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

RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Anarchosophy and Anarchism

Expand Messages
  • Frank Thomas Smith
    Tarjei, ... and ... Sorry, but your mail seems to indicate Steiner, with all the quotation marks and gospels. (Maybe you re reading too much Steiner, if I
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 1, 2004

      > Hi Frank, you wrote:
      > >You wrote, that RS said: : "The innumerable gods are man's creators, but
      > >they have now withdrawn their authority so that we shall become mature
      > >self dependent enough to make
      > >it on our own. The gods are in other words anarchists. The free spirit in
      > > man, the anarchist soul, is the goal and purpose of creation. "
      > No I didn't. I was quoting myself, not RS.

      Sorry, but your mail seems to indicate Steiner, with all the quotation marks
      and gospels. (Maybe you're reading too much Steiner, if I can't even tell
      you apart.) Anyway, I wrote my opionons "no matter who says it", if you
      remember. If you wish to reply to my mail with that in mind, please do.
    • Frank Thomas Smith
      ... however, ... this ... On second thought, my reply would be the same, only substituting Tarjei for Rudolf. Frank
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 1, 2004
        > Sorry, my mistake - I guess. If you'll re-read your original post,
        > you'll see how the mistake was understandable. I'll redo my reply with
        > in mind.

        On second thought, my reply would be the same, only substituting Tarjei for
      • Tarjei Straume
        ... I once read a book by Harry Browne entitled How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World. I m not going to talk about the content of the book, but its title.
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 1, 2004
          At 21:09 01.03.2004, Frank wrote:

          >On second thought, my reply would be the same, only substituting Tarjei
          >for Rudolf.

          I once read a book by Harry Browne entitled "How I Found Freedom in an
          Unfree World." I'm not going to talk about the content of the book, but its
          title. Anthroposophy, anarchism, anarchosophy, call it anything you like or
          delete all the labels and isms altogether. We're talking about a quest for
          liberty here, which was once so beautifully expressed by Ben Tucker:

          Our Purpose

          Liberty enters the field of journalism to speak for herself because she
          finds no one willing to speak for her. She hears no voice that always
          champions her; she knows no pen that always writes in her defence; she sees
          no hand that is always lifted to avenge her wrongs or vindicate her rights.
          Many claim to speak in her name, but few really understand her. Still fewer
          have the courage and the opportunity to consistently fight for her. Her
          battle, then, is her own to wage and win. She accepts it fearlessly, and
          with a determined spirit.

          - Benjamin R. Tucker, Liberty, August 6, 1881.

          From this quote alone, it is easy to see why Benjamin Tucker was praised
          by Rudolf Steiner as the greatest champion for freedom and given a column
          and platform by him when he was in Berlin. For Tucker and MacKay, this
          quest for liberty entailed a political agenda. Steiner, however,
          experienced MacKay's ambitions to involve him in this agenda by
          politicizing the PoF and making a social ideology out of it, as an
          ahrimanic temptation:

          "Through my experience with J.H. Mackay and Stirner, my destiny caused me
          once more to enter a world of thought where I had to go through a spiritual
          test. Ethical individualism, as I had elaborated it, is the reality of
          moral life experienced purely within the human soul. Nothing was further
          from my intention in elaborating this conception than to make it the basis
          for a purely political view. But at this time, about 1898, my soul with its
          conception of ethical individualism, was to be dragged into a kind of
          abyss. From being a purely individual experience within the human soul, it
          was to become something theoretical and external. The esoteric was to be
          diverted into the exoteric."
          - Mein Lebensgang, GA 28, Chapter 28.

          This is the difference between anarchosophy - or esoteric anarchism - and
          political anarchism. It is legitimate to call Steiner's ethical
          individualism a branch of anarchism because he did acknowledge that if he
          had to say whether or not he was an anarchist, his answer would be an
          unequivocal 'yes'. So although you have problems with these isms, that can
          be ditched altogether for all I care, I'm only trying to use the language
          in the best way I can. Personally, I think it's beside the point whether
          Peter S is an anarchist or a communist or both. What is interesting is
          whether or not he is a dialectical materialist. Steiner argued that
          dialectical materialism made freedom impossible because it enslaved
          thinking in a mechanical universe:

          "If the hypothetically assumed entity is conceived as in itself unthinking,
          acting according to purely mechanical laws, as materialism would have it,
          then it must also produce out of itself, by purely mechanical necessity,
          the human individual with all his characteristic features. The
          consciousness of freedom can then be nothing more than an illusion. For
          though I consider myself the author of my action, it is the matter of which
          I am composed and the movements going on in it that are working in me. I
          believe myself free; but in fact all my actions are nothing but the result
          of the material processes which underlie my physical and mental
          organization. It is said that we have the feeling of freedom only because
          we do not know the motives compelling us."

          - Die Philosophie der Freiheit 1894, GA 4: Chapter 10: Freiheitsphilosophie
          und Monismus.

          Over on the WC list, Walden just wrote about our list (Sun, 29 Feb 2004):

          "What a wonderful chance for discussion of Steiner's ideas (racism,
          anti-Semitism - or not) and what do we see? The Staudenmaier Inquisition
          complete with character attacks and paranoia."

          Walden has apparently ignored my long essays about the complexity of Jewry,
          anti-Semitism, assimilation, Christianity, Rudolf Steiner's ideas about
          these things, my personal ideas about the same, etc. etc. All we're
          discussing according to these people is whether or not Peter S is a
          crocodile. And because they don't understand our anthro-babble, they return
          to their jungle drum and continue beating on the worn-out racist doctrine
          slogans and the racism slogans, and they keep doing their Nazi war dance
          against us waving swastikas at us, crying anti-Semitism, totally ignorant
          of what anti-Semitism is. These attacks come from a variety of life
          conceptions and political colors, but their choir tends to howl after the
          loudest voice, so if this voice is atheist-agnostic and anarchist, they're
          all atheist-agnostic and anarchists as long as it gives them the illusion
          that Anthroposophy is taking a beating.

          For this reason, I believe it's important to establish that Rudolf Steiner
          has a rightful place in the anarchist camp, and to wipe the lies against
          him out of this camp.


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.