STEINER WALDORF SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONS #2

[zzooey]

The steiner waldorf thread ran to a halt because apparently a 1000 messages are a maximum. Let's continue here!!

PeteK- you are right- thebee's sites are an advertisement for the ludicrous and specious anthroposohic nonsense, and then has a link to plans...

I know, as a parent, which site I would think has the truer picture!

HeY Zooey- isn't he a Yorkshire Terrier? Not a Scotish one?

sssh sssh he's a big dangerous KILLER dog

Seriously, thebee is refering to my e-mailadress that I use on the WC-list, which happens to be 'scottie dog'!

Of course, he keeps track of such things

Northern: "That's what this board is about.
It is for MOTHERS ( predominately- there are Dads welcome) to discuss issues like education with other mothers.

Not for old men, with no children, to promote their cult.Understand?"

Don't forget dog owners!! (But we're sort of mums and dads too, aren't we? It's just our babies have fur and tails!!)

As for the rest of the beeish ravings, he's going nuttier by the minute. It's obvious he's following you - and what I think he wants is to make the impression that other people who read this might be up for the same treatment. Like Faraway. He just like people to shut up before they've even begun.

Zzooey:
"And let's say, Michaelmass in itself isn't the problem. I don't think it's directly harmful (I think it can be, taken into context of all other weird things in waldorf, though). What is harmful is the inability to discuss it and be honest about it. It's crazy to try to avoid the obvious facts: Steiner, and anthroposophists today, believe very specific things about Michael. It's actually very far from the ordinary S:t George-myth (that really isn't anything more than an old fairytale that nobody bothers much about)."

Yeah. Of course Rudi, so far as I know, never claimed to have been buddies with St. George. however, we do have Steiner's revelation (so it must be accurate eh? Koff koff) of:
"A relationship between life in the Spirit World where they (Steiner and Ita 'Weleda' Wegman) met with the Archangel
Michael and take on his mission on Earth, known as 'The Michaelic School'"

There's a wee bit more on Rudi's incarnations at the Steiner and Wegman page at easeonline.www.easeonline.org/Steiner.htm
Davy

"so it must be accurate eh? Koff koff"

Naturally!

What a fascinating threesome - Rudolf, Wegman and the archangel M.

Sometimes you can't help but wonder...

Davey - "What is harmful is the inability to discuss it and be honest about it".
Exactly!

Thomas Aguinas, not Augustine, as I think I said.

All this dressing up of anthroposophy and steiner/waldorf education makes me think of the euphemisms employed during the second world war I'm not comparing this to their actions, just that the fervant desire to conceal the truth reminds me of it.

I want them to be honest and open
Why can't they rename their schools:
'schools of anthoposophy' or 'anthoposophy schools'?

It is a very dangerous game the antho PR machine is using, hiding the truth, deceiving people by playing with language in this way.

And it's not just an American and British issue. In addition to PLANS. Open Waldorf and Roger Rawlings in America, Chase and Ease in the UK, Zooey in Sweden, and Robert Smith-Hald in Norway, there are these sites that are critical of Steiner/Waldorf "education."

Australia
steiner.thruhere.net/

Holland
www.stelling.nl/simpos/anthroposophy.htm

Denmark
www.steinerkritik.dk/index.html

Scandinavia
htt p://groups.yahoo.com/group/steinerkritiskforum/

There may be many other sites I don't know about. These are just the ones I've come across. In any case, the English language forums draw people from all over the world, not just those countries where residents have set up Web sites for critical discussion of Waldorf/Steiner schools.

Margaret

Norway

www.steinerkritikk.no

Sorry, just could not make that last link work right. Here it is in cut-and-paste form:

Scandinavia
Scandinavia
groups.yahoo.com/group/steinerkritiskforum/

groups.yahoo.com/group/steinerkritiskforum/

Um - I just don't have time to catch up on 50 more posts here.

Did he ever answer any of the simple questions about Michaelmas, like isn't St. Michael an important figure in anthroposophy? Isn't Michaelmas an anthroposophical ritual? That was all too complicated for him to get around to?

Hard question, Diana.

No, just kidding

As far as I can see, he hasn't answered any questionsyet. But he said, a while ago, that he wasn't here to discuss with evil people like us, but only to inform newcomers and readers about the Truth behind the evilness.

Zooey wrote:

"And let's say, Michaelmass in itself isn't the problem. I don't think it's directly harmful (I think it can be, taken into context of all other weird things in waldorf, though). What is harmful is the inability to discuss it and be honest about it."

For the record, I fully agree. I don't have any problem with anybody celebrating Michaelmas, or "following" St. Michael, believing he's an archangel or whatever it is they believe about him (Regent of this Planetary Era or something like that). Fine - he seems well intentioned, though I don't go for all the medieval sword wielding stuff, personally, or think it is necessarily all perfectly wholesome for children (there's images I'd rather impress on children, personally).

But lots of religions celebrate similar myths; this is not some kind of problem for society.

The problem for society is groups that aren't honest, groups that operate by stealth, especially where children are involved. Saying that is unhealthy is an understatement - it's antidemocratic and fundamentally dangerous, in my view. The secrecy and hiding are what create the very disturbed environments and that is when children get hurt. It isn't the specific beliefs of the group, which are really no wackier than any other religion. It is the dysfunctional behavior of the adults that endangers children.

He did the same thing to me at wikipedia, Northern, till a check user proved he was wrong. But he doesn't learn his lesson - he's very proud of his detective skills, even though they are lame.

"Seriously, thebee is refering to my e-mailadress that I use on the WC-list, which happens to be 'scottie dog'!

Of course, he keeps track of such things"

He does, you guys. He's famous for keeping statistics. When he tells you you've written x number of posts on this or that forum, he isn't bluffing. He keeps statistics on all of us. And obviously, he doesn't realize how bad this looks.

Either he is pointlessly harassing Northern, making shit up about where he thinks she might post using what name, or he is literally tracing computers. Since I don't know who "faraway" is, I don't know which it is. Which of these is worse? I don't know, take your pick, it's disturbed and delusional behavior, either way. It is amazing that Dornach does not ask him to stop, or even take legal action to make him stop. He crossed a line from useful PR person to nut case making the cult look even cultier, long ago.

"for some reason he thinks Faraway is someone else. S/he wrote just a small number of posts a while ago."

Yeah, and hasn't been back, apparently. He's probably got her so freaked out she won't post again.

Here's the little ditty our kindergarteners were taught about St. Michael. It's sung every September in Steiner kindergartens:

"The autumn wind blows open the gate
Oh, Michae-el, for you we wait
We follow you, show us the way
With joy we greet this autumn day."

Michael is pronounced in three syllables "My-ky-ell" by anthroposophists; this is apparently the correct way to prounce the archangel's name, I forget why exactly, but if you say "Michael" the regular way the rest of us pronounce the name, they look at you pityingly, because it means you're not "one of them." (It's the badge of a cult insider to pronounce things anthroposophically.)

Amazingly, as some have written already, he "serious" anthroposophical organizations and schools link to him or his web sites.

Which makes me suspect that their belief system has influenced them so that they can't think rationally. Sometimes they can't separate craziness from normal information. Kind of a PR problem.

I think I can tell you the reason for the weird pronounciation of Michael. In Swedish it is pronounced exactly as the quite common name Mikael (or Michael - both ways of spelling it works fine, but the difference isn't heard when spoken).

I'm sure we had the same verses, plays and such, just in Swedish. The originals being in German, of course. Well, say the texts are the same, but translation and making it sound the same isn't always easy.

'Ordinary' Michael in english is like this

• -

My-ky-ell is

---

Mikael in Swedish (as well as in German) is

---

You see the pattern??

It's obvious the 2 syllable version won't fit into anthro universe. So they changed it. And being used to nuttiness, they probably don't think it sounds weird.

I didn't mean to put a space between the 2 -- in the first normal english example! So just disregard that, it has nothing to do with anything!

I meant to write:

--

---

Conclusion - they are trying a Germanic pronounciation! That's of course why they feel their insider knowledge is superiour.

Why? Don't you know how to say Mikael in Swedish?