Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

37615Re: Looking for the anthroposophical Dr.Mengele

Expand Messages
  • Frank Thomas Smith
    Jun 28, 2008
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Albert Sándor
      <montek@...> wrote:
      > I am reading the Akasha Chronicles, Steiner does use the term savage
      for certain populations, said to resembel in their habits the lives of
      the ancient lemurians or atlanteans.
      > He also uses the term, our western culture and implies that it is a
      more evolved one.
      I would call this a mis - or interpretive translation. I don't have
      the original Akasha anymore, but if I remember correctly, Steiner says
      "wilde Rassen". (Correct me, someone, if I'm wrong.) Now "wild" can be
      translated as savage, but also as wild, meaning uncivilized. IMO he
      used it in this sense.

      > Now, this will hurt some feelings as today, in the age of great
      democracies and freedom, and in our just hearts, we cannot stand that
      human beings are classified, or thought to be of different value.
      > Steiner does not make the difference between the savage man, and the
      western man. He makes the difference between a the extroverted,
      industrious, scientific culture of the west, and the paleolitic
      culture of some tribe on an island behind the back of God. Everyone
      must agree that although both are human cultures, the former is more
      evolved and according to our time, than the latter. This does not mean
      better ! It just means that the former is in the mainstream of
      evolution, and the latter is on a sidetrack, stagnating.
      > This does not mean that the latter is useless, or it's people are
      below human level, or something like that.
      > We know that real savages lurk in the underground of our great
      cities, or in high seats of politics. We know that a tribe leader in
      the rainforest might be more enlightened than the average Joe in an
      unknown office.
      > Yes there are great differences between human souls, but this is not
      race, gender, or place related anymore. Those who attack
      anthroposophy, do not have in mind that souls are incarnating in
      various places, so if anything, anthroposophy is what against racism,
      sexism, xenophoby.
      > If one life you are a caucasian, and the next you are african
      american ... how is that racist ? If one life you are a man, next life
      you are a woman, how is that sexist ?
      > If one life you are spanish, next life you are irish, how is that
      xenophoby ?
      > Oh, you say, ethnic souls, leading spirits od nations, races ...
      those are of the past. They leave us more and more freedom.
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Frank Thomas Smith
      > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 2:53 AM
      > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Looking for the anthroposophical
      > Peter Staudenmaier: "There is a need for backward races, according to
      > anthroposophists
      > and theosophists, as long as there are still backward souls that need
      > to progress further before they can incarnate in advanced races. That
      > is what Steiner taught."
      > Rhubarb Steinar:
      > "What do they need backward races for? Biological experiments by
      > cult-doctors? I am wondering if the Steiner-people also have their own
      > Doctor Mengele."
      > These Waldorf-Critics revelations are getting more and more
      > penetrating. I mean they really worry me. Does anyone know an
      > anthroposophical doc who openly, i.e. not secretly in some dungeon,
      > practices such disgusting stuff on backward races. I mean even if they
      > *are* backward that's no reason to cut 'em and stuff 'em.
      > Frank
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic