My final and permanent unsub from
the WC
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sun Feb 8, 2004 9:40 am
Subject: My final and permanent unsub from the WC
Peter Staudenmaier's infamous article "Anthroposophy
and Ecofascism" begins as follows:
In June 1910 Rudolf Steiner,
the founder of anthroposophy, began a speaking tour of Norway
with a lecture to a large and attentive audience in Oslo. The
lecture was titled "The Mission of Individual European National
Souls in Relation to Nordic-Germanic Mythology." In the
Oslo lecture and throughout his Norwegian tour Steiner presented
his theory of "national souls" (Volksseelen in German,
Steiner's native tongue) and paid particular attention to the
mysterious wonders of the "Nordic spirit." The "national
souls" of Northern and Central Europe were, Steiner explained,
components of the "germanic-nordic sub-race," the world's
most spiritually advanced ethnic group, which was in turn the
vanguard of the highest of five historical "root races."
This superior fifth root race, Steiner told his Oslo audience,
was naturally the "Aryan race."
When I confronted PS with this outrageous
bullshit, he did admit that his claim that RS had taught his
audience about the superiority of the Aryan race was simply "an
opening device", i.e. an attention-getter. There are other
untruths in this "opening device" of course, proving
how extremely sloppy PS' research has been - RS did not, for
instance, begin any "speaking tour of Norway" at the
time in question (or any other time) but held a cycle of lectures
in Christiania (Oslo) - but that's beside the point.
It was easy to recognize that this was no
accidental error or misconception on PS' part, but a deliberate
distortion, in other words: a lie. Sune was involuntarily unsubscribed
by the moderator for calling PS a liar. I didn't do that; I only
called his statement a lie. A spade is a spade I would think.
To his credit, I must say that Dan Dugan was
always a gentleman who treated the subcribers with fairness.
But something seems to have affected his judgement after the
arrival of PS, who echoed his own fantasies about Anthroposophy
and Nazism with a flair he must have enjoyed so much that he
worried about his superstar leaving. Calling his bluff on this
particular point and pushing it too far might have done that
trick. So nobody was permitted to say that the statement in question
here was a lie. It was a so-called "ad hominem argument"
against Peter Staudenmaier to say that it was a deliberate distortion
to claim that RS taught his audience in Oslo that the Aryans
are a superior race.
For the record, here is my final post to the
WC, proving my point:
[long link]
Re: Peter Staudenmaier's
lie about RS exposed Tarjei Straume Oct 05, 2001 16:20 PDT
Tarjei:
Now I'm being censored
too because DD cannot stand to see his pet theory about RS and
Nazism disproven and PS' lies exposed.
Dan Dugan:
Wrong, Tarjei. You have
been warned not to call your fellow subscriber a liar.
Tarjei:
I have not called my fellow
subscribers anything at all. I did write at one point that they
waddled like mudducks, and I would have accepted a protest on
that one. But to call a statement a lie is within the bounds
of topic-related, issue-related, statement-related freedom of
expression.
Dan Dugan:
Nothing to do with censorship,
Tarjei:
When I am prevented from saying
that a statement is an untruth, a lie, it is censorship.
Five months is a long time.
Goodbye.
(unsubscribing)
--
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
Cheers,
Tarjei
...................................................................................................................................
From: VALENTINA BRUNETTI
Date: Sun Feb 8, 2004 10:17 am
Subject: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent unsub
from the WC
The link between PS and Rudolf Steiner's Anthoposophy
is just the same existing between the "historian" David
Irving and the studies about the Holocaust.
A.
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sun Feb 8, 2004 10:55 am
Subject: Re: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
At 19:17 08.02.2004, Andrea wrote:
The link between PS and Rudolf Steiner's
Anthoposophy is just the same existing between the "historian"
David Irving and the studies about the Holocaust.
I told him that. He knows. He knows very well.
His response was to argue why "historical revisionism",
which I called it, is very normal and necessary when historians
discover new facts of history. He is in other words defending
his undocumented fables and smears by hinting at non-existing
new discoveries that should call for a revision of the history
of the Anthroposophical Movement.
Tarjei
...................................................................................................................................
From: VALENTINA BRUNETTI
Date: Sun Feb 8, 2004 10:01 pm
Subject: R: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
----- Original Message -----
From: Tarjei Straume
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
At 19:17 08.02.2004, Andrea wrote:
The link between PS and Rudolf Steiner's
Anthoposophy is just the same existing between the "historian"
David Irving and the studies about the Holocaust.
I told him that. He knows. He knows very
well. His response was to argue why "historical revisionism",
which I called it, is very normal and necessary when historians
discover new facts of history.
.....But David Irving did not discover anything
new. He is only used to twist evry possible fact in order to
support is own world of twisted ideological paranoia. PS does
just the same!
A.
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Mon Feb 9, 2004 3:02 am
Subject: Re: R: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
Andrea wrote:
The link between PS and Rudolf Steiner's
Anthoposophy is just the same existing between the "historian"
David Irving and the studies about the Holocaust.
Tarjei wrote:
I told him that. He knows. He knows very
well. His response was to argue why "historical revisionism",
which I called it, is very normal and necessary when historians
discover new facts of history.
Andrea wrote:
.....But David Irving did not discover
anything new. He is only used to twist evry possible fact in
order to support is own world of twisted ideological paranoia.
PS does just the same!
You're absolutely right. I didn't refer to
Irving specifically in my exchange with PS, but I did mention
Holocaust denial. PS has a peculiar debating style, however,
which is clearly illustrated by the piece below that I extracted
from the Topica archives. The date of the following exchange
is May 15, 2001:
Tarjei:
In fact, it is historical
revisionism masquerading as historical inquiry, deluding unsuspecting
outsiders.
Peter S:
You seem to have some sort
of grudge against revisionist arguments in historiography. Could
you explain why?
Tarjei:
What I was getting at was
endeavors to convince people that Hitler had no death camps
Peter S:
Ah, sorry about that, I misunderstood
you. In the field of holocaust historiography, "revisionism"
does indeed mean denial of the holocaust. But not in the wider
historiography of the Third Reich, much less in modern German
history as a whole. But now that I see what you mean, I must
ask, what do my arguments have to do with holocaust denial?
At this time, PS seemed a little confused
when I mentioned the statistics from voting record among Norwegian
anthroposophists, which is overwhelmingly left wing, in the face
of PS' suggestion that anthroposophy is a right-wing ideology
with historical close ties to Nazism. So he claimed that the
history of the anthroposophical movement in Germany proved his
point. So I asked if he knew anything about Italy (same date
as above):
Tarjei:
So the question is, does
the majority of Italian anthroposophists also vote right wing?
My educated guess is that we'll never get an answer to that from
_you_, because the facts won't fit your untruthful pet theory.
Peter S:
You won't get an answer from
me because I don't know much about the topic (not to mention
the fact that it isn't relevant to our debate). You, on the other
hand, seem quite confident that most Italian anthros vote left.
It might interest you to learn that there was a lengthy article
on Italian anthroposophists in the tageszeitung in 1995 (their
infamous special issue on anthroposophy) which says the very
opposite.
Comments from an Italian may be interesting.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: VALENTINA BRUNETTI
Date: Mon Feb 9, 2004 9:59 am
Subject: R: R: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
----- Original Message -----
From: Tarjei Straume <anthrouncle@chello.no>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: R: R: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] My final and permanent
unsub from the WC
Comments from an Italian may be interesting.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
That's an interesting question, but a difficult
one to answer. First of all, Italina anthropop are few and usually
"silent" about political choices. So I'm able to talk
only about the insights sprung from my own personal stadpoint.
I live in Rome but, since I write on Anthro
magazines, I got also aome knowledge about the anthro movement
outside Rome
Well If you bear in mind the above and note
also that here we have got the "Berlusconi problem"
I can say that , for the most part, Anthropop are "no Silvio"
and opposite to his garbage-government.
Neverthless this does not mean that theiy
are "leftist", (here "left" keeps somewhat
the meaning of "marxist") but I coul better call them
"liberals" or "liberal-democrats" or, as
myself "liberal-ecologists".. (just like the whole
of the fellows of my own personal "group", more or
less 20-25 individuals).
There is also, here in Rome, a small circle of "right-winged"
, mostly for biographical matters (some of them was a rightwing
extremist saved from the doom by "Anthropos Sophia, neverthless
he's keeping some "rightwing" background in his soul!).
Some of them is also convinced that Hess was an anthropop., and
I've been writing something to demonstrate that they are wrong...........
So here you can see the cooperation of the
"Two Hindrancers" from left and from right, leading
to the same conclusion doesn't it?
A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
February/March
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
