return to WCA Archive Index
-- Topica Digest --
Fruits of the Greens
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Praise for Toronto W. School
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
To Serena
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: Fruits of the Greens
By dan dandugan.com
Catholic Church 1919 pronouncement on Theosophy
By dan dandugan.com
Everybody loves an Inquisition...
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
By dan dandugan.com
Steiner and the American Indians
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Fruits of the Greens
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By harlangilbert optonline.net
RE: Steiner's predictions
By harlangilbert optonline.net
Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
By dan dandugan.com
Re: Fruits of the Greens
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Catholic Church 1919 pronouncement on Theosophy
By feetapparel hotmail.com
Re: Fruits of the Greens
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By harlangilbert optonline.net
Racism on this list
By harlangilbert optonline.net
Resistance to Nazism in Europe
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By harlangilbert optonline.net
Re: Fruits of the Greens
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Fruits of the Greens
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
RE: Fruits of the Greens
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
RE: Steiner and the American Indians
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:48:51 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Fruits of the Greens
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0131-04.htm
Published on Monday, January 31, 2005 by the Agence France Presse
German Farmers Championing 'Flower Power' for Cleaner Energy
BERLIN - Germany is looking to messier energy sources to produce cleaner
fuel, showing the world that it is possible use all-natural plant and animal
products to run cars and heat homes.
------------------- cut -----------------------
Germany's center-left government has taken a leading role in championing
cleaner energy sources, reducing the country's reliance on tightening oil
supplies, risky nuclear power and heavy carbon dioxide producers, believed to be
responsible for global warming.
Biological energy is the most productive of the renewable energy sources
which also include wind, hydraulic and solar power, the ministry said.
Each year, it allows the country to prevent the emission of nearly 20 million
tons of greenhouse gases.
The dreamers even believe that biomass -- organic products used to produce
energy -- could power an entire town.
Juehnde, close to the northern university city of Goettingen, decided to test
the theory. The town, population 800, now predicts it will soon be able to
satisfy all of its heat and electricity needs with animal and plant products
from its own backyard.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:54:55 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Praise for Toronto W. School
A lesson in good design
Waldorf school, house construction is part of the Grade 3 curriculum
By DAVE LeBLANC
Friday, January 28, 2005 - Page G4
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050128/ARCHIC
OL28/TPEducation/
Education is so much more than the dissemination and absorption of facts.
It's interactive and organic; teachers, parents and even architecture should all
play a part in the journey.
Pie-in-the-sky, you say? On Bathurst Street just north of Highway 7, you
might catch a glimpse of a place where this is true. Peering over the treetops
like a giant periscope (or perhaps the tip of the iceberg of knowledge) is the
distinctive "sky dome" of Canada's oldest Waldorf school.
------------------- cut ---------------------
But it wasn't easy. Even with the early school's success, money was still
tight. So, the entire staff pitched in to help with construction, "just like an
Amish or Mennonite barn-raising," he chuckles. "Of course it didn't take place
on just two days."
In addition to teaching, staff members would spend their nights, weekends and
holidays with hammers in hand. For the first little while, the ceiling of the
then-uncompleted second floor served as the roof.
The pitching-in continues to this day, with parents building small things
such as gates and fences, or students erecting a gazebo or straw hut out in the
schoolyard, which is really a forest.
Faculty chairman Todd Royer says matter-of-factly that house building is
"part of our Grade 3 curriculum." This continuity and sense of living history is
why the Toronto Waldorf school is so electric, so tied to its community.
With ever-changing artwork on the walls, music floating through circular
corridors, light pouring from Mr. Bowman's jauntily shaped windows or the gift of
construction labour, this is a place where interactivity is key.
Recycling both its water in the new "green" room and even its furniture in
the staff lounges (mismatched, comfortable and obviously donated), this is also
a building that works both spiritually and architecturally.
---------- cut ------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:41:21 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: To Serena
Hi Serena,
Interesting article you posted about Flower Power in Germany but what does
it have to do with Waldorf/Anthroposophy?
I have asked you twice now if you would like to continue our discussion
about Waldorf/Anthroposophy. I am hoping to hear from you regarding my last
post of
January 23 - thread: Back to Basics....
While I, for one, have been quite active with environmental activism over
the years, I would prefer to try to stay on topic at this list. Is there a
reason you do not wish to discuss Waldorf/Anthroposophy?
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:28:31 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Fruits of the Greens
Good news, an important current issue, and off-topic unless you link
it to Anthroposophy.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:56:35 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Catholic Church 1919 pronouncement on Theosophy
For years and years I've been trying to find the actual text of the
Catholic Church's reported condemnation of Theosophy and/or
Anthroposophy in 1919. Finally with the help of a friend and the
Apostolic Nunciature in Australia, I found it! Some letters might be
garbled from an imperfect fax; looks like they have their own set of
Latin abbreviations that must have saved those medieval monks a lot
of scratching. I've transcribed letters with a long mark over them as
the letter followed by an apostrophe, emphasis -thus-.
-Dan Dugan
***
18 July 1919
Acta Apostolica Sedis, N. 11, p. 317
Suprema S. Congregatio S. Oficii
II
DUBIUM
DE THEOSOPHISMO
Feria IV die 16 iulii 1919
In plenario conventu habito ab Em'is ac Rm'is Dominis
Cardinalibus in rebus fidei et morum Inquisitoribus Generalibus,
proposito dubio:
)An doctrinae, quas hodie theosophicas dicunt, componi possint com
)doctrina catholica; ideoque an liceat nomen dare societatibus
)theosophicis, carum conventibus interesse, ipsarumque libros,
)ephemerides, diaria, scripta legere
Item Em'i ac Rm'i Dopmini, praehabito DD. Consultorium voto,
respondendum decreverunt: -Negative in omnibus-.
Et feria V die 17 eiusdem mensis, SSm'us D.N.D. Benedictus Div.
Prov. PP. XV, in solita audientia R.P.D. Assessori S.O. impertita,
relatam sibi Em'orum Patrum resolutionem approbavit et publicari
mandavit.
Datum Romae, ex aedibus S. Offici, die 18 iulii 1919.
A. Castellano, Supremae S.C.S. Off. Notarius.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:34:44 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
More irony: why would a secular humanist rely upon an
edict of the Roman Catholic Church for support?
Does PLANS agree that the Church has the authority to
forbid members from having beliefs with which it disagrees?
Ahhh -- maybe the element of agreement between the two
bodies lies in the word "Inquisition."
=======================
Catholic Church 1919 pronouncement on Theosophy
Dan Dugan
Jan 31, 2005 10:57 PST
For years and years I've been trying to find the actual text of the
Catholic Church's reported condemnation of Theosophy and/or
Anthroposophy in 1919. Finally with the help of a friend and the
Apostolic Nunciature in Australia, I found it! Some letters might be
garbled from an imperfect fax; looks like they have their own set of
Latin abbreviations that must have saved those medieval monks a lot
of scratching. I've transcribed letters with a long mark over them as
the letter followed by an apostrophe, emphasis -thus-.
-Dan Dugan
***
18 July 1919
Acta Apostolica Sedis, N. 11, p. 317
Suprema S. Congregatio S. Oficii
II
DUBIUM
DE THEOSOPHISMO
Feria IV die 16 iulii 1919
In plenario conventu habito ab Em'is ac Rm'is Dominis
Cardinalibus in rebus fidei et morum Inquisitoribus Generalibus,
proposito dubio:
An doctrinae, quas hodie theosophicas dicunt, componi possint com
doctrina catholica; ideoque an liceat nomen dare societatibus
theosophicis, carum conventibus interesse, ipsarumque libros,
ephemerides, diaria, scripta legere
Item Em'i ac Rm'i Dopmini, praehabito DD. Consultorium voto,
respondendum decreverunt: -Negative in omnibus-.
Et feria V die 17 eiusdem mensis, SSm'us D.N.D. Benedictus Div.
Prov. PP. XV, in solita audientia R.P.D. Assessori S.O. impertita,
relatam sibi Em'orum Patrum resolutionem approbavit et publicari
mandavit.
Datum Romae, ex aedibus S. Offici, die 18 iulii 1919.
A. Castellano, Supremae S.C.S. Off. Notarius.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:59:58 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
Serena, you wrote,
)More irony: why would a secular humanist rely upon an
)edict of the Roman Catholic Church for support?
It's important to Catholics.
)Does PLANS agree that the Church has the authority to
)forbid members from having beliefs with which it disagrees?
Ask a Catholic.
)Ahhh -- maybe the element of agreement between the two
)bodies lies in the word "Inquisition."
(pythonvoice) Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition! (/pythonvoice)
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:52:35 -0600
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Steiner and the American Indians
Regarding the Steiner passages that Barnaby quoted: If THIS is what
Steiner thought and his followers actually BELIEVE now, in our
present-day (how can anyone believe that made-up racist garbage?!) then
from now on I won't take anything personally or seriously that his
present-day followers say! It is so absurd, insulting, and untrue! I
think I finally understand why the mostly white Steiner followers (and
others I have known) "play Indian" with their own "sweatlodges" and
"vision quests": they must actually believe that real American Indian
tribes are going "extinct" and they are the the "re-incarnated
Indians"?!
This is so very BIZARRE! So, now I ask the pro-Waldorf people here: do
you really believe this?
For the record: I have NO desire to "play Indian" or to change and then
"consume" their ceremonies for my own use!
Thanks for posting this Barnaby.
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:49:26 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
Dan replied to Serena:
)
)Serena, you wrote,
)
))More irony: why would a secular humanist rely upon an
))edict of the Roman Catholic Church for support?
)
)It's important to Catholics.
)
))Does PLANS agree that the Church has the authority to
))forbid members from having beliefs with which it disagrees?
)
)Ask a Catholic.
)
))Ahhh -- maybe the element of agreement between the two
))bodies lies in the word "Inquisition."
)
)(pythonvoice) Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition! (/pythonvoice)
)
)-Dan Dugan
)
I think this ruling by the Catholic Church has a bearing on the claim of
non-denominational. However there are some issues with this. The first is
that my reading of the document Dan provided is that it refers explicitly to
Theosophy and not to Anthroposophy at all. My Latin is very rusty so I could
be wrong. It seems very obvious to me that the objections the Catholic
Church held against Theosophy would equally apply to Anthroposophy.
Secondly it is not obvious to me that it is the responsibility of the
operators of Waldorf Schools to be aware of this ruling. It is the
responsibility of Catholics to be aware of this ruling.
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:31:57 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Fruits of the Greens
To Serena
walden
Jan 31, 2005 10:37 PST
Hi Serena,
Interesting article you posted about Flower Power in Germany but what does
it have to do with Waldorf/Anthroposophy?
I have asked you twice now if you would like to continue our discussion
about Waldorf/Anthroposophy. I am hoping to hear from you regarding my last
post of
January 23 - thread: Back to Basics....
While I, for one, have been quite active with environmental activism over
the years, I would prefer to try to stay on topic at this list. Is there a
reason you do not wish to discuss Waldorf/Anthroposophy?
-Walden
Dear Walden,
I thought WC'ers would see the dread implications of my
post on ecological progress in Germany immediately:
Ecology + Germany + politics = Greens
Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
important role in the formation of the German Greens,
and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
is an anthroposophist."
Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)
You mean guilt by association is not enough and I
must state *explicitly* that Anthro. or WE is somehow
involved in my post? I am so sorry -- I thought certain
associations were so well-established on the WC list
that I could just get away with a code word (Greens)
and everyone would understand what I meant.
For example, see Dan's post about the Catholic Church's
denunciation of the Theosophical Society. I didn't see
a word about the Anthrop.Soc. there, did you? But it
obviously was intended to be associated with the AS,
don't you agree? What is good enough for Dan should
be ok for me, too. Or?
How is the Theosophical Society on topic?
As to your wish to discuss...I don't really know how
it's possible to "discuss" A. + WE with someone who's
mind is made up. It's limited and ultimately unsatisfying,
at least for me.
--I can't undo your bad/diificult/challenging experiences
with WE. That's history.
--I can't help you put them into perspective with the benefits
as most parents learn to do (& as I also did)
--I can't bring you to any deeper understanding of WE or
A. You've written both off.
I just looked over your Back to basics post: what is
so pressing in it that you need to have addressed by
me in particular?
Best,
Serena Blaue
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:54:05 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition... Dan Dugan
Jan 31, 2005 15:33 PST
Serena, you wrote,
More irony: why would a secular humanist rely upon an
edict of the Roman Catholic Church for support?
It's important to Catholics.
Does PLANS agree that the Church has the authority to
forbid members from having beliefs with which it disagrees?
Ask a Catholic.
Ahhh -- maybe the element of agreement between the two
bodies lies in the word "Inquisition."
(pythonvoice) Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition! (/pythonvoice)
-Dan Dugan
Dan, I seem to recall reading a thread by our friend Sune
on your viewpoint that fully trained and licenced physicians
should lose their licenses if they *read* Steiner. Indeed, I
found it at:
http://www.thebee.se/comments/postings/falsely-argued-permanent-unsubscription
.htm
I was serious when I used the words "witch hunt" earlier.
See http://www.thebee.se/comments/plans1.html
On 10 June 1997, the Sacramento Bee commented on
PLANS' anti-Waldorf campaign in an editorial titled "The
Attack on Oak Ridge":
" ... in recent weeks, at the urging of a Bay Area-based group called People
for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools (PLANS) and a few disgruntled teachers, a
protest movement has brewed among a number of parents, marked by picketing and
a boycott that kept a third of the student body out of school for parts of
last week. PLANS suggests that Waldorf methods involve the teaching of witchcraft
...
… with a parent population that includes many recent Hmong and Mien
immigrants who don't speak English well, PLANS has found fertile ground in which to
plant the seed of paranoia. ... What's important now is to counter the
misinformation campaign ..."
May I say earnestly to you, Dan, that the Inquisition may
not be your best model for a campaign against WE + A.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 01:03:39 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
My dearest Deborah,
Well, well! This is a surprise! A single difference of factual
knowledge, you believe -- over whether Harriet Tubman was a Captain in
the Union Army -- is enough to definitively characterize the difference,
not only in my and your knowledge of Harriet Tubman's life, but of our
understanding of African-American history in general! And beyond this,
of the understanding of people 'in Waldorf' and those 'not in Waldorf'!
I hoped I might be saved by one of the posters on this site. Surely
someone could have come forward to say, 'Well, building such a
overweening judgement over a single piece of information is a bit
extreme.' But no, no, you're all going to make me suffer! Ahhhh! Help!
Oh, well, the Lord helps those who help themselves, and I see that I
have to be quite explicit around here. In my last post on the subject, I
mentioned that I'd be delighted to find that Harriet Tubman was honored
with an officer's commission, such as that of a Captain. I'd still be
delighted to find that it was so.
Unfortunately, as is well known to all who know anything at all about
African-American history, Secretary of State Stanton refused to allow
the commissioning of black officers during the Civil War, in part
because white troops would have to salute them and he feared a backlash
from this in the Northern (Union) States. As Catherine Clinton says in
her outstanding biography, thoughout the war Tubman had 'no official
appointment, no regular salary and no recognition'. We have the pass
Harriet Tubman used to travel on military transport in 1865, which
refers to her as 'Mrs. Harriet Tubman'. And we know that she fought for
a pension, which was refused for a long time because her name appeared
in no military records whatsoever. She finally achieved a pension
largely on the basis of her second husband's military service, with an
increment added to this in recognition of the help she herself rendered
to the Union cause.
Actually, Clinton was exaggerating slightly, for Harriet Tubman was
honored with one appointment. She was the first black woman to be
appointed 'Nurse or Matron' to the military hospital where she worked
(or to any U.S. military hospital, almost certainly to any American
hospital of any kind up to that time).
I am sad to hear that an ignorance of even the basics of
African-American history is so rampant amongst you and your friends (I'm
assuming that if they were true friends, they would have corrected your
embarassing faux pas if they had had the slightest idea of the facts.) I
accept your general evaluation of this difference between us, however; I
am prepared to accept that it is indeed characteristic, both as regards
an overall knowledge of history and as regards our attitude towards
truth and facts.
Hoping you are extremely well,
and wishing you luck finding work,
Harlan
Gideon Mills wrote:
)
)
)
) walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca) wrote:
)
) 'Deborah wrote:
)
) "Harriet Tubman was a Captain in the Union Army of the U.S. None of the
) men
) under her command died in battle while under her command. (If I am
) correctly remembering, she also never lost anyone she moved through the
) Underground Railroad.) She was no pacifist either; she carried a gun
) under
) her skirts. The U.S. government refused to release the pension to which
) she
) was entitled because. . .I am certain we call fill in that particular
) blank."
)
) But the government bent a little a couple of years ago. Interesting.
) Speaking of real "experiential" schools and Harriet Tubman...'
)
) "True (and timely) story: A couple of years ago Chris Mercogliano of the
) Albany Free School told me about a good lesson some kids at his school
) were
) involved with regarding accountability and Harriet Tubman's pension. It
) was
) an experiential lesson which involved the kids finally meeting with
) Hillary
) Clinton:"
)
) The best book I have read re: Harriet Tubman is "Harriet Tubman" by Earl
) Conrad. There is no doubt that she was a captain in the U.S. Army and
) was denied the pension to which she was entitled, but she was far more
) than that. For the abolitionists, outlawing slavery was a hobby and/or
) something that bouyed their political aspirations (none of them provided
) much in the way of monetary or physical aid for the Underground
) Railroad); obviously for Tubman it meant something very different. I
) wouldn't expect anyone with a Waldorf education to know about any of
) that; I was told that African-American history is not taught in Waldorf
) schools by the same person who told me that there is an African-American
) curriculum component approved by AWSNA. Considering the paucity of
) people of color in Waldorf, the latter is quite chilling. I think it is
) telling that someone in Waldorf knows more about Joan of Arc than the
) history of the U.S. When I was in public school in the 1950s and 1960s
) we
) received more instruction in A-A history than I am seeing being taught
) today in any schools, but the Waldorf graduates I know are completely
) clueless as to that history, in contrast to what they know (or rather
) think they know) about Tibet, for example.
)
) Deborah
)
)
)
) ---------------------------------
) Do you Yahoo!?
) Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
) --
) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
)
..
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 01:15:55 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
Deborah,
Perhaps I would be remiss if I did not add that the suggestion that
Harriet Tubman held a commission in the Union Army also shows an
absolute and total ignorance of the history of women in America. In the
1860s, and for long, long afterwards, a woman could not have enlisted in
the Army at all. It was 1901 before this was possible; in this year, the
Army created a "Nurse Corps (Female)". Commissions were not granted to
women in this Corps until 1920, and even then only as equivalent ranks
not truly integrated into the military itself.
The history of minorities in America is a fascinating and often
troubling one. You should really learn something about it.
Harlan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:14:10 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: Everybody loves an Inquisition...
Peter Farrell, you wrote,
)I think this ruling by the Catholic Church has a bearing on the
)claim of non-denominational. However there are some issues with
)this. The first is that my reading of the document Dan provided is
)that it refers explicitly to Theosophy and not to Anthroposophy at
)all. My Latin is very rusty so I could be wrong.
I agree.
)It seems very obvious to me that the objections the Catholic Church
)held against Theosophy would equally apply to Anthroposophy.
I agree also, but I suspect Anthroposophists won't.
)Secondly it is not obvious to me that it is the responsibility of
)the operators of Waldorf Schools to be aware of this ruling. It is
)the responsibility of Catholics to be aware of this ruling.
Yes.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:30:54 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Fruits of the Greens
Serena wrote:
"I thought WC'ers would see the dread implications of my
post on ecological progress in Germany immediately:
Ecology + Germany + politics = Greens"
Well, you thought wrong, Serena. Here is a suggestion to help us
communicate: WC'ers (which I assume means Waldorf Critics) are individual
human beings.
When you put anyone critical of Waldorf/Anthroposophy in a small box, it
will be very difficult for you to communicate with them/us.
Serena wrote:
Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
important role in the formation of the German Greens,
and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
is an anthroposophist."
Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)"
I appreciate the learning experience - including research by Peter
Staudenmaier and others. Does this mean I do not support useful
environmental causes in Germany because there might be an Anthro or two
involved? Of course not. Again, please take me out of your box.
Serena wrote:
"For example, see Dan's post about the Catholic Church's
denunciation of the Theosophical Society. I didn't see
a word about the Anthrop.Soc. there, did you? But it
obviously was intended to be associated with the AS,
don't you agree? What is good enough for Dan should
be ok for me, too. Or?
How is the Theosophical Society on topic?"
I'm not sure if you're serious with this question as I am sure you realize
Anthroposophy is largely derived from Theosophy. The word "Theosophy" is the
title of an important book written by Rudolf Steiner. After his break from
the Theosophists Steiner still used the term and held beliefs from...
Theosophy. Why on earth would this be off topic?
Serena wrote:
"As to your wish to discuss...I don't really know how
it's possible to "discuss" A. + WE with someone who's
mind is made up. It's limited and ultimately unsatisfying,
at least for me."
Let me try it this way: I am very interested in your views despite your
belief that my "mind is made up." Is it really a black and white world,
Serena? Is hearing different perspectives/feelings/thoughts really limiting
and unsatisfying? Is there no way for each of us to learn something from
each other?
Serena wrote:
"--I can't undo your bad/diificult/challenging experiences
with WE. That's history.
--I can't help you put them into perspective with the benefits
as most parents learn to do (& as I also did)"
I agree but please understand I do not ask this of you.
Serena wrote:
"--I can't bring you to any deeper understanding of WE or
A. You've written both off."
There you might be wrong. I have not "written both off" and many critics
have, IN FACT, had good things to say about some aspects of Waldorf
education.
Matter of fact, ten minutes ago one of my kids was remembering how much he
liked baking bread in kindergarten! We reminisced for a few minutes and had
good memories of those days. Then I noticed your email and I left the little
guy to continue with his craft project (not watching TV!!)
No, I have not "written off" much in life. It might kill my curiosity and
love of learning. With all due respect, I wonder if it might be *you* that
has written off a little box you call "WC'ers?"
Serena wrote:
"I just looked over your Back to basics post: what is so pressing in it that
you need to have addressed by me in particular?"
It's not really so pressing - just that we were actually having a good
conversation (IMO) and I spent some time thinking about and responding to
points you had made. I was hoping to hear what you had to say about my
response and questions in my last post to you. I actually felt that we were
communicating quite well.
Here's hoping,
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 02:55:31 +0000
From: "Peter Farrell" (feetapparel hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Catholic Church 1919 pronouncement on Theosophy
G'day Dan,
thanks for posting this. I have wanted to see it ever since I heard of it as
well. Remarkably short, ain't it. No doubt there are records of
deliberations and collected evidence which supports the outcome buried in
the Vatican Archives, probably not in languages that help me very much.
See you, Peter
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:35:58 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Re: Fruits of the Greens
No, I have not "written off" much in life. It might kill my curiosity and
love of learning. With all due respect, I wonder if it might be *you* that
has written off a little box you call "WC'ers?"
Serena wrote:
"I just looked over your Back to basics post: what is so pressing in it that
you need to have addressed by me in particular?"
It's not really so pressing - just that we were actually having a good
conversation (IMO) and I spent some time thinking about and responding to
points you had made. I was hoping to hear what you had to say about my
response and questions in my last post to you. I actually felt that we were
communicating quite well.
Here's hoping,
-Walden
Walden,
Your recollection of a "good conversation" is, well, unusual:
Walden:
There is no "nailing" of anyone here, Serena. This is discussion which often
means questions and answers. If you really feel that you are being "nailed"
I respectfully suggest you answer some of the questions during the
discussion. Your last post was full of nastiness aimed at Waldorf Critics.
Your comments had nothing to do with the discussion and I saw them as mean
spirited. One might be tempted to say that is the post of one who is losing
an argument but I would prefer to think in terms of an error in judgment
during a discussion.
Serena:
My jaw drops in amazement. I wonder if we are reading the same list.
"My" posts are "mean-spirited and "full of nastiness." You say this to me
on a list that is devoted, dedicated, committed to trashing WE and A,
to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements of our existence:
racism, anti-semitism and nazism.
Best,
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:56:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net) wrote:
"The history of minorities in America is a fascinating and often
troubling one. You should really learn something about it."
First, who are the "minorities" in "America" and which america are you referring? For example, women have never been a "minority" by any definition of that word. Second, it is only the history of African-Americans as written by African-Americans and not by white males that I regard as truthful and pertinent to our lives. You are displaying the arrogance we find typical of anthroposophists, very few of whom have had any meaningful contact with people of color.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:05:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net) wrote:
"My dearest Deborah,
I am sad to hear that an ignorance of even the basics of
African-American history is so rampant amongst you and your friends (I'm
assuming that if they were true friends, they would have corrected your
embarassing faux pas if they had had the slightest idea of the facts.)"
Another white male telling an African-American woman what our history is. Not surprising you are an apologist for anthroposophists who attempt to convince us that Steiner did not say what he said or if he said it, he meant something else.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:11:44 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
My dearest Deborah,
There aren't black facts and white facts. De facts ah de facts, honey. A
lie is a lie. And Harriet Tubman was not a Captain in the Union army. If
a black person tells you that she was, well, that person is distorting
history.
For that matter, if any person, including you, tells anybody, including
me, that Tubman was a Captain in the Union army, that person is
distorting history.
Now, it may be that you are misled; if so, you should quote the source
that misled you. Or it may be that you are making up facts. But one way
or another, your version of the truth is laughably far from the
historical realities of mid-19th century America (an African-American
female given an Army commission when neither African-Americans nor
females where anywheres near this point, unfortunately). You do a
disservice to all African-Americans everywhere, and to all women. I
speak for my brothers and my sisters.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:27:39 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: Racism on this list
Dear Dan, and others responsible for this list,
Please ensure that negative comments about people's gender, race,
religion, and ethnic background are unwelcome on this site. Stereotypes
about 'all blacks are...' or 'all whites are...' are simply racist. So
are comments that 'no person of the following
(gender/race/religion/ethnicity) may comment on...'.
It would be unfortunate if this list became known for harboring racism
of the most despicable kind. Especially since you have, or say you have
the noble goal of working against this elsewhere, a goal I
wholeheartedly support.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:29:07 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: Resistance to Nazism in Europe
Deborah, I have a problem with some of your statements on resistance to
Nazism in Europe. I'm going to try to address them without patronising
you in the way that Harlan has done recently.
You wrote:
) I am finishing my reading of Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing
) Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust"...
A couple of reviews of Goldhagen's book, noting some fairly serious
flaws amongst its useful areas:
http://schulkin.org/goldhagenrv.html
) In sum, Hitler's Willing Executioners can serve as a resource to
) which high school teachers might wish to refer students interested
) in doing research on Reserve Police Battalions, work camps or death
) marches. Its chapters on Police Battalions, especially chapter 7 on
) Police Battalion 101, provide an interesting and potentially
) enlightening counterpoint to Christopher Browning's Ordinary Men.
) Beyond that, however, it is the rare high school student (or
) teacher) who will benefit from reading Goldhagen's weighty tome from
) cover to cover.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19961101fareviewessay4241/fritz-stern/the-goldhagen-controversy-one-nation-one-people-one-theory.html
) Goldhagen argues that the road to Auschwitz was straight, and he
) pays little heed to the improvisations and uncertainties of the
) regime's first five years. Yet policies during that period aimed at
) the extrusion, not the extermination, of Jews, at their isolation
) and impoverishment, so as to drive them out of the country.
Goldhagen's reply doesn't address many of that review's main points,
IMO:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19970101faresponse3749/daniel-jonah-goldhagen/germans-vs-the-critics.html
You also wrote:
) It seems very clear - and not just from the information provided in
) those books - that not many people in europe defied naziism or what
) preceded it. (Jewish people were being persecuted, including killed,
) long before Hitler was even born.)
It isn't news that antisemitic murder is an older practice than Nazism,
and it's not at all clear to me that not many people in Europe defied
Nazism. My grandfather was one; he defied it by getting into a wooden
plane and flying low-level daylight bombing missions targetting the
canal systems of occupied Europe, for which he was awarded the
Distinguished Flying Cross. It goes without saying that Jews resisted
the Nazis in ways ranging from armed resistance to raising money for
Jews flung into poverty.
Your statement above implies that Nazism was simply a prolonged pogrom:
that's also incorrect. As well as antisemitic terror, the NSDAP and
later the Nazi regime practised counter-revolutionary terror against
it's best-organised enemy, the German labour movement. Though hampered
by its leadership, the labour movement fought against the Nazis with
every means at its disposal, including shooting them in street battles.
By the end of 1933 there were thousands of political prisoners in the
camps, largely communists, socialists and trade-union members:
http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=2837
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERhitler.htm
You wrote:
) At least the Churches (Protestant and Catholic) have made some
) attempts (including what is now read in many churches on Good
) Friday, etc.) to come to grips with their responsibility in what
) transpired during WW II and before.
This wrongly implies that the churches either approved of the regime or
were entirely oblivious to it nature. Those were not the only possible
Christian responses. As well as being one of the first to come to grips
with the extent of the churches' complicity, pastor Martin Niemöller was
an early member of the resistance:
http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0528_Bios-_Martin_Niemlle.html
) As the methods of oppression by the Nazis grew worse, the
) resistance movement justified previously unimagined types of
) disobedience. For Niemöller and the resistance, the plan to
) assassinate a tyrant was a matter of obedience to God. They reasoned
) that Hitler was anti-Christ, therefore they decided to join the
) underground plan to eliminate him. Niemöller remained a key figure
) in the resistance movement until his arrest and imprisonment.
There were also loosely organised groups of youngsters which went under
different names, for example Edelweiss Pirates and Kittelbach Pirates.
There were also 'Meuten' ('packs') in many working-class areas, which
had a stronger political basis. For various reasons, these groups
resisted by painting anti-regime graffiti, attacking Hitler Youth and
Brownshirt detachments, stealing armaments, sheltering deserters and so
on. There weren't many of them in total:
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~semp/germans.htm
http://www.holocaust-education.de/news/stories/storyReader$1150
There are reports of Brownshirt and Hitler Youth leaders complaining to
the police about the depredations of these groups:
http://www.geocities.com/kk_abacus/vb/wd3-3ep.html
A film has been made about them, but I guess it'll take some pretty big
liberties:
http://www.edelweisspiraten.com/
Please be more careful not to make sweeping statements. With the one I'm
replying to here, you insult the memories of many people who gave their
lives in defiance of Nazism. Did you mean 'not many non-Jews resisted by
the regime's antisemitism' or 'Historically, Europe has been plagued by
antisemitism which has often been expressed in intense violence, the
most horrific being the Nazi's use of killing-factories in their 'final
solution'. Those political and church leaders not actively stoking the
fires often looked the other way'?
You were replying to Akua when she wrote:
"If only the number of those who defied Naziism and helped Jews, Sinti
and Roma etc been bigger, things might have looked very different over
here ...."
To bring this thread back on topic, I wonder if any of Waldorf's
supporters can give us an example of anthroposophists swelling the ranks
of the resistance.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:29:27 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Steiner's predictions
I
mentioned that I'd be delighted to find that Harriet Tubman was honored
with an officer's commission, such as that of a Captain. I'd still be
delighted to find that it was so.
Unfortunately, as is well known to all who know anything at all about
African-American history, Secretary of State Stanton refused to allow
the commissioning of black officers during the Civil War, in part
because white troops would have to salute them and he feared a backlash
from this in the Northern (Union) States. As Catherine Clinton says in
her outstanding biography, thoughout the war Tubman had 'no official
appointment, no regular salary and no recognition'. We have the pass
Harriet Tubman used to travel on military transport in 1865, which
refers to her as 'Mrs. Harriet Tubman'. And we know that she fought for
a pension, which was refused for a long time because her name appeared
in no military records whatsoever. She finally achieved a pension
largely on the basis of her second husband's military service, with an
increment added to this in recognition of the help she herself rendered
to the Union cause.
Actually, Clinton was exaggerating slightly, for Harriet Tubman was
honored with one appointment. She was the first black woman to be
appointed 'Nurse or Matron' to the military hospital where she worked
(or to any U.S. military hospital, almost certainly to any American
hospital of any kind up to that time).
I am sad to hear that an ignorance of even the basics of
African-American history is so rampant amongst you and your friends (I'm
assuming that if they were true friends, they would have corrected your
embarassing faux pas if they had had the slightest idea of the facts.) I
accept your general evaluation of this difference between us, however; I
am prepared to accept that it is indeed characteristic, both as regards
an overall knowledge of history and as regards our attitude towards
truth and facts.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 02:40:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Fruits of the Greens
--- Serena Blaue (SerenaBlaue aol.com) wrote:
(snip)
) My jaw drops in amazement. I wonder if we are
) reading the same list.
) "My" posts are "mean-spirited and "full of
) nastiness." You say this to me
) on a list that is devoted, dedicated, committed to
) trashing WE and A,
) to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements
) of our existence:
) racism, anti-semitism and nazism.
Correction: It was Rudolf Steiner who linked WE, A,
and himself to racism, anti-semitism, and the Nazi
concept of Arian superiority.
Best wishes,
Margaret
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:59:52 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: Fruits of the Greens
I wrote:
"It's not really so pressing - just that we were actually having a good
conversation (IMO) and I spent some time thinking about and responding to
points you had made. I was hoping to hear what you had to say about my
response and questions in my last post to you. I actually felt that we were
communicating quite well.
Here's hoping,
-Walden"
Serena replied:
"Your recollection of a "good conversation" is, well, unusual:"
And then quoted me from a previous post (which had nothing to do with our
conversation):
"Walden:
There is no "nailing" of anyone here, Serena. This is discussion which often
means questions and answers. If you really feel that you are being "nailed"
I respectfully suggest you answer some of the questions during the
discussion. Your last post was full of nastiness aimed at Waldorf Critics.
Your comments had nothing to do with the discussion and I saw them as mean
spirited. One might be tempted to say that is the post of one who is losing
an argument but I would prefer to think in terms of an error in judgment
during a discussion."
Serena then added:
"My jaw drops in amazement. I wonder if we are reading the same list.
"My" posts are "mean-spirited and "full of nastiness." You say this to me
on a list that is devoted, dedicated, committed to trashing WE and A,
to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements of our existence:
racism, anti-semitism and nazism."
Please have a look what has happened here, Serena. First, I did not say
your "posts." I said "your last post." It seems to me that you are feeling
frustrated. It also seems that your frustration level rises in relation with
...your continually not dealing with the issues. I have asked you to take me
out your preconceived WC'ers box, yet I see no acknowledgment of this
request. I have also asked if we might continue our discussion from a
previous thread - where we actually *did* seem to be communicating without
anger or frustration yet I see no acknowledgment of that request in this
recent post.
Why can we not simply discuss issues without the generalizations and
deflections?
If you have issues with Dan or Deborah or anyone else, respond to those
people. I am not Dan or Deborah or Diana, etc. I still suggest that by
placing them in a little box together you weaken your chance of
communicating with them and thus helping yourself to understand where they
each are coming from - i.e. the odds of your frustration level decreasing
are not good. When I try to treat people as individuals ( as opposed to
Anthroposophist,Christian, Monty Python fan, right wing, left wing, etc.) I
realize how much better the conversations generally are. And it's not just
about helping the other person - I can disagree with what the person is
saying but I am grateful for the experience of understanding where they are
coming from.
Now, as you have brought up a quote of mine from a previous post, I will
deal with it ... and hope (again) that we might be able to get back to our
original conversation.
Yes, I *do* believe a post of yours was mean-spirited and not conducive to
meaningful conversation. It added nothing to the conversation and actually
took anything of value away from the conversation. Gross generalizations can
kill communication while specifics - especially when clearly articulated -
can add fertile soil to communication. During a conversation, here is an
example of a communication killer and what I consider mean spirited:
Serena wrote:
"Waldorf Critics seem to me like a group of people on their hands
and knees, pushing peas around with their noses and complaining
about the dirt and how their knees hurt. And how they cajole and
beg passers-by to join them in the mud!
They had their experiences with WE, they were unhappy, and
now their only satisfaction is trying to make others as unhappy
as they were/are.Truth has had very little to do with this exercise
in hate.
Yes, you all had your difficult experiences with WE. And now you
spend _years_ recycling your victimhood. And you want to create
more victims to justify your own self-pity.
I've read quite a bit in the archives: I saw that others have tried to
explain,
clarify, give informaton on WE/AS -- all futile, rejected with contempt.
There's really no point, no point at all in trying. You've
created your own little Hell where you circle around and
around the same themes, endlessly. No growth, no change,
just the same fury at what you think of as a "closed system."
But it's just a strawman you have created at which
to vent your rage and disappointment that WE was not what
you expected. And, encouraged by your right-wing buddies,
you join the witch hunt shouting "occult sect!"
And you don't, won't, can't understand what the point is
to it all because you hate so much and hatred blinds.
Other people do -- and they are not Anthroposophists. You
don't need to be one to understand what WE tries to accomplish
with the children who find their way to Waldorf schools.
The PLANS lawsuit is failing. While PLANS flounders in its strawman
arguments to attack WE and the AS, right-wing "christians" are
implementing their plans for a U.S. theocracy, real racist identity groups
are influencing teenagers, psuedo-science is peddled by an ad-
ministration that appears more fascist day by day and kids are
maimed for life or dying in our current Vietnam.
I believe that as long as Waldorf Schools are wanted/needed,
they will grow and change, continuing to positively influence
how we educate our children in the US and elsewhere in the
forseeable future.
So stay on your hands and knees, pushing the peas around
with your noses through the dirt, complaining bitterly, smugly
and in self-righteous fury. You have little to offer other than
your contempt and bitterness. Oh, yes, and the eternal
righteousness of victimhood."
What I feel when I read this (above) is your frustration, Serena. I honestly
believe the best way to deal with anger/frustration is to understand where
it comes from.
If you are very angry with Dan or the board of PLANS or what you consider
the right wing Christians or even individual members of this list - let them
know about your anger. If you are angry or feeling frustrated with *me* for
something I wrote, please let me know. Again, the worst way to deal with
frustration is to *not* deal with it by plopping everyone who does not agree
with you on every issue... into a little box... and *letting them have it*
with a non-specific (and nasty) post (above).
Now, in your latest post you wrote:
"You say this to me on a list that is devoted, dedicated, committed to
trashing WE and A,
to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements of our existence:
racism, anti-semitism and nazism."
This is not the first time I have seen this - I think Linda had a similar
thought a little while ago. She also seemed very frustrated. Again, the
reality is that a "list" cannot be devoted, dedicated, committed to trashing
anything. A book - yes. A film - yes. A website - yes. But a place where
anybody can write what they want as long as it remains on topic and
relatively civil cannot possibly accomplish this trashing you seem to see.
If you believe some members of this list are "committed to trashing WE and
A, to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements of our existence:
racism, anti-semitism and nazism," then we would all benefit by reading your
specific concerns to those people and their response to you. That, imo, is
the reason for lists like this one.
Still hoping for clear communication (and continuing our conversation....),
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:32:56 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Fruits of the Greens
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Ecology + Germany + politics = Greens
)
) Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
) important role in the formation of the German Greens,
) and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
) one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
) is an anthroposophist."
)
) Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)
)
) You mean guilt by association is not enough and I
) must state *explicitly* that Anthro. or WE is somehow
) involved in my post? I am so sorry -- I thought certain
) associations were so well-established on the WC list
) that I could just get away with a code word (Greens)
) and everyone would understand what I meant.
Serena, you're making the same mistake as an Australian politician did a
couple of years ago. Peter Staudenmaier has had to explicitly state that
his work shouldn't be taken as attacking Green politics in general,
after his work was misused in this way by an Australian politician:
) These people refer to my research on ecofascism as a cheap tactic to
) impugn virtually all varieties of political environmentalism. In my
) opinion, this is not a serious way to approach important historical )
) questions.
Here's Google's cache of the article:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:3_d64QbMlW0J:www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/13/1068674308841.html+%22peter+staudenmaier%22+site:.au&hl=en
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:23:43 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Steiner and the American Indians
Yarngal wrote:
) So, now I ask the pro-Waldorf people here: do
) you really believe this?
I think Akua posted an article recently (I'm too lazy to look for it in
Topica's clunky archive) which seems to show that at least some Waldorf
teachers in Europe believe it absolutely. Why is that? I mean I live in
Europe too, and I know that Indians aren't extinct. Could it be that
Waldorf treats Steiner like Catholics treat the Pope?
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1631
-- Topica Digest --
WC: "Rudi is fair game"
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Racism on this list
By Ldenike aol.com
RE: Racism on this list
By pkcompany netzero.net
RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By bkmartin6 hotmail.com
RE: Racism on this list
By harlangilbert optonline.net
RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com
Re: "Rudi is fair game"
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
Re: WC: "Rudi is fair game"
By dan dandugan.com
RE: Racism on this list
By Ldenike aol.com
Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By jknight4 socal.rr.com
Re: Steiner's predictions
By lioncell gmx.net
Re: Steiner and the American Indians
By lioncell gmx.net
RE: Racism on this list
By harlangilbert optonline.net
Re: WC: "Rudi is fair game"
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Why can't modern W.E. dump Steiner?
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Why can't modern W.E. dump Steiner?
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Staudenmaier's misinformation campaign
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
new Waldorf charter in Ohio
By dan dandugan.com
Re: new Waldorf charter in Ohio
By dan dandugan.com
Re: "Rudi is fair game"
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 08:40:00 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: WC: "Rudi is fair game"
Feb 1 2005
Walden wrote:
This is not the first time I have seen this - I think Linda had a similar
thought a little while ago. She also seemed very frustrated. Again, the
reality is that a "list" cannot be devoted, dedicated, committed to trashing
anything. A book - yes. A film - yes. A website - yes. But a place where
anybody can write what they want as long as it remains on topic and
relatively civil cannot possibly accomplish this trashing you seem to see.
If you believe some members of this list are "committed to trashing WE and
A, to linking them and R. St. with the vilest elements of our existence:
racism, anti-semitism and nazism," then we would all benefit by reading your
specific concerns to those people and their response to you. That, imo, is
the reason for lists like this one.
Still hoping for clear communication (and continuing our conversation....),
-Walden
Dear Walden,
The reality is that this list _is_ dedicated to trashing A + WE + R St.
I think it is somewhat naive of you not to see this.
See the exchange below between Dan and L Schelly.
How individuals participate is another thing - which seems to be the
point you are making and indeed, some are more thoughtful and
considered than others. There are a few people with whom I
would enjoy having a cup of coffee (or herbal tea!).
However, if you join a list with a specific agenda, please don't
complain if you are associated with that agenda.
I know that nothing I say has the slightest likelihood of changing
the guiding premise of this list, which is to attack R St. and his
"followers" as Dan so nicely put it. As I have already said, and
Dan confirms it below, those of us who find Anthr. helpful and
inspiring are "fair game" for "attacks". However, *we* must not
attack Critics. That's the rule of the game here and it's played
out again and again.
And Dan is the judge (Inquistor) by his own admission.
Margaret pipes up at just the right moment to confirm it for us all:
"Correction: It was Rudolf Steiner who linked WE, A,
and himself to racism, anti-semitism, and the Nazi
concept of Arian superiority."
By the way, the entire Topica archives are readily available --
Dan doesn't really have to archive them on PLANS.
See: http://lists.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read?start=0&sort=
Best,
Serena Blaue
===========================================
AOL does not preserve the formatting showing who is writing,
so this message is best read onsite at:
http://lists.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read/message.html?sort=d&mid=170
3059434&start=14
RE: WC up and running again! Dan Dugan
Oct 05, 2000 23:36 PDT
Luke Schelly quoted the list description:
Intended to be a networking resource for parents, teachers,
school boards and ))reporters interested in Waldorf education, as
viewed from outside the cult of
Rudolf Steiner. It is a free-speech forum; subscription is open
to the public ))and postings are not reviewed. The important rules
are that the topic must be ))Waldorf or Anthroposophy, and that
personal attacks are not permitted.
And commented:
Does this mean no personal attacks on Rudolf Steiner either?
Nope, Rudi is fair game.
Has anybody got any idea as to what the delineation is between
being outside and being inside the "cult of Rudolf Steiner" (no
personal attack intended of course).
It's kind of like the definition of who can be an Anthroposophist.
Doesn't that go something like "anybody who believes the Goetheanum
has a role to play in cosmic destiny" or some crap like that (please
correct me, I know it's only approximate).
Couldn't that be a set of one person -Rudolf Steiner?
No, it includes all his followers.
Is this a scare tactic phrase?
I hope it will give fair warning.
You be the judge.
I am. I'm outside.
-Dan Dugan
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 08:50:40 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
RE: Fruits of the Greens Barnaby McEwan
Feb 01, 2005 02:42 PST
Serena- aol.com wrote:
Ecology + Germany + politics = Greens
Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
important role in the formation of the German Greens,
and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
is an anthroposophist."
Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)
You mean guilt by association is not enough and I
must state *explicitly* that Anthro. or WE is somehow
involved in my post? I am so sorry -- I thought certain
associations were so well-established on the WC list
that I could just get away with a code word (Greens)
and everyone would understand what I meant.
Serena, you're making the same mistake as an Australian politician did a
couple of years ago. Peter Staudenmaier has had to explicitly state that
his work shouldn't be taken as attacking Green politics in general,
after his work was misused in this way by an Australian politician:
These people refer to my research on ecofascism as a cheap tactic to
impugn virtually all varieties of political environmentalism. In my
opinion, this is not a serious way to approach important historical )
questions.
Here's Google's cache of the article:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:3_d64QbMlW0J:www.smh.com.au/articles/2003
/11/13/1068674308841.html+%22peter+staudenmaier%22+site:.au&hl=en
***************************************************
Barnaby,
My quick take on this is that Staudenmaier was too short-sighted
to imagine how his "research" would actually be read: as a
polemic that right-wing idealogues would find useful to trash pro-
gressive ecological programs.
This could be an argument that his viewpoints lack balance
because extremists find them useful.
Best,
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 10:26:16 -0500
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
Omigosh, you people are not to be believed. Sheesh! Why not read what Peter Staudenmaier actually *says* in his research? Your assessment of how Staudenmaier's research is being misused (which you blame on the researcher) is humorous to me, because you are the same people who think Waldorf critics are not justified in criticizing Waldorf teachers who take Steiner's words as gospel and try to follow his instructions literally, sometimes with unfortunate results. You say (and I paraphrase, here) "Oh, it's not Steiner's fault that modern day people misinterpret what he says! His motives were pure."
Shaking my head in disbelief,
Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 10:28:12 -0500
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: Re: Racism on this list
Yeah, tell that to Rudolf Steiner. He has some pretty nauseating theories on the races of humankind. Racism *is* unwelcome anywhere, and especially in schools where young minds are being molded and nurtured. That's why some of us object to the Waldorf philosophy. We don't believe that it is OK to say that the more blonde and blue eyed people become, the more intelligent they are. But Steiner thought that was true, and some Waldorf teachers believe it, too.
Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:06:09 +0000
From: Pete Karaiskos (pkcompany netzero.net)
Subject: RE: Racism on this list
Harlan Gilbert wrote:
) De facts ah de facts, honey.
And in his next post:
) Dear Dan, and others responsible for this list,
)
) Please ensure that negative comments about people's gender, race,
) religion, and ethnic background are unwelcome on this site. Stereotypes
) about 'all blacks are...' or 'all whites are...' are simply racist.
Holy mackerel Andy, you put your foot in your mouth in one post and
tried to extract it in the next. LOL!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:19:38 +0000
From: Brad Martin (bkmartin6 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
Ldenike aol.com wrote:
(snip) you are the same people who think Waldorf critics are not
justified in criticizing Waldorf teachers who take Steiner's words as
gospel and try to follow his instructions literally, sometimes with
unfortunate results. (snip) Shaking my head in disbelief,
) Lisa
I am a critic of the Waldorf Critic Activists who state anthroposophy is
a religion and do not comprehend the larger context of generic
anthroposophy small a as a part of what is called in the West, the
Perennial Philosophy. I say, and have said, it is completely justified
to "critique Waldorf teachers who take Steiner's words as gospel and try
to follow his instructions literally". It is further justified to
investigate the administration of Waldorf and AWSNA who hire and train
teachers of teachers. To what degree do they allow the taking of
Steiner's words as gospel and follow his instructions literally? Why are
they not updating much of what was said 100 years ago by current
knowledge in systems science and the principles of holistic education?
For example, the 'heart is not a pump' issue that is obsessed over, is
explained by modern neurocardiology.
I contend that in much of Anhroposophy, large A, and Waldorf worldwide,
there are many administrators, teachers and parents who *get* this
larger context, extract the valid and essential core of Steiner, and
dismiss the rest. They get on with Waldorf as an experiential/holistic
pedagogy, and do well, as the Helen Hanson letter indicates. No
nefarious plots, no racism, and no anti-semitism. Just loving education
of the children, both intellectually and imaginatively.
To the degree that folks can have constructive criticism along this
line, fine. However, the Waldorf Critic Activists go much further, which
delegitimizes Waldorf Critics and PLANS. They have taken their personal
bad experience and mounted personal vendettas again the whole operation.
Waldorf bashing has become their obsession. The PLANS lawsuit is a
monument of this obsession.
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:34:45 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Racism on this list
Well, then, keep it out of this list.
Ldenike aol.com wrote:
)
) Yeah, tell that to Rudolf Steiner. He has some pretty nauseating
) theories on the races of humankind. Racism *is* unwelcome anywhere, and
) especially in schools where young minds are being molded and nurtured.
) That's why some of us object to the Waldorf philosophy. We don't believe
) that it is OK to say that the more blonde and blue eyed people become,
) the more intelligent they are. But Steiner thought that was true, and
) some Waldorf teachers believe it, too.
) Lisa
..
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:43:03 +0000
From: Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
) important role in the formation of the German Greens,
) and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
) one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
) is an anthroposophist."
)
) Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)
[snip]
) I thought certain
) associations were so well-established on the WC list
) that I could just get away with a code word (Greens)
) and everyone would understand what I meant.
In a later post:
) My quick take on this is that Staudenmaier was too short-sighted
) to imagine how his "research" would actually be read as a
) polemic that right-wing idealogues would find useful to trash pro-
) gressive ecological programs.
Make your mind up! First PS is sneakily attacking Green politics
himself, then he's just the unwitting accomplice of others who do that.
Which is it?
On page two of the book in question (Biehl & Staudenmaier, 'Ecofascism;
Lessons from the German Experience'. AK Press, 1995, ISBN 1-873176 73 2)
the authors anticipate exactly the use that Brandeis tried to make of
their work:
) As social ecologists, it is not our intention to deprecate the
) all-important efforts that environmentalists and ecologists are
) making to rescue the biosphere from destruction. Quite to the
) contrary: it is our deepest concern to protect the integrity of
) serious ecological movements from ugly reactionary tendencies that
) seek to exploit the widespread popular concern about ecological
) problems for regressive agendas.
You wrote:
) This could be an argument that his viewpoints lack balance
) because extremists find them useful.
A silly extremist might think that 'Ecofascism' would be useful; but
only until her/his opponents read the book's introduction. Evidently
Brandeis hadn't read it. Have you?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 10:14:21 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: "Rudi is fair game"
Serena wrote:
"The reality is that this list _is_ dedicated to trashing A + WE + R St.
I think it is somewhat naive of you not to see this.
See the exchange below between Dan and L Schelly.
How individuals participate is another thing - which seems to be the
point you are making and indeed, some are more thoughtful and
considered than others. There are a few people with whom I
would enjoy having a cup of coffee (or herbal tea!).
However, if you join a list with a specific agenda, please don't
complain if you are associated with that agenda.
I know that nothing I say has the slightest likelihood of changing
the guiding premise of this list, which is to attack R St. and his
"followers" as Dan so nicely put it. As I have already said, and
Dan confirms it below, those of us who find Anthr. helpful and
inspiring are "fair game" for "attacks". However, *we* must not
attack Critics. That's the rule of the game here and it's played
out again and again.
And Dan is the judge (Inquistor) by his own admission."
I'm still (patiently) hoping we can continue our previous conversation. In
the meantime...
Coffee or herbal tea - both are fine by me... sipping on coffee as I write.
Now, you raise an interesting point or two:
You must have noticed that you and I have *both* joined this list. Are
*you,* then, associated with what you perceive as its "agenda?"
I don't see it. I see that you are make interesting points (and I hope we
can get back to that area from our previous chat) about
Anthroposophy/Waldorf. I also note that other members make interesting
points, as well. Sometimes these thoughts are a million miles apart and
sometimes people feel frustrated reading each others posts. Would not the
human social experience be boring if we all agreed with each other? I
welcome different perspectives! Seriously. For example, I enjoy reading how
people here interpret Steiner - from his prediction of war to his thoughts
on race to the Mystery at Golgatha and reincarnation and his thoughts on
"love, etc." And... how all these ideas might influence the education of
children in a Waldorf school. Yes, Serena - Steiner's thoughts on race *are*
a topic on this list and elsewhere and for very good reason.
Important: This does not mean I think you are a racist. When a member here
raises a Steiner quote that might be perceived as sounding racist and when a
member here expresses a view of Anthroposophy/Waldorf that does not reflect
*your* view, it is not an attack on *you.* If you feel attacked I invite
you to share the reasons for that feeling - of at least think about them.
As for Dan-the-Inquisitor and you posting something from 5 years ago, I
think I am safe in translating that bit thus: The rules of this list insist
that personal attacks on other live list members (ad hominems) are not
allowed. Go after my ideas but leave *me* alone. This is a good idea, imo,
as personal attacks take away from the discussion. When we talk about Rudolf
Steiner, the first thing to keep in mind is that he is
a) no longer alive and/or
b) not a member of this list.
Obviously, as we are discussing Anthroposophy/Waldorf, we need relevant
information. Some of that information - especially the historical roots of
Anthroposophy - might make some list members feel uncomfortable. Don't you
think, however, we would be remiss if we avoided that history?
Worse than simply avoiding history is labeling people interested in that
history as hateful.
I've seen plenty of Steiner quotes up for discussion and interpretation. I
think one of the reasons this list is important is that this type of
discussion simply will not happen at other lists - talk about "inquisition!"
Here's an interesting sidebar: When PLANS was revamping the waldorfcritics
website a few years ago, I offered a few suggestions to Dan. I remember a
couple of off list chats and I remember explaining to Dan that I thought
calling Anthroposophic medicine "quackery" or "quack" was not the best idea.
I thought it sounded antagonistic. There were a few other areas I thought
should be changed, as well. Guess what? Dan listened - not because *I* was
right and *he* was wrong but because what I said made sense to him, I
suppose. I certainly do not agree with everything Dan or Lisa or other PLANS
members think - but I respect their right to have and express their views
and from time to time... we can actually change each other's views. Or we
can agree to disagree - without any need for name calling.
Look at recent examples of critics disagreeing with each other on this very
list. I think it's healthy.
We are all unique individuals. Why not try to respect (and learn from) our
differences?
Hope I've helped you see that perhaps this list is *not* "dedicated to
trashing" anything but invites people to express their views. Speaking of
which... I look forward to continuing with our previous discussion.
-Walden
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 10:58:29 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: WC: "Rudi is fair game"
Serena Blaue, you wrote,
)I know that nothing I say has the slightest likelihood of changing
)the guiding premise of this list, which is to attack R St. and his
)"followers" as Dan so nicely put it. As I have already said, and
)Dan confirms it below, those of us who find Anthr. helpful and
)inspiring are "fair game" for "attacks". However, *we* must not
)attack Critics. That's the rule of the game here and it's played
)out again and again.
You aren't making the distinction between attacking ideas and
attacking people. I understand that when someone who you hold near
and dear, Steiner, is accused of something like anti-Semitism, you
feel personally attacked. But you must put those feelings aside, or
at least channel them into an objective discussion. Nobody is
attacking Serena Blaue!
)And Dan is the judge (Inquistor) by his own admission.
The day I can't criticize a bad idea will be the day I'm dead! Only a
devout relativist doesn't exercise judgement. You be the judge!
)Margaret pipes up at just the right moment to confirm it for us all:
)
)"Correction: It was Rudolf Steiner who linked WE, A,
)and himself to racism, anti-semitism, and the Nazi
)concept of Arian superiority."
Amen. We wouldn't be talking about those concepts here if we hadn't
"encountered" them all too frequently in Steiner, and in rare cases,
in Waldorf schools.
)By the way, the entire Topica archives are readily available --
)Dan doesn't really have to archive them on PLANS.
I was mistaken about how far back the Topica archive goes, but the
PLANS archive goes back to 1995, more than twice as far as Topica's.
And the PLANS search engine is better.
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 14:56:03 -0500
From: Ldenike aol.com
Subject: RE: Racism on this list
Let me get this right: you want us to keep our *discussion* of Streiner's racist writings and philosophies and our view of how they pertain to modern day Waldorf, off this list?
Dare to dream.
How racism fits into the Anthro. mindset is important, in my opinion and that of others here.
Sorry if it offends you. It should. In my opinion, such views should offend everyone. But part of shedding light where it is needed is discussion. That's what we do here.
Lisa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 12:43:30 -0800
From: "J. Marshall Knight" (jknight4 socal.rr.com)
Subject: Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
Understanding! understanding! understanding! this is what is called far
when I (WC) address racism in Waldorf schools. I suspect that most
perhaps 80% of the Waldorf teachers would be abhorred if they thought
they were racists. However, the racism is in the pedagogic
processes--the famous curriculum. So to speak of the "loving education"
seems contradictory to me especially when the whole process builds on a
entirely racist foundation. I have met only two Waldorf teachers who
have the awareness of the curriculum and how it presents humankind to
be able to view the progression of the curriculum as filled with and
promotes the continuation of racism--not necessarily bigotry--in
children's consciousness.
Jim
"Train your mind to see your eyes seeing"
On Feb 1, 2005, at 9:19 AM, Brad Martin wrote:
) I contend that in much of Anhroposophy, large A, and Waldorf worldwide,
) there are many administrators, teachers and parents who *get* this
) larger context, extract the valid and essential core of Steiner, and
) dismiss the rest. They get on with Waldorf as an experiential/holistic
) pedagogy, and do well, as the Helen Hanson letter indicates. No
) nefarious plots, no racism, and no anti-semitism. Just loving education
) of the children, both intellectually and imaginatively.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:50:20 +0100
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner's predictions
Harlan wrote:
"My dearest Deborah,
There aren't black facts and white facts. De facts ah de facts, honey. A
lie is a lie. And Harriet Tubman was not a Captain in the Union army.
If a black person tells you that she was, well, that person is
distorting history."
Akua:
Harlan, 'dearest' and 'honey' in this context is nothing but mockery and
so is 'de facts ah de facts'. In favour of spreading the fun around,
huh? In regard to black and white facts and the distortion of history I
am not suprised Deborah is reluctant to trust white scholars and authors
in regard to that of African Americans and FN peoples. We have seen
socalled scientists and other 'renowned' authors distorting facts all
too often. Had it not been for African, African American, FN scholars,
activists, authors etc many of the myths spread about people of colour,
their history and culture would have gone unchallenged. Science is not
neutral, neither is the telling of historical 'facts'.
Harlan again:
"[ . . . ] You do a disservice to all African-Americans everywhere, and
to all women."
Akua:
It seems you know pretty well how African-Americans and women feel about
the content of Deborah's post?
Harlan:
"I speak for my brothers and my sisters."
Akua:
Who are *your* sisters and brothers then?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:50:51 +0100
From: Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net)
Subject: Re: Steiner and the American Indians
Barnaby McEwan wrote:
I think Akua posted an article recently (I'm too lazy to look for it in
Topica's clunky archive) which seems to show that at least some Waldorf
teachers in Europe believe it absolutely. Why is that? I mean I live in
Europe too, and I know that Indians aren't extinct. Could it be that
Waldorf treats Steiner like Catholics treat the Pope?
Akua:
Well, from what I gathered this is taught at a number of Waldorf
teachers' training centres and quite a few WS. The most disturbing fact
is this is anything but limited to WS over here. A former classmate of
my daughter's, adult like her, wasn't the only one who had doubts about
the survival of 'Indians'. This particular one was woken by my
daughter's remarks in regard to the ongoing FN genocide in the Americas.
Believe it or not, their history teacher needed some material to catch
up on a number of issues too, her present one got his share of copies
this morning. And there are so many similar stories. Surprises? Not
really, I had to do the same thing more than twenty years ago while I
was still in school.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 22:48:35 +0000
From: Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net)
Subject: RE: Racism on this list
Dear Lisa,
I'm sorry if my request was unclear to you, as it obviously was. Perhaps
you'd not been following this thread. I would like to keep actual
racism, i.e. racist comments, off this list. I'm sure you would, too.
I have no idea whence you got what you wrote (copied below). I didn't
mention anything about Steiner's writings and philosophy; we were
actually talking about the Civil War.
I hope that this clarifies the situation. Discussions about racism are
important. Racist comments are, I hope, inappropriate in this forum.
Best wishes,
Harlan
Ldenike aol.com wrote:
)
) Let me get this right: you want us to keep our *discussion* of
) Streiner's racist writings and philosophies and our view of how they
) pertain to modern day Waldorf, off this list?
) Dare to dream.
) How racism fits into the Anthro. mindset is important, in my opinion and
) that of others here.
) Sorry if it offends you. It should. In my opinion, such views should
) offend everyone. But part of shedding light where it is needed is
) discussion. That's what we do here.
) Lisa
..
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 15:00:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Margaret Sachs (powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: WC: "Rudi is fair game"
) Walden wrote:
)
) This is not the first time I have seen this - I
) think Linda had a similar
) thought a little while ago. She also seemed very
) frustrated. Again, the
) reality is that a "list" cannot be devoted,
) dedicated, committed to trashing
) anything. A book - yes. A film - yes. A website -
) yes. But a place where
) anybody can write what they want as long as it
) remains on topic and
) relatively civil cannot possibly accomplish this
) trashing you seem to see.
) If you believe some members of this list are
) "committed to trashing WE and
) A, to linking them and R. St. with the vilest
) elements of our existence:
) racism, anti-semitism and nazism," then we would all
) benefit by reading your
) specific concerns to those people and their response
) to you. That, imo, is
) the reason for lists like this one.
)
) Still hoping for clear communication (and continuing
) our conversation....),
)
) -Walden
)
)
) Dear Walden,
)
) The reality is that this list _is_ dedicated to
) trashing A + WE + R St.
) I think it is somewhat naive of you not to see this.
)
) See the exchange below between Dan and L Schelly.
)
) How individuals participate is another thing - which
) seems to be the
) point you are making and indeed, some are more
) thoughtful and
) considered than others. There are a few people with
) whom I
) would enjoy having a cup of coffee (or herbal tea!).
)
) However, if you join a list with a specific agenda,
) please don't
) complain if you are associated with that agenda.
)
) I know that nothing I say has the slightest
) likelihood of changing
) the guiding premise of this list, which is to attack
) R St. and his
) "followers" as Dan so nicely put it. As I have
) already said, and
) Dan confirms it below, those of us who find Anthr.
) helpful and
) inspiring are "fair game" for "attacks". However,
) *we* must not
) attack Critics. That's the rule of the game here
) and it's played
) out again and again.
)
) And Dan is the judge (Inquistor) by his own
) admission.
)
) Margaret pipes up at just the right moment to
) confirm it for us all:
)
) "Correction: It was Rudolf Steiner who linked WE, A,
) and himself to racism, anti-semitism, and the Nazi
) concept of Arian superiority."
Serena, how about addressing the point I made instead
of using the fact that I made it to justify or divert
attention from your mean-spirited pea pushing rant?
Best wishes,
Margaret
)
) By the way, the entire Topica archives are readily
) available --
) Dan doesn't really have to archive them on PLANS.
)
) See:
)
http://lists.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read?start=0&sort=
)
) Best,
)
) Serena Blaue
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:05:53 -0600
From: Yarngal webtv.net (Yarngal)
Subject: Why can't modern W.E. dump Steiner?
Hi Barnaby and All,
What I cannot understand is since Steiner had such bizarre beliefs about
"root races" and waldorf supporters say that they are NOT racists and
that they "don't follow those outmoded beliefs of Steiner's", then why
can't they just DUMP all of Steiner's writings, beliefs, and philosophy
and therefore be progressive and non-racist as they claim to be now? Why
hold on to outdated beliefs? If they don't agree with certain things
Steiner said and wrote, then why not just DUMP EVERYTHING he wrote?
People have told me that "Steiner was just reflecting the beliefs of his
time". Well since his time, society has CHANGED, so why not just dump
Steiner , and then reflect the progressive changes of modern day
society?
Why hold onto his outdated beliefs? What about Steiner do they LIKE so
much?
Best Wishes, Yarngal
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:50:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Why can't modern W.E. dump Steiner?
yarngal yarngal (yarngal webtv.net) wrote:
"Hi Barnaby and All,
What I cannot understand is since Steiner had such bizarre beliefs about
"root races" and waldorf supporters say that they are NOT racists and
that they "don't follow those outmoded beliefs of Steiner's", then why
can't they just DUMP all of Steiner's writings, beliefs, and philosophy
and therefore be progressive and non-racist as they claim to be now? Why
hold on to outdated beliefs?"
They hold on to those beliefs because they are not only not outdated, but increasingly supported. (What the U.S. has done to a lot of brown people in the past two years is just one example of that. The U.S. administration is asking for 80 million more dollars to wipe out even more brown people; per capita that amounts to more than the U.S. is spending on social programs serving several thousand people - but never mind, that is outside the scope of this discussion, right?) Also, "progress" is not per se in a forward direction, i.e. if I shift my car into "reverse" I am in "progress."
'People have told me that "Steiner was just reflecting the beliefs of his
time".'
Well, no. He was reflecting the beliefs of europeans of his time. He was not reflecting the beliefs of Jewish people, Ethiopians, Mdewakatons, Armenians, or Romanian "Gypsies," or most inhabitants of the earth.
"Well since his time, society has CHANGED, so why not just dump
Steiner , and then reflect the progressive changes of modern day
society?"
The only progressive change that matters is that we now outnumber the steiners; how much assimilation has progressed will determine the outcome.
"Why hold onto his outdated beliefs? What about Steiner do they LIKE so
much?"
He validates on what they base their existence. When one believes s/he is superior to all else in the universe, then s/he clings to whatever piece of detritus - have you seen "Titanic?" - s/he can grab on to.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 23:13:24 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Staudenmaier's misinformation campaign
Margaret pipes up at just the right moment to
confirm it for us all:
"Correction: It was Rudolf Steiner who linked WE, A,
and himself to racism, anti-semitism, and the Nazi
concept of Arian superiority."
Serena, how about addressing the point I made instead
of using the fact that I made it to justify or divert
attention from your mean-spirited pea pushing rant?
Best wishes,
Margaret
Margaret,
Your unsupported "points" have been dealt with by
better minds than I -- however, I can't force you to read or
understand the thoughtful rebuttals by Waage, Nordwall,
Hindes or others.
Best,
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 23:27:02 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
RE: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics Barnaby McEwan
Feb 01, 2005 09:43 PST
Serena- aol.com wrote:
Greens a la Stauenmeier: "Anthroposophists played an
important role in the formation of the German Greens,
and Germany's current Interior Minister, Otto Schily,
one of the most prominent founders of the Greens,
is an anthroposophist."
Anthro ~ nazism, Hitler, the occult (woo-da, woo-da)
[snip]
I thought certain
associations were so well-established on the WC list
that I could just get away with a code word (Greens)
and everyone would understand what I meant.
In a later post:
My quick take on this is that Staudenmaier was too short-sighted
to imagine how his "research" would actually be read as a
polemic that right-wing idealogues would find useful to trash pro-
gressive ecological programs.
Make your mind up! First PS is sneakily attacking Green politics
himself, then he's just the unwitting accomplice of others who do that.
Which is it?
On page two of the book in question (Biehl & Staudenmaier, 'Ecofascism;
Lessons from the German Experience'. AK Press, 1995, ISBN 1-873176 73 2)
the authors anticipate exactly the use that Brandeis tried to make of
their work:
As social ecologists, it is not our intention to deprecate the
all-important efforts that environmentalists and ecologists are
making to rescue the biosphere from destruction. Quite to the
contrary: it is our deepest concern to protect the integrity of
serious ecological movements from ugly reactionary tendencies that
seek to exploit the widespread popular concern about ecological
problems for regressive agendas.
You wrote:
This could be an argument that his viewpoints lack balance
because extremists find them useful.
A silly extremist might think that 'Ecofascism' would be useful; but
only until her/his opponents read the book's introduction. Evidently
Brandeis hadn't read it. Have you?
***************************************************************************
Seems I have to put the word "humor" in brackets from now on...
this was the point of my linkages that you took so seriously.
I really haven't made any comment about Staudenmaier's
linking of the Greens with anthros. through Schily...I don't
know where you see an opinion in my attempt to replicate
the kind of mindless associations that are common on the
WC list for a spot of humor.
Yes, I have read their introduction.
Best,
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:08:51 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: new Waldorf charter in Ohio
Excerpt from a column in the Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2/1/05
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/110725402889380.xml
-Dan Dugan
***
New school:
A school that emphasizes traditional lessons in the morning and
arts, crafts and physical activity in the afternoon will open this
fall in Cleveland Heights.
Cedar Creek Community School, a charter school, will become the
first public Waldorf school in Ohio, according to the school's press
release.
Enrollment for Cedar Creek, which will have grades kindergarten
through four, begins today and ends March 15.
Students in lower grades at Waldorf schools normally study a lesson
for several weeks, according to the National Association of Waldorf
Schools North America. The Waldorf school movement began in Germany
in 1919.
Plain Dealer reporter Jennifer Gonzalez contributed to this column.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 23:43:35 -0800
From: Dan Dugan (dan dandugan.com)
Subject: Re: new Waldorf charter in Ohio
See http://cedarcreekcs.org/
-Dan Dugan
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 01:14:40 -0800
From: walden (awaldenpond shaw.ca)
Subject: Re: "Rudi is fair game"
Serena suggested we look at the archives:
See: http://lists.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read?start=0&sort
This was before my time methinks but I found two interesting posts here.
The first is from Dan who quotes Joan Almon and the second post is by a list
member named Luke.
Interesting perspectives:
Dan Dugan wrote:
"I ran across this from Waldorf authority Joan Almon:
"A growing question in Waldorf kindergartens and schools is to what
extent is Waldorf education bound to the Christian religion and to
what extent is it more universal. The answer points towards the
modern mysteries, for Waldorf education is centered around the Christ
as a Universal Being who has helped humans in their development from
the beginning of time...Waldorf education strives to create a place
in which the highest beings, including the Christ, can find their
home, but it is not connected to one religion or another.
"In the Waldorf kindergarten we tend to live from season to season,
from festival to festival, but it is also wonderful to reflect on the
year as a whole. Rudolf Steiner's *Soul Calendar* is a means of
sensitizing ourselves to the inner moods of the year and our soul
responses to them. Working with the current verse andd relating it to
the verse for the opposite time of year is a step towards developing
a conscousness for the year as a whole and for its powerful rhythms
which we experience inwardly as well as outwardly in nature."
[Almon, Joan. "The Seasons and their Festivals." An Overview of the
Waldorf Kindergarten: Articles from the Waldorf Kindergarten
Newsletter 1981 to 1992 Volume One. Silver Spring, MD: Waldorf
Kindergarten Association of North America, Inc., 1993, p. 72.]
This is a good example of both the religiosity of Waldorf, and of how
it is denied. "Modern mysteries"? "Universal Being"? Are these not
the matters of religion?
Almon says "not connected to one religion or another" and then goes
on to recommend reading from a book of weekly prayers by Steiner.
-Dan Dugan "
Luke replied:
"Camphill used to advertise itself as "non-denominational Christian" -- that
at least was a *little* closer to the truth. However, in more recent years
they have struck that information from their Public
Information/Disinformation Bank of Facts We Will 'Fess Up To [no doubt a
"sacrifice" made to further the larger goal of getting Waldorf into the
public school system].
It is also interesting to note that in researching the academic data bases,
"Anthroposophy" is always identified as and classified with "Religions".
Apparently, they are the only ones without a clue.
Luke"
------------------------------
==^================================================================
You can ask any question about Waldorf you like here, no matter how basic. New threads are always welcome.
End of waldorf-critics topica.com digest, issue 1632
-- Topica Digest --
Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By diana.winters verizon.net
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By bkmartin6 hotmail.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By bkmartin6 hotmail.com
Updating the disclosure
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Racism on this list
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Resistance to Nazism in Europe
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By diana.winters verizon.net
Re: You're right Deborah (about the new age group I had trusted)
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Back to basics: less grammar, more play
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: racism and SteinerRE: To (((Akua)) with all my support
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Why can't modern Waldorf dump Steiner?
By Yarngal webtv.net
Re: Updating the disclosure
By Ldenike aol.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By bkmartin6 hotmail.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By SerenaBlaue aol.com
RE: Updating the disclosure
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Staudenmaier's misinformation campaign
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
Re: Steiner's predictions
By gideonmills yahoo.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
Re: Steiner's predictions and the spin on history
By realwaldorf hotmail.com
RE: Steiner's predictions
By aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com
RE: racism and SteinerRE: To (((Akua)) with all my support
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By powerofjoy2004 yahoo.com
Re: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
By awaldenpond shaw.ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:42:29 EST
From: SerenaBlaue aol.com
Subject: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
e: "Rudi is fair game" walden
Feb 01, 2005 10:13 PST
Serena wrote:
"The reality is that this list _is_ dedicated to trashing A + WE + R St.
I think it is somewhat naive of you not to see this.
See the exchange below between Dan and L Schelly.
How individuals participate is another thing - which seems to be the
point you are making and indeed, some are more thoughtful and
considered than others. There are a few people with whom I
would enjoy having a cup of coffee (or herbal tea!).
However, if you join a list with a specific agenda, please don't
complain if you are associated with that agenda.
I know that nothing I say has the slightest likelihood of changing
the guiding premise of this list, which is to attack R St. and his
"followers" as Dan so nicely put it. As I have already said, and
Dan confirms it below, those of us who find Anthr. helpful and
inspiring are "fair game" for "attacks". However, *we* must not
attack Critics. That's the rule of the game here and it's played
out again and again.
And Dan is the judge (Inquistor) by his own admission."
I'm still (patiently) hoping we can continue our previous conversation. In
the meantime...
Coffee or herbal tea - both are fine by me... sipping on coffee as I write.
Now, you raise an interesting point or two:
You must have noticed that you and I have *both* joined this list. Are
*you,* then, associated with what you perceive as its "agenda?"
I don't see it. I see that you are make interesting points (and I hope we
can get back to that area from our previous chat) about
Anthroposophy/Waldorf. I also note that other members make interesting
points, as well. Sometimes these thoughts are a million miles apart and
sometimes people feel frustrated reading each others posts. Would not the
human social experience be boring if we all agreed with each other? I
welcome different perspectives! Seriously. For example, I enjoy reading how
people here interpret Steiner - from his prediction of war to his thoughts
on race to the Mystery at Golgatha and reincarnation and his thoughts on
"love, etc." And... how all these ideas might influence the education of
children in a Waldorf school. Yes, Serena - Steiner's thoughts on race *are*
a topic on this list and elsewhere and for very good reason.
Serena:
I'm rushing off to work, so a quick remark or two must suffice:
I wonder how friends of mine who belong to the local Quaker
Society would feel if I invited them to a conversation dedicated
to finding fault with their society. They must comply with my
rules:
1. They must acknowledge that they are a sect, a cult, and
so anything they say is suspect. In fact, I will start the
conversation by calling one of their central tenets "crap".
2. I can attack their convictions, philosophy, ideas, their founder
but they will be in trouble if they attack my accuracy or any key
personalities of my society or association.
3. I will not listen with the intent to understand: my goal is to
catch them in what I consider to be falsehoods, inconsistencies,
etc.
4. I will hold all of their institutions and initiatives up to the light,
looking for flaws, expecting perfection.
5. I will smile on occasion, but every detail of the conversation will
be saved and examined with a fine-toothed comb with an eye as to
how I can use it in on-going litigation attacking schools that they
are supportive of.
I somehow doubt that my Quaker friends would sit down and feel
free to share their thoughts in such a forum.
***************
Important: This does not mean I think you are a racist. When a member here
raises a Steiner quote that might be perceived as sounding racist and when a
member here expresses a view of Anthroposophy/Waldorf that does not reflect
*your* view, it is not an attack on *you.* If you feel attacked I invite
you to share the reasons for that feeling - of at least think about them.
Serena:
Attacking R St. and mischaracterizing what he wrote is painful in the
same way it pains one to see lies of any kind being spread in order to
cause harm.
***********************
As for Dan-the-Inquisitor and you posting something from 5 years ago, I
think I am safe in translating that bit thus: The rules of this list insist
that personal attacks on other live list members (ad hominems) are not
allowed. Go after my ideas but leave *me* alone. This is a good idea, imo,
as personal attacks take away from the discussion. When we talk about Rudolf
Steiner, the first thing to keep in mind is that he is
a) no longer alive and/or
b) not a member of this list.
Serena:
If this were really true, then the frequent ad homs from WC regulars
would be flagged; instead they are ignored and tolerated.
*********************
Obviously, as we are discussing Anthroposophy/Waldorf, we need relevant
information. Some of that information - especially the historical roots of
Anthroposophy - might make some list members feel uncomfortable. Don't you
think, however, we would be remiss if we avoided that history?
Worse than simply avoiding history is labeling people interested in that
history as hateful.
Serena:
The archives are full of finely crafted attempts to give information,
also regarding the historical issues. It has been ignored. Repetition
will not change this, IMO.
***************
I've seen plenty of Steiner quotes up for discussion and interpretation. I
think one of the reasons this list is important is that this type of
discussion simply will not happen at other lists - talk about "inquisition!"
Here's an interesting sidebar: When PLANS was revamping the waldorfcritics
website a few years ago, I offered a few suggestions to Dan. I remember a
couple of off list chats and I remember explaining to Dan that I thought
calling Anthroposophic medicine "quackery" or "quack" was not the best idea.
I thought it sounded antagonistic. There were a few other areas I thought
should be changed, as well. Guess what? Dan listened - not because *I* was
right and *he* was wrong but because what I said made sense to him, I
suppose. I certainly do not agree with everything Dan or Lisa or other PLANS
members think - but I respect their right to have and express their views
and from time to time... we can actually change each other's views. Or we
can agree to disagree - without any need for name calling.
Look at recent examples of critics disagreeing with each other on this very
list. I think it's healthy.
Serena:
I welcome a public statement from Dan Dugan that he no longer
calls A. complementary medicine "quackery." I'm not holding my
breath, however.
Whose views do you think have really changed since the list's
beginning?
**************************
We are all unique individuals. Why not try to respect (and learn from) our
differences?
Hope I've helped you see that perhaps this list is *not* "dedicated to
trashing" anything but invites people to express their views. Speaking of
which... I look forward to continuing with our previous discussion.
-Walden
Serena:
I have to disagree.
The last days alone have more than adequately reinforced the fact
that this list is devoted to trashing R St., A + WE.
The more I read in the archives, the more this is affirmed.
I do read posts individually and have learned a lot. That's one of the
reasons I continue to read the list.
My key area of fascination is how people who hate a philosophy
can dedicate themselves to studying it intensively, getting most
of it wrong. The intensity exceeds that of many who study A.
The WC seems like a forum for the shadow (maybe in a Jungian
sense?) followers of R. St. For this reason alone the WC list is
interesting.
What was that previous discussion?
Have a fine day~
Serena Blaue
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:23:36 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
Serena, it's often difficult to read your posts, since you don't try to
reformat to make it obvious who said what. It would be courteous if you
would try.
)I'm rushing off to work, so a quick remark or two must suffice: I wonder
)how friends of mine who belong to the local Quaker Society would feel if I
)invited them to a conversation dedicated to finding fault with their
)society.
Your Quaker analogy interests me since my child attends a Quaker school, and
hopefully will go all the way through Quaker schools. We've had a wonderful
experience with the Quaker schools here. I'm not a Quaker but also have
friends who are members of the Society of Friends, which runs the schools.
)They must comply with my rules:
)1. They must acknowledge that they are a sect, a cult,
I can't imagine Quakers having any problem acknowledging they are a "sect."
What the heck do you think they are?
A cult? It's my opinion that most small religious orders are in danger of
developing cult-like qualities, as perhaps most organizations are. I don't
know a lot about the inner workings of the Society of Friends here but
there's no doubt it's a bit clannish . . . kind of an "old money" thing in
this town. This is no secret, and I doubt they cringe or flinch every time
someone points this out about them, as has occurred numerous times in their
history. They're well established and well respected here and don't need to
be defensive. Their good works precede them . . . (a little hint for
Waldorf: try doing good works in the community *without* self-promotion, and
watch how your reputation will improve).
A small sect like anthroposophy is on the defensive when faults are pointed
out; I'm sure this is natural to some extent, but it's also maladaptive.
They need to look at criticism calmly and not panic.
Overall, quite a bit about the way the Quakers do things here works against
cultish tendencies coming to the fore. A bit off-topic here, but I'd venture
that simply not being secretive or defensive about their core doctrines has
a lot to do with (what I at least perceive to be) the overall healthiness of
the organization.
I have often used the Quaker schools here as a fine example for Waldorf to
emulate. There is no worldwide critical reaction against the Quaker schools
for the very simple reason (oh, please listen carefully!) that they are open
and honest about their mission and goals. They run QUAKER schools and never
bother trying to pretend the schools are anything but Quaker schools. There
is no reason they should obfuscate; people want to send their kids to the
Quaker schools here because they're good schools, and safe, happy
environments. That's what you do if you want to drum up business, and
minimize the number of unhappy customers. Also, try honesty. Quakers tell
you that in their schools, Quaker values are promoted; Quaker organizational
principles are followed; Quaker doctrines are taught to students. Quaker
beliefs shape the curriculum in numerous ways: this is something they are
proud of, a big selling point for the schools.
Many of Waldorf's problems will be over when anthroposophists figure out
that the way to stop the hubbub is to announce that anthroposophists run
anthroposophic schools. Anthroposophic values are promoted; anthroposophical
organizational principles are followed; anthroposophic doctrines are taught
to students. Anthroposophic beliefs shape the curriculum in numerous ways:
if they are proud of their beliefs, they should use them to sell the school.
My son's school has a big banner in the front yard, visible from several
main roads which converge at the busy intersection where the school is
located. It says: Peace Is The Way.
Can you imagine the Waldorf school putting up a big banner visible from main
roadways approaching the school: Karma Is The Way.
)and so anything they say is suspect.
Yes. Anyone, anywhere, anytime, is free in the US of A to announce that a
religious doctrine is suspect.
I find Quaker doctrines suspect myself and have had no problem making clear
to various people at the school whom I've either worked with on projects at
the school, or my son's teachers, that I do not subscribe to their
doctrines.
Maybe it's just that they don't have any doctrines I consider "crap." If
they did, I'd probably get worried, because I don't want my son affected by
somebody's crappy religious doctrines, like using karma to explain
playground politics . . .
One of the Quakers' central doctrines is nonviolence - which I admire.
Anthroposophy doesn't have anything comparable for me to admire.
)I somehow doubt that my Quaker friends would sit down and feel free to
)share their thoughts in such a forum.
The Quakers are *extremely* self-reflective. Sittin' down and criticizin'
themselves and each other is something they seem to do all day long,
sometimes, in my observation; in fact it is a little wearying, all the
"processing." If anything they go to the other extreme.
Anthroposophists by contrast "hold people in the light:" hypocrisy, denial,
projection, calling their critics "enemies," speaking of devils and
"shadows" working in people, etc. Vicious nonsense.
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:40:34 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
Just revisiting this point, Serena said:
)I wonder how friends of mine who belong to the local Quaker Society would
)feel if I invited them to a conversation dedicated to finding fault with
)their society.
I think that here, they would show up in droves, and be enthusiastically
thanking their critics. That is my experience with Quakers here. They are
focused on their mission, and how to achieve it.
Of course, the nature of any criticism against the Quakers would be quite
different. Perhaps I'll try to find some. I feel fairly sure there is no
talk of Quakers' obscure but troubling entanglements with Nazism because
there weren't any Quaker Nazis, and there are no obscure but troubling
Quaker writings on race. Hm! Anyone able to contradict this?
Diana
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:20:08 +0000
From: Brad Martin (bkmartin6 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
SerenaBlaue aol.com wrote:
) My key area of fascination is how people who hate a philosophy
) can dedicate themselves to studying it intensively, getting most
) of it wrong. The intensity exceeds that of many who study A.
That has become my fascination, as well. More and more, this line seems
to be about the particular psychology/motivations/life issues of the
individual WC Activists. It has gone beyond any constructive criticism
of Waldorf/Anthro, and into some strange realm of particular obsessions.
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:00:46 -0500
From: "Diana Winters" (diana.winters verizon.net)
Subject: RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
Is that right Brad? What do you know about the lives of anyone here? Do
tell.
Diana
)More and more, this line seems to be about the particular
)psychology/motivations/life issues of the individual WC Activists.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:09:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Steiner's predictions
Akua Desta (lioncell gmx.net) wrote:
Akua:
Harlan, 'dearest' and 'honey' in this context is nothing but mockery and
so is 'de facts ah de facts'. In favour of spreading the fun around,
huh? In regard to black and white facts and the distortion of history I
am not suprised Deborah is reluctant to trust white scholars and authors
in regard to that of African Americans and FN peoples. We have seen
socalled scientists and other 'renowned' authors distorting facts all
too often. Had it not been for African, African American, FN scholars,
activists, authors etc many of the myths spread about people of colour,
their history and culture would have gone unchallenged. Science is not
neutral, neither is the telling of historical 'facts'."
Thanks Akua. Very few people in the U.S. even know that February is Black History month here. One of the primary reasons for this institution of this, is because of the large volume of misinformation re: African-American people and our history and the perceived need to at least begin to correct it. (November is "Native American" month and was instituted for the same reasons.)
In the local Waldorf school, according to the Waldorf parents I have spoken with, nothing is taught re: African-American history and what is taught re: First Nations' history is based on stereotypes and cultural appropriation. Most of the Waldorf adults I know make money from the latter; for some it is their primary source of income in addition to their trust funds.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:14:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Staudenmaier inspires right wing politics
"J. Marshall Knight" (jknight4 socal.rr.com) wrote:
So to speak of the "loving education" seems contradictory to me especially when the whole process builds on a entirely racist foundation."
They admit as much in their own "Family Guide" where it states: "Neither Anthroposophy nor religion are taught in our school. They are the foundation under the building, which supports and defines the structure.” P. 90 [Marin Waldorf School Parent Handbook]
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:35:13 +0000
From: Brad Martin (bkmartin6 hotmail.com)
Subject: RE: Is "conversation" possible on WC?
Diana Winters wrote:
)
) Is that right Brad? What do you know about the lives of anyone here? Do
) tell.
) Diana
)
) )More and more, this line seems to be about the particular
) )psychology/motivations/life issues of the individual WC Activists.
Well, Diana, you all reveal yourselves over time with all of the
comments. A pattern takes shape. Many of the visitors to this site have
remarked on it one way or the other.
Let's see, civilization has been through slavery, civil wars, the
holocaust. The southern plantation culture quoted the Bible to justify
their actions. As a result, civilization has instituted checks and
balances to these injustices, such as the civil rights movement. We have
the separation of church and state to prevent a theocracy. Many people
and institutions have adapted to righting the wrongs, yet those same
people and insitutions may harbor vestiges of the ills. In large
measure, these vestiges of the shortcomings of human nature are held in
check.
Given this reality and recognition, how is it that across the United
States, there are inititiatives to bring holistic education, including
Waldorf, into the public square? (religious fundamentalists do not like
any of the holistic education) Mr. Dugan just posted a new public
Waldorf in the Cleveland area as a simple news item. How is it, in the
face of many decades of struggle to combat injustice, with many people
and groups in place to be vigilant, that the country is not threatened
or concerned with this alleged 'vicious, racist, anti-semitic, child
damaging' form of education.
How can there be massive 'duping' of the United States in the face of
this history? The answer is simple. Waldorf/Anthro has been factored in
to the larger equation, and found to be no threat. There are growing
pains, causing local problems. But there is no threat from
Waldorf/anthro that will reverse history.
However, there apparently will continue to be a number of Chicken
Little's who see the sky falling because of gnomes in the classroom, and
all the other perceived threats to civilization from this organization
whose numbers can't be more than in the thousands.
WC makes for an interesting circus to observe, however. It is a
microcosm of the struggle to become wise.
Brad
PS What you will see next is a post from one of the WC Activists not
addressing this fundamental observation made by a number of observers of
WC. Instead, there will be a petulant comment to me personally on the
order of, "Well, and what makes you think you are so wise?"
Therefore, we add to the principle tenets of the Loyal Order of Waldorf
Critic Activists, LOWCA.
-Thou shalt smugly ask for evidence and clarifications from those who
are not joining the chorus of Chicken Littles.
-Thou shalt ignore any and all evidence when presented which undermines
the leaky ship of WC/PLANS.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 18:25:25 +0000
From: L G Clemens (aesopo_aeternus yahoo.com)
Subject: Updating the disclosure
Dan, it has been a week now and still no sign this has been done.
You agreed to rewrite the Critics List policy such that it is fully
disclosed to members that in order to post on your list, they must agree
to allow you to archive their messages at the PLANS website.
How is this coming along?
Also, could you persuade PLANS to agree to include this rewritten
disclosure on its page devoted to this list?
Will you agree to abide by the PLANS policy that minors must receive
parental permission to post here? Will you agree to fully disclose this
policy on the list directory, alerting new subscribers? And again, will
PLANS agree to post this policy on the appropriate page as well?
Also, will PLANS agree to disclose to those responding to your
solicitation for feedback on the PLANS website that all such feedback,
including the author's name and email address, will be delivered to the
owner of the individually owned Waldorf Critics list for a very public
republishing?
And a final question. Have you agreed to the complete removal of Alex's
email address before moving it to the archives? You originally agreed
to in a "compromise offer". It seems unclear, however, whether this is
what you ultimately agreed to or whether you were inclined to simply
disguise it superficially to befuddle the data miners.
Linda
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:27:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Racism on this list
Harlan Gilbert (harlangilbert optonline.net) wrote:
Dear Dan, and others responsible for this list,
Please ensure that negative comments about people's gender, race,
religion, and ethnic background are unwelcome on this site. Stereotypes
about 'all blacks are...' or 'all whites are...' are simply racist. So
are comments that 'no person of the following
(gender/race/religion/ethnicity) may comment on...'. "
It would be a bit difficult to analyze Steiner (and therefore anthroposohy and WE) without quoting him and his supporters.
Deborah
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:25:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Gideon Mills (gideonmills yahoo.com)
Subject: Re: Resistance to Nazism in Europe
Barnaby McEwan (barnaby_mcewan hotmail.com) wrote:
Deborah, I have a problem with some of your statements on resistance to
Nazism in Europe. I'm going to try to address them without patronising
you in the way that Harlan has done recently."
It's impossible to patronize me; to do that would require me to respect that person's opinion and/or look up to him/her.
I have problems with some of Goldhagen's writing also. I am in the early stages of my reading re: that particular holocaust. Primarily from my interactions with some of its survivors decades ago, I concluded that very few (within the context of millions, which would allow for thousands of resistors) worked against the Third Reich. How else could it have gone as far as it did and why does antisemitism appear to be a virulent as ever? I have read some of the primary Church documents from that period and I cannot see where the support of the Churches (which isn't synonymous with their memberships) of the Third Reich can be argued anymore than the fact that Steiner based his religion on "race." I have photos of cardinals and nuns doing the nazi salute. The top figures in the Churches, as do some anthroposophists, that Hitler, etal. planned to obliterate them (not necessarily physically) too (which appears to be true) and that therefore they could not have been supportive of the
Third Reich. That might fly if there weren't so many primary documents showing otherwise, e.g. the Concordat. Likewise, if the vast majority of european colonists had not supported the U.S. government's written policies re: First Nations people, there would be a lot more "Indians" and Nations in the americas than there now are.
You wrote:
) I am finishing my reading of Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing
) Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust"...
A couple of reviews of Goldhagen's book, noting some fairly serious
flaws amongst its useful areas:
http://schulkin.org/goldhagenrv.html
"Its chapters on Police Battalions, especially chapter 7 on
) Police Battalion 101, provide an interesting and potentially
) enlightening counterpoint to Christopher Browning's Ordinary Men."
Precisely the part of that book that I would use. (I thought I had stated that in an earlier post, but apparently must have forgotten to.) Browning's is the next book on my list to read.
) Goldhagen argues that the road to Auschwitz was straight, and he
) pays little heed to the improvisations and uncertainties of the
) regime's first five years. Yet policies during that period aimed at
) the extrusion, not the extermination, of Jews, at their isolation
) and impoverishment, so as to drive them out of the country."
Actually, he does cover that in his books and that is a large portion of my new understanding of what was transpiring in europe pre-Third Reich and before the physical genocide became the "final solution." Also, not all high-ranking nazis or SS officers agreed with that "solution" even as they worked at implementing it.
"It isn't news that antisemitic murder is an older practice than Nazism,
and it's not at all clear to me that not many people in Europe defied
Nazism. My grandfather was one; he defied it by getting into a wooden
plane and flying low-level daylight bombing missions targetting the
canal systems of occupied Europe, for which he was awarded the
Distinguished Flying Cross."
It's a lack of definitions perhaps that is problematic here. When I use the word "few" I am thinking in terms of the millions of people who not only allowed (actively or passively) what happened to transpire, but of the thousands if not millions who benefited from it.
"This wrongly implies that the churches either approved of the regime or
were entirely oblivious to it nature. Those were not the only possible
Christian responses. As well as being one of the first to come to grips
with the extent of the churches' complicity, pastor Martin Niemöller was
an early member of the resistance:"
It's because they weren't oblivious to its nature that it behooved them to do something about it. The German Churches embraced racism - it was something to be proud of at that time. The president of Slovakia was a priest and actively supported the genocide as did many of the Croatian priests who personally participated in the killings.
Niemöller was an anti-Nazi who frequently vocalized his anti-semitic beliefs, e.g. "We speak of the 'eternal Jew' and conjure up the picutre or a restless wanderer who has no home and who cannot find peace. We see a highly gifted people which produced idea after idea for the benefit of the world, but whatever it takes up becomes poisoned, and all that it ever reaps is contempt and hatred because ever and anon the world notices the deception and avenges itself in its own way." [Martin Niemöller , Here I Stand! (Chicago: Willett, Clarke & Co., 1937), p. 195]
Niemöller did not believe that it was for humans to solve the "Jewish problem," but that it was only for god to do so and that was the view of many clergypersons. After WW II Niemöller spoke about what he as an outspoken anti-semite had contributed to: "Christianity in Germany bears a greater responsibility before God than the National Socialists, the SS and the Gestapo. We ought to have recognized the Lord Jesus in the brother who suffered and was persecuted despite him being a communist or a Jew. . .Are not we Christians much more to blame, am I not much more guilty, than many who bathed their hands in blood?" [Quoted in Gutteridge, The German Evangelical Church and the Jews, p. 304]
It is that sort of self-examination that is missing in, I believe, most people and clearly missing in those who defend Steiner, who never disavowed his anti-semitism or racialist beliefs. How could he? They formed the basis of his view of the world, past, present and future.
"With the one I'm replying to here, you insult the memories of many people who gave their lives in defiance of Nazism."
Even if I had to the power to do so, I would never do that. That would mean insulting the survivors I personally know.
"Did you mean 'not many non-Jews resisted by
the regime's antisemitism' or 'Historically, Europe has been plagued by
antisemitism which has often been expressed in intense violence, the
most horrific being the Nazi's use of killing-factories in their 'final
solution'. T