Re: Gulags for Anthros?
- To Val, who wrote:
>>I'm afraid I am further confused by the termslight and semi-occultism which are entirely new
[Robert had written: ". . . . light occultisms
or semi-occultisms such as Anthroposophy . .
Robert writes now:
Perhaps my choice of words was awkward. I
meant "light occultism" as opposed to "dark
occultisms" such as that of the anti-
evolutionary supra-political power occultists.
I may have been nodding a little, forgetting
the basic Anthro understanding of the Golden
Mean: the Christic balance between the "dark"
Ahrimanic and the "light" Luciferic.
I was suggesting the qualifier *semi* for
reasons such as I stated in the little semantic
discussion that followed: One might say that,
strictly, Anthroposophy is not an "occultism"
since the given "doctrine" is not physically
hidden; still one might say that it is
"occultic" since it reveals much that was
formerly hidden physically and since it flows
from and leads to the worlds beyond the Veil.
Maybe I would have done better to have written:
"the Christian occultism or semi-occultism of
Robert had written:
>>You seem to allow that the energy isdestructive and perverse, but you didn't
experience any "hatred" in it? Well, again:
what do you suppose makes it destructive and
>>Time maybe-it seems to kind of really bewearing on these people.<<
Robert writes now:
I don't understand why you would say that. Are
you suggesting that the WC wasn't "destructive
and perverse" in the beginning but became such
only because they've been at it for so long???
Robert had written:
>>And the WC in itself is only a part of thatgreater complex of "enemies of Anthroposophy" I
was referring to.<<
>>. . . . I am unaware of the greater complexso please clue me in.<<
Robert writes now:
I'm a little surprised that you seem to be
plugged into the Waldorf movement and still
don't have a "clue" about this. -- The
"enemies of Anthroposophy" are first of all the
spiritual Adversaries. On earth their minions
have been working against Anthroposophy almost
since Steiner first opened his mouth. As Marie
Steiner said of RS:
"How could he escape being hated with all the
demonic power of which Hell is capable? . . .
". . . .
They hissed with hate and blocked his forward way.
His work they shattered even as he wrought it.
They raged with venom and with flame . . . .
"He did what once Prometheus expiated
What gave to Socrates the poisoned cup-
The pardoning of Barabbas was less vile-
A deed whose expiation is the cross.
We demons cannot suffer such a thing.
We harry, hunt, pursue who dares such deeds
With all those souls who give themselves to us,
With all those forces which obey our will.
For ours are the turning-points of time
And ours this humanity which lies,
Without their God, in weakness, vice, and error.
We never yield the booty we have won
But tear to pieces him who dares to touch it. .
In the present, as it seems to me, these
enemies work in two ways: through infiltration
and subversion from within, and by attacks from
without through slander, distortion, lawsuits --
which, as the little blurb in my original
post shows, seem to be building toward legal
repression. The WC seems, as far as I see, to
be part, but not the whole, of the "outer"
complex of (earthly, human) enemies.
Again, I don't get around much, but I get the
impression that the rest of this "outer
complex" is more active in Europe than in the
US. And again, that blurb in my original post
was one example of such activity. I also have
the impression that "outer" attacks against
Anthroposophy in the Netherlands brought forth
a few years ago that infamous Anthro report on
Steiner's allegedly "discriminatory" statements.
For another example, you can see here:
"A study shows that Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925),
the founder of anthroposophy, was an active
opponent of anti-Semitism (1). The study
contradicts allegations, made especially since
a broadcast in Germany (Report Mainz) in
February (2000), about Waldorf schools and
their founder. The allegations about Steiner
are based on a lack of overview and an
understanding of his views."
I did a little more Googling around, and it
wasn't hard to find examples of attacks against
Anthroposophy and some responses to them.
*SkepticReport* "The Racial Teachings of Rudolf Steiner"
"On a libelous article in Salon on Waldorf education"
-- And I don't think all of the attacks were
coming from Europe. I don't know about
*SkepticReport*, but I think *Salon* is
American. -- The enemies of Anthroposophy are
>>I live in what has been called a "WaldorfGhetto"-there are a few such places in the U.S.
I am told. My next door neighbor, for example
is a second generation Anthroposophist.<<
I knew that there are the Camphill Villages
and that "fellowship community" that runs
Mercury Press, but "Waldorf ghettoes"? That's
a new one on me. I'm trying to imagine what
one would look like: a clutch of BD farms
surrounded by barbed wire and watchtowers out
in the boonies?
>>I have not known anyone in real life to callthemselves an Anthroposophist and be
Robert signs off:
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Robert Mason
> I don't object to the mere fact that my view isI'm sorry you feel that way.-Val
> being challenged; I was inviting a discussion.
> But so far you haven't shown me anything that
> convinces me that your "challenge" is well-
> founded in this case. And now it seems to me
> that our discussion has reached an impasse, a
> dead end; you're not saying anything really
> new. So I don't see any point in my