Suddenly appeared, on the critics list, a link to a new article, in French, and a new name: Grégoire Perra (he has a blog). Or, the article wasn’t actually new, it had been published a year ago, but I — and apparently some others — had not seen it before. It — entitled ‘Anthroposophical indoctrination of students in Waldorf-Steiner schools’ — was published by a French anti-cult organisation, UNADFI.
Cathy writes about Perra and the article:
This is such an important article; the conclusion he draws is that even if only a few students become full blown anthroposophists, this subtle indoctrination masked as education is an affront to the freedom of children.
The author was indeed a member of First Class, and recently heavily involved, not only as a teacher but on various anthroposophical committees connected to education etc,, writing articles, and even with with the school of Spiritual science in Switzerland, (which he states with an air of pride and awe I think!)
He confirms unequivocally anthroposophical indoctrination is rife in Steiner Waldorf schools, and the subtle, subliminal way authorities and those “outsiders” are led up the wrong path. He says how organised this method of indoctrination is, and the words ” subliminal, surreptitious, ritual secrets, insidious, indoctrination, leitmotif, charismatic figures” etc abound.
Read the rest of her post, it’s really worth it. I might even try to struggle through the original article in French one day… Diana, who also reads French much faster than I could ever imagine doing, writes that ’it is damning. Students are taught to see the world through the eyes of Rudolf Steiner, without ever “naming” for them what they are learning (anthroposophy). Limiting of cultural references, without the students having the context to understand that the world view they are imbibing is partial.’
An anonymous list reader sent Dan some links to relevant posts on Grégoire Perra’s blog; it appears that, among other things, he and the cult organisation have been threatend with a lawsuit for making these claims and accusations against anthroposophy; this, on the part of anthroposophy, is a kind of behaviour that only serves to reinforce the impression of a cult. Perhaps in particular when used against a defector of the movement, who claims the kinds of things Perra is claiming. Even anthroposophists should understand that suing people is not the way to go in cases like that (unless they want a bad reputation… as an ethically challenged cult). That what he writes is controversial stuff is pretty clear, however, even from my limited reading so far.
Oh thanks Alicia! I’m off the radar recently, but caught sight of this article and it struck me as so important; it’s so recent, he has been involved at the highest level, and answers questions lots of people have asked for years. (One of the things he addresses is why the authorities don’t catch on, and why there aren’t more ex teachers who speak up.)
First, I just can’t wait for the Anthroposophical Society to sue me too… Second, I apologize that my French isn’t good enough to help with the translation… Third, I hope efforts to translate this material go forward as I believe this may be one of the most important sources English-speaking critics have uncovered.
“He confirms unequivocally anthroposophical indoctrination is rife in Steiner Waldorf schools, and the subtle, subliminal way authorities and those “outsiders” are led up the wrong path. He says how organised this method of indoctrination is, and the words ” subliminal, surreptitious, ritual secrets, insidious, indoctrination, leitmotif, charismatic figures” etc abound.”
I too, am looking forwards to a translation of what Perra says. I will be interested to see on what foundations these various judgements are made. I have seen just such language used by left-wingers, feminists, religious fundamentalists, and other extremists to describe the non-waldorf education system in England.
Without Cathy’s summary of some of the points/the content I wouldn’t have dared post anything this early — I couldn’t have come up with it so quickly and accurately with my french or with google…
This is potentially very interesting. Of course, it’s not news that waldorf education is anthroposophical, and when waldorf schools and organisations aren’t fully open about that (and all the consequences) they get themselves into situations where people feel they need to be exposed, and it all tends to become or at least sound more extreme than if they had practiced full openness and honesty from the beginning. It’s interesting to see examples, but the entire reason it is considered a revelation of sorts that somebody says waldorf is immersed in anthroposophy is that there’s a lack of honesty (and a lack of acknowledging that anthroposophy is not some kind of neutral worldview that could be considered only beneficial to children to be brought up according to). It’s really good that people say that waldorf is deeply anthroposophical, but it shouldn’t be a big thing.
I kind of wonder what the secrets are except first class though. (Here’s one reason I think it’s good for everyone that these lessons are out there — they aren’t actually secret anymore. All the drama about that can simply be gone in the future.) That first class lessons are held in France and at the Goetheanum is simply no huge revelation (they’re even listed online at the website…). Perhaps in France anthros have gone more extreme and more sectarian and secretive; it’s difficult to judge.
Another reason for me to post it was the blatantly empty threat from the A S. I have very little respect for organisations (and people) that act like this. To throw in the possibility of legal actions only to intimidate. That’s cultish — and stupid. And deserves negative attention.
I want neither threats nor action myself, and I trust it’s not in the swedish A S’s interest to go down that route either. As for Sune, his threats were always empty — and hopefully he’s thought better of it. If you don’t want to look like a cult — and if you want to deserve any respect at all — you just have to avoid things like that, and to swallow that people don’t always think of you nicely or talk about you in positive terms.
@Tom H-S ” left-wingers, feminists, religious fundamentalists, and other extremists”
crikey- do you see feminists and left wingers as “extremists” Tom?
(Some certainly are…)
As Alica says, ‘some certainly are’.
I remember being told in the 70′s that even the maths we were teaching was part of the male supremacist culture, part of the ritual diminuition of the female. Certainly the Marxist/Leninists and various kinds of Trotskyists who ran the NUT in Lewisham and many other London Boroughs in the same period used this sort language about the way in which the capitalist state maintained its stranglehold on the poor hapless proletariat and the deluded liberal middle-classes – ‘[The] subtle, subliminal way…… “outsiders” are led up the wrong path. ….. how organised this method of indoctrination is, ….and the words ” subliminal, surreptitious,…… insidious, indoctrination, leitmotif, charismatic figures” etc.”. They were talking about what happens in schools and seeing it all as a way in which the capitalist state controls the thinking of its citizens and maintains itself in power.( Or men maintain themselves in power if they were radical feminists.)
There’s a book: Janja Lalich, Bounded Choice. Lalich is a sociologist and cult researcher but she was once herself a member of a left-wing political cult.
Interesting book. (The other example she uses is the… What were they called, they committed mass suicide because they believed they were going to leave earth with that comet…)
Well I’m sure there’s plenty of theories about “indoctrination” and deluding the proletariat, but here we’re talking about anthroposophy. Funny that, how the one thing that’s being discussed is shoved aside and the doings of anthroposophists aren’t addressed.
I don’t think Lalich makes any claims about deluding the proletariat. The point — the I one tried to make — is that political groups (in her case, a communist group) can function as cults as well.
I’m certainly not brushing aside what Perra says. In fact, I’d like to know more and hope I will. It’s a matter of fact and (to me) uncontroversial that the same kinds of arguments apply to other movements. Not that itsel necessarily changes anything.
As for waldorf education being immersed in anthroposophy, that — to me — is nothing new and far from brushing it aside I’ve dealt with it in numerous posts over the years.
Was supposed to write ‘Not that that itself…’.
Feminism is “extreme,” Tom? Wow. Are we going to have to debrief you too, now that we’re seemingly done (gave up) trying to fix Jan Luiten’s head?
I’ll just quote Caitlin Moran, asking younger women who disavow feminism just exactly WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM.
“What do you think feminism IS, ladies? What part of ‘liberation for women’ is not for you? Is it freedom to vote? The right not to be owned by the man you marry? The campaign for equal pay? ‘Vogue’ by Madonna? Jeans? Did all that good shit GET ON YOUR NERVES? Or were you just DRUNK AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY?”
Don’t you think some of it is extreme? I do. The Valerie Solanas fans, for example. When feminists idolize a psychotic woman, call men ‘animals’, and sometimes even think men are better off dead — I’m wondering if some of this is not to blame for people starting to disrespect feminism, which is, in my view, an extremely unfortunate development.
I don’t trust people in general to be able to spot the (not so subtle) nuance between wanting equal rights and wanting to eradicate men. To put it in a less than nuanced way.
Oh, Jan. He seems to have gone. I wrote a little summary, with links to documents and some comments, and quoting your summary — I want that thread not to disappear in the archives as the topic changed a lot… I couldn’t post it though because I felt I need to be able to keep an eye on it, and can’t at the moment. But I will. I also wondered if Jan had something more to say, but it appears he doesn’t. (I got the Kertész book the other day. By the way. Just tried to start to read it but unfortunately feel very sleepy and am keeping myself awake online instead ;-) I’ll regain full consciousness soon hopefully.)
I am also still typing on the Dutch article. It is laborious, however, and I’m not sure it’s really worth typing the whole article in. But every time I get to something I think should be quoted, I end up thinking I need more of the context around it. So it is slow going.
Oh, you will find the Kertesz book very worthwhile and engrossing, I’m sure, if you can stay awake through the first couple of chapters. It is a very insidious narrative – well, what happened to him, and millions of others, was insidious. Kind of like a frog in water heated very slowly to boiling … not recognizing what was happening until it was far too late.
Well, yes, there was the “all men are rapists” Andrea Dworkin school of feminism. But this is a small minority; I don’t think such views are represented at all today.
I don’t know who Valerie Solanas is … maybe I need to find out.
I was not trying to diss feminism. I was married to a strong feminist for 33 years and loved what she stood for. Neither am I trying to derail the discussion in terms of the focus on anthroposophy and its percieved shadow side. I was just saying that the sort of buzz words quoted by Cathy can and have been applied by all sorts of groups taking an extreme view on some subject. By themselves they don’t tell me anything useful.
sort fo language sed by many people with a
The box caught me out there! revealing my typos.
She wrote the scum-manifesto and shot Warhol. (Scum = society for cutting up men.) It was put on stage for school kids recently, or rather a play made from it. If kids conclude feminists are idiots after that, well… (Of course, the intention is the opposite. Boys were to be made aware of how men are oppressors, et c.)
Not to speak of the new, very important group of professionals in swedish society: the ‘gender pedagogues’! Really. Professional, state-funded ‘feminists’ who are supposed — I assume, it’s all a bit obscure… — to teach people how to behave and instill the conviction that gender is nothing but social construction. Even I find it silly enough, and I never cared for gender roles or for defending them. Basically, both camps often seem equally silly. (And, personally, I think feminism should be something different; to worry about the severe oppression of women in some minority communities, e g, rather than obsessing about not designating toddlers as he or she… Ha! I remember I wrote a post about the ‘gender-neutral’ nurseries long ago…)
Hearing some american politicians recently (the rape-abortion thing), one is certainly made conscious of how necessary the women’s rights question still is worldwide. It is here, too, of course, but the questions are a bit different.
I’ve read the first chapter of Kertesz. Very good.
It’s tricky, that box…
Yes, Andrea Dworkin. I have the impression that some (though I would guess quite a small subset though!) still take her seriously. I may be wrong. One rather prominent swedish feminist caused a big quarrel when she claimed all men are ‘animals’. (Unlike women.)
“Yes, Andrea Dworkin. I have the impression that some (though I would guess quite a small subset though!) still take her seriously.”
Nah, I don’t think so.
Although, if we must talk about the moron senator from Missouri who thinks that women who are raped can’t get pregnant (we apparently “secrete” something that stops implanation of an embryo, did you know?), “animals” is one of the nicer words that comes to mind. One of the nicer comments I read about him was a reader suggesting that it was too bad that he didn’t secrete something out of his male body that would have shut his mouth.
“Although, if we must talk about the moron senator from Missouri”
At first, I thought maybe there is another Mormon in congress… then I kept reading…
Believe me, this news is ghastly. My family hails from Missouri, I’m sorry to report. It is a backward place, full of some of the worst American prejudices. I mean, the guy who made this statement is well known for these views, and has been re-elected 6 times. I’m not going to ask her – in my household these days, we avoid all political discussion when she is present, and she’s usually present – but I’m guessing my mother likes him.
Egad. I went to wikipedia to look at his election history. I find a bunch of cretins arguing about whether he might actually be RIGHT in his crackpot beliefs about female reproductive physiology. Go wikipedia.
Actually, I’ve given some thought to the similarities between his beliefs and certain concepts in anthroposophy. More later …
Yep, that’s the one I was thinking of. He’s rather (in)famous over here too by now. Animals would be offended to hear of any family relationship between him and them.
Amthroposophy? Now, that’s interesting. Rape and karma? Karma of victim and perpetrator? The incarnating soul’s ‘decision’ in the higher worlds to have exactly these two parents?
There could be some intriguing angles, taking some ideas to the extreme and applying them to cases like these.
Rape is an extreme form of bullying, and we know THAT’S karmic.
Steiner cites many examples of cases where victim and perpetrator of various crimes or abuses are reversed in succeeding incarnations. Baldly stated, if you victimize someone in this lifetime, you become their victim in the next. I don’t recall if he ever mentioned rape per se, but it’s clearly covered by the general theory that you bring your suffering on yourself in order to right wrongs you have committed in other lifetimes, to learn “spiritual lessons,” or to complete “spiritual tasks.”
I don’t recall Steiner’s “indications” regarding reproductive physiology offhand, but the notion that if the woman is “uptight” she won’t conceive seems in line with his general thinking. (Remember the one about the deleterious effects of a pregnant white woman reading novels by “Negroes”?)
Might as well pop it up here (full quote):
“You see, if a pregnant woman today were to ask for something to read, there
is nothing to give her! There isn’t even anything to recommend! Recently I
went into a bookstore in Basel and found an example of the latest publishing
agenda: a Negro novel, just as the Negroes in general are entering into
European civilization step by step! Everywhere Negro dances are being
performed, Negro dances are being hopped. But we even have this Negro novel
already. It is utterly boring, dreadfully boring, but people devour it. I am
personally convinced that if we get more Negro novels, and give these Negro
novels to pregnant women to read during the first phase of pregnancy, when
as you know they can sometimes develop such cravings, if we give these Negro
novels to pregnant women to read, then it won’t even be necessary for
Negroes to come to Europe in order for mulattoes to appear. Simply through
the spiritual effects of reading Negro novels, a multitude of children will
be born in Europe that are completely gray, that have mulatto hair, that
look like mulattoes!”
(Rudolf Steiner, Über Gesundheit und Krankheit, Dornach 1994, p. 189)
Gosh – it’s even more offensive than I remembered. Women develop “such cravings” during pregnancy …
So, is the congressman from Missouri more misguided than this?
Anthroposophists keep strange company, ideologically!
And just like a sad species of backward-thinking American politician, they often prefer not to actually admit what they believe. The main reason the Republicans are so mad at Tod Akin is that he said what many of them think, only they know the civilized world is appalled by these beliefs. So they HIDE them. Until they can get into public office, and then they IMPOSE them. The Republican party has just adopted into its platform their intention/desire to pass a constitutional amendment banning abortion even in the event of rape or incest. Yet the Republican presidential ticket, Romney/Ryan, couldn’t disassociate themselves fast enough from Akin, demanded he withdraw from his race, etc. Paul Ryan called him personally to beg him to shut up and go away. Paul Ryan SHARES his beliefs, but threw Akin under the bus for saying these things OUT LOUD.
This behavior is certainly familiar from anthroposophists. Re: the infamous “Negro novel,” all over the internet you can find anthroposophists insisting they don’t really believe such a thing, Steiner was joking, please not to speak about these things where “enemies” (i.e., critics) are listening, etc.
That was, for sure, not Steiner’s most illuminated moment…
As for karma — that’s pretty much what I was thinking. One might speculate — I don’t think Steiner ever says — if rape is karmically connected to some particular type of action or attitude in a previous life.
Diana says, ‘Steiner cites many examples of cases where victim and perpetrator of various crimes or abuses are reversed in succeeding incarnations. Baldly stated, if you victimize someone in this lifetime, you become their victim in the next.’ I have never come across these cases. I would be interested to know where to find them. Can you give me a reference?
The implication of what Diana says is that if you are raped in this life, then you will be a rapist in the next. I find it hard to believe he ever said that.
If I assault someone, then two things follow. One is that after death, in the period called kamaloca I experience myself all the pain and anguish I caused to the other person. Out of this arises the desire to make reparation in some way. The karmic consequence in an other life might be that I am in a position to help that person I assaulted, maybe even at some cost in suffering to myself. I might also suffer something that causes me pain and anguish, but it wont necessarily be the same kind of assault that I perpetrated.
Rape is a terrible crime and should never be condoned or explained away.
The conception of karma put forward by Diana does not allow for new things happening.
Not everything that happens to a person is connected with past karma, but it may have karmic consequences in future lives.
Regarding the negro novels. What many anthroposophists are unable to admit is that like every human being Steiner had a lower self, and occasionally, because his life was lived so much in public, we get a glimpse of it.
Knowing he had a lower self and could harbour such sick thoughts in his head does not for me diminish his achievements and the ideals he strove for even if he couldn’t always attain those ideals himself.
Tom: “The implication of what Diana says is that if you are raped in this life, then you will be a rapist in the next. I find it hard to believe he ever said that.”
No, that isn’t the implication. The statement was that victims and victimizers find their positions reversed. That is karmically correct in Steiner. You know your Steiner better than that, and you know I do, too. And yes, there is always an allowance for “new things” happening, a reassurance anthroposophists cling to like drowning men in these discussions. I haven’t the time in the next little while to ferret out quotes, but will try to do so this evening.
As I always say about Steiner and karma: it isn’t always about vengeance and retribution. Just usually.
Certainly Steiner’s misstatements and various ignorant and mean-spirited pronouncements do not negate everything he ever accomplished. They do, however, make it all less impressive, and they make easy to judge whether he was “clairvoyant,” channeling great wise truths for the ages, etc. He did not possess the moral stature to be a great spiritual leader of humanity.
Just think of all the ordinary people in the world who DON’T believe ignorant and unkind things like “reading Negro novels will make your child a mulatto,” most of whom also do not try to set themselves up as world gurus, but just go about their lives. That’s much more impressive than Rudolf Steiner.
I’m sitting down the hall at the moment from a young man whom I admire, who at age 34 was just given a diagnosis of probably terminal cancer (it has recurred several times). He has a family, a very young child. He just came in with his coffee saying big smiley hellos to everyone; he’s here working in his office as if nothing were wrong, keeping his head up, contributing not only to the productivity of the organization but also makes a lot of valued personal contributions around here. Now him I’m impressed by. There are people in the world worth looking up to.
‘He did not possess the moral stature to be a great spiritual leader of humanity.’
Even more problematic, today, is the moral stature of his followers, many of whom still think they’re destined to lead humanity into spiritually more evolved epochs.
As for the negro novel — obviously, even back then lots of people knew better. But lots of people didn’t. Steiner should have known better, and I can’t help but wonder if he really didn’t (I mean, as regards the mere facts), but, well, the big issue would be whether people see it for what it is — ugly error — rather than the insight of someone spiritually so superior he’s hardly a man anymore.
To say that rape, too, like so many other things, is karmic, means of course that it can either be a karmic consequence of something that took place earlier or have karmic consequences later. The problem is of course thinking of it as some kind of karmic ‘need’. The person could have this karmic need to suffer in this way, and perhaps in such karmic circumstances, there doesn’t even have to be some particular karmic bond between perpetrator or victim. Lots of things could be going on karmically.
By the way, I wanted to whine a bit about probably having lyme disease, but then thought that at least I don’t have cancer (I hope, I’m constantly afraid I do). I might complain a bit tomorrow, maybe. What are the karmic aspects of lyme disease, one wonders. What did I do in my previous lifetime?
Do you really????!! Oh, I’m so sorry. I hope you will have only a mild case. You say probably – you haven’t been diagnosed?
I grew up near the actual Lyme, and it’s endemic here, too. Practically everyone I know has had it. (I haven’t.) As I’m sure you know you MUST take the full course of antibiotics, don’t miss any. It can be anywhere from very mild to very nasty. My husband had it a few summers ago; the acute phase was not that bad, like a mild flu, but the effects did linger for quite awhile. My father also had a strange manifestation of Lyme a number of years ago. He had a strange growth on his arm – got bigger and bigger and he was afraid to go to the doctor, didn’t go until it finally got to looking so awful he was embarrassed to leave the house. (I don’t recommend dealing with symptoms in this fashion; remember he was a Christian Scientist) Doctor eventually diagnosed a rare manifestation of Lyme. He never had any other symptoms. Yeah, my parents lived in the area (southeastern Connecticut) and there’s a very high index of suspicion for it there. My mother had it years ago.
I hope you caught it early. Must have been acquired during your romps on the island?
I don’t think Steiner ever heard of Lyme disease, so he probably didn’t give any “indication.”
– Let’s face it, in reality, the man never showed any signs of clairvoyance, at least not of the kind that might have been 1) verifiable or 2) of any use to anyone. (I was looking through Karmic Relationships, trying to find an example for Tom of where the victim and perpetrator of a crime reverse roles in the next incarnation – haven’t found an instance of it yet, but I’m sure there are some cited in KR – and was getting entertained reading about all the previous incarnations of historical personalities. Charles Darwin was previously Muslim, did you know? It’s cheating, don’t you think? His followers apparently consider twenty bajillion volumes of such “spiritual research” to be evidence of clairvoyance. It doesn’t seem to embarrass them in the slightest that it’s made up.
Anyway do write more tomorrow about your troubles! I hope you are not feeling ill.
Came in from the archipelago yesterday evening and called this place that isn’t really an emergency room but a sort of light emergencies place. It’s open on evenings and weekends. They told me I would get an appointment today, but recomended I phoned in when they open, at 7.30… So today I’m up at 6 to walk and feed mr D so I can leave quickly… Trying to wake myself up with coffee.
I think the tick bite was more than a month ago ago and the mark on the leg began to appear about three weeks ago, but I didn’t identify it as suspicious until now. I don’t feel ill; only a slight feeling it’s not entirely ok, mild headache often, et c. Put it down to being august… But really, I can’t complain. I realize I propably need antibiotics and I’m a bit scared of doctors, but otherwise it’s ok. I’ve had it before and it was more severe — fever, stiff neck, stiff jaws.
Will report later!
However disgusting it sounds the ticks and I may be joined in a karmic connection. Maybe I was burnt as a witch in a previous lifetime and now I burn the villagers in my bathroom. I usually burn mr D’s ticks. (I know, we don’t turn into animals.) Must think more about this…
So. Called them, got an appointment an hour later. Doctor said it’s a text book example of lyme disease, based on the mark. So typical, she said, it should be photographed (for educational purpuses or something) ;-)
Now passing time until the regular pharmacies open in half an hour.
And, yup, I think I may have got it on the island, but there are so many ticks here in Stockholm too. This damp and cold summer has made things worse, the ticks seem to be very active.
Steiner said suspiciously little about diseases that were not known during his lifetime ;-) But other anthroposophists have said things… hehe, googling at the moment. This might turn into a post…
Reblogged this on Blog de Grégoire Perra.
Merci pour votre introduction à mon article !
Il me semble important qu’il soit connu également dans les pays anglophones.
Thank’s also for any support ! (sorry for my bad english !)
Grégoire Perra
[...] Grégoire Perra [...]
Merci!
It’s something of a mystery that it remained unknown to many of us for so long, because it’s really very interesting!
(Don’t worry. My french is a thousand times worse.)
Just a few random thoughts, haven’t read everything.
1) Wasn’t a french politician once fined for calling anthroposophy a cult? Or was that some atavistic clairvision?
2) I remember a swedish author, Mikael Niemi, joking about the hardcore communists in northern Sweden, blaming every conceivable problem on US imperialism. Including the bad weather! Could it have been a case of atavistic clairvoyance? As it turns out, the global economic system (including the former Soviet Union and China) isn’t entirely innocent in the climate change …
3) There were some horrible excesses especially among Maoist cults in Sweden in the seventies. And according to a friend of mine who was involved herself, quite a few of the more “moderate” followers of Stalin at that time had a family background from the “free churches”.
Quick answer to a: Jaques Guyard. There was a parliamentary investigation into cults and, yes, he called anthroposophy a cult on tv. The anthroposophists — in order to prove him right, presumably — could not abide this, sued him and made themselves look more ludicrous than they usually do.
And did he have to pay?
Yes, as far as I can remember. There are at least two old post, one which quotes what he said on tv. (I spelled his name wrong earlier, it’s Jacques.)
Anthro orgs happily tout this as a success. Which to me suggests a certain cluelessness as to how it makes them appear.
Hello,
No, Jacques Guyard didn’t have to pay anithing :
“La décision de la Cour d’appel de Paris, qui a effectivement relaxé le député Jacques Guyard, elle n’a à aucun moment consacré le « caractère pénalement répréhensible de toute allégation de sectarisme portée à l’encontre des institutions anthroposophique ». En revanche, elle a bien débouté la Fédération des Écoles Steiner-Waldorf en France de toutes ses demandes de dommages-intérêts…”
http://www.unadfi.org/l-endoctrinement-a-l
The problem at that time was that so few intern testimonys of anthroposophy-vistims existed
Thank you!! I’m glad I had it wrong; shows there’s some reason in the world, after all.
We will see this last point after my trial :-)
A special dedication to cathy: I feel no “pride” or “awe” to have been a member of the School of Spiritual Science, on the contrary. In my article, I wanted to express the fact that when it is anthroposophy and is accepted in this “school”, it makes you believe that it is an honor …
About the School of Science of the Spirit, I wrote a passage in my article titled :
Who are the anthroposophical ?
(http://gregoireperra.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/qui-sont-les-anthroposophes-les-differents-cercles-du-milieu-anthroposophique/)
There is no harm, I just brings this precision (-:
So they are taking it to trial for real? Spectacularly dumb… not to say — the very word they don’t want to hear — cultish!
From what I’ve heard, first class basically consists of going through the first class lessons. But I can understand that within the context of anthroposophy it is something of an honor (however, most who want to take part seem able to do so after a year or so of membership). And you don’t cheat, because you perhaps fear premature exposure to the lectures can be to your detriment rather than benefit…!
my last writing… complement of the article published by UNADFI :
http://gregoireperra.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/une-emprise-et-un-endoctrinement-presque-indetectables/
Thank you for the heads-up! Will try to struggle through it without the help of google translate… this is good practice for my (almost non-existent) french!
(I’ve read one book in french, and that is Le Petit Prince. My french vocabulary is basically restricted to what was in Le Petit Prince ;-))
“L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux” (-:
Ah, c’est magnifique!
Grégoire — I’ve been debating with myself whether to tell you this openly, privately or not at all (you’d discover it anyway, eventually). I don’t wish to go behind backs and cause unnecessary drama, so I’ll say it here: be cautious around the couple from New Zealand/UK/France (Steinermentary/Amazon news media/et c), especially with agreeing to video shoots. I’ve blogged about them before. I don’t know what they’re up to these days, but me and several other people have had the misfortune of encountering them and sadly I can’t recommend the experience. It turns nasty very easily.
(You don’t have to respond. I just had to say this to ease my own mind; if/when they cause the next disaster and it involves you, I don’t want to be the person standing there having known and predicted it but said nothing. I hope you understand.)
All I want to say is be careful before committing to anything (even apart from videos) and make sure you have a way out if you do. We’re quite a few who are pretty thankful today that we didn’t agree to send tapes or be taped. It’s been bad enough anyway. Even for someone like me, who never committed to anything or made any efforts or promises to help them. Well, I think I’ve said enough.
Yes, this is the article I was talking about last night.
Angel’s latest histrionics might help:
http://steinermentary.com/SM/Luciferocity-Speculation.html
To make a long story short, if you work with them, there’s a good chance in a few months you’ll find yourself the subject of a blog post like this.
S
I hope the latest rant doesn’t mention me, but I suppose the risk exists.
Actually, one doesn’t even have work with them or agree to anything. Very little suffices to get drawn into the madness.
[...] A letter in which they make the initial threats to take action is available here and Grégoire confirms that he is awaiting [...]
On March 21st 2000 Jacques Guyard, the President of the French Parliamentary Commission on Sects was convicted for calling the anthroposophical movement a sect on TV. He was fined $2,850 (20,000 francs). The court also ordered Guyard to pay approximately $12,850 (90,000 francs) in damages.
An appeal by Mr. Guyard led to a confirmation in 2001 of the conviction of libel, but – accepting his argued for parliamentary immunity – relieved him of the fines and punitive damages to which the lower court had sentenced him.
For information from the US State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices in 2000 for France on the case, see
http://thebee.se/comments/France/US-State-Department-2000-1.htm
Hello Sune. This is appalling. The only appropriate reaction from other anthroposophists would be to reject vehemently the actions of the french steiner waldorf federation.
Suing someone for expressing their views — that’s the behaviour of a CULT. And it is inexcusable for anthroposophy to behave that way.
Excalibor, if anyone wonders, is Sune Nordwall, former employee of the swedish waldorf federation. Who happily threatens lawsuits if people write things that displease him. Perhaps we should talk about this once more, Sune?
About what behaviour like that tells us about anthroposophy. In my opinion, inability to tolerate criticism should be weighed in when it comes to state funding. Educational organisations which sue or threaten to sue (in order to shut up) former members, students, parents when they voice concern and criticism — highly suspicious.