergraduate, and I found Confucianism and Taoism more interesting =
than Maoism. No thought police will stop me from forming my own opinions.
Mr. Bonhiver:
)Please define for us what you and/or Steiner consider "the height" of a =
civilization/culture/people, and also what constitutes "the decline" of a =
civilization/culture/people...
D.H.: The concept of the "rise and fall of the Roman empire" was neither =
coined by Steiner nor by me. I think there is a book with that title. =
Another racist, no doubt, in your view. But it seems to have been =
generally accepted that Roman civilization declined whith the late Ceasars. =
The Roman Empire declines and ceased to exist. Taking another example: =
lots of people speak of a pinnacle of Greek culture during the time that =
philosophers like Socrates, Plate and Aristotle were around. Come on, this =
doesn't denigrate modern Greek culture a bit. But the significance and the =
impact of ancient Greek philosophers on the course of civilization was far =
greater than the impact of current Greek culture. You know, you can overdo =
this PC stuff a bit.
I thought twice about answering your questions, Mr. Bonhiver, after you =
yelled at me. I answered, but don't expect any more contributions from me =
in this thread.
D. Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 18:00:28 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: to Terry -- what Waldorf is
Dear Terry,
I was interested in your recent post relating that your five year old
daughter has been enrolled -- by her mother -- at a Massachusetts Waldorf
school whose philosophy about spiritual development (called Anthroposophy)
you apparently were not aware of before the enrollment.
You say:
((This concerns me because 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself
with my child's spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school
would undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development
without my knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would be so
deceptive and manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda without
being up-front about that agenda. ))
Lisa again: Terry, your concerns echo the basic concerns of many of those of
us who call ourselves "Waldorf critics." More than a few people on this list
(and almost everyone on another list called "Waldorf survivors") feel
strongly that Waldorf schools are *obligated* to reveal the spiritual system
that forms the whole foundation for their approach BEFORE families enroll
their children. Unfortunately, it seems that that kind of full disclosure is
*not* happening at many schools, leaving parents to discover what I would
call the school's "true nature" after the child is already there, settled,
has made friends, etc.
Be clear about one thing (and I know that the Waldorf advocates are gonna
jump all over me for this, but here goes!): almost everything at a Waldorf
school is based upon Steiner's spiritual science religion, called
Anthroposophy. That means that Anthroposophy dictates things large and
small, from what the children learn when to how they learn it to the colors
of the classroom walls in each grade to what snacks the preschoolers are
given and on what days. (My daughter's preschool teacher -- and a number of
others I know -- wear certain colors on certain days of the week, depending
upon which "planet" is prominent in the Zodiac that day.)
Naturally, Waldorf schools do not advertise this essential fact. Instead of
saying that they *really* believe it is better for a child *not* to learn to
read until age 9 or so (Steiner would have preferred age 14, if he could
have gotten away with it!), Waldorf promoters contend that reading is
introduced "gradually" and "gently." Instead of revealing that children are
actively discouraged from taking on abstract concepts before the magical age
of 14 (which Steiner deemed the advent of puberty), Waldorf promoters call
their curriculum "developmentally based."
Of course, they don't mention that the child development model upon which
they base everything is Steiner's, and that *he* got it from his supposed
powers of clairvoyance. (Whether he was "clairvoyant" or not I don't know.
What I do know is that he pieced Anthroposophy together from a hodgepodge of
very, very old religions and spiritual paths, from Rosicrucianism and
Buddhism to hermeticism, Zoroastrianism, Theosophy, Christianity, and more.)
The result is an education that is NOT the latest, progressive approach that
many parents believe it to be. In fact, when you buy Waldorf education, you
are actually buying something that, in parts, dates back to the Middle Ages!
(Consider the "Four Temperments" -- a system by which Waldorf teachers
classify children.)
How I do rant on! The point here, Terry, is that I urge you to ask as many
questions as you can, both here on this list and at your child's school. If
you are interested, I will post a list of questions that I compiled, along
with several other former Waldorf parents. It contains questions that we
wished *we* had asked before enrolling. Let me know.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:58:52 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Up-front school
Terry Tirrell wrote:
) 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with my child's
) spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
) undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development
) without my knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would
) be so deceptive and manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious
) agenda without being up-front about that agenda.
Is http://www.thewaldorfschool.org/index.html (Waldorf School in
Lexington) the home page of the school the mother of your 5 year old
daughter has put her in?
At http://www.thewaldorfschool.org/about.html it says:
'Statement of Mission
We strive to be an exemplary Waldorf school, a contributing member of
the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America (AWSNA) and the
international Waldorf school movement.
Therefore we base our work on the research and insights of Rudolf
Steiner. His understanding of the individual as a spiritual being
developing over time is the foundation of Waldorf Education.
It is our task to understand and to develop his indications for this
time and place.'
The page was last modified 26 March 2000.
Don't they have a brochure of some kind saying about the same thing? Is
the mother of your child of the same opinion as you about the school?
Kind regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:04:05 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Up-front school
--part1_71.aad8467.27b5df75_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/09/2001 4:00:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
) Don't they have a brochure of some kind saying about the same thing? Is
) the mother of your child of the same opinion as you about the school?
Even if there is a brochure or web page, prospective parents do not
necessarily receive them or the information about them. W
--part1_71.aad8467.27b5df75_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/09/2001 4:00:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")Don't they have a brochure of some kind saying about the same thing? Is
(BR)the mother of your child of the same opinion as you about the school?(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)
(BR)Even if there is a brochure or web page, prospective parents do not
(BR)necessarily receive them or the information about them. W(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_71.aad8467.27b5df75_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:08:52 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Up-front school
--part1_5e.7012074.27b5e094_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/09/2001 4:00:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
) Don't they have a brochure of some kind saying about the same thing? Is
) the mother of your child of the same opinion as you about the school?
)
)
)
Hit the send button before I was ready. Whatever I said and then please add:
We never received written information about Waldorf at EITHER school. We got
information about tuition payments and state forms to fill out and return,
but nothing else. It wasn't until we had been at the second Waldork school
for a few months (after the Christmas break) that we realized there WAS a
student/parent handbook that we had never received. None of the information
we received ever discussed spiritual aspects.
P
--part1_5e.7012074.27b5e094_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/09/2001 4:00:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)Sune.Nordwall home.se writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")Don't they have a brochure of some kind saying about the same thing? Is
(BR)the mother of your child of the same opinion as you about the school?
(BR)
(BR)
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)Hit the send button before I was ready. Whatever I said and then please add:
(BR)
(BR)We never received written information about Waldorf at EITHER school. We got
(BR)information about tuition payments and state forms to fill out and return,
(BR)but nothing else. It wasn't until we had been at the second Waldork school
(BR)for a few months (after the Christmas break) that we realized there WAS a
(BR)student/parent handbook that we had never received. None of the information
(BR)we received ever discussed spiritual aspects.
(BR)
(BR)P
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_5e.7012074.27b5e094_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: 9 Feb 2001 19:10:08 -0400
From: "Luke Schelly" (lschelly jackrouse.com)
Subject: FW: "Aryans" and "Semites"
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____
From: Luke Schelly on Thu, Feb 8, 2001 6:23 PM
Subject: RE: "Aryans" and "Semites"
To: Luke Schelly
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
First lets start off with the debate over whether races exist. I have to =
say, that I am far from preoccup[ied with this subject as this is the =
first time I really have entered this discussion in the two plus years =
that this list has been discussing it. I only entered it because I =
thought Koala was mistaken that races don't exist. I am willing to be =
convinced otherwise.
You (Koala) stated that they do not exist and that scientist have proven =
it.
I disagreed (that scientists have proven that it doesn't exist) and =
mentioned the encyclopedia (as well as a number of other places where =
race is a factor).
The 1998 Encyclopedia Britanica states:
RACE,
A biological grouping within the human species possessing genetically =
transmitted traits that are sufficient to characterize it as a distinct =
human type.
A brief statement follows. For full treatment, see Macropaedia: =
Evolution, Human.
The overwhelming majority of all human populations can be seperated =
into roughly nine large groupings known as geographic races, which =
correspond to geographic areas of continental proportions. These are =
distiguished as follows, with their historical site of origin indicated =
in parantheses...(snip, nine classifications LS). Smaller groups, known =
as local races, exist within most geographic races. Local races remain =
distinct through the influence of such factors as social custom, =
religious custom, geography,and population density. Even smaller races, =
known as microraces, can be discerned within local races. The origins =
and racial development of some peoples, such as the Ainu of Japan, =
however, are still unknown.
Many problems arise when attempting to distinguish one racial group =
from another on a nongenetic basis. While one racial group may differ =
significantly from another in its adaptation to the environment, =
individuals within the same racial group often differ widely among =
themselves. Furthermore, groups change over long periods of time.
Physical characteristics in which racial variations occur include body =
weight and proportions, skin pigmentation, hair texture and colour, blood =
composition, and fingerprints. Through the process of evolution by =
natural selection, those characteristics endure that best enable their =
owners to function in their environments. Thus, most racial traits have =
demonstratable adaptive usefullness in the the climates and conditions in =
which they originated. For instance, the blood condition known as sickle =
cell anemia affects mainly people of African descent; in its carrier =
state it protects against malaria, which is endemic in the hot, damp =
regions of Africa. The narrower noses of desert-dwelling Arabs humidify =
the air they inhale better than would shorter or broader noses.
Bergmann's Rule and Allen's Rule specify two ways in which human =
pysiology adapts to envoronmental conditions. (snip elaboration LS)
Racial groups are differentiated today on the basis of inherited traits =
that can be measured and evaluated precisely. Traits often include =
differences in blood type, differences in the excretion of amino acids, =
and inherited enzyme diffeciencies. Older methods of differentiation, =
like hair form and body measurement, are considered far less =
scientifically reliable, because of the great deal of individual =
variation and the influence of environmental factors
Medical studies have discovered links between race and various physical =
disorders, blood types and congenital defects. While sickle-cell anemia =
effects primarily people of African origin, cystic fibrosis effects =
mostly those of european origin. Blood type B, though relatively common =
in East Asia, India, and Africa, is absent in Australian Aborigines. =
Impacted wisdom teeth (third molars) are most prevalent among Asians and =
Europeans.
Human races are in a continual state of flux, with genes constantly =
flowing from one gene pool to another. This process is known as =
admixture (also called miscegenation, or gene flow). Cause of admixture =
are numerous and include political disturbance, poulation pressure, and =
war. Another source of new genetic material in the gene pool is =
mutation, which occurs at the rate proportional to the level of =
penetrating radiation on a population. Through natural selection, mutant =
genes that are advantageous will be passed on to followinggenerations and =
will increase in frequency over time.
Isolation, either geographic or cultural, preserves racial differences =
and aloows isolated populations to maximally adapt to climatic and =
disease factors over long periods of time. For example, before =
Christopher Columbus' voyages to America, indigenous Americans had long =
been isolated from European, African, and Asian gene pools; they =
therefore lacked immunity to Europoean diseases.
Small sample effects, expressed as genetic drift and the founder =
effect, are another explanation for genetic differences among =
populations. Small populations are much more susceptable than large ones =
to genetic drift, the fluctuations in gene frequencies from generation to =
generation caused by randomassortment. Thus, genes that may be lost in =
large populations may become established in smaller ones. as small =
populations enlarge and split into new groups, each new group develops a =
new gene pool that reflects the genetic makeup of the founders of the =
group. This phenomena, called the founder effect, can also establish dist=
inctive genetic traits. An example of this effect is in evidence in the =
Pitcairn Island, where most inhabitants are descendants of an HMS Bounty =
mutineer.
Part of the process of evolutionary change is the dying out of some =
races and the birth of others. Some gene pools have been completely =
eradicated,but other are spreading through new populations by means of =
immigration and intermixture. New races are also springing up, as the =
result of history, geography, political alliances, military activities, an=
d economics. In the Carribean, for example, the Carib Indians, as a =
distinct racial group, have completely disappeared, but new races are =
forming in the region in which individuals possess genetic traits from =
Europe, Asia, and Africa.
Ther are no pure races; all racial groups currently existing are =
thoroughly mixed. Admixture does tend to favor new genetic combinations, =
thus increasing the rate of evolutionary change.
the designation "race" has been applied to language groups (the Aryan =
race), thenational groups (the Scottish race), religious groups (the =
Jewish race), and the entire species of humans (the human race), but =
these usages are biologically and scientifically meaningless. =
Nonetheless, throughout human history these types of distinctions have =
been made; in addition, contact between races have frequently caused =
conflict. the antagonism that one group of people feels for another is =
called racism. Racism is most likely to appear when the differences =
between groups are extremely obviuos, as in differences of language or =
physical appearance. See also geographic race; local race; microrace.
end of encyclopedia post
Please remember, if you differ with this you differ with the encyclopedia =
not necessaraly me. Please keep your responses to the point that the =
book makes as I am not the author of this just the typist who brought it. =
I am, like each of us, looking for clarity to questions too.
I will try to respond to the rest of Koala's post in a later post, =
however it seems he/she turns away from the scientific question of race =
and resorts to philosophy, which was not the point of my original post =
(disputing that scientists have proven races don't exist).
Luke
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:13:47 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: "Aryans" and "Semites"
Detlef wrote:
) I was hoping that Nazi propaganda may one day stop blinding us about the
) fact that certain words had different meanings before the Nazis misused
) them. Although this misused obviously has a history itself and didn't
) appear with Hitler out of nowhere, it did not dominate meaning until
) Hitler cast his spell - as, for example, with regard to the meaning of
) word "Aryan".
Why are you convinced of this, Detlef? What sources indicate that Hitler
completely changed the pre-existing understanding of the term Aryan race?
This is no more plausible than the idea that the Nazis invented eugenics.
Can you point us to something that would back up your argument?
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:18:24 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
Sune writes that Steiner
) stopped using the theosophical improper terminology of 'root races' and
) 'sub races' before writing 'Occult science - an outline' in 1909 and
) before holding the lectures on 'The mission of folk souls' in relation
) to Nordic mythology in 1910, that you grossly misrepresent in your
) article at the site of PLANS.
How does my article misrepresent those lectures? Here is the entirety of
what I wrote about them there:
"The lecture was titled "The Mission of
European National Souls in Relation to Nordic-Germanic Mythology." In the
Oslo lecture and throughout his Norwegian tour Steiner presented his theory
of "national souls" (Volksseelen in German, Steiner's native tongue) and
paid particular attention to the mysterious wonders of the "Nordic spirit."
The "national souls" of Northern and Central Europe were, Steiner
explained, components of the "germanic-nordic sub-race," the world's most
spiritually advanced ethnic group, which was in turn the vanguard of the
highest of five historical "root races." This superior fifth root race,
Steiner told his Oslo audience, was naturally the "Aryan race.""
What do you dispute in that paragraph? Also, you say that Steiner "stopped
using" the root-race terminology before he gave these lectures. What on
earth are you talking about? The sixth of those lectures is titled "The
Five Root Races of Mankind". Detlef made the same preposterous claim last
year. Are we talking about two different books here?
) Actually reading it , one sees that its basic perspective on Nordic
) mythology is quite different from the way you imply it to be in your
) article, using the lecture series to imply that they should show a
) inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
I don't believe that there is an inherent fascism in anthroposophy, and my
article neither argues nor implies that there is. I really didn't make much
of the lecture series in my article, since I hadn't even read them at the
time (I relied primarily on an anthroposophist source for what little I did
have to say about them). They certainly don't form a major part of my
argument there.
) What they show is the opposite. As I showed in a posting on Fri 18 Feb
) last year (15:39) and have repeated also later on this list:
)
) 'The main specific relation to 'Nordic mythology' in the series of
) lectures on single Folk spirits ... has to do (final, 11th lecture) with
) a specific character in this mythology; Widar, as someone who points the
) way to the future experience of the Christ that is present in any
) meeting between people when they gather together in the spirit of what
) Paul said: 'Not I, but Christ in me', the one who pointed to that in us
) that has nothing to do if we are 'Jews or Greeks', that is: that in us
) that has _nothing_ to do with to which nation we belong.'
Yes, that is more or less what the eleventh lecture says. Are you trying to
say that this is *not* an argument for the superiority of European
spiritual traditions? At the very least you must acknowledge that Steiner
is demanding that we all recognize the validity of Christianity, refracted
through a 'nordic' lens. Where does that leave all of us non-christians?
) ) This racial typology
) ) has been affirmed many times by later anthroposophists; for example,
) ) A.P. Shepherd's book A Scientist of the Invisible: An Introduction to
) ) the Life and Work of Rudolf Steiner (London 1954) recapitulates
) ) Steiner's teachings in chapter ten, "The Origin and Destiny of Man".
) ) Shepherd uses the terms "stages", "periods" and "races"
) ) interchangeably,
)
) Your way of referring and describing it gives me the impression that you
) have read it very quickly and not understood what you have read on more
) than a very general and unspecific word-level.
I can't imagine how my "way of referring and describing" could possibly
convey that information. Have you been peering into my soul again, Sune?
) ) and writes that humankind is "differentiated into races, at different
) ) cultural and moral levels." (p. 103)
)
) I have closely read the corresponding pages of the Swedish translation
) of the book by Shepherd and don't find what you quote as that humankind
) is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels."
The sentence appears at the end of the paragraph describing the Lemurian
Age. It reads in full: "In this age, too, the power of speech developed,
and mankind began to be differentiated into races, at different cultural
and moral levels." The next paragraph describes Atlantean man. If the
sentence is missing from the Swedish edition, that would hardly be
surprising; this happens all the time with anthroposophist translations.
The sentence from Steiner's autobiography where he reminisces fondly about
his pan-German activism, for example, doesn't appear in the Norwegian
translation of the book.
) I think Uehli has very little on his feet in view of what can be found
) in 'Cosmic Memory' on the issue. Detlef has commented well on this and
) the rest of your post, I think.
I am glad to see that you and Detlef have a low opinion of Uehli and his
ravings, but don't you think it's important to mention that Steiner
decidedly did not share this opinion? Uehli was one of Steiner's closest
pupils, a teacher at the original Waldorf school and an officer of the
Anthroposophical Society. In some anthroposophist circles Uehli
is regarded as an outstanding anti-fascist; Uwe Werner makes special
mention of him as having been "extremely critical" of National Socialism
(Werner, Anthroposophen in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus, p. 97).
Doesn't that tell you something?
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:23:31 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
I wrote:
) )It is not the case that Steiner's notion of an "Aryan race" was common
) ) in his time, it is not the case that his use of the term was radically
) ) different from the Nazi version, and it is not the case that the Nazis
) ) used the term to refer only to Germans, of any complexion
Detlef replied:
) it is not the case that Peter Staudenmaier has any healthy
) relation or any sense for what is true or what is false. This is
) perverse.
Perhaps you could be more specific, Detlef. Which of my claims do you
consider inaccurate?
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:33:05 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
Detlef wrote:
) Mr. Bonhiver, please tone down your hostility a bit.
I believe the term for this sort of remark is passive-aggressive.
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:38:41 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Diana wrote:
)Thank you for the advice. I don't know which books you're
)recommending, but I've read all the Steiner I care to read. I know
)that you assume a critic of anthroposophy can't possibly have read
)or studied enough to understand properly as you do. It is a typical
)anthroposophist retort, as is referring to Steiner to defend
)Steiner. I consider anthroposophy to be a religion using terms and
)criteria that most people would use, and the fact that
)anthroposophists consider themselves above such worldly debates
)doesn't change it. It is the usual response - we have knowledge you
)don't have, we have understanding you don't have, we have undergone
)a spiritual journey to get here, we are insiders and you are
)outsiders - and it is of course one of the things that makes a
)religion a religion!
I didnt give any advice, just tried as best I could to answer your
question in a hurry and give some indication as to were you can read
more about it, if as I asumed, your interested.
I=B4m not defending Steiner and I do not consider myself to be above or
below worldly debates.
Im rather humble about what knowledge or understanding I might have,
and I do not presume anything about yours.
I wrote:
))By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
))methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
))the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
and Diana answered:
)This reification of "thinking" is one of the things I find scariest
)about anthroposophy - this idea that by observing your own mental
)processes (or Steiner's, really; it seems actually to be a process
)of trying to get the contents of your own mind to match Steiner's),
)you are somehow getting to some objective reality about the world.
Well, I consider thinking and rethinking an important part of the
scietific process, ie somehow getting to some objective reality about
the world.
Peace
Per Hallstrom
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:39:24 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
Diana wrote:
)It's too much to ask because it's a *religion*. It's "revealed"
)truth. It's the whole package or nothing, an anthroposophist can't
)go picking and choosing which parts make sense and which don't. If
)it were just somebody's theory, there would be no problem chucking
)out the outdated parts or the parts that clearly make trouble. If it
)doesn't make sense, they go on trying to get more spiritual,
)meditate more, until it does make sense. Or else they pretend it
)makes sense, for fear of ostracism.
No, its science, or it is not anthroposophy at all.
Rudolph Steiners sayings and writings are only valid to me as far as
I can validate them myself. To that extent he is no different than
other people.
There is no "whole package" you can buy or take on, anymore than
there is science on the whole.
When things do not make sense to me, in science reports, I either try
to improve my understanding, my knowledge in the field in question,
or I consider them as weird. Weird to me means hard to comprehend,
not verified, possibly mistaken and maybe utterly wrong.
Ostracism? Where I come from that is something we fight when it shows up.
peace
Per Hallstrom
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:05:52 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
)Could you explain the more specific criteria you use in
)considering the article to be on-topic on this list?
Cult news.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:16:29 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Terry, you wrote,
)Recently I wrote to ask about Anthroposophy as a religion. Only Per Hallstrom
)responded directly to my inquiry. Others seemed to be just continuing some
)internal debate with each other.
Different threads can go on simultaneously.
)I am the father of a five year old girl who's mother enrolled her in the
)Waldorf School in Lexington MA. Over the course of the past several months I
)have become increasingly alarmed that the "school" is actually some kind of
)relgious cult, more interested in concerning themselves with my daughter's
)spiritual development!
You're right.
)This concerns me because 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with
)my child's spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
)undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development without my
)knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would be so deceptive and
)manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda without being up-front
)about that agenda.
That's exactly why this mailing list exists. You have pointed out the
main ethical problem with Waldorf education. There are other problems
(bad science, crackpot development theory, etc.) but you're on to a
biggie.
)As a new-comer to this list, it would be helpful to me if others would also
)reveal their bias.
)
)And again, are their objective/neutral entities which have designated
)Anthroposophy as a religion?
Some encyclopedias and dictionaries do.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:35:31 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
Luke Schelly, you wrote,
)FYI
) Heres the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia
)Britannica:
)
)anthroposophy,
) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the
)ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf
)Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who
)postulated a spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but
)fully accessible only to the faculties of knowledge latent in all
)human beings. He regarded human beings as having originally
)participated in the spiritual process of the world through a
)dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed that an enhanced
)consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to
)develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of the
)senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in
)1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches
)around the world.
)
)Is every philosophy a religion?
By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a
religious activity by the U.S. courts.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:37:07 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: oops didnot delete digest format
At 11:28 AM -0800 2/9/01, Luke Schelly wrote:
)I think I forgot to delete the rest of the digest format when I
)posted my last post. Please delete it if you are going to respond
)to my post.
)
)Sorry
If you're going to participate in the discussion, you'll find
subscribing in the single messages mode more convenient.
-Dan Dugan
Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 06:53:54 EST
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
Subject: Re: Up-front school
--part1_b9.b55abb5.27b685d2_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sune,
Is your post, that the Lexington Waldorf School has a website on which it
indicates its affiliation with the national association, meant to be an
adequate substitute for an honest, frank, up-front discussion with
prospective parents about the "school's" real intent? If so, that is
pathetic.
--part1_b9.b55abb5.27b685d2_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Bookman Old Style" LANG="0")Sune,
(BR)
(BR)Is your post, that the Lexington Waldorf School has a website on which it
(BR)indicates its affiliation with the national association, meant to be an
(BR)adequate substitute for an honest, frank, up-front discussion with
(BR)prospective parents about the "school's" real intent? If so, that is
(BR)pathetic.(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_b9.b55abb5.27b685d2_boundary--
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 155
-- Topica Digest --
Re: FW: "Aryans" and "Semites"
By winters_diana hotmail.com
RE: (Luke) Is anthroposophy a religion?
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: Up-front school
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
US courts say: 'The philosophy of Hegel is a religion' ?
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Alliance for childhood
By snell netshel.net
RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: Up-front school
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: old discussion I
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: old discussion I (childhood illess)
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: old discussion II
By hardorp gmx.net
Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: US courts say: 'The philosophy of Hegel is a religion' ?
By koala noos.fr
where eyes are opened
By momof2gals mindspring.com
Re: LISA & TERRY POSTS
By firefly tpg.com.au
Re: where eyes are opened
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: Anthroposophy as religion
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: old discussion II
By Sune.Nordwall home.se
Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By Speckraybill aol.com
Re: old discussion I
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
By winters_diana hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 12:20:59 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: FW: "Aryans" and "Semites"
[Luke on the debate over whether races exist:]
)The 1998 Encyclopedia Britanica states: (SNIP) and
)Please remember, if you differ with this you differ with the )encyclopedia
)not necessaraly me. Please keep your responses to the )point that the book
)makes as I am not the author of this just the )typist who brought it
LOL. Luke, I don't have time this weekend to respond to your post to me
about the definition of religion and whether anthroposophy meets it, though
I will soon. I am just finding it funny that you are posting an encyclopedia
definition on this topic and insisting that we respect it, and on the other
question, the dictionary definition is not good enough for you.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:05:10 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: (Luke) Is anthroposophy a religion?
Luke, never mind a long retort, or your absurd claim that public education
also is a "religion" according to the dictionary definition I posted. The
gist of your clever argument is apparently that anything, or everything, is
a religion. There would be nothing to differentiate a religious school from
a nonreligious school. I don't think the US courts are going to see it that
way.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:35:02 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
))I wrote:
)) ) By anthroposophy being a scientific endeavor I mean, as a first
)) ) methodical step, to use the method of natural science but widening
)) ) the field of experience to encompass the experience of thinking.
)
)Ray wrote:
)Please elaborate. I have no idea what you are talking about.
)Thanks,
)Ray
Scientific studies of nature are made primarily through observing
given perceptions (sense perceptions and feelings) and then relating
the perceptions to one ad another by the process of thinking.
This thinking process is not there without our doing, in same sense
as the other given perceptions.
But when we have done it, done some thinking, we can observe our own
thought process, and thereby improve it for instance.
It becomes part of the world we can perceive and thereby accessible
to science, if we like.
Per Hallstrom
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:07:33 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: Up-front school
Terry Tirrell wrote:
) Sune,
) Is your post, that the Lexington Waldorf School has a website on
) which it indicates its affiliation with the national association,
) meant to be an adequate substitute for an honest, frank, up-front
) discussion with prospective parents about the "school's" real intent?
No. The first sentence of the quote from the home page of the school was
not my point. The third sentence of the 'Statement of Mission' of the
school was.
You had written:
) 1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with my child's
) spiritual development, 2) I am disturbed that a school would
) undertake to concern itself with my child's spiritual development
) without my knowledge, and 3) I am disturbed that a school would
) be so deceptive and manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious
) agenda without being up-front about that agenda.
Looking at the home page of the school, which I hypothesize has a
counterpart in a brochure in some form produced by the school to
describe itself to interested parents, it says since at least 26 March
last year:
'... we base our work on the research and insights of Rudolf Steiner.
His understanding of the individual as a spiritual being developing over
time is the foundation of Waldorf Education.
It is our task to understand and to develop his indications for this
time and place.'
Putting that on the home page of the school, and as possible implication
also in a brochure produced for the prospective parents of children at
the school, I think does not fully correspond to your description of the
school not being up-front on the basis and the agenda of the school, in
its view of the pupils as spiritual beings developing over time, and
viewing it as the task of the school to support the pupils in their
development from this perspective.
To the extent that not has been made or is not clear to your daughter's
mother, who you say enrolled your daughter in the school, and if you
agree or disagree in your views of the school is not clear from your
postings.
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:55:33 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: US courts say: 'The philosophy of Hegel is a religion' ?
Dan Dugan wrote:
) Luke Schelly, you wrote,
)
) )FYI
) ) Heres the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia
) )Britannica:
) )
) )anthroposophy,
) ) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the
) )ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf
) )Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who
) )postulated a spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but
) )fully accessible only to the faculties of knowledge latent in all
) )human beings. He regarded human beings as having originally
) )participated in the spiritual process of the world through a
) )dreamlike consciousness. Because Steiner claimed that an enhanced
) )consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to
) )develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of the
) )senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in
) )1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches
) )around the world.
) )
) )Is every philosophy a religion?
DD:
) By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a
) religious activity by the U.S. courts.
If the description of anthroposophy as given by the Encyclopedia
Britannica would make U.S. courts classify anthroposophy as a religious
activity, they would probably have to do the same with the philosophy of
Hegel, coming to the conclusion by the pure inner activity of a
developed thinking that the evolution of the world is an expression of
the World Spirit becoming aware of itself through man.
Judging the philosophy of Hegel to be a religion would probably be
disputed by most philosophers.
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:50:09 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Alliance for childhood
)From another list:
-ds
http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/play/index.htm
This coming May, 20 experts in different areas of child
development will attend a consultancy at Columbia
University for
a strategy building session on the importance of
play, the arts, and
creativity in children?s lives. The consultancy is
sponsored by the
Center for the Study of the Spiritual Foundations
of Education at
Teachers College, Columbia University in
conjunction with the
Alliance.
Experts around the world attest to the importance
of unstructured
play, yet it has become a grossly undervalued
activity in
preschools, kindergartens, and elementary schools.
Play is a
critical activity of childhood and, research shows,
can contribute to
significant gains in language and social skills.
The Alliance looks
forward to working with others to foster play and
creativity as part
of a healthy childhood.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:32:10 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
--============_-1230295886==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
)Dan commented the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998
)encyclodepia Britannica:
)
)anthroposophy,
) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the
)ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf
)Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who
)postulated a spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but
)fully accessible only to the faculties of knowledge latent in all
)human beings. He regarded human beings as having originally
)participated in the spiritual process of the world through a
)dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed that an enhanced
)consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to
)develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of the
)senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in
)1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches
)around the world.
)
)Is every philosophy a religion? (Luke Schelly asks)
)
)Dan Dugan comments:
)By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a
)religious activity by the U.S. courts.
And I wonder: do you know that for a fact Dan, or is just your own
court ruling.
Peace and science
Per Hallstrom
--============_-1230295886==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
(!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN")
(html)(head)(style type="text/css")(!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--)(/style)(title)RE: Is anthroposophy a
religion?(/title)(/head)(body)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)Dan commented the explanation of
Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia Britannica:(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)(br)(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)(b)anthroposophy(/b),(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite) philosophy based on the premise
that the human intellect has the ability to contact spiritual worlds.
It was formulated by Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philosopher,
scientist, and artist, who postulated a spiritual world comprehensible
to pure thought but fully accessible only to the faculties of
knowledge latent in all human beings. He regarded human beings
as having originally participated in the spiritual process of the
world through a dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed
that an enhanced consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he
attempted to develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of
the senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical
Society in 1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has
branches around the world.(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)(br)(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)Is every philosophy a religion? (Luke
Schelly asks)(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)(br)(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)Dan Dugan comments:(/blockquote)
(blockquote type="cite" cite)By this definition alone, Anthroposophy
would be classified as a religious activity by the U.S.
courts.(/blockquote)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)And I wonder: do you know that for a fact Dan, or is just your
own court ruling.(/div)
(div)(br)(/div)
(div)Peace and science(/div)
(div)Per Hallstrom(/div)
(/body)
(/html)
--============_-1230295886==_ma============--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 12:50:42 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: Re: Up-front school
) THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3064654242_57335_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Terry, I could not agree more. So what if a web site (or pamphlet, for that
matter?) mentions the words "Rudolf Steiner" or "Anthroposophy"? I assert
that doing so IS NOT ENOUGH.
Anthroposophy is not even defined in most dictionaries .... Can't the
schools do better than that?! Or don't they want to ....???
Lisa
----------
From: TTirrell1 aol.com
To: waldorf-critics topica.com
Subject: Re: Up-front school
Date: Sat, Feb 10, 2001, 7:54 AM
Sune,
Is your post, that the Lexington Waldorf School has a website on which it
indicates its affiliation with the national association, meant to be an
adequate substitute for an honest, frank, up-front discussion with
prospective parents about the "school's" real intent? If so, that is
pathetic. ____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
--MS_Mac_OE_3064654242_57335_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
(HTML)
(HEAD)
(TITLE)Re: Up-front school(/TITLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#FFFFFF")
Terry, I could not agree more. So what if a web site (or pamphlet, for that=
matter?) mentions the words "Rudolf Steiner" or "Anthroposop=
hy"? I assert that doing so IS NOT ENOUGH.(BR)
(BR)
Anthroposophy is not even defined in most dictionaries .... Can't the=
schools do better than that?! Or don't they want to ....???(BR)
(BR)
Lisa(BR)
(BR)
----------(BR)
From: TTirrell1 aol.com(BR)
To: waldorf-critics topica.com(BR)
Subject: Re: Up-front school(BR)
Date: Sat, Feb 10, 2001, 7:54 AM(BR)
(BR)
(BR)
(BLOCKQUOTE)(FONT SIZE=3D"2")Sune, (BR)
(BR)
Is your post, that the Lexington Waldorf School has a website on whic=
h it (BR)
indicates its affiliation with the national association, meant to be an (BR=
)
adequate substitute for an honest, frank, up-front discussion with (BR)
prospective parents about the "school's" real intent? If so=
, that is (BR)
pathetic.(/FONT) __________________________________________________________=
__(BR)
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less. (BR)
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.(BR)
(FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF")(U)http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01(/U)(/FONT) (BR=
)
(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(/BODY)
(/HTML)
--MS_Mac_OE_3064654242_57335_MIME_Part--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:02:23 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
Dan Dugan wrote commenting on the question:
) )Could you explain the more specific criteria you use in
) )considering the article to be on-topic on this list?
)
) Cult news.
Minister of Unitarian church, a religious missionary arm of the secular
humanist movement, arrested for trespassing in a Baptist church,
protesting accusation by Baptist minister calling members of Thompson's
Unitarian church pagan worshipers of the devil.
http://www.reporternews.com/texas/reltrial0520.html
*******************************************************
BEAUMONT, Texas (AP) -- Legal, not religious, issues are at the heart of
a trial in which a Unitarian minister is accused of trespassing in a
Baptist church to protest claims that his followers are
devil-worshipers, a judge has told jurors.
The trial of the Rev. Michael Thompson continued Tuesday with Unitarian
supporters on one side of the courtroom and Baptists on the other.
Thompson was arrested nearly two years ago after he interrupted a
Baptist minister at an anti-occult seminar after the minister called
members of Thompson's church pagan worshipers of the devil.
Thompson was carried out of the seminar at the Highland Avenue Baptist
Church and charged with misdemeanor trespassing.
"Moral, ethical and religious issues will not be settled here," County
Court-at-Law Judge John Paul Davis told jurors as the trial began
Monday. "This is not the place we settle those issues, if they can be
settled at all."
But to those involved, the issue is clearly one of religion.
Citing constitutional protections of free speech and religion, Thompson
insists he had the right to speak out and refute the charge that members
of his church worshiped the devil.
The Rev. Dennis Rozell, pastor at Highland Avenue Baptist Church, agrees
the case represents a freedom of speech issue. However, he says it was
his freedom that was violated.
Prosecutor John Ross questioned witnesses about the incident Monday and
quickly rested his case. Defense lawyer David Gerger was to present
witnesses on Thompson's behalf Tuesday.
Thompson was arrested on July 18, 1996, after he refused to leave the
seminar. He claimed he was invited to the gathering, which was in
response to an incident the previous May in which children encountered
members of a pagan group behind the Unitarian church.
Thompson interrupted Rozell's opening comments and was asked to be
quiet. When he refused, Rozell asked law enforcement officers in the
sanctuary to escort Thompson out.
Witnesses said Thompson dropped to his knees and refused to leave.
As officers carried him out of the sanctuary, Rozell led visitors in the
hymn, "Victory for Jesus."
*******************************************************
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:21:09 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
--part1_4d.749d2a0.27b6e095_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The local Waldorf school (in my area) is housed in the UU Church.
Paula
--part1_4d.749d2a0.27b6e095_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")The local Waldorf school (in my area) is housed in the UU Church.
(BR)Paula
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_4d.749d2a0.27b6e095_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:46:22 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
Diana wrote:
)Snip-
)Here's the definition of "religion" from the Random House College
)Dictionary, easiest to hand at the moment:
)
)"1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of
)the universe, esp. when
) considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or
)agencies, usually involving devotional
) and ritual observances and often having a moral code for the
)conduct of human affairs.
)2. a specific and institutionalized set of beliefs and practices
)generally agreed upon by a number
) of persons or sects; the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
)3. the body of persons or institutions adhering to a set of
)religious beliefs and practices: a
) world council of religions
)4. a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and
)practices: to get religion
)5. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion
)6. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
)
)7. a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of
)fighting prejudice [ital] 8.
) religions, Archaic. religious rites. 9. Archaic, strict
)faithfulness; devotion: a religion
) to one's vow"
)
)and Diana added:
)Which of these definitions does anthroposophy *not* meet? For
)definitions 1-3 it seems indisputable to me.
)
)Arguments can be made for most of the other definitions, too (e.g.,
)many Waldorf teachers approach their teaching as if they were
)"entering religion" the way a nun or monk does, and new converts to
)Waldorf certainly often act as if they have just "gotten religion.")
)Diana
And then I reply:
Anthroposophy is no belief and no set of beliefs. It is a pursuit of
a widened scientific understanding of the world. (by widening the
field of observation so that it also includes primary perceptions
like feelings, artistic consideration and thought processes, and by
also using learning by doing-like methods)
Sayings and writings by Rudolph Steiner and others are considered
interesting by some people, but they are not beliefs.
and I quote from the
Statutes of the General Anthroposophical Society
1. The Anthroposophical Society is to be an association of people
whose will is to nurture the life of the soul, both in the individual
and in human society, on the basis of a true knowledge of the
spiritual world.
2. The persons gathered at the Goetheanum in Dornach at Christmas,
1923, both the individuals and the groups represented, form the
nucleus of the Society. They are convinced that there exists in our
time a genuine science of the spiritual world, elaborated for years
past, and in important particulars already published; and that the
civilization of today is lacking the cultivation of such a science.
This cultivation is to be the task of the Anthroposophical Society.
It will endeavour to fulfill this task by making the Anthroposophical
Spiritual Science cultivated at the Goetheanum in Dornach the centre
of its activities, together with all that results form this for
brotherhood in human relationships and for the moral and religious as
well as the artistic and cultural life.[1]
3. The persons gathered in Dornach as the nucleus of the Society
recognize and endorse the view of the leadership at the Goetheanum
(represented by the Vorstand [Executive Council] formed at the
Foundation Meeting): "Anthroposophy, as fostered at the Goetheanum,
leads to results which can serve every human being as a stimulus to
spiritual life, whatever his nation, social standing or religion.
They can lead to a social life genuinely built on brotherly love. No
special degree of academic learning is required to make them one's
own and to found one's life upon them, but only an open-minded human
nature. Research into these results, however, as well as competent
evaluation of them, depends upon spiritual-scientific training, which
is to be acquired step by step. These results are in their own way
as exact as the results of genuine natural science. When they attain
general recognition in the same way as these, they will bring about
comparable progress in all spheres of life, not only in the spiritual
but also in the practical realm."
4. The Anthroposophical Society is in no sense a secret society, but
is entirely public. Anyone can become a member, without regard to
nationality, social standing, religion, scientific or artistic
conviction, who considers as justified the existence of an
institution such as the Goetheanum in Dornach, in its capacity as a
School of Spiritual Science. The Anthroposophical Society rejects
any kind of sectarian activity. Party politics it considers not to
be within its task.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:27:15 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:48:06 -0500
Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
[Chris]
I was relying here on Peter Staudenmaier's description of Steiner's
involvement with the German nationalist movement in Austria in the
1890s. He laid out that involvement (including Steiner's writing for
various nationalist papers and publications) in some detail. Since
no one challenged or disputed his information, I took it to be
reasonably reliable. If you feel he was wrong I would be interested
to hear your perspective on it.
D.H.: Peter S. manages to give impressions that have absolutely nothing to =
do with reality. He is constantly disseminating desinformation on this =
list. Fact is that Steiner did not write for a single nationalist paper or =
publication. He loathed nationalism and always spoke out against it. =
Since Steiner _did_ write for a variety of papers and reviews, it is very =
easy for somebody to come along and simply claim that they were =
nationalist. Should that claim have been made on this list: it is simply =
not true. And since almost nobody on this list has much of an overview =
over papers in Austria a century ago, you can get away with the most absurd =
claims - if you are brash enough. Peter S. - in his next incarnation - =
will convince the die-hard waldorf critics of the 22nd century that Dan =
Dugan proselytised anthroposophy. Proof: the waldorf critics archives, =
were Dan posted lots of Steiner quotes. The fact that Dan posted them =
exclusively to dispute Steiner will be conveniently left out of the =
picture, since that would not serve the purpose of proving that Dan Dugan =
proselytised anthroposophy. That is the way Staudenmaier is constantly =
turning facts of history on their head.
[Chris]
)I may be misunderstanding something, but it seems to me that you have
described two *different* ways of using the term here. I do not see how
one can view the theosophical use of the term and the modern dictionary
definition as the same thing. If I am understanding you and Sune =
correctly,
you are saying that the theosophists used the term to cover an =
entire(immense) "cultural epoch" covering everything from the last =
glaciation
to the present day.
DH: You're right, it is used in two ways. Since the one you just described =
is obviously a misnomer, Steiner stopped calling it that very early on.
)Which raises another question, actually. If the "Aryan race" is really a
term for the "cultural epoch" which covers all of known recorded
history, then just where *do* the Chinese and other East Asian
civilizations fit in?
DH: Steiner sometimes makes the remark that he's primarily talking about =
the development of Western civilization. For Asia, things look very =
differently and it would be wrong to subsume them under the same umbrella. =
But he never actually gives this very different description (as far as I =
know).
)I am also troubled by Steiner's use of the term "degeneration". One
does not normally speak of the "degeneration" of the Roman people
when discussing the decline and fall of their empire. That would seem
to imply that modern Italians are something less than their Roman
forebears.
DH: No! Because Italian culture is something new, not just a product of =
Roman culture. When people get old, their body can degenerate and =
eventually die. Those are the facts of life, and old people know the =
realities of this degeneration well. In American culture, people don't =
like to face death and degeneration. The eternal teenager is sought after. =
But it doesn't exist.
And just like people come and go (i.e. get born and die), so it is with =
cultures. Latin died together with the Roman empire and Ceasarian culure. =
Sure, it influenced the new cultures of Italy and France in its dying =
throngs. In fact it still lives on as a corpse in much of jurisprudence. =
But if you look at Quadrocentro Florence, you see the birth of a new =
culture, of a new historical epoch, of a new consciousness, right in the =
midst of what once was the Roman empire. Bruneleschi, Alberti, Leonardo, =
Raffael etc.: through them a new epoch becomes reality and redirects the =
sense of reality as far as Western civilisation is concerned.
Detlef Hardorp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:27:38 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: old discussion I (childhood illess)
On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:59:29 -0500
Chris Brostrup-Jensen (C_Brostrup-Jensen brown.edu)
[Chris]
)I was quite struck by that phrase, "childhood illness", used by Steiner to
describe his use of the theosophical race language in early =
anthroposophical
writings. A childhood illness, even more in Steiner's day than now, is=20
essentially
an act of God. It happens to one through no fault of one's own other than
the simple human act of associating with others who are infected. There
is no element of individual choice or responsibility involved. =20
DH: That is not the connotation it has to me. I hear Steiner saying: "I =
should have rejected this terminology earlier. I regret that I didn't. If =
I had had more foresight and more maturity, I would have rejected it =
earlier. It was an illness in the childhood of our anthroposophical =
movement, coming from the influence of that theosophical nanny."
Detlef Hardorp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:27:59 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:05:52 -0800
Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
)Cult news.
A cult: a group of people who share increasingly paranoid ideas. They =
often define themselves by opposition to some real or imagined enemy, who =
must be overcome by all imaginable means, including law suits and the =
sowing of desinformation. A small number of programmers set the tone with =
potent sound bites, luring in new members. This gradually forms a basis of =
common belief within the cult, whose members spend increasing amounts of =
time engaged in cult activities (which are nowadays often networked through =
the internet and email hate groups), sometimes leading to sleep deprivation
Welcome to waldorf-critics. Here you can get "clear" of all those =
treacherous lies you fell for before your eyes were opened to the terrible =
truth about waldorf and anthroposophy.
-Detlef Hardorp=
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:27:49 +0100
From: Detlef Hardorp (hardorp gmx.net)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:18:24 -0600
Mr. Staudenmaier forgets that we've been through this before:
[Sune: Steiner]
) stopped using the theosophical improper terminology of 'root races' and
) 'sub races' before writing 'Occult science - an outline' in 1909 and
) before holding the lectures on 'The mission of folk souls' in relation
) to Nordic mythology in 1910, that you grossly misrepresent in your
) article at the site of PLANS.
)P.St.: How does my article misrepresent those lectures? Here is the =
entirety of
what I wrote about them there:=20
)"The lecture was titled "The Mission of=20
European National Souls in Relation to Nordic-Germanic Mythology." In the
Oslo lecture and throughout his Norwegian tour Steiner presented his theory
of "national souls" (Volksseelen in German, Steiner's native tongue) and
paid particular attention to the mysterious wonders of the "Nordic spirit."
The "national souls" of Northern and Central Europe were, Steiner
explained, components of the "germanic-nordic sub-race," the world's most
spiritually advanced ethnic group, which was in turn the vanguard of the
highest of five historical "root races." This superior fifth root race,
Steiner told his Oslo audience, was naturally the "Aryan race.""
DH: Mr. Staudenmaier, this is a gross distortion, because Steiner does not =
write about the
)"germanic-nordic sub-race," as the world's most
spiritually advanced ethnic group,
Nor does he claim
) which was in turn the vanguard of the
highest of five historical "root races."
No "highest" in Steiner's book.
) This superior fifth root race,
Steiner told his Oslo audience, was naturally the "Aryan race.""
The word "superior" was brought to you by your sponsor: the highly =
imaginative figment of Peter Staudenmaier's phantasies.
There are some honest critics on this list. But much of what happens on =
this list has the quality of a well-oiled propaganda machine of a hate =
group, pouncing on a minority. Historical precedents exist ...
)What do you dispute in that paragraph? Also, you say that Steiner "stopped
using" the root-race terminology before he gave these lectures. What on
earth are you talking about? The sixth of those lectures is titled "The
Five Root Races of Mankind". Detlef made the same preposterous claim last
year. Are we talking about two different books here?
DH: Peter S.,we've been through this before several times. You read =
German, you should know better by now. The German concept Steiner uses in =
Oslo is NOT "Wurzelrasse", but "Haupt-" and "Grundrasse". This was =
MISTRANSLATED as root-race by an incompetent translator.
"Wurzelrasse" is the theosophical vocabulary Steiner unequivocally =
distances himself from, because it is a misnomer. That does not mean he =
stops using the concept of "race" in its normal sense. Steiner speaks =
about 5 or 6 "Haupt-" or "Grundrasse" (main races) in Oslo in a terminology =
that Sune discovered verbatim in an American high school book of the time. =
Well, folks, did Steiner infiltrate American Education in 1910? It is =
rather more likely that he was simply repeating the standard view on races =
of the day. Got it? Please store it your hard-drive and make a backup.
Detlef Hardorp
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:50:26 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
Per, please turn off HTML when you send your messages...some emailers may have
trouble displaying embedded HTML
...Gary
Per Hallstr–m wrote:
)) Dan commented the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia
)) Britannica:
)
))
)
)) anthroposophy,
)
)) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the ability
)) to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf Steiner, an
)) Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who postulated a spiritual
)) world comprehensible to pure thought but fully accessible only to the
)) faculties of knowledge latent in all human beings. He regarded human beings
)) as having originally participated in the spiritual process of the world
)) through a dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed that an enhanced
)) consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to develop a
)) faculty for spiritual perception independent of the senses. Toward this end
)) he founded the Anthroposophical Society in 1912. The society, now based in
)) Dornach, Switz., has branches around the world.
)
))
)
)) Is every philosophy a religion? (Luke Schelly asks)
)
))
)
)) Dan Dugan comments:
)
)) By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a religious
)) activity by the U.S. courts.
)
) And I wonder: do you know that for a fact Dan, or is just your own court
) ruling. Peace and sciencePer Hallstrom
)
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:26:48 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
Diana Winters wrote, two weeks ago:
) [Sune:]
) )Then, having understood what 'ether body' and 'astral body' are after
) )reading and having thought about it in 5 minutes, maybe you have a
) )comment on what still can be found at the site of waldorfcritics after )5
) )years(?) as the summary of Dan's understanding of it, after studied )it as
) )'a hobby' for now 10(?) years, and that constitutes one of his )main basis'
) )for critisizing it as a 'crackpot theory':
)
) )'Steiner's theory of child development, [is] based on reincarnation of
) )*the etheric body,* *the astral body,* and *the I* ' ?
Diana:
) I do agree with you that whoever wrote the above (Dan?) did not get it
) straight on which of the four "members" of "man" are reincarnated. I think
) it's only supposed to be the "I," right? You don't take along your physical,
) ether, or astral bodies to your next incarnation. Dan was wrong! Wrong!
) Wrong! Dan must not understand anthroposophy after all!!! Whew!
It does not seem your understanding (after 5 minutes?) of the untruth of
what has been on PLANS' site for 5 years(?) as its basic untrue
description of the basis of waldorf education as
*... Steiner's theory of child development [is] based on reincarnation
of "the etheric body," "the astral body," and "the I" *
has impressed the editor of the page and moderator of this list much
yet, still being there after the last update of the page.
It is about as true as saying:
* ... Steiner's theory of child development, based on the view that man
brings his left foot along through his repeated lives on Earth, ....*
An at least more true version would possibly be, from PLANS'
perspective, if PLANS wants to argue that:
* ... Steiner's theory of child development, based on his alleged
understanding of man as a spiritual being, reincarnating through
repeated lives on Earth and his development through three 7-year periods
from birth to adulthood, differs significantly from the consensus of
child development specialists.* and linking it to the the page Neil has
set up at http://www.jlc.net/~faiman/waldorf/handbook_philosophy.html
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 22:17:28 +0100
From: (koala noos.fr)
Subject: Re: US courts say: 'The philosophy of Hegel is a religion' ?
Sune Nordwall10/02/01 17:56Sune.Nordwall home.se
) Dan Dugan wrote:
)
)) Luke Schelly, you wrote,
))
))) FYI
))) Heres the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998 encyclodepia
))) Britannica:
)))
))) anthroposophy,
))) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the
))) ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf
))) Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who
))) postulated a spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but
))) fully accessible only to the faculties of knowledge latent in all
))) human beings. He regarded human beings as having originally
))) participated in the spiritual process of the world through a
))) dreamlike consciousness. Because Steiner claimed that an enhanced
))) consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to
))) develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of the
))) senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in
))) 1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches
))) around the world.
)))
))) Is every philosophy a religion?
)
) DD:
)) By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a
)) religious activity by the U.S. courts.
)
) If the description of anthroposophy as given by the Encyclopedia
) Britannica would make U.S. courts classify anthroposophy as a religious
) activity, they would probably have to do the same with the philosophy of
) Hegel, coming to the conclusion by the pure inner activity of a
) developed thinking that the evolution of the world is an expression of
) the World Spirit becoming aware of itself through man.
Through a man of which sub-race ?
Just to see if I ever have a chance to reach that stage or if I fit in the
picture.
When we knee, we'd better check the feet we are about to kiss... By
screening for instance ?
koala.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:53:38 -0400
From: "Lisa Ercolano" (momof2gals mindspring.com)
Subject: where eyes are opened
Our old friend Detlef says:
((Welcome to waldorf-critics. Here you can get "clear" of all those
treacherous lies you fell for before your eyes were opened to the terrible
truth about waldorf and anthroposophy.))
Lisa: The flaw in your attempt at what I assume was satire is that Waldorf
critics *is* where one's eyes can be opened to what, for many, *is* the
"terrible truth": that an educational approach that promised to be
arts-based and progressive was actually a rigid, controlling, and thus
non-artistic system where the word "education" has little to do with the
human intellect and everything to do with an Austrian guru's idea of human
spiritual development.
Participating on this list -- and doing research elsewhere, reading
Steiner yourself, etc. -- *are*, in fact, a few of the ways that parents can
learn what Waldorf is really about, which is ANTHROPOSOPHY. The other way to
learn this is to enroll your child in a Waldorf school and learn by
experience. Unfortunately, for those of us who are not Anthroposophers or
whose worldviews are not in sympathy with Steiner's, that "learning by
doing" often comes at our childrens' -- and our families' -- expense (both
in terms of money and emotional costs. Not to mention the cost in terms of
lost education for the children.)
We seem to go round and round with the same discussions on this list
year after year. Increasingly, I find it difficult to understand why, if
Waldorf educators think *their* approach is so wonderful, so wholesome and
so wholistic, they don't just tell parents up front that Waldorf schools are
the parochial schools of Anthroposophy.
Be like the Catholic or Jewish day schools who put their religious
orientation and approach up front.
That way, those of us who do not believe that our children have etheric
or astral bodies and who *do* believe that children can think abstractly
before age 14 and should be challenged academically beginning in first grade
(or in some cases, a bit younger), will just stay away.
What could be simpler?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:14:22 +1100
From: "firefly mail" (firefly tpg.com.au)
Subject: Re: LISA & TERRY POSTS
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C09413.6733A060
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lisa,=20
I found your response to Terry's recent posting very interesting for a =
number of reasons. I think the only way I can respond is by taking each =
statement and offer my opinion (in blue). Firstly I'd like to make a few =
comments about Terry's original posting.
Terry stated:
1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with my child's spiritual =
development.
But many parents do. Whether it is alternative or conventional ie =
schools of a particular religious persuasion. If you don't want a =
spiritual/religious input then that is your choice.
2) I am disturbed that a school would undertake to concern itself with =
my child's spiritual development
without my knowledge.
Was your wife not aware of this? Was this not discussed between you and =
your wife? Did you not investigate before sending your child there? =
Maybe you are separated?
3) I am disturbed that a school would be so
deceptive and manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda =
without
being up-front about that agenda.=20
Personally I thought this was quite obvious from the literature I had =
read even though I wasn't au fait with Anthroposophy. Admittedly, my son =
started a Steiner school aged 13 with a number of children from =
mainstream schools. I haven't had much exposure to the primary years but =
I am observing more.=20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
Lisa responds:
"Unfortunately, it seems that that kind of full disclosure is *not* =
happening at many schools, leaving parents to discover what I would call =
the school's "true nature" after the child is already there, settled, =
has made friends, etc."
Following on from my last comment I really can't understand how =
prospective parents couldn't see that Steiner schools offered something =
completely different. I found the environment & the children's work in =
sharp contrast to other public & private schools I had experienced or =
visited. There were so many clues & unique approaches to learning that I =
would have had to have been a complete fool not to have noticed.=20
I agree as I have met many parents who have sent their children to a =
particular school only to become disenchanted (with the teachers, =
bullying etc) and have to withdraw them. It is a sad consequence for the =
children.=20
"Be clear about one thing (and I know that the Waldorf advocates are =
gonna
jump all over me for this, but here goes!): almost everything at a =
Waldorf
school is based upon Steiner's spiritual science religion, called =
Anthroposophy. "
Even though I wasn't familiar with 'Anthroposophy' I certainly =
understood that the school was based on Steiner philosophies. The onus, =
I felt was on me to learn what this meant. Hence one of the reasons for =
joining this list.
"That means that Anthroposophy dictates things large and
small, from what the children learn when to how they learn it to the =
colors
of the classroom walls in each grade to what snacks the preschoolers are
given and on what days. (My daughter's preschool teacher -- and a number =
of
others I know -- wear certain colors on certain days of the week, =
depending
upon which "planet" is prominent in the Zodiac that day.)"
I'm not sure what to make of the Zodiac & dress codes but certainly =
'colour therapy' has been accepted into mainstream thinking for some =
time. I think we are all affected by colour or the lack of. My mood =
influences my choice of colour! Basing one's wardrobe on planetary =
positions may be silly superstitious nonsense but I really don't see it =
does any harm.
As for the food thing, well as I said my son didn't attend pre/primary =
years but I am delighted that his school doesn't have a =
'tuckshop/canteen' & encourages healthy choices and condemns junk food & =
all the environmentally damaging packaging! It's extra work for me but =
with the increase of conditions such as 'celiac disease' (and the effort =
these parents have to make) then it is a small sacrifice. Obesity is a =
huge problem here in Australia & the USA so healthy eating patterns are =
essential I think.=20
"Naturally, Waldorf schools do not advertise this essential fact. =
Instead of saying that they *really* believe it is better for a child =
*not* to learn to read until age 9 or so (Steiner would have preferred =
age 14, if he could
have gotten away with it!), Waldorf promoters contend that reading is =
introduced "gradually" and "gently."=20
)From what I had heard or read I knew Steiner schools had a different =
approach to education and reading. Someone once told me that Steiner =
school kids don't learn to read until they got their second teeth! At =
first I thought this sounded absurd. Educational techniques and =
philosophies have undergone a lot of changes in the past 15 years and =
the emphasis on phonics has taken precedence over sight reading because =
it didn't work for a lot of kids.=20
=20
Certainly with the seeming explosion of 'learning difficulties' in =
recent years I am all for a system that works. Some kids almost teach =
themselves to read at 4 whilst others struggle throughout their primary =
years with reading and spelling. Illiteracy in some developed countries =
is very alarming so at the end of the day as long as a child learns to =
read & write well & confidently there are no complaints from me as to =
the modis operandi.=20
"Of course, they don't mention that the child development model upon =
which
they base everything is Steiner's, and that *he* got it from his =
supposed
powers of clairvoyance. (Whether he was "clairvoyant" or not I don't =
know.
What I do know is that he pieced Anthroposophy together from a =
hodgepodge of
very, very old religions and spiritual paths, from Rosicrucianism and
Buddhism to hermeticism, Zoroastrianism, Theosophy, Christianity, and =
more.)"
Sorry but as I said if a school promotes itself as a 'Rudolf Steiner' =
school to me this implies that it IS modelled on his teachings. I wasn't =
aware (until I joined this list) that he drew from his 'powers of =
claivoyance'. I am starting to learn a little about the origins of his =
philosophies.
"The result is an education that is NOT the latest, progressive approach =
that
many parents believe it to be. In fact, when you buy Waldorf education, =
you
are actually buying something that, in parts, dates back to the Middle =
Ages!
(Consider the "Four Temperments" -- a system by which Waldorf teachers
classify children.)"
Before enrolling my son I had heard that Steiner was a 'progressive' =
educator in his time. I did not have any illusions about the school =
being the latest or most progessive learning environment. In fact I =
observed my son's school to be almost anachronistic, in a 70's time =
warp! I have little problem with a school drawing on the antiquities for =
some of its teachings. As I have already mentioned there have been some =
disastrous 'hit & miss' approaches to education in the past 20 years. My =
main concern is that my children are happy & learning and that this =
becomes a lifelong quest.
I can only assume teachers classify children all the time in any school. =
They probaly all have their own technique using astrology or psychology. =
To classify or 'label' is an instinctive thing it's what we do with that =
information and how we respond to different behaviours and personalities =
that it the important thing.=20
At the end of the day we are all concerned parents wanting the best for =
our children. Steiner works for some and not others. I certainly knew =
little about Waldorf Education and am still on a learning curve. It =
really comes down to freedom of choice. With the wealth of information =
offered on the internet (including this list) it makes it much easier =
for parents to make informed decisions about education and indeed many =
things.=20
I am surprised to read so many complaints about Steiner schools =
concealing their true nature. I only had to take a look in the =
classrooms to see that there was something very different going on. I =
also am able to ask questions and get answers. I might not agree with =
nor understand the rationale behind it all but I made a choice to try =
the system. If there is an attempt to conceal information from the =
parents it seems quite pointless.=20
Obviously to really understand Steiner/Anthro stuff requires a lot of =
research & much is available to this group. It is fascinating reading to =
follow some of the arguments in these threads but I think it is unfair =
to turn around and say I was hoodwinked because I have a wealth of =
information available at my fingertips.=20
With regards
Deb-Sydney-Australia
=20
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C09413.6733A060
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN")
(HTML)(HEAD)
(META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type)
(META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR)
(STYLE)(/STYLE)
(/HEAD)
(BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff)
(DIV)Lisa, (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)I found your response to Terry's recent posting very interesting =
for a=20
number of reasons. I think the only way I can respond is by taking =
each=20
statement and offer my opinion (in blue). Firstly I'd like to make a few =
comments about Terry's original posting.(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)Terry stated:(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)1) I don't look to a school to concern itself with my child's =
spiritual=20
development.(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)But many parents do. Whether it is =
alternative or=20
conventional ie schools of a particular religious persuasion(/FONT). =
(FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff)If you don't want a spiritual/religious input then that =
is your=20
choice.(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)2) I am disturbed that a school would undertake to concern =
itself with=20
my child's spiritual development(BR) without my knowledge.(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Was your wife not aware of this? Was this not =
discussed=20
between you and your wife? Did you not investigate before sending your =
child=20
there? Maybe you are separated?(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) 3) I am disturbed that a school would be =
so(BR) deceptive and=20
manipulative as to pursue a spiritual/religious agenda =
without(BR) being=20
up-front about that agenda. (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Personally I thought this was quite obvious =
from the=20
literature I had read even though I wasn't au fait with Anthroposophy.=20
Admittedly, my son started a Steiner school aged 13 with a number of =
children=20
from mainstream schools. I haven't had much exposure to the primary =
years but I=20
am observing more. (/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff)---------------------------------------------------------=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------------------(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)(/DIV)
(DIV)Lisa responds:(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)"Unfortunately, it seems that that kind of full disclosure=20
is *not* happening at many schools, leaving parents to =
discover what=20
I would call the school's "true nature" after the child is already =
there,=20
settled, has made friends, etc."(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Following on from my last comment I really =
can't=20
understand how prospective parents couldn't see that Steiner schools =
offered=20
something completely different. I found the environment & the =
children's=20
work in sharp contrast to other public & private schools I had =
experienced=20
or visited. There were so many clues & unique approaches to learning =
that I=20
would have had to have been a complete fool not to have noticed.=20
(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)I agree as I have met many parents who have =
sent their=20
children to a particular school only to become disenchanted (with the =
teachers,=20
bullying etc) and have to withdraw them. It is a sad consequence for the =
children. (/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) "Be clear about one thing (and I know that the Waldorf =
advocates are=20
gonna(BR) jump all over me for this, but here goes!): almost =
everything at=20
a Waldorf(BR) school is based upon Steiner's spiritual science =
religion,=20
called Anthroposophy. "(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Even though I wasn't familiar with =
'Anthroposophy' I=20
certainly understood that the school was based on Steiner philosophies. =
The=20
onus, I felt was on me to learn what this meant. Hence one of the =
reasons for=20
joining this list.(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)"That means that Anthroposophy dictates things large and(BR)small, =
from=20
what the children learn when to how they learn it to the colors(BR)of =
the=20
classroom walls in each grade to what snacks the preschoolers =
are(BR)given and=20
on what days. (My daughter's preschool teacher -- and a number =
of(BR)others I=20
know -- wear certain colors on certain days of the week, =
depending(BR)upon which=20
"planet" is prominent in the Zodiac that day.)"(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)I'm not sure what to make of the Zodiac & =
dress=20
codes but certainly 'colour therapy' has been accepted into mainstream =
thinking=20
for some time. I think we are all affected by colour or the lack of. My =
mood=20
influences my choice of colour! Basing one's wardrobe on planetary =
positions may=20
be silly superstitious nonsense but I really don't see it does any=20
harm.(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)As for the food thing, well as I said my =
son=20
didn't attend pre/primary years but I am delighted that his school =
doesn't have=20
a 'tuckshop/canteen' & encourages healthy choices and condemns junk =
food=20
& all the environmentally damaging packaging! It's extra work for me =
but=20
with the increase of conditions such as 'celiac disease' (and the effort =
these=20
parents have to make) then it is a small sacrifice. Obesity is a huge =
problem=20
here in Australia & the USA so healthy eating patterns are essential =
I=20
think. (BR)(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)"Naturally, Waldorf schools do not advertise this essential fact. =
Instead=20
of saying that they *really* believe it is better for a child *not* to =
learn to=20
read until age 9 or so (Steiner would have preferred age 14, if he =
could(BR)have=20
gotten away with it!), Waldorf promoters contend that reading =
is introduced=20
"gradually" and "gently." (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)From what I had heard or read I knew Steiner =
schools=20
had a different approach to education and reading. Someone once told me =
that=20
Steiner school kids don't learn to read until they got their second =
teeth! At=20
first I thought this sounded absurd. Educational techniques and =
philosophies=20
have undergone a lot of changes in the past 15 years and the emphasis on =
phonics=20
has taken precedence over sight reading because it didn't work for a lot =
of=20
kids. (/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)(/FONT) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Certainly with the seeming explosion of =
'learning=20
difficulties' in recent years I am all for a system that works. Some =
kids almost=20
teach themselves to read at 4 whilst others struggle throughout their =
primary=20
years with reading and spelling. Illiteracy in some developed countries =
is very=20
alarming so at the end of the day as long as a child learns to read =
& write=20
well & confidently there are no complaints from me as to the modis=20
operandi(/FONT). (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)"Of course, they don't mention that the child development model =
upon=20
which(BR) they base everything is Steiner's, and that *he* got it =
from his=20
supposed(BR) powers of clairvoyance. (Whether he was "clairvoyant" =
or not I=20
don't know.(BR) What I do know is that he pieced Anthroposophy =
together=20
from a hodgepodge of(BR) very, very old religions and spiritual =
paths, from=20
Rosicrucianism and(BR) Buddhism to hermeticism, Zoroastrianism, =
Theosophy,=20
Christianity, and more.)"(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Sorry but as I said if a school promotes =
itself as a=20
'Rudolf Steiner' school to me this implies that it IS modelled on his =
teachings.=20
I wasn't aware (until I joined this list) that he drew from his 'powers =
of=20
claivoyance'. I am starting to learn a little about the origins of his=20
philosophies.(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)"The result is an education that is NOT the latest, progressive =
approach=20
that(BR) many parents believe it to be. In fact, when you buy =
Waldorf=20
education, you(BR)are actually buying something that, in parts, dates =
back to=20
the Middle Ages!(BR)(Consider the "Four Temperments" -- a system by =
which=20
Waldorf teachers(BR) classify children.)"(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Before enrolling my son I had heard that =
Steiner was a=20
'progressive' educator in his time. I did not have any illusions about =
the=20
school being the latest or most progessive learning environment. In fact =
I=20
observed my son's school to be almost anachronistic, in a 70's time =
warp! I have=20
little problem with a school drawing on the antiquities for some of its=20
teachings. As I have already mentioned there have been some disastrous =
'hit=20
& miss' approaches to education in the past 20 years. My main =
concern is=20
that my children are happy & learning and that this becomes a =
lifelong=20
quest.(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)I can only assume teachers classify children =
all the=20
time in any school. They probaly all have their own technique using =
astrology or=20
psychology. To classify or 'label' is an instinctive thing it's what we =
do with=20
that information and how we respond to different behaviours and =
personalities=20
that it the important thing. (/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)At the end of the day we are all concerned =
parents=20
wanting the best for our children. Steiner works for some and not =
others. I=20
certainly knew little about Waldorf Education and am still on a learning =
curve.=20
It really comes down to freedom of choice. With the wealth of =
information=20
offered on the internet (including this list) it makes it much easier =
for=20
parents to make informed decisions about education and indeed many =
things.=20
(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)I am surprised to read so many complaints =
about Steiner=20
schools concealing their true nature. I only had to take a look in the=20
classrooms to see that there was something very different going on. I =
also am=20
able to ask questions and get answers. I might not agree with nor =
understand the=20
rationale behind it all but I made a choice to try the system. If =
there is=20
an attempt to conceal information from the parents it seems quite =
pointless.=20
(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Obviously to really understand Steiner/Anthro =
stuff=20
requires a lot of research & much is available to this group. It is=20
fascinating reading to follow some of the arguments in these threads but =
I think=20
it is unfair to turn around and say I was hoodwinked because I have a =
wealth of=20
information available at my fingertips. (/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)With regards(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV)(FONT color=3D#0000ff)Deb-Sydney-Australia(/FONT)(/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV) (/DIV)
(DIV)(BR)(BR) (/DIV)(/BODY)(/HTML)
------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C09413.6733A060--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 00:31:23 +0100
From: Per =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hallstr=F6m?= (Per.Hallstrom work.utfors.se)
Subject: Re: where eyes are opened
)Participating on this list -- and doing research elsewhere, reading
)Steiner yourself, etc. -- *are*, in fact, a few of the ways that parents can
)learn what Waldorf is really about, which is ANTHROPOSOPHY. The other way to
)learn this is to enroll your child in a Waldorf school and learn by
)experience. Unfortunately, for those of us who are not Anthroposophers or
)whose worldviews are not in sympathy with Steiner's, that "learning by
)doing" often comes at our childrens' -- and our families' -- expense (both
)in terms of money and emotional costs. Not to mention the cost in terms of
)lost education for the children.)
) We seem to go round and round with the same discussions on this list
)year after year. Increasingly, I find it difficult to understand why, if
)Waldorf educators think *their* approach is so wonderful, so wholesome and
)so wholistic, they don't just tell parents up front that Waldorf schools are
)the parochial schools of Anthroposophy.
) Be like the Catholic or Jewish day schools who put their religious
)orientation and approach up front.
) That way, those of us who do not believe that our children have etheric
)or astral bodies and who *do* believe that children can think abstractly
)before age 14 and should be challenged academically beginning in first grade
)(or in some cases, a bit younger), will just stay away.
) What could be simpler?
)Yes Lisa; Waldorfschools should tell parents up front that Waldorf
)schools work with a pedagogy
that is based on Anthroposophy. In Sweden they very much are, and as
far as I know, most schools in the world are. So that really should
not be such a big problem.
But to understand that to have scientific hypotheses about something
more than matter is something else than to have a religious,
institutionalized set of beliefs, that seems to be a big problem.
It seems to be a threat to there whole world view of the "true
believers" on this list.
Peace and understanding
Per Hallstrom
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:14:51 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Anthroposophy as religion
Per Hallstrom, you wrote,
)Scientific studies of nature are made primarily through observing
)given perceptions (sense perceptions and feelings) and then relating
)the perceptions to one ad another by the process of thinking.
In the 17th century. Modern science demands the clear statement of an
hypothesis, followed by a definitive test of the hypothesis.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:19:37 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: RE: Is anthroposophy a religion?
At 9:34 AM -0800 2/10/01, Per Hallstr=F6m wrote:
))Dan commented the explanation of Anthroposophy from the 1998
))encyclodepia Britannica:
))
))anthroposophy,
)) philosophy based on the premise that the human intellect has the
))ability to contact spiritual worlds. It was formulated by Rudolf
))Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and artist, who
))postulated a spiritual world comprehensible to pure thought but
))fully accessible only to the faculties of knowledge latent in all
))human beings. He regarded human beings as having originally
))participated in the spiritual process of the world through a
))dreamlike consciousness. Becasue Steiner claimed that an enhanced
))consciousness can again percieve spiritual worlds, he attempted to
))develop a faculty for spiritual perception independent of the
))senses. Toward this end he founded the Anthroposophical Society in
))1912. The society, now based in Dornach, Switz., has branches
))around the world.
))
))Is every philosophy a religion? (Luke Schelly asks)
))
))Dan Dugan comments:
))By this definition alone, Anthroposophy would be classified as a
))religious activity by the U.S. courts.
)
)And I wonder: do you know that for a fact Dan, or is just your own
)court ruling.
It's my opinion based on knowledge of the precedents. But don't take
legal advice from me, ask a lawyer familiar with U.S. constitutional
law.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:30:18 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
Sune, you wrote,
)Minister of Unitarian church, a religious missionary arm of the secular
)humanist movement,
Sune, I know there are Unitarians and Secular Humanists in Europe, so
you must be kidding about linking them. There is no relationship
between Unitarians (my sister is a Unitarian) and Secular Humanists
(I am one).
(snip)
)Thompson interrupted Rozell's opening comments and was asked to be
)quiet. When he refused, Rozell asked law enforcement officers in the
)sanctuary to escort Thompson out.
Thompson was obviously trying to be busted. I think he had a good
point, and he probably could have made it in the seminar at an
appropriate time. Making a disturbance was a provocation.
Secular Humanists, and Waldorf critics, generally have more sense and
manners. When I objected to pseudo-science lectures at our Waldorf
school, for example, I would wait until the question period, and
until some other questions had been asked.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:31:20 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
Paula wrote,
)The local Waldorf school (in my area) is housed in the UU Church.
The nearest one to me, a kindergarten, is housed in an Episcopal church.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:35:08 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
Per Hallstrom, you wrote,
)Anthroposophy is no belief and no set of beliefs. It is a pursuit of
)a widened scientific understanding of the world. (by widening the
)field of observation so that it also includes primary perceptions
)like feelings, artistic consideration and thought processes, and by
)also using learning by doing-like methods)
"Widened scientific" isn't scientific. You're warping the language to
your purpose.
)Sayings and writings by Rudolph Steiner and others are considered
)interesting by some people, but they are not beliefs.
Tell me another fairy tale, Per. If Steiner's writings weren't held
to be holy scripture by Anthroposophists, they would have discarded
large portions as erroneous, as, for example, science has with
Newton's writings.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:38:23 +0100
From: Sune Nordwall (Sune.Nordwall home.se)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
Peter Staudenmaier wrote:
(Detlef has answered on the first part of your mail.)
=2E..
) Also, you say that Steiner "stopped
) using" the root-race terminology before he gave these lectures. What on=
) earth are you talking about? The sixth of those lectures is titled "The=
) Five Root Races of Mankind". Detlef made the same preposterous claim la=
st
) year. Are we talking about two different books here?
Maybe you weren't subscribed when this was discussed on the list (?). As
can be seen from the original, if you have it, even the translator got
the concepts mixed and mistranslated 'main races' (the 5 according to
the very wide spread view during the greater part of of at least the
first part of the 20th century) with 'root races' in the English
translation from 1970, referring to something completely else.
Me: =
) ) Actually reading it, one sees that its basic perspective on Nordic
) ) mythology is quite different from the way you imply it to be in your
) ) article, using the lecture series to imply that they should show a
) ) inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
You:
) I don't believe that there is an inherent fascism in anthroposophy, and=
my
) article neither argues nor implies that there is.
My understanding of your article with the title 'Anthroposophy and
Ecofascism' (you don't stand behind that?) and trying to depict a
'lengthy history of ideological implication in fascism' of
anthroposophy, very much are implied arguments by you that there is an
inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
If you now say that is not the case, maybe you should reconsider your
article.
) I really didn't make much
) of the lecture series in my article, since I hadn't even read them at t=
he
) time (I relied primarily on an anthroposophist source for what little I=
did
) have to say about them). They certainly don't form a major part of my
) argument there.
I did not write that they form a major part of your argument. Your way
of putting the description of the lecture series, as a sort of
introducing summary of the theme of the article, and your way of
describing the lecture series, to me stands out as a use of it to imply
it is a support of your main argument in the article.
Me: =
) ) What they show is the opposite. As I showed in a posting on Fri 18 Fe=
b
) ) last year (15:39) and have repeated also later on this list:
) )
) ) 'The main specific relation to 'Nordic mythology' in the series of
) ) lectures on single Folk spirits ... has to do (final, 11th lecture) w=
ith
) ) a specific character in this mythology; Widar, as someone who points =
the
) ) way to the future experience of the Christ that is present in any
) ) meeting between people when they gather together in the spirit of wha=
t
) ) Paul said: 'Not I, but Christ in me', the one who pointed to that in =
us
) ) that has nothing to do if we are 'Jews or Greeks', that is: that in u=
s
) ) that has _nothing_ to do with to which nation we belong.'
You: =
) Yes, that is more or less what the eleventh lecture says. Are you tryin=
g to
) say that this is *not* an argument for the superiority of European
) spiritual traditions?
I think taking it that Steiner should argue that Nordic-Germanic
mythology should be superior to what has come out of other ethnic groups
or nations with the basic argument that it points the importance of what
has _nothing_ to do with ethnic group or nation somehow stands out as
self-contradictory.
) At the very least you must acknowledge that Steiner
) is demanding that we all recognize the validity of Christianity, refrac=
ted
) through a 'nordic' lens.
No. He does not in the lecture series demand that everybody recognizes
the validity of Christianity. The books is a transcribed lecture series,
held to members of the Theosophical society in Oslo in 1910. It is not a
book he wrote for a general public on the issue discussed in the lecture
series.
To the _audience_; members of the TS, he in the lecture series argued on
the _importance_ of Vidar in Mordic mythology as pointing to Christ. He
did not in any way demand that _you_ recognize the validity of
Christianity. You're free to believe what you want on the validity of
Christianity. But I think it is unfair to Steiner not to do him justice
in describing _his_ views on Christianity, even if you don't agree with
him.
) Where does that leave all of us non-christians?
You're free to believe what _you_ want and find reasonable, as I do.
) ) ) This racial typology
) ) ) has been affirmed many times by later anthroposophists; for example=
,
) ) ) A.P. Shepherd's book A Scientist of the Invisible: An Introduction =
to
) ) ) the Life and Work of Rudolf Steiner (London 1954) recapitulates
) ) ) Steiner's teachings in chapter ten, "The Origin and Destiny of Man"=
=2E
) ) ) Shepherd uses the terms "stages", "periods" and "races"
) ) ) interchangeably,
) )
) ) Your way of referring and describing it gives me the impression that =
you
) ) have read it very quickly and not understood what you have read on mo=
re
) ) than a very general and unspecific word-level.
) =
) I can't imagine how my "way of referring and describing" could possibly=
) convey that information. Have you been peering into my soul again, Sune=
?
Try to, at least at times, through what you write :-). Don't you with
what other people write, say and do?
You: =
) ) ) and writes that humankind is "differentiated into races, at differe=
nt
) ) ) cultural and moral levels." (p. 103)
Me:
) ) I have closely read the corresponding pages of the Swedish translatio=
n
) ) of the book by Shepherd and don't find what you quote as that humanki=
nd
) ) is "differentiated into races, at different cultural and moral levels=
=2E"
You: =
) The sentence appears at the end of the paragraph describing the Lemuria=
n
) Age. It reads in full: "In this age, too, the power of speech developed=
,
) and mankind began to be differentiated into races, at different cultura=
l
) and moral levels." The next paragraph describes Atlantean man. =
Ah. Find it. (But the paragraph at the end of which it is found does not
describe the Lemurian Age. It describes the beginning of the 'Atlantean'
age.) It refers the differentiation into 5 races that according to
Steiner took place at the beginning of Atlantean time (to my
understanding corresponding to the beginning of Tertiary), and that was
the general concept in at least the West for a number decades during the
first part of the now last century.
Only reading that and not knowing or having understood his expressed
view on the overriding central importance of the individual in every
human (from 1894, Philosophy of freedom, chapter 'Individuality and
genus' at http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA004/TPOF/pofc14.html) in
relation the any external characteristic, and explicitely arguing on the
fading importance of 'races' after Atlantean time in different contexts
(see quoted or mentioned lectures in earlier posting) I can see that you
may come to the view you have expressed.
If Steiner somewhere differentiated between races in terms of 'moral
levels', I still have to read it. It's not part of my basic
understanding of Steiner and anthroposophy.
) If the
) sentence is missing from the Swedish edition, that would hardly be
) surprising; this happens all the time with anthroposophist translations=
=2E
) The sentence from Steiner's autobiography where he reminisces fondly ab=
out
) his pan-German activism, for example, doesn't appear in the Norwegian
) translation of the book.
All the time? What sentence from his autobiography is missing in the
Norwegian translation and do you have a number of other examples (as you
write it happens 'all the time' ...)?
) =
) ) I think Uehli has very little on his feet in view of what can be foun=
d
) ) in 'Cosmic Memory' on the issue. Detlef has commented well on this an=
d
) ) the rest of your post, I think.
) =
) I am glad to see that you and Detlef have a low opinion of Uehli and hi=
s
) ravings, but don't you think it's important to mention that Steiner
) decidedly did not share this opinion?
I do. I don't remember having personally read anything by Uehli, even if
I've seen one other of his books at some time. As to his 'ravings' on
the relation between different races, from what I've read _about_ it, it
does not do Steiner justice. Detlef has commented on it at
http://www.waldorf.net/swr_erwiderung.htm#uehli
I translated it for this list two months ago (5 Dec).
It also is a comment on
You:
) Uehli was one of Steiner's closest
) pupils, a teacher at the original Waldorf school and an officer of the
) Anthroposophical Society. In some anthroposophist circles Uehli
) is regarded as an outstanding anti-fascist; Uwe Werner makes special
) mention of him as having been "extremely critical" of National Socialis=
m
) (Werner, Anthroposophen in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus, p. 97).
) Doesn't that tell you something?
***********************************************************
On Ernst Uehli and his properly criticized book "Atlantis und die R=E4tse=
l
der Eiszeitkunst" ("Atlantis and the riddle of the art of the glacial
age") =
In the second year of the first Waldorf school Ernst Uehli in 1920 came
as teacher in the subject of the free religious teaching to the teaching
staff. Later he also taught the history of the arts. He was never a
class teacher. Until recently he - in contrast to many of his more
important colleagues - had been almost completely forgotten. =
The first edition of his book "Atlantis und die R=E4tsel der Eiszeitkunst=
"
("Atlantis and the riddle of the art of the glacial age") appeared in
1936 and is already unpleasantly influenced by the situation at the time
in its wording. =
He belonged to the those who desperately and in vain for the Association
of Waldorf schools tried to safeguard the survival of the Waldorf
schools against the national socialist government in 1936. That may also
have influenced the by him in 1936 written book "Atlantis und die R=E4tse=
l
der Eiszeitkunst". The by Report-Mainz correctly criticized chapter on
"formation of races" and the "aryan race" in part is racist. Uehli's
exposition are also a distortion of the expositions by Steiner on the
"concert of peoples" that - because of their differentiations - make it
necessary that they all play together. =
Steiner never denied the differences between peoples, and even dared to
characterize the characteristics of different ethnic groups - a
dangerous terrain! Steiner already then often complained that he
repeatedly was misunderstood. He thereby always made it clear that he
only tried to characterize characteristics of the physical body.
According to Steiner the development of the souls and the spirit of the
individual human to a high degree is independent of these
characteristics. By Uehli any such restricting remark is missing. =
According to Steiner man is not a slave of his race, his people, his
tribe, his family, and as he makes more than clear in the basic chapter
on "Individual and ..." in his basic work "The philosophy of freedom"
(http://www.elib.com/Steiner/Books/GA004/POSA ) man should not be the
slave of his physical body. The basis of racism is the contrary view
that forces man into and only views him as belonging to a species,
making him into an animal. "The naked ape" is racistically conceived, as
the =
individuality only is seen as a by-product of the physical body. =
Steiner does not deny what European civilization has achieved, but often
points to the problems and limitations of this civilization in relation
to other cultures - in contrast to Uehli, who puts the "aryan race"
clearly above other races. According to Steiner, one can view European
civilization both as the high point and the lowest point of human
evolution.
Here, according to Steiner, there exists no absolute evaluation: it is
always a question of perspective, and there are many perspectives, none
of which - according to Steiner - can demand to be taken as the pure and
full truth. These highly complex, polar starting points of anthroposophy
are suppressed by Uehli and reduced to a simplistic and partly racist
scheme. =
It is very embarrassing that Uehli's book until recently still was be
found in a booklet with literature suggestions for the work of class
teachers at Waldorf schools. Almost one thousand literature suggestions
can be found at the list, which is a mixture of existing literature put
together by teachers for teachers. In a remark at the beginning of the
list it is noted: "It is up to the class teacher to judge how much and
in what form e title on the list is relevant in the preparation of the
teaching." =
But even with such a "disclaimer" the book by Uehli definitely should
not be on a literature list for Waldorf teachers. This mistake primarily
comes from the fact that almost nobody reads it anymore. It merely stood
collecting dust on many bookshelves, until Report-Maintz blew it up,
making it into a leading text book. =
Or is that not the case? A journal reported that it had found a case in
Berlin, where Uehli had been used in the teaching. I therefore asked all
Waldorf teachers in Berlin via the leaderships of the schools about it.
Of all teachers at the six Waldorf schools, only four knew about it
before the Report broadcast, only one of which was a class teacher. None
of these teachers had used Uehli's expositions in the preparation of
their teaching, as his description of the art of the glacial age, which
is the main theme of the book, is out-of-date - reflecting the
standpoints of 1936. =
The publishing company that republished it again in 1980 (Mellinger
Verlag, Stuttgart) cannot any more trace the basis for the decision to
do it. The publisher who decided to do it has deceased. The publishing
company only few days ago decided not to sell it anymore. That should
not be difficult as almost the whole remaining edition was sold out
after the turbulence caused by the Report broadcast. =
The SD-Hauptamt (?) made the following judgement about the basis of
Waldorf education in a report from May 1936:
"Also, anthroposophy separates the spirit from its connection to the
race and the people and condemns that which is racial and volkish as
belonging to a lower sphere of primitivity, of instincts, to be
overcome by the spirit as belonging to the past. It thereby shows its
intimate connection with the main streams of the European cultural
tradition, especially the enlightenment, the German idealism and the
liberalism of the past centuries. (...) This basic world view has
caused anthroposophy to be open to anti-volkish, anti-national,
supernational, pacifist and especially Jewish influences in a disastrous
way. (...) In accordance with the devaluation of the state and political
life, it puts forth the for the German people dangerous thesis that its
task not should lie in the political, but in the cultural field: =
"Germany must build its politics on a cultural-spiritual basis, if it is
to assert itself as a nation in the future". (Ernst Uehli:
"Welttatsachen und Welttendenzen" ("World facts and world tendencies")
in: "Die Drei", Jg. 1, 1921, S. 316.)"
=
(Source: Uwe Werner: "Anthroposophen in der Zeit des
Nationalsozialismus" ("Anthropsophists during the time of national
socialism"), Oldenburg, 1999, S. 383f) =
That is how the secret service SS quoted the Swiss Ernst Uehli. Born in
1875, deceased in 1959, he had to leave Germany in 1938 for political
reasons. =
***********************************************************
Regards,
Sune Nordwall
Stockholm, Sweden
http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
- a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:40:43 EST
From: Speckraybill aol.com
Subject: Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
--part1_8c.2427888.27b7398b_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 02/10/2001 4:33:30 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dan dandugan.com writes:
) The nearest one to me, a kindergarten, is housed in an Episcopal church.
)
)
The first one we went to was supported by the Unity Church--eventually kicked
them out. I get so confused between Unity, Unitarians and Universalist
Unitarians or Unitarian Universalists (cannot figure out which comes first as
they always call themselves the UU's around here). Whatever, after reading
the article Sune posted, I agree with Dan's view on what happened.
Paula
--part1_8c.2427888.27b7398b_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(HTML)(FONT FACE=arial,helvetica)(FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")In a message dated 02/10/2001 4:33:30 PM Pacific Standard Time,
(BR)dan dandugan.com writes:
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0")
(BR)(BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px")The nearest one to me, a kindergarten, is housed in an Episcopal church.
(BR)
(BR)(/BLOCKQUOTE)
(BR)(/FONT)(FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Book Antiqua" LANG="0")
(BR)The first one we went to was supported by the Unity Church--eventually kicked
(BR)them out. I get so confused between Unity, Unitarians and Universalist
(BR)Unitarians or Unitarian Universalists (cannot figure out which comes first as
(BR)they always call themselves the UU's around here). Whatever, after reading
(BR)the article Sune posted, I agree with Dan's view on what happened.
(BR)
(BR)Paula
(BR)
(BR)(/FONT)(/HTML)
--part1_8c.2427888.27b7398b_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:16:26 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I
[P. Hallstrom:]
)Rudolph Steiners sayings and writings are only valid to me as far as
)I can validate them myself
It's just a dead-end discussion. I don't think any of it is verifiable, and
I don't credit the supposed "clairvoyance" that anthroposophists claim can
be used to verify it. I also don't think fantastic stories about other
planets and hierarchies of cosmic beings have a thing in the world to do
with real spirituality.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:29:54 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
[Sune:]
)It does not seem your understanding (after 5 minutes?) of the untruth )of
)what has been on PLANS' site for 5 years(?) as its basic untrue
)description of the basis of waldorf education as
)*... Steiner's theory of child development [is] based on reincarnation
)of "the etheric body," "the astral body," and "the I" *
)has impressed the editor of the page and moderator of this list much
)yet, still being there after the last update of the page.
Sune, I am sorry you are truly perturbed by this. I am afraid I must agree:
Dan does not seem to care.
Shall I be blunt? If one considers the "four members of man" to be hogwash,
and the idea of reincarnation of any "member" of anybody, any way you slice
it, likewise to be not credible, then it just may not seem important to Dan
to make sure that visitors to the PLANS site get totally clear on which of
these four entities were considered by Steiner to travel together between
"incarnations," and which not.
The point of the PLANS website isn't to provide accurate Steiner trivia, as
fascinating as such can be, in a horrifying sort of way . . .. It's to
explain to prospective parents that Waldorf is purely a project of
anthroposophy, and because it is a religious mission it is inappropriate for
US tax dollars to be spent on Waldorf.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 156
-- Topica Digest --
Re: old discussion I (childhood illess)
By winters_diana hotmail.com
Re: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
By Gary GoodWinter.com
Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
By snell netshel.net
Re: old discussion II
By rbc supranet.com
Re: old discussion II
By rbc supranet.com
Re: criminal trial of Scientology in Spain
By dan dandugan.com
Re: old discussion II
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: old discussion I
By dan dandugan.com
Re: old discussion I
By rbc supranet.com
Re: Is anthroposophy a religion?
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
Re: where eyes are opened
By per.hallstrom work.utfors.se
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:52:40 -0000
From: "Diana Winters" (winters_diana hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion I (childhood illess)
[Chris]
) )I was quite struck by that phrase, "childhood illness", used by Steiner
)to describe his use of the theosophical race language in early
)anthroposophical writings. A childhood illness, even more in Steiner's day
)than now, is essentially an act of God. It happens to one through no fault
)of one's own other than the simple human act of associating with others who
)are infected. There is no element of individual choice or responsibility
)involved.
[Detlef:]
That is not the connotation it has to me. I hear Steiner saying: "I should
have rejected this terminology earlier. I regret that I didn't. If I had
had more foresight and more maturity, I would have rejected it earlier. It
was an illness in the childhood of our anthroposophical movement, coming
from the influence of that theosophical nanny."
However, Detlef, if we refer to Steiner's *own* understanding of "childhood
illness," rather than yours, Chris's understanding is much closer. Would you
dispute what Chris wrote, and what I wrote in my other post, is how Steiner
understood actual childhood illnesses? (karma - necessary and desirable,
serving the purposes of growth and development, rather than something to be
avoided or regretted, even if one could avoid them, i.e., through
vaccination)
You don't catch a childhood illness from your nanny. It is convenient to
blame any "misunderstandings" on "theosophical influence," I suppose.
Diana
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 21:05:48 -0500
From: "Gary A. Bonhiver" (gary goodwinter.com)
Subject: Re: Continuing untruth at PLANS' site?
Sune, please provide a re-written sentence that you believe is true, to help
illustrate your point about the inaccuracy. Enlighten us, please.
...Gary
Sune Nordwall wrote:
) Diana Winters wrote, two weeks ago:
)
) ) [Sune:]
) ) )Then, having understood what 'ether body' and 'astral body' are after
) ) )reading and having thought about it in 5 minutes, maybe you have a
) ) )comment on what still can be found at the site of waldorfcritics after )5
) ) )years(?) as the summary of Dan's understanding of it, after studied )it as
) ) )'a hobby' for now 10(?) years, and that constitutes one of his )main basis'
) ) )for critisizing it as a 'crackpot theory':
) )
) ) )'Steiner's theory of child development, [is] based on reincarnation of
) ) )*the etheric body,* *the astral body,* and *the I* ' ?
)
) Diana:
) ) I do agree with you that whoever wrote the above (Dan?) did not get it
) ) straight on which of the four "members" of "man" are reincarnated. I think
) ) it's only supposed to be the "I," right? You don't take along your physical,
) ) ether, or astral bodies to your next incarnation. Dan was wrong! Wrong!
) ) Wrong! Dan must not understand anthroposophy after all!!! Whew!
)
) It does not seem your understanding (after 5 minutes?) of the untruth of
) what has been on PLANS' site for 5 years(?) as its basic untrue
) description of the basis of waldorf education as
)
) *... Steiner's theory of child development [is] based on reincarnation
) of "the etheric body," "the astral body," and "the I" *
)
) has impressed the editor of the page and moderator of this list much
) yet, still being there after the last update of the page.
)
) It is about as true as saying:
)
) * ... Steiner's theory of child development, based on the view that man
) brings his left foot along through his repeated lives on Earth, ....*
)
) An at least more true version would possibly be, from PLANS'
) perspective, if PLANS wants to argue that:
)
) * ... Steiner's theory of child development, based on his alleged
) understanding of man as a spiritual being, reincarnating through
) repeated lives on Earth and his development through three 7-year periods
) from birth to adulthood, differs significantly from the consensus of
) child development specialists.* and linking it to the the page Neil has
) set up at http://www.jlc.net/~faiman/waldorf/handbook_philosophy.html
)
) Sune Nordwall
) Stockholm, Sweden
)
) http://hem.passagen.se/thebee/indexeng.htm
) - a site on science, homeopathy, cosmological cell
) biology, EU, globalization and social threefolding
)
) ____________________________________________________________
) T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
) Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
) http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:36:55 -0800
From: Debra Snell (snell netshel.net)
Subject: Re: Cult news: Secular Humanist Minister arrested for trespassing
Sune wrote:
))Thompson interrupted Rozell's opening comments and was asked to be
))quiet. When he refused, Rozell asked law enforcement officers in the
))sanctuary to escort Thompson out.
Dan:
)Thompson was obviously trying to be busted. I think he had a good
)point, and he probably could have made it in the seminar at an
)appropriate time. Making a disturbance was a provocation.
)
)Secular Humanists, and Waldorf critics, generally have more sense and
)manners. When I objected to pseudo-science lectures at our Waldorf
)school, for example, I would wait until the question period, and
)until some other questions had been asked.
Debra:
Yes, when PLANS gives slide shows. We are always polite - shaking hands and
introducing ourselves. We sit quietly while the Waldorf promoters make
their presentations.
OTOH, Waldorf promoters will speak out of turn or loudly laugh like what
we're saying is crazy. Funny thing though, we just expose Waldorf, using
Waldorf/Anthroposophy's own publications.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 22:18:58 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
Detlef wrote:
) Mr. Staudenmaier forgets that we've been through this before
That's funny, actually; it was exactly a year ago today that I sent my
message to this list about Steiner's lectures on national souls, once I had
finally gotten my hands on a copy of the book. If anybody who wasn't on the
list then really cares that much about this point, I recommend visiting the
list archive and comparing Detlef's and my posts to see which one of us
misrepresented Steiner's text.
) Mr. Staudenmaier, this is a gross distortion, because Steiner does not
write about the
) )"germanic-nordic sub-race," as the world's most
) spiritually advanced ethnic group,
)
) Nor does he claim
) ) which was in turn the vanguard of the
) highest of five historical "root races."
)
) No "highest" in Steiner's book.
The book Detlef is talking about is called, in the English translation, The
Mission of the Individual Folk Souls in Relation to Teutonic Mythology
(Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1970). I highly recommend that anyone
interested in Steiner's racial ideas read it. Detlef says there is no
"highest" race in this book. In chapter four ("The Evolution of Races and
Civilizations") Steiner discusses the various ostensible characteristics of
several "races", using a number of different terms to designate them. On p.
75 he prints a handy little diagram that shows "Africa" on the bottom,
"Asia" in the middle, and "Europe" on the top. On the same page Steiner
explains this hierarchy: African people are children, racially speaking,
while Asians are adolescents, and Europeans are adults. In Steiner's words:
"The black or Negro race is substantially determined by these childhood
characteristics. If we now cross over to Asia, we find a point or centre
where the formative forces of the Earth impress permanently on man the
particular characteristics of later youth or adolescence and determine his
racial character. Such races are the yellow and brown races of our time. If
we continue northward and then turn in a westernly direction towards
Europe, a third point or centre is reached which permanently impresses upon
man the characteristics of his adult life."
I suppose it might almost be possible to interpret this material
'geographically' rather than 'racially', if it weren't for the fact that
Steiner goes on in chapter six ("The Five Root Races of Mankind") to
associate each "race" with parts of the human anatomy as well as with
Roman deities. He associates the "Aryans" with the brain, often considered
the highest organ, and with Jupiter, the highest figure in the Roman
pantheon. In Steiner's words: "Now the Jupiter forces work indirectly
through the sense-impressions and from there radiate to those parts of the
central nervous system which are situated in the brain and spinal cord.
Here is the seat of those forces which determine the particular racial
character of those races belonging to the Jupiter humanity. This applies
more or less to the Aryans, to the peoples of Asia Minor and Europe whom we
regard as members of the Caucasian race." (p. 106)
) ) This superior fifth root race, Steiner told
) ) his Oslo audience, was naturally the "Aryan race.""
)
) The word "superior" was brought to you by your sponsor: the highly
) imaginative figment of Peter Staudenmaier's phantasies.
Sadly, I cannot take credit for having single-handedly exposed Steiner's
racism. I recognize that there are people -- nearly all of them
anthroposophists -- who understand Steiner differently on this question.
But many others who have taken the time to read his works have come to the
same conclusion I have: Steiner taught a "spiritual" version of Aryan
supremacy.
) ) Also, you say that Steiner "stopped using" the root-race terminology
) ) before he gave these lectures. What on earth are you talking about?
) ) The sixth of those lectures is titled "The Five Root Races of Mankind".
) ) Detlef made the same preposterous claim last
)) year. Are we talking about two different books here?
)
) DH: Peter S.,we've been through this before several times. You read
) German, you should know better by now. The German concept Steiner uses
) in Oslo is NOT "Wurzelrasse", but "Haupt-" and "Grundrasse". This was
) MISTRANSLATED as root-race by an incompetent translator.
I don't know why Detlef and Sune consider this a mistranslation, but they
probably ought to take it up with the editors of Steiner's works, not with
me. I'm not a big fan of other aspects of the English translation of this
book (e.g. "folk souls" is meaningless, as far as I can see; the original
term is national souls or people-souls), but rendering "Hauptrassen" as
"root races" doesn't do violence to Steiner's meaning, in my opinion.
) "Wurzelrasse" is the theosophical vocabulary Steiner unequivocally
) distances himself from, because it is a misnomer. That does not mean he
) stops using the concept of "race" in its normal sense. Steiner speaks
) about 5 or 6 "Haupt-" or "Grundrasse" (main races) in Oslo in a
) terminology that Sune discovered verbatim in an American high school
) book of the time. Well, folks, did Steiner infiltrate American Education
) in 1910? It is rather more likely that he was simply repeating the
) standard view on races of the day. Got it? Please store it your
) hard-drive and make a backup.
I do believe Detlef is avoiding the issue. A "misnomer" means a poor choice
of words. That is not what anthroposophy's critics hold against it. What
the rest of us find so repugnant about Steiner's racial babble is not the
vocabulary (although that is indeed quite telling in itself), but the
content. That Detlef continues to characterize Steiner's views on childlike
blacks and kingly whites as "using the concept of race in its normal sense"
is unsettling, if unsurprising. If this is what passes for "normal" among
contemporary anthroposophists, I'd rather go back to 1910.
Peter Staudenmaier
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 22:32:23 -0600
From: "Rainbow Bookstore Cooperative" (rbc supranet.com)
Subject: Re: old discussion II
Hi Sune,
) Maybe you weren't subscribed when this was discussed on the list (?). As
) can be seen from the original, if you have it, even the translator got
) the concepts mixed and mistranslated 'main races' (the 5 according to
) the very wide spread view during the greater part of of at least the
) first part of the 20th century) with 'root races' in the English
) translation from 1970, referring to something completely else.
I wasn't subscribed back then, but I did get a forwarded copy of Detlef's
mail where he blamed his mistakes on the translator. I don't buy that
argument, since the English translation, published by the Rudolf Steiner
Press, is clearly authorized by Steiner's literary estate (the copyright
page says: "This English edition is published by permission of the Rudolf
Steiner Nachlassverwaltung, Dornach, Switzerland."). I still haven't seen a
copy of the German edition, but I'm happy to take Detlef's word for it that
the terms used in that edition are "Hauptrassen" and "Grundrassen" rather
than "Wurzelrassen". What I don't understand is why you think those terms
mean "something completely else"; all three terms could quite accurately be
translated as "primary races", and my reading of Steiner's text is that he
used each of them interchangeably. I realize that you don't agree with that
reading, but it truly isn't far-fetched. I'm also not convinced by your
argument that what Steiner really meant with all his race-jargon was
"cultural stages"; I think he knew perfectly well what he was saying when
talked on and on about "races". To my mind the disagreement between you and
me falls into the category of a difference of interpretation rather than a
"gross misrepresentation" or "gross distortion".
) Me:
) ) ) Actually reading it, one sees that its basic perspective on Nordic
) ) ) mythology is quite different from the way you imply it to be in your
) ) ) article, using the lecture series to imply that they should show a
) ) ) inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
)
) You:
) ) I don't believe that there is an inherent fascism in anthroposophy, and
) ) my article neither argues nor implies that there is.
)
) My understanding of your article with the title 'Anthroposophy and
) Ecofascism' (you don't stand behind that?) and trying to depict a
) 'lengthy history of ideological implication in fascism' of
) anthroposophy, very much are implied arguments by you that there is an
) inherent fascism in anthroposophy.
)
) If you now say that is not the case, maybe you should reconsider your
) article.
Perhaps I misunderstood your phrase "an inherent fascism in anthroposophy";
that phrase suggests to me that anthroposophy is inherently fascistic, that
it leads inevitably to fascist politics. I do not hold that view; if I did,
I would have replaced the word "and" in my article's title with the word
"is". I do indeed stand behind the title "Anthroposophy and Ecofascism",
since the relation between those two tendencies is what the article
explores. But I don't collapse the two into one another. There were not a
few anthroposophists who resisted European fascism when it was in power,
and there are many anthroposophists today who work against the re-emergence
of neo-fascist groups. But there is also a strikingly consistent historical
record of anthroposophists collaborating with fascists, as well as with
non-fascist far-right groups. All of the research I've done since I wrote
that article has confirmed this.
) ) I really didn't make much
) ) of the lecture series in my article, since I hadn't even read them at
) ) the time (I relied primarily on an anthroposophist source for what
) ) little I did have to say about them). They certainly don't form a
) ) major part of my argument there.
)
) I did not write that they form a major part of your argument. Your way
) of putting the description of the lecture series, as a sort of
) introducing summary of the theme of the article, and your way of
) describing the lecture series, to me stands out as a use of it to imply
) it is a support of your main argument in the article.
Fair enough. I thought it would work well as an opening device for an
article in Norwegian, and I do think I offered sufficient substantiation
for my thesis later in the article. But perhaps I stretched the
terminological similarities between Steiner and the Nazis too far in the
opening paragraphs.
) I think taking it that Steiner should argue that Nordic-Germanic
) mythology should be superior to what has come out of other ethnic groups
) or nations with the basic argument that it points the importance of what
) has _nothing_ to do with ethnic group or nation somehow stands out as
) self-contradictory.
I think so too, but it seems obvious to me that this contradiction is in
Steiner's text, not in my reading of it. Of course he says a number of
things that suggest an argument for cultural understanding and tolerance,
but those passages are literally right next to passages that I consider to
be unmistakably racist. It is precisely that combination which I think is
so dangerous.
) ) At the very least you must acknowledge that Steiner
) ) is demanding that we all recognize the validity of Christianity,
) ) refracted through a 'nordic' lens.
)
) No. He does not in the lecture series demand that everybody recognizes
) the validity of Christianity. The books is a transcribed lecture series,
) held to members of the Theosophical society in Oslo in 1910. It is not a
) book he wrote for a general public on the issue discussed in the lecture
) series.
I don't buy that. The book you and I are discussing does not consist of raw
lecture transcripts (as so many other volumes in Steiner's collected works
do). Steiner himself reworked thos