This morning, we discovered that pharmaceutical companies in Germany that manufacture homeopathic remedies, had being paying shills to discredit critics of alternative medicine. One of the organsiations was Weleda, an anthroposophical health care company founded by Rudolf Steiner.
Yesterday, on my blog post on the Steinerist Triodos Bank, a pro-Steiner commenter tried to discredit my interpretation of Steiner’s views on race and geology by calling an academic who had researched these ideas a “Janus faced historian and intellectual con artist”. I asked him to tone down his language before I would allow him to post. It turns out that the person responsible was actually paid by a Steiner organisation to ‘monitor the web’ for criticisms of Steiner schools and he has done so with associated legal threats against groups like Mumsnet.
When I first started writing about Anthroposophical Medicine and Steiner Schools, I struggled to understand the nature of this strange organisation that appeared to be behind so many schools, businesses, farms, banks and medical centres. There is not a great deal of independent writing about Anthroposophy. Much information has to come from places like discussion forums for ‘survivors’ of Steiner schools where parents have actually started to ask questions about what is going on in these schools.
What appears to be a common theme is that Steinerist organisations do not make a habit of being open about their anthroposophical roots. When I wrote about the proposed Frome Steiner Free School, I was critical that parents were being given no insight into the true nature of a Steiner education, instead relying on empty phrases such as it employing ”progressive approach to teaching that uniquely follows a child’s personal development”. Anyone investing in Triodos Bank, again, would have to work hard to uncover its Anthoposophical aims.
The only way I can really describe Anthroposophy is as an esoteric crypto-religious organisation based on a mystical and racist view of humanity and an astrological and clairvoyant view of understanding science. Anthroposophy is full of barmpot ideas, such as the literal existence of gnomes, that the British Isles floats on the sea, homeopathy works, and burning mice ritually will protect your crops from them. Oh, and if you are good, you will be reincarnated as an Northern European Ayrian. And its adherents either don’t want to know this themselves and most definitely do not want you to know this. Should its fundamental beliefs and aims become common knowledge then it would cause all sorts of problems, not least for Gove’s new free Steiner Schools*. Adherents deny and spread disingenuous misinformation in order to soften criticism.
After Jeevan Vasagar wrote a rather watery article in the Guardian last May about the new Steiner Schools, I wrote to him asking if I could respond with a piece for Comment is Free highlighting some of the concerns about Steiner Schools, their secretiveness, and their anti-science. I got a response back from a CiF editor telling me that Jeevan’s article ‘had been critical enough’. It did not surprise me to learn that many journalists in the Guardian stable have anthroposophical links. We see senior journalist Yvonne Roberts tweeting that “Waldorf Steiner schools start at 3 but they also educate the whole lovely child not produce exam robots!” And media reporter Jemima Kiss tweeting an advert for a Steiner teacher. Various Steiner puff pieces have appeared in the Guardian over recent years, including Steiner parent Nikki Schreiber telling us that the schools are ‘not full of weirdos‘. And Adharanand Finn telling us that it is possible that the time for state funded Steiner Schools has come.
So, with that out of the way, here is some correspondence sent to me recently between a concerned ex-Steiner parent who wanted to alert the Holocaust Educational Trust about some of the darker associations of Anthroposophy. This, one might think, is important not least given the links between Steiner company Weleda supplying Dachau with ‘experimental’ medical supplies and the biodynamic garden set up in the same camp.
I hope you get to the end. There is quite a punchline.
Message: I am writing to ask if the trust are aware of the links between Anthroposophy and Nazism? Helmut Zander, historian of German history calls Anthroposophy ‘the most successful alternative religion of the twentieth century’. Anthroposophy operates almost invisibly and is known by many different names. There are over 10,000 institutions and initiatives that have been founded that endeavor to apply the belief system – Steiner Waldorf education, Spiritual Science, Triodos Bank, the Camphill Movement, Biodynamic agriculture, Anthroposophical Medicine, Weleda, the Movement for Religious Renewal (also known as The Christian Community) and Eurythmy.
Anthroposophy is advertised as spiritual enquiry, the ‘wisdom of man’. What is not made clear is that central to Anthroposophy is the belief that the soul reincarnates through a racial hierarchy from Black to Aryan via the actions of karma. The belief system was claimed to be gained by clairvoyant vision from Anthroposphy’s founder Rudolf Steiner 1865 -1925
The reason I am writing to you is that many Steiner Waldorf schools are applying for public funding under the government’s Free Schools initiative. I noticed from reading a number of the school newsletters that members of the HET have been invited to speak at Steiner Waldorf schools. I have also written to Michael Gove expressing my concerns and was told that diversity and parent choice are at the heart of his Free School policy, an adviser also referred to a number of disclaimers recently issued from the movement which myself and a colleague analyzed for Professor David Colqhoun’s blog here:
http://www.dcscience.net/?p=3853
The historian Dr Peter Staudenmaier provides further analysis of the various disclaimers here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13677
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13673
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/9507
I have a copy of Dr Staudenamier’s recent dissertation which I can email. In the meantime I hope the following articles may be of interest:
http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/anthroposophy-and-ecofascism-2/
http://www.egoisten.de/autoren/staudenmaier/frankfurt_memo/frankfurt_memo.html
http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/the-art-of-avoiding-history-2/
http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/anthroposophy-and-its-defenders-2/
http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/the-janus-face-of-anthroposophy-2/
Dr Staudenmaier writes:
“The Waldorf school in Stuttgart was founded as a bulwark against the corrosive powers of intellectualism and materialism in 1919, when our Volk was at its lowest point politically and culturally. Already at that time, when international tendencies were dominant, and despite facing strong hostility, the school consistently cultivated German spiritual life and built the entire education of the children on this basis. Eighteen years of experience have proven that through the Waldorf school, our children are being brought up to be hardworking, full-fledged members of the national community, healthy in body and soul. We are therefore convinced that the educational work of the Waldorf school can be successfully made fruitful for the cultural rebuilding of our Volk within the framework of the National Socialist state.” (Eingabe der Elternschaft der Stuttgarter Waldorfschule, March 14, 1938; BA R4901/2521: 9-22)
The real difficulties arise when these worldviews are put into practice and implemented in concrete practical endeavors, like agriculture or health care or the education of children. Schools based on an esoteric belief system have a special obligation to delineate their underlying ideology clearly and plainly, without obfuscation and euphemism and to explain how they apply occult ideas in practice’.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/19940
Steiner Waldorf schools state that Anthroposophy is not taught to the children, this statement is disingenuous. Anthroposophy underpins every aspect of the pedagogy in Steiner Waldorf schools and communities. The self-described “fastest growing education movement in the world” has given rise to a survivors group and critics across the world. Dr Staudenmaier pinpoints my main concern:
“What is worrisome about the Waldorf movements continued failure to address anthroposophy’s racial legacy is not that Waldorf schools in the twenty-first century will start churning out little Hitler youths; what is worrisome is that Waldorf advocates and sympathizers may unknowingly help prepare the ideological groundwork for another unforeseen shift in the broader cultural terrain, in which notions of racial and ethnic superiority and inferiority could once again take on a spiritual significance that lends itself all too easily to practical implementation in a changed social and political context. For this reason among others, I strongly encourage those involved in Waldorf endeavors to take another look at the history of their movement and the doctrines at its core”.
http://www.social-ecology.org/2009/01/the-art-of-avoiding-history-2/
I very much look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely
XXXXXXX
I received a reply nearly 2 months later:
Dear XXXXXXX
Many thanks for your email and apologies for the delay in replying, it has taken me some time to read through all the web links you provided.I do appreciate your vigilance and concern about the influence of Nazism in UK schools, however having read extensively through the sources you provided, I must say that the assertions made about Steiner-Waldorf do not appear to be from reputable sources. As I’m sure you can appreciate, with the prevalence of antisemitic and Holocaust denial websites on the internet today, we are particularly aware of the need to scrutinise the neutrality and historical accuracy of all web sources – and I can assure you that the claims I have read are not ones which should give you any cause for alarm.
The Holocaust Educational Trust aims to educate as many students as possible about the Holocaust and its contemporary relevance. We work closely with many types of schools including faith schools, specialist schools and academies – and we hope that we will soon have the opportunity to engage with Free Schools as well. Of course if we ever have any reason to suspect any schools of promoting antisemitism in any way at all, we will take immediate and appropriate action.
Thank you again for bringing this matter to our attention.
Best wishes
xxxxxxxxx
The writer of the letter told me they were “completely baffled by his reply” and so she researched the person who worked for HET online. She found he lists Brighton Steiner School on his facebook page.
I did a little more digging and found his wife used to work at Brighton Steiner School.
* On a side note, Gove approved the UK’s first Steiner Free School in Frome within the past few days. The bid has been supported by local Steiner School leader, Emma Craigie, who just happens to be sister of local Somerset Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, and journalist Annunziatta Rees-Mogg.
The person at HET wrote: ‘I do appreciate your vigilance and concern about the influence of Nazism in UK schools, however having read extensively through the sources you provided, I must say that the assertions made about Steiner-Waldorf do not appear to be from reputable sources.’
That this person says that Peter Staudenmaier is not a reputable source is utterly inappropriate. It also pretty much proves that this person relies on highly biased sources for this judgement, in particular perhaps the writings of the anthroposophist you mentioned earlier in the post, Andy, the one who has been accusing Peter of being a con-artist for years now. It should make us question this person’s knowledge and competence. Unfortunately, too many people within the waldorf and anthroposophical movement don’t bother to make an effort and rely instead on the accuracy of positive messages that there is no problem and that anthroposophy was always on the ‘good’ side doing good things and that there is no problem with racism in the philosophy itself, even though it contains a theory on racial hierarchies.
This topic should be important for the HET, or at least not be brushed away like that. Not because, for example, anthroposophists today bear responsibility for what other anthroposophists did during the nazi era (they don’t), but because anthroposophists today are so eager to justify, ignore or even outright deny these ethically compromised elements of the movement’s past. That is the troubling thing. It’s about how the past is dealt with, not that it contains some not so pretty and nice thing.
My guess is that the HET person probably found one of the various Steinerite “debunkings” of Dr. Staudenmaier (here’s a typical one in that it doesn’t actually debunk anything Staudenmaier said or wrote: http://www.uncletaz.com/peterbull.html ) and since he trusts his fellow Steinerites more than anyone else decided that Staudenmaier was somehow dodgy without bothering to look further into the matter.
It would be one thing if the Steinerites acknowledged their founder’s follies but made it crystal clear that they had moved away from those follies. Planned Parenthood acknowleges that Margaret Sanger, as did nearly the entire scientific community of her time, held what are now considered racist views. This fact, carefully and deceptively shorn of historical context, is used by hypocritical anti-contraception conservatives who are often themselves racists to bash Planned Parenthood. I suspect that many of the Waldorf enthusiasts don’t know that much about the writings and actions of Steiner and his key disciples, and so suspect that attacks on him are of the same deceptive right-wing kind as attacks on Sanger and Planned Parenthood.
Just to be clear, Peter Staudenmaier is a Cornell-trained historian and a professor at Marquette University in Wisconsin. The lunatic who runs around the Web trying to “debunk” him is a Steiner zealot named Sune Nordwall. He has actively tried to derail Dr. Staudenmaier’s career, including accusing him of “forgery,” and continues to repeat bizarre allegations today. When he finally understood that the “forgery” charges were not going to stick, he backed off and said he meant that Peter’s work is a “spiritual forgery.”
Peter Staudenmaier’s CV:
http://www.marquette.edu/history/documents/StaudenmaierCV2011.pdf
Some of his recent activities – includes a blurb w/more professional info:
http://marquettehistorians.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/holocaust-remembrance-day-at-marquette/
Actually, the “forgery” issue is very easy to understand.
I’m Swedish, not English or American and from the beginning have used “forgery” to mean “false description” with regard to Staudenmaier¨s description of the source he claims to describe as introduction to his first solo article on anthroposophy.
His original story and a number of his followup stories about it, when called on what he writes, are all described here:
http://thebee.se/comments/PS/Staudenmaier.html
It made me completely lose all confidence in his further writings on or related to anthroposophy until I have checked the sources he claims for them down to the last comma.
LOL. Yes, Sune, I find it easy to understand as well, but thanks for trying to help. You know quite well what the word “forgery” means, and if in doubt you could always consult a dictionary. It doesn’t mean “something Sune Nordwall disagrees with.”
Wow….so many misconceptions out there. I am a Waldorf trained teacher who taught in steiner education for fifteen years and was a memember of the anthroposophical society. The Waldorf education movement has a important task I believe to untake…to look carefully at why it practises the cirruculum it does.
Yes the curriculum is based around a racial theory of re-incarnation and many of the so called spiritual indications set out by Stiener are very questionable and unfounded…In the schools I have taught in I have heard my co-teachers explain away many things in regards to individual childrens development and behaviours as “karmic lessons” and thus have not support the child towards resolving problems in a balanced, healthy way….it is common, alarming and a practise that is often denied…
Much in anthroposophical circles is not made fully clear until a student of anthroposphy is deemed evolved enough to go on a journey in the occult truths!!
Parents my advice to you all is Do alot of reading and ask many questions around the evolution of consciousness and its relationship to the incarnating child as parents, so that you can make an informed choice before sending your child into Steiner based education…be certain it holds the ideals you want reflected for your childs future.
Many steiner teachers will be very upset at me posting such a frank statement, yet I am tired of the hushed unspoken aspect of Waldorf curriculum that needs to open…anthroposopy is the foundation that the curriculum stems from, so of course it influences how a teacher views and works with the children in their care.
I have never met a waldorf teacher that does not turly love the children they teacher yet I fear, have experienced and held myself views as a teacher that now objectively I can see were unbalanced and distorted, which I am very a shamed of as I am of “mixed races” as Steiner would point out!!
ex Steiner teacher: “Parents my advice to you all is Do alot of reading and ask many questions around the evolution of consciousness and its relationship to the incarnating child as parents, so that you can make an informed choice before sending your child into Steiner based education”
This is excellent advice. Thank you for speaking up.
In other words, that’s who they’re saying is not a “reputable source.”
Alicia wrote:
“Not because, for example, anthroposophists today bear responsibility for what other anthroposophists did during the nazi era (they don’t), but because anthroposophists today are so eager to justify, ignore or even outright deny these ethically compromised elements of the movement’s past.”
And because anthroposophy today is attractive to holocaust deniers. The vast majority of anthroposophists certainly are not holocaust deniers, but the movement is reluctant to publicly disassociate from holocaust deniers, because in so doing, they would call attention to the aspects of Steiner’s writings that holocaust deniers and other racists continue to find sympathetic.
Anthroposophy’s survival is quite remarkable. Other neo-esoteric traditions of the nineteenth century have fallen by the wayside or become transformed into something else. It is important to be clear that anthroposophy did not emerge out of a vacuum and is very much a product of the Occult revival of the period, especially in Germany and Austria. Ariosophy was a contemporary but very much darker yet anthroposophy can be seen as part of a continuum with it. If it were not for Steiner’s interest in Judaism, anthroposophy would have been regarded as much more völkisch. Oh, and the lack of runes and Odin didn’t help either.
Interesting article – thanks for all the links to back it up. Except you haven’t provided evidence for this statement:
” It turns out that the person responsible was actually paid by a Steiner organisation to ‘monitor the web’ for criticisms of Steiner schools”
I’d love to see that one as it would be one heck of a smoking gun!
I’ve heard of Sune Nordwall before, but by putting this statement up (which he flatly denies), you may be making him look more important than he actually is.
Keith,
the information about Sune’s employment was found in the minutes from a meeting of the Swedish waldorf school federation (the Swedish equivalent of the Steiner Waldorf School Fellowship). I have blogged about it here:
http://zooey.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/supervising-the-attacks/
The document was swiftly withdrawn after its existence had been discovered (still available elsewhere via a link on my blog post). They have never denied they employed him, but they have never actually admitted it either. Other than in that document which was probably not meant for public consumption but which I found by accident.
Sune Nordwall does not, to my knowledge, deny that he was employed by the Swedish Waldorf federation. (He does not want to answer questions, but that’s another thing.) He has written, however, that his employment ended in the end of 2011 (I assume lasting the year). I’m sorry I don’t have a link to this. I think it was on my blog somewhere but can’t find it, so maybe it was elsewhere or I’m not searching the right alias (he has several). Maybe he’ll clarify things, as I’m pretty sure he’s reading this.
Sune has, at times, indicated there’s a distinction between when he’s speaking as an individual and when he’s speaking as an employee of the SWSF. Whether or not the “distinction” part is true, the statement is indeed acknowledgement of having been employed by them to misinform. Who are these people – that they need their own propaganda machine?
Alicia writes about me and my employment as part-time media consultant for the Swedish Federation of Waldorf schools from 2008 to 2011:
“He has written, however, that his employment ended in the end of 2011 (I assume lasting the year). I’m sorry I don’t have a link to this.”
The link is: http://excalibor.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/interview-with-zooey-ambivalent-former-steiner-waldorf-pupil/
Good. Interesting that Keith seems to think you’re flatly denying your employment. Have you been doing that? one wonders…
And for everyone else: he’s presuming to present a picture of me in that link. In my opinion, it’s a quite an odd piece of text.
Well, he has verified, at least, that Waldorf DOES pay people to misinform readers and derail critical discussions on the internet. So the question is not who and when, but WHY? It’s flatly dishonest and amounts to fraud! Why would a school system pay people to do this? To the obvious detriment of children? Read the stories of parents who were deceived by Waldorf representatives like Sune Nordwall here: http://thewaldorfreview.blogspot.com/ Then stand up to Waldorf dishonesty whenever it shows its ugly head! Children are the victims of this fanatical group for whom ethics is meaningless.
Diana Winters writes:
“The vast majority of anthroposophists certainly are not holocaust deniers, but the movement is reluctant to publicly disassociate from holocaust deniers” …
See http://waldorfanswers.org/AAntisemitismMyth.htm
Are you denying that there are any anthroposophical holocaust deniers?
Oh my, not the best link to convince people of the educational value of Steinerism.
“In anthroposophy, the development of humanity in connection with the development of our present solar system is not described in terms of “root races”, but with the term “Earth epochs”, and the development of humanity during post-glacial times in this long-term perspective is described as the fifth “Earth epoch” or with the terms the “post-Atlantean epoch” or the “post-Atlantean cultural epochs”.”
If a great many people in the best institutions of our age — the HET, a first rate newspaper, a socially responsible bank — are interested in a theme, I begin to wonder if this might reflect something interesting that is going on there, rather than that it is a conspiracy. That a representative of HET has her children at a Steiner school speaks volumes.
As historical anchoring: The Society of Friends (“Quakers”) was from the first and often still is termed a dangerous cult. Many of my friends have their children at the Friends schools, which appear to be great places, despite the radical and unconventional ideas of their sponsors. One generation’s dangerous cult (e.g. Christianity, secular humanism) is another generation’s conventional thinking.
Would you like to declare any association with anthroposophyy?
I doubt that the literal existence of gnomes and the idea of the British Isles floating on the sea are either likely to become conventional thinking.
Perhaps you can give us an annotated list of the parts of Steiner’s vision that are historical wackiness, at which we should point and laugh, and which bits are valid descriptions of the world.
I know which list contains those gnomes and the floaty Britain. What about you?
My family (not me) are Quakers; it’s actually quite offensive to bracket anthroposophists and Quakers. As well as great social reformers and philanthropists, they certainly have no “hidden agenda”, no occult or racial doctrine; I think they have been occasionally called a cult because they questioned the dogma of the day. They are open and accepting of all, some aren’t necessarily even very Christian, some Quakers believe in reincarnation too, they have no creed except “seeing God in everyone”. Generally very honest, open, true, fair and believing in the absolute equality of all humans. Their schools are actually liberal in the widest sense but also fairly conventional; there is a great deal of mutual respect between teachers, pupils, kitchen staff, technicians; bullying is dealt with and absolutely and totally unacceptable. Steiner schools, Camphill and Anthroposphy on the other hand…oh, well, couldn’t be more opposite in my view and experience.
Thank you for some excellent posts here; it really is about time Steiner schools were forced to be open
“That a representative of HET has her children at a Steiner school speaks volumes.”
It suggests she likely hasn’t read much Steiner. Most Steiner parents haven’t, and the schools are fine with that.
A few facts people:
1)The HET representative is a he not a she.
2)His wife worked one hour per week at the Brighton Steiner School for a total of 6 weeks.
3)Both parents believe that most of Steiner’s philosophy is bonkers.
4)Their child goes to the local Steiner for reasons to do with issue regarding UK education. If they could afford it they would home educate. The Steiner school is the best of a bad bunch.
5)Both parents have read quite a lot of Steiner’s stuff so they were able to reach a difficult decision – and hence recognise it is nonsense.
6) The anti-Steiner lobby are just as biased as the pro-Steiner lobby.
7)What (legal) digging was done to find out the HET representative’s wife worked very briefly at the Brighton Steiner – it is not on anyone’s Facebook page, so were school records hacked? We should be told. Especially if the pertinent facts are misleading and or inaccurate.
8) The Brighton Steiner School can hardly be held up as a model of Steiner eduction.
Tom Jackson, you are the Holocaust Education Trust outreach co-ordinator.
Would you please explain why you told a member of the public that American historian Peter Staudenmaier, Professor of Modern German History at Marquette University, whose doctoral dissertation on the history of Anthroposophy and its relationship to National Socialism (1900-1945) was conducted at Cornell, is not a ‘reputable source’?
The Holocaust Education Trust should consider carefully before questioning the integrity of an academic, I’m sure you would agree. I believe you owe Dr Staudenmaier an apology, and that your actions reflect poorly on the HET as a organisation. It is best for all concerned that the history of Anthroposophy (an esoteric belief system which informs all Steiner schools, including Brighton) is openly and honestly discussed. What is concerning is that supporters of Steiner education (including you) seem incapable of acknowledging that history.
http://www.brightonsteinerschool.org.uk/links.html
A few replies to the sordid pronouncements of the Nordwall misinformation machine:
Steiner quote, displayed prominently atop the page to which Sune linked:
“Value should be attached solely to the mutual exchange between individuals. It is irrelevant whether someone is a Jew or a German … This is so obvious that one feels stupid even putting it into words. So how stupid must one be to assert the opposite!”
In other words, some of Steiner’s best friends were Jews.
There’s no doubt Steiner felt friendly toward some individual Jews. So do most antisemites. Anthroposophists aren’t Nazis, for the most part, and neither was Rudolf Steiner.
In anthroposophy, reincarnation means that you alternate “incarnations” in different races. You might be Jewish this time, and Hindu next time – all a question of your personal spiritual development. You can go backwards or forwards, alternate in “advanced” or not so advanced races, many times. Anthroposophists will not hold your present race or your present incarnation in a less advanced group such as Jewry against you. We are all said to be “striving.”
More Steiner:
“Evil will be openly present in a large number of people as an attitude, a way of thinking, not any more covered up or hidden. The evil ones will praise the evil as something especially valuable. A certain sensual pleasure in this evil, this demony … can already be seen in many people … Nietzsche’s ‘blond beast’ is for example only a spectral premonition, pointing to it.”
I find this quote unpleasant, but I don’t think it relates to antisemitism. You seem to think by placing it prominently at the top of a page about Steiner and antisemitism, we’ll read it as a denunciation of antisemitism?
Sune continues:
“What was Steiner’s view of Jewry and Judaism and their role in human culture, and how is Judaism treated in Waldorf education and Waldorf schools?” with some bizarre material titled:
STEINER: THE MAIN POST-GLACIAL CULTURES OF HUMANITY ORIGINATE WITH NOAH
This is intended to show that Steiner thought highly of the ancient Hebrews and their contribution to the advancement of civilization. That’s true. You fail to note that Steiner also said that that time was PAST:
“It certainly cannot be denied that Jewry today still behaves as a closed totality, and that it has frequently intervened in the development of our current state of affairs in a way that is anything but favorable to European ideas of culture. But Jewry as such has long since outlived its time; it has no more justification within the modern life of peoples, and the fact that it continues to exist is a mistake of world history whose consequences are unavoidable. We do not mean the forms of the Jewish religion alone, but above
all the spirit of Jewry, the Jewish way of thinking.” (Rudolf Steiner, ‘Robert Hamerling: Homunkulus’, Deutsche Wochenschrift 1888 vol. VI nos. 16 and 17; reprinted in Steiner, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur
Literatur, pp. 145-155; quotes at 148 and 153.)
So, Waldorf education and Judaism. Yes, we know third graders study the Old Testament and Hebrew culture – because it is thought to “correspond” to their own level of development, spiritually. Jews are in third grade, spiritually. They study this BEFORE ancient Greece and Rome etc. because those civilizations are thought to have superseded Judaism. Spiritually. Karmically. The child is thought to “recapitulate” the spiritual development of humanity through the course of cosmic eons. This “spiritual” framework is superimposed on the timeline that is taught as history in Waldorf schools. In anthroposophy, it’s always about spiritual progress, whether of individuals, nations and races, or humanity as a whole. You have the less spiritually advanced coming before the more spiritually advanced. This is a basic principle and a basic structure of thought in anthroposophy. It’s juvenile, of course, but mistaken for “deep” by anthroposophists.
And no – changing the theosophical term “root race” to the preferred term in anthroposophy -“Earth epochs”- makes no difference. This is lipstick on a pig. It’s not the terminology that matters, but the actual concepts. The concept is spiritual development by race. Later, more spiritually evolved races are supposed to replace older, less spiritually evolved races. That is why you can have pronouncements such as Steiner’s that the continued existence of Jewry is a “mistake of world history.”
“Anthroposophy completely rejects and condemns everything that Nazism developed in these contexts.”
‘Tis good to hear … but never mind the Nazis, it is not really that impressive to run around shouting that you reject Nazism. You don’t say?
What critics ask is that you reject the antisemitic things that STEINER taught. Clean your own house and you won’t find Nazism so worrying. Help those in your midst who don’t necessarily “reject everything Nazism developed in these contexts” get the message that anthroposophy doesn’t want them around. So far, that hasn’t happened and some holocaust deniers somehow still feel they’ve found a comfortable niche in anthroposophy.
“A historical anchoring: The Society of Friends (“Quakers”) was from the first and often still is termed a dangerous cult. Many of my friends have their children at the Friends schools, which appear to be great places, despite the radical and unconventional ideas of their sponsors. One generation’s dangerous cult (e.g. Christianity, secular humanism) is another generation’s conventional thinking.”
Sorry, but as someone whose child attended Quaker schools, I cannot let this pass. Nobody says Quakerism is a dangerous cult today. Or would you like to produce some evidence of someone today who calls Quakerism a dangerous cult?
I have observed closely at length in both Waldorf and Quaker schools and the differences could not be more stark. I have written often advising Waldorf to take a page from Quaker schools in their PR practices – the Quaker schools are entirely honest and forthcoming in their promotional materials and their recruiting methods.
Yes, we could say that Quakerism espouses some “radical and unconventional” ideas, assuming you mean pacificism. The Quaker school my son attended has a huge sign out front, placed strategically to maximize its visibility to passing traffic on a busy road:
PEACE IS THE WAY.
They aren’t hiding this. They will tell you about it until you are ready to scream No More! The children are practically pounded with it, in weekly “meeting” and in the classroom as well.
I look forward to the day Waldorf schools promote themselves with the same honesty, the same self-scrutiny and humility. I want to see a big sign out front the Waldorf school:
KARMA IS THE WAY.
Isn’t that what they believe? Why then aren’t parents told this proudly, up front, every day? Why isn’t it printed in the brochures and flashing in a pretty Waldorf font on the welcome page of every Waldorf school web site?
Just an aside, really. Years ago, about 1980 I think, in the course of my work I had to visit a Steiner school on behalf of a local authority. Before the journey, I was browsing in a newsagents, looking to purchase a copy of “New Society” (which folded a few years later). That week’s headline, which remains engraved in my grey matter, was “The Image of Benign Dottiness” – about our friend Rudolf. With hindsight, “benign” was no doubt far too indulgent, while “dottiness” something of an understatement.
The single greatest selling for us at the Quaker school, after we took our son out of the Waldorf school, was their absolute and total, nonnegotiable, assurance that physical violence would not be tolerated at the school. Your child is as safe as humanly possible in a Quaker school.
There is a significant difference in philosophy on this point, between Quakerism and anthroposophy. In a Quaker school there is no hesitation to stop physical violence, and absolutely no doctrinal fuzziness over its wrongness at all times; no mulling over privately whether “karma” is involved in interpersonal conflicts.
It seems a common practice among anthroposophists and their organisations to try and “out” critics, pathologise their actions, deliberately strike in a very personal way, rather than actually the discuss the criticisms themselves.( I’ve even been in contact with people who have had death threats made against them.) I find all this quite arbitrarily irrational, and quite chilling.
Cathy wrote: “I’ve even been in contact with people who have had death threats made against them.”
That, I could have handled. When a Waldorf teacher made threats against my CHILDREN if I didn’t stop my criticism within the school community, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I became (arguably) the world’s most outspoken Waldorf critic (the Anti-Sune?). I know I’m not the only angry dad, but I very well may be the angriest.
Pete, six hours after I gave a link (July 6, 2012 at 10:09 am) to a description of the specifics of my relation to the Swedish Federation of Steiner Waldorf schools in 2008-2011, telling that it has not paid me to write anything on their behalf on the net, only and purely inform them about what was published in the net durint the period in uestion, you write that I have “verified, at least, that Waldorf DOES pay people to misinform readers and derail critical discussions on the internet.”
If you had read the link I gave, you’d see that it does not tell what you write.
Greetings,
Sune
Sune, why would anyone follow your links down your personal rabbit hole? Just answer honestly, were you working in your official capacity for the SWSF when you threatened mumsnet with a lawsuit if they didn’t remove critical discussion? Was Percy Bratt your personal lawyer or was he working for the SWSF?
Sune, I suspect you won’t answer my question above.. I’m certain everyone reading this believes you threatened legal action against mumsnet as a private citizen who was just so anguished by the unfair criticism of Steiner, you had to involve your personal attorney to threaten a lawsuit against them. Individuals acting on their own do that sort of internet bullying of parenting magazines all the time. That makes complete sense.
Another question… During your employment with the SWSF, you claim you were monitoring the internet in order to inform them of what was being published about Waldorf. While you were monitoring the internet from 2008 to 2011 under the employ of the SWSF, were you also posting on the internet? It’s easy enough to verify. If so, how were you able to differentiate the hours for which you billed them from the hours you were posting? Did you have a stopwatch going? Or did they just sort of pay you WHILE you were also posting stuff that they were in complete agreement with? Also, did the SWSF ask you to misrepresent yourself as a mother with children on the internet or was that your idea? Was disguising yourself as a mother part of their directive to gather information or was it just you as an individual being your regular old dishonest self? The truth hurts Sune… but lies are like murder in the spirit world.
Remember writing this Sune?
“If I see her posting promotion of libel at Mumsnet once more, I won’t tell you about it, but ask Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden to contact you in cooperation with the legal representatives of The Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland (http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html), about your negligent way of allowing libel to be published at Mumsnet and the one who is the most fervent publisher of it to continue to publish at Mumsnet.”
You weren’t expecting Sune to reply to any of this, were you, Pete?
@Diana – No, not in my wildest dreams. Sune disappears whenever someone turns on the heat. But at least everyone who reads this will know who he is. No wonder he posts by so many different identities. An honest person wouldn’t have to – or want to.
After he was debunked as a pseudo-skeptic, one could expect that Canard would produce another collage against the anthroposophy. Well, he has produced two collages within a short period of time. I don’t want to spend many words to it. In fact two words will do: cheap populism. When you want to damage a person or a movement you accuse them of racism. Further, you don’t give a definition of racism but leave it open, so you can manipulate with that concept.
There is however something else I want to say here.
In my opinion there are two great people who deserve a statue (and this time I don’t mean you, Pete Karaistos).
The first one, as you may be expect from me, is Albert Memmi. His great theory and definition of racism is the solid wall protecting Steiner against all accusations of racism, no matter how thick the books are German professors are writing or what American anti-anthroposophy- gurus are saying.
What again was the definition of racism by Albert Memmi?
Memmi: “racism offers overall and final validity to the idea of biological differences, real or imagined — all to the advantage of the dominant party or to the detriment of the victim, in order to legitimate an act of aggression or certain privileges.”
In his article “What is racism” Alain de Benoist comment this definition. (http://alaindebenoist.com/pdf/what_is_racism.pdf)
“ In this case, racist domination is no longer seen as a result or as a potential consequence of theory. On the contrary, theory is seen as resulting from the intention to dominate or exploit. Thus, racist ideology turns into a theory forged to justify an act of aggression or to legitimate a relation of domination from which one would expect to profit. Racism,
then, becomes a belief which justifies behavior. This is not unlike the idea
that class consciousness is the driving force of proletarian action. It is also
similar to so-called “conspiracy” theory, a pseudo-explanatory construct
occasionally used by victims of racism. Close to Memmi is Colette
Guillaumin, for whom racism is not so much a theory or an opinion but a
social relation. She writes: “This is a very particular relation, one of domination,
which is seen as completely natural.” More broadly, racism is
generated from the “normalization” of a relation of domination. This idea is frequently espoused by authors who see an intimate relation between racism, colonialism, imperialism, etc “
It is clear that we do not find ”the intention to dominate or exploit” in the work of Rudolf Steiner. His theory is NOT ” forged to justify an act of aggression or to legitimate a relation of domination from which one would expect to profit”.
I recommend Memmi’s book “Racism” to all opportunistic critics and adversaries of anthroposohy.
The second person who deserves a statue is Marcello Truzzi. He made me see that many skeptics who have prejudices towards the existence of a supersensible world and who attack the anthroposophy are in fact pseudo-skeptics.
They betray the original skeptic principles of being non-dogmatic and non-prejudiced.
They claim that it is certain that there is no spiritual world. Pseudo-skeptics cultivate the prejudice against Anthroposophy, not seeing they are destroying their own reputation.
Tell us about the gnomes.
Too lazy to look up yourself?
[edited as cut and paste of long articles from wikipedia is just comment spam]
OK, a bit shorter now, from Encyclopedia Britannica
gnome,
in European folklore, dwarfish, subterranean goblin or earth spirit who guards mines of precious treasures hidden in the earth. He is represented in medieval mythologies as a small, physically deformed (usually hunchbacked) creature resembling a dry, gnarled old man. Gob, the king of the gnome race, ruled with a magic sword and is said to have influenced the melancholic temperament of man.
The term was popularized through works of the 16th-century Swiss alchemist Paracelsus in which gnomes were described as capable of moving through solid earth as fish move through water.
So, are you saying gnomes aren’t real?
Wait… how come you went to Encyclopedia Britannica for your “gnome” definition but had to go to Encyclopedia Universalis for your racism definition? What’s wrong with the definition of racism in Encyclopedia Britannica – since you have it handy? Here it is:
“racism, also called racialism , any action, practice, or belief that reflects the racial worldview—the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called “races,” that there is a causal link between inherited physical traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioral features, and that some races are innately superior to others.”
Wow, what a surprise? No “aggression” is required to be a racist. Does Encyclopedia Universalis define gnomes as real beings?
I don’t see that a pseudo-skeptic label arises out of being skeptical of a pseudo-religion.
Anthroposophy is a complexly woven combination of imaginations, philosophy shorn of its axioms and rewritten rules of social interactions. It is just goofy. How anyone with a sense of himself and his relation with the world (social and environment) would change everything to follow these ramblings does not make any sense. The key is the word “supersensible”, I don’t believe it. So much of anthroposophy is too much like a revealed religion without any sensible proof.
What about the gnomes?
OK, JimR, you don’t believe it.
Well it is no matter of believing but of investigating.
Pseudo-skeptics do not investigate just cultivate their prejudices
About the gnomes:
[edited as cut and paste of long articles from wikipedia is just comment spam]
Jan, you know, because I’ve told you several times, that Steiner’s teachings fit very nicely within Memmi’s definition of racism. There is no question of this except in your mind. And that ONE definition has been the flag you’ve been waving for how long now? Besides, what Memmi is describing is racial bigotry, not racism (the notion that one race stands above another race – which is exactly what Steiner taught).
Furthermore, it isn’t only “skeptics” who find fault with Steiner’s materials. Lots of people, most Christians for example, find Steiner’s Christian works extremely problematic. Farmers find his ideas about biodynamics silly. Scientists find his beliefs laughable. Architects look upon the Goetheanum as an eyesore. Outside of Anthroposophical audiences, Steiner’s works are embarrassingly crude.
What I find funny, is the folks I know, who send their kids to Steiner or Waldorf are either Black or Jewish, and one kid I know is both, and they try to educate me about the philosophy and encourage me to send my blond haired blue eyed child there.
Their kids seem happy, very healthy,imaginative and bright, I wish my catholic up bringing was as stimulating.
Show me then, Pete Karaistos, that Steiner has developed his general theory about races with the intention to dominate or to exploit, or has forged his theory to justify an act of aggression or to legitimate a relation of domination from which one would expect to profit.
But don’t come up with loose standing, separate quotations it is about the theory as a whole, and please leave the “hierarchy of races” because this is a fabrication of Ralf Sonnenberg and not a concept of Steiner.
Well, firstly, Jan, Steiner doesn’t have to fulfill ANY of those criteria to be a racist – those are only Memmi’s criteria (under which almost NOBODY is a racist)… but you’re also quite mistaken here. The “hierarchy of races” is absolutely Steiner’s concept. Steiner put everything into hierarchies. He went into great detail about spiritual hierarchies, cherubs, angels, archangels, seraphim, thrones and so forth. He put the plant kingdom into hierarchies too – with the rose representing the most highly evolved plant (according to Steiner). The mineral kingdom too had hierarchies – and at the top, Steiner placed diamonds. Steiner described human racial characteristics in great detail – as derived from spiritual science. While one group had characteristics like “intelligence” and had achieved the “highest” physical form, other racial groups were “degenerate” and “regressing”. The truth of the matter is that Steiner was indeed a racist, spiritual science did little more than simply exploit a lot of racial stereotypes of the day for its readers. And anything you can say positively about Steiner with regards to racism falls apart when the notion of “reincarnation” isn’t applied to his teachings. His idea of not being a racist was encouraging people to work harder to become WHITE!
A very weak reaction Pete.
You come up with all kind of hierarchies that are not relevant here. Steiner never talked about a hierarchy of races. Like I said it was Ralf Sonnenberg who invented this concept in one of his articles. It was a concept the adversaries could use but it has nothing to do with Steiner.
The characteristics you mention and which Steiner brought in connection to different races are not brought by Steiner as an instrument to “justify an act of aggression or to legitimate a relation of domination from which one would expect to profit” and you know it.
I really think the game is over Pete.
The above definition of Albert Memmi is not standing alone. I will always use this definition and it is an accepted and leading definition. Guru Peter Staudenmaier might say differently, and his followers will say “yes Peter “and “of course Peter” and “amen”. But still Albert Memmi has a greater reputation than Peter Staudenmaier, his definition is in the Encyclopedia Universalis and more scholars are thinking like him.
Peter Staudenmaier has disappointed me. I had to read on yahoo Waldorf Critics that anthroposophists did not come up with a definition of racism. He knows and you know that that is not true.
Jan,
could you please link to the article where Ralf Sonnenberg supposedly invents that there is in Steiner’s work a hierarchal conception of human races?
-alicia
PS. Your preferred definition of racism has been discussed many times before. As far as I can tell, the game is over — but for you!
Boy, talk about your weak arguments… You’re kidding right? The following quote is from STEINER, nobody else.
“The relation between soul-development and race-development is preserved to us in a wonderful myth. Let us imagine race following race, civilization following civilization. The soul going through its earth mission in the right way is incarnated in a certain race; it strives upward in this race, and acquires the capacities of this race in order next time to be incarnated in a higher one. Only the souls which sink in the race and do not work out of the physical materiality, are held back in the race by their own weight, as one might say. They appear a second time in the same race and eventually a third time in bodies in similarly formed races. Such souls hold back the bodies of the race. This has been wonderfully described in a legend. We know, indeed, that man progresses further in the fulfillment of the mission of the earth by following the great Leaders of humanity who point out the goals to be attained; if he rejects them, if he does not follow them, he must remain behind with his race, for he cannot then get beyond it. Let us think of a personality who has the good fortune to meet a great Leader of humanity, let us suppose such a personality confronting Christ Jesus himself, for example; he sees how all his deeds are evidence for leading humanity forward, but he will have nothing to do with this progress, he rejects the Leader of humanity. Such a personality, such a soul would be condemned to remain in the race. If we follow this thought to its conclusion such a soul would have to appear again and again in the same race, and we have the legend of Ahasuerus who had to appear in the same race again and again because he rejected Christ Jesus. Great truths concerning the evolution of humanity are placed before us in such a legend as this.” (Rudolf Steiner, The Apocalypse of St. John, pp. 80-81)
Jan, you’re trying to redefine racism as requireing “aggression”. That doesn’t fit the rest of the world’s understanding – but still, since you’ve fallen down Sune’s rabbit hole… do we need to redefine “aggression” too? Telling people they don’t belong on your continent is “aggression”… It’s VERY AGGRESSIVE. Steiner said this about blacks publicly in articles. That activity falls firmly within Memmis definition and YOU know it. Um… the game was over the last time I explained this to you but you don’t get it. I’ll keep explaining it to you for the other readers who do. Steiner was a racist. This is rather obvious by what he believed and espoused. If you need further proof, a commission of Dutch ANTHROPOSOPHISTS found his writings to be racist! Get it? Even Anthroposophists had to admit Steiner’s writings are racist. But YOU certainly don’t have to admit this – denial of this obvious fact is quite common among Anthroposophists.
Hey, why not help Anthros invent their own definition of racism now that you know Memmis’ still fits Steiner? After all, they’ve redefined “medicine”, “education”, “gardening”, “banking”, even stuff like “honesty” and the relationship between parent and child. They got the idea of “redefining” stuff right from Steiner. You’re doing the same.
How many people have to explain this to you before you get it… let alone declare victory? Show me ANYTHING written by Steiner that suggests he believed in the equality of people of all races and you can declare victory. Short of presenting that statement, you’ll have a lot more definition-twisting to do. If Steiner believed all races are equal he could have mentioned it in over 40 books and 6000 lectures. He DIDN’T – because he didn’t.
I was curious about gnomes and found this authoritative web site which has copies from the German book, “The Big Gnome Book”.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/49767
This was published in the 70′s, but I assume the material was available from other sources in RS lifetime.
Anthroposophy is an anagram for Harpoon Typos, whatever that means.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that particular group has confused gnomes with trolls…
Pete writes:
“While you were monitoring the internet from 2008 to 2011 under the employ of the SWSF, were you also posting on the internet?”
I have never been employed by the SWSF. The link to the posting at http://excalibor.wordpress.com that I have given above give the details of my relation to the Swedish Federation of Waldorf schools 2008-2011.
Sune
“I have never been employed by the SWSF.”
Sune, you’re such a bad liar, you can’t keep your stories straight. On July 9th – RIGHT HERE ON THIS THREAD, you admited you were employed by the SWSF. You were either lying then, or you’re lying now. Which is it?
You’re wrong. What I wrote referred to my work as media consultant 2008-2011 for the Swedish Federation of Waldorf Schools. SWSF is the umbrella organisation for Steiner Waldorf Schools in the UK and Ireland.
But Sune, in order to get posts by ex-Steiner mothers removed from mumsnet, you threatened the forum that you would:
‘..ask Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden to contact you in cooperation with the legal representatives of The Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland (http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html), about your negligent way of allowing libel to be published at Mumsnet..”
were you just posturing? Or were ‘the legal representatives of The Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland (http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html)’ involved in your attempt to silence mothers on mumsnet?
Oh crap… I got SWSF and SFWS mixed up… now Sune’s going to devote a few blog pages telling the world what a liar I am… Stand by everyone.
Splitters.
Pete writes:
“If Steiner believed all races are equal he could have mentioned it in over 40 books and 6000 lectures. He DIDN’T – because he didn’t.”
http://waldorfanswers.org/WRacismMyth.htm
Sune linked to his disinformation website. Unfortunately, that link DOES NOT suggest all races are equal. Sorry. It’s a weasel-worded expose of Steiner’s words taken OUT OF CONTEXT (notice all the … where text has been removed?). In other words, this is another one of Sune’s carefully crafted LIES!
Sune NEVER places the full context of Steiner’s quotes on the page… how come? Does he EVER provide the link to Steiner’s actual text – so that readers can verify what Steiner ACTUALLY wrote? NOPE! Sune has gone to a lot of effort to produce a disinformation website – and it works very well to misinform people on a daily basis. READ THE FULL CONTEXT when Sune quotes Steiner – you will come away with a VERY different picture of what Steiner had to say.
Steiner NEVER, EVER said all races are equal. At best, he said racial differences will be insignificant – A FEW THOUSAND YEARS FROM NOW! Read the full context – or let Sune, the paid disinformation officer cherry-pick Steiner’s words for you… it’s up to you!
Sune can’t tolerate honest discussion. When the boys come out to play, Sune Nordwall runs away.
I just love it when Sune links to a page. Here’s an example of the distortions available on Sune’s website – from the page he linked to:
“Accusations that racism was taught in Waldorf schools in the Netherlands and appeared in Steiner’s writings prompted the Anthroposophical Society in the Netherlands in July 1996 to set up a commission to investigate the issue, led by an anthroposophical lawyer specializing in discrimination issues. The commission set about analyzing the published works of Rudolf Steiner, encompassing approximately 89,000 pages, mostly transcripts of some 4,000 lectures, but also some 50 written works.
The key question it tried to investigate was whether Rudolf Steiner taught a racial doctrine, in the sense of a seemingly scientific theory whereby the superiority of one race is supposed to be legitimized at the expense of another.
The 720 page report of the commission, that was published on April 1, 2000, going through the complete collected works by Steiner, answered the question in the negative: anthroposophy contains no such racial doctrine.”
Is this accurate? In TRUTH, the ENTIRE COMMISSION was made up of ANTHROPOSOPHISTS (not just one lawyer as Sune claims). Even so, they were forced to ADMIT that there were at least 16 racist remarks by Steiner that would have landed him IN JAIL if they were uttered today. Sune doesn’t mention this on his website.
That a team of Anthroposophists could suggest to the world Steiner’s racism is benign is LAUGHABLE, yet Sune continues to use this as some sort of “evidence” that Steiner wasn’t a racist.
He also claims, as evidence, that the Waldorf schools in Nazi Germany were shut down… but in fact, ALL non-national schools were shut down – and Waldorf schools lasted the longest BECAUSE they (teachers AND parents) made a good case that they were in alignment with Nazi thinking. Sune doesn’t mention this… why not?
I followed Sune’s link to the quote by Steiner… it is supposed to be from GA192. GA192 isn’t listed in the Rudolf Steiner Archive but I found it here. I can’t find the quote Sune listed: The lecture is called “Proletarian Demands and how to put them in practice” – do you have the page number Sune? Searches for the words you have quoted don’t seem to work.
http://steinerbooks.org/research/archive/education_as_a_force_for_social_change/education_as_a_force_for_social_change.pdf
Does anyone see the quote Sune has on his website in that lecture? I may be missing something here. The name of the book that contains the lecture is revealing “Education as a force for social change”. Does anybody believe they’re really getting math, geography and history at Waldorf schools?
Well, I Googled Sune’s quote and the only place the quote seems to be listed is on Wikipedia (where it could easily have been fabricated) – again, no link to the source.
Sune, it behooves YOU to make the source of this quote available. On what page of GA192 does your quote reside?
The search continues for the quote Sune has on his website. I’ve asked Waldorf critics to help find it since Sune won’t post a link to where it can be found. It isn’t unlike Sune to put words in Steiner’s mouth (read on his website how Sune explains early humans with regard to things Steiner never said). I’ll give you another day to provide the link Sune. Unless you can show you haven’t made this quote up (like you’ve fabricated other things Steiner supposedly said) – I’ll assume this has been another one of your fabrications. Did you get the number wrong Sune? Is it in a different lecture? NOW is NOT the time to run away Sune… your credibility is at stake!
It turns out, following Sune’s link, I’ve discovered that Steiner had yet another way to divide children. In the conclusion of this series of lectures (link is in my previous post), (p208) – Steiner makes a distinction between bourgeois children (spoiled – brought up in a “hot house”) and proletarian children (rowdy – brought up with nothing good to imitate).
So, besides pigeonholing children as being large or small-headed, right or left handed, and assigning them to one of the four temperaments, and taking all their racial qualities into account, Waldorf teachers also differentiate between the spoiled from the rowdy children. Good to know.
Well, Sune’s good friend Peter Staudenmaier provided information on the missing quote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/24870 and also confirmed what I and most readers already know, that Sune has misunderstood (once again) what Steiner wrote.
Peter advises checking out p6 for some of Steiner’s feelings about Asians.
http://steinerbooks.org/research/archive/education_as_a_force_for_social_change/education_as_a_force_for_social_change.pdf
Above, Diana Winters on July 6, 2012 at 1:44 pm quotes from a page a WaldorfAnswers, but does not give the link to it.
It is http://www.waldorfanswers.com/AAntisemitismMyth.htm
She also quotes from a comment by the 27-year-old Rudolf Steiner in an 1888 literary review of the drama “Homunculus” by the poet Robert Hamerling.
The quote is commented on at http://waldorfanswers.org/OnSalonArticle.html#Anti-Semitism
Sune complains in his link, above, that this quote is taken out of context – claiming it’s by poet Robert Hamerling:
“Jewry as such has long since outlived its time; it has no more justification within the modern life of peoples, and the fact that it continues to exist is a mistake of world history whose consequences are unavoidable”
According to Sune, Steiner wouldn’t say such a thing. Yet, he said the SAME THING in The Fifth Gospel, only this time pretending it was JESUS who was saying this. Here’s the quote from The 5th Gospel – by Rudolf Steiner:
Jesus (speaking to Mary): “All the forces of soul which I believed had been bestowed upon me lead only to the realisation that in the evolution of the Jewish people there is no longer the capacity to reach the heights of Divine revelations.” (Steiner, 1913, The Fifth Gospel. (1913) Trans. C. Davy & D.S. Osmond. London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1968. p. 67)
Clearly, Steiner was of the opinion that Jews had outlived their purpose. No amount of distortion by Steiner apologists like Sune will change that FACT!
Read more of Steiner’s bright ideas here: http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/12/steiner-quotes-jews-racial-progression.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/12/steiner-quotes-on-thinking-and.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/12/steiner-quotes-specifically-race.html
http://petekaraiskos.blogspot.com/2010/12/steiner-quotes-specifically-waldorf.html
Sune has pointed us to his own analysis of the Steiner quote mentioned above. For balance, I think viewers would do well to read Peter Staudenmaier’s analysis of the quote by Steiner:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10623
Here’s a peek:
In an 1888 Deutsche Wochenschrift review of the book “Homunculus” by the Austrian pan-German author Robert Hamerling, a darling of Schönerer’s faction, Steiner made this point with particular force. Hamerling’s book was a wide-ranging satire that included a crucial antisemitic chapter structured around malicious caricatures of Jews.[viii] Among the well-worn anti-Jewish
stereotypes that Hamerling employed were the fantasy of a Jewish drive for world domination (the Jews aspire to “the triumph of homunculism on earth”, and emigrate to Palestine in order to “found a new Kingdom of Israel, destined to encompass the whole world eventually”)[ix]; the Jew as usurer (“Schacherjuden”,
“Wucherjuden”, “Börsejuden”, and “mauschelnde Finanzbarone”)[x]; and the “concentrated oriental perspiration” of the Jews.[xi] In Hamerling’s portrait,Jews have taken over European newspapers, art, literature, and the medical profession and live parasitically off of the debts of gentiles. At one point he
compares “the entire Jewish population” (das gesamte Judenvolk) to an anthill, “raucous, wailing, screeching, croaking, raving”.[xii]
Steiner vigorously defended Hamerling’s book and excoriated critics who objected to its antisemitism, dismissing these critics as “oversensitive Jews” incapable of reaching an “objective judgement” on the work.[xiii] The heart of Steiner’s
celebratory review of Hamerling’s crude parody was the following passage, in which Steiner laid out his beliefs about the Jews in general terms for the first time:
“It certainly cannot be denied that Jewry today still behaves as a closed totality, and that it has frequently intervened in the development of our current state of affairs in a way that is anything but favorable to European ideas of culture. But Jewry as such has long since outlived its time; it has no more justification within the modern life of peoples, and the fact that it continues to exist is a mistake of world history whose consequences are unavoidable. We do not mean the forms of the Jewish religion alone, but above all the spirit of Jewry, the Jewish way of thinking.” [xiv]
For an intro to the Dutch study mentioned at a page linked on to from the page mentioned above, see http://waldorfanswers.org/ARacistMyth.htm#Netherlands
For more on the study and its background, see http://thebee.se/comments/Holland/
For some comments on anthroposophy in the time of Nazi Germany, se http://www.waldorfanswers.com/AnthroposophyDuringNaziTimes.htm
You ALMOST mentioned the truth about the Dutch commission in your Steiner apologia page. They were 100% Anthroposophists. No mention of that. The comments were not only “discriminatory” – they would have landed Steiner in JAIL… no mention of that. It sounds like ONE Anthroposophist was on the commission. That’s dishonest. You say only five of Steiner’s lectures were on the races… that’s a flat lie.
I have allegations of Waldorf teachers teaching Steiner’s racism as science in California. Are Anthroposophists going to form a commission to see what’s going on Sune? So far, they are denying that any racism is being taught… the teacher has moved on to another Waldorf school – teaching the same subject. Who’s going to look into it Sune? Wouldn’t it be better to look into it than to hear about it on every blog that talks about Waldorf? The fact is – STEINER’S RACISM IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF ANTHROPOSOPHY AND WALDORF EDUCATION – AND THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE. I challenge you, if you aren’t a racist, Sune, to look into Highland Hall – a 50+ year old Waldorf school – and find out why they stood behind the teaching of racism as science.
When the TRUTH comes out to play, Sune Nordwall runs away!
This author, and former Dutch Waldorf student, describes the Dutch Anthroposophical commission’s report and gives us a sense of how much they completely IGNORED in the way of Steiner’s racism. It’s a long article, but the commission study is near the beginning. The remainder of the article provides great information about Steiner’s/Anthroposophy’s relationship to the races.
http://fhs1973.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/neo-nazi-elements-sold-as-anthroposophy/
As an aside, I think he casually mentions our friend Sune as “one of the contributors” when he says:
“If you think back in time, keeping in mind that the bones were still soft, you may never be found fossil remains of the ancestors of the current humans. Cartilage, or soft material, now has been lost and didn’t fossilise like hard bones’.
I think this is a quiet effective explanation, except for one thing. For so far I know Steiner doesn’t discuss, or hardly discuss (on ‘racisme debat’, one of the contributors claimed that he does somewhere, but these passages are unknown to me) earlier forms of man, like the Neanderthals, etc.. Steiner talks about ‘human races’.”
So, I guess I’m not the only one who can’t find verification for the things Sune has attributed to Steiner. Maybe Sune can provide a link to Steiner (not his own website) where he talks about primitive, earlier forms of man like Neanderthals… since he claims Steiner described these.
When the truth comes out to play, Sune Nordwall runs away!
Pete: “When the boys come out to play, Sune Nordwall runs away.”
And you get banned as editor from Wikipedia for foul play and an uppercut to the chairperson of the Wikipedia arbitration committee that you did not like.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Waldorf_education
LMAO! That’s right Sune – I stand toe to toe with you guys… 5 to one isn’t much of a fair fight – but I sure as hell didn’t run away. I let myself be banned rather than put up a defense for a SECOND trial. Babysitting Wikipedia became a ridiculous waste of time. I got your websites excluded and the archives expose a lot of information. You really think I’m banned? I could ALWAYS go there anonymously – like the Anthroposopists do – but I have too much integrity. All one has to do is look at the edits and discussions to see what’s going on at Wikipedia. I’m not interested in Wikipedia anymore. Nobody uses it as a source with a straight face these days.
Uppercut? You’re the only one who threatened to physically punch anyone while we were there, Sune. You mean exposing the “arbitrator” – the former attorney who had his license to practice revoked but still felt he made a good judge? Thugs and bullies don’t make it in my book. The guy was as unscrupulous as YOU are Sune… well, almost.
You never answered my questions to you Sune? Why not? Running away? Do you represent yourself when you post on forums as a mother? Steiner says Great Britain floats in the OCEAN, not on a bed of magma. What deep crevice did you pull that nonsense from? Do you acknowledge that your quotes on your “myths” page are EACH taken out of context – and that Steiner never, not once, said all races are equal? Can you show ANYWHERE where Steiner made such a claim without distorting the context of the lecture? The world is waiting for your answers… YOU have been exposed Sune.
Wow, I just had a look at the Wikipedia talk page Sune linked to above. I suggest everyone read it. People who question the integrity of the article get blocked immediately by Waldorf teacher Harlan Gilbert. He’s finding excuses for using Steiner foundation-funded studies and flying under the arbitration committee guidelines. Meanwhile, people continually ask where the criticism of Waldorf is. Gilbert acts like there isn’t any.
Thanks for the link Sune. You do an amazing job of shooting yourself in the foot with every post.
Did Sune Nordwall run away?
C’mon Sune, you’ve got LOTS of pages you haven’t linked to yet… Don’t you want to advertise your website here anymore? Are you thinking it may be better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to provide more links and remove all doubt.
Readers should know that Sune is also the author of the Americans4Waldorf website (is he representing himself as an American now too?).