Bill Roache, Karma, Reincarnation and Steiner Schools.

Stephen

You have at least made a constructive contribution. Let’s test what you have just said to some degree.

“Steiner was, in my opinion neither a rascist or a loon and no, steiner schools”

How do you reconcile your assertion that Steiner was not a racist with the racial theoretical ideas that are documented here in Andy Lewis’s blog and in other places?
What about his belief in the literal existence of gnomes?

We have had two (apparent) pupils of Steiner schools appear in the last few hours and now you’re here. Each of you has advanced a position that is actually a strawman argument, to whit, the critics of steinerism say that no students come out of Steiner schools capable of functioning at a high level in the outside academic and professional world. That is not what is being said. The issue is one of covert and institutionalised racism and other beliefs which may not even be recognised by the students themselves but are implicit in the philosophy that has guided their education. We saw also in relation to the Frome free school blog someone who claimed to associated with the founding of that school who appeared to be advocating some kind of Steinerism-light, which kept all the cuddly bits but excluded all the nasty and weird stuff. The problem was that he could present no coherent way in which the good cherries were picked from the toxic dross. Can you address this?

hi, firstly i proposed no strawman argument I merely shared my own experiences , please adress what I write and not simply lump in random assertions of others over which i have neither control nor interest in defending.Yes many anthroposophists believe in the existence of elemental beings and other things which you may have problems with…..so what. is that really so ludicrous that beliefs which have existed within our western european culture are still in evidence?Can I mention Arthur Conan Doyle, G.K.Chesterton, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein the last three of whom had discussion groups on Theosophy and later Anthroposophy?? We can say that now we have advanced culturally and scientificaly we have no place for such beliefs and I respect that but,,when you somewhat arrogantly say that we shall put things to the test are you not really saying that the onus is on me to prove something ??? that’s not a debate or a discussion but rather a bully pulpit. The aforementioned writers were , incidentally,
contemporaries of Rudolf Steiners and were very sympathetic to his philosophy, which was far more complex than merely seeing gnomes or fairies.I will answer one part of your comments about steiner / waldorf education, again from personal experience. I have friends in Norway whose son just finished studying at a Waldorf school, he didnt have to sit any final exams or entrance exams for university, it was enough to get a letter of recommendation from his teacher for him to be accepted into med-school,such is the trust the state has in the waldorf curriculum. On a final note I was raised as a catholic, a belief system I have long since discarded, yet when I visit home and see many of my friends and family members still attending mass, then I don`t lecture them ,I don`t look down my nose at them and i certainly don`t feel superior to them I simply feel different.The steiner school movement is the largest non-state school system here in Germany do you really think it could really harbour racists without the parents, the pupils the teachers or the educational authority noticing…really? I know of two teachers who were fired for connections to right wing parties in the whole of Germany, in nineteen years…..less by far than in the state system of whatever country you might compare it with.

“hi, firstly i proposed no strawman argument”

You didn’t explicitly, those two pupils did. But now you have;

“I have friends in Norway whose son just finished studying at a Waldorf school, he didnt have to sit any final exams or entrance exams for university…”

Call me psychic.

You also seem to have answered a set of questions rather different to the ones I asked. They were;

How do you reconcile your assertion that Steiner was not a racist with the racial theoretical ideas that are documented here in Andy Lewis’s blog and in other places?
What about his belief in the literal existence of gnomes?

I’ll answer your question;

“you really think it could really harbour racists without the parents, the pupils the teachers or the educational authority noticing…really?”

Given the policies of obfuscation and evasion that Andy and others have documented and the lack of willingness of public authorities to examine the background of these schools that have been allowed to grow in parallel to state schools I can see a number of reasons why this could occur.

All of this has wandered off the original topic of this blog, which is leniency towards perpetrators and blaming of victims of abuse because their actions are blamed on the working out of karma and reincarnation. You say that only 15% of your colleagues are practising anthroposophists. What are their views of this? What is yours? If you find this aspect of steinerism to be unpalatable, explain to us, as I have previously asked, how do you create the steinerism-light that you imply contains only the good bits ?

Stephen – CS Lewis was not fond of anthroposophy and called Rudolf Steiner “a sort of panpsychist, with a vein of posing superstition.” So you can mention him if you like, but it will not help your case.

hi Melanie,
good that someone else uses their given name! I mentioned Lewis because He, Tolkein and Chesterton were interested in Theosophy, the forerunner of Anthroposophy and had regular meetings on the topic, out of this came Lewis`s decision to convert to catholicism.My point in mentioning them was more to illustrate their willingness to explore new ideas and philosophies, (including the existence or possibility thereof of elemental beings) than to make them into poster boys of anthroposophy. My original point was and is that no self-respecting waldorf teacher would agree with the loathsome opinions espoused by Bill Roach. I have the feeling that some of the commentators here are happier with the assumption that this is a result of waldorf education and I`m merely trying to bring a balancing view based not on theory but practice and direct experience.

monkey, a strawman argument whereby i give you a concrete example of how other countries view Waldorf education and accept that the students are capable of adding positively to modern society??? you appear erudite and I assume computer literate , then google Norway and Steiner school and see what you find…..no straw just facts.Now , pleases read my contributions through, read my description of my own school, I personally am not an anthroposophist, but (and yes, here comes a clarification that will no doubt irk) it isnt a requirment for staff because it is not part of the curriculum and is not fed to the children. If you can show me any proof whatsoever that steiner schools are institutionaly racist then present it , a knee-jerk its so because I heard it somewhere or read a blog doesn`t quite cut it. I`ve read other blogs where people have maintained that Steiner collaborated with the National Socialists despite the fact that he died in the twenties!! And simply to present one last point the Steiner schools and Anthroposophy were banned by the N.S. regime in Germany, especially because of the work they did with mentally handicapped people.

“a strawman argument whereby i give you a concrete example of how other countries view Waldorf education and accept that the students are capable of adding positively to modern society???”

It’s a strawman argument because the capability of selected examples of Steiner school students is not where the criticism is being directed.

You’ve still not directly addressed the issue of Steiner’s racial theories and explained how they have been acknowledged and explicitly rejected by steiner-light organisations.

Do you accept or deny that Steiner’s published views, in the light of modern understanding of these issues, were racist?

I gave you an example of a governmental acknowledgement of the school system not just individual children but steiner schools throughout Norway…all….. every one. And I`m still waiting for a direct example of racist teachings in order to respond…..are you reading any of my comments through??

Norway + Steiner schools =

http://www.steinerkritikk.no/

http://www.cappelendamm.no/main/katalog.aspx?f=11100&isbn=9788202318888

http://humanist.no/et_steinerbarns_bekjennelser.html

melanie fair play to ya at least you made the effort now delve further and see what you find about the norwegian department of education recognizing an d accepting that students are admitted to third level education without taking state exams, that was my point. It`s a wee bit disingenuous to only seek out the critics.I am sure you are aware that there’s websites to suit every taste….there are even, shudder… websites devoted to attacking secularism and humanism, ( although they`re not much fun lots of bigotry and members who are not able to countenance other opinions 🙂

I didn’t ‘seek out the critics’, Stephen – I’m highlighting a book by a major Norwegian publishing house.

Melanie, fair enough but I’m still interested as to whether you found any information on my original point.

Neither Tolkien (note the spelling) nor C.S. Lewis were interested in or sympathetic to Anthroposophy; the only connection is that they were part of an Oxford literary circle called the Inklings which included one member, Owen Barfield, who was an Anthroposophist.

Lewis was never a Catholic – he was converted to Christianity from an atheist position by Tolkien (who was a Catholic), but remained resolutely Protestant.

It is a long, long time since I read the phrase “mentally handicapped”, btw. Are Steiner schools still using it? Their idea of people with learning disabilities as “imperfectly incarnated souls” is neither progressive nor empowering.

A woman with learning disabilities told me once that her boyfriend had lived at a Steiner boarding scholl and had hated it because he was not allowed radio or television. I suppose he learnt about gnomes instead.

Having been raised in a buddhist household, I can certainly confirm that this interpretation of karma is not unique to anthroposophy. Karma is cause and effect, i.e. effects that happen in your life are a result of causes that you have made in your life, or previous lives. So if something bad happens to you, you have done something to deserve it.

None of the buddhists I’ve ever met would be so crass as to tell this to victims of abuse though.

Well, Grumpycat, I’ll allow that you are not a Yes-butter, you’re more of a Random Tangentialist.

All that is required for the points Andy makes in this blog to be valid is for Bill Roache to speak for Bill Roache and for Bill Roache to be a product of an unpleasant esoteric cult.

So are Hinduism and Buddhism unpleasant esoteric cults BSM? Yes or no?

No

Grumpycat

You are very done of the “only asking questions” ploy. Just for a change, say something substantive, relevant and useful. Give us some positive characteristics about Steiner’s views on race and karma.

Feckin’ autocorrect.

Grumpycat

You are very good at the “only asking questions” ploy. Just for a change, say something substantive, relevant and useful. Give us some positive characteristics about Steiner’s views on race and karma.

Some of the Buddhists in Burma appear to be pretty unpleasant. Not sure how ethnic cleansing fits in with karma.

http://www.voanews.com/content/muslims-vanish-as-buddhist-attacks-approach-burma-biggest-city/1631625.html

“Logic” might be overstating the case. Like “God”, if Karma (were it real) has this much control over our lives, it could stop the “bad things can happen to good people” merry-go-round and just make everyone good. That it doesn’t do this suggests that, like “God”, it lacks a worthwhile moral compass.

Sam Harris (End Of Faith et al) tells an interesting story about when he was exploring Buddhism. Travelling in Tibet he encountered a seriously disabled girl. When he expressed sympathy for the girl to the woman who was ‘caring’ for her, the woman made it clear that sympathy was not valid since the girl had clearly brought her state upon herself through her actions in a previous life.

Harris says that was a turning point for him in realising that Buddhism wasn’t necessarily all lovely.

Karma is a typically religious man made and nonsense concept, and necessarily leads to the riciculous views expressed by Roache.

I agree with the last comment by Matt. The problem is that the concept of karma can be used in very Nazi ways. Of course I have come across other people who interpret karma in a very liberal and “compassionate” way. But however you look at it when is it dressed down to its basics it is a “blame the victim” philosophy and Andy’s post expressed that it can be used in this manner, and often is.

The problem with child abuse victims is that they often blame themselves and think there must have been something wrong with them to get abused in the first place and all good therapy is based on helping them come to the realisation that they did nothing wrong and the total blame for the abuse always lies with the abusive adult. Therefore any philosophy that can be interpreted to tell them that they actually were to blame for their abuse for actions in a previous life actually becomes another form of child abuse, and Bill Roache is using it as such. In making such statements I consider that he himself is a child abuser and am not surprised at his defence of others abusers.

I an very grateful to Andy and people like him for bringing this philosophy to light

For what it’s worth, I think the word “tangentialist” is genius. I instantly know what it means and although it’s a long word it conveys a complicated idea that would otherwise need many words to explain.

Thanks.

I thought it close to literature. Beautifully written.

But I do wonder if Steve is one of those playground bullies he refers to given that he’s on the internet calling other people racists, offenders and bullies. Not really the sort of Karmic “compassion towards both abuser and abused” that was written about earlier.

Karma Khazi

What goes around comes around.
What goes up must go down.
What goes in must come out.
That’s good for your soul.

Just flush and spray a little air freshener. That’s good for your sole.
Use a bidet and a wet-wipe. That’s good for your hole.

That was my Japanese/Irish uncle Toshiro O’Faoilte – “The Feckin Eejit of the Divine Wind” – who was Irelands most decorated kamikazi pilot with 43 succesful missions.

No, my own composition. Mr Jobs just put his sole in my soul where I didn’t need it.

Firstly please desist from using terms like “steinerist” since as a current Steiner school student, I have never heard of any such thing. Second, I am nothing like steiner’s advocate and can’t say I would be much good at it either since in all my years at this school I have never been taught anything about him or what his beliefs might have been. Lastly, about this whole karma business, everyone knows karma is, pardon my French, bullshit. As a Steiner student I have never been told otherwise and I don’t see when Steiner education and karma became apparently intertwined at all since we have no particular belief in it, it’s irrelevant.

I think the word steinerist works just fine, thanks, so I’ll use it as appropriate.

“I don’t see when Steiner education and karma became apparently intertwined”

With Steiner.

By the way, has it become some sort of class project to post on this blog or did you find it independently and choose to post here?

I found this blog independently and decided to start posting because the arguments here seem very unfair, in other words all your negative opinions of anthroposophy and Rudolph Steiner have been reflected on to steiner schools, and I just wanted to make clear from a first hand point of view that we are not taught any of these ideas at school at all. I have no intention of protecting anthroposophists, all i want to say is that the education I am receiving is of a very high standard and i have had no kind of contact with the side of steiner described as a “cult”.

The obvious question Mike is how do you know you had had a good education and have not been taught Steinerist thinking?

Because I am currently in education and do not feel pressured into any particular belief system, in fact all teachers i have encountered form several different schools are very open minded and perfectly willing to listen to other student’s views without contradicting them. That being the case, if I have been somehow programmed with Steiner ideology it has been entirely without my knowing, so are you suggesting that i am some kind of “steinerist” sleeper agent waiting to be activated to spread karma and overly diluted medicine to the world?

Perhaps Mike should find out what Steiner teachers study to become teachers.

It might also surprise him to find out that not everyone thinks the karma business is bullshit. Anthroposophists are among those who do not think that. Oddly enough. Karma is certainly not irrelevant in anthroposophy, and not in waldorf education either, as waldorf is based upon the anthroposophical view of man. (Check it out! Even a former Steiner school student can do it!)

In fact a current Steiner school student, and whilst i have no intention of flatly disregarding any link between karma and anthroposophy (since i know virtually nothing about either)I will say that the Steiner curriculum is not synonymous with anthroposophy and whether or not it linked, it is most certainly not taught, let alone imposed on students.

@ Mike March 25, 2013 at 11:37 pm (these threads are hopeless, sorry, there’s no reply button on Mike’s comment).

If you had read properly, you would have noted that I didn’t claim anhroposophy is imposed on students. Though indirectly it actually is — as it is the foundation of the pedagogy, which certainly is imposed on students.

Of course there is a link between anthroposophy and karma — karma and reincarnation are central beliefs of anthroposophy! I do not understand why Steiner students make ridiculous objections to what Andy writes when they don’t have the faintest clue even about the most central anthroposophical ideas. And, yes, Steiner teachers do study anthroposophy to become teachers.

As a former Steiner school student who has managed to find out more, I’m sure you can do it too!

For the purpose of this argument let’s assume you are right about what goes on behind the student’s backs, and by this I am neither agreeing nor disregarding your point. That said, if these aspects never leak through to the students and therefore do not influence them directly in any way, and meanwhile manage to provide an excellent standard of education, then from the child’s point of view, I would see no problem.

Once again, how do you know you have been given an excellent education and that you have not been influenced by anthroposophy?

I know I have been given an excellent education because I achieved straight A’s in my GCSEs last year without any outside tutoring and am doing well so far this year too. As for anthroposophy, I don’t believe in it. That is enough of an assurance for me that I haven’t been influenced.

Mike – would you like to declare how many GCSE exams you sat and in which subjects?

Mike – Are you Sune?

8 subjects. English, maths, Spanish, double science, history, German and fine art. Sune? I don’t know what that is

Mike

Just to be clear about your achievement, these were all at grade A were they? Doubtless some of your colleagues got a fair portion of A* grades. Am I right?

correct, there were those that did better, and others worse, just like any other school as far as i am aware. I am merely highlighting that steiner schools actually do provide good education in “normal” subjects, not just in painting, singing and whatever other things are stereotypical associated with steiner schools.

I’m sorry, I missed one of your points in my reply. I have indeed been to a faculty nesting and I saw no such thing. As to the spiritual development of children, this is something possibly present in the lower school, but if so I think what you are referring to is how they discus a child’s development, which if you ask me is perfectly normal since the main goal of a school at that stage is to make sure the children develop into mature and independent adults. This does not mean “spiritual the development” in the sense of karma and such, but general mental development.

This is from a handbook on how to set up a Steiner School,

While Rudolf Steiner himself recognized the need to compromise on some issues in order for the first Waldorf school to survive, he was quite clear that some things were not negotiable. One of these was the absolute connection between the way of working in the school and the spiritual realities upon which this way of working is based. The teacher is not to teach anthroposophy to the children. But the teacher is required to use anthroposophy as a method of investigation and of understanding in order to properly meet the children.

“The teacher is not to teach anthroposophy to the children.”

So if using anthroposophy to understand the child works (which it can do in some cases) without imposing those beliefs on them is something they believed in why is that a problem considering that children come out of Steiner schools as well developed and qualified individuals? On a side note, it might interest you to know that our school has received letters from universities commenting on the high standard of students coming out of our school. If a little anthroposophy was employed in the early years maybe I will also have to admit maybe it worked…

Mike – I am beginning to think you are taking the piss now.

A student would not be invited to those parts of the meeting of the college of teachers when candles are lit, prayers are said, meditations or discussion on a the spiritual development of individual children take place. It differs, as far as I know, but it isn’t even self-evident that all teachers or staff participate. I don’t have a lot of information about how it works, but I can say as much as this: pupils would not participate. If they’re invited in, for some reason, it is to those parts of the meeting wich don’t require an anthroposophical understanding. (It would of course be unethical, if not actually breaking confidentiality and even laws, to let another student sit in to listen while the spiritual aspects or personal problems of another student are discussed.)

The term Steiner school only comes from its founder and does not necessarily imply that all his possibly outdated ideas are actively taught to students.

65I must say I´m rather disappointed by this thread so far.People with apparently no experience of waldorf education pontificating on issues of which they they have no real understanding.I as a waldorf teracher of over 20 years standing and Mike, who has just come through the school system have attempted, independently of each other , to put some points forward based on direct experience .Badly-shaved-monkey (and how proud he must be of his clever pseudonym ) has time and time again accused steiner and by default me as a waldorf teacher also of being racist .Now i have asked him a number of times to give me a concrete example and have yet to recieve a reply, in fact he`s spent the time arrogantly attacking the posts of a schoolboy !! A couple of points need to be made. BSM steinerist is not a word and because you deem it to be one does not make it `àppropriate“…My reaction to Roaches remarks has been of pure disgust.. I have never in my career came across anyone in a steiner school, neither among the teachers nor the parent body who shared Roaches totally erroneous take on Karma.I mentioned that I work with children with special social needs and developmental problems.Quite a lot of them have been abused,physically,sexually and emotionally.The work of our institution is not only important it`s essential for the needs of these children so perhaps you need to consider whether or not you really want to tar everyone with the same brush.
It would be far more refreshing to encounter a rational exchange of opinions than be confronted with closed minds and bully-pulpits. There is really no challenge involved in` hear me i am right you`re wrong.

Thank you for this, i completely agree. I was accused earlier of of being a “steinerist” masquerading as a teenager in order to give my points more credibility due to my writing style which is apparently too sophisticated for someone taking their A-levels. If people on this forum would use more valid arguments to contradict me than calling me a liar, I would be much obliged.

‘People with apparently no experience of waldorf education pontificating on issues …’

That’s not true. I’ve been at a Steiner school for 9 years, and I basically agree with Andy — sure, there are details where I might differ, but on the whole, I believe he offers a necessary corrective to the official waldorf/steiner image.

And as for karma: When reading about Steiner education I’ve certainly come across many perspectives on karma that differ from Roache’s perspective only in degree not in nature.

The thing is, one might reasonably ask what ideas about karma have got to do in education at all. You can do all you need to do for children and their education without involving or using any ideas about karma. I suspect that the risks inherent in applying such a concept far outweighs the potential benefits (which don’t seem too apparent to me).

Alicia ,Firstly your understanding of what goes on in teachers meetings is a little off, having spent 22 years in various schools i can only say that I`ve only once experienced candles in the meeting.As for Karma it is a part of the overall view of the individual children and as such does get some attention but to be frank I´ve heard the word very little over the years. Believe it or not our meetings also include issues such as curriculum, paperwork,substitute teaching and all the other mundane day to day tasks involved in any school.And yes Waldorf schools can be described as faith-based, which could best be described as Christian with esoteric influences.Now that might be a problem for some but there are many alternative school systems available.I`ve personally never witnessed, or took part in the forcing of a child to enroll in a Waldorf school.I`m a little baffled as to why Steiner schools get people so riled up, why should the concept of Karma so enrage people? This is not a rhetorical question , I am genuinely interested.

Stephen — I can’t say what’s been going on in the faculty meetings at your particular school. Lighting candles is pretty much a standard thing in Steiner environments, and I do not find reports of candles at faculty meetings worth doubting — I have no reason to doubt teachers or anthroposophists who have written about these meetings. I can’t even see why it would be wrong to light candles; there is a spiritual/religious atmosphere to certain parts of these meetings — prayers, meditations, reading Steiner –, and candles or not is not the issue. I have a much bigger problem with the so called ‘child studies’ — whether or not the happen by candle-light.

I think that what riles people up more than karma is that Steiner schools don’t openly say that they evaluate children based upon, among other things, ideas about karma. That this is part of how they view children.

Being more open about it would be a good start. It shouldn’t be up to critics of Steiner schools to explain why and how karma is part of anthroposophy and thus relevant to Steiner education.

Basically, people who do not want to have their children subjected to teachers who might view them from a karmic perspective ought to have a chance to understand that this might happen — and go elsewhere.

I’m sure there would still be people who were riled up at the mere thought of applying karma, but Steiner schools would avoid one particular reason for people being riled up: not having been fully informed before making a choice.

And if we’re talking about state funding of these schools — these things must be on the table. And since Steiner school proponents won’t highlight them, it really is up to people like Andy to raise objections.

So perhaps that might be some reasons.

I think you’re wrong about the description, by the way — I think waldorf schools are more aptly described as esoteric with a christian tinge than ‘christian with esoteric influences’. Steiner’s worldview is esoteric and there are christian elements but also much else (some of which is pretty far from christianity).

stephen dorgan

The difficulty is that Steiner Schools are so closely tied to your description of a religion that is ” Christian with esoteric influences”.

I would suggest firstly that description is very misleading as Anthroposophy is a very long way from what most people describe as Christian.

The big issue is that in a Christian influenced school, the day to day curriculum and activities are not tightly prescribed by the religious beliefs. There is not a chapter in the bible that describes how children should be taught, the art materials they should use, the dances they should perform, the myths they need to learn, the age they should start to read and the way teachers should behave.

In Steiner education though, this is true. The occult writings of Steiner very much drive what happens and my problem is that this essential fact is withheld from prospective parents.

For a new parent to think that their choice of school is ‘broadly Christian’ and ‘inspired by the views of Steiner on child development’ is deeply misleading. And until such time as schools are fully open about this, expect people like me to point it out to parents for you.

Andy, I think it might be helpful to separate the ideas of Anthroposophy as a religion and an educational system because they are two separate entities.The religous belief system is known as the Christian Community with priests (male or female) churches and services.Having attended a number of services and having being raised a catholic I can compare it to the Catholic church services before the second vatican council. The school system is a completely seperate institution and could best be described as having a holistic approach to the childs development.My 18 year old son is in his second to last year at a Waldorf school and I can only offer the fact that both he and I are happy with his experiences there.Having taken part in many introductory meetings with potential parents at my own school I can only report that well over 90% know in advance the pedagogical methodology of the schools, the other 10% are encouraged to meet up with other parents and exchange experiences before making up their minds. So again a simple question what is it exactly about Waldorf schools that get people so riled up? We deliver, as they say, exactly what it says on the box!

Andy, a quick Addendum, do you really have such little faith in the intelligence of others that you really feel you need to point things out to them?? really? I find most people can handle school choices quite adequately and in the age of Google there`s a lot of pros and cons posted out there to help make an informed, balanced choice.

My next blog post will examine if what you say is true about Steiner Schools disclosing to parents the nature of their pedagogy.

I have plenty of faith in the intelligence of parents. The issue is, once again, that intelligence cannot be used to make informed decisions if they are being misled.

Very clever people can be misled.

Andy , read my post again, I gave my experience from my school, where is this paranoia coming from? Do you honestly believe that Steiner schools are part of a mooney-like cult???Really I don`t know whether to laugh or cry.The interesting thing for me is the different attitudes between the U.K. and here in Germany.The steiner school system is the most popular non-state system here and in the main well-regarded and is very much out in the open. Like all schools we are subsidised by the government and are regularly inspected by the state.Do you really think that we could exist in an open ,modern and democratic country if we were anything else but fully transparent??

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/bildung/kritik-an-erster-staatlicher-waldorfschule-steiner-vom-staat-1.1583357

Stephen Dorgan: ‘The religous belief system is known as the Christian Community …’

The Christian Community is anthroposophical spirituality (or esoteric religion) become more exoterically religious, with reigious rituals and services and so forth. The existance of the Christian Community in no way changes the nature of anthroposophy itself, although far from all anthroposophists belong to the Christian Community.

As for your claim that parents can google — you’re quite right. It is much easier for parents to find out today than it used to be, say, 20 years ago. (Though back then I think schools were also less secretive — they didn’t feel the ‘need’ they apparently feel today to hide away Steiner and his ideas.) But that it is easier to find out today — and to make better informed choices — has a lot to do with the activities of critics and sceptics, like Andy. Steiner schools themselves don’t tell parents about karma, reincarnation, or even about anthroposophy (they’re more likely to say it’s not so important).

You also mention Germany. Now, in Germany, there isn’t exactly only applause for waldorf schools. Andy already posted a link to an article about protests against a planned state waldorf school. That’s certainly not all.

And, yes, I certainly do believe waldorf schools can exist in a modern, democratic society without being fully transparent. Sweden is a good example. Waldorf schools here are definitely not fully transparent — and they’ve been fully state-funded for decades now! And now requiring state-funding for teacher training — without making much effort (if any) to be fully transparent. In fact, they rarely even mention anthroposophy. Same situation as everywhere, in other words.

This is somewhat of a superfluous point; there has been a lot of victim blaming going around these days and i object to it as much as the next guy, but if a rapist is catholic does that mean all catholic priests condone and even teach this to be acceptable? This seems to have been suggested about steiner teachers, I hope you understand why it is a grossly unfair generalization.

“if a rapist is catholic does that mean all catholic priests condone and even teach this to be acceptable?”

But, we’re not talking about Catholic priests here, we’re talking about Waldorf teachers. I don’t think Catholic priests believe in karma. But… According to Bill Roache, who follows the same philosophy as Waldorf teachers, perpetrator and victim are simply working out pre-existing karmic circumstances. All Waldorf teachers believe this to some extent (unless they are frauds). It is what they are taught in Waldorf teacher training… and it’s part of the Anthroposophy that supposedly doesn’t influence students.

‘Very surprised reader’ here’s a hint-
Among those who use the internet regularly, who really gives a turd for petty details or ‘spell-check policing’, when the content of the discussion is the obvious subject at hand?

Also paragraphing,layout & ‘normal’ literary requirements do not appear as comfortable upon the eyes when on computers -compared with a printed page; hence a usual leniency among most free-thinking folk.

Many people on this site seem to be ‘bullying’ anyone who tries to give a more balanced outlook on Stiener Schools, I’ve met many great people from their schools over the last 40 years or so, yet know that some Stiener schools/students have suffered or been stigmatised by abuse- but to keep this in perspective- what schools haven’t? I think you will find the catholic church far more reprehensible than the Stiener school transgressions mentioned.

Please don’t forget one of Stieners greatest adversaries was Hitler!
The charge of racism against Stiener is sadly largely true, although this was typical of the age…& it would be hard to find many at the time whom we would consider ‘not racist’! Now-a-days even considering racial differences is an act of racism,& defined as such.

‘very surprised reader’ I think you should apologise to Mike for the offencive & trite remarks you made regarding his education & mode of expression.
Youre attempt at belittlement exposes many of your own failings, as I’m sure you will notice as you mature; but also a mean spirited nature & obsession with ‘style’ (of which you seem redundant) over meaningful content.

Mike.

It is quite odd then that you got ‘straight As’ as this would mean that you got the second highest mark in all your subjects.

That is either a rather remarkable coincidence, or you are not familiar with the GCSE system and assumed an A was the highest mark.

Would you like to comment on that?

Mike doesn’t seem to have much to say about it, but I’ll comment. In my experience of marking undergraduate essays and reports at university, I have found that vanishingly few teenagers submit written work with English as coherent as evident in Mike’s posts. So, there are 3 possibilities here. 1) I’m at a dreadful university. 2) Mike is an absolute credit to himself, and the education system that he represents. 3) Mike is not in fact a teenage student at a Steiner school, but in fact is the fictional creation of an adult supporter of Steiner education.

I’ll say what you’re thinking Andy – number 3.

I’m going to take that as a compliment, thanks Marcus! I don’t see why i would have the need to masquerade as a teenager since the adults on this forum all have their own (sometimes strong) cases to make.

Sorry that was me, wrong user name for this forum

Also one of my subjects is english literature, do you really think I would be on that course if i couldn’t write?

Hi Mike don`t let it get you down, its sometimes easier for people to attack individuals rather than ideas . I`m still waiting for some semblance of a debate here but when it gets reduced to petty paranoia then theres little hope , cheers stephen ( a university graduate and waldorf teacher masquerading as nothing but himself)

“so far I have been receiving excellent education in my subjects (maths, geography, chemistry and graphic design…”

You already told us what your subjects were, and English literature wasn’t one of them. Lies are so hard to keep track of, aren’t they?

Right then, verification of me (directed at “bock” in a comment below) http://i.imgur.com/lQqmWt8.jpg

Yes i mean what i say, straight As, not A*s. is that a problem?

Yes at GCSE, pleae try to keep up.

There should also be a comma after “Mike” since you are addressing me, and then a full stop at the end of your post since it is also the end of the sentence. So if you have anything valid to say, speak up.

Mike
There is an inconsistency in style; you contributions look like they have been written by a committee, not a student.

I suppose I’ll have to take that as a compliment. I am 17 years old and attend a Steiner school. If you insist on contradicting me about who I am, there’s not a lot I can do about it. If your only basis for dismissing my arguments is that you think I am an imposter (or a committee of them)I find that a bit pathetic. Maybe its hard for you to admit that a Steiner student can write coherently without resorting to arguments about karma and anthroposophy.

Mike, I’m always happy, but thanks for asking anyway. Who’s the kid in the picture?

Me, how much evidence do you need?

I could demand as much evidence as Steiner had for the existence karma but I won’t. Instead I’ll take your word for it.

well thank you for that at least. Now can people stop telling me I’m lying about who i am? And thanks to everyone who said I write too well for a student.

Mike, I didn’t say you wrote well. I said your verbal patterns suggested a much older person.

it was said elsewhwere http://i.imgur.com/bj6TXB0.png

Isla , if you genuinely want to hear someone else’s view on karma it might first be helpful not to use the word crackpot,just saying.

Karma. By definition crackpot.

hardly, by “definition”:

(in Hinduism and Buddhism) The sum of a person’s actions in this and previous states of existence, viewed as deciding their fate in…
Destiny or fate, following as effect from cause.

Believe in it all you want. It’s still nonsense.

I don’t believe in it, but that doesn’t make you right.

What you believe in has no bearing on my position one way or the other. What point are you making?

Eh, no actually, in your opinion it’s nonsense,sorry to burst your bubble here but you are not the arbitrator of all that is true in the world, perhaps if you prefaced your comments with “in my opinion…..” you might be able to engage in debate or dialogue with others who have different opinions. Failing that you could cover your ears and shout ” blah, blah, blah can’t hear you”

Stephen, did you think I was giving someone else’s opinion?

Do you believe in gnomes like Steiner?h

If A Giraffe is Mike, I find it odd that he now objects to karma being a ‘crackpot’ idea. This is what he wrote earlier in the thread, and which I challenged, saying that to many, including anthroposophists, karma is not bullshit:

‘Lastly, about this whole karma business, everyone knows karma is, pardon my French, bullshit. As a Steiner student I have never been told otherwise …’

I do not know if there’s a qualitative difference between ‘bullshit’ and ‘crackpot’. Maybe there is.

My opinion on karma hardly alters its technical definition.

Stephen

I know all about karma. There can be fewer more crackpot concepts around. Bock seems to have the measure of it.

I don’t want to know any more about it.

I just want to know how to get my credit rating up so that I do not come back deformed.

Let’s call it my cosmic karmic hedge.

I merely want to quantify how many more ants I need to avoid. Simple question really.

Bock, exactly, that’s what made me a little leery having read your comment.

Stephen, you seem to be coming from a position of belief. Once that happens, there is no possibility of rational discussion.

Bock, I’m actually coming from a position of openness which is something a bit different than belief, if you want more personal information the certainly.I believe that people are entitled to their own opinions, ideologies and beliefs as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.Frankly I find the idea that a person of any belief is incapable of debate or discussion is incredibly close-minded and arrogant.If I had the opportunity to meet the Dali Lama for example I’d be very happy to engage in conversation with him.I’m not working to an agenda here, I am actually interested in the topic being discussed, but let’s be honest here, read any of my comments on this thread and compare it to the tone and tenor of the responses.now tell me who’s being more debate-resistant here.And to give even more personal information the pedantry and absolutism I’m seeing here reminds me of why I turned my back on all organised religions, so you are of course entitled to your opinions but please refrain from thinking you know anything about me,if you can’t respect my right to hold opinions at variance to yours then say so , don’t weasel about with arguing that I’m somehow close-minded or tainted with a belief system, sound fair to you?

I think you’re basing your position on uncritical belief, since you seem to accept the existence of karma without requiring supportive evidence. But of course, as always, I might be wrong. By the way, “weasel” is a very loaded word.

Isla, read the last sentence of your first paragraph, then please reread my last sentence in the post above……QED I`d say

Bock yes you are right weasel is a loaded word, almost as loaded as crackpot or nonsense, Perhaps a little more biography might help, I was raised a catholic in Ireland and endured a catholic school,my first action as an adult (well 16 really) was to get the hell away from all established religions,But here`s the rub I ended up becoming a waldorf teacher in Germany and have spent the last 20 years working with emotionally and developmently damaged children who have fallen through the cracks of the school system here. I`m working shoulder to shoulder with a mix of co-workers of various or no religous backgrounds, some are anthroposophists, some catholic,jewish,muslim and protestant. I also help organise benefit concerts (totally independent of the school) for aids orphans in Nambibia and have met some of the catholic nuns who work there .Now here`s the crux i respect the hell out of these people without sharing much or any of their beliefs.there are some things ive learned over the years that have built a certain framework for how i view what we could call the big picture but I am open to any ideas I come across.I originally got involved in this thread not because Steiner was being criticised but that the school sytem in which i am active was being greatly misrepresented. I thought that this might be an opportunity to give a different take on the topic simply for the sake of balance. Having said that fair play to ya for admitting you might be wrong;)

OK I am now skeptophile!

So with regard to Steiner schools the main argument of those defending them seems to be that on certain issues such as race and karma, and no doubt many others, the present schools do not adhere to Steiner’s original views. So I’m with someone else on this – then why not just call them schools?

Stephen

i have asked you over and over again for one scintilla of proof

I’m sorry, Stephen, are you really saying you have not read the other blogs in this site where this has been discussed. I was assuming you were up to speed with this. Just to be clear, are you really and truly mantaining that Steiner did hold hold views that we would judge to be racist?

I’m concerned now that we have been seriously at cross-purposes here. There is a basic assumption that people defending Steiner schools have sufficient knowledge of Steiner upon which to base their defence.

Bsm, you find it bizarre that I haven’t read all the blogs on this site…….bizarre???? I came across this report on Bill Roaches comments and was interested enough to try and take part in a discussion, I am assuming that you at least understand what a discussion is because so far I’ve seen far more polemic and dogma.The fact is that you have still not shown me an example of racist teachings from Steiner,I have time and time again answered your points based on my experiences and now you are upset and confused because I have not basked in the glow of your previous postings on other topics, I also find it somehow disconcerting that 5 years of university and almost 20 years of experience in Steiner education have no value in your world-view because you have decided it’s wrong.And then you trump yourself with the almost hilariously arrogant statement,”there is a basic assumption that people defending Steiner schools……” I am not defending anything or anyone here, I reacted to statements which I found erroneous and tried , in the spirit of intellectual exchange, to share an alternative viewpoint based on experience.What are you basing your viewpoints on? Rigorous investigation using all available information? Years of experience based on closely working within the school system? Or simply finding comments and blogs which speak to your own personal prejudices and accepting them blindly as immutable facts? I have spent a lot of time on this thread, I have not hidden behind a pseudonym, I have not once evaded a question,despite, I must say the pejorative manner in which they were posed, I had decided to just give up but your above comment was simply too crass , arrogant and frankly, so far removed from the concept of intellectual debate that I had to respond,

Stephen

My assumption was that you had read Andy’s other posts on the topic of steinerism because this individual blog is only part of the wider story that he has told over some months and many of the points being made depend of that context. I was simply surprised that someone would engage so heavily in this particular thread of discussion without having read some or all of his other commentary. You haven’t. I know that now. Please feel free to explore the site.

Stephen

I also mostly post here from a phone, so searching out links to copy and paste is tedious, but I have done so for you now.

http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2013/01/tory-free-schools-plot-to-spin-away-the-racism-of-steiner-schools.html

http://www.dcscience.net/?p=3853

If you read those pieces and still wish to say that the foundational beliefs of steinerism are not racist then I shall be fascinated to hear you argue in support of that contention.

BAM.thank you for the effort, I was to be honest more intersected in the second link, I’ll explain why anon.I found the article interesting but nothing new, I could send you links disputing each point made but then we are reduced to a ” he said..she said ” slanging match.I can only say that I have yet,personally, to meet a racist colleague nor have I come across a view which could be construed as racists during my training period.That my experience and as I`’ve said many times I am not writing to an agenda I am simply presenting.y opinion.
Now as to why I’m not reacting to the first link,I have also taken the time to catch up on other blogs and must say I find this site to be somewhat tainted.I came to this site initially on the recommendation of a die_hard humanist friend who thought the topic might interest me.I was naive enough to trust the article, now I’ve discovered on the Guardian,,and other websites that the interpretation presented here is a simple case of cutting the cloth to suit the tailor! The facts as presented seem to concur that Roaches daft mutterings were based on a misunderstanding of eastern concepts of Karma.The writer, Andy,who advertises his willingness to give public anti_Steiner talks, has decided that because Roaches grandfather was an anthroposophist and because he enrolled his grandson in his own Waldorf school then ipso facto Roaches ideas come from him.Now my paternal grandfather spent three years as a guerrilla in the Irish war of independence, in the twenties, by Andy’s logic then I must be an Irish republican terrorist.Roaches spent most of his school_life in a private Methodist boarding school so should we be as concerned with their methodology? This reminds me of the Bush logic after 9/11. “We have been attacked by a number of Saudi Arabian terrorists, so let’s invade Iraq” .I wish you well but , if you will allow a piece of advice, beware of absolutes and be open to really hearing what others have to say then make up your own mind on issues whilst still maintaining respect for others points of view then you will learn the difference between intelligence and wisdom, good luck,!

Stephen

You have Sked repeatedly for concrete examples of racism is Steiner’s philosophy. I just have it to you. You say you have not met (or perhaps recognised) it in your Steiner colleagues.

When did the racism drop out? Where is the evidence that a conscious process of self-aware criticism occurred within steinerism to eliminate racism and other equally no joys ideas?

I keep asking this question. Time and again I find in debating alties on the interwebs that we reach a point where a very simple question is just met with a brick wall. I am left to conclude that the other side of the argument is either unable to grasp the simpe question, which stretches credibility, or is consciously evading it to avoid the risk of travelling a path that is dangerous to an important part of their view of the world. Stephen, are you doing to engage with these questions or tell us again that all your anthroposophical colleagues seem fine to you.

Read what is written! My last post was actually meant to be my last so here is the absolute last then I’m off,You have not reacted to any of my posts,I can only assume that the concept of giving me your own opinions rather than simply trotting out other people’s ideas is posing problems.Why is that I wonder?I have deliberately avoided trotting out links and articles to back up my ideas because that rather defeats the idea of engaging in a conversation or debate.again and again and again I am giving my opinions based on my experiences because I feel it is pertinent to the theme.This thread originated with a ridiculous and erroneous interpretation of karma yet you and others have insisted on simply attacking anything to do with Steiner.I told you why I am leaving this thread…..no reaction, I have asked you for the grounds of your opinions………no reaction, just a reference to someone else’s ideas.In your eyes I am following a fascist and crackpot path, in my eyes I’m on an Easter break and gathering the strength and energy to go back to work giving practical and emotional help to children who badly need it within the framework of an educational system which is more geared to the intellectual and emotional development of the child than any other system I’ve come across.By all means be critical and sceptical and even downright hostile to the Steiner system but deal in facts and realities.I have absolutely no problems with secularism or humanism, nor do I have a problem with healthy scepticism,I do however have major problems with dogmatic closemindedness,I’m now leaving this thread, feel free to view this as a capitulation or a typical Steiner supporter can’t argue with my logic etc.etc etc but I’m actually leaving out of boredom from cant, ignorance and an unwillingness to engage in any kind of honest or intelligent debate.

“have Sked repeatedly”

have asked…

“equally no joys ideas?”

I think autocorrect is unlearning!!

equally noxious..

Bsm auto correct problem here as well,read racist not fascist

Stephen

When did the racism drop out of steinerism? Where is the evidence that a conscious process of self-aware criticism occurred within steinerism to eliminate racism and other equally no joys ideas?

It is amazing how blind Steiner supports are to his absurd and abhorrent racism.

Steiner schools are racist you say? So because Henry VIII had the unfortunate habit of having his wives killed, you would by that logic judge all Anglicans of being wife beaters? Whether or not Steiner was a racist (by which I am by no means confirming he was) would’t necessarily reflect on the schools today.

No. Steiner’s racist beliefs need not influence modern athroposophists and Steiner Schools if the movement had undergone a thorough examination of his racist views, understood why they should be rejected, analysed the possible influence these views could have on teaching, and taken steps to ensure that they never did influence teaching.

I see no evidence of such a process having been conducted.

Indeed, I see supporters even trying to deny Steiner held racist views. Not confidence building.

“Whether or not Steiner was a racist (by which I am by no means confirming he was) would’t necessarily reflect on the schools today.”

Except that his racist teachings, the foundation of Anthropsophy, are part of Waldorf teacher training materials. If they don’t intend to use racist ideas in Waldorf schools, why teach them to the teachers? You may remember at your school, they made a big deal about the temperaments – kids were categorized and treated in accordance with their temperament. You might not have noticed that the sanguine children were the ones who ran messages to the office, but the teachers knew to pick them. After all, a phlegmatic child might take all day.

Your teachers also made a distinction between which children were large-headed and small-headed. This has nothing to do with head size, BTW, it has to do with a child’s disposition toward intellectualism.

At some Waldorf schools, Waldorf teachers still look at left-handedness as a karmic issue. You may have had left-handed friends at your school. How would you know if teachers considered them spiritually different?

Steiner had a LOT to say about the races, and he gave a lot of indications to teachers about what the races mean, just like he taught them about all the other things I mentioned above. Waldorf teachers absolutely consider race when considering the overall child. How could they not, when they consider so much other stupid stuff on a daily basis that Steiner told them was also important? They really don’t think it’s any big deal (just like Bill Roache doesn’t think some of Steiner’s other offensive ideas aren’t a big deal).

How would any child, or parent, know if a Waldorf teacher is viewing them according to how Steiner defined people of their particular race?

“I can only say that I have yet,personally, to meet a racist colleague nor have I come across a view which could be construed as racists during my training period.”

“Construed as racist”? Seriously, have you read ANY Steiner at all. YES, schools teach Steiner’s racist ideas… but if you don’t see them as racist, then how could you notice? Do you understand what racism is? Would you know it if it were being taught in a classroom.

Waldorf teachers DEFINITELY teach Steiner’s racist ideas – they taught them to my child AND defended them when I complained.

I’m personally sick and tired of people who claim they don’t see racism in Steiner’s work… They either haven’t read it or are being naive or more likely dishonest.

I have great admiration for Andy, fielding the same ridiculous comments time and time again, with incredible patience.

Stephen, like so many Steiner supporters you seem to think that a neutral position concerning Steiner’s explicit racial doctrine is a non racist position. It isn’t. Not opposing institutional racism is to allow it to flourish and you, whether by accident or design, are racist by default in terms of your neutrality and racist by commission in terms of your attempts to hide the intrinsic racism of the system you support after the evidence has been presented to you.

Likewise, Steiner/Waldorf students seem to be almost entirely unaware of the racist elements of their own education that has inculcated them into a position of denial – they seem to think that racism does not exist in their schools; not merely that it is less prevalent than elsewhere.

The lack of self examination concerning racism within the Steiner movement has also encouraged many Steiner supporters, teachers and students to become quite reactionary when criticized by anti-racist campaigners – effectively blaming the victims of racism for daring to ask Steiner supporters to reject their racist positions.

The idea that “what goes around comes around” , (sometimes), is a common sense understanding of human nature. e.g. if you punch someone on the nose many people will punch you back. If you hurt someone in office politics some people will wait a while and then try to “get even”. That is some people’s human nature. This is commonsense.

It has nothing to do with non-provable belief systems concerning past lives like karma or the other karma-lite product of the imagination – the so-called “law of attraction”. If people cannot understand the difference between the two I cannot explain more.

By the way the only hatred I see in this thread is Bill Roache’s comment. I see no hatred in telling children that they do not deserve to be sexually abused or that all races are equal. Yes, there has been some strong language but this mainly reflects disgust at the concepts not always the proponents themselves. If this has been the case remember that everyone on this thread has been a child and many have children and it is an emotive subject.

? off you go into assumption land….
without empathy or humour what is the point?

You’ve compound your own confusion with your definition of common scense, something that has become increasingly rare!

What you seem to be battling with is ‘other peoples definition of Karma’ & your own (limited) perspective & definition. Wordy folk have written whole books trying to define it…. You’ve simplified it to the point of ridicule & in the proccess missed any constructive resonance.

Many of the assumptions in this thread have belittled most of the planets populations belief & implied they are living a delusion… &I’m not disagreeing with that- we all live with delusions, some of which are constructive, others not so.
The idea of Karma has become no more real than the ‘Historical Jesus of Nazareth’, ‘Santa Clause’ or the tooth fairy, but that doesn’t mean they’re any less usefull as means to make life more bearable, to simplify it to the point of inconsequence or to justify abuse- crusades, inquisitions & McCarthy all spring to mind.

Words are dangerous when misused & this thread is a prime example of ‘word’ confusion, where they become more important than peoples feelings & thoughts. The barage of insults about Steiners racism (that was perfectly ‘normal’ for the time-sadly) does not negate the fact he was a great man who’s done more towards the liberation of the human race than anyone on this site ever will (probably!), you seem blissfully unaware of WHAT HE WAS FIGHTING AGAINST & WHAT HE COULD DO as genuine risks he made to help humanity. The liberations we now know were encouraged & nurtured by him & his contempories, though clearly far from perfect, who here is any better?
The sad fact that the Anthrosophical society has been infiltrated & corrupted by ‘proffessional sodomists’ is one of the greatest crimes imaginable,especially considering Stieners warnings you seem totally unaware of.

no-one here is in support of Roaches/Hoddles etc crass statements on Karma- quite rightly seen as malicious & (probably) delusiional.

If you really want to stop massive organised sexual abuse then start by closing down all the public schools where institutionalised homosexuality is prevalent (a gentle take on this is the entire book by Brian Aldiss’-A Hand reared boy)… & the expression ‘my boy’ meant something far more intimate than the general public presume…
These people run the world & many of them suffered analrape to bond them in their conivences for power & control, do you think they care if the rest of the population is then also abused?

By the way I’m not a ‘Stieinerist’ ,or the like;

No, obviously not.

he was a great man who’s done more towards the liberation of the human race than anyone on this site ever will

And waddling and quacking in the recognised manner, does not make one a member of the order Anatidae.

Sorry BS MONKEY- what do you mean by that?

I think there was enough given to work it out. Think of it as a puzzle, if you will.

B.S. Moonkey you are a very sad little duck…
You heckling opinions project a mean-spirit & lack of empathy- you’d rather badger open minded debate with your own mis-guided ignorance & intolerance.

You’ve manoeuvred the horror of abuse away from the subject of the headline into a smear campaign against Steiner, his ideas & schools. Loads of good people have benifited from these schools.
They, like nearly all other organisation suffered corruptions & increasing hypocrisies. Steiner is not responsible for other peoples actions or belief, we are all influenced by MANY things.

I find Steiner’s writing boring & tedious, yet among this padding is a well meaning spirit & a brave soul who took great risks in his age & communicated ageless knowledge that modern science is only just beginning to fathom! You are blind to this constructive element.

You imply I am a ‘Sternest’ because you can not comprehend any view that is not a gross generalisation

Your ceaseless yapping upon the same topic reveals the source of your psychopathological motivation & dynamo…
Pestering anyone with opposing views has become your addiction & ‘unfoldment’.
I’m beginning to think you’re just some kind of JESUIT agent!
Misery is your medium-lost in Maya.
You probably don’t even realise your own fundamentalist nature?!

Dear monkey monikerd moderator , here’s a reminder from a more Humane member of the discussion- please pause for thought, it may expand your limited awareness of what is important in this life…& it’s further incarnations!

‘your close(d)mindedness and inability to see beyond your uninformed bias are becoming tedious and rather cliched.You have at no stage in this thread responded in a spirit of discussion,…please do not call this forum insightful,thoughtful or thorough, it’s an insult to the concept of open and free debate.’
previously posted by Stephen

Most intelligent or open hearted folk will quickly weary of your disrespectful attitude- ‘verbal dioreaists’ such as yourself can now exist in plenitude on the net/web, while if you ‘talked’ that way in a pub you’d be quickly ‘twatted’, a small mercy then that you only exist as a figment of the planets imagination in this virtual sphere.
Please stay indoors.

Hmm.. okaaay…I’m backing away now. Just keep your hands where we can see them while we clear the area.

Oh Badly Shaved Monkey I meant my sighing and head banging to be for Ram not for you! x I like your comments.

Thanks.

I think Ram is trying to tell us he holds the keys to the Universe. They give them away for free when you buy a tin-foil hat.

Now don’t be horrid BSM – you might get bad karma in your next life! ROLF!

Sigh………Bangs head against wall…….zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

“The barage of insults about Steiners racism (that was perfectly ‘normal’ for the time-sadly) ”

Let’s put an end to this line of thinking please. Racism was definitely NOT perfectly normal in Steiner’s time. Where did you come up with an idea like that? Steiner apologia websites perhaps?

Steiner was more than just a racist… he promoted his racism in newspapers and in his writings. His ridiculous notions about the racial mixing of blood are still being taught today in Waldorf schools. Please stop suggesting this is normal… it definitely ISN’T!

Also, I’d love to see something that indicates Steiner schools have made ANY significant or even insignificant changes in their teachings since WWII, when they claimed to be in exact alignment with Hitler’s ideas. If they were in alignment with Hitler then, how are they different now?

Pete, sorry but I can’t seem to leave this thread the anti_Steiner rhetoric is simply so cliches I’m now actually hanging around just for the novelty value but your last posts are so ludicrous, so removed from reality and so simple to answer.1,you maintain that the dropout rate in Steiner schools is 12 to 1, you actually wrote that? My son attends a Steiner school in Berlin where the percentage rate of children who leave is currently 3%…well within the norm at all school systems.2,you then present the most hackneyed and ,frankly intellectually lazy analogy possible by comparing Steiner ideas with the N.S.regime.Are you really so blinkered by your own experience with one individual school that you have to resort to this?The historical fact, easily proved, is that Steiner schools,the Anthroposophical society and the Christian community were all banned under the Nazis.You had bad experience with Steiner schools, fair enough, that’s unfortunate but begs two questions,why did you choose the school in the first place?And do you believe that those parents who chose to remain are now consciously raising racist children?

“1,you maintain that the dropout rate in Steiner schools is 12 to 1, you actually wrote that?”

It’s more than that at some schools… it really depends on how honest they are. At my kids’ school, the board reported an exodus rate of 25% (of the entire school) PER YEAR.

“The historical fact, easily proved, is that Steiner schools,the Anthroposophical society and the Christian community were all banned under the Nazis.”

All non-state schools were. You leave out the fact that Steiner schools held on the longest of any because there were many within the Nazi part who were convinced they were completely in alignment with Nazi ideas. Many, many Steiner schools in Germany issued letters to the Nazi party claiming exactly this. My question stands, what has changed about Steiner schools since then?

“why did you choose the school in the first place?”

I didn’t. I married a former Waldorf student, who insisted our children must have a Waldorf education (or we would be divorced). I went along with it for as long as I could.

“And do you believe that those parents who chose to remain are now consciously raising racist children?”

Are you kidding? The racist stuff was extremely covert in the school. It was by accident that I found out about it. When the school wouldn’t back down from the racist lesson they taught, I started investigating and discovered that ALL Anthroposophists, if they follow Steiner’s beliefs, are indeed racists.

Now answer a question for me…

Why on Earth do we need schools that have spiritual racism as one of the tenets of the philosophy teachers are required to accept… and that underlies the school?

Stephen, you may want to check this page out. It discusses Nazi Germany and the growth of Waldorf schools.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/19940

Stephen

1 on what personal experiences are you basing your rigorous attack on Steiner education?

None. It’s odd that you think this might be relevant. I don’t need personal experience of astrology or homeopathy to be able to point out their problems. Personal experience is a poor guide to many things and we have developed systematic methods of scientific investigation and rational disputation to resolve problems. The latter is what we’re trying to do here.

2,why do you never react to the content of a post in the spirit in which it is posted.

What spirit is that? You have been asked a number of quite straightforward questions and have evaded them. I have responded to that spirit of evasiveness by persistence in pursuit of the argument.

3do you have any personal opinions or are you happy enough simply trawling through other people’s ideas and then simply regurgitating them?

I have loads, thanks. Friends who post here and that have known me online and in the real world for years seem to regard Badly Shaved Monkey as being a vehicle for a fair amount of insightful and thoughtful sceptical commentary. Here’s an example: Alicia Hamberg posted the following;

‘You expect your doctor to practise medicine upon you. You do not expect him/her to teach you medicine.’

This is a brilliant analogy.

I’ll take the complement.

Meanwhile, the specific questions that I have repeatedly asked you and your colleagues are still dangling.

Please confirm whether you have read the Handbook for Waldorf Class Teachers. If you have not, do you know whether your anthroposophical colleagues have done so?

Does the following blog accurately reflect the content of that book?

http://zooey.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/guidelines-for-child-study-working-with-angels-beings-and-children/

How and where is “MODERN” steinerist education defined and differentiated from Steiner’s teachings ? How is this reflected in the texts and manuals that underpin the teaching in Steiner schools ?

I’m going to add another now. Do you accept that there was racism in Steiner’s teachings?

Tell you what , read my comments again.but honestly your closemindedness and inability to see beyond your uninformed bias are becoming tedious and rather cliched.You have at no stage in this thread responded in a spirit of discussion,You have not answered any question of mine and then prove your experience by quoting a post by yet another person! This is my last contribution, have fun in your little community of likeminded people but please do not call this forum insightful,thoughtful or thorough, it’s an insult to the concept of open and free debate.don’t even bother to respond it’s really too much a waste of my time.

Stephen

You wrote this;

You have not answered any question of mine

in response to a post if mine in which I answered the three specific questions that you posed me.

You have answered none of the very straightforward questions I have given you.

Did Steiner hold racist beliefs?

Here’s a new one for you. Have you taken part in meeting with your teaching colleagues in which you have classified pupils according to “types” that derive from anthroposophical theory?

I am left bemused as to why you spend do much time here saying almost anything except answering the relevant questions.

“I have never in my years of teaching in a Waldorf school experienced racism , prejudice or questionable racist ideas from any colleague.”

Sadly, this is part of the problem. Most people steeped in Waldorf can’t seem to identify racism. The people at my kids’ Waldorf school didn’t think the statement “The blood of Europeans is more evolved than the blood of Africans and Asians” was racist. They still don’t.

Hi Pete

I’ve just been reading over this again, many thanks for your contribution!

As I am in the UK, can you, or anyone else tell me if a UK court will hear or consider a precedent from another country?

You are absolutely right, and the case refers that if two parents are antagonistic to the point where communication has broken down, giving equal (or at least more) custodial rights, or equal shared residency as it’s called here may be a target I should aim for in my case.

Any thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

R

Hi Robert,

I can’t answer what the UK courts will hear, but I think the case could be made that, if the parents don’t agree on schooling, putting the kids in the MOST CONTROVERSIAL SCHOOL SYSTEM IN THE WORLD should not be one of the choices available to the judge. A non-controversial choice (public school) or a benign private school makes a lot more sense (hopefully to the judge too). Please check out The Waldorf Review for lots and lots of testimonials about how horrible Waldorf schools can be… both here in the US and in the UK.

Hi Pete

Thanks for taking the time to reply, well appreciated! I will look for testimonials and possibly hunt down a Waldorf survivor. What I haven’t mentioned here is that I attended a Waldorf school for a year when I was 12 going on 13… inadmissable! 🙂

Thanks again!

I have one piece of advice: not to allow your wife, future ex-wife, to enroll the child in a steiner school. Unless you feel you can live with that decision for 15 or so years to come. As long as you share custody of the child, you should be able to have a say in the school question. In my experience — which is limited, but from the parents I’ve heard from or of — it’s awfully difficult to set things right again once you’ve agreed to a steiner school and the child is already in school. Even if you can show that the child is not progressing academically or whatever — it’s awfully difficult, because you’ve said yes to it. And unless you’d be abe to convince the child’s mother, you’d be forced to take the matter to court — all while your child’s education is being squandered in front of your eyes. Better, in my opinion, to say no from the start, than to later regret consenting to it.

Many thanks Alicia!

While I don’t mean to hijack this thread, I very much appreciate the advice.

Alicia, this is my top priority right now, even ahead of the divorce as we are moving quickly towards the school holidays in the UK, after which she will need to be enrolled somewhere. Luckily, we are obliged to stay (or at least pay for) the following term at her present school, which is September to December. I doubt very much that any judge would have me lose the fees already paid in favour of a mother who wishes to relocate the child on such short notice. The short notice stems from her desperation to begin her own course in September.

On the one hand I am a little nervous since my wife displays incredible confidence that she will get her way (either since she may be being funded by a 3rd party, or through wishful thinking on the assumption that a court will always find for the mother, regardless) or as I more likely suspect, I will be able to successfully intervene, however it will cost me in solicitor’s fees, which I am happy to pay if necessary.

As I said in previous discussions the Steiner school refused my daughter’s application on grounds that I was not informed, nor would I give my consent. I have subsequently discovered that this is consistent with Steiner schools as they even wish the parents to motivate their application with a questionnaire as to why they have chosen Waldorf / Steiner, possibly to eek out any skepticism from one or both parents to ensure they have a ‘good’ candidate with long term prospects in the school. Needless to say she wrote a long motivation, including Steiner philosophy, Anthroposophy, Theosophy etc as the family doctrinal influence.

It’s a lonely battle I must say I feel confident that reason will win in the end. Explaining to my daughter in 20 years time why I did this will be easy to do – I wonder if her mum could say the same.

Thanks again!

R