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

Pete K the Greek Ignorabimus- supremo

Expand Messages
  • Frank Thomas Smith
    I knows I should just ignore those imbeciles in the WC, but sometimes I just can t resist. Take Pete K, who claims to know so much about anthroposphy and
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 11, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      I knows I should just ignore those imbeciles in the WC, but sometimes I just can't resist. Take Pete K, who claims to know so much about anthroposphy and Waldorf now proves that he is completely ignorant of either subject...or any subject for all I know...by writing the following:

      "I challenge ANY and ALL Anthroposophists to produce a statement from Steiner that says something like "All men are created equal"... Something that says people of all races TODAY (or in his day) are ALL EQUAL. Not a statement that all races will someday be equal... but a simple statement uttered by Steiner at ANY TIME IN HIS LIFE that declared that all humans are equal TODAY!

      The reason I don't believe this statement is available is that Steiner REALLY didn't believe all humans are equal. He actually believed some human races are ascending and others are in decline. Why not acknowledge this instead of lying about it?

      Anyway, my challenge stands to anyone... Either Steiner believed we are all equal or he didn't. There's plenty of evidence that he believed races are hierarchically arranged. I'm waiting for one shred of evidence that Steiner believed otherwise."
      ________
      Of course he didn't believe everyone is equal...nor does any sensible person think that. Considering myself sensible, I don't either. Pete may think he's equal to Einstein, MLK, JFK, Mozart and Ronald Reagan. (Well, maybe the last one he is) According to R. Steiner and ME, all men are equal before the law, have equal rights - but spiritually there's a yawning abyss between a creep like Pete and almost everyone else. (I know, Tarjei, I'm supposed to love even creeps, but it's hard.) "All men are created equal..." - sure, and they retain human rights, but they sure as hell don't stay equal.
      Frank
    • ted.wrinch
      You re right of course Frank - we are all different in our capacities and abilities, but should be equal in our opportunities. But this is an area that
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 12, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        You're right of course Frank - we are all different in our capacities and abilities, but should be equal in our opportunities. But this is an area that intersects with political correctness in sugarland, it seems, and Pete K has previously argued that there is nothing distinctive about modern European culture either and that it could as easily have begun in the Amazon jungle in the C14 as in Renaissance Italy.

        Der Staudi has responded to Pete K's recent claim that Steiner's writing is irredeemably racist by surprisingly posting a few quotes from Steiner's hundreds of pages of writing and lectures that argue that nation and race need to be transcended in our time. However, after this brief and never previously seen moment of balance, he then lapsed back into his usual mode of one-sided hostility and supported Pete's perspective. From this perspective, Der Staudi has claimed that Steiner believed that the Jewish people provided the 'template for nationalist particularity' and that when Steiner made an argument against nationalism he was really making an argument against the Jewish people as such and for anti-Semitism. The argument Der Staudi is making here is that when Steiner described the Jewish culture of the Old Testament period as a 'folk culture', that if carried into our age becomes nationalistic, he was arguing that Jewishness and Judaism were paradigmatic of nationalism. But this is not what Steiner was saying. Instead, he said that all people of the period of the Old Testament were more or less nationalistic, and that this was right for those days. The Egyptians, Babylonians and Jews were all led by folk spirits and believed that their own cultures were the superior ones:

        "In the latter ['Old Testament teaching'], the human being did not yet fully feel the "I AM" in himself. He still possessed a remnant of a dreamy state of consciousness, held over from those ancient times when he did not feel himself as a personality, but as a part of a Divine Being, just as the animal today is still a member of a group-soul. Mankind had its beginning in the group-soul and then advanced to a state of independent, personal existence, in which every individual experiences the "I AM," and the Christ is the force that has brought it to this consciousness of the "I AM.""

        Gospel of St John, lecture 3.

        After 10 years of being presented with the same obscure Steiner quotes from untranslated German that Der Staudi is fond of digging up he has again claimed from similar sources that Steiner said that 'the Jews ought to disappear into the surrounding peoples', implying that Steiner believed they should cease to exist. I found this rare quote in English from Steiner on this topic:

        "The Jews worshipped the one God Jehovah and men were thereby saved from wholly losing their way in polytheism. A natural consequence has been that the Jews have always kept themselves distinct from other men and so too — as always happens in such a case — have in many respects evoked dislike and antipathy. The right attitude to take to-day is that in the times to come it will not be necessary to segregate any particular culture in order to prevent its dissipation — as the Jews have been doing for centuries — but that this practice must be superseded byspiritual knowledge.

        Star Wisdom, Moon Religion, Sun Religion, lecture 3

        In other words, Steiner was not arguing for the dissipation of Jewish culture but Jewish nationalism (or 'particularism' in Der Staudi's terms), the same that partially led to the setting up of the state of Israel. In Steiner's view, a spiritual knowledge and understanding of Jewish culture would be sufficient to preserve it. He was wrong on this score, as the tragedy of the holocaust subsequently showed, but it's clear from his membership of the group fighting anti-Semitism in his youth, his friendship throughout his life with many prominent and ordinary Jews, and the deep respect for Jewish culture shown throughout his writings that he would have fought against the anti-Semitism of '30s Germany, had he been alive, as hard as he fought against the nationalism of previous decades.

        Der Staudi has also said that Steiner was a pan-German nationalist, and that his view of the Universal Human of the future was 'plausibly' that of a 'white German'. But how likely is this? Of many quotes that could found on the Universal Human by Steiner this one is typical:

        "It has no taint of Nation or peoples; for it is that which did not come down from the Cosmos but which the Christ came to find, and with which He indicted Himself. Christ, unlike the Jehovah-Deity, United Himself with no nation but with universal humanity. He was in the confraternity of those Gods from whom the nations took their rise, but He left that realm when it was ready to pass away; He came to earth and took up His abode in humanity at large."


        Der Staudi aligns Steiner with the pan-Germans of his day in what he calls 'nationalist cosmopolitanism', which is more commonly known as German imperialism. But what does Steiner say about cosmopolitanism?

        "The internationalism prevailing in the age of Goethe assumed this form. It is this kind of internationalism that permeates such thoughts as are found, for instance, in The Boundaries of the State by William Von Humboldt. It is the striving of a true cosmopolitanism which, by assimilating all that can be acquired from a love extended to other races, ennobles and uplifts the individual people; knowledge of one's own race is sought by assimilating all that is idealistic, great and beautiful in other peoples of the Earth. It is because of this that in Germany's days of spiritual prime there arose from out of the rhythmic life of her people a lofty cosmopolitanism which had been sought from among all other peoples. Just think how Herder's search took him among other peoples, how he tried to unravel the deepest being of all peoples of the Earth! How penetrated he was by the thought that permeating the individual man of flesh there is another man, greater and more powerful, who can be discovered only when we are able to pour ourselves out over all peoples."

        "The kind of internationalism which appears in Marxism and all that has developed from it is the result of remaining stationary within a one-sided and wholly unpractical system of thought that is applied merely to the world of sense and has not penetrated to the real national qualities. True internationalism, by contrast, springs from a love which goes out to all peoples and races in order that the light received from them may be kindled in the deeds, concepts and creations of one's own people. Each individual race must so find its place in the great chorus of the peoples on the Earth that it contributes to the full understanding which can alone unite them all in real and mutual knowledge."

        "This lecture should show you that the hatred and antipathy in the world today can indeed be followed by international love with healing in its wings. This is indeed possible. But we are living in an age when all that is possible must be consciously, deliberately and freely striven for by men. There must be knowledge of the conditions requisite for uniting the peoples of the Earth, in order that, as a result of this knowledge, each individual people may help to make the waves of love follow those of hatred. Human love alone has power to heal the wounds of hatred. If mankind has no wish for this love, chaos will remain. That is the terrible alternative now facing men who have knowledge. Those who realise its terrors know that the souls of men dare not sleep, for otherwise, as a result of the powerlessness caused by the sleep into which the souls of the peoples have fallen, the healing waves of love will not be able to flow over the waves of hatred."


        The Peoples of the Earth in the Light of Anthroposophy, 1920

        T.

        Ted Wrinch

        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > I knows I should just ignore those imbeciles in the WC, but sometimes I just can't resist. Take Pete K, who claims to know so much about anthroposphy and Waldorf now proves that he is completely ignorant of either subject...or any subject for all I know...by writing the following:
        >
        > "I challenge ANY and ALL Anthroposophists to produce a statement from Steiner that says something like "All men are created equal"... Something that says people of all races TODAY (or in his day) are ALL EQUAL. Not a statement that all races will someday be equal... but a simple statement uttered by Steiner at ANY TIME IN HIS LIFE that declared that all humans are equal TODAY!
        >
        > The reason I don't believe this statement is available is that Steiner REALLY didn't believe all humans are equal. He actually believed some human races are ascending and others are in decline. Why not acknowledge this instead of lying about it?
        >
        > Anyway, my challenge stands to anyone... Either Steiner believed we are all equal or he didn't. There's plenty of evidence that he believed races are hierarchically arranged. I'm waiting for one shred of evidence that Steiner believed otherwise."
        > ________
        > Of course he didn't believe everyone is equal...nor does any sensible person think that. Considering myself sensible, I don't either. Pete may think he's equal to Einstein, MLK, JFK, Mozart and Ronald Reagan. (Well, maybe the last one he is) According to R. Steiner and ME, all men are equal before the law, have equal rights - but spiritually there's a yawning abyss between a creep like Pete and almost everyone else. (I know, Tarjei, I'm supposed to love even creeps, but it's hard.) "All men are created equal..." - sure, and they retain human rights, but they sure as hell don't stay equal.
        > Frank
        >
      • ted.wrinch
        The internationalism prevailing in the age of Goethe assumed this form… It s worth pointing out that at the time Steiner is describing here, before the
        Message 3 of 4 , Nov 12, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          "The internationalism prevailing in the age of Goethe assumed this form…"

          It's worth pointing out that at the time Steiner is describing here, before the political unification under Bismarck, Germany was known in England as the nation of poets and musicians, and leading examples of English culture, like Carlysle and Coleridge, knew German culture well and used the notions of German Idealism in their own writings.

          T.

          Ted Wrinch

          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
          >
          > You're right of course Frank - we are all different in our capacities and abilities, but should be equal in our opportunities. But this is an area that intersects with political correctness in sugarland, it seems, and Pete K has previously argued that there is nothing distinctive about modern European culture either and that it could as easily have begun in the Amazon jungle in the C14 as in Renaissance Italy.
          >
          > Der Staudi has responded to Pete K's recent claim that Steiner's writing is irredeemably racist by surprisingly posting a few quotes from Steiner's hundreds of pages of writing and lectures that argue that nation and race need to be transcended in our time. However, after this brief and never previously seen moment of balance, he then lapsed back into his usual mode of one-sided hostility and supported Pete's perspective. From this perspective, Der Staudi has claimed that Steiner believed that the Jewish people provided the 'template for nationalist particularity' and that when Steiner made an argument against nationalism he was really making an argument against the Jewish people as such and for anti-Semitism. The argument Der Staudi is making here is that when Steiner described the Jewish culture of the Old Testament period as a 'folk culture', that if carried into our age becomes nationalistic, he was arguing that Jewishness and Judaism were paradigmatic of nationalism. But this is not what Steiner was saying. Instead, he said that all people of the period of the Old Testament were more or less nationalistic, and that this was right for those days. The Egyptians, Babylonians and Jews were all led by folk spirits and believed that their own cultures were the superior ones:
          >
          > "In the latter ['Old Testament teaching'], the human being did not yet fully feel the "I AM" in himself. He still possessed a remnant of a dreamy state of consciousness, held over from those ancient times when he did not feel himself as a personality, but as a part of a Divine Being, just as the animal today is still a member of a group-soul. Mankind had its beginning in the group-soul and then advanced to a state of independent, personal existence, in which every individual experiences the "I AM," and the Christ is the force that has brought it to this consciousness of the "I AM.""
          >
          > Gospel of St John, lecture 3.
          >
          > After 10 years of being presented with the same obscure Steiner quotes from untranslated German that Der Staudi is fond of digging up he has again claimed from similar sources that Steiner said that 'the Jews ought to disappear into the surrounding peoples', implying that Steiner believed they should cease to exist. I found this rare quote in English from Steiner on this topic:
          >
          > "The Jews worshipped the one God Jehovah and men were thereby saved from wholly losing their way in polytheism. A natural consequence has been that the Jews have always kept themselves distinct from other men and so too — as always happens in such a case — have in many respects evoked dislike and antipathy. The right attitude to take to-day is that in the times to come it will not be necessary to segregate any particular culture in order to prevent its dissipation — as the Jews have been doing for centuries — but that this practice must be superseded byspiritual knowledge.
          >
          > Star Wisdom, Moon Religion, Sun Religion, lecture 3
          >
          > In other words, Steiner was not arguing for the dissipation of Jewish culture but Jewish nationalism (or 'particularism' in Der Staudi's terms), the same that partially led to the setting up of the state of Israel. In Steiner's view, a spiritual knowledge and understanding of Jewish culture would be sufficient to preserve it. He was wrong on this score, as the tragedy of the holocaust subsequently showed, but it's clear from his membership of the group fighting anti-Semitism in his youth, his friendship throughout his life with many prominent and ordinary Jews, and the deep respect for Jewish culture shown throughout his writings that he would have fought against the anti-Semitism of '30s Germany, had he been alive, as hard as he fought against the nationalism of previous decades.
          >
          > Der Staudi has also said that Steiner was a pan-German nationalist, and that his view of the Universal Human of the future was 'plausibly' that of a 'white German'. But how likely is this? Of many quotes that could found on the Universal Human by Steiner this one is typical:
          >
          > "It has no taint of Nation or peoples; for it is that which did not come down from the Cosmos but which the Christ came to find, and with which He indicted Himself. Christ, unlike the Jehovah-Deity, United Himself with no nation but with universal humanity. He was in the confraternity of those Gods from whom the nations took their rise, but He left that realm when it was ready to pass away; He came to earth and took up His abode in humanity at large."
          >
          >
          > Der Staudi aligns Steiner with the pan-Germans of his day in what he calls 'nationalist cosmopolitanism', which is more commonly known as German imperialism. But what does Steiner say about cosmopolitanism?
          >
          > "The internationalism prevailing in the age of Goethe assumed this form. It is this kind of internationalism that permeates such thoughts as are found, for instance, in The Boundaries of the State by William Von Humboldt. It is the striving of a true cosmopolitanism which, by assimilating all that can be acquired from a love extended to other races, ennobles and uplifts the individual people; knowledge of one's own race is sought by assimilating all that is idealistic, great and beautiful in other peoples of the Earth. It is because of this that in Germany's days of spiritual prime there arose from out of the rhythmic life of her people a lofty cosmopolitanism which had been sought from among all other peoples. Just think how Herder's search took him among other peoples, how he tried to unravel the deepest being of all peoples of the Earth! How penetrated he was by the thought that permeating the individual man of flesh there is another man, greater and more powerful, who can be discovered only when we are able to pour ourselves out over all peoples."
          >
          > "The kind of internationalism which appears in Marxism and all that has developed from it is the result of remaining stationary within a one-sided and wholly unpractical system of thought that is applied merely to the world of sense and has not penetrated to the real national qualities. True internationalism, by contrast, springs from a love which goes out to all peoples and races in order that the light received from them may be kindled in the deeds, concepts and creations of one's own people. Each individual race must so find its place in the great chorus of the peoples on the Earth that it contributes to the full understanding which can alone unite them all in real and mutual knowledge."
          >
          > "This lecture should show you that the hatred and antipathy in the world today can indeed be followed by international love with healing in its wings. This is indeed possible. But we are living in an age when all that is possible must be consciously, deliberately and freely striven for by men. There must be knowledge of the conditions requisite for uniting the peoples of the Earth, in order that, as a result of this knowledge, each individual people may help to make the waves of love follow those of hatred. Human love alone has power to heal the wounds of hatred. If mankind has no wish for this love, chaos will remain. That is the terrible alternative now facing men who have knowledge. Those who realise its terrors know that the souls of men dare not sleep, for otherwise, as a result of the powerlessness caused by the sleep into which the souls of the peoples have fallen, the healing waves of love will not be able to flow over the waves of hatred."
          >
          >
          > The Peoples of the Earth in the Light of Anthroposophy, 1920
          >
          > T.
          >
          > Ted Wrinch
          >
          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > I knows I should just ignore those imbeciles in the WC, but sometimes I just can't resist. Take Pete K, who claims to know so much about anthroposphy and Waldorf now proves that he is completely ignorant of either subject...or any subject for all I know...by writing the following:
          > >
          > > "I challenge ANY and ALL Anthroposophists to produce a statement from Steiner that says something like "All men are created equal"... Something that says people of all races TODAY (or in his day) are ALL EQUAL. Not a statement that all races will someday be equal... but a simple statement uttered by Steiner at ANY TIME IN HIS LIFE that declared that all humans are equal TODAY!
          > >
          > > The reason I don't believe this statement is available is that Steiner REALLY didn't believe all humans are equal. He actually believed some human races are ascending and others are in decline. Why not acknowledge this instead of lying about it?
          > >
          > > Anyway, my challenge stands to anyone... Either Steiner believed we are all equal or he didn't. There's plenty of evidence that he believed races are hierarchically arranged. I'm waiting for one shred of evidence that Steiner believed otherwise."
          > > ________
          > > Of course he didn't believe everyone is equal...nor does any sensible person think that. Considering myself sensible, I don't either. Pete may think he's equal to Einstein, MLK, JFK, Mozart and Ronald Reagan. (Well, maybe the last one he is) According to R. Steiner and ME, all men are equal before the law, have equal rights - but spiritually there's a yawning abyss between a creep like Pete and almost everyone else. (I know, Tarjei, I'm supposed to love even creeps, but it's hard.) "All men are created equal..." - sure, and they retain human rights, but they sure as hell don't stay equal.
          > > Frank
          > >
          >
        • Kim
          Steiner simply described how cultures developed and was followed by new cultures, following this rule: It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor
          Message 4 of 4 , Nov 15, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Steiner simply described how cultures developed and was followed by new cultures, following this rule:
            It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
            Charles Darwin
            When fex the Persian culture had reached it's height another more primitive culture, the Greek, had to take over to reach the next level, building on the Persian, but not bound by the luxury or traditions the old culture had.
            Kim
            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > I knows I should just ignore those imbeciles in the WC, but sometimes I just can't resist. Take Pete K, who claims to know so much about anthroposphy and Waldorf now proves that he is completely ignorant of either subject...or any subject for all I know...by writing the following:
            >
            > "I challenge ANY and ALL Anthroposophists to produce a statement from Steiner that says something like "All men are created equal"... Something that says people of all races TODAY (or in his day) are ALL EQUAL. Not a statement that all races will someday be equal... but a simple statement uttered by Steiner at ANY TIME IN HIS LIFE that declared that all humans are equal TODAY!
            >
            > The reason I don't believe this statement is available is that Steiner REALLY didn't believe all humans are equal. He actually believed some human races are ascending and others are in decline. Why not acknowledge this instead of lying about it?
            >
            > Anyway, my challenge stands to anyone... Either Steiner believed we are all equal or he didn't. There's plenty of evidence that he believed races are hierarchically arranged. I'm waiting for one shred of evidence that Steiner believed otherwise."
            > ________
            > Of course he didn't believe everyone is equal...nor does any sensible person think that. Considering myself sensible, I don't either. Pete may think he's equal to Einstein, MLK, JFK, Mozart and Ronald Reagan. (Well, maybe the last one he is) According to R. Steiner and ME, all men are equal before the law, have equal rights - but spiritually there's a yawning abyss between a creep like Pete and almost everyone else. (I know, Tarjei, I'm supposed to love even creeps, but it's hard.) "All men are created equal..." - sure, and they retain human rights, but they sure as hell don't stay equal.
            > Frank
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.