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

Anti-intellectualism

Expand Messages
  • ted.wrinch
    Don t you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki s blacked out)? I ve been reading a newish translation of Steiner s tumultuous but subtle and
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):

      "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
      the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness, he,
      wherever he was born, and whatever language he speaks, is of our lineage, he
      belongs to us, and he will join us."

      Of this activity (of German Idealism, which Der Staudi in typical Marxist fashion calls 'boiler-plate') Enest Rennan, in a letter to David Friedrich Strauss in 1870, says:

      "in Germany" there has „for a century come about
      one of the most beautiful spiritual developments known to history, a development which, if I may venture the expression, has added a level of depth and extension to the human spirit, so that whoever has remained untouched by this
      new development is to him who has gone through it as one who knows only
      elementary mathematics is to him who is experienced in differential calculus."

      In the same letter Renan says of the Franco-Prussian war:

      "The hour is solemn. There are in France two currents of
      opinion. The ones judge thus: Let us make an end to this hated business as
      quickly as possible; let us give away everything, Alsace, Lorraine; let us sign the
      peace accord; but then, hatred unto death, preparations without rest, alliance
      with anyone convenient, unlimited permissiveness toward all Russian overreachings; one single goal, one single driving force for life: the struggle of obliteration against the German race. Others say: Let us save France's integrity, let
      us develop the constitutional institutions, let us make good our mistakes, not by
      dreaming of revenge for a war in which we were the unjust attackers, but by
      concluding a treaty with Germany and England whose effect will be to lead the
      world further on the path of free civilized morality."

      Steiner writes on the origins of the Franco Russian alliance and how the Russian drive to attack Germany was prepared by a politicised, transformation of what should have been the later 6th epoch slav impulse. He gives Khomyakov as an example, on whom Wiki says this:

      "For Khomyakov, socialism and capitalism were equally repugnant offspring of Western decadence. The West failed to solve human spiritual problems, as it stressed competition at the expense of cooperation. In his own words, "Rome kept unity at the expense of freedom, while Protestants had freedom but lost unity."[1]"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Khomyakov

      Leading to the pan-Slavism of Danilevsky:

      "Europe fears us as the newer and higher cultural Type, called to replace the wizened old age of the Romanic-Germanic civilization."

      Which Soloviev resisted in a critique in 1888, preferring to keep the mission of the slavs, that he agreed existed, as a spiritual and not geopolitical one:

      "Nevertheless, both the content of Danilevsky's book and
      his later admissions and those of his like-minded friend — meaning Strakhov,
      who advocated Danilevsky's ideas after his death — lead to a different answer:
      Europe looks upon us as an opponent and with worry because in the Russian
      people there live dark and unclear elemental forces, because its spiritual and cultural powers are meager and insufficient, whereas its demands make their appearance blatantly, and sharply defined. Mightily the calls resound out to
      Europe of what the Russian people wills as a nation, that it wants to annihilate
      Turkey and Austria, defeat Germany, wants to seize Constantinople, and if possible, India too. And when they ask us, in place of what we seize and destroy,
      what favors we want to bestow on mankind, what spiritual and cultural rejuvenation we want to bring into world evolution, we must either be silent or babble
      meaningless clichés. And if Danilevsky's bitter confession that Russia is beginning to fall ill is just, then instead of the question: why does Europe not love us?
      we would have to occupy ourselves rather with a different one, a question closer
      to us and more important to us: why and wherefore are we ill? Physically, Russia is still fairly strong, as shown in the latest Russian war; so our malady is a
      moral one. There weigh upon us, according to the words of an old author, the
      sins hidden in the folk character and not coming to our awareness — and so it is needful above all to bring these up into the light of bright consciousness. As long
      as we are spiritually bound and paralyzed, all our elemental instincts must cause
      us only harm. The essential, indeed the only essential question for true patriotism is not the question about the power of Russia and about its calling, but about
      its sins.""

      On the anti-Nationalism of the Germans, Fiche says in the same reference as above:

      "There are peoples who, while themselves retaining their peculiarities and wanting them honored, also let the other peoples have theirs, and do not begrudge
      them them, and grant them them; without doubt the Germans belong to these,
      and this trait is so deeply founded in their entire past and present life in the
      world that very often, in order to be just both towards the contemporary world
      abroad and towards antiquity, they are unjust towards themselves. Again there
      are other peoples whose narrowly ingrown self never allows them the freeness of
      separating off for a cool and calm contemplation of what is foreign, and who are
      therefore compelled to believe there is only one way of qualifying as an educated
      person, and that every time this way is the one that some chance has cast precisely upon them at this point in time; that all other people in the world have no
      other calling than to become as they are, and that they ought to pay them the
      greatest thanks if they are willing to take upon themselves the pains of thus
      forming them. Between peoples of the first kind, an interplay of mutual formation and education most beneficial to the development of man in general takes
      place, and an interpenetration in which nevertheless each one, with the good will
      of the other, remains himself. Peoples of the second kind are able to educate
      nothing, for they are unable to take hold of anything in its existent state; they
      only want to annihilate everything that stands existent, and outside of themselves everywhere produce an empty place, in which they can only keep repeating their own shape; even their initial apparent entry into foreign customs is
      only the good-natured condescension of the educator toward the apprentice who
      is now still feeble but gives good hope; even the figures of the perfection of the
      ancient world they do not like, until they have wrapped them in their garment,
      and if they could, they would wake them up from the tombs to educate them after their fashion."

      Steiner quotes Emerson on the Germans, who reminds me of similar sentiments from Coleridge and Carlysle in Britain at a similar time:

      "What distinguishes Goethe for French and English readers is a property which he shares
      with his nation, — a habitual reference to interior truth. In England and in
      America there is a respect for talent; and, if it is exerted in support of any ascertained or intelligible interest or party, or in regular opposition to any, the public
      is satisfied. In France there is even a greater delight in intellectual brilliancy for
      its own sake. And in all these countries, men of talent write from talent. It is
      enough if the understanding is occupied, the taste propitiated, — so many columns, so many hours, filled in a lively and creditable way. The German intellect
      wants the French sprightliness, the fine practical understanding of the English,
      and the American adventure; but it has a certain probity, which never rests in a
      superficial performance, but asks steadily, To what end? A German public asks
      for a controlling sincerity. Here is activity of thought; but what is it for? What
      does the man mean? Whence, whence all these thoughts?"

      He quotes Goethe on the English:

      "But while the Germans torture
      themselves solving philosophical problems, the English with their great practical
      mind laugh at us, and win the world. Everyman knows their declamations
      against the slave trade, and while they would have us believe what humane
      principles lie at the basis of such a policy, it now comes out that the true motive
      is a real object, without which the English, as is known, never do so, and which
      one should have known."

      And Emerson too:

      "The Germans think for Europe . . . The English want the faculty of
      grouping men in natural classes by an insight of general laws . . . The English
      cannot interpret the German mind."

      But in the end it'a all a bit sad and Steiner quotes from "The Genesis of the Defensive Alliance," by Emerich von Halasz, in the
      March, 1911 issue of Young Hungary:

      "„If we . . . consider that
      Andrassy stepped back from directing affairs more than thirty, and Bismarck
      more than twenty-one years ago, and this great work of peace stands ever yet in
      full power, and promises to have still further a long duration: then surely we 29
      need not surrender to a gloomy pessimism . . . Bismarck and Andrassy with
      united force found an impressive solution to the middle-European problem, and
      thereby fulfilled a civilizational work that hopefully will outlast several generations . . . In the history of alliances we seek in vain for a formation of such duration and of such mighty conception"

      There's much more of interest in the article. But all the subtly and balance that Steiner presents in it becomes reduced by Der Staudi to:

      "Waage claims that Steiner's 1916 book Gedanken während der Zeit des Krieges ("Thoughts During Wartime") does not advocate German militarism. In fact this book endorses the belligerent central powers in unambiguous terms: "The Germans could foresee that this war would one day be fought against them. It was their duty to arm themselves for it"

      http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/anthroposophy_criticism_notes.htm

      But the full passage, that he quotes from, means the opposite of his interpretation:

      "One will seek in vain among the Germans for such driving forces as had to
      lead to the present war in a similar way to those characterized by Solovieff
      among the Russians, proclaimed in advance for the French by Renan. The Germans could foresee that one would wage this war against them some day. It was
      their obligation to arm for it. What they have done to fulfill this obligation, is
      called among their opponents the cultivation of their militarism.

      What the Germans have to accomplish, for their own sake, and in order to
      fulfill the tasks laid upon them by world-historical necessities, would have been
      possible f o r t h e m to accomplish without this war, if these accomplishments
      were just as acceptable to others as they are n e c e s s a r y to them. ..."

      Rather than seeking war, in Steiner's account, the Germans sought to defend against it; and rather than seeking to impose anything on other nations by 'militarism' (one has to doubt whether this is entirely true when reflecting on the existence of Prussia at the heart of Bismarck's Germany) Germany merely wanted to be free to pursue the cultural goals of Fichte, Schiller and etc.

      To cover over this meaning in Steiner's article and replace it with a summary that says the opposite is the work of a demagogue, and not that of the intellectual, historian and scholar that Der Staudi claims himself to be. He castigates 'Steiner fans' for being 'anti-intellectual'; but a person such as himself behaving with such disregard for truth is by their action indicting them self as an 'anti-intellectual'.

      Here's to a genuine respect for the intellect, exerted in pursuit of the truth.

      T.

      Ted Wrinch
    • ted.wrinch
      Missed a bit: PS: In general it should be said that judgments about war guilt and such tended to go in the direction of Steiner s account before WW2; after
      Message 2 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Missed a bit:

        PS: In general it should be said that judgments about war guilt and such tended to go in the direction of Steiner's account before WW2; after WW2, perhaps unsurprisingly, it has gone against him.

        T.

        Ted Wrinch

        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
        >
        > Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):
        >
        > "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
        > the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness, he,
        > wherever he was born, and whatever language he speaks, is of our lineage, he
        > belongs to us, and he will join us."
        >
        > Of this activity (of German Idealism, which Der Staudi in typical Marxist fashion calls 'boiler-plate') Enest Rennan, in a letter to David Friedrich Strauss in 1870, says:
        >
        > "in Germany" there has „for a century come about
        > one of the most beautiful spiritual developments known to history, a development which, if I may venture the expression, has added a level of depth and extension to the human spirit, so that whoever has remained untouched by this
        > new development is to him who has gone through it as one who knows only
        > elementary mathematics is to him who is experienced in differential calculus."
        >
        > In the same letter Renan says of the Franco-Prussian war:
        >
        > "The hour is solemn. There are in France two currents of
        > opinion. The ones judge thus: Let us make an end to this hated business as
        > quickly as possible; let us give away everything, Alsace, Lorraine; let us sign the
        > peace accord; but then, hatred unto death, preparations without rest, alliance
        > with anyone convenient, unlimited permissiveness toward all Russian overreachings; one single goal, one single driving force for life: the struggle of obliteration against the German race. Others say: Let us save France's integrity, let
        > us develop the constitutional institutions, let us make good our mistakes, not by
        > dreaming of revenge for a war in which we were the unjust attackers, but by
        > concluding a treaty with Germany and England whose effect will be to lead the
        > world further on the path of free civilized morality."
        >
        > Steiner writes on the origins of the Franco Russian alliance and how the Russian drive to attack Germany was prepared by a politicised, transformation of what should have been the later 6th epoch slav impulse. He gives Khomyakov as an example, on whom Wiki says this:
        >
        > "For Khomyakov, socialism and capitalism were equally repugnant offspring of Western decadence. The West failed to solve human spiritual problems, as it stressed competition at the expense of cooperation. In his own words, "Rome kept unity at the expense of freedom, while Protestants had freedom but lost unity."[1]"
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Khomyakov
        >
        > Leading to the pan-Slavism of Danilevsky:
        >
        > "Europe fears us as the newer and higher cultural Type, called to replace the wizened old age of the Romanic-Germanic civilization."
        >
        > Which Soloviev resisted in a critique in 1888, preferring to keep the mission of the slavs, that he agreed existed, as a spiritual and not geopolitical one:
        >
        > "Nevertheless, both the content of Danilevsky's book and
        > his later admissions and those of his like-minded friend — meaning Strakhov,
        > who advocated Danilevsky's ideas after his death — lead to a different answer:
        > Europe looks upon us as an opponent and with worry because in the Russian
        > people there live dark and unclear elemental forces, because its spiritual and cultural powers are meager and insufficient, whereas its demands make their appearance blatantly, and sharply defined. Mightily the calls resound out to
        > Europe of what the Russian people wills as a nation, that it wants to annihilate
        > Turkey and Austria, defeat Germany, wants to seize Constantinople, and if possible, India too. And when they ask us, in place of what we seize and destroy,
        > what favors we want to bestow on mankind, what spiritual and cultural rejuvenation we want to bring into world evolution, we must either be silent or babble
        > meaningless clichés. And if Danilevsky's bitter confession that Russia is beginning to fall ill is just, then instead of the question: why does Europe not love us?
        > we would have to occupy ourselves rather with a different one, a question closer
        > to us and more important to us: why and wherefore are we ill? Physically, Russia is still fairly strong, as shown in the latest Russian war; so our malady is a
        > moral one. There weigh upon us, according to the words of an old author, the
        > sins hidden in the folk character and not coming to our awareness — and so it is needful above all to bring these up into the light of bright consciousness. As long
        > as we are spiritually bound and paralyzed, all our elemental instincts must cause
        > us only harm. The essential, indeed the only essential question for true patriotism is not the question about the power of Russia and about its calling, but about
        > its sins.""
        >
        > On the anti-Nationalism of the Germans, Fiche says in the same reference as above:
        >
        > "There are peoples who, while themselves retaining their peculiarities and wanting them honored, also let the other peoples have theirs, and do not begrudge
        > them them, and grant them them; without doubt the Germans belong to these,
        > and this trait is so deeply founded in their entire past and present life in the
        > world that very often, in order to be just both towards the contemporary world
        > abroad and towards antiquity, they are unjust towards themselves. Again there
        > are other peoples whose narrowly ingrown self never allows them the freeness of
        > separating off for a cool and calm contemplation of what is foreign, and who are
        > therefore compelled to believe there is only one way of qualifying as an educated
        > person, and that every time this way is the one that some chance has cast precisely upon them at this point in time; that all other people in the world have no
        > other calling than to become as they are, and that they ought to pay them the
        > greatest thanks if they are willing to take upon themselves the pains of thus
        > forming them. Between peoples of the first kind, an interplay of mutual formation and education most beneficial to the development of man in general takes
        > place, and an interpenetration in which nevertheless each one, with the good will
        > of the other, remains himself. Peoples of the second kind are able to educate
        > nothing, for they are unable to take hold of anything in its existent state; they
        > only want to annihilate everything that stands existent, and outside of themselves everywhere produce an empty place, in which they can only keep repeating their own shape; even their initial apparent entry into foreign customs is
        > only the good-natured condescension of the educator toward the apprentice who
        > is now still feeble but gives good hope; even the figures of the perfection of the
        > ancient world they do not like, until they have wrapped them in their garment,
        > and if they could, they would wake them up from the tombs to educate them after their fashion."
        >
        > Steiner quotes Emerson on the Germans, who reminds me of similar sentiments from Coleridge and Carlysle in Britain at a similar time:
        >
        > "What distinguishes Goethe for French and English readers is a property which he shares
        > with his nation, — a habitual reference to interior truth. In England and in
        > America there is a respect for talent; and, if it is exerted in support of any ascertained or intelligible interest or party, or in regular opposition to any, the public
        > is satisfied. In France there is even a greater delight in intellectual brilliancy for
        > its own sake. And in all these countries, men of talent write from talent. It is
        > enough if the understanding is occupied, the taste propitiated, — so many columns, so many hours, filled in a lively and creditable way. The German intellect
        > wants the French sprightliness, the fine practical understanding of the English,
        > and the American adventure; but it has a certain probity, which never rests in a
        > superficial performance, but asks steadily, To what end? A German public asks
        > for a controlling sincerity. Here is activity of thought; but what is it for? What
        > does the man mean? Whence, whence all these thoughts?"
        >
        > He quotes Goethe on the English:
        >
        > "But while the Germans torture
        > themselves solving philosophical problems, the English with their great practical
        > mind laugh at us, and win the world. Everyman knows their declamations
        > against the slave trade, and while they would have us believe what humane
        > principles lie at the basis of such a policy, it now comes out that the true motive
        > is a real object, without which the English, as is known, never do so, and which
        > one should have known."
        >
        > And Emerson too:
        >
        > "The Germans think for Europe . . . The English want the faculty of
        > grouping men in natural classes by an insight of general laws . . . The English
        > cannot interpret the German mind."
        >
        > But in the end it'a all a bit sad and Steiner quotes from "The Genesis of the Defensive Alliance," by Emerich von Halasz, in the
        > March, 1911 issue of Young Hungary:
        >
        > "„If we . . . consider that
        > Andrassy stepped back from directing affairs more than thirty, and Bismarck
        > more than twenty-one years ago, and this great work of peace stands ever yet in
        > full power, and promises to have still further a long duration: then surely we 29
        > need not surrender to a gloomy pessimism . . . Bismarck and Andrassy with
        > united force found an impressive solution to the middle-European problem, and
        > thereby fulfilled a civilizational work that hopefully will outlast several generations . . . In the history of alliances we seek in vain for a formation of such duration and of such mighty conception"
        >
        > There's much more of interest in the article. But all the subtly and balance that Steiner presents in it becomes reduced by Der Staudi to:
        >
        > "Waage claims that Steiner's 1916 book Gedanken während der Zeit des Krieges ("Thoughts During Wartime") does not advocate German militarism. In fact this book endorses the belligerent central powers in unambiguous terms: "The Germans could foresee that this war would one day be fought against them. It was their duty to arm themselves for it"
        >
        > http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/anthroposophy_criticism_notes.htm
        >
        > But the full passage, that he quotes from, means the opposite of his interpretation:
        >
        > "One will seek in vain among the Germans for such driving forces as had to
        > lead to the present war in a similar way to those characterized by Solovieff
        > among the Russians, proclaimed in advance for the French by Renan. The Germans could foresee that one would wage this war against them some day. It was
        > their obligation to arm for it. What they have done to fulfill this obligation, is
        > called among their opponents the cultivation of their militarism.
        >
        > What the Germans have to accomplish, for their own sake, and in order to
        > fulfill the tasks laid upon them by world-historical necessities, would have been
        > possible f o r t h e m to accomplish without this war, if these accomplishments
        > were just as acceptable to others as they are n e c e s s a r y to them. ..."
        >
        > Rather than seeking war, in Steiner's account, the Germans sought to defend against it; and rather than seeking to impose anything on other nations by 'militarism' (one has to doubt whether this is entirely true when reflecting on the existence of Prussia at the heart of Bismarck's Germany) Germany merely wanted to be free to pursue the cultural goals of Fichte, Schiller and etc.
        >
        > To cover over this meaning in Steiner's article and replace it with a summary that says the opposite is the work of a demagogue, and not that of the intellectual, historian and scholar that Der Staudi claims himself to be. He castigates 'Steiner fans' for being 'anti-intellectual'; but a person such as himself behaving with such disregard for truth is by their action indicting them self as an 'anti-intellectual'.
        >
        > Here's to a genuine respect for the intellect, exerted in pursuit of the truth.
        >
        > T.
        >
        > Ted Wrinch
        >
      • ted.wrinch
        And the link s been broken by Yahoo, as usual, and should have been: http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Ti
        Message 3 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          And the link's been broken by Yahoo, as usual, and should have been:

          http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Ti\
          me%20of%20War.pdf


          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
          >
          > Missed a bit:
          >
          > PS: In general it should be said that judgments about war guilt and such tended to go in the direction of Steiner's account before WW2; after WW2, perhaps unsurprisingly, it has gone against him.
          >
          > T.
          >
          > Ted Wrinch
          >
          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):
          > >
          > > "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
          > > the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness, he,
          > > wherever he was born, and whatever language he speaks, is of our lineage, he
          > > belongs to us, and he will join us."
          > >
          > > Of this activity (of German Idealism, which Der Staudi in typical Marxist fashion calls 'boiler-plate') Enest Rennan, in a letter to David Friedrich Strauss in 1870, says:
          > >
          > > "in Germany" there has „for a century come about
          > > one of the most beautiful spiritual developments known to history, a development which, if I may venture the expression, has added a level of depth and extension to the human spirit, so that whoever has remained untouched by this
          > > new development is to him who has gone through it as one who knows only
          > > elementary mathematics is to him who is experienced in differential calculus."
          > >
          > > In the same letter Renan says of the Franco-Prussian war:
          > >
          > > "The hour is solemn. There are in France two currents of
          > > opinion. The ones judge thus: Let us make an end to this hated business as
          > > quickly as possible; let us give away everything, Alsace, Lorraine; let us sign the
          > > peace accord; but then, hatred unto death, preparations without rest, alliance
          > > with anyone convenient, unlimited permissiveness toward all Russian overreachings; one single goal, one single driving force for life: the struggle of obliteration against the German race. Others say: Let us save France's integrity, let
          > > us develop the constitutional institutions, let us make good our mistakes, not by
          > > dreaming of revenge for a war in which we were the unjust attackers, but by
          > > concluding a treaty with Germany and England whose effect will be to lead the
          > > world further on the path of free civilized morality."
          > >
          > > Steiner writes on the origins of the Franco Russian alliance and how the Russian drive to attack Germany was prepared by a politicised, transformation of what should have been the later 6th epoch slav impulse. He gives Khomyakov as an example, on whom Wiki says this:
          > >
          > > "For Khomyakov, socialism and capitalism were equally repugnant offspring of Western decadence. The West failed to solve human spiritual problems, as it stressed competition at the expense of cooperation. In his own words, "Rome kept unity at the expense of freedom, while Protestants had freedom but lost unity."[1]"
          > >
          > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Khomyakov
          > >
          > > Leading to the pan-Slavism of Danilevsky:
          > >
          > > "Europe fears us as the newer and higher cultural Type, called to replace the wizened old age of the Romanic-Germanic civilization."
          > >
          > > Which Soloviev resisted in a critique in 1888, preferring to keep the mission of the slavs, that he agreed existed, as a spiritual and not geopolitical one:
          > >
          > > "Nevertheless, both the content of Danilevsky's book and
          > > his later admissions and those of his like-minded friend — meaning Strakhov,
          > > who advocated Danilevsky's ideas after his death — lead to a different answer:
          > > Europe looks upon us as an opponent and with worry because in the Russian
          > > people there live dark and unclear elemental forces, because its spiritual and cultural powers are meager and insufficient, whereas its demands make their appearance blatantly, and sharply defined. Mightily the calls resound out to
          > > Europe of what the Russian people wills as a nation, that it wants to annihilate
          > > Turkey and Austria, defeat Germany, wants to seize Constantinople, and if possible, India too. And when they ask us, in place of what we seize and destroy,
          > > what favors we want to bestow on mankind, what spiritual and cultural rejuvenation we want to bring into world evolution, we must either be silent or babble
          > > meaningless clichés. And if Danilevsky's bitter confession that Russia is beginning to fall ill is just, then instead of the question: why does Europe not love us?
          > > we would have to occupy ourselves rather with a different one, a question closer
          > > to us and more important to us: why and wherefore are we ill? Physically, Russia is still fairly strong, as shown in the latest Russian war; so our malady is a
          > > moral one. There weigh upon us, according to the words of an old author, the
          > > sins hidden in the folk character and not coming to our awareness — and so it is needful above all to bring these up into the light of bright consciousness. As long
          > > as we are spiritually bound and paralyzed, all our elemental instincts must cause
          > > us only harm. The essential, indeed the only essential question for true patriotism is not the question about the power of Russia and about its calling, but about
          > > its sins.""
          > >
          > > On the anti-Nationalism of the Germans, Fiche says in the same reference as above:
          > >
          > > "There are peoples who, while themselves retaining their peculiarities and wanting them honored, also let the other peoples have theirs, and do not begrudge
          > > them them, and grant them them; without doubt the Germans belong to these,
          > > and this trait is so deeply founded in their entire past and present life in the
          > > world that very often, in order to be just both towards the contemporary world
          > > abroad and towards antiquity, they are unjust towards themselves. Again there
          > > are other peoples whose narrowly ingrown self never allows them the freeness of
          > > separating off for a cool and calm contemplation of what is foreign, and who are
          > > therefore compelled to believe there is only one way of qualifying as an educated
          > > person, and that every time this way is the one that some chance has cast precisely upon them at this point in time; that all other people in the world have no
          > > other calling than to become as they are, and that they ought to pay them the
          > > greatest thanks if they are willing to take upon themselves the pains of thus
          > > forming them. Between peoples of the first kind, an interplay of mutual formation and education most beneficial to the development of man in general takes
          > > place, and an interpenetration in which nevertheless each one, with the good will
          > > of the other, remains himself. Peoples of the second kind are able to educate
          > > nothing, for they are unable to take hold of anything in its existent state; they
          > > only want to annihilate everything that stands existent, and outside of themselves everywhere produce an empty place, in which they can only keep repeating their own shape; even their initial apparent entry into foreign customs is
          > > only the good-natured condescension of the educator toward the apprentice who
          > > is now still feeble but gives good hope; even the figures of the perfection of the
          > > ancient world they do not like, until they have wrapped them in their garment,
          > > and if they could, they would wake them up from the tombs to educate them after their fashion."
          > >
          > > Steiner quotes Emerson on the Germans, who reminds me of similar sentiments from Coleridge and Carlysle in Britain at a similar time:
          > >
          > > "What distinguishes Goethe for French and English readers is a property which he shares
          > > with his nation, — a habitual reference to interior truth. In England and in
          > > America there is a respect for talent; and, if it is exerted in support of any ascertained or intelligible interest or party, or in regular opposition to any, the public
          > > is satisfied. In France there is even a greater delight in intellectual brilliancy for
          > > its own sake. And in all these countries, men of talent write from talent. It is
          > > enough if the understanding is occupied, the taste propitiated, — so many columns, so many hours, filled in a lively and creditable way. The German intellect
          > > wants the French sprightliness, the fine practical understanding of the English,
          > > and the American adventure; but it has a certain probity, which never rests in a
          > > superficial performance, but asks steadily, To what end? A German public asks
          > > for a controlling sincerity. Here is activity of thought; but what is it for? What
          > > does the man mean? Whence, whence all these thoughts?"
          > >
          > > He quotes Goethe on the English:
          > >
          > > "But while the Germans torture
          > > themselves solving philosophical problems, the English with their great practical
          > > mind laugh at us, and win the world. Everyman knows their declamations
          > > against the slave trade, and while they would have us believe what humane
          > > principles lie at the basis of such a policy, it now comes out that the true motive
          > > is a real object, without which the English, as is known, never do so, and which
          > > one should have known."
          > >
          > > And Emerson too:
          > >
          > > "The Germans think for Europe . . . The English want the faculty of
          > > grouping men in natural classes by an insight of general laws . . . The English
          > > cannot interpret the German mind."
          > >
          > > But in the end it'a all a bit sad and Steiner quotes from "The Genesis of the Defensive Alliance," by Emerich von Halasz, in the
          > > March, 1911 issue of Young Hungary:
          > >
          > > "„If we . . . consider that
          > > Andrassy stepped back from directing affairs more than thirty, and Bismarck
          > > more than twenty-one years ago, and this great work of peace stands ever yet in
          > > full power, and promises to have still further a long duration: then surely we 29
          > > need not surrender to a gloomy pessimism . . . Bismarck and Andrassy with
          > > united force found an impressive solution to the middle-European problem, and
          > > thereby fulfilled a civilizational work that hopefully will outlast several generations . . . In the history of alliances we seek in vain for a formation of such duration and of such mighty conception"
          > >
          > > There's much more of interest in the article. But all the subtly and balance that Steiner presents in it becomes reduced by Der Staudi to:
          > >
          > > "Waage claims that Steiner's 1916 book Gedanken während der Zeit des Krieges ("Thoughts During Wartime") does not advocate German militarism. In fact this book endorses the belligerent central powers in unambiguous terms: "The Germans could foresee that this war would one day be fought against them. It was their duty to arm themselves for it"
          > >
          > > http://www.stelling.nl/simpos/anthroposophy_criticism_notes.htm
          > >
          > > But the full passage, that he quotes from, means the opposite of his interpretation:
          > >
          > > "One will seek in vain among the Germans for such driving forces as had to
          > > lead to the present war in a similar way to those characterized by Solovieff
          > > among the Russians, proclaimed in advance for the French by Renan. The Germans could foresee that one would wage this war against them some day. It was
          > > their obligation to arm for it. What they have done to fulfill this obligation, is
          > > called among their opponents the cultivation of their militarism.
          > >
          > > What the Germans have to accomplish, for their own sake, and in order to
          > > fulfill the tasks laid upon them by world-historical necessities, would have been
          > > possible f o r t h e m to accomplish without this war, if these accomplishments
          > > were just as acceptable to others as they are n e c e s s a r y to them. ..."
          > >
          > > Rather than seeking war, in Steiner's account, the Germans sought to defend against it; and rather than seeking to impose anything on other nations by 'militarism' (one has to doubt whether this is entirely true when reflecting on the existence of Prussia at the heart of Bismarck's Germany) Germany merely wanted to be free to pursue the cultural goals of Fichte, Schiller and etc.
          > >
          > > To cover over this meaning in Steiner's article and replace it with a summary that says the opposite is the work of a demagogue, and not that of the intellectual, historian and scholar that Der Staudi claims himself to be. He castigates 'Steiner fans' for being 'anti-intellectual'; but a person such as himself behaving with such disregard for truth is by their action indicting them self as an 'anti-intellectual'.
          > >
          > > Here's to a genuine respect for the intellect, exerted in pursuit of the truth.
          > >
          > > T.
          > >
          > > Ted Wrinch
          > >
          >
        • Frank Thomas Smith
          ... I stopped reading at the pseudo-word freeness . Frank
          Message 4 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
            >
            > Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):
            >
            > "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
            > the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness,


            I stopped reading at the pseudo-word "freeness".
            Frank
          • ted.wrinch
            Surely not! I did find the article heavy going, but then that s usually how we Anglos find German Idealism, isn t it? Must also be really hard to translate
            Message 5 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Surely not!

              I did find the article heavy going, but then that's usually how we Anglos find German Idealism, isn't it? Must also be really hard to translate well I should think. Still, though it took me a while to read, in the end I thought it was well worth it.

              T.

              Ted Wrinch

              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):
              > >
              > > "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
              > > the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness,
              >
              >
              > I stopped reading at the pseudo-word "freeness".
              > Frank
              >
            • Frank Thomas Smith
              ... It may well have been worth it Ted. My objection to such translations is that the translator is a fanatic. He/she gets a horror like freeness from when
              Message 6 of 6 , Jan 19, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
                >
                > Surely not!
                >
                > I did find the article heavy going, but then that's usually how we Anglos find German Idealism, isn't it? Must also be really hard to translate well I should think. Still, though it took me a while to read, in the end I thought it was well worth it.

                It may well have been worth it Ted. My objection to such translations is that the translator is a fanatic. He/she gets a horror like "freeness" from when Steiner said the English title of Philosophy of Freedom should be "Philosophy of Spiritual Activity". Something about the German word "Frei*heit* and the English "Free*dom*". He said (apparently)that the meanings aren't exactly the same. But Steiner didn't go so far as to suggest "Philosophy of Freehood" which is absurd. But the translator of this article thinks he can use a non-existant word in order to kowtow (in deep humility surely) to der Doktor. So for me the whole translation is tainted, being by someone who is afraid to use correct English and produces a miscarriage instead. Btw, Steiner didn't speak English, so I don't see how he could claim that "freedom" isn't the same as "Freiheit". And just think of Spanish, fe, where the word is "libertad". Hell, those Latin types, can't have a clue. ;-)
                Frank


                >
                > Ted Wrinch
                >
                > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Don't you just love the i/net (and the Google cache now Wiki's blacked out)? I've been reading a newish translation of Steiner's tumultuous but subtle and penetrating 'Thoughts during the time of war', http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/Online_Translations/Thoughts%20during%20the%20Time%20of%20War.pdf. Very interesting stuff from Fichte on on being German, from Speeches to the German Nation (I think):
                > > >
                > > > "Anybody who believes in spiritual-intellectual activity, and freeness of this spiritual-intellectual activity, and wants
                > > > the eternal further education of this spiritual-intellectual activity by freeness,
                > >
                > >
                > > I stopped reading at the pseudo-word "freeness".
                > > Frank
                > >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.