| An analysis of Mr. Staudenmaier
as "Protocol
of Steiner" forger and the stages in his efforts to cover up his
untruthfulness
as self-proclaimed "historical scholar" (part III)
(Continued from here)
| BASIC UNTRUTHFUL STORY
ONE - IN 2000 |
As the central thesis and
introduction to his first
article as a writer on anthroposophy, "Anthroposophy and Ecofascism",
Mr. Staudenmaier, commissioned by a Norwegian secular humanist journal,
"Humanist", presents what amounts to a forgery about a lecture
series
titled "Mission of Folk Souls" held by Rudolf Steiner in Oslo 1910.
The forgery is on a par with the
"Protocols of
Zion" forgery used to demonize Judaism 100 years earlier, and is
therefore
here dubbed the "Protocol of Steiner" forgery.
The Staudenmaier article is still
published by
Mr. Dugan, secretary of PLANS Inc. in San Francisco at his PLANS site
and
at a number of other places on the Internet, with Mr. Staudenmaier's
continued
tacit approval, despite repeated objections as to its falsehood. Only
five
years after the article was written in its original form has it been
replaced
(some time around or after July 2005) with a slightly edited version,
that
has removed some of the most obvious untruths, repeatedly defended by
Mr.
Staudenmaier, described below.
Mr. Staudenmaier begins the article in
the version,
that has been published from the beginning of 2000 up to at least July
2005 at the site of PLANS with his clear approval:
"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.'
[...]
"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.' "
What Mr. Staudenmaier writes implies
that Steiner
toured Norway, to lay the groundwork for an Aryan supremacist style
ideology,
implying that Steiner was the forerunner of Nazi racist and
anti-Semitic
ideology. (For the opposite view by the Nazi authorities on this in
1935,
when they prohibited the Waldorf schools from taking on more pupils,
and
prohibited and dissolved the Anthroposophical Society in Germany for
constituting
a threat to Nazi ideology, see here
and here.)
Checking the facts, it turns out
Rudolf Steiner
did not even make a speaking tour of Norway at the time, but only held
the lecture series referred to and two additional lectures in Oslo.
Many of the works, to which Mr.
Staudenmaier refers
as sources of what he writes on Rudolf Steiner and anthroposophy, are
probably
difficult for most people to find, in order to check the extent his
descriptions
of them are actually true.
The last printed edition in English
(1970) of the
lecture series, that Staudenmaier asserts he describes has been out of
print for many years. (Only the last year was it republished, however
without
any review and correction of errors in the 1970 edition.) It has been
possible
for a number of years, however, to order it in paperback at Amazon.de
in German (which Mr. Staudenmaier speaks fluently) and get in a week
for
about US$10.
Reading the actual well
documented and
published lecture by Steiner, that Staudenmaier asserts that he
describes,
shows that the second part of his introduction is a complete
fabrication
by Staudenmaier of the first lecture and the lecture series in its
totality,
in a way that constitutes an insult to the concept of
"historical
scholar" as he prefers to describe himself.
Discussions with him have shown that,
when writing
the article, he just made up the introduction out of his speculative
imagination
on the basis of loose reading of journals, as an "opening device" to
"draw
in" his readers in Norway, where the article was first published in
2000.
The lecture,
which
Mr. Staudenmaier asserts he describes, the first lecture in the lecture
series (for the actual lecture in English translation, see here)
in
no place mentions either "root race",
or
an "Aryan race", or describes it as a "superior fifth
root
race" or a "Germanic-nordic sub-race", as "the vanguard of the highest
of five historical 'root races' " or as "the world's most spiritually
advanced
ethnic group". This is all a fabrication by Mr. Staudenmaier.
What the lecture instead gives, among
other things,
is a description, in the tradition of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, of
man as a spiritual being.
It also describes some of the
spiritual beings
described by the Jewish-Christian tradition as angels, archangels and
higher
spiritual beings, as an introduction -- in the same Jewish-Christian
tradition
-- to how they, in Steiner's understanding and view, have interacted
with
man during different stages of our development as humanity.
For a more detailed analysis of the
deficient basis
for Mr. Staudenmaier's fabricated "Aryan horror story" -- with which he
introduces his first writings on anthroposophy, also with regard to the
lecture series as a whole -- see here.
The repeated untruthfulness of
Peter Staudenmaier
A further
check of what
Mr. Staudenmaier writes, in relation to the sources he claims to refer
to, indicates that the untruthfulness demonstrated by his introductory
paragraphs, is a repeated and typical characteristic of his writings on
Steiner and anthroposophy.
As in the case of the fabricated,
untruthful introduction
to his article, it probably is difficult for most readers to check what
he writes against the actual sources to which he claims he refers in
his
argumentation, in a way that would make it possible to come to a
judgment
of what he writes.
For some sources, found on-line on
the Internet,
however, that is possible. Among these sources are Rudolf Steiner's
autobiography,
which Mr. Staudenmaier uses in his argumentation against Steiner.
For an introduction to some
untruthful side stories
to his main story, by Mr. Staudenmaier and a Mr. Zegers, see here.
When Mr. Staudenmaier was
criticized for the way
he describes the alleged sources he refers to in the article "Anthroposophy
and Ecofascism", he answered in a follow up article ("The Art of
Avoiding History") that the method he has applied in writing the
article
"Anthroposophy and Ecofascism" is "methodologically boring and
conservative".
For some comments on this
specific story,
as one of the many stories by Mr. Staudenmaier, see here.
For a description of the first
stage in the efforts
by Mr. Staudenmaier to cover up his untruthfulness as self-proclaimed
"historical
scholar" and "Protocol of Steiner" forger, documented by his
introduction,
continue here.
|
