Tories offer state funding to schools linked to ‘occult society’


8:40 am - March 18th 2010

by Unity    


      Share on Tumblr

Liberal Conspiracy has obtained a set of notes taken at a recent seminar which show that the Conservative Party is pushing ahead with plans to provide state funding to a network of independent schools with close ties to a controversial occult society.

The notes were taken at a recent seminar organised by the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship (SWSF), an offshoot of the Anthroposophical Society, which exists to promote the occult philosophies of the German mystic Rudolf Steiner, and also suggest that a newly registered educational charity with close ties to the Conservative Party may be actively engaged in the promotion of Conservative education policy in such a way as to breach the Charity Commission’s regulations on charity involvement in political activity.

The meeting, which took place last November, was described as a ‘pre-election seminar about possible developments in the state funding opportunity for Steiner Schools’ and included seminars with Sam Freedman, the head of Policy Exchange’s education unit and a current advisor to Shadow Education Minister, Michael Gove, and Rachel Wolf, the Founder/Director of the New Schools Network and former education advisor to the Conservative Party.

According to the notes we’ve obtained, which were taken at the meeting, Wolf told SWSF members, during a session billed as ‘If the Conservatives win the election…” that her organisation performed three functions;

a) to give guidance to certain schools looking to become state funded;

b) to communicate the benefits of the [Conservative Party] policy being discussed today;

c) to research the policy by looking at the experience of schools in the UK and abroad that are involved in similar state funding arrangements

Wolf’s organisation, was incorporated in July 2009 and granted charitable status shortly afterwards (October 2009) with the objective of promoting “the creation of maintained charitable schools (where there is a need) with a view to improving educational opportunities for young people and in particular those with necessitous circumstances”. However, item b) on the list can easily, and legitimately, be construed as suggesting that Wolf and/or her organisation could also be considered to working to an unstated and undisclosed non-charitable objective of furthering the policy aims of the Conservative Party, a practice that is not permitted under charity law.

It is also evident that the existing Steiner Schools network, which currently draws the vast majority of its pupils from white middle-class families, is something of a mismatch with NSN’s stated objective of setting up new schools for pupils with necessitous circumstances.

Despite their obvious enthusiasm for the possibility of using the existing Steiner network as a quick win for their education policy, the Tories are also extremely wary of the network’s links to the Anthroposophical Society and occult philosophies of its founder, Rudolf Steiner, and in particular of Steiner’s theory of racial evolution through reincarnation which suggested that human evolve upward through the races until their reach the apex of human evolution as a blond, blue-eyed Aryan.

When asked if he could foresee any particular problems with Steiner schools receiving state funding, Tory education advisor Sam Freedman gave this [verbatim] response:

“Not in terms of the way we want to legislate, but, I mean I’m sure this is something that you all know about anyway, there’s a big PR issue, and if a lot of Steiner schools open quite quickly in the state sector, I mean I’ve been, erm, I’ve had all sorts of people writing to me just because they found out that I was coming to this meeting. Attacking. Attacking the Steiner Schools… Anonymously. Through social networking. People find out who you are, find out your account number and bombard you with articles, negative articles… This was pointing out all the things they think are wrong with Steiner movement, link after link after link. And that’s just from me coming to this meeting, so you have to be aware, well I know you’ll all be aware anyway, but this will be on a much, much bigger scale.”

The discussion went on to two specific PR issues 1) Accounts from parents who are or have been unhappy with the Steiner schooling system and those that have had negative experiences associated with the schools, and 2) the writings of Rudolf Steiner and Anthroposophy, of which the latter was though to present the greatest difficulties. Freedman then suggested that it was important that the schools should “explain to people quite strongly that they are not teaching what he [Rudolf Steiner] said” before likening the situation to the fact that not all Christians believe every word of the Bible.

This may, however, prove to be easier said than done.

One observer at the meeting asked Freedman whether or not a Conservative government would consider intervening with Steiner teacher training to ensure that the racist aspects of Steiner’s writings would not be included, to which Freedman responded to this question by stating that if the issue becomes a big PR problem for Steiner schools, and the state is funding those schools, then it will become a big PR problem for the state. He then suggested that the schools should seek to nip any potential problems with their teacher training in the bud, because any pressure on ministers from negative PR was likely to be problematic for the school, at which point the SWSF were offered free media training, by Rachel Wolf, to help them deal with the ‘PR issues’.

It was not, however, until the meeting’s afternoon session, which neither Freedman nor Wolf attended, that the full scope of the SWSF’s ‘PR Issues’ were made clear.

During that session, which was led by Emma Craigie, the eldest daughter of William Rees-Mogg and sister of ToryPPCs Jacob and Annunziata Rees-Moog –  it was suggested that the Steiner Schools Fellowship should give a clear and categorical rebuttal of the racist aspects of Steiner’s work and that clear statements should be issued to the effect that the Fellowship does not  human beings evolve through the races or that blond hair bestows intelligence, etc…”. However, the meeting also noted that it would be difficult to rebut Steiner’s occult beliefs generally because ‘many people throughout the Steiner schools system, especially teachers, strongly support many aspects of that belief system” and it was felt that many of these teachers would refuse to play ball with the SWSF’s PR strategy.

The notes also indicate that the SWSF members who attended the meeting were left with the clear impression that any backing from a future Tory government would also include help with any negative press:

It was also stated that it would be important for the Steiner schools Fellowship to make sure that they have a clear PR message to convey to the politicians themselves. This would reassure the politicians that the negative criticisms aimed at the schools are not justified, and if there were a public outcry about the schools, the politicians would themselves be in a position to refute the claims. Indeed, there would be a government PR machine available to help refute the claims.

None of this addresses any of the major issues that providing state funding to Steiner schools would raise, particularly in regards to the teaching of science, where Steiner’s bizarre pseudoscientific outlook is heavily favoured over the teaching of the scientific method and well-established scientific ideas to the extent that, less than two years ago, Stockholm University chose to pull out of providing Steiner-Waldorf teacher training courses after concluding that the course’s science curriculum contained ‘too much myth and too little fact’.

Bringing Steiner schools fully into the state education system would fly squarely in the face of Shadow Education Minister Michael Gove’s public statements on the importance of returning state schools to a more ‘traditional’ form of education and, particularly, on the value he professes to place on the natural sciences. Here, he recently suggested that the curriculum should, in future, be shaped by, amongst others, the eminent astronomer Lord Rees and the doctor and scientist Lord Winston, neither of whom would be likely to countenance the incorporation of Steiner’s ideas in the curriculum.

It would also make a complete mockery of David Cameron’s publicly expressed aspiration of making teaching ‘brazenly elitist’ by restricting access to teaching to only the best candidates, i.e. those graduating from a university with a minimum of a 2:2.

At the present time, many of those teaching in Steiner schools lack any kind of degree level qualification, least of all a teaching qualification, and until it ceased any further recruitment in 2009, the only degree level course in Steiner education on offer in the UK, at the University of Plymouth, required only two E’s at A level for entry onto the course. While the university is now looking at the possibility of incorporating a Steiner option in its BA course in Education Studies it seems unlikely that this will improve matters at all.  Our own analysis of the reading list given to students attending the existing Steiner course, for example, showed the existing course to be overwhelmingly dominated by the works of Steiner and other members of the Anthroposophical movement.

Of the ‘science’ textbooks on that list, only Gray’s Anatomy could legitimately be consider to belong to the scientific mainstream.

Although the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship routinely reject any suggestion that Anthroposophy, Steiner’s occult belief system, is being taught in Steiner schools, the overwhelming focus on Anthroposophical texts in the training of Steiner teachers suggest that this is, at best, a wholly naïve view of the reality of Steiner education. Open discussion of Anthroposophy may well be frowned upon to the extent that there are well-documented cases of parents being asked to remove their child from Steiner school after asking teachers too many awkward questions, but this does not mean that pupils attending these schools are not being quietly exposed to Steiner’s occult beliefs, particularly in those schools that offer secondary as well as primary education.

What these schools practice is not ‘brainwashing’ in the conventional sense of the term.

Rather the educational environment that schools provide is designed foster a very particular outlook, one paves the way for the later inculcation of Steiner’s belief system in those students who show themselves to be receptive to Anthroposophical ideas once they become adults. This process may be one of slow acclimatisation rather than overt indoctrination and, therefore, appear to lack any of the threatening connotations usually associated with cult/occult activity but the outcome for those who do fully absorb the carefully wrought atmosphere of these schools is ultimately the same.

The real issue that Steiner schools need to address here is, consequently, not that of getting out the right kind of PR and engaging in media charm offensives but that of making a clear and unequivocal commitment to teaching children to understand the real world rather than the delusions of a long discredited German mystic and his latter-day acolytes.

—–

Credit is due here to the UK Anthroposophy blog for publishing the full notes of this meeting, a PDF copy of which I’ve also uploaded here for the convenience of our own readers.

As per the statement made by UK Anthroposophy, these notes were taken at a publicly advertised meeting under conditions in which there was, to the best of my knowledge, no formal or informal ‘code of confidentiality’ and raise issue in which there is, so far as I’m concern, a legitimate public interest.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
'Unity' is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He also blogs at Ministry of Truth.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Conservative Party ,Education ,Science

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Shatterface

‘Liberal Conspiracy has obtained a set of notes taken at a recent seminar which show that the Conservative Party is pushing ahead with plans to provide state funding to a network of independent schools with close ties to a controversial occult society.’

Surely Catholic schools have been publicly funded since the Middle Ages?

Good grief, what next?

3. gastro george

I wouldn’t call Steiner schooling “occult”, but it’s certainly very odd. It seemed to appeal to a certain hippy type who liked the artistic and nurturing ethos. What wasn’t talked about much was the extremely proscriptive curriculum. For example children are actively discouraged from reading until they’re seven. I wonder how that is going to sit with the modern emphasis on literacy.

How many Green Party voters support Steiner Schools ? I can see a split developing between Labour and Green Party over this issue. Some Green Party voters , especially in W England may end up suporting the Tories.

5. ThetisMercurio

There’s a great analysis of the related UK Anthroposophy post and the UK Steiner Waldorf movement’s attitude to critics/parents at: http://zooey.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/rebutting-anthroposophy/

For example children are actively discouraged from reading until they’re seven. I wonder how that is going to sit with the modern emphasis on literacy.

That’s an aspect of Steiner education that, for purely personal reasons, I have no sympathy with whatsoever.

I was, I’m afraid, something of a prodigious little sod when it came to reading and had a reading age that was off the standard scale that was used in primary schools – which topped out at 13 – at the age of seven.

Frankly, I find it bizarre to think that the poor bastards who get sent to Steiner schools are only just getting started on Ladybird easy readers at the same age that I was reading RL Stevenson, Lewis Carroll and JRR Tolkien, and yet those schools claim to be all about stimulating children’s imagination.

If you want kids to exercise their imagination then get them reading Treasure Island or Gulliver’s Travels as soon as they’re up it.

As an aside, I don’t think the article (even on LC) needs the racist angle. Anthroposophy was banned by the Nazis and any racism in the philosophy seems to be almost accidental- a bi-product of the fact that it was obviously conceived by a fruitcake.

Overall, it’s a tricky one.

I would be in favour (as I assume you are) of publicly funded schools providing a purely rational and secular education. On the other hand, it is clear that there is a demand, from those who have some form of religious faith, to have their children exposed to its teachings in their schooling.

So, if we are prepared to allow some schools that are based on a religious platform to be funded we must allow them all to be so and rely on demand to be the measure of their funding and success.

Of course, if they are state funded they should not be allowed to slant the playing field, in terms of demand for places, by receiving additional funding from elsewhere.

Pagar, you said:

“As an aside, I don’t think the article (even on LC) needs the racist angle. Anthroposophy was banned by the Nazis and any racism in the philosophy seems to be almost accidental- a bi-product of the fact that it was obviously conceived by a fruitcake”.

I agree it’s clear he was a fruitcake, but the relationship between Anthroposophy and Nazism is much more complex than your statement suggests. Current research by US historian Peter Staudenmaier at Cornell University NY exposes a much murkier reality:

http://www.egoisten.de/diskussion/waldorf/waldorf.html

Didn’t the Tories already say they’d be willing to help fund Goldie Hawn’s school for those with too much money and so little sense that they want to reduce education to breathing exercises?

@ The admins need to delete waterman’s comment, what a knob.

@ LO

Done.

@7

When Blair went down the state-funding for religious schools route this became inevitable.

I know what you think of multiculturalism from your previous postings but I hope you’d agree that a secular state is essential for a multicultural society to avoid this kind of pitfall.

I think the key question here is whether the degree level course at the University of Plymouth in Steiner Education led to Qualified Teacher Status? If so, I think we can presume the actual methods being taught are considered educationally viable if abnormal.

As to the ideology of Steiner Education, I cannot directly comment. However, what I can say is that I was taught by a large number of teachers who imparted into me the message ‘socialism is an ideal system’ (regular readers may suspect with minimal success), not through any particular malice but because the school I went to was of a particular type at a particular time. Undoubtedly there were Conservative-party members etc on the staff, but the ideology of the school was very much in the left-wing mould, and this was the only generally expressed opinion. In a secular comprehensive (to the point we did not have religious assemblies). To be fair though, I had good teachers, so they were prepared to argue with my teenage self (very brave of them – I was probably objectionable) and accept my disagreements, but the fact remains that I went to a school with a particular ideological orientation. So in defending the secular system, remember that it does not actually produce value-neutral schools, but schools which impart particular sets of values reflective of staff, management and community to varying degrees.

However, what I can say is that I was taught by a large number of teachers who imparted into me the message ’socialism is an ideal system’ (regular readers may suspect with minimal success), not through any particular malice but because the school I went to was of a particular type at a particular time.

Oddly enough, my own experience at Sixth Form college ran in entirely the opposite direction inasmuch as the college would not permit a senior sociology teacher, who was known to be a member of a Marxist political party, to teach any part of the A level course that dealt with Marxism.

Everything else was fine, but when classes came to look at the work of Marx and other Marxist writers, his classes were taken over by another teacher.

@Watchman – as I understand it, the Steiner BA at Plymouth didn’t lead to QTS and has in any case been abandoned.

And no one is saying education delivers a values-free message, but there’s a difference between an education – whatever its values – that concentrates on delivering facts and one that has an alternative focus. What you’ve discussed is an attitude amongst staff – some staff – but not that staff were prepared to simply make stuff up, or to deny that rational, scientific analysis is the basis on which we should build our arguments and views.

Will @ 8

Thanks for the link and I take your point that there is more to it than I was suggesting.

However there is no suggestion, as far as I’m aware, that there is a racist agenda in Steiner schools and that is why I felt the racist angle was an unnecessary distraction to the main thrust of the article.

A bit like decrying the work of the Scout movement by arguing Baden Powell was a paedophile.

Actually, Pagar, the racism issue is somewhat more important that it might at first seem.

For one thing, what we have here is a situation in those who attended the meeting – who were, in the main, Steiner school administrators – openly admitted to concerns about the content of Steiner’s work that Anthroposophists – who make up most of the teaching staff – either flatly deny or try to bullshit their way out of when challenged.

Whether they realise it or not, this raises fundamental questions about the core premise on which these schools are based.

To understand why, its helpful to contrast Steiner’s philosophical teaching with Darwinian evolutionary theory.

Both have, at various time, been use to justify prejudicial views of the nature of race and its presumed influence on human development, however the impact of that on each is very different.

Darwin’s ideas are founded on a solid evidence base that stand independently of any speculative uses or interpretations of his theory to the extent that even though its now acknowledged that the Social Darwinists and Eugeniscists of the early 20th Century were wrong in their view of human evolution that in no sense affects or compromises the validity of Darwin’s theory.

Steiner, on the other hand, claimed to come by his idea by means of divine/spiritual revelation, including his ideas on childhood development and education.

If you accept that a part of that supposed ‘revelation’ was seriously in error, as is the case with his views on race, then you also have to question whether and to what extent the rest of ideas might also be wrong, which is why Anthroposophists routinely go to ridiculous lengths to avoid having to admit or accept that Steiner was talking out of his arse on the subject of race.

No, there is no ‘racist’ agenda to waldorf/steiner schools. However, they’re founded on anthroposophy. You can’t get rid of the anthroposophy. What is worrying is not so much that anthroposophy contain racist beliefs but the fact that anthroposophical and waldorf/steiner organizations fail utterly in dealing with their own history and the contents of the philosophy they subscribe to.

And although I agree there’s no racist ‘agenda’, I know that there have been a number of anthroposophically flavoured incidents of racism in waldorf/steiner schools. In the UK as well as in other countries.

This is something the waldorf/steiner movement must handle, and they must do so seriously. It’s not about PR. As long as they think it is about securing good PR, they’re heading in the wrong direction. They don’t acknowledge there are problematic issues at all — and that I find distasteful. It’s a bit like trying to cover mold by painting it over; it doesn’t solve the problem, it temporarily conceals it.

I attended a Steiner school from the age of 9 until GCSEs and I find all this talk of the occult a bit bemusing.

I am confident that I was not exposed to any kind of indoctrination and we were actively encouraged to ask questions and challenge assumptions. The school was secular to the point that when I continued to a local state sixth form for my A-levels I was shocked and appalled to find a vicar/priest leading assembly every Thursday. Until then I had no idea that non-faith schools were allowed to preach a religion to their students. It still seems very wrong to me now.

As for anthroposophy, I was aware that it was some kind of weird philosophy dreamed up by Rudolf Steiner but that was pretty much the extent of my knowledge or exposure. I do think it’s quite odd that Steiner teachers are required to study it and I think schools would do well to drop it completely, not just as a PR exercise.

All I can say is that I had a great time at school. I am still in touch with many of my classmates and, as we approach 30, we are all successful in our diverse fields of law, IT, agriculture, construction, TV, cinema & music.

For what it’s worth we are all atheists too.

Dave,

“And no one is saying education delivers a values-free message, but there’s a difference between an education – whatever its values – that concentrates on delivering facts and one that has an alternative focus. What you’ve discussed is an attitude amongst staff – some staff – but not that staff were prepared to simply make stuff up, or to deny that rational, scientific analysis is the basis on which we should build our arguments and views.”

And here the argument built on the original posting falls down, because nowhere has it been said that Steiner schools would be immune from the sort of inspection that all other schools receive (in my opinion, with too much notice), and therefore the consequent threat of closure/funding withdrawal/special measures if they are not teaching acceptable material. You could argue against any cloud-fairy/mystical/political movement ever opening a school on the same measures as you do now, but that ultimately comes down to ‘they can’t open a school, because their beliefs do not fit with mine’; unless you believe this to be a good way of deciding what to do (well, actually we all do, don’t we? But since we never agree on what is right…), perhaps just ensuring that what is taught meets certain standards and leaving it up to parents, teachers and governors how it is taught would be the best idea.

On the contrary Watchman, Steiner Waldorf schools are immune from rigorous inspection.

As well as receiving exemptions regarding EYFS, Ofsted no longer inspect them. As from September 2009 all Steiner Waldorf schools are inspected by the Schools Inspection Service, an organisation set up by the Focus Learning Trust to inspect Brethren schools.

Worrying to see each lay inspector attending is also connected directly with Anthroposophy.

http://www.schoolinspectionservice.co.uk/recent_inspections.php

22. ThetisMercurio

Tamlyn – if they dropped ‘it’ (anthroposophy) completely there wouldn’t be any Steiner Waldorf schools. Period.

Doesn’t it strike you as more than odd that they had to take it up in the first place?

You’re lucky to be successful. But so many of the Steiner students I know have had a very difficult time finding their feet outside these schools. They know they haven’t had an education, they know they’ve been cheated. And all the other schools that have to pick up the pieces know it too.

“On the contrary Watchman, Steiner Waldorf schools are immune from rigorous inspection.”

Yes, but has anyone said they would be immune if they were state funded? I am not talking now, but in the hypothetical future, hence my use of the future conditional ‘would be’.

@Watchman – depends on what you mean by ‘immune from rigorous inspection’ – the laws which govern what students can and can’t be taught form the national curriculum and the laws relating to sex education etc. As with religious schools, Steiner schools are immune from these laws as a very condition of their existence. If they weren’t, there’d be no room for their anthroposophical stuff.

So these things will certainly be immune, yes. Which means that all the things Unity highlights, which are curriculum based objections, would not be subject to scrutiny by HMI.

Dave,

I think you are forgetting that state funding creates an obligation. So whilst Steiner schools do not need to teach according to socially-agreed norms, Steiner schools in receipt of state funding will.

Remember that there is already one state-funded Steiner academy in the UK, in Hereford: http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/education/4697083.__5m_%20expansion_scheme_for_Herefordshire_s_Steiner_Academy/

This is not just a Conservative scheme. As the Steiner Fellowship said: “we have to be thankful to the Labour government for that.”

Pagar, whether or not you think the article “needs a racist angle” it is entirely relevant; tempting as it is to marvel at Gove and co hurling themselves into a huge free school wok and stir frying themselves into a mess, they are patently aware of Steiner schools very “special” version of spirituality, as the transcript of this meeting Unity has written about illustrates; they even artfully discuss how to bury it.
Unfortunately, Steiner schools are entirely dependent on their host organism anthroposophy, as the teacher training course shows in Unity’s earlier article here http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/11/10/more-tory-support-for-occult-society-schools/
And where I wonder do you imagine Steiner teachers like this one get their ideas?
bit.ly/9L5CSE
This mother “was told that ds was a ‘black soul’ put on earth in the incarnation of a blonde haired, blue eyed boy for the purpose of spiritual deception. That I was dark as I had committed evil in a previous life and that evil was living on through my child who was born in order to deceive.”

The bitly link didn’t work, here is the mumsnet source of the quote where a mother

“was told that ds was a ‘black soul’ put on earth in the incarnation of a blonde haired, blue eyed boy for the purpose of spiritual deception. That I was dark as I had committed evil in a previous life and that evil was living on through my child who was born in order to deceive.”

http://www.mumsnet.com/ReportTalkPost?topicid=1375&threadid=880326&msgid=17938692

The state funded Hereford Steiner Waldorf Academy is being built against under the guise of an ‘eco-school’ against great local opposition http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/mar/10/schools.uk2 which itself relied on a government report, the Woods Report on Steiner Education, one of whose three writers is an Angelic Reiki Healer and former student of anthroposophy, another worked as a Steiner teacher. The Report is flawed but even so manages to express concerns. There is not one independent research paper that supports Steiner’s pedagogy.

Hereford Steiner Waldorf Academy seems also to have survived a ‘parent boycott’ of the SATS tests that were in the end a condition of their funding. I note it was only the BBC who reported The DCSF said that in science, all pupils were working below the level of the test so were not required to sit it. I add that the children would have scored poorly, which would have looked even worse than their anarchist gesture of defiance http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8391766.stm

Looks like a clear breach of contract to me.

@ Cathy

OK I concede.

If there is racism in Steiner schools that is a serious issue and examples like the one you cite should be used to out the Tories for considering bringing them into the mainstream.

They should be left to rot on the vine- but along with all the other schools founded with the purpose of indoctrinating children with mumbo jumbo.

Agreed?

@Watchman – state funding only creates obligations if that’s what the Tories insert into the legislation. The whole point of worrying is that, based on the views Tories have expressed elsewhere on other subjects, their cavalier attitude to abolishing regulation without proper democratic constraints to replace it – which I’m in favour of by the way, I’m not a centralist – there’s no assurance they won’t simply gift the money over. Likewise to religious schools.

@Watchman – actually, in fairness, this builds on the Labour Academies programme – these schools get a great deal of independence and a great deal of state money, compared to limited monies (often withheld in breach of contract) promised by the partners who jump on the bandwagon to create some Academies.

It’s not a partisan issue, though as with many things, the Tories are likely to be worse and less secular.

Pagar writes in response to Cathy, who since long pursues a crusade on the net to try to smear Steiner Waldorf schools in seemingly all ways she can find (http://thebee.se/comments/MN.html) :

“If there is racism in Steiner schools that is a serious issue and examples like the one you cite should be used to out the Tories for considering bringing them into the mainstream.”

What Cathy knows quite well – but does not tell – a what a study by an independent criminological research institute has told, done some years on pupils in general in Germany, at the request of the German Parliament, to find out how wide spread racism and violence is among German pupils.

According to the study, the proportion of xenophobic pupils, hostile to foreigners, was by far the lowest among Waldorf pupils, 2.8%, compared to “Gymnasien” (High schools) 8.3%, “Gesamtschulen” 16.5 %, “Realschulen” 17.4 % and “Hauptschulen” (main schools) 24.7 %.

I doubt the situation is very different in other Steiner Waldorf schools, in other countries.

So, what is left in this smear campaign against Steiner Waldorf schools? Little but purely ideological secular humanist propaganda.

http://waldorfanswers.org/Myths.htm

Sune

This was not published, as it was intended, before the former posting, seemingly because of a limit to the number of links you can have in a comment.

Will recommends reading a Peter Staudenmaier as source on anthroposophy and the Waldorf movement.

Yeah, Staudenmaier.

He started his career as solo writer on anthroposophy ten years ago with a false, demonizing story about a lecture and lecture series by Steiner that he never – as far as I’ve seen has retracted – http://www.thebee.se/comments/PS/Staudenmaier.html and http://www.americans4waldorf.org/MrStaudenmaier.html

He then for years continued to play “historical scholar” on anthroposophy, based on – it later turned out – a B.A. in German literature. When I checked a number of the statements he made about published historical sources he claimed to describe, it repeatedly turned out they were untruthful descriptions of the published sources.

Since then – even since he started PhD studies at Cornell five years ago – I don’t believe one word he writes about published historical sources until I have checked them myself, down to the last comma, neither with regard to what the sources say, nor with regard to giving the full picture of the subjects he writes about, however detailed and reliable he sounds.

In the article that Will recommends, Staudenmaier writes for example:

“Waldorf representatives today sometimes claim that the Nazi state shut down the Waldorf schools in 1935. This is inaccurate. What did occur in November 1935 was an official order dissolving the Anthroposophical Society in Germany. The order did not close any of the Waldorf schools.” and later “The only Waldorf schools that were closed by the Nazi authorities were the Stuttgart school in 1938 and the Dresden school in 1941.”

What he very probably knows, but for some reason refrains from telling in his story, however balanced, detailed and nuanced it looks, is that in March 1936, the year following the prohibiton of the Anthroposophical Society in Germany, Waldorf Schools were prohibited from taking on new students, and made to shrink from that time on – http://waldorfanswers.org/AnthroposophyDuringNaziTimes.htm

The background is indicated in the motivation for the prohibition of the Anthroposophical Society the previous year:

“The methods of teaching developed by its founder, Steiner, and followed in the anthroposophical schools still existing today follow an individualistic and human-oriented education, which has nothing in common with principles of National Socialistic education.

“As a result of this opposition to the National Socialistic idea of Volk (Voelkische Gedanke), the continued activity of the Anthroposophical Society imposes the danger of injuring the National Socialistic State. The organization is therefore to be dissolved on account of its subversive character and the danger it poses to the public.”

Staudenmaier also describes a report from 1937 by a Baumler about Waldorf schools with

“Indeed one of the most critical passages in the document begins with praise for Steiner’s ‘deep and correct insights’ that lie at the basis of anthroposophy, while Baeumler’s conclusion commends ‘the great advantages of Waldorf pedagogy’. His reports were extremely enthusiastic about Waldorf’s anti-intellectualism, and the 1937 document concludes by endorsing the establishment of state-supported Waldorf ‘experimental schools’ and the development of a ‘modified Waldorf curriculum.’ ”

What he does not tell is what Baumler writes in his report:

“The understanding of man (Menschenkunde) which underlies Waldorf education contain deep and correct insights, which R.Steiner derived mostly from his exceedingly fruitful study of Goethe’s writings on natural science. The National Socialistic understanding of man can only be derived from race. To the extent to which race is a reality of nature, it could appear that already in the point of departure there lay an essential correlation between Rudolf Steiner’s understanding of man, and that of National Socialism: Steiner departs from the formative forces of Nature and bases school-education on the development of natural forces. One might thereby call his education “biologically” founded.

“However, if one were to attempt to introduce the concept of race as we understand it into this biological foundation, it would explode Steiner’s understanding of man. This is because National Socialism departs from the reality of blood, and from differences that exist between groups of people of differing blood. We grasp these differences not only biologically/anthropologically, but primarily historically, in that we turn our attention to those things which people of varying blood-heritage have produced and developed: the cities, works of art, inventions, scientific systems, etc.

“Rudolf Steiner’s understanding of man has no access to this historical thinking derived from knowledge of the reality of race. The position occupied in our world view by the man determined by the forces of race is occupied in the world view of Rudolf Steiner by the Spirit of Man, sovereign over all history. The thought of Rudolf Steiner is not biological-racist, but biological-cosmic.”

And the following year:

“Steiner is not only an epigone of idealistic philosophy, but he builds upon the philosophy of the intellect (spirit) in a decided manner. The fateful turning point occurs through the fact that Steiner replaces the theory of heredity with a different, positive theory. He does not simply overlook the biological reality, but rather consciously converts it to its opposite. Anthroposophy is one of the most consequent antibiological systems in existence.” (p.401)

“Objectives of pedagogical activity: According to the basic assumptions of anthroposophy, these objectives can only be humanistic, and not based on race or ethnic groups.” (p.403)

So, how reliable is Staudenmaier in his descriptions of anthroposophy and Steiner Waldorf education?

Thanks Sune, that’s very nice demonstration of what I was saying to Pagar earlier about Anthroposophists being in denial over Steiner’s views on race.

TheBee, Instead of addressing the concerns that are being raised, you consistently attack individuals personally as with Cathy and historian Peter Staudenmaier. It’s common knowledge that you contacted Cornell University in your attempt to discredit Peter – Cornell were mystified by your behaviour.

I think it’s really useful for readers to know you have been engaged in this type of behaviour for many years. Take Mumsnet for example, you registered pretending to be a mother (which you admitted, saying Eva52 was your anima) to derail the thread. Here is one of the many letters you sent to Mumsnet while parents were trying to discuss and support each other after distressing and confusing experiences in these schools.

“If I see her posting promotion of libel at Mumsnet once more, I won’t
tell you about it, but ask Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden
to contact you in cooperation with the legal representatives of The
Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland
(http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html), about your negligent
way of allowing libel to be published at Mumsnet and the one who is the
most fervent publisher of it to continue to publish at Mumsnet.”

You don’t have children, you are not a teacher, your only interest is to protect your brand, no matter how many little children get hurt.

[7] Pagar, I used to live next door to a very devout family of Shia Muslims. They were quite happy to send their children to the local comprehensive and leave the brainwashing to their mosque’s Saturday school (and themselves, presumably).

Aside from a few rather daft beliefs based on their religion they were very decent, rational, pragmatic and well integrated and didn’t regard people of other faiths – or none – as any sort of threat to their religious integrity.

The problem with the demand for state sponsored religious schools seems to me to stem quite often from people who are sufficiently insecure in their faith or otherwise so hysterical/illogical that they want to seggregate their children from all other influences.

It goes without saying that politicians should not be basing policy on the views of people like that!

@Unity

I agree with you about the value of early reading. But to be fair – the only three people I know who went to Steiner schools all turned out fully literate. Perhaps significantly, they are all (quite successful) artists. I just heard from one to whom I’d sent a link to this post. Her reaction: ROFL. She remembers no ‘occultism’ – just plenty of painting and drawing and creative play.

Will, you write:

“TheBee, Instead of addressing the concerns that are being raised, you consistently attack individuals personally as with Cathy and historian Peter Staudenmaier.”

You mean in contrast to you?

I address Cathy’s anecdotal story with what I know has been done in terms of research by independent researchers on the prevalence of xenophobia at Waldorf schools compared to at other schools. It indicates that her anecdote is little typical with regard to the situation at Steiner Waldorf schools as an indication of racism cultivated at or spread by the schools, its teachers and pupils. You know research that tells differently?

As for what Peter Staudenmaier writes at the site you recommend, I address it by comparing it with other sources on the situation he describes and on the sources he refers to as basis for what he writes.

It indicates that he continues to spin his stories in a similar way as he has done from the start of his writing career as solo author on anthroposophy some ten years ago, and I link to descriptions of how he has done this in the past too to demonstrate this.

As for my participation at Mumsnet, I used a pseudonym, like many, if not most do at Mumsnet, to get at least some small breathing space before I knew WCs would dive into the discussion, as they also did.

I started to participate, not to deny or try to refute any personal experience by any mother, but purely to address the defamation spread by the WC-crusaders on the net, using the repeatedly untruthful writings of Peter Staudenmaier as their maybe main tools, that may have hit them in the stomach, and that they then use to hit other people in the stomach the same way, out of reach from and overriding any thinking analysis of it.

41. ThetisMercurio

Gould, I remember the reaction of the teenage friend of my son, who was already pretty pissed off with the Steiner school he’d suffered for years, when I told him about anthroposophy. Not that it didn’t make sense: in fact it all suddenly made a great deal more sense. He did not roll on the floor laughing. Indeed I had to discourage him from using the welding gear he was so successful with at his new school (which is creative, unlike the Steiner school, where the drawing and the painting were prescribed) to make his previous Steiner teacher a new face.

It’s just not worth funding this nonsense, even if people survive it with the ability to become quite successful later on. It certainly isn’t worth making a tit of yourself over, as Sam Freedman must be thinking now. Politicians should put down the gnomes and back away now.

Unity, you write:

“Thanks Sune, that’s very nice demonstration of what I was saying to Pagar earlier about Anthroposophists being in denial over Steiner’s views on race.”

I don’t quite agree, that’s a simplified view. The issue has been and is of little relevance to most people engaged in any practical activity in some way related to or more directly based on anthroposophy.

At http://waldorfanswers I have tried to contribute to a number of aspects of this very complex theme that ideological critics are so fond of, not for practical reasons in terms of being a serious problem at for example waldorf schools, but for mainly ideological reasons.

It’s much more complicated than you first might think when you try to understand what he actually was taking about at different times and far from the simplistic picture that you may come to when you just read one or other quote promoted in anti-Steiner crusades.

http://waldorfanswers.org/AAntisemitismMyth.htm and
http://waldorfanswers.org/ThreeConcepts.htm

just scratch on the surface of this.

Regards,

As for Peter Staudenmaier, who — by the way — is not on a ‘crusade’ of any kind, I would encourage everybody reading this to not take TheBee all that seriously. He’s got a serious hang-up on Peter, and it’s turned into full-blown obsession over the years. Many of the critics have read the objections TheBee makes (although it wears you down eventually and you stop caring) — they are simply not reasonable, sometimes not even comprehensible. Peter participates regularly at the waldorf critics list (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/messages) and, unlike TheBee, responds to discussion and to questions. There are anthroposophists who welcome Peter’s research. But for anthroposophists like TheBee, the very fact that Peter researches the uncomfortable history of some parts of anthroposophy is enough to discredit him. Instead of reading what TheBee writes, I recommend that you read Peter’s article in Nova Religio, ‘Race and Redemption’.

The only person who seems to be on anything resembling a crusade here is TheBee himself. He’s ‘crusading’ against unsatisfied waldorf parents and students as well as against academics who study anthroposophy. At times, his ‘crusades’ even target other anthroposophists.

Pagar, yes, agree. Some anthroposophists use Steiner’s work as a kind of original text, referring to it in every instance; I challenge any sane person to feel strong enough to read much of it. The point is, they have a starting point in these schools that karma, reincarnation, etheric bodies etc are factual truths. But they don’t tell parents….they just say “it’s difficult”.

I don’t for one moment think the schools are full of racist bigots, there are actually some wonderful (misguided) people in these places; but the belief in incarnating through different races, however spiritual, sweet and gentle one is to those who haven’t reached the pinnacle of white skin is the most transgressive idea of all, (along with illness etc being a sort of “karmic lesson”, labeling children with a”temperament” and many other beliefs)

People like TheBee are worked up because they don’t want these “special” beliefs discussed by “materialists”. Some anthroposophists actually believe those criticising their world view, are driven by the forces of the devil (ahriman)

Sune, as Unity says, you are the epitome of many anthroposophists, in total denial and seemingly dazzled by Steiner’s words. As Will points out, you use personal attack as a defence, and seem to focus your obsession on specific individuals – (at least you have at last deleted my name & address from your rant; I do have young children.)
For some reason, it’s ok for you to use pseudonyms all over the web, but not those trying to escape your apparent stalking.

It is disingenuous too, to omit the fact that many parent forums which have had any negative discussion about Steiner waldorf have been threatened with libel action.

There’s no smear campaign from parents, only people trying to open up, discuss and understand what the Steiner Waldorf PR machine is trying to bury. If Steiner Waldorf schools, Camphill, biodynamic producers etc were honest about the spiritual pseudo religious world view they angle their initiatives from none of this would arise.

It’s the teachings of anthroposophy that include racist beliefs, and the danger lies in poorly qualified teachers taking Steiner’s words unquestioningly – this is a criticism from even those who seem to support Steiner education,

(“Many teachers, in our view, are too dependent on following the guidance and ideas of Steiner as if they were ‘sacred’ directions.” In Harmony with the Child – P & G Woods, who wrote the government document about Steiner schools)
and something that is actually happening in the schools ( see the mother on my previous post)

It seems Steiner schools are unable to disentangle themselves from the mothership anthroposophy, so will continue to use PR tactics to deflect from their true core.

45. Golden Gordon

Frankly, I find it bizarre to think that the poor bastards who get sent to Steiner schools are only just getting started on Ladybird easy readers at the same age that I was reading RL Stevenson, Lewis Carroll and JRR Tolkien, and yet those schools claim to be all about stimulating children’s imagination.

If you want kids to exercise their imagination then get them reading Treasure Island or Gulliver’s Travels as soon as they’re up it.
I can understand your view Unity but there is considerable evidence that countries, like Finland who concentrate on play centred activities from 1 to 7 outstrip systems that start numeracy and literacy in the early years.

But countries where formall schooling, i e traditional school subjects, come in relatively late in the child’s life — like Sweden and Finland — don’t do, in general, what waldorf people do. In a Swedish child care unit *there are books*. In a waldorf kindergarten, there are not. Nobody in their right mind would discourage reading and writing — much the opposite would happen. Children would be encouraged to do it, if they show aptitude and willingness. That’s not the case in waldorf, where books aren’t available and where children are actively discouraged or even forbidden to bring their own books or to write stuff. If Sweden and Finland did what waldorf schools do, they wouldn’t — not that I know if they do as it is — oustrip any other country in numeracy and literacy.

Well, I really came here to notify any readers who might be interested that Peter Staudenmaier, whom TheBee accuses of defamation and ‘repeatedly untruthful writings’, has responded to this discussion, see:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13446

47. ThetisMercurio

From Peter Staudenmaier’s response (link above):

‘Baeumler’s report nevertheless praised several significant facets of Waldorf
schooling, above all its anti-intellectual orientation, which he saw as fully
compatible with National Socialist principles. In this respect, Baeumler
portrayed Waldorf pedagogy as a significant advance and a much-needed complement to Nazi educational objectives.’

@47

In the interests of balance, it should be pointed out that that, the fourth paragraph of the repeated posting, was following three paragraphs detailing Baeumler’s problems with Waldorf schooling, including the notable “Baeumler’s 1937 memorandum is largely critical of Waldorf education from a
National Socialist perspective” (in the cause of balance, depending on how you count them two-four paragraphs follow detailing how this lack of clear message was characteristic of Nazi assessments of Waldorf schooling, and how this has been misinterpreted).

It is also an interesting question as to whether anyone has checked to see if British Steiner schools are essentially identical to the Waldorf schools of 1930s Germany, or whether they are merely inspired by the same philosophy, as this looks like a rather irrelevant issue.

In fact, assuming the answer is that there have been changes (because of the odd 70 years or so, never mind the different country…) I would suggest that linking Steiner schools to Nazism is a bit tenuous, although there is clearly a vigorous debate(/shouting of vesting interests) between interested parties about the history of the relationship between the movement and the Nazis.

@48

No, of course modern waldorf/steiner schools aren’t nazist. Or racist. There have been racist incidents, yes. But nobody would claim they’re happening all the time. I spent 9 years in a waldorf school. I can’t remember witnessing any racism, definitely no overt racism. (It doesn’t surprise me that it happens, though — anthroposophy includes, as has been noted, a doctrine on spiritual-racial hierarchies.)

This doesn’t mean there are no problems. Speaking of it on a general level, it’s more of a problem that the movement is trying to whitewash its history (even lying and threatening people to keep it concealed) than it is a problem with actual racist incidents, however painful they are for the individual.

Basically, when people like TheBee want other people shut up for criticizing or even for doing research on the movement — that’s the problem. Not acknowledging facts — that’s a problem. The waldorf movement — including TheBee — makes a big thing out of waldorf schools being closed by the nazis. It’s part of their PR. ‘We were humanitarians’ et cetera. Whether or not modern anthroposophists/teachers are racists doesn’t change the fact that waldorf’s self-image — as well as what they present to others — is incorrect. It’s about time somebody challenges this. That they can’t view their own history realistically does tell us something about their approach to knowledge in more general terms.

I spent 9 years in a waldorf school. I can’t remember witnessing any racism, definitely no overt racism.

Were there even any non-whites there though?

Dunc,

I went to an effectively all white school (less than 0.5% non white – or less than one per year), and there was a lot of racism. Expressed rather than actioned (in fact, I think the few non-white kids were treated the same by everyone), but it was clearly there.

@50 — nope, not really. There were a couple of adopted kids, one left early, another left after a couple of years (but quite a number of people left, so leaving in itself is not an indication of an underlying reason related to racism). Anyway, I wanted to sort of… refute an ‘accusation’ made by some waldorf defenders against us critics: that we presumably say waldorf schools are steeped in racism and all waldorf teachers are racists and act upon racist beliefs. I don’t believe that — and I have always stressed that I have no reason to believe any of my waldorf teachers were racists. It would be patently unfair of me to claim such things without any good reasons. Yet, views like ‘all waldorf teachers are racists’ have been ascribed to me and to many other waldorf critics. It’s just silly. In my opinion, they do this to discredit us: it’s a way of making us look like a bunch of people making absurd claims that simply can’t be true.

53. ThetisMercurio

@48

Watchman: The balance is there in the linked-to text, as you’re well aware. If I highlight this comment, it’s because the ‘anti-intellectual orientation’ mentioned is such a noted feature of Steiner education in the UK NOW.

If the careful elaboration of research seems to you to be shouting, I suggest it’s because it makes you uncomfortable. It certainly isn’t comfortable reading for anyone who had a child in one of these schools – not because the teachers were Nazis – but because the movement is so dishonest about its past. And a great deal else, as zooey will agree.

We’re talking about a Steiner Waldorf brand, sold to parents as one thing when in reality it’s quite another. The brand (and not the children) is the point here. As the full text on UK Anthroposophy indicates, Steiner school representatives at the meeting discussed by Unity suggested to the SWSF: ‘A PR officer would be required to place positive stories in the media, and also to counter the stream of negative ones.’ So they’re expecting a stream of parents who have had negative experiences, to which no one must listen? What are these people?

So frankly we might all feel uncomfortable, even without knowledge of the Waldorf movement’s previous unpleasant friends. Personally, I think a great many people will find Peter’s research relevant, which is why there’s such an attempt to discredit its value.

When charges of racism in Waldorf and/or anthroposophy are leveled, defenders invariably respond by saying something to this effect: “Well, OK, what RS said here could be construed as racist today, but such utterances are few and far between; and besides, after all, most of all, he was just a ‘man of his time’.” Why, even the indefatigable “Bee” who buzzes into these discussions to sting the likes of Cathy and Peter Staudenmaier, has actually quantified this defense. He has verily calculated a percentage ratio of the total number of words of alleged racist statements Steiner made divided by the total number of written and spoken words published in the entire collected works: circa 15 books and 6,000 lectures. I vaguely recall The Bee’s figure as something like: 0.0025% — (although, you know, Sune, if it’s that low, I would suggest better expressing the ratio as ppm = parts per million.)

As an anthroposophist myself since 1976 and a former Waldorf teacher, I too, once subscribed to that “quantum defense.” However, in recent years, I have come to see the total irrelevance of that argument, because it is clear that racial differentiation is not peripheral to, but rather absolutely fundamental to the doctrine of anthroposophy itself.

And for my evidence, I must quote Rudolf Steiner’s own words from a lecture he gave in 1923 to the workmen re-building the burned down Goetheanum in Switzerland. Now some of you recognize the more spectacular contents of this lecture, such as this diagram showing how the brains, bodies and skin colors of the 3 main races: Negro, Asian and Caucasian are constituted. http://tinyurl.com/ynw9vd

This is the famous, or infamous, lecture, whose title is “Color and the Human Races” and which goes into great detail about the differing racial characteristics of the 5 basic human races: Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, White, and how the White race is the “spiritually creative race,” and all that.

However, no one ever quotes the very beginning of the lecture, where Rudolf Steiner himself — as any good lecturer would do at the beginning of a public talk — gives the important reason why we need to study these racial characteristic and differences in the first place.

So while the sketch with the 3 racial figures, their various brain characteristics correlated with skin color, etc., is quite sensational and draws all the attention of critics and defenders alike, the very purpose of the study, i.e. the intention of the lecturer, is overlooked.

After greeting the audience in the first paragraph, Rudolf Steiner then provides the rationale and the overview of the coming lecture: (given March 3, 1923, part of GA 349)

(I put my own translation first, followed by the German original.)
————————————–
“But now, in addition to this European skin color, we also have four other major skin colors. And we want to investigate that today a little bit, because, in reality, we may only understand all of history and the entire [past] social life, as well as today’s social life if we can really delve into the racial characteristics of human beings. And only then will we be able understand everything spiritual in the true sense [of that word] — if we occupy ourselves first [and foremost] with how this spiritual essence in human beings functions precisely through skin color itself.”
————————————————
Nun haben wir aber außer dieser europaischen Hautfarbe noch vier hauptsachliche andere Hautfarben. Und das wollen wir heute ein bißchen betrachten, weil man eigentlich die ganze Geschichte und das ganze soziale Leben, auch das heutige soziale Leben nur versteht, wenn man auf die Rasseneigentumlichkeiten der Menschen eingehen kann. Und dann kann man ja auch erst im richtigen Sinne alles Geistige verstehen, wenn man sich zuerst damit beschäftigt, wie dieses Geistige im Menschen gerade durch die Hautfarbe hindurch wirkt.”
———————————————-

You really can’t get any clearer and more foundational/fundamental than that statement. The reason anthroposophists need to study skin color is so that they can truly understand the spiritual essence of all human beings, as that essence expresses itself through skin color!

Yet I also see Steiner’s racism as earnest and benevolent, very akin to the idea of seeing the Negroes as the “white-man’s burden.” Thus, the Caucasian race is not superior in the Nazi sense, but its spiritual maturity is more like that of a Chief Executive Officer of a corporation, a kind of benevolent “parent-figure” of the other races, that is to say, the white race can best manage society and take care of the more child-like races, especially the Negro race, and even show great “compassion” for the present “elderly and dying” American Indian race.

Tom Mellett
Los Angeles, CA

I think some of you are being a little naive.If teachers are being taught that Black people are at the bottom of the heap spiritually then it stands to reason that some of them will of course be racist.More than some.The Steiner school my children attended was in fact full of racism.The fact that these schools do not have PHSE classes,access to recorded music or computers does not help and they are far behind state schools in regards to access to multicultural literature etc.There is a reason that posters on the white supremacist site Stormfront recommends these schools.If Black families were aware of the background of Steiner’s belief system I don’t think a single Black child would be visible in their classrooms.We left because of the racism from other children but I never blamed the children,the problem was the teachers didn’t know how to handle the racism.I was told some years after we left about the belief system and things fell into place,a lot of things made sense.

Inker/Tom “Yet I also see Steiner’s racism as earnest and benevolent, very akin to the idea of seeing the Negroes as the “white-man’s burden.” Thus, the Caucasian race is not superior in the Nazi sense, but its spiritual maturity is more like that of a Chief Executive Officer of a corporation, a kind of benevolent “parent-figure” of the other races, that is to say, the white race can best manage society and take care of the more child-like races, especially the Negro race, and even show great “compassion” for the present “elderly and dying” American Indian race.”

Tom,an Anthroposophist and former Steiner teacher thinks earnest and benevolent racism is preferable to any other kind.
Tom I don’t want your race to parent my race !
Thankyou for so eloquently illustrating what many Anthroposophists and Steiner Waldorf teachers believe.

It is the pedagogy that is racist, no matter how you try and dress it up.

Hi Tom, anthroposophist since 1976(?),

Nice to see you here, too, Tom. How many times have you pointed to your main contribution to anthroposophy on the net now, a scanned picture from one of the approximately five lectures on the issue of “race” in the traditional sense of the appr. 4,000 published lectures he held (the second of two morning coffe break lectures to workmen at one time, not on “race”, but on colour as a phenomenon in nature and in the world of man as a natural being)?

For some reason you don’t mention his qualitative comment on the actual importance in Steiner’s view of the external quality of “race”, or gender for that matter, for what we are as humans (out of the whole nature of anthroposophy, which is the main basis for Steiner Waldorf education):

“… as regards … what is independent of our bodily makeup we are all individually made; each one of us is his or her own self, an individual. With the exception of the far less important differences that show up as racial or national differences … but which are (if you have a sense for this you cannot help noticing it) mere trifles by comparison with differences in individual gifts and skills: with the exception of these we are all equal as human beings … as regards our external, physical humanity. We are equal as human beings, here in the physical world, specifically in that we all have the same human form and all manifest a human countenance. The fact that we all bear a human countenance and encounter one another as external, physical human beings… this makes us equal on this footing. We differ from one another in our individual gifts which, however, belong to our inner nature.”

Rudolf Steiner: Education as a Force for Social Change (in GA 192), Hudson 1997, lecture of 23 April 1919.

http://waldorfanswers.org/WRacismMyth.htm

If you want to sing this duet again, Tom, just drop me a line, and I’ll be there, just for you 🙂

Dave, you wrote:

“Thanks Sune, that’s very nice demonstration of what I was saying to Pagar earlier about Anthroposophists being in denial over Steiner’s views on race.”

I don’t completely disagree with you in the sense that I have only commented on other comments in this discussion, and not on what you write in the article as:

” … Steiner’s theory of racial evolution through reincarnation which suggested that human evolve upward through the races until their reach the apex of human evolution as a blond, blue-eyed Aryan.”

When you have met this description, that is a construction, among other things based on mixing up comments by Steiner on “race” in three different senses (see earlier comment), you can forget that you have already, years ago, commented on that specific myth. It is one of three different myths discussed at http://waldorfanswers.org/OnSalonArticle.html

The primary source for the myth is a mixup of a comment he very probably made on two other senses of “race” (not the five ones), with the common understanding of it (Blumenbach’s).

As for Steiner’s view of how we actually have reincarnate in different cultures at different times through history, he describes what he saw as one of these global reincarnation patterns in some lectures, shortly described at http://thebee.se/Steiner/reincarnation-globally.htm

The issue (Steiner’s view of how we move through different cultures through history) is much more complicated that you may think.at first.

Regards,

Greetings, Sune, The Swedish Bee! I have finally come up with a decent sobriquet for you. It is Anthropo-Sophro-Sune from the Greek word “sophrosune” which means “moral sanity, prudence, common sense” — it is the opposite of “?hubris”)

Now before we start playing our duet, I want to alert all readers who do not understand German that my nickname here is “Imker” which is the German word for “Beekeeper.” However, since you, The Bee, have called attention to my favorite Steiner sketch, then the animal kingdom reference has shifted, as I will explain below.

——————————-

BEE: Hi Tom, anthroposophist since 1976(?),

IMKER: Do you know, Mr. Bee, with your 40 years added on to my 34 years in anthroposophy, we almost extend back to Steiner’s death year of 1925! Just 11 years short, a mere sunspot cycle! (Actually, we reach back to 1936, which is quite a big year in Peter Staudenmaier’s PhD dissertation on “Anthroposophy during the Nazi Era.”)

THE BEE: Nice to see you here, too, Tom. How many times have you pointed to your main contribution to anthroposophy on the net now, a scanned picture . . .

IMKER: You see, Anthropo-Sophro-Sune, you Beacon of Reason and Common Sense, that tiny scanned picture I use is a cape because I am the Matador and you are the Bull. (That’s the new animal reference). When I shake the cape, you cannot resist charging it. As I twirl the cape and you charge by it, you leave a wondrously illuminating trail — not of BS, (that’s too crude) — but rather of RS, that is, statements of Rudolf Steiner about race and evolution and reincarnation, etc., to which you give your unique and thorough anthro-spin, and thus enable the Critics to sit back and watch as you are doing their job for them!!! 😉

BEE: . . . from one of the approximately five lectures on the issue of “race” in the traditional sense of the appr. 4,000 published lectures he held . . .

IMKER: Aha! So may I calculate the new Steiner Coefficient of Racism (SCR). That would be: 5/4000 = 1/800 = 0.00125 = 0.125% However, I did suggest to you the units of parts per million, which would be 1,250 ppm of racist particles in the GA. Hmmm, that sounds a little high. For PR purposes, I suggest going back to 0.125% but please don’t mention the power of homeopathy in such small doses!

BEE: . . . (the second of two morning coffee break lectures to workmen at one time,

IMKER: This lecture really causes you problems, doesn’t it? I mean why else would you grasp at straws to somehow mitigate its content, by here, for example, trying to imply that because RS was not officially lecturing to a staid, august audience in a clean well-heated lecture hall, that his words are therefore not valid or true? This argument cuts both ways, Sune. You see, your implication that Steiner was speaking “off the cuff” to the workmen, that he was unprepared, merely ad-libbing, perhaps even joking to a crowd “at recess,” as it were, could also imply that he might be so candid as to let truths slip out that he would have self-censored in a more-prepared lecture situation.

BEE: . . . not on “race”, but on colour as a phenomenon in nature and in the world of man as a natural being)?

IMKER: As matador here, I really should allow you to re-consider this statement, as you are quite vulnerable here to the matador’s sword being plunged between the bull’s shoulders into the heart. So let me get this straight, Sune. You are actually saying here, that the “forbidden color lecture” of March 3, 1923, GA 349, is NOT about race, but rather about the color of human skin independent of race? And yet the title of the lecture itself is “Farbe und die Menschenrassen” = “Color and the Human Races.” Ole!

(THE AUDIENCE CHEERS AS MATADOR TOM SPARES KILLING THE BULL WHICH CHARGES PAST AND CIRCLES ROUND FOR ANOTHER GO.)

BEE: For some reason you don’t mention his qualitative comment on the actual importance in Steiner’s view of the external quality of “race”, or gender for that matter, for what we are as humans (out of the whole nature of anthroposophy, which is the main basis for Steiner Waldorf education):

IMKER: But that is your job, Sune, not mine, and you do it so well!!! Thank you again for leaving this wondrous trail of RS wisdom.

BEE QUOTING STEINER: “… as regards … what is independent of our bodily makeup we are all individually made; each one of us is his or her own self, an individual. With the exception of the far less important differences that show up as racial or national differences … but which are (if you have a sense for this you cannot help noticing it) mere trifles by comparison with differences in individual gifts and skills:

IMKER: Oh God, Anthropo-Sophro-Sune, we make such a great team! What an excellent Steiner quote to enhance my point!

Consider the audience RS is speaking to there in Stuttgart, but actually anywhere at any time during the “lecture years” (1903-1924). I would estimate the racial composition of the audience as 98% Caucasian. That also happens to be the %age of Caucasians at all the long-established (i.e., K-12) Waldorf schools in the USA (with the exception of the Detroit WS, which Sr. Joanna can speak to). Indeed it is also the same percentage I estimate for the Critics of Waldorf and anthropoposhy, including your favorite “hat-typ av grupp in Kalifornien” (see, I’m learning Swedish from you!), which I affectionately refer to as “Swami Dan and the Duganandas.”

The point I’m making is that we Caucasian Anthroposophists (and critics thereof), all understand well what is “independent of our bodily makeup,” i.e., what makes us individuals with all those “gifts and skills,” but it is precisely the non-white, or colored races that do not see racial differences as “mere trifles.” Au contraire, the colored races’ sense of individuality is almost entirely defined by their racial characteristics — according to RS in the racial color lecture of March 3, 1923!

BEE QUOTING STEINER: . . . with the exception of these we are all equal as human beings … as regards our external, physical humanity. We are equal as human beings, here in the physical world, specifically in that we all have the same human form and all manifest a human countenance. The fact that we all bear a human countenance and encounter one another as external, physical human beings… this makes us equal on this footing. We differ from one another in our individual gifts which, however, belong to our inner nature.”

Rudolf Steiner: Education as a Force for Social Change (in GA 192), Hudson 1997, lecture of 23 April 1919.

IMKER: Yes, yes, of course, we are all humans and all equal. That’s Caucasian Rudolf Steiner talking to his 98% Caucasian audience, and probably 98% Caucasian readership of this lecture over the next 8 decades!

But the real “sticking point” as it were, is those differences among “individual gifts” which “belong to our inner nature.” According to RS, the forces of this inner nature are very strong in the colored races, especially in the Negro race, which he spoke of as having powerful instincts “simmering” or “cooking” in their metabolism that would act to hinder them from seeing the equality of humanity that is more easily seen by us Caucasians! After all, why else would RS designate our white race as “the race of the future, the spiritually creative race?” Thus we have a spiritual mandate to be as paternalistic and maternalistic as possible to help the races less fortunate than ours to find their individuality beyond the confines of race and nation.

BEE: If you want to sing this duet again, Tom, just drop me a line, and I’ll be there, just for you 🙂

IMKER: Anthro-Sophro-Sune, I must say, that you are one hell of an accommodating Bull! We should rehearse more and take this show on the road, maybe to all the Waldorf school in the USA. Reminds me a bit of Wild Bill Hickock’s Wild West extravaganzas in the USA in the 1880’s — during Rudolf Steiner’s wild and crazy Bohemian atheist days in Vienna.

Some nonsense.

But not all nonsense, I take it! 😎

Thomasius

63. Notahobbit

a question for Sam Freedman, you said:

“I’ve had all sorts of people writing to me just because they found out that I was coming to this meeting. Attacking. Attacking the Steiner Schools… Anonymously. Through social networking. People find out who you are, find out your account number and bombard you with articles, negative articles… This was pointing out all the things they think are wrong with Steiner movement, link after link after link”.

Your use of the word ‘attack’ is puzzling, are you suggesting parents, children and former students previously involved in Steiner schools have no place making contact with you (as Gove’s special education adviser) to express concerns? Do you think parents with small children would spend their very precious spare time making up stories, misinform and tell lies about what happened in these schools?

Sam, Steiner Waldorf schools are not accountable and giving them public money wouldn’t change this as proven in other countries http://zooey.wordpress.com/links/ I can only guess as to the amount of people who have made contact with you, probably after years of frustration As for people remaining anonymous, numerous threads demonstrate what happens when people who have had bad experiences try and express concerns that the movement wishes prospective policy makers and parents rather not see. I and others are happy to meet in person if you need verification.

The main problem which I hope you are beginning to understand, is that nobody outside the movement is able to make an informed decision based on an afternoon visit and the promotional literature, whether it’s Michael Gove, Rachel Wolf or a prospective parent – unless they have all the facts. The facts are very difficult to get hold of, especially when complaints aren’t registered or lost for example or that the information regarding reincarnation, karma and Steiner’s unusual views on race are deliberately kept away from the public eye or deleted when posted on a forum.

Surely our concerns must be taken seriously, especially when it involves the welfare of children.

The page recommended by Notahobbit documents some of the conflicts beween individuals and cultural groups of different orientation since some decades.

In this case it especially promotes libel, defamation and badmouthing of Steiner Waldorf education and schools, much rooted and promoted in anti-Steiner campaigns cultivated on the net since almost 15 years by the mothership of all such campaigns and crusades, the Waldorf Critics (WC) in SF/CA/US – http://thebee.se/comments/plans1.html

http://americans4waldorf.org/Summary.html provides a summary of the campaigns.

Notahobbit also writes that it is difficult to make an informed decision about Steiner Waldorf schools only based on an afternoon visit to a Steiner school. With today’s wide spread internet access in large parts of the world, the best source on the net on Steiner Waldorf education probably is the English language Wikipedia article on the subject and related subjects – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_education

After a mediation some years ago, it was ruled that the editors of that and all related articles only were allowed to use reliable published sources for the articles. WCs don’t like that as it has made it impossible for them to use the articles as tools in their anti-Steiner crusades.

65. Jane Blammer

is thebee part of the future Tory ‘government PR machine available to help refute the claims’ of parents and ex-pupils of Steiner schools? Via Wiki? Heaven help us…

If you want to import TheBee to be a part of the Tory government, let me know and I’ll have him shipped in a cardboard box from Stockholm to the UK. Me and my UK friends can arrange for some Gnome or other to pick up the parcel from the post office closest to the Parliament.

TheBee and his friends wrote the Wikis.* He’s also the person behind the website Waldorf Answers. It’s all part of the waldorf PR machine. This problem is universal — they try to control all information there is on waldorf. Thus articles like this one is immensely important — at least somewhere the other side of the story is available to some small extent. Most people probably go away from waldorf in silent disappointment, some of us don’t. We are labelled ‘crusaders’ and sometimes even worse things.

(*And regarding the mediation he refers to, there is another side to that story… I’ve never been involved in the wiki wards, but I do know TheBee is misrepresenting reality…)

Notahobbit recommended my website. TheBee, a Swedish anthroposophist, then decided to accuse me of libel and defamation. It is not the first time. (In fact, it’s the second time this week.) I have responded to it, but I don’t think it has much to do with this blog; thus, only a link: http://zooey.wordpress.com/2010/03/25/sune-nordwall-accuses-me-of-libel-and-defamation-again/

Nokwezi wrote in #55.

If teachers are being taught that Black people are at the bottom of the heap spiritually then it stands to reason that some of them will of course be racist. More than some. The Steiner school my children attended was in fact full of racism.

Hello Nokwezi,

Before I address some of your concerns about the anthroposophy behind Waldorf, I’d like to connect you with a UK parent who also had similar racial problems at her Waldorf school. Her name is [redacted] and she has made a few comments on the UK Anthroposophy blog here, where a parallel discussion about Steiner racism, Waldorf and school funding is going on. I’m sure you would have a lot to talk about together.

http://ukanthroposophy.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/plymouth-university-axes-steiner%5C-ba/

Imker:

Don’t post the names of vulnerable individuals on here without getting their permission first, please.

70. Notahobbit

Looking at the transcript of the afternoon session, it states:

[excerpt starts] An observer was asked which Steiner quotes he/she had seen online and elsewhere. The oberver gave the example of the spiritual hierarchy of the races. It was acknowledged that the Steiner schools Fellowship should give a clear and categorical rebuttal of these aspects of Steiner’s work. Clear statements should be made stating “We do not believe that human beings evolve through the races. We do not believe that blond hair bestows intelligence, etc…”.

It was felt that there may be some difficulty in making a blanket rebuttal of all Anthroposophy because many people throughout the Steiner schools system, especially teachers, strongly support many aspects of that belief system. If teachers were asked to make a blanket rebuttal of Anthroposophy, many of them may not do this. [excerpt ends]

Bearing in mind the core belief of anthroposophy is that the soul reincarnates through a racial hierarchy by virtue of ones karma, how do the trustees of the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship plan to address this issue?

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/ContactAndTrustees.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=295104&SubsidiaryNumber=0

Notahobbit writes:

“Bearing in mind the core belief of anthroposophy is that the soul reincarnates through a racial hierarchy by virtue of ones karma, …”

That’s a construction built on a number of not penetrated sources, and mixing up at least three different senses in which the term and concept “race” appears in the works, mostly lectures, by Steiner.

One is

‘Peoples and races are after all, merely different developmental stages in our evolution toward a pure humanity. The more perfectly that individual members of that race or people express the pure, ideal human type – the more they have worked their way through from the physical and mortal to the super sensible and immortal realm – the “higher” this race or nation is.’ R.Steiner ,’How to Know Higher Worlds’.Anthroposophical Press 2008 Pg 201

The chapter from which the quote is taken is an essay, published in the immediate historical context of a discussion in a journal, not of “races” as they were understood in Steiner’s own time. The temporal context in the journal was another series of essays, that were a discussion of among other things “races” in two other senses, the theosophical concept of “root races” and “sub races of Atlantis”.

In Steiner’s view, the theosophical concept “root race” refers to the stages in the development of our present solar system, not to “races” in a biological sense, and the concept of “sub races of Atlantis”, refers, not to “races” as they were understood at Steiner’s time, but to the sequential increasingly human forms that developed during Tertiary and Quaternary time up to holocen.

For “race” in those senses, and especially the increasingly human forms that developed from beginning of Tertiary up to Holocen, the description is quite to the point, if you look at the paleontological remains that reflect this development.

For more on this complicated issue, and the at least three different concepts of “race” you find in Steiner’s works (lectures), see http://waldorfanswers.org//CenozoicPeriod-AtlantisMyth.htm and http://waldorfanswers.org/ThreeConcepts.htm

What is the “core belief” of anthroposophy?

That we as humans all are primarily spiritual beings, that what we are as individuals largely and increasingly is something that is independent of any external characteristics we may have, not only with regard to “ethnic group”, or gender, but also age in an external sense, that we all have the responsibility to form our destiny as humanity, but also that it is possible to develop the present research methods of natural science to include research into and understanding also of our spiritual origin and nature, not only children of our spiritual origin, but as a grown up humanity, responsible for our own future.

Sune

Children of our spiritual origin, well well. As ‘spiritual beings’ we have different ‘spiritual origin’, or? How do you figure natural science, with it’s focus on the material and material processes, could be used to explore the immaterial, stuff like the different ‘spiritual origins’ of children?

What about the accusation of libel and defamation, Sune? I think this needs to be addressed. You say my blog’s link page is somehow a vehicle for libel and defamation. I’d like you to substantiate these claims. Or I advice you to refrain from making them in the future.

73. ThetisMercurio

So, Sune, it’s a kind of spiritual, ‘holistic’ racism, which makes it all right: a woolly, silky, ‘natural’ racism, superior to other forms of racism. A biodynamic, homeopathic racism. Only someone with Special Knowledge can understand how benign this racism really is. Having studied Mme Blavatsky’s theosophy and fully internalised (with deep integrity) the concepts of “root races” and “sub races of Atlantis”, we can all now think with our hearts, abandon Reason and throw ourselves off the cliff of sanity into the full flow of the endarkenment.

I feel so nourished.

74. Notahobbit

Thebee, may I suggest you take your Spiritual Science and Tory PR machine elsewhere, it has no place in our schools.

If I lived in the U.K, I probably would not vote for the Tories and have no interest in promoting them.

76. Notahobbit

damn it Sune, that’s going to be a hell of a disappointment to the Rees-Moggs.

Sune/TheBee, how about replying to me. You accused me (comment #64) of maintaining a collection of links that was, in your estimation, libellous and/or defamatory. If you don’t reply, I urge everybody reading to interpret this as a retraction of your earlier accusation. That is good. But I’d prefer if you’d be explicit. It is, after all, a pretty grave accusation.

Alicia, you write:

“You say my blog’s link page is somehow a vehicle for libel and defamation. I’d like you to substantiate these claims. Or I advice you to refrain from making them in the future.”

I tell it as I see it, that your link page, mentioned and linked to in the discussion here, not in all countriees, but in some under some circumstances, promotes libel and defamation of Waldorf schools, not only in a factual, but also in a legal sense.

Why shouldn’t I?

Sue me.

Sune,
You have chosen to sign your posts with your real name on this blog. I have not. I ask that you refrain from posting my real name here.

Thank you. You believe that my list of links is libellous and defamatory. Also ‘in a legal sense’.

Do you understand that there are consequences to making claims like these? Either you act on your assertions. Have you? I urge you to do it, now. Or your accusations were unfounded, in which case you are libelling me by repeatedly making them, by repeatedly asserting that I’m committing crimes*. I’ve told you so several times in the past. You apparently think you don’t have to take the consequences of your accusations. I suggest you rethink.

*you and I live in Sweden, Sune. I don’t care about your guesses as to what the laws are in Iran, Uganda, Canada or Greenland. I’m sure I’m breaking laws of many jurisdictions (for example, I go out in public without a chaperone and shake hands with unknown men, I’m sure I’d be stoned to death in some places for that) — it’s just that since I don’t live in these jurisdictions, it doesn’t need bother me. And it is libellous of you do claim, eg, that I’m breaking the laws of Iran, if you’d claim that. I am under no obligation to heed the laws of Iran, thus I’m not doing anything wrong if I break them!

Sune, as for suing — YOU say I’m committing crimes. YOU contact the police or the district attorney’s office (whatever is appropriate).

Words.

82. Notahobbit

Thebee. it was me who linked to Zooey’s blog.

I think the page I linked to is a very important one as it demonstrates just how widespread the Steiner Waldorf problem is, it is worldwide.

You cannot sue every parent and child for telling the truth, however hard it is for you to bear. Every prospective parent and policy maker has the right to see Zooey’s blog, just as they have a right to know what happened in the meeting detailed above, it’s in the public interest. It’s called making an informed decision.

As for suing, we all know the movement is not accountable, that is why you’ve all managed to get away with it for so long.

I think I already have commented on most of what you write.

Sune/TheBee: “Word.”

I’m looking forward to the lawsuit you’re preparing, Sune. Shall we notify the Swedish Waldorf school federation? They may need to begin thinking about damage control.

The bee

…and nowhere is the sense of anti climax quite so intense as when reading your comments… like listening to the child whose dog ate the homework.
I think Zooey has you in missile lock, and you can see that resistance is futile…

How do you explain though, where Steiner waldorf teachers get their ideas about dark skin and blondness here-
” ds was a ‘black soul’ put on earth in the incarnation of a blonde haired, blue eyed boy for the purpose of spiritual deception. That I was dark as I had committed evil in a previous life and that evil was living on through my child who was born in order to deceive.” ?
Coincidence?

86. Notahobbit

Apologies, it appears in some parts of the world the Steiner Waldorf movement have indeed been held to account.

A teacher sued the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America together with the Rudolf Steiner school of New York for racism, I understand she got a confidential settlement and a gagging order. Factual allegations include:

26. The College of Teachers learn and follow as part of their teacher training Steiner’s principals, racial ethnography and racial evolution theory.

27. As part of their teacher training, each of the aforesaid College of Teachers at the NY Rudolf Steiner school learned a principal tenant of Steiner’s racial evolution theory followed by Defendants is that people of color can’t develop on their own and must be educated by whites. This principal is based upon Defendants reasoning that Europeans have always been the origin of all human development.

28. Defendants’ racial ethnography theories are based upon racial stereotypes of negroes and people of color.

29. Steiner’s racial evolution theory followed by Defendants believes the Aryan race is the great root race of humanity.

30. Steiner’s racial evolution theory followed by Defendants espouses that the black race is underdeveloped and equates with the infant/baby stage of human development while equating the white race as the adult race.

Document here: http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/charmainecomp.pdf

@Unity in #69
Sorry about that. I had assumed that since she used her full name and described her situation on the other blog that it would be OK to “network.”
Now I see that I have some “Beekeeping” to attend to.

Not sure ordinary beekeeping is enough. You need to arrange for beehive dungeons to keep some bees locked-up in. It would, I’m sure, bee very much in the interest of the world community of bees, the international beesophical society, I believe it’s called…

So many animal metaphors; so little time! What with buzzing bees and charging bulls, but now what come to mind is a favorite phrase that was made popular by Sarah Palin in the 2008 Presidential campaign in the USA, to wit: “putting lipstick on a pig.”

Now the eminently sane Anthro-Waldi-Defender, whom I call Anthropo-Sophro-Sune, has made claims about Rudolf Steiner’s usage of the originally Theosophical terminology of the “Root-Races” in describing the evolution of the human race up to this point.

You will notice that Sune locks into one and only one aspect of the concept of “Root-Races,” that is to say, its temporal aspect. I quote the Bee from #71:

The chapter from which the quote is taken is an essay, published in the immediate historical context of a discussion in a journal, not of “races” as they were understood in Steiner’s own time. The temporal context in the journal was another series of essays, that were a discussion of among other things “races” in two other senses, the theosophical concept of “root races” and “sub races of Atlantis”.

In Steiner’s view, the theosophical concept “root race” refers to the stages in the development of our present solar system, not to “races” in a biological sense, and the concept of “sub races of Atlantis”, refers, not to “races” as they were understood at Steiner’s time, but to the sequential increasingly human forms that developed during Tertiary and Quaternary time up to holocen” (sp. Holocene)

Now it is certainly true that word “race” has many temporal connotations in both German and English. We speak of “foot-races” and “horse races” and a “race to finish the project,” etc. But now imagine if you were a horse racing aficionado, and your friend Sune was working as a technician at the race course involved in maintaining the photo-finish camera and recording the times the horses ran. You call him on his cell phone and ask him about a particular race that just finished. “Sune, who won the race? Who placed? Who showed?” Sune would answer: “the registered times were in a range from 2:45 through 3:08. And one horse fell and could not complete the race.”

The point is that, yes of course, there is a temporal aspect to the concept of root-races and sub-races in Atlantis, but not exclusively temporal. You see, the racehorses do have names, and some racehorses are faster than others, and some racehorses even drop out.

By the way, here is the listing of the latest horse race run at the Post-Atlantean Evolutionary Steeplechase. (Their owners are the planets from which the horses were trained in their Pre-Lemurian configurations. I include this because Sune did mention the connection with the solar system)

Win: Caucasian (owned by Jupiter) time: 2:45
Place: Mongol (owned by Mars) time: 2:46
Show: Malay (owned by Venus) time: 2:49
4th: Negro (owned by Mercury) time: 3:08
Dropped out of race: Redskin (owned by Saturn) time: none (failed to finish race)

(By the way, if you are a betting man or woman, I have an inside tip for you for the next Root-Race. Rudolf Steiner predicted a humongous war in the future between the White Race and the Yellow Race. Who will win? Well, you’ll need to do some research. Hopefully I can put together a “Tip-sheet” for you that is in the English language. Ohhh, those Germans know, but they hardly ever tell!!! 😉

Cathy:

“I think Zooey has you in missile lock, and you can see that resistance is futile…”

Riight …

“How do you explain though, …”

Lose talk.

91. Notahobbit

Just taken a look at the latest newsletter from the Meadow School for Steiner Education (17/03/10) and see Emma Craigie is still pushing ahead for state funding:

Steiner Schools Funded by the State?
Emma Craigie

“If we have a change of government after the next election it is likely to become possible for more Steiner schools to receive state funding. If you are interested in the helping the Meadow School to explore this possibility please get in touch with me via xxxx@gmail.com or xxxxx. I am drafting a proposal to form a support team to research whether this would be a good way forward for the Meadow School and what it would involve”.

http://www.meadowsteiner.somerset.sch.uk/download/buzz.pdf

Equally alarming is a disclaimer at the bottom of the newsletter, why would a school need a get out clause?

The Meadow School for Steiner Education Ltd.

Registered Office 18-20 High Street, Bruton, Somerset, BA10 0AA

Telephone: (01749) 813176

E-mail: admin@meadowsteiner.somerset.sch.uk http://www.meadowsteiner.somerset.sch.uk

Registered in England and Wales No 3709542 Registered Charity No 1077488

Disclaimer

Please note that the contents of this publication do not necessarily represent those of the

Meadow School or of the Steiner Education ethos in general.

Cathy: “I think Zooey has you in missile lock, and you can see that resistance is futile…”
Sune: Riight …
Cathy: “How do you explain though, …”
Sune: Lose talk.

Sune, how dare you tell Cathy to shut up! What’s the matter, Herr Biene, is her truth giving you heartburn?

When all TheBee can say is ‘right…’ then you know he’s exactly where Cathy said he was… And the same goes for his other reply ‘lose talk’. He really can’t reply. How’s he going to explain something like that? By speaking of the ‘spiritual origins of children’… or what?

As for the horse-racing, he’d refuse to read the registered times. He would reply, referring the spiritual teachings of equineosophy, that all horses have been foals of spiritual origins, they have destinies and as adult horses they have responsibilties to the future of the equine community.

Unity,

Could you (or anyone reading this in the UK) see yourself as a possible TV or video producer? Consider this scenario guaranteed to create such PR problems for the SWSF that they would have to call another summit meeting with the Tories to deal with it.

The sketch of the 3 racial figures, which Sune says is my only contribution to anthroposophy in my 34 years of being an A-pop, comes from a specific lecture, which I have termed: “The Forbidden Colored Lecture of March 3, 1923.” Why? Because this lecture has been completely bowdlerized, absolutely deleted from the English edition of the lecture cycle by the publishers, Rudolf Steiner Press (at that time in London, now relocated to Forest Row.)

The Rudolf Steiner Press has a facility somewhere in Forest Row, and I assume there would be a room open to the public with books on display. I couldn’t find it on GoogleMaps, but the address is Hillside House, Lewes Road, Forest Row, East Sussex RH18 5ES.

One of those books — with the excised forbidden lecture — is called “From Limestone to Lucifer” and the RS Press description is here:
http://www.rudolfsteinerpress.com/pages/viewbook.php?isbn_in=9781855840973

The book itself can be read on Google Books here
http://books.google.com/books?id=R8gFmQwvejIC

There you can go to the opening page with the publisher’s info. This is the only mention of the missing lecture. It says:
——————————————–
First published by Rudolf Steiner Press 1999

Originally published in German (with an additional lecture dated 3 March 1923) under the title . . .
—————————————–

Suppose you were to visit the bookstore with a camera person recording, and pick up that volume and ask a clerk about the missing lecture, in the hopes that someone on the editorial board might come out and explain why they deleted a whole lecture from this book, Have this printed summary of the lecture with you, to let them know of the contents:

SUMMARY of Lecture 3 given March 3, 1923, in Dornach, GA 349, pages 52-68
———————————————————–
“Color and the Human Races.”

— Skin color and other characteristics of the black, white, yellow, brown, and copper-red races of humanity.
— Malayans, Native Americans, and Hindus.
— The white population of America.
— The European proves, [while] the American asserts.
— The future of American civilization.
— Anthroposophy must be developed out of the spirit.
— In Europe anthroposophy is cultivated in a spiritual way; the American cultivates it in a natural way.
— Spiritism as an American product.
— On Wilson’s theories.
— The white race is the race of the future, the race of spiritual creativity.
— On the first chapter of “die Kernpunkte”.[Core Points of the Social Question]”
==============================

If pressed for time, you might want to shorten it to:
————————
“Color and the Human Races.”

Skin color and other characteristics of the black, white, yellow, brown, and
copper-red races of humanity.
Malayans, Native Americans, and Hindus.
The white population of America. . . . .
The white race is the race of the future, the race of spiritual creativity.
—————————

Anyway, you get the gist,. I think it would make quite compelling television, especially if someone at RS Press tried to explain why you were being prevented from finding out what Rudolf Steiner had to say about all the different races.

Oh, and of course, don’t forget to have a magnified copy of the 3 racial figures sketch which appears in the middle of that lecture. http://tinyurl.com/ynw9vd

This is the famous “cape” that I use to provoke the bull charges of Sophro-Sune.

And here is the English translation of the labels in the figures:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NEGRO FIGURE———ASIAN FIGURE———CAUCASIAN FIGURE
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hind-Brain———————Mid-Brain——————-Fore-Brain
——————————————————————-Thinking Life
———————————-Feeling Life
Instinctual Life
(or Willing Life)
Black—————————-Yellow————————-White
Copper-Red——————Brown
===============================================

Whatever happens, make sure it eventually gets up on YouTube so we can all watch
it.

Tom Mellett
Los Angeles, CA

Zacharias Martin, misanthrope, plays games.

“Sune, as for suing — YOU say I’m committing crimes. YOU contact the police or the district attorney’s office (whatever is appropriate).”

Check your lecture notes on BrB, 5 kap, 5 § again. I (very probably) can’t sue you for your link page. Why pretend I can.

96. ThetisMercurio

Then Sune, could you sue mumsnet for allowing mothers to post links on their forum to exactly the same sites as linked to from zooey’s blog? As you threatened to do, as quoted by Will @37:

“If I see her posting promotion of libel at Mumsnet once more, I won’t
tell you about it, but ask Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden
to contact you in cooperation with the legal representatives of The
Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in the UK and Ireland
(http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html), about your negligent
way of allowing libel to be published at Mumsnet and the one who is the
most fervent publisher of it to continue to publish at Mumsnet.”

Do you have the permission of the SWSF in the UK to issue threats to mumsnet in their name? If not, we would expect the SWSF in the UK to deny any involvement with your actions. If they do not do so, we will assume that they are indeed complicit.

Since you are clearly not in any position to pursue your threats, we would expect you to withdraw & allow parents in the UK to discuss their experience of Steiner Waldorf education on whichever forum they please, and to read the comments & observations of others which may assist them in important choices they make about the future welfare of their children, unmolested by your attempts to deny them these rights. If Steiner Waldorf education is as good as you believe it to be, if Rudolf Steiner as great a seer, you should expect your movement to flourish in spite of any negative comments. If not, your movement’s customer base will inevitably fall away.

It is most important that the international Steiner Waldorf movement (of which the SWSF is the UK branch) is honest with its customers about exactly what it is that informs the pedagogy of Steiner Waldorf education. It’s no surprise that the recently published Norwegian book critical of Waldorf is called ‘What they do not tell us’. Nor that one of the most telling comments on UK’s mumsnet was ‘You don’t expect a school to lie.’

I know you’re Zooey’s closest friend on the net. It’s ok.

TheBee:

“Check your lecture notes on BrB, 5 kap, 5 § again. I (very probably) can’t sue you for your link page. Why pretend I can.”

Because that is what you are pretending, and I am challenging your habit of pretending such things. I *know* you can’t. (And believe me, I need no lecture notes to know that.)

I wasn’t pretending I could sue you for it.

When I described and describe your link page as promoting libel, defamation and badmouthing of Waldorf educstion and schools, I refer to the factual meaning of the words, what they normally mean to people, not the limited legal sense of the words in the sense of what specifically I can sue you for, that you then play mind games about.

@86 – notahobbit – the points from the US court case are so shocking

http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/charmainecomp.pdf

There is a thread on the US site mothering where a Steiner Waldorf teacher describes their training which never fails to shock me

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=368640

It’s essential that these things are addressed, questioned and monitored. How can a government think of funding schools when they have apparently no idea of the content of the training courses?

thebee describes a statement by a distressed mother, @85, whose child has suffered considerable upset, as “loose talk”.
He illustrates beautifully the attitude of Steiner teachers and anthroposophists – dismissal, implications of dishonesty, and that only their version is the truth.

thebee, people are telling their true experiences however unpalatable that may be for those protecting the schools.

TheBee,

then you need to choose other words. Libel and defamation are legal words. You have been using these words as legal words too, repeatedly. Given your history of threatening people with lawsuits, you can’t exactly expect readers to be able to diffrentiate between you using the words libel and defamation casually and when you’re using them legally. You can’t be unaware that people will interpret your words as referring to their legal meanings. (I believe this is your intention. And now you’re backpedaling.)

I think you ought to give this thorough consideration, because your actions look rather foolish.

I didn’t describe what the mother said as lose talk. I was referring to what the teacher said.

What the teacher said was ‘lose talk’? How? Why?

Back pedaling not one bit. Who do you think helped K with your email address when she wanted to get in contact with you? I almost regret I did.

TheBee,
Well, my email-address is available on my blog and numerous other places! And I’m certain J Lj has it too, through his blog. Although, had she asked someone else, she would have actually got the *right* email-address. (You gave her an old, disused one.) Nonetheless, thanks. It was good you did the right thing. Not that I can spot any decent alternatives to giving the address.

I gave her the one I had been using to discuss with you. I did not know any other email address of yours.

When she told she wanted to get in contact with you, I told I had an email address, and provided her with it.

I wouldn’t call it ‘discussing’, but yes, that’s the address you’ve been using occasionally. I suppose you got it from the critics list, long ago.

Anyway, it was good and thanks (but it is off-topic here, I’d say).

Sune, is this loose talk too?

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=368640&page=28

A Steiner Waldorf trained teacher comments on a quote from Sune Nordwall’s site Waldorf Answers – Myths about anti semitism

“Anthroposophy completely rejects every form of racism and anti-Semitism, including the white Aryan supremacy propagated by National Socialism and its later offshoots, and membership in the Anthroposophical Society is incompatible with membership in any organization advocating nationalist or racist ideals.”

I have seen that. But it makes me wonder why they still taught it to ME, and continue to use all of Steiner’s supremacist writings and lectures in Anthroposophical study groups.

Why do teachers still speak from the perspective of racial supremacy -as was just quoted by another poster- inside faculty meetings and child study group meetings? This is why I brought up the topic in the first place because I have already seen that staement…but it seems inconsistent with what is still being practiced.”

111. Notahobbit

Thebee, during your correspondence with Mumsnet @37 you also used the legal word ‘libel’. Though your admission in post @99 in your reply to Zooey you say that your meaning is “not the limited legal sense”.

It is in my opinion disingenuous of you, a form of blackmail to use such legal terms in communication with a parenting forum. I believe you have deliberately used legal terminology in an attempt to discredit parents who wish to discuss their experience of Steiner schools, including some very unpleasant and distressing experiences which were not adequately dealt with by those who should hold responsibility.

It is terrifying when parents discover that the teacher appears to carry no duty of care when things go wrong, nor the College of Teachers, nor the trustees, nor the SWSF for what has happened to their children. That is why you find so many parents looking for support from other families and seeking to fully understand the philosophy that informs the pedagogy and behaviour of the movement. When you have found such discussions, you have reported various posts demanding they be deleted.

I am baffled as to why you think you have the authority to decide what Mumsnet should and shouldn’t publish. Mumsnet is a parenting forum, a place where parents seek support and discuss a multitude of subjects including education.

Does the lawyer you refer to in your correspondence with Mumsnet, Percy Bratt of Bratt and Feinsilber in Sweden give you full permission to use his name to imply the threat of legal action?

Does the law society of Sweden know you have been using the name of Percy Bratt and law firm Bratt and Feinsilber to possibly intimidate moderators into thinking you are threatening legal action?

I wonder what responsibility the firm Bratt and Feinsilber would carry if this was brought to the attention of the public?

http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&u=http://www.bflaw.se/Default.aspx%3FtabIndex%3D5%26tabId%3D90&ei=C1uuS4j4K5Cw4QbXvMDdDw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CA4Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dpercy%2Bbratt%2BBratt%2Band%2BFeinsilber%26num%3D100%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den

I see you love me. I love you too, wolfs, sorry – guys.

Can’t remember having asked Mumsnet to delete any other postings than ones that directly or indirectly promote this site: http://americans4waldorf.org/Myths.html Mumsnet seemed to agree with me.

Oh, Peter Staudenmaier — http://www.arts.cornell.edu/history/graduate-students-dissertation.php — surely a grad student writing his dissertation about the history anthroposophy must be libelling and defaming anthroposophy? That is what you’re saying. You’re saying that research on the anthroposophic movement’s history is libel and defamation. And that when people, who are discussing waldorf/anthroposophy on Mumsnet, refer to texts by this historical scholar, we’re ‘promoting libel and defamation’…? Right?

You are also saying that, e g, the article published in Nova Religio (see: http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/nr.2008.11.3.4?cookieSet=1&journalCode=nr) was libellous and defamatory? The article which won an award for excellency (see: http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/nr.2009.12.3.4?journalCode=nr)? Right?

I just want to get this straightened out. With or without awards or dissertations or whatnot, Peter’s articles are worth attention on their own merits. At the same time, I think it’s worth pointing out how absurd it is for TheBee to persist in these bizarre accusations of libel and defamation towards someone who has chosen to study the history of anthroposophy.

I have checked his writings against a number of the sources he refers to as “basis” for what he writes. Have you?

WCs love him like anti-Semites love David Irving. It would be a disgrace to Cornell if they provided him with a PhD.

I know your arguments. I have read them. They are ridiculous.

Peter’s arguments and references, however, are always top-notch. Anybody wanting to ask him questions about his research is very welcome to do so, I’m sure. He’s always forth-coming. (See the waldorf critics list.) If we ‘love’ him, as you so hysterically put it, it’s because we do like what we see. Someone who reasons well, who argues his stances clearly and fairly, somebody who actually has something to teach us… well, I like that. And I’m sure others agree.

As for disgrace, you’re disgracing yourself here. And, thank dog, no university provides you with anything as a reward for your ‘work’.

That you compare Peter S with David Irving is pretty telling. Of course, it isn’t telling us anything about Peter, but about you and your arguments.

He’s an outstanding intellectual con artist, in his way of mixing truths with untruths and distortions, that you don’t start to look through until you have started to check his statements against the sources he refers to as basis for them.

I have. You have avoided the question if you have, every time I have asked you, and I think hinted at some examples where you could start.

http://www.thebee.se/comments/PS/Steiner-on-Heinrich-von-Treitschke.htm and http://www.thebee.se/comments/PS/Steiner-on-JuliusLangbehn.htm are just some very few of them.

http://defendingsteiner.com/refutations/Top_10_Things_Wrong.php is another. They are just hints at the problem. Some of the other pages I have mentioned provide other examples.

He’s good! A word magician.

119. ThetisMercurio

Indeed, the reputation of Peter Staudenmaier’s supervisors at Cornell is on the line, as with any dissertation. I’m sure they’re well aware of that.

When Peter’s dissertation is published, its conclusions can be disputed. It’ll be an unusual honour for a dissertation in an obscure area of early 20th century esoteric history to have so much attention focused on its veracity. It may even make him famous.

Oh dog, give me patience.

Yes, TheBee, I have checked your so-called arguments. They are as ridiculous as they are endless. You’re repeating the same crap you’ve been obsessing about for the past 10-15 years.

I have seen Peter S’s replies to some of the stuff you’ve hurled at him. (I’m surprised he’s bothered to be so polite with someone so rude as you: look, you’re the one making nazi allusions.)

There’s no doubt in my mind who’s more accurate, more truthful and more intellectually honest.

121. ThetisMercurio

Peter Staudenmaier comments on this discussion:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13482

‘One of the current concerns in that discussion is anthroposophist disgruntlement
at scholarly attention to their movement. As we’ve seen recently on this list,
esotericists often reject the very notion of historical scholarship on figures
like Steiner and on movements and worldviews like anthroposophy. Sometimes
anthroposophists claim to have ‘checked the sources’ that historians cite, and
are then outraged to find that their own reading of these sources differs from
scholarly analyses. In reality, there is nothing surprising about this, as
anthroposophists do not approach Steiner’s texts as historical sources in the
first place. It can nonetheless be instructive to look into the particular
complaints that Steiner’s admirers lodge against historians and other scholars…”

(btw I’m not on the Waldorf Critics list. Not everyone skeptical of Steiner ed has to be on there, unless membership occurs automatically with the first dissenting thought.)

The devil lives in the details.

After I have treated two specific texts as historical sources and documented in full at two pages what they actually say as basis for what Staudenmaier writes about them

http://www.thebee.se/comments/PS/Steiner-on-Heinrich-von-Treitschke.htm
http://www.thebee.se/comments/PS/Steiner-on-JuliusLangbehn.htm

Staudenmaier writes in response

“anthroposophists do not approach Steiner’s texts as historical sources”

but does not discuss the specific examples I have documented but moves on to discuss something else, that youi can’t judge the truthfulness of (either) until you have read the sources he refers to in full to find out.

That’s Staudenmaier in a nutshell. Lighthearted, elegant mind manipulation at its very “best”. He’s master at it.

A word or two about this line of tedious post; it is not new. Here is a reply to one of Sune Nordwall’s rants by Dutch write Peter Zegers

“Nordwall’s confused accusations (again)
by Peter Zegers

http://archive.indymedia.be/news/2002/08/28171.html

“is a mystery to me on what exactly Nordwall’s view is based…..He
even gets elementary facts the wrong way……maybe he just wants to discredit me by alleging that I see every person as an antisemites (Nordwall writes: “Mr. Zegers, you need not see enemies of Jews and Jewry everywhere”). I never said
such a thing, I have always been very specific.”

I dare say Zegers is right – Nordwall seems intent on “discrediting” those who write unfavourably about Steiner; the evidence is all over the place. Mostly people can’t be bothered with him, and I agree with Zooey that Peter Staudenmaier is unfailingly patient and polite.

This all of course, deflects from the main issues in Unity’s article, and the questions asked by various posters.

@37 If mumsnet was bombarded with masses of emails which threatened to have them contacted by Percy Bratt and legal representatives of the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship, were both of these parties aware of these threats in their name?

@70 The concern shown for the “damaging of the brand” rather than the content of Steiner’s texts is a question that clearly needs adressing. It has been documented that Steiner teachers all too often use the words of Steiner as a sort of sacred text to follow; no wonder then, that the mother @28 was told these appalling things, and the Steiner Waldorf trained teacher @110 said

” they still taught it to ME, and continue to use all of Steiner’s supremacist writings and lectures in Anthroposophical study groups.

Why do teachers still speak from the perspective of racial supremacy -as was just quoted by another poster- inside faculty meetings and child study group meetings?”

Sam Freedman and Rachel Woolf would do well to do some more research, because if their reading up to date has been sites written by Sune Nordwall, they are stepping off the rational cliff of verifiable reality into the sea of supernatural conviction; and it’s children who are being messed with.

Hello Ladywolf,

I think I have alredy addressed most of what you write in earlier comments. Of course people like the drama queen Charmaine and Beansvi use the WC as “source” for what they write on anthroposophy.

As for my analysis and comments on the writings of Staudenmaier – normally, you can get far with a street smart approach to judging people. With con artists in general and people like Staudenmaier, that’s not enough to be able to judge his qualities as seemingly normal, honest historian. You have to check the actual sources he claims to describe.

I did that when I first started to read what he wrote, as it surprised me so much. It made me completely lose any trust in his credibility as “scholar”, that you maybe normally have towards people who seem to be scholars, not least in reading how he addressed what the source analysis showed, and have documened that and the basis for my view at my personal site and the site of americans4waldorf.org.

You also write about what I write on the allegations that Steiner Waldorf schools promote racism, that it means

“stepping off the rational cliff of verifiable reality into the sea of supernatural conviction”.

I take this to refer to what I write about actual independent empirical research on the subject, that is what I assume you think Sam Freedman and Rachel Woolf should rely most on.

Give me better independent empirical research and I’ll look at it, as I assume also Sam Freedman and Rachel Woolf would.

I think most would agree that Peter Staudenmaier’s research surpasses Sune Nordwall’s in every respect; and that research done by anthroposophists, about anthroposophy and anthroposophical schools leaves much to be questioned.

One of my favorite quotes on the subject of anthroposophists falling to the floor with an attack of the vapors about “research” is this

“http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/9691

“For one thing, the notion that claims like like Sune’s (e.g. that I forged a text published forty-five years before I was born) could imperil anybody’s academic career is genuinely amusing. There is very little danger that concerns like Sune’s, or Frank’s for that matter, will derail any academic assessment of virtually anything. It isn’t just me they get upset about, by the way; some German anthroposophists are currently trying to get Helmut Zander’s degree revoked, on the basis that he neglected to consult the Higher Worlds in writing his history of anthroposophy.”
Peter Staudenmaier

126. Notahobbit

It would appear there are some followers of Rudolf Steiner so deluded they have invented a new set of rules without informing the legal profession – “anthroposophical law”.

127. Diana Winters

For the record, I’ve never encountered anyone less like a drama queen than Charmaine. Neither she nor “Beansavi” have been involved at the Waldorf critics list. Charmaine wrote a handful of posts there over the years, informing us about her lawsuit, though with no details, as per her legal settlement. Beansavi has never posted there that I can recall. She ran a group on the Mothering discussion site for several years (not sure if it is still active), which none of the regulars, including myself, have been involved in.

Those folks are in (if I recall correctly) Virginia and New York. The much vilified founder of PLANS, Dan Dugan, is in San Francisco. I’m in Philadelphia. Most of the folks posting here are in Europe and the UK. Funny how Staudenmaier at Cornell can personally have fooled all so many of us with his forgeries and fake history.

As is obvious, I’m not British or American. I have used the word “forgery” to describe Staudenmaier’s first invented, made up story about in the sense of a false description of a published historical source, when “invention” clearly is a more proper term.

What he writes is one of his many mind- and word-games, typical for him, to comment on this fact, and the discussion of it.

The problem for him, when it comes to Steiner, is that anyone with internet access and a VISA or similar card with enough money on the account (usually not much neded) easily can order basically all his published workd using Amazon, and check for themselves if what he writes on it is true or not.

He should have chosen another subject.

Sune Nordwall discrediting people again. He calls these former Steiner waldorf teachers ‘drama queens’

the African American in @86 who sued Steiner waldorf schools

and the poster here

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=368640&page=7

She says

” I am a trained Waldorf teacher,
assisted in the founding of a Waldorf school,
belonged to an Anthroposophical study group for years and
did the first stages of membership into the School of Spiritual Science (the “First Class” level of Anthroposophy whose doctrines/books are guarded and held in secrecy by the Anthroposophical Society in America and members of the School of Spiritual Science). ”

I suggest their crimes were to talk openly, and thus be belittled, shunned and pilloried.

Alfa Lady wolves never give up, do they.

I used “drama queen” to refer to Charmaine, but both she and Beansvi clearly seem to have used the WC-site – http://americans4waldorf.org/OnPLANS.html – as source for their views of and understanding of Steiner and anthroposophy.

Forgot, the other, one of the many endless myths propagated by WCs, the “secrecy” myth.

The lectures Beansvi mentions are all published and (99% sure about it) can be ordered and bought from any book store and easily read by anyone who knows the language in which they were held. As for the English translation of them, I’m less aware of the situation.

While those specific lectures, that do not differ much from all other lectures by Steiner easily available from Amazon, may not be found on the net for free, something that is the case with most other of the works by Steiner (mostly lectures).

These two women were Steiner trained teachers. Are you accusing them of being dishonest about their Steiner Waldorf training? Neither of them mention WC’s, you seem obsessive about this site; but then you’ve written many things to try and discredit them too, so it’s hardly surprising.

Could I suggest that you read the comments policy below?
“Abusive, sarcastic or silly comments may be deleted’ – I class name calling in that category, and see it as a desperate attempt to stifle adult debate.

You mind that I tell that I experience you as a ladywolf in this discussion. Sorry lady.

Regrettably, I don’t any more time for now to continue discussing with you and the other … ladies.

Have a nice day.

134. Notahobbit

Now the transcript of the meeting has been made public, the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship know they have finally been caught out.

They have just issued the following disclaimer on the front page of their site:

“We also reject any racism stated or implied in any of Rudolf Steiner’s speeches and writings”.

http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html

This is an admission that much of Steiner’s work is intrinsically racist.

135. ThetisMercurio

Maybe this is the new SWSF PR campaign?

It’s going to make things very difficult, since anthroposophists believe Rudolf Steiner was clairvoyant. So, which bits of his writings/lectures come from the spirit worlds? Was he only occasionally clairvoyant or were the Higher Powers untrustworthy? Which bits need verification? In fact, since there is no independent evidence that the bizarre pedagogy of Steiner Waldorf education is based on anything other than the ramblings of a Mystic Barmpot who – the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship of the UK now at last admits – was prone to stating his racist beliefs – who in their right mind would devote public money to encourage more families to entrust their children to these people?

And who benefits if they do?

136. Diana Winters

Sune/Sunny:

(More name changes? Why?)

“I have used the word “forgery” to describe Staudenmaier’s first invented, made up story about in the sense of a false description of a published historical source, when “invention” clearly is a more proper term.”

Yes, you’ve been claiming not to know the meaning of the terms you use for years now. With that VISA card and minimal money in the account, acquire a dictionary. “Forgery,” “libel” etc. are not difficult terms to understand in either your language or mine. Maybe after making legal threats against multiple individuals and web sites for a decade or so now, you might want to learn what you’re accusing people of, rather than back off pretending it’s all a misunderstanding when you’re confronted with facts.

“The problem for him, when it comes to Steiner, is that anyone with internet access and a VISA or similar card with enough money on the account (usually not much neded) easily can order basically all his published workd using Amazon, and check for themselves if what he writes on it is true or not.”

I am glad to hear that you have finally learned how to use Amazon, after I taught you to use the google button a couple of years ago, finally enabling you to follow Peter Staudenmaier’s career without needing to phone Ithaca long distance. (Must have been getting expensive.) Yes, most of us have figured out that Peter’s writings aren’t hard to access (most of us did this about 10 years ago, but okay). You can also check used book stores for Ecofascism; maybe not so many copies of it float around Stockholm, I don’t know.

But the problem for *you* is that to actually read *Steiner’s* remarks – as opposed to waving your arms like some kind of mad self-flagellant in a Da Vinci Code plot, shouting that Staudenmaier is a con man – not even a credit card is necessary, ‘cus Steiner’s remarks are free at the Steiner archive:

http://www.rsarchive.org/

137. Diana Winters

‘Alfa Lady wolves never give up, do they.

I used “drama queen” to refer to Charmaine, but both she and Beansvi clearly seem to have used the WC-site” ‘

I don’t think that posting these sexist remarks calling ordinary mothers and Waldorf teachers (most of who are women) “wolves” and “drama queens” will help your case with ordinary parents.

138. ThetisMercurio

Yes, it’s not the first time I’ve noticed how misogynist this Steinerbollocks is. Women in long skirts cleaning: good. Women using intellect: lying drama queens, alfa lady-wolves.

139. Diana Winters

“I used “drama queen” to refer to Charmaine, but both she and Beansvi clearly seem to have used the WC-site”

No – they were both Waldorf teachers, and in Beansavi’s case a Waldorf parent. Their understandings are based on what happened to them, and they later sought connection with others online who had had similar experiences. You try this line on everyone – you tried it on me 10 years ago, saying I must have “read Dan Dugan’s story.” I was confused, thinking who is Dan Dugan and am I supposed to have read his story? I had come to the site because of our own family’s experiences in Waldorf and my observations as an aide in a Waldorf kindergarten.

This is the pattern. Sune then informs whoever will listen that this person is making it up, just copying Dan Dugan’s story or some kind of Peter Staudenmaier groupie.

140. Diana Winters

“As for the English translation of them, I’m less aware of the situation.”

LOL. Are you now!

141. Diana Winters

“We also reject any racism stated or implied in any of Rudolf Steiner’s speeches and writings”.

http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/index.html

This is completely marvelous. This is success!! This is what can be done with pressure on groups like this. Public exposure is the. only. way. It will eventually work. They will not reject Steiner’s racism unless they have to, but if they have to, they will. That is the critics’ goal.

142. Diana Winters

“Women in long skirts cleaning: good. Women using intellect: lying drama queens, alfa lady-wolves.”

That’s it.

Sune:

‘[Staudenmaier] should have chosen another subject.’

It comes as no surprise that Sune would believe this! LOL! Thank Dog, and his alfa wolves — his furry and saintly bitches* –, that Sune isn’t choosing what topics other people do research on! (*The usual term for female canines, but mr Dog also calls them ‘ladies’, but he’s charming for real and not deceptive…)

Thetis:

‘Women in long skirts cleaning: good. Women using intellect: lying drama queens, alfa lady-wolves.’

!!

As Diana noted, there’s the rsarchive.org. For people who read German (and the German versions are usually less tampered with or tidied up compared to translations) practically the whole Gesamtausgabe is available online. You don’t actually need to order books. Or have a credit card. You can check those sources immediately without leaving your computer…

145. Notahobbit

Peter Staudenmaier has just responded to the earlier part of this discussion regarding Steiner’s root race theory.

Essential reading for policy makers and prospective parents:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13484

Now that SWSF are on the right track, perhaps it’s time to restate a previous question — do they stand behind the legal threats Sune has made against discussion forums? We know at least one case where he explicitly used SWSF’s name. Does SWSF want to be associated with stifling debate and silencing concerned individuals and unhappy parents?

@134 notahobbit- Holey Moley – first the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship admit publicly that anthroposophic belief was acquired through Steiner’s clairvoyance and then they they admit Steiner’s work includes racism!

@135 Thetismercurio- exactly. Who knows what bits of Steiner’s anthroposophical truths and laws will be used?

In esoteric belief systems, like anthroposophy and scientology, knowledge is apparently gradually revealed to those who show themselves open to it.

The ex Steiner Waldorf teacher, Beansavi, who Sune Nordwall calls a “drama queen” says here

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=368640

“There are many, more obscure, books I have had access to via my Anthroposophical study-group’s founder.
Many Anthroposophical books are off-limits to members not in the first class level of membership (most never reach that point, I did), called The School of Spiritual Science.”

“I will tell you that I have been one of those Waldorf “insiders” who studied Anthroposophy for years on deep levels, who studied their sacred mysteries and had access to other insiders I could question all the time. I was educated in W. teacher training and by mentors on how to bring these mysteries in story and song form to the children…”

“You can buy many of Steiner’s books and lectures online, at the Rudolf Steiner College Bookstore (and other Waldorf teacher-training center bookstores), etc.

But I will say that there are books that are not available for public view or purchase. This is deliberately done because they contain “mystery knowledge”. Some have not even been translated out of German, and a lot of Steiner’s teachings have not been written down-intentionally because of the mystery knowledge issue.
You would come across this information by joining an Anthroposophical study group or joining a teacher training school.”

A lot of what I learned by mouth in study group I did not hear of even in teacher training, nor in my numerous Steiner books.”

Unity @17

In relation to the steiner waldorf Schools fellowship admition that Steiner’s writing includes racism

“If you accept that a part of that supposed ‘revelation’ was seriously in error, as is the case with his views on race, then you also have to question whether and to what extent the rest of ideas might also be wrong, which is why Anthroposophists routinely go to ridiculous lengths to avoid having to admit or accept that Steiner was talking out of his arse on the subject of race.”

149. ThetisMercurio

That’s not the only disclaimer on the New! Re-branded! SWSF site. Stars are my emphasis:

http://www.steinerwaldorf.org/whatissteinereducation.html

Who was Rudolf Steiner?
Rudolf Steiner (1861 – 1925) was an innovative academic born in Austria whose ideas founded the basis of Anthroposophy.
He applied his ideas to education as well as agriculture, medicine, architecture and social reform. ***The Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship acknowledges Rudolf Steiner as the founding inspiration of modern day Steiner schools, but does not promote Anthroposophy or endorse every aspect of it.***

Rudolf Steiner & Steiner Schools
The first Steiner school opened in Stuttgart in 1919 for children of workers at the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory. The school’s benefactor was managing director, Emil Molt, who asked Dr Rudolf Steiner to found and lead the school in its early stages.
This philosopher and scientist’s insights inspired what has become a worldwide movement of schools that espouse and promote universal human values, educational pluralism and meaningful teaching and learning opportunities. This progressive, international schools movement is noted by educationalists, doctors, policy-makers and parents for the effective education that it offers children. The ideas and principles which inform the education provide a credible and thoughtful perspective to the debate on education and human development.’

Personally I’d like to meet the doctors – the medical doctors I assume they mean, not Dr Richard House, or indeed Dr Steiner – who endorse Steiner education.

Which bits of anthroposophy ARE they going to endorse? Reincarnation, Illness as spiritual development, physiognomy as a manifestation of karma? Eurythmy? Curative eurythmy? The attentions of the school (anthroposophical) doctor? Temperaments? Change of teeth as an indication of class-readiness? In fact..the entire pedagogy… What will be left? ‘Eco’ schools? A self-development programme for people who wouldn’t have voted Tory otherwise?

And what will be left as required reading on the Steiner teacher training courses, wherever they are? A look through the reading list of the now closed University of Plymouth course, posted by Unity a few months ago, is instructive. The anthroposophical texts are in blue:

http://liberalconspiracy.org/files/2009/11/Plymouth-Steiner-Reading-List.pdf

But of course, they won’t promote anthroposophy in any of their new teacher training courses. Not at all.

150. Diana Winters

“The anthroposophical texts are in blue:

http://liberalconspiracy.org/files/2009/11/Plymouth-Steiner-Reading-List.pdf

Bortoft and Edelglass are also anthroposophical. (It can take some digging to identify the obscure things anthroposophists are reading, but it’s usually a safe bet that unknown texts are … anthroposophical.)

It doesn’t seem quite right for Steiner schools to claim they are no longer promoting anthroposophy if they still plan to immerse the teachers in Steiner before credentialing them to teach, eh?

151. Diana Winters

Furthermore, the notion that they “don’t endorse every aspect of it” is not really anything new, though it’s meant to sound like they’re trying to get all reasonable all of a sudden. It was never possible to find an anthroposophist who would admit to endorsing *everything* Steiner said. They always claim to be testing and researching and meditating on it and keeping an open mind about things Steiner said. The discussion gets interesting when you ask them to *name one thing* Steiner said that they don’t actually agree with. The anthroposophist will usually have an attack of vagueness right then (or get angry with you).

Yep, several more books on the list are anthroposophical. I commented on this in the original thread, when the list was published here on LibCon.

As for medical doctors who endorse Steiner education as well as wacky ideas about rotten souls, let me mention the cancer specialist from Finland who sent a letter to Waldorf Critics yesterday… (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/13487)

But perhaps Thetis would ‘like to meet’ some medical doctor who is less rude, but who still endorses Steiner education… 😉

154. ThetisMercurio

I do know one. But she got stuck in an extreme yoga position and had to be rescued by the air-ambulance 😉

155. Notahobbit

Parents must sign a ‘home school agreement’ before enrolling their child at the state funded Steiner Waldorf Academy Hereford which states the following:

“Enabling my child to see the School Doctor at the Academy’s request and taking my child to any therapy sessions or special needs assessment required by the Academy. I understand this is necessary to support my child accessing the education and the teachers’ ability to meet his/her needs”.

http://www.herefordwaldorfschool.org/index.php/component/remository/func-startdown/8/

The School Doctor they refer to is an Anthroposophical Doctor, a map of those practicing here: http://ahasc.org.uk/downloads/AMA_MAP.pdf

156. Notahobbit

The following Norwegian article published only last week is a useful indicator on what can happen when anthroposophical beliefs are applied to childhood illness (google translation):

Outbreaks in Waldorf
World Health Organization had hoped to eradicate the disease in Europe this year. Instead, the number of sick people in Western Europe increased by 60 percent since 2000.

Danish health authorities warned last week about the risk of a major eruption. Also Norway has cause for concern – especially when it comes to alternative settings where children are not vaccinated, said Dr. Rebecca Martin of the WHO told NRK.

– We saw an outbreak in Norway in 2008 at a Waldorf school with infection from Germany and Austria, “said Dr Martin.

There are in fact especially in Waldorf circles in Europe that measles breaks out. In these environments, many a completely different view of the disease.

– No worries

Homeopath Gro Lystad see no reason for concern for measles, and believe the disease is good for children.

– Measles is, according to Rudolf Steiner a transformative disease that makes you grow as a person.We will become deprived of vaccination.

– Are you absolutely sure that this is good for kids?

– I am absolutely sure that it is positive for a child who is healthy. It is conceivable that some will die, but this applies to children who are impaired in advance, “she says to NRK.

Lystad also has good knowledge of the fact that some parents go in to the children infected with measles.

– The Steiner-environment, there are some places so-called contagion rings.If they hear about children who have measles, mumps or rubella, they will encourage people to exercise it.

– I think it makes sense, especially if you have a homeopath in the back, and I’ve done it many times.

Will drop the vaccine
It is not just measles Lystad think you can drop the vaccine but also against diphtheria, meningitis, whooping cough, mumps, measles, polio, rubella, tetanus, influenza, tuberculosis and tropical diseases.

– Do you mean then that all these vaccines are unnecessary?

– I think there are better ways to treat these diseases than to vaccinate.

http://nrk.no/nyheter/norge/1.7043347

157. Diana Winters

” Measles is, according to Rudolf Steiner a transformative disease that makes you grow as a person.We will become deprived of vaccination.

– Are you absolutely sure that this is good for kids?

– I am absolutely sure that it is positive for a child who is healthy. It is conceivable that some will die, but this applies to children who are impaired in advance, “she says to NRK.”

Holy moly.

Oh, Diana, the distress in your Gemuet is palpable! Please allow me to assuage your fears and melancholy and help you make sense of your non-anthroposophical life, which must be wretched. I understand and pity you. And now I share with you a modicum of my own joy as an anthroposophist in the hope that some of it may rub off and make you happy.

You see Diana, you and all these other Critics, you all have one thing in common. You are obsessed with this one single life that you have at present, believing it to be the one and only one you’ll ever have. So, of course, it is very understandable that you would want to vaccinate all children so that none of them would ever die from the very pedagogically-rich disease of measles.

But the joy of anthroposophy is that we have reincarnation. So that if a child dies from measles, well, that is the child’s karma, and not to worry, because the child will get another chance to come back in another, perhaps even better life! Why reincarnation is very green. Just think of it as God’s cosmic recycling program!

Now the odds are that in a class, say of 25 pre-school age kids who were not vaccinated against measles, maybe only 1 or 2 would die. But then, if you flip the coin over, you see, there would be 23 or 24 children who survived the measles and they would have their lives enhanced immensely by the measles experience.

You see there is profound anthroposophical truth in the old saying: “Whatever doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger.” But for anthroposophists, I would have to add: “And even if it does kill you, you still have a chance to come back and reincarnate in a new and better life!”

Now that’s a cosmic prescription that just can’t be beat. A win-win situation for everyone involved. So please don’t be so short-sighted, Diana. If only your spiritual gaze would look beyond the confining barriers of death and birth into the spiritual world itself, then you would not feel so obsessively about this one life. And then you would not demand that all children be vaccinated against measles.

I mean, really Diana, would you want to have placed on your own “karmic tab” as it were, the severe consequences of interfering in the karma of all those children? Not only would you be responsible for thwarting the karmically pre-ordained deaths of those 1 or 2 children, you would also be responsible for causing detriment to the lives of the other 23 or 24 survivors whose lives would have been so much more immensely enriched by experiencing the “last, full measure of measles,” as it were.

159. Diana Winters

Yes, Imker, I think that sums it up. Karma and reincarnation are central to anthroposophy and the two are inextricable from each other. Karmic theories about disease are much more palatable if you believe in multiple lifetimes, so indeed dying of something like measles doesn’t seem so terrible if there’s some sort of spiritual lesson in it that the child can benefit from in the next lifetime. And the risk maybe seems more worth taking; the children who survive apparently gain all sorts of pedagogical and karmic benefits, and those who don’t, well, better luck next time. The basis of karma in Steiner is that you can’t really complain about misfortunes in your life because you actually chose them yourself. Children who die young *need* to die young and *choose* to die young, based either on something bad they did in a previous life that they have to make amends for, or sometimes, it is thought, by choosing to undergo such an ordeal they are gaining strength for “tasks” they will pursue in a future lifetime.

But yes, for those of us who believe in only one lifetime, the notion that only a few children will not survive measles, but why worry ‘cus it’s all karmic, is not acceptable.

Speaking of diseases and waldorf schools:
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19527

161. ThetisMercurio

This measles outbreak has just been commented on by a Danish blogger: http://kriswager.blogspot.com/2010/04/measles-outbreak-in-german-caused-by.html

162. Notahobbit

“We must worm our way through…[I]n order to do what we want to do, at least, it is necessary to talk with the people, not because we want to, but because we have to, and inwardly make fools of them.”

[Rudolf Steiner, Conferences with Teachers of the Waldorf School in Stuttgart, vol.1, 1919 to 1920 Forest Row, East Sussex, England: Steiner schools Fellowship Publications, 1986 pp. 125]

As you can see the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship will recognise the above statement as they published it.

Who are they making fools of? Are the fools Michael Gove, Sam Freedman and Rachel Wolf? Or are they making fools of us?

How on earth have Steiner Waldorf schools get this far?

Who in the DCFS (previously DFES) commissioned the Woods report, the main purpose of which, was to inform Government policy concerning possible entry of Steiner schools into the state sector?

Who then assigned it to Martin Ashley, Philip and Glenys Woods – two of whom are connected to the Anthroposophy movement?

Why did nobody bother to realise there is not one independent research paper that supports Steiner Waldorf pedagogy?

Why did nobody question why Steiner Waldorf schools threatened to issue a judicial review of the EYFS exemptions process? http://www.savesteinerschools.org/

Who gave the green light to Hereford Steiner Waldorf Academy despite great local opposition? http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/mar/10/schools.uk2

Who is the Hereford Steiner Waldorf Acadmey’s private donor who wishes to remain anonymous? http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/foischeme/_documents/DfES_FoI_404.pdf

Who recently gave approval for the Schools Inspection Service (an inspectorate of Brethren schools) to replace Ofsted in inspection of Steiner Waldorf schools?

and who persuaded Michael Gove to consider giving these schools public money, is this purely about votes and profit however questionable the pedagogy?

http://schoolslist.steinerwaldorf.org/

163. stephen Gillon

I had to remove my son from state school he has polysystic kidney disease and was being bullied to the point where the hospital advised his removal for safety reasons.
I put him in a Steiner School and he thrived and gt the education He deserved as a human being.

Steiner School is not a cult at all I am a Christian as are My Kids they where not taught the beliefs of steiner they where taught unlike in their state school about Christianity in the state school their belief in God was mocked by the staff.

In steiner the morning started with Christian Prayer unlike their former school bullying was almost unheard od The Kids could speak at least 2 languages before secondary level reasonably well and thheir ability to work on their own and show leadership and initiative was better than their state school peers a was their level of education in most areas.

Steiner education is for human beings state education or secular indoctrination is designed to create drones not educated people.

Yes I am sure in more affluant areas their will be good state schools but for the majority this in not the case and many children on leaving can not even read or write properly and if disabled in any way are treated as second class pupils.

The absence of class barriers is also a refreshing feature part of steiner education as it is in many state schools.

Steiner or home schooling are the best alternatives for parents that want a decent indoctrination free school experience.

164. stephen Gillon

Pardon my poor grammar/spelling I had a state school education.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  2. Richard Wilson

    Charity Commission's peculiar brand of 'soft touch regulation' risks damaging public trust in the whole sector IMO http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  3. UK Education Matters

    For the Steiner sceptics among you RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  4. UK Education Matters

    For the Steiner sceptics among you RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  5. Paula Thomas

    good morning for #sameoldtories with girls -> jail for pregnancy http://bit.ly/dxHXxt and funding Steiner schools http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  6. SomeBeans

    RT @gimpyblog: Whoa, is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  7. Tim Ireland

    RT @Unity_MoT: RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  8. Giles Wilkes

    RT @alixmortimer: RT @gimpyblog is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endo …

  9. Matthew Taylor

    Fancy a conspiracy theory today? @LibCon provides: http://bit.ly/bqkhu1 (Try subbing "Christianity" for "Anthroposophy"…)

  10. Paul Sandars

    RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  11. Richard Bartholomew

    RT @Unity_MoT: RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  12. Thetis

    RT @Unity_MoT: RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  13. Thetis

    RT @gimpyblog Whoa, is this true Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  14. JackofKent.com

    RT @ThetisMercurio: RT @gimpyblog Whoa, is this true Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  15. Sarah Raphael

    @nickcohen2 thanks! another article by @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  16. sawherry

    RT @gimpyblog: Whoa, is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  17. Lovely Horse

    @bbceducation State funding racism – Tories offer Steiner Schools Fellowship lessons in spin http://bit.ly/dAnAX2 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  18. Lovely Horse

    @R_Dawkinsdotcom & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  19. zooey

    RT @Unity_MoT: RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  20. Kev

    Not the Sith thankfully RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  21. topsy_top20k

    Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  22. topsy_top20k

    Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  23. gimpy

    Whoa, is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  24. Soho Politico

    RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to ‘occult society’ http://bit.ly/cWxyeR

  25. alixmortimer

    RT @gimpyblog is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  26. Prateek Buch

    RT @gimpyblog: is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  27. uberVU - social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to ‘occult society’ http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  28. Unity

    RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  29. Lauren B

    RT @SohoPolitico: RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to ‘occult society’ http://bit.ly/cWxyeR

  30. asquith

    RT @Unity_MoT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  31. Lovely Horse

    @journalismnews Tories offer Steiner Schools Fellowship lessons in spin http://bit.ly/bnzBKf & http://bit.ly/dAnAX2 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  32. Richard A Brooks

    RT @libcon Tories offer state funding to schools linked to ‘occult society’ http://bit.ly/cWxyeR

  33. Lovely Horse

    @campbellclaret Re RachelWolfTories offer SteinerSchools lessons in spin http://bit.ly/bnzBKf & http://bit.ly/dAnAX2 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  34. Sarah Raphael

    RT @gimpyblog: Whoa, is this true that Tories going to fund Steiner schools? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM They are a crazy quack endorsing organisation.

  35. Sarah Raphael

    RT @Unity_MoT RT @libcon: Tories offer state funding to schools linked to 'occult society' http://bit.ly/cWVC4B

  36. Sarah Raphael

    RT @ThetisMercurio: @Samfr Free Schools: New Schools Network deliberately misleading voters? Difficult to believe I know… http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Govewatch

  37. Lovely Horse

    @JAD73 Steiner racism & state funding–Tories offer SWSF lessons on spin http://bit.ly/bnzBKf & http://bit.ly/dAnAX2 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  38. Lovely Horse

    @BBCNewsnight & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  39. Jane A D

    RT Steiner racism & state fundingTories offer lessons on spin http://bit.ly/bnzBKf http://bit.ly/dAnAX2 http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM via@Lovelyhorse

  40. Thetis

    @wonderfrancis the worrying New Schools network & PR: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & here: http://bit.ly/bnzBKf analysed here: http://wp.me/p1nCt-MU

  41. Thetis

    @ollyfayers pic clearly taken after reading Lib Con, as his Free Schools policy disaster reaches farcical proportions: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  42. Thetis

    @jessshepherd1 Tories, New Schools Network & PR: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & here: http://bit.ly/bnzBKf analysed here: http://wp.me/p1nCt-MU

  43. rebutting anthroposophy « zooey

    […] http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/03/18/tories-offer-state-funding-to-schools-linked-to-occult-socie… […]

  44. Thetis

    @The_Hustings Tories, New Schools Network & PR: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & here: http://bit.ly/bnzBKf analysed here: http://wp.me/p1nCt-MU

  45. Lovely Horse

    @pzmyers & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  46. Lovely Horse

    @w1ld3rn3ss & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  47. Lovely Horse

    @VictoriaPeckham & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  48. Lovely Horse

    @indiaknight & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  49. Lovely Horse

    @RichardDawkins & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  50. Sarah Raphael

    RT @ThetisMercurio: @jessshepherd1 Tories, New Schools Network & PR: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & here: http://bit.ly/bnzBKf analysed here: http://wp.me/p1nCt-MU

  51. Lovely Horse

    @DrEvanHarris & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM
    #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  52. Lovely Horse

    @channel4news & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  53. Lovely Horse

    @edballsmp full inquiry needed http://bit.ly/c2eA6p

  54. Lovely Horse

    @SarahBrown10 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  55. Lovely Horse

    @campbellclaret Tories attempt to shut mothers up – Steiner racism, state funding & lessons in spin & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  56. Andrew Old

    Two for the "you couldn't make it up" file: http://bit.ly/dxz9qy and http://bit.ly/dqxnv6

  57. Thetis

    @dontgetfooled #ToxicTories happy to provide a PR machine to suppress concerns of parents http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & http://bit.ly/bnzBKf

  58. Sarah Raphael

    RT @lovelyhorse_: @SarahBrown10 & http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM #Steiner #Waldorf #Woo #Anthroposophy

  59. Thetis

    @RamonDeJonghe yes, it's my little baby google-fish 😉 Have you been reading the British political Steiner scandal? http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM

  60. Thetis

    @adharanand Yep, Tory, Steiner & PR #fail: http://bit.ly/bjQ5oM & here http://bit.ly/bnzBKf analysed here: http://wp.me/p1nCt-MU try busking

  61. sune nordwall accuses me of libel and defamation (again) « zooey

    […] defamation (again) March 25, 2010 tags: anthroposophists, law, the bee by zooey Over at Liberal Conspiracy, Notahobbit recommends my blog. This blog. Sune Nordwall […]

  62. Lovely Horse

    @jonronson @timminchin "A biodynamic, homeopathic racism .." http://bit.ly/c2eA6p

  63. sune nordwall fortsättning « zooey

    […] nordwall fortsättning March 26, 2010 tags: rätt, the bee by zooey Liberal Conspiracy. Notera att Sune Nordwall alltså vidhåller att jag gör mig skyldig till ärekränkning genom att […]

  64. libel and defamation (again) « zooey

    […] ThetisMercurio, asking many pertinent questions, wrote: […]

  65. Thetis

    @Mother_magazine it's the wrong moment to start promoting Steiner ed, homeopathy & chiropractic & anti-vax loons: http://bit.ly/bz9p8e

  66. Lovely Horse

    @DerrenBrown are you familiar with anthroposophy? http://bit.ly/dqxnv6

  67. Sarah Raphael

    RT @lovelyhorse_: @DerrenBrown are you familiar with anthroposophy? http://bit.ly/dqxnv6

  68. Lovely Horse

    @bengoldacre A Rees-Mogg promotes homeopathy & has secured state funding for #Steiner schools http://bit.ly/3Sc0l9 & http://bit.ly/dqxnv6

  69. Melanie Byng

    @IntravenusMP alternatively lib con here: http://t.co/2u3bkXXH or UK Anthroposophy: http://t.co/yDnnK8Dz or anything by steiner is a clue.





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.