return to WCA Archive Index
There are 3 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Peter Staudenmaier
1b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
1c. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Peter Staudenmaier" pstaud hotmail.com pstauden
Date: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:20 am ((PDT))
A few days ago I mentioned in a message to Roger that a number of leading
Italian anthroposophists were also fascists. While several prominent German
anthroposophists were also Nazis, the role of the anthroposophical movement
in Fascist Italy is somewhat in contrast to the situation in Nazi Germany,
where there was considerable controversy among both anthroposophists and
Nazis over relations between the anthroposophical movement and the regime.
In Italy, for much of Mussolini's reign the anthroposophical movement had in
general a notably comfortable relationship with fascism. Leading
ultra-fascists such as Giovanni Preziosi were longtime supporters of
anthroposophy, and an anthroposophist was a cabinet minister in Mussolini's
first government, though he later became an opponent of Mussolini. During
the Fascist era, the political police frequently noted the political
reliability of anthroposophist groups and individuals and reported that
Italian anthroposophists demonstrated "sentiments favorable to the regime".
What follows is a quick and incomplete summary of Italian anthroposophists
who were actively involved in the fascist movement.
1. Ettore Martinoli, secretary general of the Italian Anthroposophical
Society from its founding in 1931, was a militant in the Fascist movement
from the very beginning of that movement in 1919 and remained totally
committed to Fascism until the bitter end in 1945. His last official
position was chief of the propaganda section of the General Inspectorate for
Race, the Fascist office in charge of implementing the antisemitic
legislation; before that he was the head of the Center for the Study of the
Jewish Problem in Trieste. In 1943 he wrote a celebration of Rudolf Steiner
for the hard-line fascist journal La Vita Italiana.
2. Massimo Scaligero, the most famous Italian anthroposophist after 1945,
was a prominent fascist racial theorist and an important promoter of a
radical antisemitic stance within the fascist movement; along with his
friend Julius Evola, he was the best-known exponent of "spiritual racism" as
the crowning achievement of fascism.
3. Rinaldo Kfferle, the foremost anthroposophist publicist in Italy in the
1930s and 1940s, was a dedicated fascist. In late September 1938, in the
midst of the upsurge of officially sponsored antisemitism within fascist
ranks, Kfferle characterized himself publicly as an "Aryan Catholic
Fascist".
4. Luigi Chimelli, anthroposophist and the chief public representative of
the biodynamic movement in fascist Italy, was an outspoken and effusive
admirer of Mussolini and of Fascism, particularly its environmental
programs.
5. Luigi Calabrini, secretary of the Italian Group for Anthroposophical
Studies, was a member in good standing of the Fascist party, which he joined
in May 1921 (Mussolini did not come to power until a year and half later).
Once again, I think that personal examples such as these are best understood
in the context of broader organizational and ideological connections between
anthroposophy and fascism, a topic to which I hope to return eventually. It
is also worth noting that Steiner remained an important figure for some
sectors of the radical right in Italy after 1945 as well. Greetings to all,
Peter Staudenmaier
_________________________________________________________________
http://liveearth.msn.com
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:00 pm ((PDT))
) In Italy, for much of Mussolini's reign the anthroposophical movement had in
) general a notably comfortable relationship with fascism. Leading
) ultra-fascists such as Giovanni Preziosi were longtime supporters of
) anthroposophy, and an anthroposophist was a cabinet minister in Mussolini's
) first government...(snip)...During
) the Fascist era, the political police frequently noted the political
) reliability of anthroposophist groups and individuals and reported that
) Italian anthroposophists demonstrated "sentiments favorable to the regime".
Truly fascinating. Why, in your opinion, were fascism and Anthroposophy apparently a better
"fit" in Italy than in Germany? Were German fascists just more fascistic? (One gets that
impression. There was something buffoonish about Mussolini and his crew, but it's hard to
laugh at Hitler and the SS.)
--War Ringer Logs
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:08 pm ((PDT))
Quick addendum. Chaplin and Brooks found ways to laugh at Hitler, but central to the humor
of both THE GREAT DICTATOR and (even more clearly) THE PRODUCERS is the extreme
parody embodied in the Hitler character. Laughing at the Fuhrer as he actually was would be
harder, in not indeed impossible.
-R
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
This message is from the new list on Yahoo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 3 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Virus? Bug? Help?
From: Roger Rawlings
2a. thoughtful article about tv
From: Dan Dugan
2b. Re: thoughtful article about tv
From: Margaret Sachs
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. Virus? Bug? Help?
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Wed Aug 1, 2007 8:28 am ((PDT))
At Yahoo Mail, I've received a bunch of spam of a sort I never received elsewhere: hailing me
as a lottery winner, etc. I delete these as soon as they come in. But suddenly my computer is
operating much more slowly than before. I suspect the computer has been infected. (I work
on an iMac, so this has never been a big worry for me before.) Anyone else having similar
problems? Anyone know what to do about it?
--Roger
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. thoughtful article about tv
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Wed Aug 1, 2007 9:24 am ((PDT))
Here's a thoughtful article about a mom's stuggle with Waldorf ideals:
http://www.umassmag.com/2007/Summer2007/Features/rule_98.html
-Dan Dugan
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: thoughtful article about tv
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Wed Aug 1, 2007 4:24 pm ((PDT))
--- Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com) wrote:
) Here's a thoughtful article about a mom's stuggle
) with Waldorf ideals:
)
)
http://www.umassmag.com/2007/Summer2007/Features/rule_98.html
)
) -Dan Dugan
The author obviously recognized the cultic nature of
Waldorf when she wrote:
"And despite the fact that I think television is an
elixir that needs to be doled out in small doses and
with great care, I also believe that to deprive
yourself of it entirely is to take yourself out of the
culture÷and isnât that how that Guyana thing started?"
Margaret
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
This message is from the new list on Yahoo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is 1 message in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. The Australian--early concern about Steiner method
From: Dan Dugan
Message
________________________________________________________________________
1. The Australian--early concern about Steiner method
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Thu Aug 2, 2007 5:16 pm ((PDT))
Early concern about Steiner method
by Milanda Rout
The Australian, July 28, 2007
(http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,22147232-12332,00.html?from=public_rss)
SERIOUS concerns about Steiner education were raised in a government
report seven years before a policy change by the Bracks
administration cleared the way for its use in Victorian state schools.
The report, completed by the Victorian Department of Education, says
Steiner's approach -- in which children learn to read and write after
their adult teeth come through at age seven -- was the "antithesis"
of the Government's program.
The report was completed by two curriculum officers in 2000 for then
acting regional director Greg Gibbs after Footscray City Primary
School indicated it wanted a Steiner stream.
Mr Gibbs told the school he was unable to "support such a proposal"
but the principal introduced Steiner in 2001.
The program has caused deep division among parents, and the state
Government has been forced to intervene, dissolving the school
council last year and establishing an inquiry.
Despite this, the state Government last year changed departmental
policy, allowing programs such as Steiner and Montessori to be run in
state schools.
The report examined Steiner curriculum proposals provided by
Footscray City Primary School and information available online about
Steiner education.
Authors Pat Hincks and Janette Cook say Steiner's ban on computers
and multimedia in primary school is in "direct contradiction" to
department policies.
"Steiner education is based on a philosophy of cocooning children
from the world to develop their imagination," the report says.
"This is in direct contrast to, for example, the studies of society
and environment ... where the emphasis is on study of family as a
'starting point to help them understand the world in which they
live'."
A Victorian Department of Education spokeswoman said specialised
curriculums had rigorous guidelines.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
This message is from the new list on Yahoo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 4 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. You've received a private message from a friend!
From: girlgmrider
2a. girlgmrider
From: Gideon Mills
2b. Admin: Re: [wc] girlgmrider
From: Dan Dugan
3. Comprehensive Model of Recruitment to Cults (abstract)
From: Dan Dugan
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. You've received a private message from a friend!
Posted by: "girlgmrider" girlgmrider yahoo.com girlgmrider
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2007 4:59 am ((PDT))
I read your profile today, I thought I would drop you a line and hope to become your friend! Check my personal page here:
http://girlgmrider.googlepages.com/girlrider.htm
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. girlgmrider
Posted by: "Gideon Mills" gideonmills yahoo.com gideonmills
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2007 6:02 pm ((PDT))
I received an e-mail with the subject line: " [wc] You've received a private message from a friend!" I suspect it is not legit. Has anyone else received a same or similar message? I deleted it without opening it.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Admin: Re: [wc] girlgmrider
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2007 10:44 pm ((PDT))
)I received an e-mail with the subject line: " [wc] You've received a
)private message from a friend!" I suspect it is not legit. Has
)anyone else received a same or similar message? I deleted it
)without opening it.
I deleted the subscription. We're an open enrollment group, and
people troll Yahoo looking for such groups to spam. Ignore such
messages, I'll take care of them.
-Dan Dugan, moderator
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. Comprehensive Model of Recruitment to Cults (abstract)
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Sun Aug 5, 2007 8:37 pm ((PDT))
Abstract from handbook of the International Cultic Studies
Association's International Conference, Brussels, June 29-July 1,
2007. ICSA can be found at: (http://www.icsahome.com/)
-Dan Dugan
Comprehensive Model of Recruitment to Cults
Piotr Tomasz Nowakowski, Ph.D.
On the basis of his research, the author attempts to formulate a
comprehensive classification of methods of recruitment used by cults.
A certain kind of degeneration of religion is characteristic of such
structures, and thus it is not surprising that it finds its
expression in their methods of recruitment. People who recruit for
cults know that it is impossible to change somebody's way of thinking
at one stroke. Therefore their general strategy involves a gradual
introduction into the group, i.e., they proceed step by step. It is a
standard for recruiters that they don't tell all the truth about
their group, but they merely use "half-truths" or "quarter-truths."
They select information precisely and hide their purposes
providently, which leads to the situation that potential adherents
are constantly underinformed. In principle the candidates are told
only as much as they are allowed to know. What is more the recruiter
obtains personal information about the potential adherent in order to
estimate whether he/she will be a valuable 'acquisition' for the
group or not. When the candidate is assessed as worth being invested
in, he/she will still be receiving attention and care by the time
he/she commits himself/herself to join the group. At the next step
the author presents three categories of methods of recruitment:
methods of emotional influence, methods of camouflage, and methods of
authority.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 5 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: pstauden
1b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
2. Animals (cont.)
From: Roger Rawlings
3. Animals (cont.).2
From: Roger Rawlings
4. "anti-waldorf" felt dolls
From: Dan Dugan
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "pstauden" pstaud hotmail.com pstauden
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 7:23 am ((PDT))
Hi Roger,
)Truly fascinating. Why, in your opinion, were fascism and
Anthroposophy apparently a better
)"fit" in Italy than in Germany? Were German fascists just more
fascistic?
That's a very good question. Part of it probably has to do with the
factor you point to, that Nazism in general was more extreme and more
intolerant than Italian Fascism. But the level of ideological
similarity may have played a role too -- it can seem somewhat
paradoxical, but worldview-based tendencies that have a fair bit in
common ideologically can end up being more intensively competitive
organizationally, thus the pronounced Germanness of anthroposophy may
have made it seem more threatening, as a potential rival, to some
Nazis than to most Italian Fascists. Also, the Italian
anthroposophical movement simply wasn't very big. I think the really
interesting thing is the extent to which Italian anthroposophists
wholeheartedly embraced the racial campaign; Martinoli and Scaligero
were the most prominent example of this, but there were others as
well, for instance anthroposophist Aniceto del Massa, who was the
editor of the periodical "The Jewish Problem" published by the Centers
for the Study of the Jewish Problem, one of the chief institutional
expressions of Fascist antisemitism. None of this is acknowledged
within the anthroposophical movement today. Greetings,
Peter S.
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 8:00 am ((PDT))
)Snip -- [T]he level of ideological
) similarity may have played a role too -- it can seem somewhat
) paradoxical, but worldview-based tendencies that have a fair bit in
) common ideologically can end up being more intensively competitive
) organizationally, thus the pronounced Germanness of anthroposophy may
) have made it seem more threatening, as a potential rival, to some
) Nazis than to most Italian Fascists.
Point well taken. If I understand the historical record, since the Nazis sought to remake (or
revive, or purify) the German soul according their own tenets, they would have seen any
alternative form of "Germanness" as a threat.
--Roger
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. Animals (cont.)
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 7:51 am ((PDT))
(Heat wave/drought.)
I'm aware that in writing about animals, I often flirt with the "pathetic fallacy." Yet
accumulating scientific evidence shows that the vaunted superiority of humans over other
animals is becoming harder and harder to define.
In writing, yesterday, that my dog Jane tries to talk, I was probably tapping on the edge of
the fallacy (if not plunging into it head-over-heels). Dogs clearly can learn to understand
at least some words, although they almost certainly do not understand them as we do
(they lack the requisite speech centers in their brains). Probably they simply learn to
associate certains sounds (not "words" as such) with certains actions of objects (sit, stay;
Jane, toy). Still, their "language" skills can be impressive. As I may have mentioned before,
reportedly there's a border collie in Germany who knows the names of at least 90 different
objects and will fetch them on command: blue ball, red ball, yellow bone, pink elephant,
etc. (I've seen films of the dog doing this.)
It is also clear that dogs express themselves, in part, through vocalizations. The "whoo-
hoo" that Jane greets me with may be a crude attempt to mimic my greetings to her, or
(more likely) they may be a natural form of expression for her. Dogs have an enormous
"vocabulary" of sounds (not words): multiple types of barks, growls, whines, yips, howls,
moans, etc. Any attentive dog owner can soon learn what many of these mean: WELCOME!
(to the dog's owner: high-pitched, rapid), go away! (to a stranger: low-pitched, slower),
I'm happy, I'm gonna bite, I'm in pain, etc.
Now, here's the point relevant to this list. Steiner would have me believe that Jane is
descended from some human being who, long ago, sank below the human level, became
sub-human, and ultimately sank to the canine level of development.
Strangely, the fossile record gives no support to Steiner. Instead, the fossil record shows
that indeed Jane and I are related, but our common ancestor was not human: it was a
primitive mammal from whom various mammalian lines branched off. Anthroposophists
face a challenge on this subject (as on so many others÷although they generally don't face
up to any of them). There's a wealth of evidence supporting Darwin and his successors.
Where's the evidence supporting Steiner?
I would humbly submit that on this subject (as on so many others) Steiner was simply dead
wrong.
-R
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. Animals (cont.).2
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 10:35 am ((PDT))
(Heat wave/drought.)
I'm aware that in writing about animals, I often flirt with the "pathetic fallacy." Yet
accumulating scientific evidence shows that the vaunted superiority of humans over other
animals is becoming harder and harder to define.
In writing, yesterday, that my dog Jane tries to talk, I was probably tapping on the edge of
the fallacy (if not plunging into it head-over-heels). Dogs clearly can learn to understand
at least some words, although they almost certainly do not understand them as we do
(they lack the requisite speech centers in their brains). Probably they simply learn to
associate certains sounds (not "words" as such) with certains actions of objects (sit, stay;
Jane, toy). Still, their "language" skills can be impressive. As I may have mentioned before,
reportedly there's a border collie in Germany who knows the names of at least 90 different
objects and will fetch them on command: blue ball, red ball, yellow bone, pink elephant,
etc. (I've seen films of the dog doing this.)
It is also clear that dogs express themselves, in part, through vocalizations. The "whoo-
hoo" that Jane greets me with may be a crude attempt to mimic my greetings to her, or
(more likely) they may be a natural form of expression for her. Dogs have an enormous
"vocabulary" of sounds (not words): multiple types of barks, growls, whines, yips, howls,
moans, etc. Any attentive dog owner can soon learn what many of these mean: WELCOME!
(to the dog's owner: high-pitched, rapid), go away! (to a stranger: low-pitched, slower),
I'm happy, I'm gonna bite, I'm in pain, etc.
Now, here's the point relevant to this list. The subtext here is evolution. Steiner's theory of
evolution in incompatible with Darwin's. Which theory is correct (or at least closer to the
truth)? Steiner would have us believe that Jane is descended (or actually is) the incarnation
of a spirit that was once human but degenerated, becoming sub-human, ultimately
sinking to the canine level of development.
Strangely, the fossile record gives no support to Steiner's evolutionary views. Instead, the
fossil record shows (to stick with my small, personal example) that indeed Jane and I are
related, but not because we both sprang from human stock. Rather, we have a common
that was a primitive mammal from whom various mammalian lines branched off.
Anthroposophists face a challenge on the subject of evolution (as they face challenges on
so many other subjects÷although they generally don't face up to any of them). There's a
wealth of evidence supporting Darwin and his successors. Where's the evidence supporting
Steiner?
I would humbly submit that on this subject (as on so many others) Steiner was simply dead
wrong.
-R
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. "anti-waldorf" felt dolls
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Tue Aug 7, 2007 3:05 pm ((PDT))
This artist apparently has some issues...
http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=6553705
-Dan Dugan
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 5 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: "anti-waldorf" felt dolls
From: Roger Rawlings
2a. Re: Rudolf Steiner Fellowship Community
From: joiedevivre68
3a. Re: "anti-waldorf" felt dolls.2
From: Roger Rawlings
4. Clarification
From: Roger Rawlings
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: M Howell
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: "anti-waldorf" felt dolls
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 6:52 am ((PDT))
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, Dan Dugan (dan ...) wrote:
)
) This artist apparently has some issues...
)
) http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=6553705
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
Now we're getting somewhere!
I have a friend who has taught his dog to bark fiercely at the sound "Osama bin Laden." I'll
gladly train anyone's dog to do the same at the sound "Rudolf Steiner."
-Rearing Growls
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Rudolf Steiner Fellowship Community
Posted by: "joiedevivre68" joiedevivre68 yahoo.com joiedevivre68
Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 1:07 pm ((PDT))
Any intentional community...or rather, any community, intentional or
not, presents any family with powerful challenges:
How do you balance the needs of the family with those of the larger
community?
Does the family share the community's expectations of how children
will be brought up? Is it important to the family and to the community
that such expectations are shared (to avoid culture clashes)?
Do both parents take an interest in the community's goals? Are both
nurtured by being in the community? Are the children nurtured by being
there?
These are all issues that everyone meets as soon as they step beyond
the bounds of their house. It doesn't work to blame your
neighborhood/community/location if you're in the wrong one; just go
and find a place that works for you!
One recommendation: cultivate friends and acquaintances outside the
community.
Good luck and
Joy
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: "anti-waldorf" felt dolls.2
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 2:03 pm ((PDT))
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, Dan Dugan (dan ...) wrote:
)
) This artist apparently has some issues...
)
) http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=6553705
)
) -Dan Dugan
)
Now we're getting somewhere!
----
Do you suppose we could persuade state legislatures to rule that henceforth garden
gnomes can be displayed only in biodynamic gardens?
----
To quit kidding (who, me?) and return to another of Peter's recent points: It's true, I think,
that the fiercest squabbles often occur between like-minded people. Waldorf critics and
Waldorf defenders have a hard time debating because we don't share the same language,
modes of thought, etc. But Nazis and Anthroposophists?
I think I've mentioned before that some of my old schoolmates have told me they came to
consider some our teachers to be Nazis. Labeling Waldorf teachers Nazis or fascists is true
(I trust) only as a sort of metaphor÷in most cases, anyway. But I understand what my old
friends are saying.
----
Back to dogs (and kidding): I have a friend who has taught his dog to bark fiercely at the
sound "Osama bin Laden." I'll gladly train anyone's dog to do the same at the sound
"Rudolf Steiner."
-Rearing Growls
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Clarification
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 4:26 pm ((PDT))
Writing in the typically rushed manner that summer imposes on me (even during droughts), I
may have seemed to say the opposite of what I meant when writing today about Nazis and
Anthroposophists. I meant to be agreeing with Peter's statement that "worldview-based
tendencies that have a fair bit in common ideologically can end up being more intensively
competitive." If my words seemed to suggest the opposite, I apologize.
OK. Got to get back outdoors and polish my garden gnomes.
--Mister Roger Rawlings
(Rare Trig Gnome Swirls)
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "M Howell" mejhowell bigpond.com medgertonhowell2002
Date: Wed Aug 8, 2007 7:28 pm ((PDT))
The file has been closed in the murder case of Abir Aramin
Nurit Peled Elhanan
Translated from Hebrew by Mark Marshall
How sad it is to come to the realization that the number of those who evade
service in the army of occupation is so low that there is virtually no
effect on the motivation of Israel's children to put on the uniform of
brutality.
Professor Stewart Cohen of Bar Ilan University consoles us by declaring that
the "blame" lies in the increase in the number of Haredis who do not serve
and he informs us that the army of the United States would have been happy
with such a low percentage of evaders during the Vietnam war. Maybe we would
do well to learn something from the Americans of the 1960s, or even from the
Haredi Jews who fear for the safety of their children.
When the extent of evasion became known, I was invited onto the programme
of Oded Shahar, "Politika", as a mother who will not permit her son (now 15
years old) to join the army. Apart from me, I was informed over the course
of a protracted campaign of persuasion, only men were invited, most of them
warmongering generals like Effie Eitam and Yossi Peled. After I was
convinced that my participation in the program would be important and
decisive, I agreed. The researcher asked me why I would not allow my son to
enlist. I explained to her that an army that has been involved for forty
years now in systematic and growing abuse of a civilian population, (abuse
that even a courageous journalist like Gideon Levy calls by the strange
mitigating name of "policing"), an army that teaches its soldiers that
killing Palestinian children and those who protect them, like Rachel Corrie
and James Miller, is not a crime, an army whose commanders are immune to
punishment though they commit daily crimes against humanity, is not a
suitable place for my son, who was brought up to love people, who has
Palestinian friends, whose brothers and parents have Palestinian friends who
are subjected to that same reign of terror and daily torment. After half an
hour I was told that despite my decisive contribution there were not enough
seats on the stage.
A few days later we were told in an isolated solitary news broadcast that
the file on the murder of Abir Aramin, the daughter of Salwa and Bassam
Aramin [was closed]. Bassam is one of the founders of the
Palestinian-Israeli movement Combatants for Peace, where my sons Elik and
Guy are members. Bassam Aramin spent 9 years in an Israeli jail for being a
member of the Fatah in the Hebron area and trying to throw a grenade on an
Israeli army Jeep which was patrolling in Occupied Hebron. On a Tuesday
afternoon, the 16th of January [2007], an Israeli soldier shot his nine year
old daughter, Abir, in the head as she was leaving school to go home. The
soldier will not spend an hour in jail. In Israel, soldiers are not
imprisoned for killing Arabs. Never. It does not matter whether the Arabs
are young or old, real or potential terrorists, peaceful demonstrators or
stone throwers. The army has not conducted an inquiry in Abir Aramin's
death. Neither the police nor the courts have hardly questioned anyone
except for Abir's sister, who was holding her hand while she was falling.
The young sister was asked time and again how many meters were they from the
school gate, from the kiosk, from the jeep????? How many meters? Don't you
remember??? There was hardly any investigation except for a private one by
Bassam and his friends who know exactly who the killer is. But as far as the
Israeli Defense Forces are concerned, the shooting did not happen. The
army's official account of her death is that she might have been hit by a
stone that one of her classmates was throwing "at our forces." That
regardless of the finding of a senior pathologist, who worked for many years
in an institute of forensic medicine.
One of the allegations against the evaders is that they have stopped
believing in "values" such as sacrifice. Whose sacrifice, exactly? On what
altar? To what god? The soldiers of Israel are called upon to sacrifice
children, parents, volunteers, and sometimes themselves on the altar of the
megalomania of the insolent corrupt leaders of the State, who succeeded in
converting this whole country into one big altar on which they sacrifice
other people's children to the god of death. Children, fetuses and newborns
are daily flung with cold blood into the kingdom of dead children that is
constantly growing beneath our feet. And no one is guilty of their deaths;
no one is ever punished for the murder of a Palestinian child. The State
takes care of those who serve it, sometimes. Other times it sacrifices even
them, with the same cold-bloodedness and for the same reasons.
And the murderers? What about them? Do they know that they committed crimes?
Do they toss and turn in their beds at night? Are they tormented by images
of the small bodies that convulse and fall under their rifles, bombs and
shells? Probably not. We know of no case in which any soldier turned himself
in and expressed remorse for his actions. That is the biggest success of
Israeli education: the distinction between blood and blood, between dead
child and dead child, and the inculcating of the secure belief that the
murder of Palestinians and their friends is not a crime.
Everyone who enlists in the army knows this and is prepared for it. Half the
nation! How many millions are there in half the nation? How many millions of
young men and women who are simply unmoved by the crying of a child, the
agonies of a woman in labour, the pleas of an old man and the deaths of
thousands of innocent people? How many millions of people who never learned
to refuse orders that are manifestly inhumane even if they are legal
according to the racist laws of their state, and to say no to corrupt
leaders and bloodthirsty generals?
Well done, IDF! Well done, Israeli Jewish education, that has succeeded
nearly perfectly in bestowing the values of racism, nearly without
opposition.
And if my son Yigal really does want to participate in the military programs
that they impose on high school students starting in grade 10, or God
forbid, to enlist in the army of occupation and torment, I will see it as a
dreadful educational failure. A terrible maternal failure. And if I do not
do everything I can to prevent him from becoming a murderer or a corpse at
age of 18 I will know that I betrayed him and my vocation as a mother.
----- Original Message -----
From: "pstauden" (pstaud hotmail.com)
To: (waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com)
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 12:23 AM
Subject: [wc] Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
)
) Hi Roger,
)
)
))Truly fascinating. Why, in your opinion, were fascism and
) Anthroposophy apparently a better
))"fit" in Italy than in Germany? Were German fascists just more
) fascistic?
)
)
) That's a very good question. Part of it probably has to do with the
) factor you point to, that Nazism in general was more extreme and more
) intolerant than Italian Fascism. But the level of ideological
) similarity may have played a role too -- it can seem somewhat
) paradoxical, but worldview-based tendencies that have a fair bit in
) common ideologically can end up being more intensively competitive
) organizationally, thus the pronounced Germanness of anthroposophy may
) have made it seem more threatening, as a potential rival, to some
) Nazis than to most Italian Fascists. Also, the Italian
) anthroposophical movement simply wasn't very big. I think the really
) interesting thing is the extent to which Italian anthroposophists
) wholeheartedly embraced the racial campaign; Martinoli and Scaligero
) were the most prominent example of this, but there were others as
) well, for instance anthroposophist Aniceto del Massa, who was the
) editor of the periodical "The Jewish Problem" published by the Centers
) for the Study of the Jewish Problem, one of the chief institutional
) expressions of Fascist antisemitism. None of this is acknowledged
) within the anthroposophical movement today. Greetings,
)
)
) Peter S.
)
)
)
)
)
) Yahoo! Groups Links
)
)
)
)
)
) --
) No virus found in this incoming message.
) Checked by AVG Free Edition.
) Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.8/941 - Release Date: 7/08/2007
) 4:06 PM
)
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 4 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Evolution (cont.)
From: Roger Rawlings
2a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
2b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Margaret Sachs
3a. Admin: OT Warning (M Howell) [Re: Italian anthroposophists and fasci
From: Dan Dugan
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Thu Aug 9, 2007 7:41 am ((PDT))
)From today's NYT:
August 9, 2007
Fossils in Kenya Challenge Linear Evolution
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Two fossils found in Kenya have shaken the human family tree, possibly rearranging major
branches thought to be in a straight ancestral line to Homo sapiens.
Scientists who dated and analyzed the specimens ÷ a 1.44 million-year-old Homo habilis
and a 1.55 million-year-old Homo erectus ÷ said their findings challenged the
conventional view that these species evolved one after the other. Instead, they apparently
lived side by side in eastern Africa for almost half a million years.
If this interpretation is correct, the early evolution of the genus Homo is left even more
shrouded in mystery than before. It means that both habilis and erectus must have
originated from a common ancestor between two million and three million years ago, a
time when fossil hunters had drawn a virtual blank.
Although the findings do not change the relationship of Homo erectus as a direct ancestor
of Homo sapiens, scientists said, the surprisingly diminutive erectus skull implies that this
species was not as humanlike as once thought.
Other paleontologists and experts in human evolution said the discovery strongly
suggested that the early transition from more apelike to more humanlike ancestors was
still poorly understood. They also said that this emphasized the need to search more
widely for fossils from the critical period at the still unknown dawn of our own genus,
Homo.
The challenge to the idea of a more linear succession of the three Homo species is being
reported today in the journal Nature. The lead author is Fred Spoor, an evolutionary
anatomist at University College London. Other authors include Meave G. Leakey and her
daughter Louise Leakey, the Kenyan paleontologists who are co-directors of the Koobi
Fora Research Project that made the discovery. The fieldwork was supported by the
National Geographic Society.
The fossils were found east of Lake Turkana in Kenya in 2000. It took years to prepare the
specimens, encased in hardened sediment, for study and to be sure of the identification of
the species, the scientists said. University of Utah geologists determined the dates of the
fossils from volcanic ash deposits.
The most recent fossils of the habilis species known before now were 1.65 million years
old or older. Some fragments of fossils with apparent habilis attributes have been dated as
early as 2.33 million years old.
In recent years, scientists not involved in the project said, discoveries were hinting at
possible overlap between the habilis and erectus species. But the implications were
considered so profound that little was said about these dates, pending more conclusive
evidence.
"The oldest Homo habilis we had known of was about the same age as erectus," said
Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard University. "Now we
have extended the duration of the habilis species, and there's no doubt that it overlaps
considerably with erectus."
In their report, Dr. Spoor and his colleagues wrote, "With the discovery of the new, well
dated specimens, H. habilis and H. erectus can now be shown to have co-occurred in
eastern Africa for nearly half a million years."
The fact that the two hominid species lived together in the same lake basin for so long and
remained separate species, Dr. Meave Leakey said in a statement from Nairobi, "suggests
that they had their own ecological niche, thus avoiding direct competition." For example,
the two may have had foraging and dietary differences.
In any case, Dr. Leakey said, "Their co-existence makes it unlikely that Homo erectus
evolved from Homo habilis."
Dr. Spoor, speaking by satellite phone from a field site near Lake Turkana, said the
evidence clearly contradicted previous ideas of human evolution "as one strong, single line
from early to us." The new findings, he added, support the revised interpretations of "a lot
of bushiness and experimentation in the fossil record," rather than a more linear
succession of species.
But Dr. Spoor said the second fossil, the 1.55 million-year-old erectus skull, was probably
the more surprising discovery. The bones are unusually well preserved.
"What is truly striking about this fossil is its size," he said. "It is the smallest Homo erectus
found thus far anywhere in the world."
The scientists reported that the individual was a young adult or "a late subadult." Its size
was closer to that of a habilis than previously known erectus fossils. But the distinctive
ridge on the cranium, the jaw and teeth and the shape of the neck are all characteristic of
erectus rather than habilis or other human ancestors.
)From the skull's small size, the scientists concluded that Homo erectus was, in one
important respect, less humanlike than had been previously assumed. Other erectus skull
and skeletal fossils had seemed to show erectus to be the first human ancestor that was
like us in so many ways, except for a smaller brain.
Susan Anton, an anthropologist at New York University and one of the report's authors,
said that the small skull pointed up a significant variation in the sizes of erectus
specimens, particularly differences between the male and female of the species, or sexual
dimorphism.
Such a characteristic is thought to be a primitive stage in evolution. In humans, males
average about 15 percent larger than females, and the same is true for chimpanzees.
Sexual dimorphism is much more striking in gorillas, and apparently also in erectus.
"The new Kenyan fossil suggests that contrary to common belief, this may have been true
of Homo erectus," Dr. Anton said, implying that erectus was not as humanlike as once
thought.
Dr. Lieberman of Harvard said, "The small skull has got to be a female, and my guess is
that all the previous erectus we have found turned out to be male."
The new findings, Dr. Lieberman said, highlight the need for obtaining more fossils that
are more than two million years old. In addition, he said, they show "just how interesting
and complex the human genus was and how poorly we understand the transition from
being something much more apelike to something more humanlike."
-----
As I mentioned to Frank, a while ago, one of the great virtues of science is that it is self-
correcting. Science is not a belief system nor an ideology, as Frank seemed to think.
Science is mankind's imperfect, incomplete but by far best effort to ascertain truth.
The new findings, above÷if borne out÷will require some adjustment of the standard
Darwinian evolutionary theory. But they will leave Steiner's "theory" unaffected since it is
disconnected from, and unsupported by, any and all scientific evidence.
-Our Are
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Thu Aug 9, 2007 9:43 am ((PDT))
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, "M Howell" (mejhowell ...) wrote:
)
) The file has been closed in the murder case of Abir Aramin
)
)
)
)
) Nurit Peled Elhanan
)
)
)
) Translated from Hebrew by Mark Marshall
)
)
)
)
)
) How sad it is to come to the realization that the number of those who evade
) service in the army of occupation is so low that there is virtually no
) effect on the motivation of Israel's children to put on the uniform of
) brutality.
That Israelis may be committing atrocities now in their conflict with the Palestinians÷just
as Americans have clearly committed atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan÷is no basis for
anti-Semitism, nor does it not excuse the atrocities committed by others in the past. The
Rape of Nanking, for instance, can never be excused. And the Holocaust will always stand
as one of the blackest pages in humanity's long, tormented, violent history. We are all
human÷which is frequently a cause for shame.
--Roger Rawlings
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Thu Aug 9, 2007 2:36 pm ((PDT))
--- M Howell (mejhowell bigpond.com) wrote:
) The file has been closed in the murder case of Abir
) Aramin
)
) Nurit Peled Elhanan
)
) Translated from Hebrew by Mark Marshall
)
) How sad it is to come to the realization that the
) number of those who evade
) service in the army of occupation is so low that
) there is virtually no
) effect on the motivation of Israel's children to put
) on the uniform of
) brutality.
)
) Professor Stewart Cohen of Bar Ilan University
) consoles us by declaring that
) the "blame" lies in the increase in the number of
) Haredis who do not serve
) and he informs us that the army of the United States
) would have been happy
) with such a low percentage of evaders during the
) Vietnam war. Maybe we would
) do well to learn something from the Americans of the
) 1960s, or even from the
) Haredi Jews who fear for the safety of their
) children.
)
) When the extent of evasion became known, I was
) invited onto the programme
) of Oded Shahar, "Politika", as a mother who will not
) permit her son (now 15
) years old) to join the army. Apart from me, I was
) informed over the course
) of a protracted campaign of persuasion, only men
) were invited, most of them
) warmongering generals like Effie Eitam and Yossi
) Peled. After I was
) convinced that my participation in the program would
) be important and
) decisive, I agreed. The researcher asked me why I
) would not allow my son to
) enlist. I explained to her that an army that has
) been involved for forty
) years now in systematic and growing abuse of a
) civilian population, (abuse
) that even a courageous journalist like Gideon Levy
) calls by the strange
) mitigating name of "policing"), an army that teaches
) its soldiers that
) killing Palestinian children and those who protect
) them, like Rachel Corrie
) and James Miller, is not a crime, an army whose
) commanders are immune to
) punishment though they commit daily crimes against
) humanity, is not a
) suitable place for my son, who was brought up to
) love people, who has
) Palestinian friends, whose brothers and parents have
) Palestinian friends who
) are subjected to that same reign of terror and daily
) torment. After half an
) hour I was told that despite my decisive
) contribution there were not enough
) seats on the stage.
)
) A few days later we were told in an isolated
) solitary news broadcast that
) the file on the murder of Abir Aramin, the daughter
) of Salwa and Bassam
) Aramin [was closed]. Bassam is one of the founders
) of the
) Palestinian-Israeli movement Combatants for Peace,
) where my sons Elik and
) Guy are members. Bassam Aramin spent 9 years in an
) Israeli jail for being a
) member of the Fatah in the Hebron area and trying to
) throw a grenade on an
) Israeli army Jeep which was patrolling in Occupied
) Hebron. On a Tuesday
) afternoon, the 16th of January [2007], an Israeli
) soldier shot his nine year
) old daughter, Abir, in the head as she was leaving
) school to go home. The
) soldier will not spend an hour in jail. In Israel,
) soldiers are not
) imprisoned for killing Arabs. Never. It does not
) matter whether the Arabs
) are young or old, real or potential terrorists,
) peaceful demonstrators or
) stone throwers. The army has not conducted an
) inquiry in Abir Aramin's
) death. Neither the police nor the courts have hardly
) questioned anyone
) except for Abir's sister, who was holding her hand
) while she was falling.
) The young sister was asked time and again how many
) meters were they from the
) school gate, from the kiosk, from the jeep????? How
) many meters? Don't you
) remember??? There was hardly any investigation
) except for a private one by
) Bassam and his friends who know exactly who the
) killer is. But as far as the
) Israeli Defense Forces are concerned, the shooting
) did not happen. The
) army's official account of her death is that she
) might have been hit by a
) stone that one of her classmates was throwing "at
) our forces." That
) regardless of the finding of a senior pathologist,
) who worked for many years
) in an institute of forensic medicine.
)
) One of the allegations against the evaders is that
) they have stopped
) believing in "values" such as sacrifice. Whose
) sacrifice, exactly? On what
) altar? To what god? The soldiers of Israel are
) called upon to sacrifice
) children, parents, volunteers, and sometimes
) themselves on the altar of the
) megalomania of the insolent corrupt leaders of the
) State, who succeeded in
) converting this whole country into one big altar on
) which they sacrifice
) other people's children to the god of death.
) Children, fetuses and newborns
) are daily flung with cold blood into the kingdom of
) dead children that is
) constantly growing beneath our feet. And no one is
) guilty of their deaths;
) no one is ever punished for the murder of a
) Palestinian child. The State
) takes care of those who serve it, sometimes. Other
) times it sacrifices even
) them, with the same cold-bloodedness and for the
) same reasons.
)
) And the murderers? What about them? Do they know
) that they committed crimes?
) Do they toss and turn in their beds at night? Are
) they tormented by images
) of the small bodies that convulse and fall under
) their rifles, bombs and
) shells? Probably not. We know of no case in which
) any soldier turned himself
) in and expressed remorse for his actions. That is
) the biggest success of
) Israeli education: the distinction between blood and
) blood, between dead
) child and dead child, and the inculcating of the
) secure belief that the
) murder of Palestinians and their friends is not a
) crime.
) Everyone who enlists in the army knows this and is
) prepared for it. Half the
) nation! How many millions are there in half the
) nation? How many millions of
) young men and women who are simply unmoved by the
) crying of a child, the
) agonies of a woman in labour, the pleas of an old
) man and the deaths of
) thousands of innocent people? How many millions of
) people who never learned
) to refuse orders that are manifestly inhumane even
) if they are legal
) according to the racist laws of their state, and to
) say no to corrupt
) leaders and bloodthirsty generals?
)
) Well done, IDF! Well done, Israeli Jewish education,
) that has succeeded
) nearly perfectly in bestowing the values of racism,
) nearly without
) opposition.
)
)
=== message truncated ===
Every nation has its Neville Chamberlains who believe
that negotiations can prevent Hitlers from carrying
out genocide, its Cindy Sheehans whose unbearable
grief turns them into useful fodder for the media
until they do something truly foolish like embracing a
foreign dictator, and its Jane Fondas who seem to
believe that their belief in their own side's
wrongness makes the other side, no matter how brutal
and ruthless, good.
But all of this is irrelevant because what Israel does
in defense of its right to exist and its efforts to
prevent terrorist attacks against its civilian
population, no matter what mistakes or wrong decisions
its leaders and individual soldiers might sometimes
make in such efforts, does not justify any antisemitic
statements Steiner might have made a century ago nor
the willingness of any of his followers to defend or
promote antisemitism between then and now.
Margaret
____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Admin: OT Warning (M Howell) [Re: Italian anthroposophists and fasci
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Thu Aug 9, 2007 10:09 am ((PDT))
M Howell, you wrote:
)The file has been closed in the murder case of Abir Aramin
(snip)
This post was off-topic. This list is for discussion of Waldorf
education and Anthroposophy only.
-Dan Dugan, moderator
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. The Woo-Woo Credo
From: winters_diana
1b. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
From: winters_diana
1c. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
From: winters_diana
1d. Quintessence of the Loon
From: winters_diana
1e. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
From: winters_diana
1f. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
From: Margaret Sachs
1g. Re: Quintessence of the Loon
From: Margaret Sachs
1h. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
From: Margaret Sachs
2a. Re: Rudolf Steiner Fellowship Community
From: winters_diana
3a. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: winters_diana
3b. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: Roger Rawlings
3c. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: winters_diana
3d. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: Roger Rawlings
4a. Brainwashing
From: Roger Rawlings
4b. Brainwashing
From: Roger Rawlings
4c. Re: Brainwashing
From: Roger Rawlings
4d. Re: Brainwashing
From: Roger Rawlings
4e. Re: Brainwashing
From: Margaret Sachs
4f. Re: Brainwashing
From: Margaret Sachs
4g. Re: Brainwashing
From: winters_diana
4h. Re: Brainwashing
From: winters_diana
4i. Re: Brainwashing
From: winters_diana
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: winters_diana
5b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: winters_diana
5c. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Margaret Sachs
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:18 am ((PDT))
http://ratbags.com/rsoles/gl/logical1.htm
Something folks here might enjoy, courtesy of the ratbags.com guy. It
will put you in mind of any long, comically tangled arguments you've
had with anthroposophists . . .
Diana
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:35 am ((PDT))
Sorry - that was the wrong link. There's other fun stuff on that page,
but the link I was trying to give was for the "Woo Woo Credo":
http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html
I wrote:
) http://ratbags.com/rsoles/gl/logical1.htm
)
) Something folks here might enjoy, courtesy of the ratbags.com guy.
It
) will put you in mind of any long, comically tangled arguments you've
) had with anthroposophists . . .
)
) Diana
)
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:34 am ((PDT))
One of the things on the Woo Woo Credo is to repeat frequently, "They
laughed at Galileo, too!" implying, of course, that some kook or guru
whose pronouncements you are touting will some day be recognized as a
misunderstood genius, too, possibly even of the stature of Galileo,
Einstein etc. - And *then* all those who doubted will sure be
sorry . . . (Of course, you have to pick and choose just whom you hold
up as a scorned-yet-later-vindicated genius - you'll notice they
rarely choose Darwin.)
Elsewhere on the ratbags site, I remember the author listing some
pseudoscientists recently in the news for making absurd
pronouncements, and he prefaces the list with "Let's laugh at these
guys so they can be right, too." :) I think that's a very useful
explanation of the fallacy involved there . . .
) http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Quintessence of the Loon
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:49 am ((PDT))
For those who don't know, part of the ratbags.com site
is "Quintessence of the Loon," and it provides hours of
enjoyment . . . it's not updated anymore, but that's all right, 'cus
it's such a treasure trove it would take years to read everything
collected there until 2004. It's basically an archive of Internet
lunacy, which perhaps someday historians will study for what it says
about our culture at the turn of the millennium.
Here's his comment on Sune Nordwall's site "The Bee" from May 2002:
http://ratbags.com/loon/2002/05may.htm
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:56 am ((PDT))
I thought I would mention here that not only am I not able to look at
the list very often for the next few weeks, my home computer recently
died, so I'm unaware of any messages sent to my personal email
account. (I have a new computer but it's still sitting in the box, and
probably will be for another week or two.) Just want to make sure no
one thinks I'm ignoring them if they've written to me off list.
Diana
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:41 pm ((PDT))
Thanks, Diana. I enjoyed both pages. I have
bookmarked the main one.
Margaret
--- winters_diana (diana.winters verizon.net) wrote:
) Sorry - that was the wrong link. There's other fun
) stuff on that page,
) but the link I was trying to give was for the "Woo
) Woo Credo":
)
) http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html
)
)
) I wrote:
)
)
) ) http://ratbags.com/rsoles/gl/logical1.htm
) )
) ) Something folks here might enjoy, courtesy of the
) ratbags.com guy.
) It
) ) will put you in mind of any long, comically
) tangled arguments you've
) ) had with anthroposophists . . .
) )
) ) Diana
) )
)
)
)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1g. Re: Quintessence of the Loon
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:47 pm ((PDT))
Ooops! Didn't see this post of yourd coming up when I
sent my previous post.
Margaret
--- winters_diana (diana.winters verizon.net) wrote:
) For those who don't know, part of the ratbags.com
) site
) is "Quintessence of the Loon," and it provides hours
) of
) enjoyment . . . it's not updated anymore, but that's
) all right, 'cus
) it's such a treasure trove it would take years to
) read everything
) collected there until 2004. It's basically an
) archive of Internet
) lunacy, which perhaps someday historians will study
) for what it says
) about our culture at the turn of the millennium.
)
) Here's his comment on Sune Nordwall's site "The Bee"
) from May 2002:
)
)
) http://ratbags.com/loon/2002/05may.htm
)
)
)
)
)
)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1h. Re: The Woo-Woo Credo
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:52 pm ((PDT))
Checking out ratbags.com again I see that Sune
Nordwall, avid Internet defender of all things
Anthroposophical, is still listed in its "archive of
madness" known as "The Quintessence of the Loon."
Margaret
--- winters_diana (diana.winters verizon.net) wrote:
)
) One of the things on the Woo Woo Credo is to repeat
) frequently, "They
) laughed at Galileo, too!" implying, of course, that
) some kook or guru
) whose pronouncements you are touting will some day
) be recognized as a
) misunderstood genius, too, possibly even of the
) stature of Galileo,
) Einstein etc. - And *then* all those who doubted
) will sure be
) sorry . . . (Of course, you have to pick and choose
) just whom you hold
) up as a scorned-yet-later-vindicated genius - you'll
) notice they
) rarely choose Darwin.)
)
) Elsewhere on the ratbags site, I remember the author
) listing some
) pseudoscientists recently in the news for making
) absurd
) pronouncements, and he prefaces the list with "Let's
) laugh at these
) guys so they can be right, too." :) I think that's a
) very useful
) explanation of the fallacy involved there . . .
)
)
) ) http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html
)
)
)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Rudolf Steiner Fellowship Community
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:22 am ((PDT))
These are a good set of suggestions. However, this will only work if
both sides are honest with each other. If one side says all the
right things but it's all been window dressing, and they've deceived
their customers about the most important parts, it may still go bad.
Also of course, Waldorf does *not* encourage families to be sure to
keep friends outside the community. I can't remember ever hearing a
Waldorf teacher encourage a parent to keep a child involved in non-
Waldorf activities, or to make sure they spend plenty of time
playing with the neighborhood kids. I heard the opposite advice many
times: take him out of that club, she shouldn't be doing that sport,
stay away from the library because of the computers, or the worst,
when you visit those relatives (whose kids play video games, of
course), you should just keep your kids in a different room of the
house, or perhaps you just shouldn't visit those relatives at all
for a few years . . .
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, "joiedevivre68"
(joiedevivre68 ...) wrote:
)
) Any intentional community...or rather, any community, intentional
or
) not, presents any family with powerful challenges:
)
) How do you balance the needs of the family with those of the
larger
) community?
) Does the family share the community's expectations of how
children
) will be brought up? Is it important to the family and to the
community
) that such expectations are shared (to avoid culture clashes)?
) Do both parents take an interest in the community's goals? Are
both
) nurtured by being in the community? Are the children nurtured by
being
) there?
)
) These are all issues that everyone meets as soon as they step
beyond
) the bounds of their house. It doesn't work to blame your
) neighborhood/community/location if you're in the wrong one; just go
) and find a place that works for you!
)
) One recommendation: cultivate friends and acquaintances outside the
) community.
)
) Good luck and
)
) Joy
)
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 am ((PDT))
Believe it or not, over on AT they've discussed this report as if it
somehow vindicates Steiner. (Apparently, they hear phrases
like "challenged the conventional view that these species evolved
one after the other" as meaning that Darwin has been proved wrong
about something, thereby opening up the possibility that, um,
Steiner was right. About something. I'm not sure what.)
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, "Roger Rawlings" wrote:
)
) From today's NYT:
)
) August 9, 2007
) Fossils in Kenya Challenge Linear Evolution
)
) By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
) Two fossils found in Kenya have shaken the human family tree,
possibly rearranging major
) branches thought to be in a straight ancestral line to Homo
sapiens.
)
) Scientists who dated and analyzed the specimens ÷ a 1.44 million-
year-old Homo habilis
) and a 1.55 million-year-old Homo erectus ÷ said their findings
challenged the
) conventional view that these species evolved one after the other.
Instead, they apparently
) lived side by side in eastern Africa for almost half a million
years.
)
) If this interpretation is correct, the early evolution of the
genus Homo is left even more
) shrouded in mystery than before. It means that both habilis and
erectus must have
) originated from a common ancestor between two million and three
million years ago, a
) time when fossil hunters had drawn a virtual blank.
)
) Although the findings do not change the relationship of Homo
erectus as a direct ancestor
) of Homo sapiens, scientists said, the surprisingly diminutive
erectus skull implies that this
) species was not as humanlike as once thought.
)
) Other paleontologists and experts in human evolution said the
discovery strongly
) suggested that the early transition from more apelike to more
humanlike ancestors was
) still poorly understood. They also said that this emphasized the
need to search more
) widely for fossils from the critical period at the still unknown
dawn of our own genus,
) Homo.
)
) The challenge to the idea of a more linear succession of the three
Homo species is being
) reported today in the journal Nature. The lead author is Fred
Spoor, an evolutionary
) anatomist at University College London. Other authors include
Meave G. Leakey and her
) daughter Louise Leakey, the Kenyan paleontologists who are co-
directors of the Koobi
) Fora Research Project that made the discovery. The fieldwork was
supported by the
) National Geographic Society.
)
) The fossils were found east of Lake Turkana in Kenya in 2000. It
took years to prepare the
) specimens, encased in hardened sediment, for study and to be sure
of the identification of
) the species, the scientists said. University of Utah geologists
determined the dates of the
) fossils from volcanic ash deposits.
)
) The most recent fossils of the habilis species known before now
were 1.65 million years
) old or older. Some fragments of fossils with apparent habilis
attributes have been dated as
) early as 2.33 million years old.
)
) In recent years, scientists not involved in the project said,
discoveries were hinting at
) possible overlap between the habilis and erectus species. But the
implications were
) considered so profound that little was said about these dates,
pending more conclusive
) evidence.
)
) "The oldest Homo habilis we had known of was about the same age as
erectus," said
) Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at
Harvard University. "Now we
) have extended the duration of the habilis species, and there's no
doubt that it overlaps
) considerably with erectus."
)
) In their report, Dr. Spoor and his colleagues wrote, "With the
discovery of the new, well
) dated specimens, H. habilis and H. erectus can now be shown to
have co-occurred in
) eastern Africa for nearly half a million years."
)
) The fact that the two hominid species lived together in the same
lake basin for so long and
) remained separate species, Dr. Meave Leakey said in a statement
from Nairobi, "suggests
) that they had their own ecological niche, thus avoiding direct
competition." For example,
) the two may have had foraging and dietary differences.
)
) In any case, Dr. Leakey said, "Their co-existence makes it
unlikely that Homo erectus
) evolved from Homo habilis."
)
) Dr. Spoor, speaking by satellite phone from a field site near Lake
Turkana, said the
) evidence clearly contradicted previous ideas of human
evolution "as one strong, single line
) from early to us." The new findings, he added, support the revised
interpretations of "a lot
) of bushiness and experimentation in the fossil record," rather
than a more linear
) succession of species.
)
) But Dr. Spoor said the second fossil, the 1.55 million-year-old
erectus skull, was probably
) the more surprising discovery. The bones are unusually well
preserved.
)
) "What is truly striking about this fossil is its size," he
said. "It is the smallest Homo erectus
) found thus far anywhere in the world."
)
) The scientists reported that the individual was a young adult
or "a late subadult." Its size
) was closer to that of a habilis than previously known erectus
fossils. But the distinctive
) ridge on the cranium, the jaw and teeth and the shape of the neck
are all characteristic of
) erectus rather than habilis or other human ancestors.
)
) From the skull's small size, the scientists concluded that Homo
erectus was, in one
) important respect, less humanlike than had been previously
assumed. Other erectus skull
) and skeletal fossils had seemed to show erectus to be the first
human ancestor that was
) like us in so many ways, except for a smaller brain.
)
) Susan Anton, an anthropologist at New York University and one of
the report's authors,
) said that the small skull pointed up a significant variation in
the sizes of erectus
) specimens, particularly differences between the male and female of
the species, or sexual
) dimorphism.
)
) Such a characteristic is thought to be a primitive stage in
evolution. In humans, males
) average about 15 percent larger than females, and the same is true
for chimpanzees.
) Sexual dimorphism is much more striking in gorillas, and
apparently also in erectus.
)
) "The new Kenyan fossil suggests that contrary to common belief,
this may have been true
) of Homo erectus," Dr. Anton said, implying that erectus was not as
humanlike as once
) thought.
)
) Dr. Lieberman of Harvard said, "The small skull has got to be a
female, and my guess is
) that all the previous erectus we have found turned out to be male."
)
) The new findings, Dr. Lieberman said, highlight the need for
obtaining more fossils that
) are more than two million years old. In addition, he said, they
show "just how interesting
) and complex the human genus was and how poorly we understand the
transition from
) being something much more apelike to something more humanlike."
)
) -----
)
) As I mentioned to Frank, a while ago, one of the great virtues of
science is that it is self-
) correcting. Science is not a belief system nor an ideology, as
Frank seemed to think.
) Science is mankind's imperfect, incomplete but by far best effort
to ascertain truth.
)
) The new findings, above÷if borne out÷will require some adjustment
of the standard
) Darwinian evolutionary theory. But they will leave
Steiner's "theory" unaffected since it is
) disconnected from, and unsupported by, any and all scientific
evidence.
)
) -Our Are
)
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:53 am ((PDT))
--- In waldorf-critics yahoogroups.com, "winters_diana" (diana.winters ...) wrote:
)
) Believe it or not, over on AT they've discussed this report as if it
) somehow vindicates Steiner. (Apparently, they hear phrases
) like "challenged the conventional view that these species evolved
) one after the other" as meaning that Darwin has been proved wrong
) about something, thereby opening up the possibility that, um,
) Steiner was right. About something. I'm not sure what.)
)
As far as I can tell, Anthrophosphists generally have no grasp of÷and certainly do not use
÷the scientific method. Scientific findings are always open to correction. That is the point
of science. We learn that some "fact" is wrong and we progress by discovering new "facts"
that bring us closer to ultimate truth. By contrast, a belief system, such as Anthroposophy,
is unaffected by factual information÷it is a generally unchanging faith. One closes ones
eyes and clings to it. As I argued in an earlier posting, such faiths generally adhere to
"rejected knowledge"÷i.e., ideas that educated people once thought were true (e.g., the
four humours) but that have long since been cast aside by the advance of science. In this
sense, those who have detected a "medieval" quality in Anthroposophy are quite correct.
Anthroposphy might most accurately be described as a survival from the Dark Ages.
--Are Are
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:27 am ((PDT))
Roger:
)Scientific findings are always open to correction. That is the point
)of science. We learn that some "fact" is wrong and we progress by
)discovering new "facts" that bring us closer to ultimate truth. By
)contrast, a belief system, such as Anthroposophy, is unaffected by
)factual information÷
And yet they are really excited when new facts emerge, or previous
findings are questioned or overturned. They actually seem to feel this
reflects poorly on science. Yet they are always eager to announce when
a new finding sounds to them (in their confusion) like maybe it
supports Steiner. (In the case in question, it was Dottie who reported
it on AT. I believe she reads the phrase "challenged the conventional
view" and that's all she needs to hear to believe Darwinism, in its
entirety, has just been reported overturned.)
Anthroposophists (and others susceptible to believing pseudoscience)
try to have this both ways. Science is materialistic and wrong and
perhaps even evil - yet when something new from science sounds to them
like it might vindicate something Steiner said, they are pretty darn
excited about it.
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:58 am ((PDT))
)
) Anthroposophists (and others susceptible to believing pseudoscience)
) try to have this both ways. Science is materialistic and wrong and
) perhaps even evil - yet when something new from science sounds to them
) like it might vindicate something Steiner said, they are pretty darn
) excited about it.
)
Point well taken. (Welcome back, by the way.) Several Steiner defenders on this list have
essentially argued that if X cannot be proven true, then anti-X must be true. This is, of
course, balderdash.
--R
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Brainwashing
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:21 am ((PDT))
It is interesting to speculate why Steiner made so many preposterous, flat-out wrong
statements (e.g., the heart doesn't pump blood, the brain is not involved in true cognition,
the planets don't orbit the sun, islands float, animals are descended from people, some
people are not human, there was once a place called Atlantis, there is an Aryan race, blond
hair betsows intelligence, Goblins exist, gravity is only a word, etc., etc.)
If we stipulate that Steiner was not insane (for some, this will be a stretch), I think it is
probable that Steiner was using what would later be recognized as a classical
brainwashing technique. (I've made this argument before, elsewhere, but not on this list. It
may be worth discussing.) He tried to utterly shatter people's conception of reality,
teaching them that all their previous opinions were wrong (unless they were already
leaning toward his stance), and therefore they had to turn to him for truth. The North
Koreans, for instance, used this technique on captured GIs during the Korean War.
This is the most fundamental way in which Anthroposophy opposes science and fact (even
if Steiner and his adherents sometimes wave a scientific fact around to try to prove that
science is wrong, as Diana has pointed out). Steiner appropriated the term "science" for his
faith (Anthroposophy: "spiritual science"). This was a sort of backhanded salute to science
and its power (as is the jubilation at AT, indicating that science must be taken seriously if
only as a powerful embodiment of evil). But search as hard as I can, I find virtually no
evidence of true, testable, ascertainable scientific thinking anywhere in Steiner's works.
If he wasn't a lunatic, Steiner was a manipulative fabulist. Anthroposophy is his (highly
derivative) fable. Waldorf students are that fable's victims.
--Roger Bernard Rawlings
(Nerd Brain Grows Larger)
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Brainwashing
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:34 am ((PDT))
It is interesting to speculate why Steiner made so many preposterous, flat-out wrong
statements (e.g., the heart doesn't pump blood, the brain is not involved in true cognition,
the planets don't orbit the sun, islands float, animals are descended from people, some
people are not human, there was once a place called Atlantis, there is an Aryan race, blond
hair bestows intelligence, Goblins exist, gravity is only a word, etc., etc.)
If we stipulate that Steiner was not insane (for some, this will be a stretch), I think it is
probable that Steiner was using what would later be recognized as a classical
brainwashing technique. (I've made this argument before, elsewhere, but not on this list. It
may be worth discussing.) He tried to utterly shatter people's conception of reality,
teaching them that all their previous opinions were wrong (unless they were already
leaning toward his stance), and therefore they had to turn to him for truth. The North
Koreans, for instance, used this technique on captured GIs during the Korean War.
This is the most fundamental way in which Anthroposophy opposes science and fact (even
if Steiner and his adherents sometimes wave a scientific finding around to try to prove that
science is wrong, as Diana has pointed out). Steiner appropriated the term "science" for his
faith (Anthroposophy: "spiritual science"). This was a sort of backhanded salute to science
and its power (as is the jubilation at AT, indicating that science must be taken seriously if
only as a powerful embodiment of evil). But search as hard as I can, I find virtually no
evidence of true, testable, ascertainable scientific thinking anywhere in Steiner's works.
If he wasn't a lunatic, Steiner was a manipulative fabulist. Anthroposophy is his (highly
derivative) fable. Waldorf students are that fable's victims.
--Roger Bernard Rawlings
(Nerd Brain Grows Larger)
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:23 am ((PDT))
The difference between being a captured GI and becoming an Anthropop is that the latter
is a voluntary act. This leads to the question, what sort(s) of prople were/are most prone
to fall/volunteer for Steinerian brainwashing?
Humans have shown an enormous proclivity for true belief÷i.e., fervent embrace of
unprovable spiritualistic propositions. All around the world, we find huge populations of
true believers (often believing tenets that are diametrically opposed to the tenets of other
faiths).
At one level, the desire for spiritual meaning and comfort is unarguable and innocent. But
killing infidels, damning sinners to Hell, consigning unbelievers to lower rungs on the
evolutionary ladder in future incarnations÷stuff like this crosses the line, in my humble
view. Yet millions/billions of us sign on for such beliefs and practices.
The problem for Steiner was how to attract would-be believers into his tent when there
were so many other tents to choose among. So far as I have been able to determine from
reading the works of Anthropops and attempting to have discussions with Anthropops is
that Steiner appeals most strongly to people who have a pronounced inclination for magic,
or÷to put it another way÷who want to have their minds blown. To generalize (which is
probably unfair), I'd suggest these are often individuals for whom burning bushes, pillars
of salt, virgin births, angelic visitations, etc., are insufficiently far out. They want to believe
that the universe is a truly, deeply, thoroughly magical place, where everything is different
than it seems, where there are many wondrous secrets and ways to attain those secrets.
This analysis does not apply exclusively to Anthroposophy, of course. Lots of mystical
movements appeal to these same yearnings. That's why, in my view, Anthroposophy
remains a fringe movement: There's too much competition in the wacko marketplace.
Nonetheless, I'd suggest that these are the sorts of folks who volunteer for Steiner's form
of brainwashing.
Hon. Roger Bernard Rawlings
(Lorn Gong÷Brainwash: Red Err)
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:51 am ((PDT))
I should have added: Waldorf schools attempt to inflict Steinerian brainwashing on their
students, although the process is necessarily incomplete, since Steiner's words are rarely if
ever divulged. Seen it the broadest context, the goal of a Waldorf school is to turn its
students into the sort(s) of people who want to become Anthropops. This is, in fact, the
primary mission of Waldorf education. The brainwashing process is completed, more or less,
when Waldorf graduates read a little Steiner (usually it is a very little, as far as I can
determine) and decide that they are, by gum, true-blue Anthropops.
Turncoat Rog
(Tug to Rancor)
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4e. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 3:04 pm ((PDT))
Nerd Brain Grows Larger (like this particular anagram,
by the way!), if Steiner was not insane and not under
the influence of drugs, what other reason would there
be for the madness of his teachings?
So far, the only possibility that comes to my mind is
that he discovered the power his charisma brought him
and deliberately brainwashed people either for the
ego-boosting attention it brought him or for the
income it enabled him to generate or both. Does
anyone know how he supported himself during his guru
days? I'm assuming he must have been accumulating
funds for his Anthroposophical activities.
Margaret
--- Roger Rawlings (downfromfog yahoo.com) wrote:
) It is interesting to speculate why Steiner made so
) many preposterous, flat-out wrong
) statements (e.g., the heart doesn't pump blood, the
) brain is not involved in true cognition,
) the planets don't orbit the sun, islands float,
) animals are descended from people, some
) people are not human, there was once a place called
) Atlantis, there is an Aryan race, blond
) hair betsows intelligence, Goblins exist, gravity is
) only a word, etc., etc.)
)
) If we stipulate that Steiner was not insane (for
) some, this will be a stretch), I think it is
) probable that Steiner was using what would later be
) recognized as a classical
) brainwashing technique. (I've made this argument
) before, elsewhere, but not on this list. It
) may be worth discussing.) He tried to utterly
) shatter people's conception of reality,
) teaching them that all their previous opinions were
) wrong (unless they were already
) leaning toward his stance), and therefore they had
) to turn to him for truth. The North
) Koreans, for instance, used this technique on
) captured GIs during the Korean War.
)
) This is the most fundamental way in which
) Anthroposophy opposes science and fact (even
) if Steiner and his adherents sometimes wave a
) scientific fact around to try to prove that
) science is wrong, as Diana has pointed out). Steiner
) appropriated the term "science" for his
) faith (Anthroposophy: "spiritual science"). This was
) a sort of backhanded salute to science
) and its power (as is the jubilation at AT,
) indicating that science must be taken seriously if
) only as a powerful embodiment of evil). But search
) as hard as I can, I find virtually no
) evidence of true, testable, ascertainable scientific
) thinking anywhere in Steiner's works.
)
) If he wasn't a lunatic, Steiner was a manipulative
) fabulist. Anthroposophy is his (highly
) derivative) fable. Waldorf students are that fable's
) victims.
)
) --Roger Bernard Rawlings
) (Nerd Brain Grows Larger)
)
)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4f. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 4:04 pm ((PDT))
--- Roger Rawlings (downfromfog yahoo.com) wrote:
) The difference between being a captured GI and
) becoming an Anthropop is that the latter
) is a voluntary act. This leads to the question, what
) sort(s) of prople were/are most prone
) to fall/volunteer for Steinerian brainwashing?
)
) Humans have shown an enormous proclivity for true
) belief÷i.e., fervent embrace of
) unprovable spiritualistic propositions. All around
) the world, we find huge populations of
) true believers (often believing tenets that are
) diametrically opposed to the tenets of other
) faiths).
)
) At one level, the desire for spiritual meaning and
) comfort is unarguable and innocent. But
) killing infidels, damning sinners to Hell,
) consigning unbelievers to lower rungs on the
) evolutionary ladder in future incarnations÷stuff
) like this crosses the line, in my humble
) view. Yet millions/billions of us sign on for such
) beliefs and practices.
I think there is a huge difference between people
being born into a religion (basically brainwashed from
early childhood)with some cross-the-line beliefs and
people adopting a religion with cross-the-line beliefs
in adulthood when they should have the capacity to
reason.
) The problem for Steiner was how to attract would-be
) believers into his tent when there
) were so many other tents to choose among. So far as
) I have been able to determine from
) reading the works of Anthropops and attempting to
) have discussions with Anthropops is
) that Steiner appeals most strongly to people who
) have a pronounced inclination for magic,
) or÷to put it another way÷who want to have their
) minds blown. To generalize (which is
) probably unfair), I'd suggest these are often
) individuals for whom burning bushes, pillars
) of salt, virgin births, angelic visitations, etc.,
) are insufficiently far out. They want to believe
) that the universe is a truly, deeply, thoroughly
) magical place, where everything is different
) than it seems, where there are many wondrous secrets
) and ways to attain those secrets.
An interesting theory I hadn't considered before. I
can understand the desire to attain the secrets of the
universe, life and death, or whatever but I wonder why
the need for far-out magic would be so comforting to
them.
) This analysis does not apply exclusively to
) Anthroposophy, of course. Lots of mystical
) movements appeal to these same yearnings. That's
) why, in my view, Anthroposophy
) remains a fringe movement: There's too much
) competition in the wacko marketplace.
)
) Nonetheless, I'd suggest that these are the sorts of
) folks who volunteer for Steiner's form
) of brainwashing.
One of the things I have always believed about the
sort of person that becomes an Anthroposophist is that
they lack something that they believe Anthroposophy
will give to them. Specifically, when around a lot of
Anthroposophists, the thing I have felt an absence of
is emotional warmth. Yet, now that I think of it, I
don't think Anthroposophy offers emotional warmth.
Therefore, maybe many of them are attracted not
because it offers something they don't have but rather
because, like them, it does not offer emotional warmth
and therefore is a comfortable fit. I'd be interested
in knowing other people's opinions on this.
Best,
Margaret
____________________________________________________________________________________
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4g. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:36 pm ((PDT))
The guy with the large (and growing) brain wrote:
)I think it is probable that Steiner was using what would later be
)recognized as a classical brainwashing technique. (I've made this
)argument before, elsewhere, but not on this list. It
)may be worth discussing.) He tried to utterly shatter people's
)conception of reality, teaching them that all their previous
)opinions were wrong (unless they were already leaning toward his
)stance), and therefore they had to turn to him for truth.
I think there's something to that. I don't know if he did this
consciously, necessarily, but I think it's a common guru trick.
Perhaps he did it increasingly automatically seeing its
effectiveness in securing him a following. I think that gurus
sometimes figure out, gradually or quickly, that their teachings to
some people become more believable, and their following more
dedicated, the *more* outrageous they are, rather than less. It gets
people committed - you're forced to consider, Am I going to believe
all this or not? and some will decide of course not and go away
then, but those who decide to believe are then prepped to believe
just about anything.
When a guru or spiritual leader preaches a doctrine that is just a
little questionable, I think people are less likely to believe it
than when he/she preaches things that are completely absurd. Really
crazy, far-out stuff is much more compelling - especially when it is
very detailed and very specific, as anthroposophy is. The person
thinks, Who could make this stuff up? I think the psychology is,
It's just so ridiculous maybe it's true.
You might say, it's really not difficult to believe six impossible
things before breakfast - after you've decided to believe the first
impossible thing, the next five are easy.
Diana
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4h. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:42 pm ((PDT))
Margaret:
) So far, the only possibility that comes to my mind is
) that he discovered the power his charisma brought him
) and deliberately brainwashed people either for the
) ego-boosting attention it brought him or for the
) income it enabled him to generate or both.
I've never been convinced he deliberately brainwashed people. I
think it's possible he became gradually accustomed to the adulation
and ego boost that came with attracting an adoring following, and
convinced himself of the great spiritual veracity of his own
teachings, and his karmic destiny to lead an advanced spiritual
elite, at the same time he was convincing others. OTOH, there is
some stuff that reads just so goofy that you can't help think he was
consciously making it up as he went along, particularly during
public lectures, and perhaps having a good laugh at some people's
gullibility. Short of an as-yet undiscovered confession from
Steiner, I don't think we'll ever know for sure.
Diana
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
4i. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:52 pm ((PDT))
Margaret:
) One of the things I have always believed about the
) sort of person that becomes an Anthroposophist is that
) they lack something that they believe Anthroposophy
) will give to them. Specifically, when around a lot of
) Anthroposophists, the thing I have felt an absence of
) is emotional warmth. Yet, now that I think of it, I
) don't think Anthroposophy offers emotional warmth.
) Therefore, maybe many of them are attracted not
) because it offers something they don't have but rather
) because, like them, it does not offer emotional warmth
) and therefore is a comfortable fit. I'd be interested
) in knowing other people's opinions on this.
I agree with you - I haven't known many anthroposophists who were
warm people. A few who had a carefully managed persona that appeared
this way at first, but who were actually tense and rageful
individuals when you got to know them. Some teachers seem to want to
be perceived as warm and nurturing, and think they can achieve it by
dressing the part, saying certain verses or singing a lot. The
parents were fooled but the children in the classroom weren't.
Diana
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:25 pm ((PDT))
Margaret, you might be interested in the response to your post over on
AT.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/32778
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:28 pm ((PDT))
And here's Deborah's response (Go, Debbie!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/32780
We might note that Michael Howell's post didn't seem to interest them.
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
5c. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Margaret Sachs" powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com powerofjoy2004
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:29 am ((PDT))
I find it interesting that Anthroposophists who claim
to be on a spiritual journey so easily resort to name
calling. This was the sort of thing I was completely
unaware of when I bought into Waldorf PR and first
enrolled my children in a Waldorf school.
Margaret
--- winters_diana (diana.winters verizon.net) wrote:
) Margaret, you might be interested in the response to
) your post over on
) AT.
)
)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/32778
)
)
)
)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
(*) To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/
(*) Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
(*) To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
(*) To change settings via email:
mailto:waldorf-critics-normal yahoogroups.com
mailto:waldorf-critics-fullfeatured yahoogroups.com
(*) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
waldorf-critics-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
(*) Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Brainwashing
From: Roger Rawlings
1b. Re: Brainwashing
From: winters_diana
2a. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: Peter Staudenmaier
2b. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: Roger Rawlings
2c. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: winters_diana
2d. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: winters_diana
2e. Re: Evolution (cont.)
From: winters_diana
3. [NNA] German Association of Waldorf Schools threatens legal action a
From: Dan Dugan
4. Re: [NNA] German Association of Waldorf Schools threatens legal acti
From: Peter Staudenmaier
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Peter Staudenmaier
5b. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
5c. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: Roger Rawlings
5d. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
From: winters_diana
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:56 am ((PDT))
Hi, all.
A few quick points:
1. The desire for magic is, indeed, strange. Yet it seems to be almost universal, even in
"innocent" forms (e.g. Harry Potter, Disney films, etc.) I can attest to my own deep desire
for the magical and mysterious when I was young (I read Tolkien and C.S. Lewis over and
over, and I was a churchgoer, and deeply committed to a Waldorfian viewpoint, etc.)
Breaking free of that desire, or somehow never developing it, is a rarity, I believe. Most
humans seem to feel the desire to some degree (knock on wood, avoid black cats, repeat
certain actions in the same order for luck÷athletes are big on this÷etc.)
2. The amount of emotional warmth found in Waldorf teachers is a sort of hit-or-miss
thing. I had a couple of teachers who were clearly good, gentle souls. One of my friends
became a Waldorf teacher because she found two of her teachers to be, in effect, mother
figures for her. OTOH I would agree that most Waldorf teachers I've known or "studied"
under were notably cold÷and some were frightening. I think almost every student at my
school feared (or loathed) the headmaster. My classroom teacher from 5th through 8th
grades was one of the teachers whom students came to call (partly in jest) a Nazi. My class
advisor in high school was stern and generally unsmiling÷I don't believe any student ever
went to him for personal counseling, advice, or comfort: it was obvious he wouldn't/
couldn't supply such.
Anthroposophy itself is not at all a jubilant, emotive, hallelujah-singing faith. It is
"intellectual" in the sense that it is based on Steiner's complex, mind-challenging lectures.
In this sense, I think it probably does appeal more to "cold" personalities.
3. I agree that there's a big difference between being lured into Anthroposophy by a
deceptive Waldorf education and voluntarily coming to Anthroposophy as an adult. The
people in the latter category are probably more interesting to consider. They have no
excuse for becoming Anthropops except for their own, presumably conscious, presumably
mature decisions.
4. Yes, we can only speculate about Steiner's motives; we can't know (unless, as you say, a
surprising confession were to crop up: Peter: keep digging). I think if Steiner were insane,
his teaching would be more scrambled and incoherent. But this is not certain. I like to
stipulate that he wasn't loony because that keeps us focused on his teachings, not on him
as an individual. But surely there is madness in the teachings, even if not in Steiner's mind.
Another way of describing Steinerian "brainwashing" is to say that Steiner discovered the
power of the Big Lie. (This may be another, slim link between Anthroposophy and Nazism.)
If Steiner said that the sun glows because of nucear fission instead of nuclear fusion, he
wouldn't have kicked up much response. But instead he said that the sun is the physical
sign of the presence of Jesus: it is where Jesus is walking around. Now that's a statement
that is guaranteed to stop certain people in their tracks and lure them in.
5. If it is a little uncertain whether Steiner was brainwashing his audiences, I think we
critics can probably agree that students attending Waldorf schools are subjected to
attempted brainwashing.
6. I, too, often have the feeling that Steiner was winging it a lot of the time. He knew
Theosophy pretty thoroughly, and he had an encyclopedic knowledge of folktales, occult
practices, etc. But still, there is an extemporaneous feel to many of his lectures. I suspect
this is one reason he asked his followers not to transcribe the lectures÷he didn't want a
written record of his utterances (sort of like the Bush administration). But of course his
true believers could'd restrain themselves.
Roger Judas Rawlings
(Jaguar Regrinds Lows)
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Brainwashing
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:31 pm ((PDT))
I just wrote a reply to this, hit a wrong key and it went pffffft,
or I think it did. I'll try to reconstruct it, apologies if it now
appears twice.
roger:
)1. The desire for magic is, indeed, strange. Yet it seems to be
)almost universal,
Yes, and there are some interesting theories about its possible role
evolutionarily - it may be that it's not the beliefs themselves but
the role they play in binding groups of people together that is
evolutionarily adaptive. From this POV the beliefs themselves could
be considered a sometimes undesirable byproduct. This is a POV that
is bound to really aggravate religious people, of course. (Who won't
like thinking of "magic" and "religion" lumped together in the first
place, let alone both dismissed as playing some role in a heartless
Darwinian scenario.)
I recall Richard Dawkins talking about how it's evolutionarily
adaptive for obvious reasons for small children to believe what
their parents tell them - trusting your parents and believing what
they tell you gives you a much greater shot at surviving to
adulthood. Dawkins speculates that this is why religious and
mystical and magical beliefs survive the ages so well - they're
simply passed to children, who are programmed to believe, and we
have a very hard time ridding ourselves of beliefs we were certain
of in childhood.
)2. The amount of emotional warmth found in Waldorf teachers is a
)sort of hit-or-miss Anthroposophy itself is not at all a jubilant,
)emotive, hallelujah-singing faith. It is "intellectual" in the
)sense that it is based on Steiner's complex, mind-challenging
)lectures. In this sense, I think it probably does appeal more
)to "cold" personalities.
I think that's true. Some of the childrearing tenets are
particularly chilling. They were absolutely invented by people who
don't like children, and there's often an uncomfortable tension
between Waldorf parents who believe, and are encouraged to believe,
that anthroposophy fits with their natural and holistic and
attachment-parenting type beliefs, versus what anthroposophy
actually teaches about children and the correct treatment of
children.
)I like to stipulate that he wasn't loony because that keeps us
)focused on his teachings, not on him as an individual. But surely
)there is madness in the teachings, even if not in Steiner's mind.
I agree with both those points, it doesn't really matter whether he
was personally sane or not, or what diagnosis, if any, he might be
given if he consulted a psychiatrist today, and it's why I'm not
usually all that interested when discussions start about whether he
might have smoked or snorted this or that or participated in spooky
rituals etc. It doesn't matter - what he taught was insane in many
ways.
)Another way of describing Steinerian "brainwashing" is to say that
)Steiner discovered the power of the Big Lie.
Yeah, that's a good way to put it. A Big Lie (the entire system of
anthroposophy) is much more powerful than small lies.
)But still, there is an extemporaneous feel to many of his lectures.
That's putting it politely.
Diana
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "Peter Staudenmaier" pstaud hotmail.com pstauden
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 8:42 am ((PDT))
Diana to Roger on the evolution story:
)Yet they are always eager to announce when
)a new finding sounds to them (in their confusion) like maybe it
)supports Steiner. (In the case in question, it was Dottie who reported
)it on AT. I believe she reads the phrase "challenged the conventional
)view" and that's all she needs to hear to believe Darwinism, in its
)entirety, has just been reported overturned.)
I don't think the story that Roger forwarded indicates an overturning of
conventional Darwinian accounts of evolution. (And if I read one of Roger's
previous posts right, I think I partially disagree with his own reading on
that score as well.) By my reading, what the news story helps overturn is
the "conventional view" of evolution as linear and progressive. But this was
scarcely Darwin's view. Indeed the news story seems to me a confirmation of
arguments put forward for decades by Stephen Jay Gould, perhaps the most
influential Darwinian author in recent US history, as well as by some of
Gould's associates, including Niles Eldredge and especially Richard
Lewontin. The reference to "bushiness" in the news story, for instance, is a
clear nod to Gould. It's also worth pointing out that even Richard Dawkins,
for example, who disagreed strongly with Gould on a number of controversies
in evolutionary theory, has expressed severe skepticism of the notion of
evolution as progressive and linear.
What the news story undermines is in fact a series of erroneous notions that
anthroposophy is built around, namely that evolution is progressive and
yields ever higher forms and so forth. These anthroposophical misconceptions
about evolution, which stem in part from Steiner's reception of Haeckel and
in part from Blavatsky's anti-Darwinian model, have long encumbered
discussions of the topic between anthroposophists and non-anthroposophists;
a particularly striking instance arose last year when Peter Farrell tried to
discuss evolution with Joel Wendt here on this list.
Esoteric conceptions of evolution, like other intelligent design frameworks,
are incompatible with Darwinian accounts of evolution, and new evidence such
as that reported in the news story is irrelevant to the esoteric versions,
anthroposophical and otherwise, which are impervious to evidence to begin
with. I think that part of the reason why some anthroposophists have
evidently misunderstood the import of the recent news story probably has to
do with confusion about what Darwinian accounts of evolution involve in the
first place. Perhaps a re-reading of both Steiner and Darwin would help.
Greetings to all,
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
See what youâre getting intoˇbefore you go there
http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_preview_0507
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "Roger Rawlings" downfromfog yahoo.com downfromfog
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:03 am ((PDT))
) I don't think the story that Roger forwarded indicates an overturning of
) conventional Darwinian accounts of evolution.
Good points, as always, Peter. I probably dashed off my comments too quickly to be quite
accurate. I certainly didn't mean that the new findings undermine Darwin or Gould, merely
that new evidence would require some revisions in the current understanding of mankind's
evolution (which I believe basically conforms to Darwin's views). As the NYT said: "Two fossils
found in Kenya have shaken the human family tree, possibly rearranging major branches....
Scientists who dated and analyzed the specimens...said their findings challenged the
conventional view...."
My main point was to praise science for being self-correcting, as Anthroposophy is not.
--Seaward Girls Jog Urn
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:12 pm ((PDT))
)I don't think the story that Roger forwarded indicates an
)overturning of conventional Darwinian accounts of evolution.
No, of course not, it was just a knee-jerk Dottie reaction. In the
mind of Dottie, the phrase "challenged the conventional view" in an
article on evolution translates directly to "Steiner was right."
)By my reading, what the news story helps overturn is
)the "conventional view" of evolution as linear and progressive.
I don't see even that in the news story. The findings are only about
Homo erectus and Homo habilis - what has been challenged is that
*these two* were in a direct sequence; now it appears they
overlapped too closely temporally for one to be said to have
descended or evolved from the other.
This doesn't represent a challenge to the general notion that some
lineages descend from other lineages, or at least, if that's the
conclusion some are drawing it's not mentioned in that article. I
realize that isn't necessarily strict Darwinism in the first place;
I wouldn't give most of our anthroposophist friends credit with
caring about such distinctions, anyway. I never assume they have
even the slightest grasp of the subject to begin with, nor in
Dottie's case any interest in ever getting a grasp. Like I say,
she's sees "evolution" in the title, the words "challenges
conventional view" further down the page, and she's good to go.
Diana
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:11 pm ((PDT))
I wrote:
)Anthroposophists (and others susceptible to believing
pseudoscience)
)try to have this both ways. Science is materialistic and wrong and
)perhaps even evil - yet when something new from science sounds to
)them like it might vindicate something Steiner said, they are
pretty )darn excited about it.
I guess there's a logic to this. They think that materialistic
science is inferior compared with spiritual science, but that there
is hope the former will eventually catch up, and ultimately physical
science will even vindicate spiritual science. Since they
(anthroposophists) have ultimate truth, and all knowledge is one,
other people will eventually, slowly but surely, come to understand
it too, in different ways. And they think that when natural science
has "confirmed" something Steiner predicted, that will cause more
and more people to turn to spiritual science. I think this is why
they bother following developments in natural sciences at all -
waiting and hoping for the rest of us to catch up, despite our
limitations and our crude methods (always demanding "proof"
and "evidence" for things that have simply been handed to them).
Just thinking some more about this.
Diana
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: Evolution (cont.)
Posted by: "winters_diana" diana.winters verizon.net winters_diana
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:33 pm ((PDT))
Roger
)My main point was to praise science for being self-correcting, as
)Anthroposophy is not.
This is part of what I was talking about, from the anthroposophical
POV science has to go on being falteringly self-correcting because
scientists are stumbling around blindly, ignorant and with no access
to larger truths. Anthroposophists are interested in and even in some
measure sympathetic to science's bumbling efforts to get closer to the
truth which they (anthroposophists) believe they already possess
intact ("given").
Diana
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. [NNA] German Association of Waldorf Schools threatens legal action a
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dan dandugan.com dandugan_1999
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:31 am ((PDT))
German Association of Waldorf Schools threatens
legal action against far-right activist
STUTTGART (NNA) - The German Association of
Waldorf Schools in Stuttgart has threatened the
former Waldorf teacher and official of the
far-right German National Democratic Party (NPD),
Andreas Molau, with legal action if he fails to
remove his announcement on the NPD website that
he intends to open a "Waldorf" education centre.
The name "Waldorf school" was legally protected
and the Association would "most certainly not
grant an institution which was associated in any
form with extremist right-wing ideas the right to
use the name," a statement from the Association
of Waldorf Schools says.
Such ideas stood in fundamental contradiction to Waldorf education.
The Association was responding to the news that
Molau has acquired a property in the German state
of Brandenburg with the aim of starting an
education centre.
Molau was a teacher at the Brunswick Waldorf
School in Lower Saxony until he was sacked in
2004 when his connections to the NPD became known.
According to a report on the ARD television
Tageschau news website, Molau additionally
intended to show ăthe connection between the
nationalist NPD ideology and the teachings of the
founder of anthroposophy, Rudolf Steiner" in
connection with the establishment of the
education centre.
Molau heads the NPD list for the next year's
state elections in Lower Saxony, the Tageschau
website said. He is responsible for education in
the NPD state executive.
End/nna/ung/cva
Item: 070813-01EN Date: 13 August 2007
Copyright 2007 News Network Anthroposophy
Limited. All rights reserved. See:
www.nna-news.org/copyright/
More NNA reports at: www.nna-news.org/en/
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Re: [NNA] German Association of Waldorf Schools threatens legal acti
Posted by: "Peter Staudenmaier" pstaud hotmail.com pstauden
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:36 pm ((PDT))
Thanks to Dan for forwarding this report from the anthroposophical news
agency. I hadn't heard about the latest project by Andreas Molau (I am now
back in the US, no longer in Germany). The report says:
)Molau was a teacher at the Brunswick Waldorf
)School in Lower Saxony until he was sacked in
)2004 when his connections to the NPD became known.
Sort of. The chief concern for the administration of Molau's Waldorf school
was the possible impact of Molau's party work on the school's public image
(the NPD is the leading neo-Nazi party in Germany). When the matter became
public in 2004, the school's principal told the media: "This is a
catastrophe for our image." And according to some reports at the time, Molau
quit rather than being fired (see e.g. Jochen Leffers, "Ex-Waldorflehrer
arbeitet knftig fr die NPD", Spiegel-Online, 29 October 2004). The
interesting question in any case is just how Molau's Waldorf colleagues
managed *not* to know about his far-right affiliations for so long.
Molau taught history and German (not math or music etc) at the same Waldorf
school for eight years, and even after the NPD episode blew up in their
faces, his fellow Waldorf teachers said they had viewed him as
"left-liberal" and "a sympathetic oddball"; they were unanimously surprised
to learn of his political activities. But Molau had been a prominent figure
on the radical right for a very long time, since the beginning of the 1990s,
writing for a range of far-right publications under his real name; he was
even culture editor of Junge Freiheit, one of the most notorious of
Germany's extreme right wing journals, for several years (where among other
things he published an article by another author denying the holocaust). His
apologetic biography of Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg was published in
1993 and not particularly hard to track down. He is mentioned in readily
available sources on the far right, such as the Handbuch deutscher
Rechtsextremismus (Handbook on German right-wing extremism) published in
1996.
)According to a report on the ARD television
)Tageschau news website, Molau additionally
)intended to show ăthe connection between the
)nationalist NPD ideology and the teachings of the
)founder of anthroposophy, Rudolf Steiner" in
)connection with the establishment of the
)education centre.
That has been Molau's position all along; in the immediate aftermath of his
quitting/firing from the Waldorf school he had taught at, he strongly
emphasized his ongoing esteem for Steiner and his own unchanged commitment
to Waldorf. He also highlighted his Waldorf background in his NPD election
materials in 2005. In September of that year, Molau was invited to speak
about the NPD at a Waldorf school in Berlin. In late 2004, in the wake of
the controversy over Molau's Waldorf career, the editor of the
anthroposophical journal Info3 reported that "a whole array of private
voices" within German anthroposophical circles spoke up in support of Molau.
)Molau heads the NPD list for the next year's
)state elections in Lower Saxony, the Tageschau
)website said. He is responsible for education in
)the NPD state executive.
Another far-right fan of Waldorf education. Waldorf enthusiasts today
dismiss such incidents as anomalies, but they are bound to repeat again and
again until the Waldorf movement reflects critically on its own political
past. Greetings to all,
Peter S.
_________________________________________________________________
Messenger Caf ÷ open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served daily.
Visit now. http://cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_AugHMtagline
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Italian anthroposophists and fascism
Posted by: "Peter Staudenmaier" pstaud hotmail.com pstauden
Date: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:43 pm ((PDT))
Thanks to Diana for noting this. It might tell us something interesting
about anthroposophist approaches to public discussion of anthroposophy.
Deborah K's post on Anthroposophy Tomorrow says that Margaret's message here
is "a great example of how the folks in the WC can link almost anything
yucky to Steiner, no matter how tenuous or unlikely the connection."
Deborah evidently believes that Margaret, and not Michael Howell, drew some
sort of link between Steiner and Israeli practices in the occupied
territories. (This is in itself already a remarkable error.) Perhaps Deborah
is unaware that Howell is an anthroposophist, and perhaps she is even
unaware of his views on the holocaust, for which his posing about Palestine
appears to be a flimsy cover.
In the minds of folks like Deborah, then, when non-anthroposophists point
out that some anthroposophists today are holocaust deniers, it is these
fiendish non-anthroposophists, and not the actual anthroposophist holocaust
deniers themselves, who have somehow link