return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By stella_blue88 hotmail.com
Quote of the Day
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Quote of the Day
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Quote of the Day
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Quote of the Day
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: Quote of the Day
By pkcompany netzero.net
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:21:59 +0000
From: Aurora Weir (stella_blue88 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Barnaby McEwan wrote:
)
) I know a five-year-old girl who attends a Waldorf school. (snip
) shoelace incident)
Barnaby,
I have no knowledge of "steiner and shoelaces" but I can tell you that
at our former , very traditional Waldorf school, the kindergartners were
encouraged to tie, and were encouraged to help the younger children tie
their (the youngers) shoes. In fact I think we were sent a letter
stating that tie shoes were preferable because they planned on teaching
shoe-tying in kindergarten. Therefore, I think your friend's ex-wife
may be misinformed or it may be a bias of that particular kindergarten
teacher??. Hope this helps.
Aurora
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:00:05 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Quote of the Day
From "Quote of the Day" at the Steiner elib:
http://www.elib.com/Steiner/
"No greater service could be done to Ahriman than to make sure that a great
number of people do not read anthroposophical literature."
- Rudolph Steiner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:11:00 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Quote of the Day
walden wrote:
)
) From "Quote of the Day" at the Steiner elib:
)
) http://www.elib.com/Steiner/
)
) "No greater service could be done to Ahriman than to make sure that a
) great
) number of people do not read anthroposophical literature."
)
) - Rudolph Steiner
)
)
Mind if I paraphrase this a bit...
"No greater disservice could be done to Waldorf schools than to make
sure that a great number of people read anthroposophical literature."
- Pete Karaiskos
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:55:36 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Quote of the Day
And I cannot resist, here's the quote of the day from
anthroposophy_tomorrow, from Brad Martin:
"After a while of sparring with the WC Activists, it crossed my mind that it
would be interesting to have a psychological profile of each of them to
determine what seems to be an underlying pathology resulting in their
vendetta. Their trekking to the cultwatch meeting in Atlanta and being on
stage with their catechism must have given them great satisfaction feeding
into their aberrant condition."
I'll put my therapist on it, Brad, and send you a report. :)
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:41:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Quote of the Day
--- Diana Winters (Diana.Winters verizon.net) wrote:
)) And I cannot resist, here's the quote of the day
) from
) anthroposophy_tomorrow, from Brad Martin:
)
) "After a while of sparring with the WC Activists, it
) crossed my mind that it
) would be interesting to have a psychological profile
) of each of them to
) determine what seems to be an underlying pathology
) resulting in their
) vendetta. Their trekking to the cultwatch meeting in
) Atlanta and being on
) stage with their catechism must have given them
) great satisfaction feeding
) into their aberrant condition."
)
) I'll put my therapist on it, Brad, and send you a
) report. :)
) Diana
Margaret here:
I am surprised by Brad's statement because I would not
have expected anthroposophists to recognize mainstream
psychology as having any validity. Don't the theories
of modern day psychology conflict with Steiner's
system of beliefs about karma?
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 02:57:04 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Quote of the Day
) "After a while of sparring with the WC Activists, it crossed my mind
) that it
) would be interesting to have a psychological profile of each of them to
) determine what seems to be an underlying pathology resulting in their
) vendetta. Their trekking to the cultwatch meeting in Atlanta and being
) on
) stage with their catechism must have given them great satisfaction
) feeding
) into their aberrant condition."
I'd like to say something about the pot calling the kettle black - but
then that would likely begin another racism debate that we could
probably do quite well without.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1493
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
[NNA] Nationwide action week by German Waldorf schools to raise
profile
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By realwaldorf hotmail.com
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:28:51 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Aurora Weir wrote:
) ...I think your friend's ex-wife
) may be misinformed or it may be a bias of that particular kindergarten
) teacher??. Hope this helps.
) Aurora
The mystery deepens; thanks, Aurora.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 11:04:45 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: [NNA] Nationwide action week by German Waldorf schools to raise
profile
Copyright 2004 News Network Anthroposophy Limited (NNA). All rights reserved.
NNA content on this website or distributed by NNA
by any other means may not be republished or
redistributed without the prior consent of News
Network Anthroposophy. Users may use and print
extracts of NNA content without permission for
their own personal and non-commercial use only.
For republication or redistribution please
contact NNA at:
(mailto:admin nna-news.org)admin nna-news.org.
+ + + + +
Nationwide action week by German Waldorf schools to raise profile
STUTTGART (NNA) - All this week German Rudolf
Steiner schools have been undertaking a variety
of actions throughout Germany to create greater
awareness of Waldorf education and make a greater
contribution to the education debate in Germany.
At the opening press conference in Stuttgart a
week ago, the chief executive of the German
Federation of Free Waldorf Schools, Walter
Hiller, said that the schools had noted an
increase in applications as a result of the
controversial debate about student achievement
and the German school system arising from the
PISA study coordinated by the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
"We don't keep an exact tally, but reports to
that effect are coming in from all the schools,"
Hiller told NNA. There was a risk, he added, that
economic arguments were dominating in the
education debate in Germany: "There is a hidden
debate about Germany as a business location going
on," he said. It was indicative that the most
recent contribution to the education debate in
Germany had come from an economic organisation,
the OECD.
Hiller also criticised the political parties for
ignoring educational aspects. Thus a structural
reform of Germany's education system, with its
confusing number of different types of school
ranging from the academic to the vocational, had
been ruled out from the beginning even though the
PISA study clearly showed that such streaming of
pupils was leading to greater social divisions.
In contrast, it was constantly being pointed out
in the education debate that a "heterogeneous
learning group is best".
In model PISA countries such as Finland, the
thinking was dominant that "no pupil should be
left behind". That is why considerably greater
resources than in Germany were being invested in
the lower classes, Hiller said.
Such unified education was already being
practiced in Waldorf schools and the success of
such a policy could also be seen in the figures.
According to statistics from the School of
Anthroposophical Education in Mannheim, 48
percent of Waldorf pupils left school with a
school leaving exam. In the state system it was
barely a quarter in all the different school
types.
Apart from the rising number of applications to
Waldorf schools, Hiller also cited the rising
numbers registering at Waldorf teacher training
seminars as another positive result for Waldorf
education as a consequence of the PISA debate.
All week, events have been taking place in city
centres across Germany, ranging from theatrical
and other performances by Waldorf pupils, and
Waldorf and state school pupils together, through
demonstrations of school work and activities as
well as projects by trainee teachers, to
exhibitions, some in collaboration with other
bodies such as UNESCO.
In Düsseldorf, for instance, pupils from
Wattenscheid Waldorf school presented an
enthusiastically received humorous performance in
eurythmy of the Brothers Grimm fairy tale "The
Town Musicians of Bremen" told in the local Ruhr
dialect and with guitar accompaniment.
In the city hall in Stuttgart, an exhibition on
"Waldorf Education Worldwide" organised together
with UNESCO showed the work of the schools in
other countries and on other continents.
In Hamburg, the OECD representative and former
Waldorf pupil Andreas Schleicher told his
audience, including a television crew from North
German Radio, that across the world those school
systems which refrained from early selection and
left a range of abilities within a single class
performed best. Students should be supported in
their individual abilities instead of being
frustrated by constant grading, he said in his
lecture.
Schools should be allowed greater flexibility and
school inspection should be replaced by an
advisory function, he added. Of course it was
important to measure student performance, but
tests should not consist of examining
standardised knowledge but they should be
considered as a measure of success and incentive
for further improvement in learning.
A meeting of the German Waldorf Parent Council in
Offenburg last weekend launched the "Offenburg
Declaration", calling for greater recognition by
politicians and administrators of the role played
by Waldorf schools in public education. A panel
called for equal state funding for Waldorf
schools. The demand by the state for equal
educational provision without equal funding in
itself represented discrimination against the
non-state schools, panel members said.
The action week will end tomorrow (Saturday) with
a major event in Stuttgart under the patronage of
the former German federal president, Johannes
Rau. The federal interior minister, Otto Schily,
is also expected to attend.
END/cva
+ + + + +
041001-03EN
1 October 2004
More NNA reports at: http://www.nna-news.org/content/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:24:21 -0500
From: "Rudy Stein" (realwaldorf hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Dear McEwan,
There seems to be a philosophy with Steiner pertaining to young children
that their feet should be unencumbered so as to relate more to the earth and
the ground forces, henceforth the preference toward soft-soled footwear such
as the slippers and "booties" often found in Waldorf early childhood
classes. I don't know of laced shoes being "taboo" necessarily, but most
lace shoes are hard-soled, and more challenging for the still-developing
motor skills of the young child. Also, having worked with children in this
age group, tie shoes are a good deal more time consuming for a teacher,
(Waldorf or not) to put on or help put on, say some 15-30 children when it
is time to go out. Some Waldorf schools encourage the parents to drop off
their children in soft-soled / slip-on shoes to avoid the changeover in
class. As for the child learning to tie laces, Waldorf first grade classes
often have the pupils "finger knit" simple items for the purpose of
developing manual dexterity at developmentally appropriate age. Learning to
tie is a similar exercise.
Hope this helps you!
Rudy
)
)Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)Save money and get healthy
)http://click.topica.com/caacGKIb1dkiGb7vDb2a/PermissionData
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)I know a five-year-old girl who attends a Waldorf school. Her parents
)are separated, and her mother sends her there: I'm friends with her dad.
)The child has cystic fibrosis, but perhaps that's a subject for another
)post. A few days ago dad was delighted to see his daughter starting to
)get the hang of tying her shoelaces. After going back to mum's house,
)the child tied one shoe but got into a muddle with the other and felt
)upset. Mum was not delighted, saying to dad, 'That's why Steiner
)[school] doesn't like laces,' implying that dad had somehow damaged his
)daughter by encouraging her.
)
)When I heard about this I was astounded. The child decided herself that
)she was going to learn to tie her laces: why not take the opportunity to
)show her it's worth persevering through difficulty?
)
)I guess this belief derives from Steiner's developmental theories but
)after a brief search, I haven't found any ancient wisdom about
)shoelaces. My friend and I are puzzled about this episode and would like
)to get to the bottom of it; can anyone shed some light?
)
)Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)Race to Claim your FREE Stock Car Racing Gift!
)http://click.topica.com/caacERRb1dkiGb7vDb2f/PermissionData
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 07:36:33 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Rudy Stein wrote:
) ...Hope this helps you!
Thanks, that was interesting, but I'm no nearer to understanding why my
friend's ex reacted the way she did. Maybe she's misinformed, like
Aurora said.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1494
-- Topica Digest --
What does Ahriman look like?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: new member
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 01:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: What does Ahriman look like?
Does anyone know the answers to any of the following
questions about Steiner's Ahriman (as opposed to the
Zoroastrian Ahriman):
1. Exactly when did Steiner carve the head of Ahriman?
Someone pointed out that it bears quite a striking
resemblance to the face on the poster of the 1922
German movie *Nosferatu.* I am wondering if Steiner's
Ahriman head was inspired by the poster.
2. What color is the skin of Steiner's Ahriman
supposed to be?
3. What kind of body does Steiner's Ahriman supposedly
have? Is it human or is it like an animal of some
sort? Does it have a tail?
4. Does Steiner's Ahriman wear clothes and, if so,
what kind of clothes?
5. Anyone know any other details about what Steiner's
Ahriman is supposed to look like?
Margaret
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:00:43 +0000
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: new member
Hi, Yarngal:
Have you shared your concerns with the directors or managers of the
local clincs and hospitals?
yarngal yarngal wrote:
)
) Hi Dan and Margaret.Thanks for your welcomes.
) I am sorry your children had bad experiences at the Waldorf school.
) I send you my support.
) The health care situation is that Anthroposophists are getting jobs at
) local cllinics and hospitals and I am afraid they may use their "Anthrop
)
) Medicine" (I want to shorten the word) on patients who are not aware of
) it being used on them.
) When I go to a clinic or hospital I want standard Evidence based
) (scientific) medicine, and NOT any alternative medicine, unless I
) specifically request it.
) I did a web search and found out that there is "Anthroposophist
) medicine", and I read about it, and I DON'T want it.
) I give informed consent for medical care and I expect to be treated with
)
) the standard Western medicine and not some esoteric new agey "healing"
) which I don't ascribe to or believe in.
) I understand others in the Anthrop movement and Waldorf schools prefer
) their own kind of medicine, but that should be a choice and others like
) me who are not in their group shouldn't be given their Anthrop medicine
) without our knowledge, or be diagnosed and judged by their group's
) terms, standards, and beliefs.
) If I wanted "spirituality" I would go someplace else for it, rather than
)
) to a clinic or hospital! So if a nurse or physician is an
) Anthroposophist they have NO RIGHT to judge me and diagnose me according
)
) to their group's beliefs about health care and medical care. If they are
)
) working with the general public then they must follow the same
) mainstream medicine that the general public uses and expects, unless a
) patient specifically requests and consents to the alternative medicine
) and the Anthrop medicine.
) Thanks again, Yarngal
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1495
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: What does Ahriman look like?
By dan dandugan.com
Re: new member
By Yarngal webtv.net
michaelmas festival described
By dan dandugan.com
Re: new member
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: new member
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:41:37 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Interesting, on the shoe-tying question, our teachers were firmly in favor
of tie shoes and against the no-lace shoes. Changing shoes from "indoor"
(eurythmy slippers) to "outdoor" was a very important ritual, definitely not
something to avoid, and it multiplies the time spent tying shoes quite a
bit. Shoes, feet, in general were a subject of fascination to our teachers,
I am really not sure the anthroposophical significance, but the shape of a
child's foot, and their gait, were frequently mentioned in "child study,"
and prescriptions for appropriate foot wear were often made to parents. I
think it has something to do with the child "incarnating," how solidly they
are on the ground perhaps. I have never known a teacher in a non-Waldorf
school to have anything to say about a child's shoes! I think it is largely
just control freakery.
Diana
Rudy wrote:
)There seems to be a philosophy with Steiner pertaining to young children
)that their feet should be unencumbered so as to relate more to the earth
)and the ground forces, henceforth the preference toward soft-soled footwear
)such as the slippers and "booties" often found in Waldorf early childhood
)classes. I don't know of laced shoes being "taboo" necessarily, but most
)lace shoes are hard-soled, and more challenging for the still-developing
)motor skills of the young child. Also, having worked with children in this
)age group, tie shoes are a good deal more time consuming for a teacher,
)(Waldorf or not) to put on or help put on, say some 15-30 children when it
)is time to go out. Some Waldorf schools encourage the parents to drop off
)their children in soft-soled / slip-on shoes to avoid the changeover in
)class. As for the child learning to tie laces, Waldorf first grade classes
)often have the pupils "finger knit" simple items for the purpose of
)developing manual dexterity at developmentally appropriate age. Learning
)to tie is a similar exercise.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 12:08:39 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: What does Ahriman look like?
Margaret, you asked,
)1. Exactly when did Steiner carve the head of Ahriman?
) Someone pointed out that it bears quite a striking
)resemblance to the face on the poster of the 1922
)German movie *Nosferatu.* I am wondering if Steiner's
)Ahriman head was inspired by the poster.
)2. What color is the skin of Steiner's Ahriman
)supposed to be?
)3. What kind of body does Steiner's Ahriman supposedly
)have? Is it human or is it like an animal of some
)sort? Does it have a tail?
)4. Does Steiner's Ahriman wear clothes and, if so,
)what kind of clothes?
)5. Anyone know any other details about what Steiner's
)Ahriman is supposed to look like?
I attended a touring production from England of one of Steiner's
"mystery plays" a few years ago. It was something like seven hours
long!
The Ahriman character was dressed as a contemporary person, but he
wore a mask of a hook-nosed stereotype Jewish chararacter, like the
Commedia Del'Arte character Pantalone ("a merchant of Venice").
I wrote to the actor asking for a photograph of him in his mask, but
he didn't reply.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 19:21:24 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Re: new member
No I am a very private person and I get anxious and have severe panic
attacks with confrontation and conflict. I am tabled a "vulnerable
adult" I am avoiding certain doctors though who are into
Anthroposophical Medicine". This is why I asked my question about this
here. Vulnerable adults have no choices on who will treat us in a health
care or psychiatric emergency and I don't want any Anthroposophist
health care workers using their own beliefs (which I don't share) to
judge me or treat me and others who are vulnerable according to their
beliefs instead of being OBJECTIVE and using evidence-based science and
medicine. I don't have an "advocate" except fiends, who can speak up for
me and protect me when I am very sick and in need of medical or
psychiatric treatment. The Anthroposophists are really getting jobs in
the local health care sphere and "taking over" it seems, since they
have the education and credentials to do so. I have not outright told
the Athrops or hospital about my concerns for FEAR they may retaliate
against me.
Sometimes I have HAD to be treated by them and one Anthrop doctor was
quite rude to me and it was obvious he looked down on me and judged me,
because the non-Anthrop doctors always treat me with respect. The local
hospitals and clinics are supposed to be non-religious and objective.
That doctor is a favorite among the Anthrops who live around here
because he uses their type of alternative medicine and ascribes to their
beliefs. He goes to their social events too. No, I cannot go get him
fired! I just use another (non-Anthrop) doctor, but sometimes there
may be no choice for me if there is an emergency and I have to have ANY
doctor or other health care worker assigned to me in the ER or clinic.
Honestly i have absolutely no problem with peoples' religious beliefs as
long as they don't judge and treat others (who are not part of their
group or belief system) with a BIAS towards their own beliefs. I do
belive in freedom of thought.I hope I am making tis clear.
For example: If a doctor is a Christian and his/her patient is Jewish or
other non-Christian, he/she should NOT preach his beliefs to them
without their consent, or judge and treat them according to his/her
belief. He still has the right to his Christian belief. If a doctor or
other health care worker is an Anthroposophist, he/she should NOT label
his/her patients according to Anthroposophic beliefs and then judge and
treat their patient with this bias.
He/she has a legal right to be an Anthroposophist, but while working in
a secular and objective setting, he/she should not impose his/her
beliefs onto others.
This s what I ma trying to say here. I don't have any advocates to
protect me, so I am SCARED if another Anthroposophist care giver has
power over my health or psychiatric care! Besides, even if I did have an
advocate, HOW could my advocate prove that I was treated with bias?
What if the powers that be are friendly to the Anthrops and/or say that
"others have no problem with that health care professional, so it is
only HER personal problem."
Most local people believe the Anthrops to be "nice, warm fuzzy people"
who are helping the local economy to grow and taking needed jobs in the
health care and other professions in this depressed rural area. Plus the
Anthrops pool their money and buy property and businesses. Each year
more new Waldorf (there are Waldorf schools in this area) families move
here and buy property and businesses and/or get into professional
positions. If other people mention this in a less than "positive" way,
they are either called "crazy", "negative", or are not taken seriously
and are told that the Waldorf families are "creating more economic
opportunities" since MONEY TALKS! Even the strong people who
criticise the Waldorf people are not taken seriously and are put down
and verbally attacked (Waldorf=Anthroposophists--but most people don't
know what the word "Anthroposophy" means, so I should use "Waldorf" to
describe them).
The Waldorf schools are now a part of the mainstream. My issue is when
the Waldorf/Anthrop people (or any other group) impose their agenda onto
OTHERS who are not in agreement with (or have no knowledge of) their
beliefs and practices. They have their freedom of religion, like
everyone else, but they should NOT impose their agenda, beliefs, and
practices onto others, especially on those who are ill, vulnerable, and
who are in dependent postitions! I am also very saddened to read
accounts of children who are or were HURT by Waldorf education and by
those who teach/preach/promote it. My heart goes out with support to
all the parents and children who were hurt.
I do have a question: Why does Waldorf "spiritualize" the handicrafts of
knitting and other crafts?
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 18:18:36 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: michaelmas festival described
Ukiah Daily Journal
Michaelmas Day: Waldorf students re-enact battle between Saint
Michael and the dragon
By MARK HEDGES/The Daily Journal
Saturday, October 02, 2004
"Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against
the dragon. The dragon with his angels fought back, but he was too
weak, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was
thrown down, that ancient serpent who led the whole world astray,
whose name is the Devil..." -- Revelation 12:7-10
Angelic help against a smoke-belching dragon was summoned Friday
morning at the Waldorf School of Mendocino County in Calpella.
The entire student body of this colorful school put on a spectacle of
feudal finery replete with a royal court, nobles, peasants and a
family of dwarves -- all in commemoration of Saint Michael's Day,
otherwise known as Michaelmas Day (Sept. 29).
Saint Michael is known as the Archangel and prince of the angels of
heaven who led his holy forces to destroy the dragon, or Satan. He is
referred to in Daniel 10:13 and 12:1, Jude 9 and Revelation 12:7-9.
Entwined with Saint Michael is the patron Saint of England, Saint
George, who in legend also slew a dragon, though Brewer's Dictionary
of Phrase and Fable (copyright 1995, page 440) explains that "the
legend of St. George and the dragon is simply an allegorical
expression of the triumph of the Christian hero over evil, which St.
John the Evangelist envisioned through the image of a dragon."
Thus, the Waldorf School's pageant of St. George re-enacted this
cataclysmic battle, with the nobles busy "protecting the weak,
supporting the good" and the peasants giving thanks to Mother Earth
for her bounties at harvest-tide until a huge dragon bursts upon the
scene.
Though the king of the land announces that a lottery will decide
which "fair child" will be given in payment to the dragon, right
quickly the peasants and nobles both bow in prayer to heaven, and the
people are exhorted to "fear not, God's will be done."
And lo! Angels appear from the blessed realm, led by none other than
Saint Michael, who instructs his legions to throw down heavenly stars
so the people of the earth will be empowered to "conquer with light."
The glimmering asteroids are gathered and taken to the halls of the
dwarves where they hammer out a sword with their "will, strength and
skill" that will wield the power of "Michael's light."
Subdued by this mini arms-race, the maiden formerly doomed to be
lunch for the dragon declares that the dragon will now be tame "and
we from darkness now shall be free," and to prove it she places a
wreath of flowers on the monster's brow.
At this point, all the assembled people gave thanks to the Creator
for this good turn of events.
Onward the procession then continued to the school field where a
feast awaited, preceded by a blessing and introduction of the new
families that had joined the school.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 00:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: new member
--- yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net) wrote:
)
) No I am a very private person and I get anxious and
) have severe panic
) attacks with confrontation and conflict. I am tabled
) a "vulnerable
) adult" I am avoiding certain doctors though who are
) into
) Anthroposophical Medicine". This is why I asked my
) question about this
) here. Vulnerable adults have no choices on who will
) treat us in a health
) care or psychiatric emergency and I don't want any
) Anthroposophist
) health care workers using their own beliefs (which I
) don't share) to
) judge me or treat me and others who are vulnerable
) according to their
) beliefs instead of being OBJECTIVE and using
) evidence-based science and
) medicine. I don't have an "advocate" except fiends,
) who can speak up for
) me and protect me when I am very sick and in need of
) medical or
) psychiatric treatment. The Anthroposophists are
) really getting jobs in
) the local health care sphere and "taking over" it
) seems, since they
) have the education and credentials to do so. I have
) not outright told
) the Athrops or hospital about my concerns for FEAR
) they may retaliate
) against me.
) Sometimes I have HAD to be treated by them and one
) Anthrop doctor was
) quite rude to me and it was obvious he looked down
) on me and judged me,
) because the non-Anthrop doctors always treat me
) with respect. The local
) hospitals and clinics are supposed to be
) non-religious and objective.
) That doctor is a favorite among the Anthrops who
) live around here
) because he uses their type of alternative medicine
) and ascribes to their
) beliefs. He goes to their social events too. No, I
) cannot go get him
) fired! I just use another (non-Anthrop) doctor,
) but sometimes there
) may be no choice for me if there is an emergency and
) I have to have ANY
) doctor or other health care worker assigned to me in
) the ER or clinic.
) Honestly i have absolutely no problem with peoples'
) religious beliefs as
) long as they don't judge and treat others (who are
) not part of their
) group or belief system) with a BIAS towards their
) own beliefs. I do
) belive in freedom of thought.I hope I am making tis
) clear.
) For example: If a doctor is a Christian and his/her
) patient is Jewish or
) other non-Christian, he/she should NOT preach his
) beliefs to them
) without their consent, or judge and treat them
) according to his/her
) belief. He still has the right to his Christian
) belief. If a doctor or
) other health care worker is an Anthroposophist,
) he/she should NOT label
) his/her patients according to Anthroposophic
) beliefs and then judge and
) treat their patient with this bias.
) He/she has a legal right to be an Anthroposophist,
) but while working in
) a secular and objective setting, he/she should not
) impose his/her
) beliefs onto others.
Margaret here: I completely agree with you. I
respect everyone's right to believe in the religion of
their choice as well as the right not to believe at
all. I would not speak publicly about my disagreement
with some of the tenets of anthroposophy if it were
not for the fact that I see anthroposophy
surreptitiously imposing aspects of its belief system
on others in ways that can sometimes be harmful.
IMHO, some anthroposophists are so convinced that
anthroposophy represents the ultimate truth that they
feel justified in acting within the concept of *the
ends justify the means.* It seems to me that some
anthroposophists who believe they know what is best
for other people feel no compunction about acting upon
that belief even when it goes against the other
person's wishes.
Perhaps you can discuss this with one or more of your
friends and have them send anonymous letters to the
heads of your local clinics and hospitals referring
them to sources of information about anthroposophy and
anthroposophical medicine.
It is a terrible thing to be the victim of rudeness
and disdain when one is sick and dependent upon other
people. If you could get your friends to take this
action, it would be a way for you to exert some of
your own power in the situation without having to be
personally involved in actual confrontation.
) This s what I ma trying to say here. I don't have
) any advocates to
) protect me, so I am SCARED if another
) Anthroposophist care giver has
) power over my health or psychiatric care! Besides,
) even if I did have an
) advocate, HOW could my advocate prove that I was
) treated with bias?
) What if the powers that be are friendly to the
) Anthrops and/or say that
) "others have no problem with that health care
) professional, so it is
) only HER personal problem."
) Most local people believe the Anthrops to be "nice,
) warm fuzzy people"
That used to be my impression. I do, however, know
some anthroposophists who are motivated by a genuine
desire to do good, work hard to accomplish good, and
are respectful of non-anthroposophists. I just don't
think *warm* and *fuzzy* are adjectives that apply to
anthroposophists in general and I think that some
anthroposophists might even agree with that
themselves. They use the word *warmth* a lot but I
think it means something different from what most
people mean when they use the word to describe a
person.
) who are helping the local economy to grow and taking
) needed jobs in the
) health care and other professions in this depressed
) rural area. Plus the
) Anthrops pool their money and buy property and
) businesses. Each year
) more new Waldorf (there are Waldorf schools in this
) area) families move
) here and buy property and businesses and/or get
) into professional
) positions. If other people mention this in a less
) than "positive" way,
) they are either called "crazy", "negative", or are
) not taken seriously
) and are told that the Waldorf families are "creating
) more economic
) opportunities" since MONEY TALKS! Even the
) strong people who
) criticise the Waldorf people are not taken seriously
) and are put down
) and verbally attacked (Waldorf=Anthroposophists--but
) most people don't
) know what the word "Anthroposophy" means, so I
) should use "Waldorf" to
) describe them).
) The Waldorf schools are now a part of the
) mainstream. My issue is when
) the Waldorf/Anthrop people (or any other group)
) impose their agenda onto
) OTHERS who are not in agreement with (or have no
) knowledge of) their
) beliefs and practices. They have their freedom of
) religion, like
) everyone else, but they should NOT impose their
) agenda, beliefs, and
) practices onto others, especially on those who are
) ill, vulnerable, and
) who are in dependent postitions! I am also very
) saddened to read
) accounts of children who are or were HURT by Waldorf
) education and by
) those who teach/preach/promote it. My heart goes
) out with support to
) all the parents and children who were hurt.
) I do have a question: Why does Waldorf
) "spiritualize" the handicrafts of
) knitting and other crafts?
I don't know. Maybe someone else can answer that.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:28:33 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: new member
Hello, Yarngal. I think we've met before on a couple of other lists.
Hope you're doing well.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:33:33 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Diana Winters wrote:
)
) Interesting, on the shoe-tying question, our teachers were firmly in
) favor
) of tie shoes and against the no-lace shoes...
) I am really not sure the anthroposophical significance, but the shape of
) a
) child's foot, and their gait, were frequently mentioned in "child
) study,"
) and prescriptions for appropriate foot wear were often made to parents.
) I
) think it has something to do with the child "incarnating," how solidly
) they
) are on the ground perhaps...
) I think it is largely
) just control freakery.
) Diana
Sure sounds like it to me. Thanks to everyone who replied to my query.
I'll be talking to my pal about this some more.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1496
-- Topica Digest --
Thanks Margaret
By Yarngal webtv.net
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By realwaldorf hotmail.com
Re: What does Ahriman look like?
By realwaldorf hotmail.com
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By diana.winters verizon.net
federal appeals court decides Camphill work is religious
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:56:24 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Thanks Margaret
Hi Thanks, Margaret, for your respectful and supportive post in answer
to my post regarding the Waldorf people (Anthroposophists) in the local
health care system and how that doctor treated me.
I agree with you 100% about them. Yes, to most of them "the end
justifies the means" and I agree that their concept of "warmth" is
different than most people's. A lot of them who I met do seem to believe
they "know what is best" for everyone else.
I notice they (Waldorf) change the language to mean other meanings than
the mainstream does. They also use the words "healing" and "community" a
lot.
I will talk with my few close friends about them more, but only one
friend really knows the TRUTH about the Waldorf people. My other
friends don't see any real problem with Waldorf except that they are
"different" and one other friend knows they are in a "clique" among
themselves and exclude (and reject) those from their social interactions
who don't follow the basic Anthrop beliefs.
Thanks for your suggestions and support, Margaret.
Take care, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 22:39:38 -0500
From: "Rudy Stein" (realwaldorf hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
) ) I think it is largely
) ) just control freakery.
) ) Diana
)
)Sure sounds like it to me. Thanks to everyone who replied to my query.
)I'll be talking to my pal about this some more.
I think you're experiencing some of the individuality and "ego presence" of
some of the strong-willed faculty that tend to rise to the top in Waldorf
schools. Some like tie shoes, some like soft slippers or eurythmy shoes;
there is flexibility in the "dogma" surrounding so many aspects of the
Waldorf curriculum and policy. A faculty member who is convinced by a
certain detail in Steiner's child development mayl make it policy in her
school. Much like sects of religion, scripture passages, etc., a lot of
Steiner's lectures and writings, which have been translated into English,
are subject to interpretation and opinion. It's the strong-willed that tend
to make it policy in their respective institution. Your friend's ex may be
simply parroting the EC teacher's feelings or those of the influential in
that particular school, having been convinced, say, by the teacher's starry
stare and "committed" voice inflections. One of Waldorf's weaknesses is
the bending of certain details by the strong personalities (egos) in the
community.
Rudy
)
)Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)Give your opinion on Abortion and Win!
)http://click.topica.com/caacHMZb1dkiGb7vDb2f/PermissionData
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
_________________________________________________________________
Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and
more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 22:49:50 -0500
From: "Rudy Stein" (realwaldorf hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: What does Ahriman look like?
Dan Dugan wrote:
)I attended a touring production from England of one of Steiner's "mystery
)plays" a few years ago. It was something like seven hours long!
)
)The Ahriman character was dressed as a contemporary person, but he wore a
)mask of a *hook-nosed stereotype Jewish chararacter*, like the Commedia
)Del'Arte character Pantalone ("a merchant of Venice").
)
)I wrote to the actor asking for a photograph of him in his mask, but he
)didn't reply.
I am amazed at how many Jewish families have their children in Waldorf
schools in the large cities., especially given the interpretation of some of
Steiner's work...
Rudy
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
_________________________________________________________________
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
School Guide! http://special.msn.com/network/04backtoschool.armx
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 01:02:38 -0400
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
) ) I think it is largely
) ) just control freakery.
) ) Diana
)
)Sure sounds like it to me. Thanks to everyone who replied to my query.
)I'll be talking to my pal about this some more.
"Rudy" said:
)I think you're experiencing some of the individuality and "ego presence" of
)some of the strong-willed faculty that tend to rise to the top in Waldorf
)schools.
LOL! You said it, Rudy. In fact, one of the teachers I worked with told me
there was to be only one ego in the classroom. (I think she meant hers.)
)Some like tie shoes, some like soft slippers or eurythmy shoes;
)there is flexibility in the "dogma" surrounding so many aspects of the
)Waldorf curriculum and policy.
Yes, you are right. Funny isn't it. It's amazing how flexible a rigid dogma
can be :)
)A faculty member who is convinced by a certain detail in Steiner's child
)development mayl make it policy in her school.
You are cracking me up, you are describing a Waldorf school so accurately.
)Much like sects of religion,
Much "like" sects of religion? Hello?
)scripture passages, etc., a lot of Steiner's lectures and writings, which
)have been translated into English, are subject to interpretation and
)opinion. It's the strong-willed that tend to make it policy in their
)respective institution. Your friend's ex may be simply parroting the EC
)teacher's feelings or those of the influential in that particular school,
)having been convinced, say, by the teacher's starry stare and "committed"
)voice inflections. One of Waldorf's weaknesses is the bending of certain
)details by the strong personalities (egos) in the community.
Yup.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 00:23:49 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: federal appeals court decides Camphill work is religious
Immigration Daily- the unmatched news resource
for legal professionals. Free! Join 14000+ readers
http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/articles/2004,1005-mehta.shtm
How Religious Must One Be To Qualify As A Religious Worker?
by Cyrus Mehta
US immigration law provides permanent residency
to people who can qualify as religious workers.
Under §1101(a)(27)(C) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA), foreign nationals who
qualify as "ministers" or who seek to work,
either as professionals or otherwise, in a
"religious vocation" or "religious occupation"
for a religious organization can qualify for this
special immigrant category. They must have also
had two years of experience in these religious
occupations immediately preceding the filing of
the religious worker petition.
While a minister is defined as an individual duly
authorized by a recognized religious denomination
to conduct religious worship and to perform other
duties usually performed by authorized members of
the clergy,1 more unclear is the definition of
"religious occupation." The INA is silent on what
constitutes a "religious occupation," although
the regulation opaquely defines it as "activity
which relates to a traditional religious
function."2 The term "traditional religious
function" is not further defined, but the
regulation provides examples of individuals in
religious occupations that include, but are not
limited to: liturgical workers, religious
instructors, religious counselors, cantors,
catechists, workers in religious hospitals or
religious health care facilities, missionaries,
religious translators, or religious broadcasters.
The regulation further states that this group
does not include: janitors, maintenance workers,
clerks, fundraisers, or persons solely involved
in the solicitation of donations.
In recent times, the US Citizenship and
Immigration Services (CIS) has asserted that a
person qualifying for a religious occupation must
have formal training established by the governing
body of the denomination. It has also denied
petitions if the religious occupation contains
any hint of secular activity.
Thus, the Appeals Administrative Office (AAO)
recently held that a "religious vocalist" was not
a religious occupation because the applicant did
not need specialized religious training, only the
ability to sing.3 The AAO in that decision
further noted, "Persons in qualifying religious
occupations must complete prescribed courses of
training established by the governing body of the
denomination, and their services must be directly
related to the creed and practice of the
religion." The AAO also indicated that the term
"traditional religious function" requires a
demonstration that the duties of the position are
directly related to the religious creed of the
denomination, that specifically prescribed
religious training or theological education is
required, that the position is defined and
recognized by the governing body of the
denomination, and that the position is
traditionally a permanent, full-time, salaried
occupation within the denomination.
On the other hand, federal courts have been
interpreting "religious occupation" more in
accordance with the actual definition as set
forth in the regulation. In a recent decision
from the Court of Appeals of the 3rd Circuit,
Camphill Soltane v. US Department of Justice, No.
03-1626 (August 26, 2004), 2004 WL 1903287 (3rd
Cir. (Pa.)), it was held that a person in a
"religious occupation" could also engage in
secular activities. In that case, Camphill
Soltane, a non-profit organization, providing
services to young adults with mental
disabilities, sought to sponsor Annagret Goetze,
a German citizen, in the religious occupation of
houseparent, music instructor, and religious
instructor at the Camphill facility. According to
the Court's decision, Camphill is rooted in the
philosophy of "Anthroposophy" and the teaching of
Rudolph Steiner. It seeks to create a spiritual
community through cooperative life, social
interaction, and spiritual activity. The Camphill
movement is focused on Christianizing the
ordinary aspects of life for the mentally
handicapped as well as for the fully able members
of the community.
The CIS had earlier denied the petition. The AAO
affirmed the denial. The AAO found that the
duties of the position involving the care of the
mentally handicapped was wholly secular function,
even if the facility was operated by a charitable
organization founded on religious principles. The
AAO parroted the recent CIS policy stating that
such positions are traditionally full-time
salaried positions requiring specific religious
or theological training.
The Court in Camphill Soltane agreed that the AAO
got it wrong, and stated that the AAO
pre-determined its conclusion by only
highlighting the secular aspects of Ms. Goetze's
duties, but totally ignored its religious
aspects. The Court also pointed out that
"religious translator" and "religious counselor,"
two examples of religious occupations in the
regulation, were secular in character. Thus, a
person could qualify in a "religious occupation"
if the duties included both secular and religious
aspects. On the other hand, if the job was wholly
secular, the position would not qualify such as
that of "janitor" or "maintenance worker" also
cited as jobs in the regulation that did not
qualify as religious occupations. As long as the
job has "some religious significance, it could
qualify as a religious occupation," according to
the Court.
Finally, the Court also questioned the AAO's
position that a religious occupation must be a
traditionally full-time salaried position
requiring specific religious or theological
training. This appeared to be inconsistent with
the list of religious occupations given in the
regulation itself, which included positions such
as "missionaries" who do not always receive
salaries. The Court also observed that when the
agency (formerly the Immigration and
Naturalization Service) promulgated the final
rule on religious workers, it explicitly stated
in the preamble that the rule had been revised to
account more clearly for uncompensated
volunteers, whose services are engaged but who
are not technically employees.
Although the Court did not specifically dispute
the AAO's contention that a religious occupation
requires religious or theological training, it
found that there was sufficient evidence in the
record to suggest that Goetze's position required
specific religious training. While the Court took
pains to state that it was not creating a
definitive test as to when a job may or may not
be characterized as a "religious occupation," it
ruled that the AAO had failed to show why the
position offered by Camphill to Goetze in this
case did not qualify.
The Third Circuit's decision in Camphill Soltane
provides greater ammunition to religious
organizations, and their attorneys, to qualify
more of their employees as people working in a
"religious occupation." The Court correctly held
that a "religious occupation" could include
duties with a secular component.
For instance, there are many positions for
musicians in religious organizations that could
conceivably qualify as a "religious occupation."
The CIS has been coming down hard on such claims
by stating that a musician does not need
extensive religious training, but only needs to
sing or play an instrument or direct a choir.
However, musicians in religious organizations,
while needing to be trained in music, must also
have knowledge about the religion and religious
music/songs, as well as a conviction in the
beliefs of their religion. If a "religious
occupation" may never have a secular component,
then how would the CIS ever be able to approve a
religious counselor or translator, especially
since these two occupations are cited as examples
of a "religious occupation" in the regulation?
Likewise, religious organizations thoroughly
exploit the media to convey their message.
Unfortunately, this author has heard of
media-related occupations in religious
organizations that have been turned down by the
CIS. Under the logic set forth in Camphill
Soltane, a "religious film maker" who produces
documentaries on the rituals and practices of the
religion could also qualify as a "religious
occupation." The CIS may still argue that such an
occupation requires only technical training and
no formal religious training, although it can be
argued that the religious filmmaker must be
conversant with the texts, ritual and doctrine of
the religion.
However, the requirement by the CIS that the
person who qualifies for the occupation require
formal religious training is also arbitrary. In
another case in a lower federal district court,
Perez v. Ashcroft, 236 F.Supp.2d 899 (N.D. Ill.
2002), that court overruled the denial of a visa
petition for a music director on the ground that
he lacked formal religious training. The Court
admonished the CIS in ruling that there was
nothing in the regulation that refers to the
background or training of people who seek to
qualify as religious workers. The court noted
that if the CIS wished to impose a new
requirement, it ought to have done so through the
formal rule making process, which requires notice
to the public and comment under the
Administrative Procedures Act. Since no such rule
has been promulgated by the CIS, it cannot now
impose additional requirements that are absent in
its currently promulgated regulation defining a
"religious occupation."
Camphill Soltane and Perez should encourage more
attorneys to seek judicial review in federal
court if the CIS denies religious worker
petitions based on definitions of "religious
occupation" that are not grounded in the current
regulation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 8 C.F.R. §204.5(m)(2).
2 Id.
3 Matter of ______(AAO Oct. 8, 2003), reported in
81 No. 11 Interpreter Releases 347-348 (Mar. 15,
2004).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
About The Author
Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge
University and Columbia Law School, practices
immigration law in New York City. He is the Chair
of the Board of Trustees of the American
Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) and recipient
of the 1997 Joseph Minsky Young Lawyers Award. He
is also Secretary of the Association of the Bar
of the City of New York (ABCNY) and former Chair
of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
Law of the same Association. The views expressed
in this article do not necessarily represent the
views of ABCNY or AILF. He frequently lectures on
various immigration subjects at legal seminars,
workshops and universities and may be contacted
in New York at 212-425-0555.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this article do not
necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.
Copyright (c) 1999-2002 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1497
-- Topica Digest --
RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 16:41:28 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Waldorf and shoelaces
Rudy Stein wrote:
) I think you're experiencing some of the individuality and "ego presence"
) of
) some of the strong-willed faculty that tend to rise to the top in
) Waldorf
) schools.
The phrase 'ideologically-driven' and the word 'bully' both spring to
mind. Just as well I'm not experiencing it directly.
) Your friend's ex may be
) simply parroting the EC teacher's feelings or those of the influential
) in
) that particular school, having been convinced, say, by the teacher's
) starry
) stare and "committed" voice inflections.
That's my reading of the situation.
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1498
-- Topica Digest --
RE: new member
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: new member
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: new member
Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com) wrote:
Hi, Yarngal:
Have you shared your concerns with the directors or managers of the
local clincs and hospitals?"
They know. I have personally provided them with packets of material re: Steiner, anthroposophy and what is being covertly practiced within their clinics/hospitals. This is a subject that I am increasingly attempting to get more info on for several reasons, but since medical communities tend to be closed and very well insulated against objective inquiry by outsiders, it is difficult to get that sort of info. I do know that there is no confidentiality within this local medical and social services community and that it is more than a by-product of incompetency.
This is in general a "christian" fundamentalist community and I believe that is why the anthrop community is increasingly growing here. It took me several years to understand why, perhaps in part because the local anthrops insist that their beliefs are diametrically in conflict with those of the fundamentalists. In fact, they are very much aligned. Add to that as in all things it is money (or lack thereof) that binds people together more now than ever, and it should be clear that the local anthrops and the local health care professionals who belong to the same financial class have formed a financial "friendship" as against everyone else and quickly close ranks whenever the former or the latter are confronted. What happened in this community last year re: "Little Mary Sunshine" is a perfect example of that.
Deborah
yarngal yarngal wrote:
)
) Hi Dan and Margaret.Thanks for your welcomes.
) I am sorry your children had bad experiences at the Waldorf school.
) I send you my support.
) The health care situation is that Anthroposophists are getting jobs at
) local cllinics and hospitals and I am afraid they may use their "Anthrop
)
) Medicine" (I want to shorten the word) on patients who are not aware of
) it being used on them.
) When I go to a clinic or hospital I want standard Evidence based
) (scientific) medicine, and NOT any alternative medicine, unless I
) specifically request it.
) I did a web search and found out that there is "Anthroposophist
) medicine", and I read about it, and I DON'T want it.
) I give informed consent for medical care and I expect to be treated with
)
) the standard Western medicine and not some esoteric new agey "healing"
) which I don't ascribe to or believe in.
) I understand others in the Anthrop movement and Waldorf schools prefer
) their own kind of medicine, but that should be a choice and others like
) me who are not in their group shouldn't be given their Anthrop medicine
) without our knowledge, or be diagnosed and judged by their group's
) terms, standards, and beliefs.
) If I wanted "spirituality" I would go someplace else for it, rather than
)
) to a clinic or hospital! So if a nurse or physician is an
) Anthroposophist they have NO RIGHT to judge me and diagnose me according
)
) to their group's beliefs about health care and medical care. If they are
)
) working with the general public then they must follow the same
) mainstream medicine that the general public uses and expects, unless a
) patient specifically requests and consents to the alternative medicine
) and the Anthrop medicine.
) Thanks again, Yarngal
Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Amazing Diet Patch
The fastest - Easiest way to lose weight! Try it now FREE!
http://click.topica.com/caacHOUb1dkiGb7eOUBf/MyDietPatches
-------------------------------------------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 20:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: new member
) Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com) wrote:
)
) Hi, Yarngal:
)
) Have you shared your concerns with the directors or
) managers of the
) local clincs and hospitals?"
)
--- Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com) wrote:
) They know. I have personally provided them with
) packets of material re: Steiner, anthroposophy and
) what is being covertly practiced within their
) clinics/hospitals. This is a subject that I am
) increasingly attempting to get more info on for
) several reasons, but since medical communities tend
) to be closed and very well insulated against
) objective inquiry by outsiders, it is difficult to
) get that sort of info. I do know that there is no
) confidentiality within this local medical and social
) services community and that it is more than a
) by-product of incompetency.
)
) This is in general a "christian" fundamentalist
) community and I believe that is why the anthrop
) community is increasingly growing here. It took me
) several years to understand why, perhaps in part
) because the local anthrops insist that their beliefs
) are diametrically in conflict with those of the
) fundamentalists. In fact, they are very much
) aligned. Add to that as in all things it is money
) (or lack thereof) that binds people together more
) now than ever, and it should be clear that the local
) anthrops and the local health care professionals who
) belong to the same financial class have formed a
) financial "friendship" as against everyone else and
) quickly close ranks whenever the former or the
) latter are confronted. What happened in this
) community last year re: "Little Mary Sunshine" is a
) perfect example of that.
Deborah, I haven't heard of "Little Mary Sunshine."
What happened?
Margaret
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1499
-- Topica Digest --
Anthrops & Christians
By Yarngal webtv.net
RE: cultural imperialism?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: cultural imperialism?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: cultural imperialism?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: cultural imperialism?
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: cultural imperialism?
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Anthrops & Christians
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: cultural imperialism?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:34:45 -0500
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Anthrops & Christians
Deborah and I live in the same area. She is 100% correct.
I may like what Jesus did and said (care for the poor, stop hypocrisy),
but I am NOT a right wing fundamentalist Christian or a member of any
church.
I was at first surprised that the fundamentalist Christians around here
are not publically speaking out against the Waldorf community (Anthrop),
but then I found out that it is about MONEY.The Waldorf people have
MONEY! As long as the children of the Christians don't join in on the
spiritual ceremonies of the Waldorf people and the two groups remain
separate except in business, they seem to tolerate one another well. I
believe the fundamentalist Christianity of today is NOT about what Jesus
preached (about giving to and caring about the poor, etc.). The Waldorf
people claim to "live simply" but most are from upper class families and
they "choose" to do without. Real poor people are FORCED to do without.
I believe in tolerance of different beliefs(although it is okay to
question them) but from what I experienced with the Waldorf people, I
had thought the Christians would at least speak out about the public
nudity, sexual openness, and other "non-Christian" behavior of the
Waldorf people.
Deborah is right: the two groups have more in common than not!
Best Wishes, yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 00:30:11 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
Sarah Longhaira wrote:
)
)
)
) thanks, linda. i really appreciated your input.
)
) do you regret sending your kids to waldorf?
)
) sarah
Not for a minute. The most painful factor has been the expense--I think
it's a terrible shame that so many families that want Waldorf education
for their kids can't afford tuition.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 01:16:51 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
Sarah Longhaira wrote:
)
)
)
) ) Linda commented:
) )
) ) ( snip )
) ) Deborah is overreacting to what you said.
) ) (snip)
) )
) )
) ) Akua:
) )
) ) Linda, are you trying to imply Deborah is overly sensitive? I really
) ) wonder how come First Nations people can forever tell white people they
) ) do not approve of this appropriation and those they address still won't
) ) stop? Land, water, culture, art and spirituality, the right to possess
) ) or utilize any of these is taken for granted. And of course money almost
) )
) )
) ) always plays a role in all this. It is about time these concerns are
) ) taken serious and respected.
) )
) )
) ) Akua
) )
)
) akua, did you read the rest of linda's post? she did address the issues
) you named above, and she's also first-nations. why aren't you taking her
)
) word for it when she says that there are many first nations people who
) don't mind selected stories being respectfully taught to children in
) schools?
)
) sarah
Welcome, Sarah, to Auntie Enmity's Thunderdome", where every word and
deed, especially the most innocent, is pulled into the snarling pit for
voracious Waldorf critics to ravage upon. A Waldorf teacher told the
children an Indian legend in school one day------oh woe! (most in my
family continue to call themselves Indian, btw, and after that Native
American. I think the term "First Nations" may be a Canadian import,
but it hasn't caught on round here.)
These teachers also teach wet-on-wet watercolor (GASP!) and celebrate
festivals (HORRORS!) and make form drawings (Y-I-K-E-S!). I recall one
school actually staged a play - it was SHAKESPEARE of all things. This
so horrified the president of PLANS, she literally couldn't contain
herself from lamenting and bewailing before the poor soul that
incautiously posted proud pictures of the "shameful" event.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 20:22:23 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: cultural imperialism?
Linda wrote:
"The most painful factor has been the expense--I think
it's a terrible shame that so many families that want Waldorf education
for their kids can't afford tuition."
Jeeez... that takes me back a few years. I would have completely agreed
with you there, Linda. I used to stand up at meetings and strongly suggest
we never turn anyone away for lack of funds. I started to look at Steiner's
threefolding ideas and would openly ask that if we demand the least wealthy
in our "community" to share their tax returns (if they apply for tuition
assistance) then we must demand the same of every member of the "community."
We bounced ideas around - like at least one US Waldorf tried some years
back - of each family paying a simple percentage of their income for Waldorf
education. This made some folks upset. But not those asking for tuition
assistance even though it would certainly have hurt them MUCH more in the
wallet.
So, yes I would have agreed that it is a terrible shame. Ironically, it was
at a series of meetings set up to deal with that very issue that I began to
understand the reality of Waldorf education. Those meetings started out
weird and became surreal. Lots of anthro/occultism and exercises. I was
told I was fortunate to attend such meetings. I went from being respectful
and quiet to finding other things to do on meeting nights.
Back to the future... after years of research and communication with other
Waldorf folks from many spots on the planet - on every possible side of the
fence - I think it is a terrible shame that Waldorf is about as transparent
as molasses in mud. It seems also shameful that institutionalized education
is what it is... but that's another topic and not one for this list.
So there ya go, Linda. Pop me back in time and we would have agreed -
totally.
- Walden
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 20:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
" A Waldorf teacher told the
children an Indian legend in school one day"
From what Nation?
"------oh woe! (most in my
family continue to call themselves Indian, btw, and after that Native
American. I think the term "First Nations" may be a Canadian import,
but it hasn't caught on round here.)"
I have yet to know a traditional FN person who does not identify by her/his Nation. By contrast I have known many people who identify as "Indian" or "Native American" who don't know what Nation(s) their ancestors are of, which immediately casts doubt on their assertions re: their ancestry. And where exactly is "round here?" Is it somewhere (e.g. the Pine Ridge reservation) where children are taught that but for the intervention of the devil (Ahriman) that they would never have been born?
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 21:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
"Not for a minute. The most painful factor has been the expense--I think
it's a terrible shame that so many families that want Waldorf education
for their kids can't afford tuition."
At the local (Pleasant Ridge) Waldorf school the students who are on "scholarship" are consistently reminded as to whom provides the funds for their Waldorf "education." In effect, there are several wealthy Waldorf families who are subsidizing the educations of the majority of Waldorf students here and the former apparently resent the financial burden. I know of one family that was so tired of hearing how they should be grateful for the subsidy they were receiving, that they left Pleasant Ridge and enrolled in a local public school.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 21:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Anthrops & Christians
yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net) wrote:
Deborah and I live in the same area. She is 100% correct.
I may like what Jesus did and said (care for the poor, stop hypocrisy),
but I am NOT a right wing fundamentalist Christian or a member of any
church.
I was at first surprised that the fundamentalist Christians around here
are not publically speaking out against the Waldorf community (Anthrop),
but then I found out that it is about MONEY."
It's about money and shared beliefs (re: racial superiority). Although the two groups appear on the surface to be substantively antagonistic, they in fact only differ in style and procedure.
"As long as the children of the Christians don't join in on the
spiritual ceremonies of the Waldorf people and the two groups remain
separate except in business, they seem to tolerate one another well."
I would add to that that the local Quakers are quite close with the Waldorf community. Several years ago I got into a verbal confrontation with a local Quaker whose facade slipped when he not only adamantly came to the support of a local anthrop on the basis of how much that anthrop had financially contributed to the local food co-op, but who during a skit re: Susan B. Anthony wound up yelling at the young children of the co-op's manager who were playing at the back of the room. It was all so ironic considering not only the supposed concern for children and their "educations" but that Susan B. Anthony in her writings supported the oppression of anyone not white and not propertied and was a covert supporter of lynching. (I brought up this fact during the question and answer part of the presentation and the attempt was made by the attending Waldorfers to make me feel like a persona non gratis, which I took as a compliment. I also told the mother of the children - in front of the
Quaker Waldorf supporter - what I thought of the Quaker's behavior towards her children.)
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:21:32 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: cultural imperialism?
LOL
Pretty good, Linda. Funny. Just in case anyone is unclear - Linda's post
was drenched in sarcasm and exaggeration, a tactic often used by those
unwilling to actually engage in meaningful conversation. Come on Linda -
give it a try. We might even be getting somewhere, but there must be a
little effort on both sides. To the best of my knowledge, I have dealt with
your concerns and questions - even those that were off topic. I am trying
to communicate here.
Recap: It was September 18 and your name was in the subject line....
- Walden
Linda wrote:
"Welcome, Sarah, to Auntie Enmity's Thunderdome", where every word and
deed, especially the most innocent, is pulled into the snarling pit for
voracious Waldorf critics to ravage upon. A Waldorf teacher told the
children an Indian legend in school one day------oh woe! (most in my
family continue to call themselves Indian, btw, and after that Native
American. I think the term "First Nations" may be a Canadian import,
but it hasn't caught on round here.)
These teachers also teach wet-on-wet watercolor (GASP!) and celebrate
festivals (HORRORS!) and make form drawings (Y-I-K-E-S!). I recall one
school actually staged a play - it was SHAKESPEARE of all things. This
so horrified the president of PLANS, she literally couldn't contain
herself from lamenting and bewailing before the poor soul that
incautiously posted proud pictures of the "shameful" event."
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1500
-- Topica Digest --
RE: cultural imperialism?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Anthrops & Christians
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: cultural imperialism?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: cultural imperialism?
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: cultural imperialism?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Anthrops & Christians
By realwaldorf hotmail.com
RE: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:35:20 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
Gideon Mills wrote:
)
)
)
) L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
) " A Waldorf teacher told the
) children an Indian legend in school one day"
)
) From what Nation?
)
) "------oh woe! (most in my
) family continue to call themselves Indian, btw, and after that Native
) American. I think the term "First Nations" may be a Canadian import,
) but it hasn't caught on round here.)"
)
) I have yet to know a traditional FN person who does not identify by )
) her/his Nation. By contrast I have known many people who identify ) as
) "Indian" or "Native American" who don't know what Nation(s)
) their ancestors are of, which immediately casts doubt on their
) assertions re: their ancestry.
Didn't this come from you just a few weeks ago? "I have witnessed its
effects on my own child, who has been told outright by local Waldorf
graduates that she cannot be 'Indian' because she does not fit their
stereotype of 'Indian' ".
You make a big noise....reminds me of the wind howling.
Your quixotisms and "stereotypes" are every bit as ill fitting as those
of the "dominant Western culture" you rail about. We continue to use
the term "Indian" - and very few think of themselves often as citizens
of a particular "nation". They think of themselves (and each other) as
coming from a particular "rez", and many think of themselves as a
particular tribe but that's very complicated for a lot of people because
their grandparents can each have come from a different tribe.
We call it "the rez" even though we don't really have reservations---we
have "rancherias". That's another long and ugly story which I won't go
into now, but that's the situation throughout much of this state.
Rancherias aren't large--in certain areas you could visit 10 of them in
one day if you didn't linger in any of them. Perhaps in your
self-appointed capacity as Gatekeeper of the First Nation Peoples you
should investigate them all and root out those with "doubtful" ancestry.
There are over a hundred "rez" in this state - I'd roll up my sleeves
and get straight to work if I were you. There are more Indians in this
state than any place in the country--you've a big job ahead of you.
) And where exactly is "round here?" Is it somewhere (e.g. the Pine
) Ridge reservation) where children are taught that but for the
) intervention of the devil (Ahriman) that they would never have been )
) born?
Uh, no. We're somewhere where my children were taught (in public
school) that Indians made totem poles and followed the buffalo. Didn't
I say this already? Yes--I think I did.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:29:01 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Anthrops & Christians
Gideon Mills wrote:
) )
) I would add to that that the local Quakers are quite close with the
) Waldorf community. Several years ago I got into a verbal confrontation
) with a local Quaker whose facade slipped when he not only adamantly came
) to the support of a local anthrop on the basis of how much that anthrop
) had financially contributed to the local food co-op, but who during a
) skit re: Susan B. Anthony wound up yelling at the young children of the
) co-op's manager who were playing at the back of the room. It was all so
) ironic considering not only the supposed concern for children and their
) "educations" but that Susan B. Anthony in her writings supported the
) oppression of anyone not white and not propertied and was a covert
) supporter of lynching. (I brought up this fact during the question and
) answer part of the presentation and the attempt was made by the
) attending Waldorfers to make me feel like a persona non gratis, which I
) took as a compliment. I also told the mother of the children - in front
) of the
) Quaker Waldorf supporter - what I thought of the Quaker's behavior
) towards her children.)
)
) Deborah
)
You've got a lively group there, sounds like anyway. Like The Blob, to
hear you tell it, your local Waldorfians have taken over the children,
the Quakers, the local food co-op, the medical establishment, and the
legacy of Susan B. Anthony. If it weren't for you standing firm against
them, they'd be taking over the First Nations peoples and their culture
too.
My kids' Waldorf school seems pretty dull in comparison.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:44:34 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
walden wrote:
)
) LOL
)
) Pretty good, Linda. Funny. Just in case anyone is unclear - Linda's
) post
) was drenched in sarcasm and exaggeration, a tactic often used by those
) unwilling to actually engage in meaningful conversation. Come on Linda
) -
) give it a try. We might even be getting somewhere, but there must be a
) little effort on both sides. To the best of my knowledge, I have dealt
) with
) your concerns and questions - even those that were off topic. I am
) trying
) to communicate here.
) Recap: It was September 18 and your name was in the subject line....
)
) - Walden
)
I wasn't exaggerating, Walden. The "cry for the poor children" against
the staging of Shakespeare took place on another list, I admit. But
they did come from the PLANS president. All the rest of it is here and
you've seen it as well as I have.
Gimmeaminute to find it, Walden. I think there were upwards of a
hundred messages with my name in the title. :-)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 19:53:10 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
walden wrote:
)
) Linda wrote:
)
) "Steiner's purportedly racist passages are so mysterious that most
) people, in this country anyway, including Anthroposophists, have no
) knowledge of it whatsoever until they bump into a PLANS recruit
) someplace, quoting obscure text (much of it, according to Peter S, isn't
) even published in English, and similarly, much of it is "cleansed" and
) buried all together by loyal followers who don't want their hero's honor
) besmirched)."
)
) Linda, the lines you come up with really do make me chuckle. Chuckling
) is a
) good thing so take it as a compliment. Are you now saying that *you* do
) not
) see the many Steiner passages you have seen here and elsewhere as being
) "racist?" The "purported racist passages" bit (above) makes me ask that
) question.
Walden, please reread the remarks made by Deborah and then perhaps you
can understand better my response to them.
"To put it succinctly, those who have the money to push
their "speech" that certain people are inferior have undermined the
"speech" of those who they have defined as "inferior" because whoever
has been convinced by the "speech" of those in power will not listen to
the "speech" of those who have been labeled as "inferior." That means
that those who are members of the class(es) of people who have been
defined as "inferior," of the dying races, of the subraces, etc. by the
anthroposophists, et. al. will not be heard by the indoctrinees nor by
those who were once among the indoctrinees and that includes those who
now criticize anthroposophy."--Deborah
What I am saying, Walden, is you can't have it both ways. Is Steiner's
racism a secret that the "cult" is in denial over, and desperate to hide
away from? Or is Steiner's racism the message by the "dominant elite"
that dupes and silences the powerless "inferiors". Weren't you the one
that asked me what I thought about his works being 'cleansed' when
translated and published?
) I am willing to accept that you really and truly do not believe
) that anthroposophy is in the classroom and that Waldorf PR is just dandy
) as
) is (denial, imo, but you believe what you want to believe) ... but do
) you
) also believe that Steiner's racist ideas were a result of bad
) stenographers
) or translations? Were they taken out of context?
I have no earthly idea if they were poorly stenographed or translated.
I do know they are frequently taken out of context (which isn't helpful
if you're trying to build a case against him imho) - I do not pretend to
know that ALL of these comments are excusable.
This is probably the 10th time I've said this, but I don't give a big
whoop about Steiner's views on the subject - I care how the teachers in
the classroom behave. Do you have any realistic idea how much racist
baggage this culture and its various peoples come with? From EVERY
direction? It's in the government. It's in the constitution. It's in
our religious institutions, as well as scientific, educational, medical,
philosophical, sociological, psychological, political, and countless
more. It's in the media. Literature. Music. Art. Politics. It's in
our holidays, for cryssakes. And we're not unique. Everyplace has it's
own racist garbage to deal with.
So I go through life demanding people own their own crap but I don't
waste a lot of time expecting people to apologize for or excuse someone
else's. It rarely accomplishes anything except to make me feel somehow
childishly superior. I've said this before, remember? Some of you
found this "dangerous" and "scary" rofl! But I've come to realize that
Waldorf supporters are frequently expected to just keep jabbering away
forever here--repeating the same things over and over and over.
) "A PLANS recruit?" Has it occurred to you that many people were
) troubled by
) Steiner's racism before PLANS?
I can imagine it might be true. But my comment still stands...I want a
show of hands here:
How many people here saw or experienced any evidence of institutional
racism in a real school?
Okay, put your hands down.
How many people here only learned about Steiner racism after coming to
the internet and finding Dan Dugan's or the PLANS website?
) Sune calls PLANS a small group of people in
) San Francisco and now you suggest the organization has recruits
) spreading
) the word of Steiner's purported racist passages.
Well, they DO, duh. You're one of them. You yourself wrote about
reading it here (or the PLANS website, not sure which) while you were
still a happy Waldorf parent, and initially making excuses for what
you'd read. Now you're a PLANS recruit and you're dutifully spreading
the word, aren't you?
) But wait... in the same
) paragraph you say that much of it isn't even published in English and is
) "cleansed and buried" anyway. So what is it?
Weren't you the one who suggested this to me, walden? You asked me my
opinion on the subject--perhaps I misunderstood you to be alleging this
WAS going on. You were instead asking my opinion on a crazy
hypothetical then? Count me as one of the multitudinous many who had
absolutely NO knowledge of Steiner's racism except what's been brought
out here and other internet messageboards where some of you same critics
have posted on the subject as well.
) Do you believe Steiner ideas
) were racist (then cleansed and buried) or Steiner did not have racist
) ideas?
I believe that if he had racist ideas that have been cleansed and
buried, or if he had no racist ideas at all, either one works just fine
by me. If he had racist ideas that are CELEBRATED and EMBRACED in
Waldorf education--now THAT'S when I'd go to war.
[ Bout time now for some critic to lecture me again about my "dangerous
ideas" :-0 ]
) And I thought you were now reading Steiner? Calling ideas that form the
) basis of his spiritual research "obscure text" is not only inaccurate,
) it'll
) guarantee you more than a few cold shoulders at your next Steiner study
) group meeting. Been there - done that. Careful.
Maybe you should try to toughen up, walden. "A few cold shoulders"? If
I can endure your scolding, patronizing me and projecting your own
angst-filled path toward post-Waldorfian "enlightenment" into mine and
my family's own experience without any lasting ill effects, hopefully I
can ride out any impending retaliation launched by these angry Steiner
study group students ready to take-me-out for this blasphemy.
Don't each of these give and take exchanges between us feel a lot like
Bumper Cars to you, walden? They do to me. I just wanted to get your
read on it...see if we're on the same page here.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 18:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
'Didn't this come from you just a few weeks ago? "I have witnessed its
effects on my own child, who has been told outright by local Waldorf
graduates that she cannot be 'Indian' because she does not fit their
stereotype of 'Indian' ".'
"You make a big noise....reminds me of the wind howling."
Are you asserting that there is a contradiction somewhere there?
' We continue to use
the term "Indian" - and very few think of themselves often as citizens
of a particular "nation"."
Yes, they do.
'They think of themselves (and each other) as
coming from a particular "rez",'
No, they do not. "Reservation" is a word and concept imposed upon the traditional and indigenous people by the U.S. government intent upon their extermination. "Rez" has never taken the place of how people identify with their ancestry and culture.
"and many think of themselves as a
particular tribe but that's very complicated for a lot of people because
their grandparents can each have come from a different tribe."
That is partially true. However, "tribe" has to do with a way of living; it is not the cultural and ancestral designation that "Nation" is. What is implicitly correct in your assertion is that tribal designation was from its inception an attempt by the U.S. government to eventually eliminate nation identity. For example, the children of a mother who is a White Earth enrollee and of a father who is a Ho-Chunk enrollee may not have the blood quantum to, under the U.S. government scheme, be an enrolled "Indian." That does not mean that the child is not "Indian."
'We call it "the rez" even though we don't really have reservations---we
have "rancherias". That's another long and ugly story which I won't go
into now, but that's the situation throughout much of this state.'
What state is that?
) And where exactly is "round here?" Is it somewhere (e.g. the Pine
) Ridge reservation) where children are taught that but for the
) intervention of the devil (Ahriman) that they would never have been )
) born?
"Uh, no. We're somewhere where my children were taught (in public
school) that Indians made totem poles and followed the buffalo. Didn't
I say this already? Yes--I think I did."
The construction of totem poles and the "following" of buffalo are as distinct as the menorah and communion. So how about the Pine Ridge situation? What is your take on that?
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: cultural imperialism?
) Linda wrote:
)
) "The most painful factor has been the expense--I
) think
) it's a terrible shame that so many families that
) want Waldorf education
) for their kids can't afford tuition."
I completely understand your thinking, Linda. I was
there once too. For many years I was such an avid
supporter of our Waldorf school that I even put
together my own packet of Waldorf PR material that I
used to hand out to friends looking for schools for
their children. When we had some financial problems I
cried in front of the school's financial manager
because I knew we weren't going to be able to continue
to send our children there. Since then I have seen
Waldorf's dark underside and learned how infused with
nonsense it is. It took me a while to get over my
embarrassment at having attempted to sell my friends
on it. But I understand why you feel the way you do
because I too was seduced by its surface beauty.
Best wishes,
Margaret
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:00:46 -0500
From: "Rudy Stein" (realwaldorf hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Anthrops & Christians
Deborah wrote:
I would add to that that the local Quakers are quite close with the Waldorf
community. Several years ago I got into a verbal confrontation with a local
Quaker whose facade slipped when he not only adamantly came to the support
of a local anthrop on the basis of how much that anthrop had financially
contributed to the local food co-op, but who during a skit re: Susan B.
Anthony wound up yelling at the young children of the co-op's manager who
were playing at the back of the room. It was all so ironic considering not
only the supposed concern for children and their "educations" but that Susan
B. Anthony in her writings supported the oppression of anyone not white and
not propertied and was a covert supporter of lynching. (I brought up this
fact during the question and answer part of the presentation and the attempt
was made by the attending Waldorfers to make me feel like a persona non
gratis, which I took as a compliment. I also told the mother of the
children - in front of the Quaker Waldorf supporter - what I thought of the
Quaker's behavior towards her children.)
)
)
)There is an old Chinese proverb that goes something like this:
If you want to change the society, you don't start a war. You quietly,
peacefully educate the children of that society.
What does that have to do with Deborah's statement? Anthrops, Christian
fundamentalists, and other fringe groups LOOK TO THE CHILDREN to educate and
indoctrinate their philosophies, little by little. The more covert, the
more peaceful the operation, the more successful it usually is. Nothing
sells like a child's well-being! It is a parent's natural instinct to want
the best for their child, and education is certainly no exception. The
facade put forth in a Waldorf school embodies the enveloping care and
well-being of that child. Nowhere evident is the controversial,
questionable elements of the Anthrop umbrella reaching over the whole thing.
Not to sound too crass, but schools and educating children is one
effective way of getting your name (and agenda) out there!
)---------------------------------
)Do you Yahoo!?
)Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
)--
)[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
)Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)Claim your Free Cruise
)http://click.topica.com/caacIqTb1dkiGb7vDb2f/PermissionData
)-------------------------------------------------------------------
)
)==^================================================================
)You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic.
)New threads are always welcome.
)
)
_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
--- L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
) This is probably the 10th time I've said this, but I
) don't give a big
) whoop about Steiner's views on the subject
Margaret here:
Steiner created anthroposophy. One of anthroposophy's
core tenets is based on a racist premise. Waldorf
teachers are anthroposophists. IMO, you should be
concerned about Steiner's views on the subject.
) - I care how the teachers in the classroom behave.
How would you know?
) I want a show of hands here:
)
) How many people here saw or experienced any evidence
) of institutional
) racism in a real school?
I can give you examples of what I consider
inappropriate remarks that some might consider
antisemitic. A mother at our ex-Waldorf school told
me that when she considered becoming a Waldorf teacher
so that she could get free tuition for her childen, a
Waldorf teacher told her she could not become a
Waldorf teacher because she is Jewish. A few years
later the teacher denied to this mother that she had
ever said that. I know of people of Jewish heritage
who are anthroposophists but I think what it boiled
down to in this case was that the mother was a
practising religious Jew who obviously would not have
converted from Judaism to the anthroposophical
polytheistic mishmash of Christianity and eastern
religions. As I have mentioned before, in another
instance, a mother told me about a history teacher
insinuating that the blame for the torture, barbaric
medical experimentation, starvation, and cold-blooded
slaughter of millions of Jews in concentration camps
could be laid at the feet of a Jew.
On another occasion - and this is not racist or
antisemitic but ties in to the hierarchical
anthroposophical worldview - a Waldorf teacher told me
that the people in a high crime area of our city were
*animals.* I was shocked at the time to hear someone
I thought was supposed to be a *spiritual* person
dismissing other human beings in such a manner. Now
that I am familiar with some of Steiner's teachings
about the so-called devolution of some people into
into so-called lower forms of animal life, I see that
remark in a different light. My worldview includes
the obligation of those of us who are more fortunate
to try to figure out ways to help break the vicious
cycle of people who commit crimes because they are
raised by people who commit crimes or who become
involved in crime because severe learning disabilities
prevent them from getting an adequate education. I
don't believe in writing people off as animals, or
mistakes of evolution, or spiritually unevolved.
Since leaving the school, I have been told of other
instances of racism and antisemitism in Waldorf
schools. Given Steiner's own words on the issues, I
don't dismiss these accounts easily.
Best wishes,
Margaret
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:41:14 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Linda and Brad's discreditation and disinformation campaign
Hi Linda,
I asked:
Are you now saying that *you* do
) not see the many Steiner passages you have seen here and elsewhere as
being
) "racist?" The "purported racist passages" bit (above) makes me ask that
) question.
Linda replied:
"Walden, please reread the remarks made by Deborah and then perhaps you
can understand better my response to them."
Done. OK. But you still have not answered my direct question to you
regarding what I see as blatant racist comments from Steiner and how you
seem to see these quotes as "purported racist passages." The question was
not a trick question, Linda. I am curious as to your choice of the word,
"purported." I'm not pulling the occasional word and twisting it for any
agenda. It's an important point, imo.
Linda wrote:
"What I am saying, Walden, is you can't have it both ways. Is Steiner's
racism a secret that the "cult" is in denial over, and desperate to hide
away from?"
No, don't think Steiner's racism (do we agree on this point now?) is a
secret. I do believe, however, Steiner's racism is certainly not front and
centre with the myriad of palatable Steiner quotes we see from
Athroposophists at Waldorf Schools. Recent edits of some books might help
to make those remarks a "secret" at some point down the road - only
available to a certain segment of Anthro society - i.e. those who lead the
Way. One does need to take the time to read books and lectures in order to
see not only the racist remarks but how those concepts help form the
foundation on which Anthroposophy stands as a
philoshophy/religion/spiritual path.
As for "denial," well, yes I have seen denial of the obvious on this list
and elsewhere for years now.
Linda wrote:
"Or is Steiner's racism the message by the "dominant elite"
that dupes and silences the powerless "inferiors".
Steiner's racism is Steiner's racism. I don't know about a "dominant elite"
but I do know of anthroposophists who refuse to discuss that topic. My
hunch is that as Anthroposophists seem to generally accept that Steiner was
clairvoyant and spiritually enlightened and/or an initiate... he was
infallible. He might have made comments that *sounded* racist but that is
not what he actually *meant.* The *what did he mean* bit is what interests
me as well as the idolatry of ideology.
Linda wrote:
"Weren't you the one that asked me what I thought about his works being
'cleansed' when translated and published?"
Yup. What do you think about that?
I wrote:
) I am willing to accept that you really and truly do not believe
) that anthroposophy is in the classroom and that Waldorf PR is just dandy
) as
) is (denial, imo, but you believe what you want to believe) ... but do
) you
) also believe that Steiner's racist ideas were a result of bad
) stenographers
) or translations? Were they taken out of context?
Linda replied:
"I have no earthly idea if they were poorly stenographed or translated.
I do know they are frequently taken out of context (which isn't helpful
if you're trying to build a case against him imho) - I do not pretend to
know that ALL of these comments are excusable."
OK - please point to a case or two where you "know" Steiner's racist ideas
have been "frequently taken out of context."
Linda wrote:
"This is probably the 10th time I've said this, but I don't give a big
whoop about Steiner's views on the subject - I care how the teachers in
the classroom behave. Do you have any realistic idea how much racist
baggage this culture and its various peoples come with? From EVERY
direction?"
I agree there is racist baggage elsewhere. Many fine people work to shine
light on the baggage and bring it out into the open. In this case, we are
talking about Rudolf Steiner and *his* racist baggage and how those ideas
might find their way into the Waldorf environment. Shall we simply ignore
this particular baggage because there is similar baggage elsewhere? I think
this is where we disagree, Linda. It might be at the centre of our
differences. You don't give a big whoop about it because there is racism
elsewhere, as well. I find that attitude rather sad, really. Have you ever
thought that Waldorf might be a better - far better, perhaps - place if more
people *did* give a big whoop about Steiner's racism? Imagine having Anthro
Central at AWSNA actually going on record as rejecting Steiner's racism.
Imagine a Waldorf environment where enrolment reflected the real cultural
diversity of the local community - where ALL families would feel welcome ...
even those of colour who had taken the time to read Steiner and his
racial/spiritual hierarchy and had felt repulsed by such concepts and would
NEVER have wanted their children to be part of such a "community"... in
denial. Imagine their reliefe when the baggage is dealt with. Why NOT deal
with the baggage? If you help Waldorf/Anthro to deal with the baggage in
the near future, Peter's Anthroposophy book might even have a happy ending.
Kinda gives you the warm fuzzies just thinking about it, huh?
Linda wrote:
"It's in the government. It's in the constitution. It's in
our religious institutions, as well as scientific, educational, medical,
philosophical, sociological, psychological, political, and countless
more. It's in the media. Literature. Music. Art. Politics. It's in
our holidays, for cryssakes. And we're not unique. Everyplace has it's
own racist garbage to deal with."
And it's in your Waldorf movement for spiritual renewal, Linda. By virtue
of having had my kids in a Waldorf school movement
that could not answer - deal with - questions of racism in Steiner's concept
of past, present and future... I was not dealing with my "own racist
garbage." The times they are a changin....
Linda wrote:
" But I've come to realize that
Waldorf supporters are frequently expected to just keep jabbering away
forever here--repeating the same things over and over and over."
No. I don't think anyone expects anything of you. If you choose to repeat
the same things over and over and over, I respectfully suggest you ask
yourself...why?
I'll speak from experience here because I can relate to this. I came to a
point where I realized I was talking without listening. I felt attacked and
I did not like the attackers... or so I chose to believe. So I talked alot.
Not on this list but IRL. Fact is, the ideas bothered me and I really
needed to work on that riddle - the people behind them were probably just
fine. Eventually my perspective changed and I felt no need to same the same
things over and over and over again. I have come to think of that response
as one of denial. Been there/Donethat.
Linda wrote:
"Don't each of these give and take exchanges between us feel a lot like
Bumper Cars to you, walden? They do to me. I just wanted to get your
read on it...see if we're on the same page here."
Not really. From time to time we seem to connect on some level. More like
a merry-go-round, maybe? One that goes up and down as it spins. I like the
ups.
I think it's wonderful that you take the time to share your views here.
Your "give and take" is appropriate, methinks. I actually try to take what
you give - thinking and trying to understand your intent, although this
medium is not the friendliest way to communicate. That's a problem (your
bumper cars) perhaps. I do wonder, though, how difficult is it for you to
really listen to what some of us are trying to communicate here? I wonder
if you have a hard time trying to "take" what I am trying to "give?" I know
you feel that Waldorf is a good thing for your kids and you could very well
be entirely correct - who am *I* to judge? But I wonder if those feelings
(Waldorf is good for your kids) might make it difficult to *grok* some of
what I am trying to communicate here with regards to research and
Waldorf-the-religious-program, Steiner's racism, etc? I hope that makes
sense....
- Walden
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1501
-- Topica Digest --
RE: cultural imperialism?
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: cultural imperialism? sorry
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: cultural imperialism?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
federal appeals court decides Camphill work is religious
By dan dandugan.com
Napa Valley Charter wants to join local district
By dan dandugan.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:33:28 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism?
Gideon Mills wrote:
)
)
)
) L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com) wrote:
)
)
) 'Didn't this come from you just a few weeks ago? "I have witnessed its
) effects on my own child, who has been told outright by local Waldorf
) graduates that she cannot be 'Indian' because she does not fit their
) stereotype of 'Indian' ".'
)
) "You make a big noise....reminds me of the wind howling."
)
) Are you asserting that there is a contradiction somewhere there?
Yes, I am. You suffer many stereotypes yourself about who is and who
isn't "valid". Very few I know have gone to some fantasy official First
Nations academy to study up on your 'approved' list of radical activist
issues and language. They're "real" nevertheless, Deborah.
) ' We continue to use
) the term "Indian" - and very few think of themselves often as citizens
) of a particular "nation"."
)
) Yes, they do.
)
Some do. We don't. Forgive me for being so presumptuous here, but you
CAN admit, can't you, that you're not the official spokesperson for each
and every one of 800ish remaining Indian tribes in this country, nor all
2 million peoples? Just 25 of these 800 tribes probably account for
over half the population. About 700,000 are dispersed among approx 675
tribes.
Let me give you this picture. Thanks to government enrollment records,
my own children trace their ancestry to 6 different tribes - I have no
idea who the ancestors were for two of the tribes listed. Five of the
tribes have multiple names or multiple spellings for the same name. One
of the names is in English. Another name, I've been told, is Indian for
"western place"--but not in the same language spoken by the people who
were given the name. The words (sometimes pushed together into just one
word) were taken from a language spoken by peoples who lived hundreds of
miles to the south. This ancestry is from among just 500ish people who
managed to survive the murder, starvation, disease and forced marches
that killed the other 95%, descendants who'd survived even earlier
disease epidemics a hundred or so years earlier which killed probably
another 200,00-300,000 people altogether, few of them ever having had
any real contact yet with any settlers.
These ancestors in our family come from 4 "rez", NONE of which land with
the resources needed to feed and support the people living there. So
these ancestors survived largely by working as indentured servants in
service to those settlers who'd conspired to eliminate them. By law,
any Indian child was forced to leave their home and perform slave labor
up until a certain age (I'm remembering it to be aged 12 which is at
least very close if not exactly right). As the peoples were
slaughtered, terrorized and herded off to these remote and unsuitable
spots to live, nobody said "We'll put this tribe here, and that tribe
there", so often people from two or three different tribes were forced
together. Having already spent several years scattered and scrabbling
desperately for food as a result of dislocation, drought, and
intimidation from armed settlers, with some splitting off to survive by
looting from settlers what they managed to find untended, these forced
resettlements also resulted in some tribal members being apprehended
remotely from the others and permanently separated from each other in
different "rez".
Today, the largest of these "rez" have at most 300 people living there.
It's officially registered to two tribes. As is not uncommon in Native
American communities, unfortunately, the social fabric there is
tumultous to say the least. There's not much year round work available
in the area, many people leave if they can find a good job somewhere
else and come back if they lose it. Moms and dads (who often didn't
both grow up in the same rez) split up, take one child here, another one
there--off the rez. One family gets into a fight with another one, and
this nasty battle flares up to push one of them off the rez with some
excuse or another. Or they get so ticked off they take off on their own
initiative. Often people are pushed out by other family members in the
SAME household.
As one might imagine, Deborah, surviving a protracted 50 years long
holocaust, being 95% wiped out, just a few hundred surviving and being
relocated along with total strangers to a strange place which you
immediately have to LEAVE again all by yourself to work someplace else
just so you can eat, where each new generation develops more subdivided
ties to different tribes and rez and if they DO live together anymore,
it's in rez that have anywhere from 75 to under 10 homes on them, one of
which is maybe or maybe not "yours" to live in only so long as the often
fickle tribal leadership lets you have it--this self-identification as a
member of some Indian "nation" doesn't quite fit like it might in other
places. These ancestors didn't negotiate treaties as a "nation". They
weren't even given reservations as a "nation". If they ever behaved as
"nations" with each other, nobody remembers it now. A number of
historians and anthropologists work at recalling those past days, but it
is NOT a community or cultural memory here anymore. The concept of
"nationhood" isn't completely alien--but it's more a modern legal angle
to argue with the state and federal governments over sovereignty
disputes than it is any kind of "selfhood".
) 'They think of themselves (and each other) as
) coming from a particular "rez",'
)
) No, they do not.
How on earth would you know? You're stereotyping again. You seem to be
taking activist "rallying cries" and protest speeches and pretending
it's representative of some "universal" of all various First Nations
peoples.
) "Reservation" is a word and concept imposed upon the traditional
) and indigenous people by the U.S. government intent upon their
) extermination. "Rez" has never taken the place of how people
) identify with their ancestry and culture.
Oh, how you DO go on, don't you?
Listen, virtually EVERYTHING was lost to most here. I only knew one
person who could still speak her ancestral language--my children's
great-grandmother. Anthropologists and linguists often came to her to
make tapes of the language--she died 25 years ago. Another relative
from another tribe remembered very few words, but she gave all 9 of her
children, 30 plus grandchildren, and I don't know how many great
grandchildren Indian names while she was alive. Most of us can't
remember the names she gave us. Her father was a "seer" for the tribe
who had the power of medicines and performing spells. He was the last
of a long line to do this--that once very significant tradition is gone
with him. She would tell stories, and her one child that was best at
retelling them herself married a Mexican and moved far away. The
storytellers today research for stories in libraries in books, most
recorded by white anthropologists or historians.
The lands were lost, the traditions, the technology, the way they fed
themselves, the language and history. After being nearly completely
wiped out, they were then resettled on "reservations" almost 150 years
ago. By the 1930s the memory of the process of resettlement was nearly
gone - and would be completely gone today except for a very small
handful of written historical records, just a couple of which came from
first hand accounts by the Indians involved. Everything else was
written from the settlers' perspective.
What unique cultural traces remain? Sweat houses, which have come and
gone and come back again, and some dance--both exactly the same as every
other tribe's here.
The resettlements were "imposed" on them, but those rez are the
fundamental foundation to just about all the cultural, historical and
political bonds left here and you pompously sniff people shouldn't have
that either? Just doesn't suit your taste in culturally exotic and
romantic anti-establishmentarianism, eh?
Go find somebody else to "save". And concentrate this time on finding
somebody that actually gives you permission to dictate to them their
"shoulds" and "shouldn'ts".
)
) "and many think of themselves as a
) particular tribe but that's very complicated for a lot of people because
)
) their grandparents can each have come from a different tribe."
)
) That is partially true. However, "tribe" has to do with a way of
) living; it is not the cultural and ancestral designation that "Nation"
) is. What is implicitly correct in your assertion is that tribal
) designation was from its inception an attempt by the U.S. government to
) eventually eliminate nation identity.
Like I said--the people I know didn't go to the First Nations Activist
Protester Academy and apparently weren't taught how they're "supposed"
to think of themselves.
) For example, the children of a mother who is a White Earth enrollee and
) of a father who is a Ho-Chunk enrollee may not have the blood quantum
) to, under the U.S. government scheme, be an enrolled "Indian." That
) does not mean that the child is not "Indian."
I'm not clear what your point is because "blood quantum" introduces a
whole nest of issues which contradict your arguments so far. The
federal government doesn't meddle much anymore in determining who is and
who isn't defined as a tribal enrollee--for the most part that's left to
tribal sovereignty. Tribes most definitely often REQUIRE a federal CIB
to become an enrolled member--but the "scheme" is defined by the tribe,
not the federal government. And like I said already, here you are not
enrolled in a "nation" OR a tribe, but instead to a rez (which are in
some cases federally registered to more than one tribe!). And you were
just earlier denying that's the reality of how we think of ourselves
here!
)
) 'We call it "the rez" even though we don't really have reservations---we
)
) have "rancherias". That's another long and ugly story which I won't go
) into now, but that's the situation throughout much of this state.'
)
) What state is that?
California. Why do you ask? Are you taking up my suggestion and coming
here to conduct a "quality assurance" inspection? Making sure, are you,
that there aren't any Indians of "doubtful" ancestry about to complicate
your stereotypes?
)
) ) And where exactly is "round here?" Is it somewhere (e.g. the Pine
) ) Ridge reservation) where children are taught that but for the
) ) intervention of the devil (Ahriman) that they would never have been )
) ) born?
)
) "Uh, no. We're somewhere where my children were taught (in public
) school) that Indians made totem poles and followed the buffalo. Didn't
) I say this already? Yes--I think I did."
)
) The construction of totem poles and the "following" of buffalo are as
) distinct as the menorah and communion.
No kidding.
) So how about the Pine Ridge situation? What is your take on that?
My take on it is that whatever is going on there doesn't look much like
the way you described it. I'm highly suspicious that the children there
are taught they're the result of satan's meddling. My first tendency is
to anticipate that other Waldorf schools are more likely to resemble OUR
Waldorf school (which is both sane and well-meaning), and somewhat
disinclined to displace that image casually, in knee-jerk reflex to
every wild and crazy internet rumor that floats up on this board.
Unless you have something more substantive, or can at least describe the
situation in some plausible fashion, I'm not That's my take.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 21:36:42 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: cultural imperialism? sorry
L G Clemens wrote:
) Unless you have something more substantive, or can at least describe the
)
) situation in some plausible fashion, I'm not That's my take.
Sorry--that should read "I'm not chasing these shadows. That's my take."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 23:45:50 -0700
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: cultural imperialism?
Linda wrote:
"These teachers also teach wet-on-wet watercolor (GASP!) and celebrate
festivals (HORRORS!) and make form drawings (Y-I-K-E-S!)."
Just to be clear here - the reason many of us have concerns about these
Waldorf exercises is not because they are bad things to do or learn; it's
that we did not understand what they were all about prior to enrolling our
kids in their schools. When I drop my kids off at hockey practice I have a
pretty good idea what the coach will be up to. When another parent drops
her kids off at Sunday School, that parent has a similar understanding of
the goings on. Waldorf is more of a mystery - a Mystery School in the real
sense. Too bad parents are often kept in the dark with meaningless/innocent
explanations for the esoteric program. Of course, Steiner knew that parents
were not up to snuff in the first place:
"You will have to take over children for their education and instruction -
children who will have received already (as you must remember) the
education, or mis-education given them by their parents. Indeed our
intentions will only be fully accomplished when we, as humanity, will have
reached the stage where parents, too, will understand that special tasks are
set for mankind to-day, even for the first years of the child's education.
But when we receive the children into the school we shall still be able to
make up for many things which have been done wrongly, or left undone, in the
first years of the child's life. For this we must fill ourselves with the
consciousness through which alone we can truly teach and educate."
Steiner, The Study of Man, Lecture One (August, 1919)
You *do* realize the reason behind Waldorf wet-on-wet, Waldorf festivals and
form drawings... don't you, Linda?
If not, you might like to do a little research and not within the folds of
Waldorf PR. Alternatively, try suggesting to the folks at your local
Waldorf School that they take a year or two off with the wet-on-wet
rainbow-Sun blobs and have the kids learn to paint landscapes. Festivals -
suggest ignoring Michaelmas and replace it with a festival from Africa or a
First Nations festival. Suggest axing form drawings for a year and replace
it with sketching portraits (with black crayons). Note: Form drawings can
actually help the trained teacher see deeper into the child's incarnation
process (a jagged or uneven line means the etheric forces are not yet free
to draw and the child has not incarnated). Did you know that Steiner would
prescribe form drawing when he saw a child with an animalic head because it
meant there was a defect in the cerebellum? If a child cannot draw a curved
form line it means he or she had meningitis or encephalitis in his earlier
years....
I would like to have had at least some understanding of how certain teachers
in my child's school viewed my child and the reasons behind his daily
routines at the school. Do you think this is asking too much?
- Walden
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:27:51 -0700
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: federal appeals court decides Camphill work is religious
In this excerpt from the 3rd Circuit Court's decision in -Camphill
Soltane-, the court quotes the arguments made by Camphill that a
foreign worker's Anthroposophically-inspired work as a houseparent
qualifies as religious activity under U.S. immigration law:
)Camphill consistently testified that Goetze's position involved a
)number of clearly religious responsibilities, including "imbuing
)residents with the religious values and practices of Camphill[;]
)conducting house-based activities, including practical chores,
)prayer, festival celebrations and Bible readings[;] instructing
)other staff in the practices and Christian values of Camphill
)life[;] [and] [t]eaching religious subjects and values to mentally
)retarded young adults." App. I at 35. Moreover, the religious
)texts included in the administrative record, including transcripts
)from a series of lectures entitled "Curative Education," App. II at
)62-85, appear to provide some support for Camphill's contention that
)even the prescribed manner of care for its mentally h