Steiner Predicts

The following essay and addendum are also available at

 http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/35.html

We've gazed far into the past and far into the future, as envisioned by R. Steiner as relayed by R. Seddon. But what about now, the present? What's the Anthroposophical take on today? One way to approach this foolish yet quite serious question is to look into the extensive network of Waldorf or Steiner schools, which are designed to mold young people into Anthropo-friendly attitudes and stances. Let's tie everything together by considering what Steiner's followers are up to now. So, ladies and gentlemen, I give you: 

Steiner presided at the first Waldorf school, which opened in 1919. Long ago. I attended a Waldorf in the 1950’s and ‘60’s. Long ago. What is the Waldorf story today? Are the schools still like the one that I remember or, more to the point, like the one that Steiner oversaw?

There are so many Waldorf and Steiner schools, today, scattered so far and wide—it is impossible to say for sure what goes on inside all of them. A large team of investigative reporters might be able to ferret out the truth, if the schools agreed to give them access. But this seems unlikely. Here’s how Steiner himself reacted when someone asked to visit just one class at the first Waldorf School:

“[T]he most that would be possible would be that we might decide to show visitors the empty school when the children and teachers are not there. There can be no question of visiting while the school is in session. That is, such a visit could only take place after weighing up carefully in consultation with those who hope to learn something by visiting the school—for instance, with people who want to see something of this school because they are trying to found a similar school elsewhere, because they themselves are doing something relevant to spread the idea of the Waldorf School....the most that we can allow is for you to see the classrooms, and even that would be burdensome at the moment...It does not work to have what I described in the first part, the spirit of the Waldorf School, on display for visitors.” [1]

Steiner sounds like someone with something to hide, doesn’t he?

Short of storming the walls of all the Waldorfs, how can we learn the truth? Actually, several methods of discovery are open to us. We may not learn precisely what is happening inside every last Waldorf, but we can form a clear, general picture. Let’s start here: This is how some Anthroposophists currently present themselves. As of today, October 15, 2007, the Waldorf school that I attended still pledges allegiance to Rudolf Steiner. This is the school’s mission statement, displayed on the school Web site (note the reference to Steiner and the implications of a spiritualistic agenda):

"To nurture toward compassion, to balance toward wholeness, to challenge toward excellence and achievement - these are the goals to which the Waldorf School of Garden City aspires. Based on the insights of Rudolf Steiner, and enriched by the diversity of our community, our methods of teaching reflect an understanding of the growing child and acknowledge the spiritual origins of humanity." [2]

Other Waldorfs are equally—or even more—explicit about their devotion to Steiner (although they generally do not provide a true account of Steiner’s teachings). Moreover, today there is an institution of higher education called Rudolf Steiner College operating in the USA. The name of the college, of course, tells us that Steiner’s teachings are of paramount importance for the faculty and students. The college describes itself this way:

"Rudolf Steiner College is one of America's leading Waldorf teacher education colleges. It is also a center for anthroposophical studies. Programs at the College arise out of the work of Austrian philosopher, scientist and educator Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925) whose innovative ideas and discoveries have inspired a wide spectrum of practical activities worldwide—in the arts, banking, architecture, medicine, agriculture, and care of the handicapped, as well as education.

"Rudolf Steiner founded the worldview known as Anthroposophy (literally, wisdom of the human being), in which the heightened capacities of thinking, feeling, and willing are seen as key to unlocking enormous human potential." [3]

In other essays on my main Web site (http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html, I have explained what Steiner’s teachings are. [4] Using this knowledge, we can decipher the college’s self-description. In Anthroposophical circles, statements intended for public consumption are customarily couched in obfuscating code. But peel back the new-age jargon (e.g., “human potential”), and we find at least a suggestion that the college subscribes to Steiner’s views on clairvoyance and intuition (“heightened capacities of thinking, feeling, and willing”). How could it be otherwise, at an institution that has named itself after the founder of Anthroposophy? Steiner taught that there are several ways for an individual to expand his/her capacities, including some methods that function while one is dreaming or asleep. [5] True knowledge of the spirit world—which, for Steiner, was the goal of human improvement—becomes available when one develops the necessary “organs” for clairvoyance: “[J]ust as natural forces build out of living matter the eyes and ears of the physical body, so will organs of clairvoyance build themselves....” [6]

Bear in mind that the chief purpose of Rudolf Steiner College is to produce a new crop of Waldorf teachers every year. Thus, in understanding the nature of the college, we understand the nature of its graduates—and the nature of newly minted Waldorf teachers today. (Quite possibly, most of the graduates are not yet fully initiated Anthroposophists, but they have begun the long, irrational, psychologically damaging journey.) Am I pushing this analysis too hard? For the sake of argument, let’s say that I am. This is only the beginning of our examination of Waldorf education today. Stronger proof lies ahead. But for now, let’s go back to an intriguing part of the college’s self-description: “Rudolf Steiner founded the worldview known as Anthroposophy.” The college makes no claims, here, for Anthroposophy, nor does it overtly endorse Steiner’s “worldview.” But I submit that, for the college, its namesake’s teachings are timelessly true, and they are enacted primarily by Waldorf teachers, such as the College’s own graduates: “Steiner's detailed psychology of child development, described early in the 20th century, has been supported by modern research in education and neuropsychology. Through Waldorf education, Steiner hoped that young people would develop the capacities of soul and intellect and the strength of will that would prepare them to meet the challenges of their own time and the future.” [7] The assertion that Steiner’s teachings have been supported by science is dubious, at best (I have to stretch to phrase this so mildly). All I ask at this stage is that you pause to consider the reverberations of the word “soul” when used by this eponymous institution.

—

Steiner’s racism [8] is the worst of his doctrines. Let’s hope that at least some Waldorfs have repudiated racism or pushed it so far into the background that their students are unaffected by it. However, as I have argued elsewhere [9], it is extremely hard to subtract racism from Anthroposophy: Racism lies so near the very core of that bizarre religion. Also, some parents have reported finding racism in Waldorfs very recently. Here is a statement made by a mother in January of 2000:

"Have you seen it written somewhere that Steiner believed white people were most evolved??? This was blatantly apparent in the curriculum of the Waldorf school we visited.

"My daughter is African American, and this is one of the two reasons (along with the sexist dynamics) that we decided against the school. The teacher, telling me about the history part of the curriculum, said that since 5th graders are becoming rational, and rationality 'came in with the Greeks,' that's what they study in 5th grade.

"The whole 'history as a developmental process paralleling children's development, with Western civilization at the pinnacle' is inherently racist.

"I saw the unit study books one class had done about Africa. At the beginning, under their identical paintings of a traditional African man hunting in silhouette, they all had the same saying copied: 'Perhaps this life of ours which begins as the quest of the child for the adult, ends as a journey by the adult to rediscover the child...It is in the Bushman wherein the two are finally and lovingly joined.' (Laurens van der Post) I shudder to think of my daughter learning about her heritage in this way." [10]

Another example: Here is a troubling message posted at the waldorfcritics discussion forum on October 24, 2001. It deals with charges that a Waldorf school in Holland was teaching racism:

"The concern was originally raised by a Waldorf parent who found racist passages in her child's school notes. After the press got their hands on some of this, the Anthroposophical Society in the Netherlands eventually decided to appoint a commission to investigate the matter, in order to quell the growing public uproar...The commission designated 16 Steiner quotes that, in their opinion, could be punishable for racial discrimination under Dutch law today. They found a further 67 quotes that they considered potentially discriminatory but not legally questionable. Aside from these two groups, they examined nearly 100 more Steiner quotes about race and declared them 'unobjectionable'. Examples of this last category include Steiner's claim that 'Negroes' are 'decadent' and 'completely cut themselves off from the spiritual world', among many other similarly 'unobjectionable' pronouncements..." [11]

Perhaps the most compelling information in this passage is that the investigators were themselves Anthroposophists, yet they conceded that at least some of Steiner’s statements were “discriminatory.” In fact, the investigators obviously were intent on covering up, to the greatest extent possible, the racism in Waldorf education: They found that calling “Negroes” decadent and disconnected from spirit (soul? come on) is unobjectionable. Waldorf teachers who find such a statement acceptable are clearly capable to making racist remarks that would wind up in their students’ school notes.

For additional recent examples of racism in Waldorf schools, see the Addendum, written by Margaret Sachs.

—

On November 13, 1999, a surprising curtain opened, allowing us to peek inside the Waldorf scene. On that day, Eugene Schwartz—who was director of Waldorf teacher-training at Sunbridge College—openly professed the religious mission of Waldorf schools, and he urged Waldorf teachers to stop denying the real purpose of Waldorf education. This was a stunner. Perhaps Schwartz was goaded into candor by the presence of Dan Dugan, whom Schwartz had invited to address a gathering of Waldorf teachers and Anthroposophists. Dugan is secretary of People for Legal And Nonsectarian Schools (PLANS), an organization opposed to the acceptance Waldorf schools into public school systems. At the gathering, Schwartz made the following candid remarks (among others):

"I'm glad my daughter gets to speak about God every morning: that's why I send her to a Waldorf school...That's why I send her to a Waldorf school. She can have a religious experience. A religious experience. I'll say it again: I send my daughter to a Waldorf school so that she can have a religious experience." [12]

“[W]e are trying to open up the religious font that is the child's right as a human being.” [13]

“If we are really to be a movement for cultural renewal, it is our responsibility to share with the parents those elements of Anthroposophy which will help them understand their children and fathom the mysterious ways in which we work. Yes, we are giving the children a version of Anthroposophy in the classroom; whether we mean to or not, it's there. So let's at least do it the right way.” [14]

“Let's face it: we're deceiving--and worst of all, we're deceiving ourselves...There is no door. It's very fluid, it goes back and forth. Let's be open and honest about that. Let's cut our losses.” [15]

"Do you realize how much Christianity there is in our school? Do you realize that we are thinking about these children in the light of reincarnation and karma? That's how a teacher's working with them." [16]

Wow. Schwartz bravely ‘fessed up to a lot that day: Waldorf schools have a religious mission; the schools teach children a form of Anthroposophy; Waldorf schools have been practicing deception in denying the real nature of their curricula; Waldorf schools are devoted to Christianity, but in an odd form, since they are also devoted to such concepts as karma and reincarnation.

I don’t want to put words in Schwartz’s mouth. His honesty was refreshing, even heroic. He acknowledged that Waldorf schools are religious institutions, and that the religion taught at Waldorfs is Anthroposophy. Thus, Schwartz overturned the typical denial, made by Anthroposophists and Waldorf faculties, that Steiner gave them a religion. [17]

The results of Schwartz’s honesty were, unfortunately, hard on him. He was soon fired as director of teacher training. Here’s how Dan Dugan, Schwartz’s friendly adversary, describes what happened:

"I asked Eugene Schwartz about the rumors [that he had been fired], and he kindly told me his story.
 
"In March, 2000, Schwartz was dismissed as Director of Teacher Training at Sunbridge College. This was a consequence of his November, 1999, 'Schools in Transformation' conference, at which I was invited to speak, and Schwartz challenged the Waldorf movement to 'come out' about its religious nature.
 
"After that meeting I said I hoped he would survive his next board meeting. Unfortunately, I wasn't far wrong.
 
"His firing in turn had the consequence of 'a near revolt of the students,' and 'a serious dip in next year's enrollment.' Schwartz feels that the resulting addition of some younger faculty and staff will have a beneficial effect on Sunbridge, though it was too late for him." [18]

We can draw a few more inferences from this. Most Waldorf schools are not willing to end their deceptive practices. They still cling to their secrets. We cannot know for sure what all those secrets are. But it is fair to infer that the great bulk of them are the doctrines of the man to whom they remain loyal: Rudolf Steiner. The secrets, in other words, generally consist of the doctrines of Anthroposophy, some of which—as I have argued elsewhere [19]—are quite awful.

—

Eugene Schwartz has not been quite so candid in his books. Of particular interest, here, is his book WALDORF EDUCATION: Schools for the Twenty-First Century. [20]  A Google Book Search of this volume yielded no references to "religion," "Jesus," "Jesus Christ," "Christianity," "reincarnation," "karma'" or "higher worlds."  At least some of these terms should be present in the book, if it purports to be an accurate description of Waldorf education. Note that Schwartz used some of these terms in his Sunbridge remarks.

On the other hand, the book does have references to "etheric body," "Steiner," "astral body," "clairvoyance," and "higher bodies," among other Anthroposophical terms. Here are a few of the statements that appear in the book:

“Must teachers be clairvoyant in order to be certain that they are teaching in the proper way? We may, indeed, need only the ‘clairvoyant’ faculties that we are already using without being aware that we possess them.” [21] Asking this question would be unthinkable to rationalists and to almost all teachers in public schools. Clairvoyance! Is he kidding? No, Schwartz affirms the reality of clairvoyance, although he muddies the picture somewhat by using the word both with and without quotation marks. His point is that we all have “clairvoyant” powers, but there are also higher forms of such powers (implicitly, as exercised by Rudolf Steiner). Consider this statement: "Earlier in this book I spoke of the 'everyday clairvoyance' which allows us to perceive the activities of the 'higher bodies' of the human being without our necessarily being endowed with the degree of spiritual insight necessary to see the bodies themselves." [22] According to Schwartz (and Steiner), there are varying degrees of spiritual insight. To Anthroposophists, it is patent that Rudolf Steiner was blessed with extremely high psychic or clairvoyant powers—perhaps the highest ever attained. Steiner declared himself to be clairvoyant, and he said he had access to the Akashic Record, among other sources of supernatural knowledge. [23] He often spoke and wrote as if he were virtually omniscient. Schwartz writes in a more reasonable-seeming manner, but it is clear that Schwartz accepts some—and perhaps all—of Steiner’s doctrines.

“Our etheric body is active in a way that our physical body is not. We go through life in an inert, ‘cause and effect’ manner. The etheric body works to reverse those effects suffered by the physical body in the course of daily life; it is the body of renewal and regeneration.” [24] The etheric body, in Anthroposophical lore, is one of three nonphysical bodies that real human beings come to incarnate. The etheric is the lowliest of these extra bodies; it is a set of life forces. The “astral body” consists of higher spirit/soul forces. The “I” is a spark of divine selfhood or ego that separates true humans from animals and subhumans. In asserting the reality of these weird, invisible bodies, Schwartz again clearly associates himself with Steiner’s doctrines—some of which have dreadful implications, as in the belief that some people are not human. [25] It’s also worth noting that reversing the “cause and effect” phenomena of real life implies the antiscientific bias of Anthroposophy. To scientists and all rationalists, cause-and-effect phenomena are the focus of observation, our best source of true information about the universe and everything in it. This is the last thing we should want to reverse.

“Using this everyday clairvoyance, it is possible to become aware of the third member of the young person, the astral body.” [26] I’ve said enough on this subject; but it is useful to note that Schwartz believes in the existence of this invisible body, too.

“The image of the child developed by Rudolf Steiner and applied in Waldorf methodology stands like a pillar of consistency....” [27] Here, Schwartz expresses his admiration of Steiner and the concept of the child as developed by Steiner. What is this concept? Steiner taught that we all have twelve senses. [28] He taught that as we grow, we incarnate nonphysical bodies. [29] He taught that each child is a representative of one of the four (and only four) “temperaments.” [30] He taught that a truly human child has both a “spirit” and a “soul.” [31] He taught that children are born with an innate knowledge of spiritual worlds. [32] He taught other nonsense about children, but this brief summary should suffice.

While Schwartz may be less heroically honest in his books than he was in his speech, WALDORF EDUCATION nevertheless confirms much that we know about the nature of Steinerian pedagogy. It is based on mysticism, antipathy to science and logic, and a completely bizarre conception of human nature: in particular, the nature of growing children. As I have suggested elsewhere, any parent thinking of sending a child to a Waldorf or Steiner school should understand what the child will be subjected to there. Caveat emptor.

The son of one Waldorf parent recently came home and said that his Waldorf high school biology teacher had taught them that European blood is more evolved than African blood! Any mainstream scientist can explain why this is nonsense. When one is familiar with Steiner's racist theories, however--thanks in large part to Peter Staudenmaier--such stories suggest that Steiner's racism possibly lives on in today's Anthroposophy and makes its way into the classroom in the form of pseudoscience. What parent researching schools would ever imagine that a school's teachers might subscribe to racist, spiritual evolution theories, that the "science" teachers might be so incredibly ignorant of real science, or that science classes might be a conduit for racist teachings? [Note by R. Rawlings: In the Wadorf I attended, I was taught the same thing about blood types. See “Unenlightened” and/or “I Went to Waldorf,” http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html.]

Another example is the Jewish high school student at our former Waldorf school who came home and told his mother that his Waldorf history teacher had been dismissive of the Holocaust and that the teacher had said something to the effect that, in any case, the Jewish people had done it to themselves because Hitler was Jewish or half-Jewish. The possibility that this story might be the result of the student misunderstanding the teacher is somewhat undermined by the open and blatant Holocaust denial by some modern-day Anthroposophists.

[1] Rudolf Steiner, RUDOLF STEINER IN THE WALDORF SCHOOL (Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1996), pp. 97-99.

[2] http://www.waldorfgarden.org/

[3] http://www.steinercollege.edu/introduction.html

[4] See, especially, “Unenlightened,” “Was He Christian?” “Humouresque,” “What We’re Made Of,” “Legends,” “Evolution, Anyone?” and “Is Anthroposophy a Religion?”  http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html

[5] Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Foundations of Waldorf Education, 1) (Great Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 1996),  p. 118.

[6] Rudolf Steiner, KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (London & New York: Anthroposophic Press, 1944), p. 28. See also “This science presupposes an entirely new inner sense organ or instrument, by means of which there is revealed a new world which does not exist for t ordinary man.” [Theosophy and Christianity, p. 67, quoted from Johann Fichte.]

[7] http://www.steinercollege.edu/waldorfed.html

[8] http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/nine.html

[9] See, especially, “Unenlightened,” “Race,” “Evolution, Anyone?” and “Non-Waldorf Waldorfs.” http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html

[10] http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/WomanSeesRacism.html

[11] http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/archives/WCA0208.html

[12] Eugene Schwartz, “Waldorf Education—For Our Times or Against Them?”, November 13, 1999, transcript edited by Michael Kopp; http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/schwartz.html

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] See “Is Anthroposophy a Religion?”  and “Unenlightened.” http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html

[18] Dan Dugan, May 30, 2000, posted at free-speech forum associated with waldorfcritics.org. Dugan was once an enthusiastic Waldorf parent. But he gradually became disillusioned when he realized, first, that science was badly taught at the school his son attended, and later that the school sold Rudolf Steiner books containing racist passages. When the school refused to repudiate these passages, Dugan became an active opponent of Waldorf schooling. While not denying the right of Waldorfs to exist as private institutions, he opposes adoption of Waldorf schools into public school systems, which would grant them the financial support of taxpayers.

[19] See, especially, “Unenlightened,” “Was He Christian?” “Race,” and “Evolution, Anyone?” http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/36.html

[20] Eugene Schwartz, WALDORF EDUCATION: Schools for the Twenty-First Century (Xlibris Corporation, 2000.)

A slightly earlier book by Schwartz, MILLENNIAL CHILD: Transforming Education for the Twenty-First Century (Great Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 1999) is equally mum on various topics. The index contains no references to "religion," "Jesus," "Jesus Christ," "reincarnation," "karma'" or "higher worlds." There is one reference to “Christianity, childrearing and” and another to “Christian missionaries.” Anthroposophy” is referred to three times, and “Anthroposophists” once.

[21] WALDORF EDUCATION, p.17.

[22] Ibid., p. 34.

[23] See, e.g.,  Rudolf Steiner, lecture given on October 15, 1911, quoted in ART INSPIRED BY RUDOLF STEINER, John Fletcher (England: Mercury Arts Publications, 1987), p. 95, and Rudolf Steiner, THE FIFTH GOSPEL: FROM THE AKASHIC RECORD (East Sussex, UK: Rudolf Steiner Press).

In occult tradition, the Akashic record is written on Akasha, or astral light, which mediates clairvoyance. The record contains knowledge of every action, thought, emotion, etc., that has ever transpired. Or so some say.

[24] WALDORF EDUCATION, p. 17.

[25] Steiner’s delineation of man’s four bodies can be found in lecture after lecture. An early and striking example, from a lecture he gave in 1907, can be found in THEOSOPHY OF THE ROSICRUCIAN (London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1981), pp. 22-25. For an informative summary of the various bodies and their significance within the context of Anthroposophy as a whole—including education at Waldorf schools—see Sharon Lombard, “Spotlight on Anthroposophy,” CULTIC STUDIES, Vol. 2, No. 2 (http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/lombard_sharon_csr0202j.htm). For Steiner’s belief that some people are not human, see, e.g., Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1998), pp. 649-650.

[26] WALDORF EDUCATION, p. 34.

[27] Ibid., p. 112.

[28] Rudolf Steiner, THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Foundations of Waldorf Education, 1) (Great Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 1996), pp. 142-145.

[29] See, e.g., Rudolf Steiner, AN OUTLINE OF ESOTERIC SCIENCE (Great Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 1997), p. 68.

[30] See, e.g., Mark Grant, “Steiner and the Humours: The Survival of Ancient Greek Science,” THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL STUDIES, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Mar. 1999), pp. 56-70.

[31] Rudolf Steiner, KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (London & New York: Anthroposophic Press, 1944), p. 96.

[32] A.C. Harwood, PORTRAIT OF A WALDORF SCHOOL (New York: The Myrin Institute Inc., 1956), pp. 15-16.