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

Re: Scholarship

Expand Messages
  • ted.wrinch
    A point that occurs to me is that I get cross when someone calls me an anti-Semitic, fascist, holocaust denier; most normal people would find an accusation
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 7, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      A point that occurs to me is that I get cross when someone calls me an anti-Semitic, fascist, holocaust denier; most normal people would find an accusation like this shocking. But no one in the Hole notices this kind of thing; they think it's normal and this is one reason why they can't understand sentences that contain references to it: they've become so de-sensitised to such things that their ability to parse sentences containing them is debilitated.

      T.

      Ted Wrinch

      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
      >
      > Similarly to the level of wilful confusion and misunderstanding evidenced in this latest exchange, it's interesting to see how WC are often immune to evidence that counters their theories and prejudices. Another example is that for nearly a year now Der Staudi has continued to laugh at the fact that we supposedly believe that he has a team of research assistants. This misunderstanding - we don't and never have believed this - was created by Der Staudi's misunderstanding of one of Cinnamon's posts, where she said that she wasn't going to do the large amount of research she'd need to to counter a Der Staudi thesis and that it was an imposition to expect her to and did he think that she was one of his research assistants. In a return post I said that I understood her to have said that she didn't mean that Der Staudi really had a team of research assistants and that she had meant this ironically, which she confirmed. This has been ignored to this day and Der Staudi still claims the converse. This is a kind of insanity.
      >
      > T.
      >
      > Ted Wrinch
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Steiner would have had great fun going over this philologically to show that these people have little understanding of what they read. For weeks I have been mentioning being labelled an 'anti-Semitic, fascist, holocaust denier' in the context of Der Staudi's eco-fascism article on his ISE web-site. Indeed, they have even been following my posts sufficiently to misunderstand what I'd said and laugh at my supposed confusion of believing that Der Staudi 'had his own web-site'. Yet they can't follow the sense of a simple piece of information like this.
      > >
      > > Pete K says of me in his most recent post:
      > >
      > > "We're supposed to think this guy is "bright" or something?"
      > >
      > > I'm pretty sure that I haven't claimed this. What I do think is that I'm of average intelligence but that I'm an independent thinker. And this lack of independent thinking was what I criticised the Hole for when I was over there - things don't seem to have got any better since I left.
      > >
      > > T.
      > >
      > > Ted Wrinch
      > >
      > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Ah - I see what's happened. The Hole thinks my talk of Der Staudi's 'institute' refers to his university! Hah! Well, if they could actually understand what they read they would have noticed that I've been talking about Der Staudi's *Institute* of Social Ecology for a few weeks now. This is not his university!!
      > > >
      > > > T.
      > > >
      > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > >
      > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Pete K over on WC has said:
      > > > >
      > > > > "As usual, Ted has misunderstood the point completely. You're "bragging" about
      > > > > turning Peter in to the "authorities"…"
      > > > >
      > > > > No, I'm not. Your previous posting, that provided the context to your quote above, said:
      > > > >
      > > > > "Interestingly, I've now had a brief e-mail correspondence
      > > > > with a leading member of Der Staudi's institute and he sees nothing wrong with
      > > > > his associate's low behaviour and seems to think that his calling people
      > > > > anti-semitic, fascist holocaust deniers without any evidence is perfectly
      > > > > acceptable."
      > > > >
      > > > > So there you have it... The leading members of Peter's institute don't take
      > > > > crank calls too seriously!
      > > > >
      > > > > There's no mention of 'turning Peter in to the authorities' - why would there be? Why would I mention this to PS' institute, since it's not relevant to them? Still, all part of your (and Alicia's) creeping insanity I suppose.
      > > > >
      > > > > T.
      > > > >
      > > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > > >
      > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > I think that Alicia's joining the ever-growing line-up of the not quite sane on WC. According to her I'm
      > > > > >
      > > > > > "probably not the first nut presenting the same or similar complaints. The other ones just don't brag
      > > > > > about it as willingly."
      > > > > >
      > > > > > I'm bragging? About *not* being an anti-Semitic, fascist, holocaust-denier? She maybe happy to belong to such a group, but to normal people not being a member of this group is something they would definitely 'brag' about, if they had been accused of the opposite by someone.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > T.
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Hot on the Mills and Boon bodice ripper 'scholarship' that Zander has been serving up I've come across a similarly incisive piece of Der Staudi 'scholarship' (sorry for the sarcasm; in this case it seems appropriate). In both cases it seems to me that we are dealing with people that are not wholly sane, for whom logic and evidence can be bent into almost any shape to serve a polemical objective. Interestingly, I've now had a brief e-mail correspondence with a leading member of Der Staudi's institute and he sees nothing wrong with his associate's low behaviour and seems to think that his calling people anti-semitic, fascist holocaust deniers without any evidence is perfectly acceptable. Anyway, back to Der Staudi, who posted this a year ago on WC and - slightly modified - as part of his 3-folding website article:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > "Even in the political sphere, however, Steiner's attitude toward democracy was at times notably negative. In October 1917, for instance, he ridiculed "democratic institutions"
      > > > > > > as mere tools of the "powers of darkness" who are always "pulling the strings"
      > > > > > > from behind the scenes. (Steiner, The Fall of the Spirits of Darkness, 223)"
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > (WC, message 16506)
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > This is a classic piece of misinformation. The excerpt in question (in http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA177/English/RSP1993/19171027p01.html) is discussing the manipulation of democratic institutions by financial interests. A little latter on in the lecture Steiner mentions the work 'La Democratie et les Financiers' by the French journalist Francis Delaisi's , where he lists the wealthy interests that a lot of control of France and are who are able to influence the voting behaviour of elected representatives simply because they supplied most of their income in those days. Steiner is not arguing against democracy, he is arguing for genuine democracy, that is democracy not manipulated by economic and financial interests. Der Staudi's misuse of material in this manner is not honest or scholarly but does serve his polemics well.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Delaisis work is not popular these days - though it should be for people that are interested in the truth - but the Scottish anthroposphist Paul Carline bought himself an old copy of the work a few years ago and translated an interesting excerpt from it (see http://www.greanvillepost.com/2011/10/08/paul-carline-revolts-everywhere-the-broader-picture/):
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > "Some adepts of the new fascist religion – partisans of authoritarian regimes and contemptuous of liberty – may wish to see this little book as an accusation against democracy and parliamentarianism.
      > > > > > >    I protest in advance – if there should be any need of it – against any selective quoting, too easy a mutilation of my thinking.
      > > > > > >   A child of the people, a scholarship student at the Lycée and the University, I owe everything to the Republic. For forty years – without belonging to any political party (a reading of this book will explain why) – I have not ceased to fight for it [the Republic]: during the Dreyfus Affair, in meetings, in the media, in the unions, in the Ligue de la jeune République, in the League for Human Rights, in the Watch Committee of Antifascist Intellectuals; and I am proud to find myself at the age of 60 on the same side of the barricades as 30 years ago.
      > > > > > >    I believe in democracy, because I think that there can be no durable economic and social equilibrium except where all members of society have equal rights and equal opportunities.
      > > > > > >    I believe in parliamentarianism because – whatever the inevitable flaws and errors of the representative system – it matters that the last word rests with the simple citizen, because the state was made for him, not him for the state.
      > > > > > >    I don't believe it is necessary to change the Constitution (that kind of machine never gives a 100% return!), but I affirm once more that – as I have already twice predicted – democracy will lead us into war and ruination as long as its levers of power are in the hands of a secret and irresponsible oligarchy.
      > > > > > >    The aim of this book is to free parliament, not condemn it.
      > > > > > >    May it, supported by this forewarning, free itself from an oligarchy which reduces it to impotence – and which tomorrow will blame it for all the mistakes it has made."
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > One can well imagine Der Staudi, self styled supporter of social progress, joining the 'partisans of authoritarian regimes' in condemning Delaisi's work, since it is a conspiracy theory and is critical of the existing forms of democracy, just like Steiner, whose work he has already condemned for the same reasons.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > T.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.