Atlantean Fantasyland with Racist Aftertaste

by Michael Eggert

translated by Tom Mellett

Today let's do without the Steiner regurgitators, the petty hair-splitters and the esoteric mind-racers, but instead, let's concentrate directly on the Doctor himself, sit at his feet and pay attention to his remarks on the subject of human origins on the continent of Atlantis --- however, not without evaluating his claims, as far as possible, against the modern scientific findings of our own day.  For example, solely by evaluating the kilometers-deep ice cores at the poles, it is possible today to sequence climatic and volcanic changes in the Earth's history according to geological age and geography. Therefore we ask: did these “Atlanteans” --- according to Steiner --- actually “live on that part of the earth which is now covered with the waves of the Atlantic Ocean?”  [1]

Many discoveries have also been made regarding variations in the human species --- in his time, Rudolf Steiner was only aware of a second hominid type alongside Homo Sapiens, namely, the so-called Neanderthals. Steiner described them, in contrast to the “Atlanteans,” as a primitive, degenerate species that evolved alongside the Atlanteans:

. . . the old Atlanteans had very high foreheads in their watery heads. Then, as I said, when the water disappeared, low foreheads appeared at first, and then they gradually grew out again into high foreheads. It was just in a transitional age that men looked like the Neanderthal man . . .” [2]

That must have been a really goddamned long “transitional age!”   Why? Because the Neanderthals, with a population of about one million, settled into the dense, lush forests between “the Indonesian archipelago and the Iberian peninsula . . .” [3], already using fire 300,000 years ago:
By about 300,000 years ago, Homo erectus, Neanderthals and the forefathers of Homo sapiens were using fire on a daily basis.”  [3]
The Neanderthals had already lived in this habitat for hundreds of thousands of years before!

In marked contrast to Rudolf Steiner's version of events, modern archaeological and paleontological research demonstrates that a first wave of human groups identified as the species Homo Sapiens, bumped into this prehistoric and static culture of Neanderthals in the Eastern Mediterranean area [the Levant]. They came to grief:
About 100,000 years ago, some Homo Sapiens groups migrated north to the Levant, which was Neanderthal territory, but failed to secure a firm footing.” [3]

The next attempt took place 30,000 years later:
"But then, beginning about 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens started doing very special things. Around that date Sapiens bands left Africa for a second time."  [3]
Among the most remarkable characteristics of this new species was its urge to explore and colonize every corner of the Earth.
"Within a remarkably short period, Sapiens reached Europe and East Asia. About 45,000 years ago, they somehow crossed the open sea and landed in Australia – a continent hitherto untouched by humans.”  [3].

Homo Sapiens' capacities for coordination, communication and adaptability correlated with a high rate of energy expenditure with respect to their own cognitive apparatus:
In Homo sapiens, the brain accounts for about 2–3 per cent of total body weight, but it consumes 25 per cent of the body’s energy when the body is at rest.”  [3]

The ancient venerable species of Neanderthals had become accustomed to behaving and thinking in timeless continuity for thousands of years. The more these Sapiens upstarts advanced on them, the Neanderthals would, as far they could, get out of their way. Sapiens were just socially, technically, and intellectually much more mobile and agile:
"In other words, while the behaviour patterns of archaic humans remained fixed for tens of thousands of years, Sapiens could transform their social structures, the nature of their interpersonal relations, their economic activities and a host of other behaviours within a decade or two.” [3]

In contradistinction to Rudolf Steiner's view, these two species, as well other hominid species, did not emerge one from the other.  In the modern human DNA code, we can only find about 2% Neanderthal genes, which indicates a very insignificant mixing. In no way whatsoever did the Neanderthals evolve from the “Atlanteans.”  Instead,  after so many hundreds of thousands of years of being the most venerable human culture, in existence, they were simply supplanted by Homo Sapiens. It is possible to determine the farm roads and trade routes of Homo Sapiens based on the distribution of sea shells --- a wide-ranging cooperation that was totally absent with the Neanderthals:

"Archaeologists excavating 30,000-year-old Sapiens sites in the European heartland occasionally find there seashells from the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts. In all likelihood, these shells got to the continental interior through long-distance trade between different Sapiens bands. Neanderthal sites lack any evidence of such trade. Each group manufactured its own tools from local materials." [3]
This means that even separate groups of Neanderthals did not trade with each other. They simply did not participate in the cognitive revolution of that time.

Rudolf Steiner supplied his own peculiar concept --- first, Atlanteans with a high forehead, then Neanderthals with a low one, followed once again by Aryans with a high forehead --- at times contradicting himself and reaching diametrically opposed conclusions:
The Atlanteans had even less frontal brain, an even farther-receding brow  . . .” [1]

Rather than portraying tens of thousands of years of parallel existing human cultures, Steiner primarily develops an Atlantean racial theory without a hint of embarrassment, yet also one that he invented so that he could sing the praises of the Aryan people:

"We distinguish seven races within the Atlantean population. Five of these exist in an ascending mode of development. ... The Fifth Sub-Race, which we call the Primal Semites, and who had their 'home base' in today's location of Ireland, formed the seminal structure  of our present Caucasian --- or, as we call them in spiritual science --- Aryan race of people. From this race --- one that is quite dissimilar to the modern Jewish population --- but because of certain interactions with the rightly named Semitic Sub-Race – a portion of them migrated across Asia and cultivated an intellectual civilization, which then spread far and wide throughout today's Europe, over southern Asia and among the populations of northern Africa.”  [4]

Especially embarrassing is the fact that Steiner felt compelled to point out that what he called “Semitic” was very unlike the “modern Jewish population.”  Apparently, he wants to emphasize once again the supposed superiority of the Aryan-Caucasian race.

Steiner didn't just cram the stuff of fairy tales and myths into his fantastical saga of Atlantis;  he also inserted the Aryan Master Race ideology into human evolutionary history. The facts ---  as well as the analysis of modern human DNA --- refute his views. The fact that the expansion of Homo Sapiens proceeded out of Africa and over to the Levant and then, from there, moved in many consecutive waves, to the East and to the West will stick in the craw of every racist. Then, after the Ice Age, there was a similar [migrational] dynamic at work regarding the agricultural revolution.

The Aryan Atlanteans of Rudolf Steiner, however, remain a fiction with a redolent racist aftertaste put forward on the basis of occult authority.


[1]  Rudolf Steiner, Foundations of Esotericism
       Lecture 18 of 31, October 16, 1905, Berlin, GA 93a

[2]  Rudolf Steiner,  Evolution of Earth & Man & the Influence of the Stars
       Lecture 4, July 9, 1924, Dornach, GA 354,

[3]  Harari, Yuval Noah, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. 
       HarperCollins, NY,  2015    

[4]  Rudolf Steiner, World Riddles and Anthroposophy
       Lecture 6 of 22 entitled:  Basic Concepts of Theosophy.  Human Races.
       November 9, 1905, Berlin, GA 54


  1. Halloo Michael, Heil Atlantis!

    I think it is very important for the Egoisten tribe to have the lyrics to Donovan's hymn to Atlantis so they can sing along with him and compare his version of the Atlantis Saga with that of Herr Doctor Rudolf Steiner.

    Here is a video with Donovan's original 1969 recording as well as lyrics on screen and nice imagery, including a few pretty Atlantean mermaids.


    The continent of Atlantis was an island
    Which lay before the great flood
    In the area we now call the Atlantic Ocean

    So great an area of land that from her western shores
    Those beautiful sailors journeyed to the south
    And the North Americas with ease

    In their ships with painted sails
    To them East Africa was a neighbor
    Across a short strait of sea miles

    The great Egyptian age is but a remnant of the Atlantian culture
    The antediluvian kings colonized the world
    All the Gods who play in the mythological dramas
    In all legends from all lands were from far Atlantis

    Knowing her fate, Atlantis sent out ships
    To all corners of the Earth, on board were the
    Twelve, 'The poet, the physician, the farmer, the scientist
    The magician and the other so-called Gods of our legends'
    Though Gods they were

    And as the elders of our time choose to remain blind
    Let us rejoice and let us sing
    And dance and ring in the new . . .

    Hail Atlantis!

    Way down below the ocean is where I wanna be, she may be
    Way down below the ocean is where I wanna be, she may be
    Way down below the ocean is where I wanna be, she may be

  2. In the quote above Steiner says that in the transitional age humans looked LIKE Neanderthals, not that they were Neanderthals. The story of Atlantis was Steiner's theory of the origins of humanity. Also all scientific theories remain only theories all the time. And in order to judge Steiner's version fairly, it requires a genuine analysis of his specific assumptions, which are not so naive and simple as one might think.

    1. Hello Tomasz, so nice to see you here on Egoisten. How are things in Poland?

      I see your point above which implies that Steiner considered the Neanderthals to be a separate group from the Atlanteans --- and therefore the modern scientific evidence that Michael Eggert presents to debunk Steiner actually blows up in his face, thus proving instead that Rudolf Steiner was totally correct and thus Michael Eggert is a total asshole.

      First of all let's take the sentence in the original German and analyze the translation:
      „Das ist eben eine Zwischenzeit, wo die Menschen so waren wie der Neandertalmensch.“

      Here is the translation you read which I copied from the RS Archive:

      Now here is my own translation of the sentence:
      “However, that was merely a transitional period when humans looked so much like the Neanderthal man.”

      Literally translated:
      “. . . where men [PLURAL] were thus, like/as the Neanderthal man [SINGULAR] .”

      OK, Tomasz, from the above linguistic analysis, your point is well-taken. It's clear that Steiner is not identifying the Atlanteans as Neanderthals but keeping them separate and only noting a resemblance between them. And therefore, Michael Eggert might still be an asshole.

      However, you need to practice what you preach, Tomasz! Because I see that our great Steiner scholar, Ton Majoor of the Netherlands (whom I have nicknamed Big Noise from the Lowlands, and sometimes Major Racket from the Swamp) has just found a Steiner passage where indeed Steiner clearly believes that the Neanderthals evolved (or devolved) directly from the Atlanteans.

      I have found the passage in English and I give you the GoogleBooks link here:

      The Children of Lucifer.
      “The Step from Love based on Kinship to Spiritual Love.”
      April 4, 1906, Düsseldorf, GA 97

      On page 113:
      “Human beings first started to develop their I-consciousness in that part of Atlantis we find in Ireland today. From this location, the Atlanteans spread over Europe toward Asia. The human skeletal remains evident in Neanderthals derived from descendants of Atlanteans having a sloped forehead.”

    2. Hello Tom!

      Nice to see you here, too. Things in Poland are recently depending on the current political orientation. Adherents of the new government say it is a good change, opponents claim we are heading towards the dictatorship.

      What about the passage you quoted, see my comments below, I explained how "descendants" (Nachkommen) by Steiner are supposed to be understood, this expression needs to be interpreted in the context of Steiner's comprehensive theory/idea of evolution.

  3. ‘Like Neanderthals’:
    Steiner referred to Homo Erectus (Java man) and Neandertal man in Haeckel & His Opponents (Bn 30) and in The Riddles of Philosophy (
    He described Neanderthals as ‘descendants of the Atlanteans’ (97.105), i.e. of the mythic ‘old Atlanteans’ with their hydrocephalic heads in the 1924 quote: “… they had quite a thin skin, a little soft cartilage — like a net — as covering for the head” (earlier Steiner had only mentioned their etheric heads).
    Still, as Michael puts it: they ‘did not emerge one [Sapiens] from the other’ [Neanderthals].

    1. "Descendants of Atlanteans" has special meaning by Steiner. Atlanteans weren't some physical people or hominids, due to Steiner they were sublime beings of "soft matter" which didn't leave material traces which could be noticed by paleontologists. "Descendants" mean creatures which "densified" from this sublime state into material being. All hominids,due to Steiner, were descendants of those sublime Atlanteans who finally descended themselves into materiality only at the end of Atlantean epoch - as contemporary humans. Thus Steiner distinguishes two lines of evolution, sublime and "harshly material". Those two lines, according to him, joined only short before the postatlantic period. Therefore Steiner never claims that Neanderthals were humans or something like this. On the contrary, he claims that both Neanderthals and contemporary humans were separate descendants from the completely different sort of beings, which as if "hovered" above the material evolution. In this respect Steiner's ideas are surprisingly in a kind of accordance with science. That's why I said that Steiner's assumptions are not so naive as they could appear at the first sight.
      Noteworthy, what about the length of Atlantean period, Steiner refers to Scott Eliott, who claims that this period lasted about 5 millions years, so this is more or less the time which science describes for the existence and evolution of hominids,so no contradiction with science here likewise.

    2. Hello Tomasz,

      Aren’t your ’sublime beings’ real human beings, then? Compare Occult Science:
      “The physical form of man was, in the primeval past that is under discussion here, still widely different from the present human shape. It was to a high degree still the expression of soul faculties. The human being consisted of a finer, softer substance than the one he acquired later. What today is solidified was in the limbs soft, supple, and easily molded. - See more at:

    3. Hello Ton,

      You have just quoted the description which clearly confirms my interpretation about 'sublime' line of evolution in Steiner's idea. It's no use to apply modern scientific theories to such conceptions, because it isn't about material evolution of hominids, primates or the like. I those would be real human beings - there is Steiner's answer in the passage you quoted, he says that those were human beings, though in the different existential form. It is not my idea, I only interprete Steiner :)

    4. With his embryonic and hydrocephalic (early) Atlanteans Steiner was clearly hinting at the scientific theories of neoteny or juvenilization, like Kollmann’s, as explanatory for human evolution (see:

    5. Neoteny is also called: paedomorphosis, domestication, prolongation of childhood, devolution and retardation. This neoteny theme is related to the mind-body monism, e.g. in Steiner’s Philosophy of Freedom (1894/1918).

      "Observe now what is already available in scientific Zoology, in Selenka's researches for instance on the difference between man and animal in the forming of the embryo and in further development after birth, — comparing man and the higher animals. You will then have a more concrete idea of this "remaining behind". Indeed we owe our human form to the fact that in embryo-life we do not go as far as the animal but remain behind." - See more at:
      Cf. Steiner 67.338 f. (1918) and Poppelbaum, Man and Animal: Their essential difference (1931/1956), Google books TElmBAAAQBAJ

      “For ordinary experience, human thinking makes its appearance only in connection with, and by means of, this organization. This form of its appearance comes so much to the fore that its real significance cannot be grasped unless we recognize that in the essence of thinking this organization plays no part whatever. Once we appreciate this, we can no longer fail to notice what a peculiar kind of relationship there is between the human organization and the thinking itself. For this organization contributes nothing to the essential nature of thinking, but recedes whenever the activity of thinking makes its appearance; it suspends its own activity, it yields ground; and on the ground thus left empty, the thinking appears. The essence which is active in thinking has a twofold function: first, it represses the activity of the human organization; secondly, it steps into its place.” - See more at:

    6. Axolotl! My esteemed Major Racket! I especially thank you for the reference to Julius Kollerman, who coined the term “neoteny” and investigated Mexican axolotls. You see, I use the word Axolotl! as my own special epithet for Excellent! Right on! Ausgezeichnet! as a way of honoring the anthroposophical evolutionary concept of neoteny.

      I highly recommend this book Growing Young by Ashley Montague that first appeared in 1981 as a work that validates the idea of neoteny for human evolution

      However, my dear Big Noise from the Lowlands, I would ask you to apply this concept of neoteny to Rudolf Steiner's racial hierarchies, especially given the strange anomaly that modern anthropologists conside the Asian race to be far more neotenous, i.e. child-like than any of the other human races. You can read about this in the wikipedia page for neoteny.

      The wiki section on Negroids and Mongoloids quotes Ashley Montagu from the Growing Young book.

      Ashley Montagu said that Negroids have the following neotenous traits relative to Caucasoids: flattish nose, flat roof of the nose, small ears, narrower joints, frontal skull eminences, later closure of the premaxillary sutures, less hairy, longer eyelashes and cruciform pattern of the lower second and third molars.

      However, Ashley then speaks of Mongolids as being the most neotenous of all races

      In fact the Mongoloid presents so many physical traits which are associated with the late fetus or young infant that he has been called a fetalized, infantilized or pedomorphic type.

      I ask this of you, Major Racket, because Rudolf Steiner clearly stated that the Negro race was the most child-like, or neotenous, of all the colored races who had descended --- to use the word as Tomasz Kozera uses it above --- or degenerated from the sublime race of human beings which was of course the white-skinned race, the Caucasians, who developed their sublime physical and spiritual culture after migrating to Central Europe, thus fulfilling the sublime mission of the Primal Semites (Ursemiten) --- which of course have nothing to do with the present Jewish population that was a "mistake of world history" as Rudolf Steiner described them in 1888..

    7. Dear Tom,
      Ethnic groups are physically and culturally stereotyped by Steiner, though not mutually exclusive and only for 15% (‘abnormal development’, 1 to 6, e.g. in GA 121). They are cliché, yet monogenist groups. 15% also happens to be the intergroup variation between arbitrary human groups.

      The same stigmas can be misused for more or less neotenous groups (see Gould). Steiner’s childlike, young, ripe and overripe groups may point to their overall genetic variability from large to small, which he characterizes as Lamarckian inherited (GA 11 and 121).

      Steiner’s archaic caucasian group is said to be mixed with the modern, ‘old celtic’ group to form the modern caucasian group , which migrates, mixes and mangles all over the world (GA 107.8; 121.6/7 and 349.3). Blavatsky’s semitic ‘Akkadians’ are stereotyped by Steiner as ‘an enterprising people’ that ‘developed the faculty of thought even further’ (GA 11).

      (as I hinted at, Ton is just short for Anthony (of Egypt) who coincidentally is called the Great)

  4. Halloo, Michael!

    You really need to include this quote about Neanderthals that Major Racket found today. Why? Because Steiner gave the lecture in your hometown of Düsseldorf!!!

    Die Kinder Des Luzifer
    Die Ablösung der Blutsliebe durch die Geistige Liebe
    Düsseldorf, 4. April 1906, GA 97

    In dem Teil der Atlantis, der an der Stelle des heutigen Irlands lag, fingen die Menschen zuerst an, das Ich-Bewußtsein auszubilden. Von dieser Stelle aus verbreiteten sich die Atlantier über Europa hin nach Asien. Die Menschenknochen, welche man im Neandertal gefunden hat, sind solche, welche von den Nachkommen der Atlantier herrühren, sie haben noch eine weit zurückliegende Stirn.

  5. Tom,
    When you make a translation of something that another person has written, are you taking any responsibility for it? In other words, do you act as independent translator, or based on the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle or Observer Effect, do you alter the concepts and put something of yourself into it? I would argue you try and have it both ways. Of course I am well used to this. For one, you get to be part of the sensational. Two, you don't have to do the work other than a translation. Third, you can always hide behind not being the author after initially defending the silly piece.

    I have to say that Tomasz does an outstanding job of debunking the bull in this piece.

    1. Hello Daniel,

      Thank you for commenting here and cheerleading Tomasz, who toils like a hermit, all alone in the Ahrimanic wilderness of some kind of science facility in Poland. He needs all the encouragement he can get.

      Now as for your questions about my translating, I think the best way to answer you is to give an example of my translation process, and I find a vivid example here on the Egoisten blog. Back in December 2010, Michael Eggert posted about a biography of Julian Assange.

      Here is the link

      Let us take the title, which is a direct quote from Julian Assange.

      "Wenn du ein Problem mit mir hast, verpiss dich"

      Now what it says literally is:
      “If you have a problem with me, piss off!”

      Well, this is a translator's dream. Why? Because the German is a translation of what Julian originally said in English, which was

      “If you have a problem with me, piss off!”

      So all I would have to do as translator is find the original English transcript and just do Copy and Paste!

      But now suppose I were to translate that same German sentence in a different context? Recall that Julian Assange is Australian and so it's natural that he would use the expression “piss off” because that's is so eminently Australian (from the British).

      But how would I translate this sentence for you, Daniel, as an American and also here as an Anthroposophist here raising questions about my own translation process?

      I give it to you now and ask you just how much of myself, a la heisenberg, I have put into this new version, created especially for you:

      “Daniel Perez, if you have a problem with me, GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!”

    2. Now Daniel, in the interests of civility in our current anthroposphical discourse, I would now like to translate my imperative to you into the warm and quaint English dialect called “Classical Anthroposophese.”

      This dialect arises from the fact that the early translators of Rudolf Steiner's books and lectures into English were almost all British and were made in the time period of 1920 through 1960. As you yourself know, it took until 1980 before there were any really good American English translations of Steiner's work, including that of your own step-father-in-law (Stief-Schwiegervater?), Bill Lindeman, and his milestone translation of Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom.

      So, with that in mind I would like to translate my original statement, expressed in my own rather harsh native New York City dialect:

      “Daniel Perez, if you have a problem with me, GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!”

      into the much more civil English dialect of Classical Anthroposophese:

      “ Daniel Perez, my dear friend, if you indeed have a problem with me, then I would ask you, in all earnestness, to undergo, as it were, a warm personal process of self-fructification.”

  6. I think, potentially, Tom’s translations have a hygienic-therapeutical effect (Tom is a short name for doubting Thomas and a mallet …).

  7. Hello Tomasz,

    I think you will be interested in reading the recent comments of Herr Doktor Professor Peter Staudenmaier, the esteemed professor of Modern European History at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconson, USA, on the subject of Atlantis with especial focus on the Atlantean racial teachings of Rudolf Steiner.

    I will break up his long comment into 3 sections.
    The entire comment is posted here

    from Professor Peter Staudenmaier, as posted to the Waldorf Critics Yahoo group this morning:


    Thanks once more to Tom for translating Michael Eggert's essay, an important example of critical anthroposophical engagement with Steiner's legacy. Some of the comments to the original post indicate just how threatening this can seem to other anthroposophists today. Race and racism, in particular, remain remarkably challenging topics for many of Steiner's followers.

    But the Atlantis myth is directly linked to the racial components of anthroposophy and especially to Steiner's version of the Aryan myth. All of these are still very much part of contemporary anthroposophist thinking -- this is by no means merely a thing of the past. It is not something that magically disappeared after 1945. Nor is it merely a matter of disembodied ideas unconnected to the social realities of racism. Consider the following passage from an anthroposophist book published in South Africa in 1987:

    "In lectures presented by the late Dr. Max Stibbe, who made an extensive study of race relations in South Africa, it was mentioned that the Mercury Mysteries in Atlantis soon degenerated, with the result that the Negro race was deprived of those spiritual impulses that introduced initiatives.

    Migrating from Atlantis, the blacks entered Africa at the mouth of the Congo river. Some of them went to North-West Africa, the rest journeying to the East and the South. The life forces of the black race are so strong that they absorb all light. The warmth of the cosmos is, so to speak, boiling inside them, hence their particular metabolism, their strong desires, instincts and emotions.

    Their skin is coarse (large-pored) and their limbs extraordinarily strong, in comparison with which the development of their thinking is much weaker. Their strong life forces see to it that of their soul
    functions, willing is by far the most strongly developed. Their metabolism is dominated by the liver, hence the frequent liver diseases–and other glandular disturbances–among blacks. They are rigidly imprisoned in the fire of their metabolism and their physical as well as etheric body is hardened."

    Hymen Picard, "Some Thoughts on Race Relations" Invisible Africa: A Search for the Grail in Africa (Novalis Press, 1987), 113-14

  8. Professor Staudenmaier then presents two examples of books published during the Nazi time promulgating Rudolf Steinr's racial teachings derived from Atlantis.

    I post the first one here about Ernst Uehli's book:


    "The Atlantis myth was a popular theme in anthroposophist publications in Nazi Germany as well. Two full-length books on Atlantis were published by leading anthroposophists in Germany in 1936. Both combined Steiner's racial teachings with his esoteric variant of the the Atlantis myth and the Aryan myth. Both books were re-published several times by anthroposophists presses after 1945, from the 1950s to the 1990s.

    Ernst Uehli's book Atlantis und das Rätsel der Eiszeitkunst: Versuch einer Mysteriengeschichte der Urzeit Europas (Stuttgart: Hoffmann, 1936) highlighted the divinely ordained nature of racial evolution. Uehli explained that the origin of racial differences lies in the spiritual realm and is expressed in the physical realm. The members of the "Aryan race" were carefully selected by their cosmically appointed guide in order to lead the development of human individuality.

    Following Steiner's model, Uehli held that the "red race" of the American Indians was "incapable of further evolution" and thus "dying out." The "black race" was "unable to develop further," hence its "symptoms of racial decline." (66) According to Uehli, these racial characteristics were based on "cosmically anchored laws of evolution." (67) But "the Aryan race, and with it the Germanic peoples, were born from spiritual foundations," empowered to carry forward the "mission of the Germanic peoples in the cultural development of Europe." (77)

  9. Finally, here is Peter Staudenmaier's evaluation of the 2nd book published during the Nazi time:


    “Sigismund von Gleich's book Der Mensch der Eiszeit und Atlantis (Stuttgart: Waldorf-Verlag, 1936) was published by the Waldorf press. The book drew on esoteric authors as well as contemporary racial theorists to construct a spiritual framework which confirmed “the cosmic order in the arrangement of the races.” (192) In Gleich's extravagantly detailed account of spiritual-racial evolution, the “Aryan root race” was threatened by “violent onslaughts” from “colored races” and “the lowest racial remnants” of the Atlanteans and Lemurians. (113) The legacy of these racial unfortunates persists within “the Semitic element.” (153) But “the best members of the white race” bear a spiritual consciousness “which enables humanity to become a free spiritual being.” (83) The virtues of the Aryans are the result of a rigorous racial selection process overseen by esoteric Initiates:

    "A small number were led out of the general moral decline and the violent natural catastrophes by the Initiates to an isolated region, in order to be cultivated into the primary seed of future evolution. These were members of the white race from north Atlantis, whose spiritual thinking ability was the most highly developed. They were able to mature into the seed of the post-Atlantean root race, which in Spiritual Science is called the Aryan." (88)

    Gleich continued:

    "Because the capacity for thought had been fostered in the finest way among the north Atlanteans, their highest spiritual leader, Manu, chose the best from among them and led them, as Rudolf Steiner describes, to a special location in inner Asia, in order to protect them from the harmful influences of those who were left behind or of peoples who had gone astray." (89)

    For Gleich, “human souls develop different cultures on the basis of different racial and ethnic forces” and “the specific racial traits” of each human group. Dark skin, for example, is due to demonic forces. (163) “People became black because of the after-effects of the Fall from grace, they became ‘black as sin,’ or ‘black as the devil,’ to whose temptations man had succumbed. Through Lucifer’s influence the astral body with its desires was corrupted and made more powerful than the divine spark, which was weakened and darkened.” (171) In vivid contrast to the debased darker races, “the outstanding sensory talents and spiritual thinking power” of the “white-skinned races of Atlantis” have “reached perfection in their descendants, the Aryan-Caucasian peoples.” (174)

    As we have seen repeatedly on this list over the years, these are myths that some of Steiner's followers continue to propagate today.

    Peter S.

    1. Oh no, I am not in Ahrimanic wilderness in Poland. I feel like the precursor of coming 6th postatlantic, Slavonic cultural period here, though indeed sometimes it feels like plowing fallow.

      I am glad to meet you Tom, but as I can see, you are having your war with all as usual... Let me show you something:

      In your opinion, is Muhammad Ali the racist? Is his claim for the right to be proud of his race, which in his opinion should not mingle with other races - a racist and chauvinist claim?

    2. Hi Tomasz, yes, of course Muhammed Ali's claim is racist and chauvinist. But I don't understand why you are asking such a question.

    3. I ask such a question because I was curious whose sake you are fighting your noble antiracist crusades for. Muhammad Ali as well as certainly many of his fellows don't care, they don't want to integrate with you.

    4. The racism question appeared as the public question in reaction to the discrimination of Afroamericans, who were fighting for equal rights, while in 1950's or 60's there were still discriminatory rights separating whites and blacks in some southern US states. But then the question of equal rights has been extended to the question of identity. Since then the racism became not only to deny equal rights for discriminated people, but also to deny that "all people are one" with no racial differences. What Muhmmad Ali says in this interview, is: "I don't want to integrate with white people that far. All people should have equal rights, but it doesn't mean that they have to give up their racial or group identity and affinity at the same time. I am proud of my identity and affinity and I claim for my right to be proud of it."

      So my point is: isn't it an interesting paradox, that while you want to protect black people against alleged Steiner's racism, those black people themselves would agree with Steiner, that people also have their racial identity and that there are some natural differences among races, which are not to be denied?

    5. ‘would agree with Steiner’:
      Steiner primarily stated a ‘normal development’ for all people:

      In other words, humans are genetically homogeneous (85%), differences (15%) are superficial:

      In 1972, Richard Lewontin performed a FST statistical analysis using 17 markers (including blood-group proteins). He found that the majority of genetic differences between humans (85.4 percent) were found within a population, 8.3 percent were found between populations within a race and 6.3 percent were found to differentiate races (Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians, and Australian Aborigines in his study). Since then, other analyses have found FST values of 6–10 percent between continental human groups, 5–15 percent between different populations on the same continent and 75–85 percent within populations.(wiki/Race_and_genetics)

    6. Hello Tomasz,

      I now understand your misunderstanding of my position about Steiner's racial statements. So let's clear that up right now.

      You wrote above that I must be on some kind of “noble ANTI-racist crusade.” Quite the opposite. If anything, I am on a “PRO-racist crusade.” I believe that what Rudolf Steiner taught about racial differences may be just as valid as what he taught about bio-dynamics or Waldorf, for example.

      My crusade is then complicated. I recognize Rudolf Steiner as racist in his Thinking, in the ideology of anthroposophy, but he is NOT racist in his Willing because he did not teach discrimination against Blacks, for example.

      As for the Jews, he did not call for their extermination, but rather for their assimilation. Thus he was antisemitic in his Thinking about Jews, but he did not allow those antisemitic thoughts to permeate his Willing and become actions against the Jews like the Nazis did.

      About 10 years ago, a black man who was a parent at the Waldorf school where I was teaching in Los Angeles told me the following.

      He said: “Tom, I believe tat you, just like Rudolf Steiner, are racist but not bigoted.”

      What does that mean in anthroposophical terms? It means that he recognized that I was racist in my thinking but I did not allow that ideological racism to permeate my will where it would have become actions or behavior against black people --- what we may call bigotry or discrimination.

      Our problem in modern society is that we do not distinguish racism in thinking from racism in willing. I am on a crusade then, to find the best words to make these differences.

      So you see, Tomasz, I consider myself to be a racist, just like I consider Rudolf Steiner to be racist, but only in my Thinking. I believe in the same ideal of the Universal Human as Rudolf Steiner believes, but of course before we get to the Universal Human, we muct acknwledge the racism in the thinking or ideologcal teaching of anthroposphy.

      You see, Tomasz, given my definition of racism above as limited to the Thinking realm, then I see that this racism is not INCIDENTAL to anthroposophy, but FUNDAMENTAL to it.

      Der Rassismus ist der Anthroposophie nicht gelegentlich, sondern ihr grundlegend.

      We then can choose in freedom whether or not to allow this fundamentally racist thinking to permeate our willing and become action or behavior in the world against people of color or against Jews or Muslims, etc.

      I hope this clears up the issue a little better.

    7. Dear Tom,

      thank you for your very interesting argument in favour of "racism in Thinking", but against letting it permeate one’s Willing.

      »We then can choose in freedom whether or not to allow this fundamentally racist thinking to permeate our willing and become action or behavior in the world against people of color or against Jews or Muslims, etc.«

      I would like to explore this further:
      You seem to see only one single possible outcome of letting racism permeate from one’s Thinking into one’s Willing – is it true that you believe "racism in Willing" must needs lead to actions against members belonging to other races than one’s own?
      (Obviously, I don’t mean to say that "racism in Willing" didn’t very often lead to exactly that – and not only in history: as we all know, it still does.)

    8. Hello Ingrid, this is a dream come true because 2 days ago I was wishing for you to comment here and now you have. And twice I see. I'm so glad you have arrived so we can have a sensible discussion of the race issue without the “agenda defenders” and the usual gang of trolling elementals from the teeming sub-Egoisten sphere.

      As for your questions about race and racism, first, I have to say that the epithet of “Racist!” hurled at anyone today has to be interpreted along a wide spectrum of connotations and assumptions. The word is so overused that it really loses meaning as anything other than an insult.

      You have characterized the main parts of the spectrum when you make the distinction between racism that simply means differentiation according to obvious physical characteristics and racism that involves pejorative moral judgments about superiority and inferiority.

      As an Anthroposophist of 40 years now, I see Rudolf Steiner as racist predominantly in the first sense (80%) where he describes the different races as an “occult biologist” or any scientist might describe phenomena objectively, showing how the several human races are rooted in distinct Planetary Racial Spirits.

      But then 20% of his racism, I believe, crosses into the morally judgmental area, like when he describes the degeneracy or decadence of the black race, their child-like natures with powerful metabolism and libidos overwhelming their ability to think with the fromtal lobes (Vorderhirn) that comes so easily to us Caucasians.

      However, notice that I still consider the 80% + 20% = 100% of Steiner's racism to be in the realm of Thinking, or Ideology. I do not believe that Steiner allowed his racist ideology/doctrine to permeate his will to the point that he would have discriminated against a black person, perhaps, wanting to join the Society and work on the new Goetheanum.

      Of course, he could have no real control over what his followers might do with these racial teachings, and yes, many of Steiner's followers during the Nazi era used Steiner's ideas to justify or perhaps merely rationalize Hitler's treatment of the Jews as part of evolutionary necessity.

      Since you have written a few articles here about Islam and Islamophobia, then maybe I can better express my ideas by asking if you believe that moderate, peace-loving Muslims should renounce the violence committed by the terrorists in the name of Islam?

      Peter Staudenmaier constantly harps on his conviction that --- not only should Anthroposphists acknowledge and admit Steiner's racism (in Thinking) but they should renounce that racism in public discussion (in Willing or Action). I myself agree 100% with Peter that all of Steiner's racial ideas need to be acknowledged --- (because many of them may actually be correct and are being slowly vindicated by modern evolutionary biology – as Ton Majoor like to point out with a renewal of Lamarckism today) --- but I disagree that Anthros need to condemn those racist ideas.

      I ask you the Islam question because it seems a good parallel to what Peter is demanding of Anthros.

      Let me stop here because I must go shopping (mainly for for the cats I serve as butler) and pick up the discussion later.

      Thank you so much, Ingrid, for raising the dignity and moral tenor of my posting here, something I have difficulty establishing myself, especially when it becomes an “All-Boys-Club.”


  10. Uehli’s and von Gleich’s quotes do not seem to reflect Steiner in GA 54 (not translated in English ), e.g. concerning development and Germans:

    Wenn wir die heutigen Menschen betrachten, dann haben sie sich, so wie sie sind, herausentwickelt aus diesen früheren Stufen des Daseins. Nicht immer verschwindet sogleich, wenn das Höhere erscheint, dasjenige, was primitiv ist. Es erhält sich vorerst und verändert sich in mannigfaltiger Weise. 54.142 (1905)

    Wir wissen ja, daß die Germanen, die Vorfahren der deutschen und angelsächsischen Völkerschaften in Europa, ein Gebiet eingenommen haben, das in Urzeiten von andern Volksstämmen, von den Kelten bewohnt war. 54.434 (1906)

  11. Trump advisor or Trump personality disorder? - With a nutty aftertaste!

    When you see one of these posts from Tom, you know the ones, where he is nasty and not funny, all you can do is scratch your head.

    Here is an example tweet from Trump, "@katyperry must have been drunk when she married Russell Brand. Brand replied, “@realDonaldTrump are you drunk when you write these tweets?”

    On the one hand you have this basic astral body disorder, the innate desire to be as mean and nasty as possible. In this regard you can imagine Tom as a Trump advisor.

    But there is another distinct possibility. Just as Tom once felt he was the reincarnated Steiner, he also has had his own issues with being stable. I have spent the last two months in a great conversation with Tom and two other individuals via email. Very detailed debates on complex and difficult topics. It has been heated at times, but responses have always been measured and respectful. He then invited our email group to be part of the egoisten blog. I then challenge him, the same way I challenge him via email, on what his role is when he translates someone else’s work and you see the response. Nasty and defensive!

    I have been debating Tom since the 1990s, and I’ve seen all kinds of responses. For the most part the responses are firm but funny, human and containing some insight. But every now and then you just see this completely irrational and really mean response. It is clear that a threshold has been reached where there is no steam release valve. It is time for a meltdown. – This is our nutty aftertaste!

    1. Mr Perez seems to have trouble Stopping aggressive monologues.

    2. Perhaps your English is as good as my German, Michael? I was pointing out how pointless Tom's posts have been. There was nothing to comment on other than the boorishness. I am glad to comment on thoughtful debates.

  12. Hello Tomasz,

    I discovered an exchange we had on Steiner Facebook from 3 years ago. I hope you don't mind me re-posting it here because it is just as germane (but not German!) now as then.


    TOMASZ: I'll ask you perhaps a little provocative question, Tom Mellett: how do you feel about the fact, that every inch of the continent, you live on, has been robbed by white race from the Indian race, that lived there before? Don't you feel guilty about that?”

    TOM MELLETT: Thank you Tomasz for asking such a provocative question because it really needs to be asked and I hope my answer will forward the discussion here about the evolutionary racial and Jewish teachings of Rudolf Steiner.

    The short answer to your question is: No! And the long answer is equally: No, I don’t feel guilty at all about the genocide perpetrated on the American Indians by my white European ancestors. Nor do I feel guilty at all about what the German Nazis did to the Jews in the Holocaust.

    Now the reason that I don’t feel guilty is that, as an Anthroposophist, I have taken in Rudolf Steiner’s teachings about the evolutionary positive essence of the Caucasian (white race whose Planetary Racial Spirit is called the Jupiter Spirit) and the evolutionary negative essence of the American Indians (copper-red race whose Planetary Racial Spirit is the Saturn Spirit.)

    I quote for you below what Rudolf Steiner taught about the two races with my all-caps emphasis on the anthroposophical principle that is the “primal phenomenon,” as it were, of the whole discussion.

    From the beginning of Lecture 7 of the John Gospel cycle, given November 22, 1907 in Basle, GA 100

    We have before us in the American race a primitive aboriginal people that has remained far, far behind, among other things in regard to its religious worldview. But this race has retained the belief in a monotheistic god, which speaks to it from all the sounds of nature.

    The Indian stands in such a profound relationship to nature that he hears in all of her expressions the voice of the high creative spirit, whereas the European is so stuck in materialistic culture that he can no longer perceive the voice of nature.

    Both peoples have the same origin, both descend from the population of Atlantis, which possessed a monotheistic faith arising from spiritual clairvoyance.


    It can be described as follows. In the course of millennia our planet transforms itself, and this transformation also demands a development of humankind. Those side branches that no longer fit in to current conditions become decadent. Thus we have an upright evolutionary trunk as well as side branches which decay."

    (Part 1 of 2, continued)

    1. Part 2 of 2

      Again I must stress that Rudolf Steiner is not calling for the genocide of the Saturn Race of American Indians by the Jupiter Race of white Europeans. But it is clear that he himself viewed the genocide as a necessary consequence of the evolution of humanity toward the Universal-Human.

      I mean, thnk about it! How else are the decadent degenerate races going to be driven extinct? They are not going to do it by themselves. They need the agency of the superior progressing spiritual race, which is always the white Jupiter Race in Steiner’s teachings.

      Therefore, to answer your question, Tomasz, since I don’t perceive any sense of guilt on the part of Steiner about these various genocides, then why should I myself, as an Anthroposophist, feel any guilt about these ugly but necessary advances of human spiritual evolution by forcing these decadent races to their extinction?

      I hope this is helpful, Tomasz. I like the way you bring the relevant issues into focus here.


      Now Tomasz, today, I have a question for you: in that 1907 lecture cited above, there is the diagram of the Tree of Evolution. Aryans (Europeans) are at the top of the tree. There are decadent side branches (“dekadente Abzweigungen.”), starting with the American Indian branch and below that, the Apes or Primates branch (Affengeschlecht). Where would you place the decadent branch of the Negro race and then where would you put the decadent branch – perhaps a sub-branch? -- of the Neanderthal species?

    2. Tomasz, I also found this quote about the American Indians, where Steiner does not blame the Europeans for the genocide, but rather blames the victims themselves. In fact, Steiner makes a point of saying that the Europeans didn’t really like helping them along the extinction path, but hey, somebody had to do it!

      Lecture 4 of Mission of the Folk-Souls, given June 10, 1910 in Christiania (Oslo) GA 121

      “The American Indians did not die out because it pleased the Europeans that they should do so, but because they had to acquire those forces which led them to die out.”

      “Nicht etwa deshalb, weil es den Europäern gefallen hat, ist die indianische Bevölkerung ausgestorben, sondern weil die indianische Bevölkerung die Kräfte erwerben mußte, die sie zum Aussterben führten.”

    3. Hi Tom,

      I do not follow your logic saying: „Again I must stress that Rudolf Steiner is not calling for the genocide of the Saturn Race of American Indians by the Jupiter Race of white Europeans. But it is clear that he himself viewed the genocide as a necessary consequence of the evolution of humanity toward the Universal-Human. “

      In fact, Steiner makes a point of saying that the Europeans didn’t really like helping them along the extinction path, but hey, somebody had to do it!"

      "If one continues this logic then also the masacres comitted in the period of colonization by the so-called „Jupiter Race of the white Europeans“ and the intented genocide on the Jewish could be interpreted as a necessary consequence … to correct history? In that logic would the extinction of Jews apply to those who did not want to assimilate to deadent catholic mainstream. Is that how Steiner understands evolution?

    4. Hello Friederike,

      Perhaps you can follow my logic better when we examine an actual genocide (Völkermord) that was taking place while Rudolf Steiner was giving a lecture. I refer to his lecture of October 25, 1906 in Berlin, GA 55, called “Blut ist ein ganz besonderer Saft” in English as “The Occult Significance of the Blood.”

      During this lecture Steiner condones the Herero genocide as a necessary consequence of human evolution, in the same way that he condoned the American indian genocide by the superior white race.

      I give you the German wikipedia here:ölkermord_an_den_Herero_und_Nama

      “Der Völkermord an den Herero und Nama geschah während und nach der Niederschlagung von Aufständen der Herero und Nama gegen die deutsche Kolonialmacht in der Kolonie Deutsch-Südwestafrika während der Jahre 1904 bis 1908.”

      Peter Staudenmaier provides the historical context of that 1906 lecture here

      The point is not that Steiner explicitly endorsed the genocide of the Herero and Nama in German South-West Africa, but that he condoned German colonial policies and their racist underpinnings in the midst of this genocide. . . .

      Thus Steiner did indeed condone colonialism, and more, in his 1906 treatise on "The Occult Significance of Blood." He says nothing at all -- much less anything critical -- about the violence of colonialism: right in the very midst of a genocidal German colonial campaign.

      Instead he equates black people with utterly barbaric savages and declares that some non-European peoples are on the down-grade of evolution and inevitably had to perish as soon as they encountered European colonists. These are classic examples of colonialist and racist ideology.


      I will follow up later with a response to your question about the Jews and the Holocaust.


    5. Thank you, Tom, for all the links!
      I read some of what Steiner wrote on 'The Occult Significance of Blood'. I had difficulties to read all of it as I have resistance to follow him. I think that Steiner (not only on this subject) took over some of racist theosophical stuff and passed it on. I still have much esteem for Steiner, I guess he was partly lost in ideology.

      I also read about the German genocide, I admit that I was ignorant of the dimension of it.
      I never could understand why Steiner, who 'explained' every corner of our solar system (...also wondering why he did not go beyond it, or did he?) never condemned the arrogance and cruelty of colonialism.

    6. Tom, first of all I apologise for the late answer, I am quite busy recently, so I will only touch few things now: Rudolf Stener never accepted the genocide on Indians, he claimed that Europeans in fact didn't make genocide on them, but they died out as if by themselves. I must admitt that I changed my mind in this respect recently, while I read somewhere, that in fact only about few thousands of Indians died in fights with white people. Millions however died out because of diseases, they simply had no resistance to the European diseases. It was different in South America where Indians mostly survived. So I guess the genocide on N. A. Indians could be in fact the product of westerns and Karl May stories. This is just some hypothesis.

      That would be so much for now due to lack of time, I will come back to your interesting arguments later if you please.

  13. The Europeans at the top of the tree in GA 100 seem to represent the modern (‘higher’) postatlantean Europeans, not the archaic (‘lower’) atlantean Europeans (the Jupiter modification).The first are said to be mixed with the old Celtic (Sun) people. The ‘Indians’ are indicating the atlantean American Indians (the stereotype Saturn modification).

    With his American Indian phrase in GA 121 Steiner apparently alluded to the then popular neo-lamarckian evolution theory (acquired bodily adaptations to the environment which become hereditary), and not to a targeted goal. Cf.:

    “A [neodarwinian] school was formed under the leadership of Weismann which denied that characteristics which an organism had acquired through adaptation to the environment could be transmitted by inheritance, and that in this way a transformation of organisms could occur.” - See more at:

    “It is possible therefore that a man is not only dependent on the locality of his birth, but that the characteristics thus acquired may also be inherited by his descendants.” - See more at:

  14. “The American Indians did not die out because it pleased the Europeans that they should do so, but because they had to acquire those forces which led them to die out.” (GA 121.4)
    ‘Those forces’ are interpreted by Steiner as an ‘ossification’ (GA 121.6). The American Indians were outwardly-physically ‘ossified’, because of their strong atlantean memory and knowledge of the Great Spirit (GA 192, not translated) i.e. by Saturn forces. In Occult Science (GA 13) the American Indians are called ‘Saturn people’. Only in 1921 (e.g. in GA 203) Steiner has spoken of an extermination of the American Indians by the Europeans.

    “Our investigation leads us over to the West, to lands in which, after the discovery of America, large numbers of Europeans founded colonies and exterminated or at all events kept the original population in a state of subjection.”

    There are two passages on colonialism in the lecture in GA 55. The first passages seems to give tacit approval to colonialism, the second (cited below) seems to condemn it on the basis of Lamarckism:

    “When two groups of people come into contact, as is in the case of colonization, then those who are acquainted with the conditions of evolution are able to foretell whether or not an alien form of civilization can be assimilated by the others. Take, for example, a people that is the product of its environment, into whose blood this environment has built itself, and try to graft upon [aufpfropfen, i.e. force upon] such a people a new form of civilization. The thing is impossible. This is why certain aboriginal peoples had to go under, as soon as colonists came to their particular parts of the world.” - See more at:

  15. Dear Tom,

    I’m not sure if you saw the question I asked you, in reply to your posting here.

    Before I repeat my question, I would like to clarify what exactly you mean by "racist thinking" (referring to which you are, as you say, »on a “PRO-racist crusade.”«):

    Is it to differentiate, to discern, to distinguish different "races"?
    Or is it to differentiate "races" in such a way that your own "race" is "better" than others?

    1. 'in such a way that your own "race" is "better" than others?'
      FAZ: 'Hannelore Kraft führt eines der wichtigsten Bundesländer...'
      Ist das rassistisch gegenüber (beispielsweise) dem Saarland?

    2. :-) Wieso sollte das „rassistisch“ sein?
      Vertrittst Du etwa die originelle Ansicht, die Bürger von Nordrhein-Westfalen und des Saarlandes gehörten unterschiedlichen „Rassen“ an?

    3. Nein, diese originelle Ansicht vertrete ich nicht!
      Aber ich halte die Formulierung 'your own race' als solche für ausgesprochen originell - denn wer hat den schon einen Stammbaum (oder gar eine genetische Typisierung) um sich tatsächlich einer Rasse zuordnen zu können.
      Die Rassendiskussion basiert doch ohnehin (fast) ausschließlich auf Geburtsorten oder gefühlten Hauptwohnsitzen.
      Der Großgeist fühlt sich als Europäer (wie kosmopolitisch!), der Kleingeist fühlt sich als Deutscher und der (Garten-)Zwerggeist fühlt sich der Spezies der Vorder-, Hinter-, Ober- oder Unterbempflinger entstammend...


    4. :-;?))((!-;: ist das Smiley für 'weiss nicht, ob ich lachen oder heulen soll...'

    5. hEY sTEFF hoscht du was gega Onterbempflinga? In jedem Zwerg schtaeckt ebbes Grosses au in Onterbempflinga. I mog Ausländer, die schaffet guet.

    6. Ha do hosch' d au widor recht!
      Sigsch' d, mor muas blos wissa wo mor nogherd...

    7. Han i doch gwusst mer verstanded ons. Also s problem ischt net wo mar nogehrd sondern wo gosch no wenn die andere saget do ghersch hir net hin. Wo ghörsch Du no Steff? I würd a mol sage von dainem schbrachlichen Duktus ghörsch Du nach Oberbembflinga hani recht?

    8. Sagod mor mol so: Oberbembflinga ligt ogfär em gleicha Erddael wie do wo i herkomm - abor drozdem send d' Oberbembflingor bei ons 'Raegschmeggde'!

    9. Oder bischt Du oiner vom Meer der so tut als ob er dazughöre will, Härr Birkholz dr Name passt scho mol gar net nach Oberbemflinga. Birkholz ha Königsberger Junkergeschlecht würd i a mol schätza? Aber uf gar koin Fall an ächter Oberbempflinger.

    10. "Oberbembflinga ligt ogfär em gleicha Erddael wie do wo i herkomm" Soebbes schwätz bloss an Oberbempflinger da kommt der allemannische Schalk und Narr zum Vorschei.

    11. Also i gäbs zua: Mae Grossvaddor väddorlichorseids war an raegschmeggdor abor älle andre kommad ausm gleicha Erddoel wia Ondorbempflenga...

    12. Merkt Ihr eigentlich wie Ihr die Standarddeutschen oder besser gesagt die niederrheinischen Hilfspreussen, die nichts anderes sind als verkleidete Holländer, die auf Deutsch und so machen, mit Eurem Dialekt ausgrenzt. Das ist doch ein Blog vom Niederrhein hier oder nicht?

    13. I wois au woher der sich her reigschmeggd hot. War sicherlich an Italiener Daine Hoar und Daine traurig melancholische Auge
      noch zom urteila.
      "Das ist doch ein Blog vom Niederrhein hier oder nicht?" Des ischt doch völlig scheissegal wo der Blog härkommt.

    14. @Anonym:
      Mir übad jo ao scho arg fleissig di anthrobosofisch Schbrochgeschdaldung - abor s' will hald no ned so rechd werda.

    15. Mo Asumang ist voll Klasse. Die hat auch schon Members vom KucklucksKlan menschlich geradezu geknackt! Aus deren au-torä-tari-tara-ristischen Codices rausgekickt, aus den martialischen Weltanschauungs-Panzers gewaltlos und mega-intelligent ausgedost! Kann ich stundenlang lernen und zuschaun und staunen. Mit solchen Menschen wird die Welt und das Leben schön. Da, mit so Menschen, da weht er wirklich: der Geist. :-))
      mischa butty

    16. Mo Asumang ischt des dr neue Mittelstürmer von dr Borussia? Also mir hot dr deutsche Fussball besser gfalla als no koine Negerle in de grossa Stadien rombolzt hent. Damals als des Daimler Stadion no Neckerschtadion ghoissa hot...die Hoenessbrüder Katsche Dr Schwalbenkönig Höltzi alles deutsche halt so Arier halt dörf mr jo nema saget. Dr Wend hot dreht seit dr letschte Landesvater Filbinger weg ischt...aber i glaub am Filbinger saine Leut die kommet jetzt die werdet no so richtige Globalplayers....ond bald hoissts wieder Neckerschtadion....

    17. Ich sags ja alleine schon wegen der Sprache hätten die Preussen das südliche Deutschland einfach der Schweiz und Österreich überlassen sollen. Bismarck hat nicht für 10 Reichspfennige nachgedacht, als er die Süddeutschen unterjochte und zu Hilfsdeutschen machte. Aber Herr Birkholz was ist den "Schbrochgeschdaldung" für eine monströse Wortschöpfung dieser Eingeborenen und vor allem was bedeutet sie. Und Herr Birkholz ich bitte Sie schreiben Sie Ihrem akademischen Grad entsprechend ordentliches Deutsch. Merci!

    18. Die Grundfrage ist allerdings, ob die birkholzschen Gross-, Klein- und Zwerggeister auch entsprechend Menschen zuordenbar sind mit jeweils grossem, kleinen und zwergenhaftem Geist.
      Wo bleibt denn die Freiheit der Gefühle?

    19. Dieses Blog übt sich im materialistischen, intellektuellen Denken des Amerika der Neuzeit. Freiheit der Gefühle? Ist Ihre Platte in den siebziger Jahren am Tag als Conny Kramer starb hängengeblieben ?

    20. Die Ausrichtung des Blogs ist klar.
      Unklar ist der Zusammenhang, bzw. die Interaktion dieses sagen wir mal einseitigen und Differenzierungen offenischtlich ausklammernden Denkens mit demjenigen Rudolf Steiners bzw. dem, was er die Ehre hatte in der Welt zu verbreiten.

      Wenn durch solche Assoziationen das sagen wir mal "abweichende", also in diesem Fall das nicht "materialistisch intellektuelle" Denken nicht nur als anders sondern mehr oder weniger als überholt dargestellt wird, beantwortet das in Analogie auch die im Zusammenhang mit der Rassismusdiskussion aufgeworfene Frage ob das Benennen einer "Rasse" lediglich auf Unterschiede hinweist oder aber gleichzeitig Wertungen impliziert.

      Es scheint also, und zwar ganz egal ob es nun auf die Art des Denkens oder eine "Rasse" bezogen wird, dass automatisch das bloße Hinweisen auf Unterschiede bereits "Rassismus" im Sinne einer negativen Ausgrenzung, mithin also eines Schlechtmachens des jeweils Andersartigen ist.

    21. @ anonym:

      »Es scheint also, und zwar ganz egal ob es nun auf die Art des Denkens oder eine "Rasse" bezogen wird, dass automatisch das bloße Hinweisen auf Unterschiede bereits "Rassismus" im Sinne einer negativen Ausgrenzung, mithin also eines Schlechtmachens des jeweils Andersartigen ist.«
      Das liegt allerdings nicht an der von Dir vermuteten Ausrichtung dieses Blogs, und hat auch gar nicht im Besonderen mit Rudolf Steiner zu tun, sondern es ist heutzutage nunmal so, daß, wie Tom es vor kurzem ausgedrückt hat, »the epithet of “Racist!” hurled at anyone today has to be interpreted along a wide spectrum of connotations and assumptions. The word is so overused that it really loses meaning as anything other than an insult.«

      Wir versuchen weiter unten gerade, das auseinanderzudröseln - in diesem thread derzeit auf Englisch.

    22. @anonym-Hilfsdeutsche

      The helpgermans are working on it under the leadership of Mr. Oettinger, who is a menber of the brotherhood 'Die Meister der Schlauheit und des Zusammenklanges der Mundarten' - he will lead us back to our common neanderthal roots we share with the human race that is settled in our days in the region of the Egoistenblog-Headquarter at the Niederrhein...

  16. Antworten
    1. Stephan, the study you cite shows the neanderthal Y-Chromosome that did NOT survive to the present day.

      This study shows the neanderthal genes that DID survive and help us today.

    2. Yes sure, the interessting to me is, that the disappearance of the others was (is) possible.
      It shows, that things are more complex...

    3. My name iz Manne from Unterbempflingen I hav questjon doo peoples in Souz Djermoney schtill hav ze Neanderthaler Jinn in ze DNA? Zorry for English long time no school hahaha

    4. Something like this has been asserted by Steiner in the above-mentioned lecture in GA 55:
      “Man is so constituted that when blood mingles with blood not too far removed in evolution, the intellect is born. By this means the original clairvoyance which belonged to the lower animal-man was destroyed, and a new form of consciousness took its place.” - See more at:

      North African populations (a Caucasian ‘modification’, cf. GA 121) also carry a substantial trace of Neandertal ancestry.

  17. Dear Tom,

    heartfelt thanks for your long answer to one of my questions!

    This is just to tell you that I’ve read and appreciated it.
    I’ll answer later (:-) I don’t serve as butler for any cats, but have to give some singing lessons…).


  18. Dear Tom,

    I heartily agree: »the epithet of “Racist!” hurled at anyone today ... is so overused that it really loses meaning as anything other than an insult.«

    That’s why I appreciate it so much to talk with someone sensible, without any „agenda“ to defend or attack.

    »As an Anthroposophist of 40 years now, I see Rudolf Steiner as racist predominantly in the first sense (80%) where he describes the different races as an “occult biologist” or any scientist might describe phenomena objectively, showing how the several human races are rooted in distinct Planetary Racial Spirits.«
    I totally agree.

    »But then 20% of his racism, I believe, crosses into the morally judgmental area, like when he describes the degeneracy or decadence of the black race, their child-like natures with powerful metabolism and libidos overwhelming their ability to think with the fromtal lobes (Vorderhirn) that comes so easily to us Caucasians.«

    Well. I don’t say that there is/was no trace of morally judgmental thinking Rudolf Steiner’s racism.
    But as to "degeneracy" or "decadence" or "child-like natures": are those really moral criteria?
    Is it not judgmental in itself to consider the use of the frontal lobes morally "higher" than the use of the inter- or afterbrain (Zwischenhirn oder Hinterhirn)?

    »However, notice that I still consider the 80% + 20% = 100% of Steiner's racism to be in the realm of Thinking, or Ideology. I do not believe that Steiner allowed his racist ideology/doctrine to permeate his will to the point that he would have discriminated against a black person, perhaps, wanting to join the Society and work on the new Goetheanum.«

    This statement leads back to my first question – I therefore cite myself:

    *** You seem to see only one single possible outcome of letting racism permeate from one’s Thinking into one’s Willing – is it true that you believe "racism in Willing" must needs lead to actions against members belonging to other races than one’s own?
    (Obviously, I don’t mean to say that "racism in Willing" didn’t very often lead to exactly that – and not only in history: as we all know, it still does.) ***

    As I see it, even if I thought others "morally inferior" than myself, I need not necessarily do anything against them. Wouldn’t it be a way better idea to try to improve their morals?

    - - -

    »Of course, he could have no real control over what his followers might do with these racial teachings, … «
    Yes. This is a painful chapter of anthroposophical history. I am just now reading Staudenmaier’s "Between Occultism and Nazism"…

    - - -

    »maybe I can better express my ideas by asking if you believe that moderate, peace-loving Muslims should renounce the violence committed by the terrorists in the name of Islam?«

    I would never request it.
    But I must say: I rejoice whenever a peaceful Muslim openly detests the actions of IS.

    Being a Christian, it was never asked to renounce anything whenever a Christian priest or bishop turned out to have sexually abused children… still. When I talked to non-Christians, I sometimes did.

    So I agree with you:

    »I myself agree 100% with Peter that all of Steiner's racial ideas need to be acknowledged ... but I disagree that Anthros need to condemn those racist ideas.«

    I don’t know if I have covered anything you asked me — but I have to stop now for lunch and the next lessons…


    lg, m.butty

    1. Esoterik - Rassismus, von den Gnostikern über Theosophie, Wurzelrassenlehre von den Theosophen übernommen....,etc.interessant.
      Ein bisserl auf österreichisch...

    2. When i heard this lovely 'bisserl auf österreichisch', i was convinced, that the cultural roots of us helpergermans are even more 'a bisserl in Österrreich' than near the Netherlands/-rheins...

    3. Interessant wäre in diesem Zusammenhang jedenfalls, ob Formen von Esoterik ohne Rassen-Begriffe/Aspekte denkbar wäre, oder ob Der Rasse-Aspekt die integrale Wurzel jeder Esoterik ist...
      Gehört dieser hermetische 'Du-gehörst-dazu-und-Du-wirst-nie-dazugehören-Aspekt' zwingend zur Esoterik?

    4. Selbstverständlich gibt es unterschiede zwischen Menschen und Kulturen - wer nicht am Meer wohnt, kann nicht im Meer baden.
      Aber Esoterik besteht ja neben der Verfügbarkeit von spirituellen Kenntnissen und Fähigkeiten (oft auch nur Hirngespinste) in der Fähigkeit, seelisch-geistig zu atmen - und vom Atmungsprozess (beispielsweise) ist kein Mensch ausgeschlossen (auch wenn der eine Alpenluft und der andere SMOG atmet)...

    5. A little bit too stringent moderated discussion, but in my opinion the essential facts were shown. A little bit it hurts, that the background of the fire, which burned down the old Goetheaneum, is obviously unknown. The talking guests, it's the year 2012 discuss about, if "the nazi" did it. I think, that is the fault of the Anthroposophical Establishment in Dornach, because they always fought against the public interests of the official press, seen as Primitive Establisment, which is not enlighted enough to have an intererest on public relationship about the background in Steiners an other anthroposophical biographies.
      The Sciences of Human Genetics, the Sciences of Brain Resarches in our times are developed and differenziated enough now , too show, how insidious Rassism was. It was the alibi for all the imperialistic trading companies and their colonial troops, an political alibi for some chapters of the industrialisation, until to the seventies of the last century. The Australian Aborigines did not have any really human rights, no human dignity, and today they are mystified by the esoteric scene.
      We know, that Steiner said, all descendet races are suffering in abusus of alcohol, because their atavistic medialism has to be destroyed, and achtually they are only suffering in their atavism, because "the white race" has to destroy the old forms of nature in the material world, to unbind the spirit for the coming Jupiter etc.
      For me it was interesting again, that it was said, that the way of gnostical thinking in classical christian traditions correlates with lots of esoteric worldinterpretations.
      In discussions related with anthroposophical terms one hears too often, in my opinion, the word "materialism". But we live in time and space, and we need time.. and space, to be in that world, otherwise we have to leave this world. What is "materialism" else, than a fight for claims for areas and their domination. It begins with the fight for a table in a well filled restaurant.
      Modern civilisation means to take possession and occupy the innocent and naturally grown nature to destroy this nature by changing it into areas of forestry industry, for agricultural industry or mining. The rest changes into cities souroundet with highways and skycrapers. All the Hippsters and Ecology Freaks are Customers und Konsuments of this "Crime, named Civilisation".
      Hippsters, Esotericians, Ecology Freaks made "High Spiritual Beings" of all the Native People, were the industrial crisis changed nature, and, indeed, the first nations, who did it in this ruthless way, were the European Nations. But not, because the were the Superior Race. It was just the historical constellation. Now, the "Superior Race" was strong enough for penance and self-pity. The made Sacred Peoples out of the one Primitive Peoples, in Afrika, Sibiria, Australia, in South - and North America. Many "sacred poeple" took "this shoes" and puttet them on. Sometimes just for making money to survive. By the way: Many Native American "Indian" Medicin Men own in our days a doctorgrade, some are ethnologists.
      mischa butty

    6. I summarize for myself: The Theosopical way solved the opposition "Primitiv Peoples?" or "Sacred Peoples" very elegant. It uses the same refined dialectical manner, what Steiner used in the "Mysteriendramen" in the Opposition of Luzifer an Ahriman, to make the story more complex.
      Once the now Primtive Peoples were Owners of the old Wisdom, were loved by God and Gods and Goddesses. And the reflection of former times is a lightfull aura arround their Holy Men etzetera
      But in our days the members of those folks start to suffer und have to drink etzeterah
      So I was really fascinated in my youth, because it all seemed very rational and neutral.
      The typical Rassists condemned any Interest for so called "Handicapped People"! But Steiner inaugurated a kind of movement for to take responsability for "Seelenpflegebedürftige".
      But this shows maybe his way of thinking: The addult White Superior Race, the brothers oft the Christ, have to take responsability for the Children of God, the descendenting Old Races. Ruyard Kipling (Mogli and the Djunglebooks) also thought a little bit like this...
      Today I see Nation, Races as virtual concepts, also war-concepts, virtual weapons of the Species Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Virtuell Concepts with no physical. It is the negative aspect of this, what we call Human Culture. I distinguish, for myself, "Civilisation" means technological state, "Culture" the philosophical state of Human Societies...

    7. Haarscharf zu knapp moderierte Diskussion, die aber m.E. viel wesentliche Punkte anspricht. Es ist dann jedoch schmerzlich, wie wenig über Rudolf Steiners Dornacher Hintergrund gewußt wird, wenn 2012 noch ernsthaft das Märchen kolportiert wird, "die Nazi" hätten das Goetheanum angezunden! Nach meiner Meinung sind an diesem Gerücht "die Dornacher" schuld, die sich gegen Diskussion mit der konventionell etablierten Welt machtvoll und mit eigener Inner-Circle-Personal-Selektion anstemmten. (denn sie selber dünkten sich ja als ein weit höhers Establishment, innerhalb des Establishments, wenn es blöd lief).
      Je weiter sich in unseren Tagen Genforschung und Hirnforschung entwickeln, desto stärker offenbart sich meines Erachtens die .. ich würde sagen Gemeinheit .. des imperialistischen Rassismus. Er ist ein Alibi der Handelsgesellschaften und deren Militärs, wird zum Alibi, um Aneignungsprozesse zu erleichtern, offenbar bis in die 70er Jahre des 20. JH in Australien, wo man den Aborigines, auch aufgrund ihrer für Normalo-Europäer schwer zu begreifenden Lebensweise, Menschenrechte und Menschenwürde nicht vollumfänglich zuerkannte.
      Hier hätte Steiner, ähnlich wie bei den Indianern, wieder sagen können: Der Alkoholismus greift bei diesen Völkern um sich, damit sie ihr atavistisches Hellsehn loswerden, insofern Teile von ihnen noch nicht gleich untergehn. Ob aber Obdachlose in Berlin auch mal hellsichtigen Veranlagung hatten, bevor sie wohnungslos wurden? Wer weiß? :-O
      Spannend fand ich in dem Versuch der gemeinsamen Bestandsaufnahme der Runde in diesem Video der Hinweis auf die christlich gnostischen Wurzeln in der esoterischen Denkart.
      Was ist denn "Materialismus" in jeglichem Imperialismus? Es ist zuerst ein Abstecken von Raum, von Revier, von Territorioum. Dann ein Verhandeln und Kampf, sich in diesen Raum hinein zu entfalten, zu entwickeln, das Gewachsene einer Landschaft zu zerstören, um sie in Betriebsgelände zu wandeln, forstwirtschaftlich, landwirtschaftlich oder montan. Oder eine ursprünglich gewachsene Landschaft zu zersiedeln. Mit Autosschlangen, Betonbändern, Wolkenkratzern. Dies zumindest empfindet der "Öko-Freak" und "Alternative" der Zivilisierten Welt mit Schrecken. Der längst ein Konsument dieser Vernutzung des Raumes geworden ist. Jetzt heiligt und verheiligt "der Hippie" die "Naturvölker", das geht los mit Karl May, endet bisher bei Castaneda, und man versteht sie immer noch nicht, die "Naturvölker". Deren Medizinleute inzwischen oft einen Doktortitel, etwa in Ethnologie besitzen.
      (Es ist eh fraglich, diese Welt und das Leben je zu verstehn, aber das ist ein ander Thema :-)) )
      Denn, was den Kaufleuten und Industriellen die degenerierten oder affenartigen Wilden waren, die man beseitigen oder versklaven durfte, insofern sie nicht an europäischen Krankheiten wegstarben, das waren den zivilisations-immanenten Kritikern - und Konsumenten - dieser Kaufleute und Industriellen gerne verkannte Heilige, Völker, die sehr bewußt im Gleichgewicht und im Einklang mit Gott und Natur lebten. Ein Schuh, den sich Angehörige dieser Ethnien denn selber anzogen, um fortan Esoterikern Seminare zu geben.

    8. Ich habe folgenden Eindruck aus diesen Debatten entwickelt:
      Die Theosophie löste die Frage ob "der Wilde" edel oder degeneriert sei, sehr elegant: Im Besitze zwar einer Urweisheit, die noch ansatzweise vorhanden, verloren diese Völker nach und nach ihre Überlegenheit, die sie in ferner Vergangenheit ausgekostet hätten, um eben jetzt einem neuen Vehikel für Inkarnationen Platz zu machen. Steiner hat das ganze dann noch verfeinert.
      Auch mir erschienen diese Gedankengänge in der Steinerschen Variante lange plausibel, doch auch beunruhigend. Denn, wenn man das Engagement Steiners für die Arbeit mit behinderten Menschen betrachtet, und den Gedanken denkt, daß der Körper quasi das Vehikel einer Inkarnation darstellt, erhält der Rassismus bei Steiner einen Drall in eine scheinbar sachliche Neutralität. Die "eroberten und verdrängten Völker" sind in der modernen Zeit ja auch "behinderte" Menschen, die unter ihrer "alten atavistischen Hellsicht" die diese einst "zu Hochkulturen befähigte", eher leiden.
      Dabei war der von Europa ausgehende Imperialismus der Neuzeit ein Phänomen der Technik und des Denkens, welches alle Menschen weltweit zu rezipieren in der Lage sind, weil es nämlich keine Rassen und keine Nationen gibt, es sind dies virtuelle Konzepte der Spezies Homo Sapiens Sapiens, und nicht physische, materielle Notwendigkeiten.
      mischa butty

  20. Eckstein @ m.butty

    Da stimme ich dir zu, vorausgesetzt ich hab deinen Punkt richtig verstanden: Wenn jemand sein soziales Engagement (z.B. Arbeit mit Behinderten) im weitesten Sinne mit einem Überlegenheitsgefühl angeht, sich als irgendwie höherwertig begreift, dann ist das wohl grundsätzlich ein Problem. Unabhängig davon, wie diese Person das dann vor sich selbst oder anderen begründen mag.

    1. Ja, sicher ein interessanter Aspekt. Zu untersuchen, wie das ur-anthroposophische Konzept "Betreuung Seelenpflegebeürftiger Menschen" ein heute als teilweise als "falsch" entlarvtes Selbstverständnis an die Betreuer und Sozial Engagierten suggeriert hat. Mir kam der Camphill-Impuls, der sich auf Steiner beruft, immer ziemlich "Amisch" vor. Amisch People, nich? Sektenhaft, etwas zu frömmelnd, ein wenig zu viel der Furcht vor dem Triebhaften, der Gier, auch bei der Nahrungs-Aufnahme bei Tisch, im "Behinderten Menschen" - was denn auch sonst. Es gibt auch zu der Camphill-Bewegung rein anthroposophische Heime aller Art..
      Es kommt jedoch - bei Konzepten - immer darauf an, ob sich Personal findet, welche charakterlich und bildungsmäßig so schwach sind, die Konzepte nahtlos auszufüllen, sich mit den Vorstellungen, Gebrauchs-Anweisungen dermaßen zu identifizieren, daß die Realitäten, die wahren menschlichen Grenzen von Betreuern und Betreuten ignotiert werden. Denn fortschrittliche und gebildete Menschen haben immer auch in anthroposophische Einrichtungen einen Pepp und Schwung hineingebracht - wenn sie sich durchsetzen konnten - von dem dann "das Ganze" profitiert hat. Habe dies in der Praxis selbst erlebt. Die Schriften von Karl König jedoch hab ich nicht lange ertragen, es war darin eine brave bürgerliche Symmetrie, eine Anleitung zur Nabelschau, die ich selber als praxisbeschränkend und als zeitraubend bis nabelschauend empfand. Hat mir nicht vie gegeben. Mein Instinkt wußte einfach mehr. Wie man für Mitmenschen sorgt, die einer Pflege und Begleitung bedürfen.
      Es wäre interessant, da ja der Rassismus, der sich oft als praktische Genetik verstehen möchte, auch Behinderte ausmendeln möchte und als Schädlinge ansah, zu untersuchen, wie die Gefahr eines Elitären Dünkels im Bereich der Anthroposophie zum Tragen kam, wo sich Anthroposophie als Konzept um Behinderte kümmerte. Es schmerzt mich freilich, immer in gewissen diabolischen Folgerichtigkeiten zu folgern, die Logik von elitär denkenden Weltanschaulichkeiten nachzutanzen. Der "Neger" und der "Behinderte" werden als empfänglicher für die triebhafte elementare Welt angesehn, das hab ich zumindest mal in diesen Zusammenhängen erlauscht. Wurde aber als Nur-Praktikant in diese offenbar delikaten Zusammenhänge von "Behinderten und triebhaften Faunwesenheiten" nicht gesprächlich einbezogen.
      mischa butty

    2. Doch ich habe in diesen Einrichtungen immer mit Freude erlebt, daß man Behinderten sehr viel Privatleben und Privatheit zugestanden hat. Meine Erfahrungen. Und ich habe einige Einrichtungen gesehen.
      mischa butty

    3. Eckstein @ m. butty

      „Bildung“ und „Charakter“ als Distinktionsmerkmale wären bei der Gelegenheit vielleicht auch hinterfragenswert. Lässt sich beides schwer festmachen. Letztlich würde ich tendenziell auch in die Richtung argumentieren, dass emotionale Intelligenz und Respekt vor Mitmenschen entscheidend sind. Ob in dem Zusammenhang das Wort „Instinkt“ glücklich gewählt ist, sei von mir aus mal dahingestellt.

    4. Der eine inverstiert mehr in Bildung, der andere in Charakter und wieder ein anderer in spezifische Geschicklichkeiten
      Entscheidend ist nicht was und wieviel man hat, sondern was man mit dem was man aus dem was man hat hervorbringen kann.
      Der edelste Charakter im Elfenbeinturm ist so wenig wert wie der Hochgebildete, der nichts auf die Kette kriegt...

    5. Ob in dem Zusammenhang das Wort „Instinkt“ glücklich gewählt ist, sei von mir aus mal dahingestellt. OK. "Instinkt" ist bestimmt ein schon wieder von völkisch marschierenden Kreisen okkupierter Begriff, der in einem ausführlicherem Zusammenhang jedoch sicher noch recht verstehbar sein könnte. Aber journalistisch und ephemer ist der Begriff "Instinkt" sicher allmählich ein "No Use".

      "Letztlich würde ich tendenziell auch in die Richtung argumentieren, dass emotionale Intelligenz und Respekt vor Mitmenschen entscheidend sind." Exakt das erlebte ich und exakt das meinte ich. Danke.

    6. Ach herrje, ich find`s allmählich auch etwas langweilig, diese bemühten und übervorsichtigen Sprachregelungen: "Instinkt" ist ein harmloser, wenn auch nicht besonders viel erklärender Alltagsbegriff; "emotionale Intelligenz" ist ein Modebegriff und Bestseller der Psycholiteratur.

    7. "Ach herrje, ich find`s allmählich auch etwas langweilig, diese bemühten und übervorsichtigen Sprachregelungen" Danke! Sich Gedanken machen über Begriffe anstatt sie gedankenlos zu benutzen, erst recht dann wenn es sich um mißbrauchte Begriffe, Redewendungen usw. handelt ist sicher nicht verkehrt. Wenn ich aber nachdem ich den Begriff,die Redewendung... durchdacht habe zu dem Schluß komme daß er nach wie vor für mich in Ordnung ist trotz mißbräuchlichen Gebrauchs durch einzelne Menschen oder bestimmte Menschengruppen dann will ich doch bitte weiterhin so reden dürfen wie mir der Schnabel gewachsen ist ohne sofort die Sprach- und Sprechpolizei im Nacken sitzen zu haben.
      Aber das scheint hier unerschöpfliches Thema zu sein und genau das ist es was mich langweilt.

    8. Richtig Frau Tanja des hent mr jetzt bis zur Vergasung gmacht ond jetzt isch a mol Schluss I ruf Widerschtand Widerschtand Helptschermans juneit! Applaus schtaending Ovaschions. Oberbempflingar Obe

    9. Jo, am Arsche, du Kunde! :-))
      Übrigens: Kann Rainer und Tanja verstehn. A-Bär: Sprache, in der Soziolinguistik weiß man das, ist in manchen Zeiten Kriegsgebiet. Nicht nur in der allumzäunten realen Welt heißt es "Baden verboten", oder, wie der Niederländer sagt "Bedreuden verbeuden"! In der Sprachzone wird noch intensiv gekämpft. Seit der Rechts-Pöbulismus mit seinen Juristen und Akademikern (Arbeiter der Stirn) sich in die Mitte der Gesellschaft vorfackelt, muß jedes Wort gut bedacht sein, um es entweder denen zu überlassen oder ums zurückzuerobern. Der hypride Krieg ist ein Krieg mit Sprache, mit Wahrheit, Lüge und Klauen von Inhalten, um diese zu verderben.

    10. Muß schon sagen, sehr praktisch so eine Ober-Unter-Sonstwas-Bempflingerrolle in die man schlüpfen kann um so richtisch lustisch anonüüm zu spotten. Da werden die Lacher aber auf deiner Seite sein während du dich höhnisch grinsend geniesserisch zurücklehnst. Reschpeckt!
      Meine Fresse, da kann man nur noch Mitleid haben.

    11. hybrider Kriech, mit "b"

    12. Liebe Tanja!
      I brauch koi Mitleid ons Helptschermanns isch nema zom helfa. Mer sent halt dr Zait emer a weng voraus Nach dem Motto onserer Schtaatsreligion Des Beschte odr nix. Apropos anonüm Es grüsst Gott Dain Uwe

    13. Soso, Uwe ist der Name im Bempflinger Phantasialand. Na, mir wurscht.

    14. Oberbemplinger TabakraucherSamstag, 9. April 2016 um 22:04:00 MESZ

      Des ischt reeler als du denkschscht dieses Bempflingen. "Ischt mir Wurscht" i fühl mi da als dynamischer Veganer etwas ausgegrenzt dorch dain Schbrochgebrauch, abär (a Bär Butty :) ) i akzeptiere das wail i an aufrechter Demokrat ben ond ned denk dass mir von de Amerikaner besetzt werden sondern emmer no von de Preussen. Als ehemaliger Protokollführer der Allemanischen Volksfront (man schaue sich die ungelenken förscht Graeffities vom Hölderlinturm in Tübingen aus den 80er Jahren auf gelben Grund an) bin ich bis heute traurig darüber, dass wir es nicht gschafft haben alle Reigeschmeggde Preussen wieder in de Norde ans Meer gschickt hent. " Und lieber Herr Butty ( woher komsch du mit so nem Name?) Sache gibts ....wo war ich schtehen geblieben?...rauch etwas schtarken Tabak,,vergesse vieles...was ich noch abschliessend sagen möchte ischt Herr Butty dene schtecka mer die Fackle oifach in arsch ond no ischt a ruh. Wer macht mit... so jetzt rauch i erscht a mol weiter den schtarken Tabak den mir main Arzt zor Schmerzlinderung aus seinem in door Gewächshaus geschenkt hot. Ond Tanja ja i gebs zu bei der Vorschtellung dass jetzt einige Leut am Niederrhein versuchat diesen informativen Text im geschriebenan Dialekt lesen und versuchet des au laut zu schprecha oder zumindascht des sich auf den Lippen zergehen lassen. Da froi i mi gäb i zu ...Tschüss Ihr da oben ond no a bissle schwäbische Onterhaltungsmusik zo ens Bett geha in der Blockflötenversion:

    15. Einer is immer das Opfer, hä? Erzähl uns mehr von zuhause, Spätzchen. Vielleicht kannst mir ja das kommentieren verderben, mh? Wenn du jetzt von den germanischen Stämmen anfängst, tja, dann viel Spaß bei der Reichsverwesung. Wir sind doch für die NWO hier, und hamm dich auf dem Schirm, mit Mindcontrol, schneller als du trollen kannst. Gute Nacht, und fahr zum Fenris mit olympischem Gruß! :-)))

    16. I gang da eigentlich nur vom Schbrachgebrauch aus stämme interessieren mich nicht so Herr Butty Komm mir ganget jetzt zo meinem Freund am Teddy Riedler ond trenket a Viertele in die You tube Beiz da siehscht wies bei mir dohoim aussieht ond Tanja nehma mir au mit. hereinschpaziert:

    17. Fin? Wieder zu Geld gekommen?

    18. Ich glaub ich muß mich beim Bempflingeruwe entschuldigen. Ich war wohl ziemlich unhöflich weil ich jemanden im Verdacht hatte mich verspotten zu wollen. Und auch bei demjenigen muß ich mich wohl entschuldigen ihn zu Unrecht beschuldigt zu haben. Es gibt wohl Phasen im Leben wo man aufpassen muß daß aus gesunder Vorsicht nicht Paranoia wird :-/ .

    19. Auch du meine Söhnin, Tanja :-(

    20. Falls du das mit der Paranoia meinst: Mit "man" meinte ich hier mich.

    21. Genug jetzt mit dem Mist, Bempflinger, Fin, Tanja, Ecksteins usw. Hab die Nase voll, dachte zuerst an etwas Späßchen, ist aber wohl keins, sondern wieder nur die übliche Trollprovo, und mich hätte ja nur in etwa interessiert, wer sich da verbirgt, ob den Pappkameraden im Real-Life kenne. Aber aus jetzt. Ende. Waldorf Bastoria

    22. Dachte zuerst noch an eine neckende Verkleidung eines Scherzboldes, aber als dann "die Fackel in den O.." unverkennbar die Anspielung auf die brennenden Heime für Familien, Frauen, Kinder, Männer aus den Kriegsgebieten gegeben war, merkte ich, daß es ernst war. Ernstes trollen. Das ist kein necken, frotzeln, es ist immer, seien wir ehrlich, eine erste Form von Gewalt. Das muß ausartikuliert, ausgesprochen werden, damit das ins Bewußtsein kommt. Mancher reagiert auf ernstes trollen, hybrides trollen ja nicht, weil "er oder sie selber ihre Emotionen nicht im Griff hätten" haha. Sie reagieren empört, weil sie spüren, wie subtile Gewalt ins Spiel anfängt einzufließen. Mein lieber Schwan.
      So, nun bin ich wieder schutzgeimpft, hoffe ich. Sicher infizieren alle Techniken des Mobbing, in dem diese uns eine Einladung zu einer Kommunikation suggerieren, die irgendwann auflösbar und zu klären sein könnte, und man geht befriedigt und lächelnd auseinander, oder neutral geklärt und etwas ausgesöhnt. Doch es ist jeder Schritt nur ein Schritt weiter in ein Labyrinth, wie in die dunklen Gassen einer Hafenstadt, oder in die Sümpfe des Mekong. Manchmal gibt es eben Redewendungen und Lieblings-Diabolismen eines Trolls, woran man ihn wiedererkennen kann. Oder es war ein einst noch gesunder Mitkommentator, der dann gekränkt wurde, oder sich in NWO-VT oder Pegida verliebte und verlor. Liebe Grüße, und Dank an Ingrids Studie über Gesang und seine Parallelen in der menschlichen Begegnung, und an Herman Finkelsteens Weckruf gestern. Herzlich
      mischa butty

    23. Jetzt muss auch ich mich entschuldigen und versuche jetzt auf Hochdeutsch oder wie mar bei ons sagt im Pfarrhausschwäbisch Dinge klarstellen. Ich bbin ein Egoist der in Oberbempflingen lebt, ich rauche lieber starken Tabak anstatt Bier oder Wein. Der Egoistenblog ist sozusagen meine kleine Kneipe am Abend wo ich zwar keine Menschen treffe aber deren Gedanken und das tut gut und das schätze ich sehr, wenn ich hier ausgehen würde, würde ich solchen Menschen wie dem Riedler am Stammtisch begegnen. Lieber Mischa auch mir geht es wie Dir, dass ich ausgehe und den Leuten immer mehr aufs Maul schaue und innerlich zusammenzucke wenn Leute so daher schwadronieren so wie auch in einigen anthroposophischen Kreisen, da sehe ich keinen grossen Unterschied zum Teddy Riedler. Ich wollte einfach zeigen wie sprachliche Missverständnisse in einer aufgeheitzten Kommunikationsatmosphäre zuerst zur verbalen Gewalt werden und dann irgendwann in die Tat umgestzt werden, wie zum Beispiel Molotovcocktails auf Familien zu werfen. Ich dachte eher daran den Fackelträgern die Fackeln zu entreissen und ihnen in den A..... zustecken, ist natürlich auch keine Lösung aber besser so als mit einem neuen Erlöser wieder über Endlösungen zu diskutieren.Da hast Du mich falsch verstanden sorry Mischa Ich habe die Form eines Trolls gewählt weil auch ich ANgst habe mit meiner durchmischten multiplen genetischen Persönlichkeitsstruktur auf physischem geistigen und weiss was ich nicht,,,, verdammt noch mal ich möchte auch einfach so sein wie ich will ohne mich erklären zu müssen wegen meiner Herkunft, merke aber wie wichtig das heute wird ....Das sind die Diabolismen die ich jeden Tag zu verarbeiten habe wo im Sprachgebrauch Nazischätze aller Art versteckt sind und die langsam aber sicher in die Tat umgestzt werden mit Widerstandsrufen und die Richter abgeschaftt werden sollten und alles nur noch auf Dorfebene verhandelt wird ohne wissentschaftliche Hilfe sondern einfach aus dem Bauch heraus...Und das Schlimme daran ist, dass es nicht wie früher die ALten sind sondern die Jungen die von Tuten und Blasen geschichtlich keine Ahnung haben und auf geschickte eloquente Propagandisten wie Elsaesser, der ander Eggert und so weiter... selbst langjährige Freunde fangen mit dem Zeug an..Ich gehe auch zum Singen von Frau Ingrid darf ich mich zu Euch stellen oder wollt Ihr mich auch ausgrenzen! Ganz liebe Grüsse und Hilferufe aus dem Süden Euer Bempflinger
      der sich für seine ungehobelte schwäbische Art entschuldigen wollte ich griff halt die Idee auf von Tanja einfach so zu schreiben wie mein Schnabel sozialisiert wurde.

    24. ‘… ist natürlich auch keine Lösung aber besser so…‘, ‘… die Form eines Trolls gewählt…‘, ‘… Nazischätze aller Art …‘?

    25. Dearest Toni Maybe I am a hobbit not so much a troll.

  21. Strictly speaking, Steiner’s ethnic groups were not distinct groups, marked by an essentialist, planetary typology (polygenism). They represent stereotype modifications of a monogenist (common descent) development, a shepherd existence (GA 349).
    Furthermore, Steiner seems to distinguish two white stereotypes: a cheese-white and a peach blossom-white modification (cf. Husmann-Kastein), one archaic and one modern (due to an Old Celtic, neolithic influence).

    We are no longer shepherds and herdsmen but something is still given to us, we still receive something, only we cannot express it so beautifully as it has already become pale and dim. But the whole of mankind today is indeed interconnected, all belong to each other, — and if one would know what man still bears in him today, one must go back to ancient times. Everywhere, all men on earth have proceeded from this shepherd-stage and have actually inherited in their bodies what could descend from these pastoral peoples. - See more at:

    Well, we know indeed that a man in Europe is not quite healthy when he is cheese-white. He is healthy when he shows his natural, fresh color, created by himself inwardly, through the white. - See more at:

  22. ... wenn ich diesen Vergleich weiterspinne, dann würde das ja bedeuten, dass falls der Behinderte von jemanden nieder geknüppelt wird, der sich seine Besitztümer aneignen will, ich dem kommentarlos zusehen kann, ist der Behinderte in seiner Inkarnation ja ohnhin zum Aussterben bestimmt. Welch perverse Haltung.

    Ein Gedanke, der dann ja auch von den Nationalsozialisten aufgegriffen und umgesetzt wurde. … Zigeuner, Juden, Behinderte …... 'dem kann ja weitergeholfen werden'.
    Weiter oben sprach Tom vom Rassismus im Denken und soweit ich ihn verstanden hat, hat er einen Rassismus im Denken von einem Rassismus im Willen unterschieden. Da bin ich anderer Meinung – der Rassismus im Denken motiviert/legitimiert den Willen zum Handeln. Vielfach geschehen im Kolonialismus und Nationalsozialismus.

    1. ... da kamen jetzt ein paar Kommentare dazwischen. Ich beeziehe mich auf den Vergleich den Mischa zwischen Behindertem und Ethnie gezogen hat.

    2. Die ganze Kategorisierung und Benennung ist doch recht fragwürdig...
      Behindert vs. Nicht-Behindert...
      Ich halten den Begriff 'Lebensgemeinschaft' doch für recht passend, denn jeder hat irgend wo Einschränkungen und Behinderungen und jeder ist irgend wo seelenpflegebedürftig...
      Als letztendlich behindert gelten dann nur jene, die ihre Einschränkungen nicht in ein gesellschftlich (noch) akzeptiertes Leben integrieren können und das ganze Lebenschiff deswegen kentert...

    3. Eckstein @ S. Birkholz

      Ich denke, dass viele derer, die deiner Definition folgend „letztlich“ als „behindert“ gelten, mit den real wirksamen gesellschaftlichen Ausgrenzungsmechanismen hadern, an ihnen scheitern oder mit ihrer „Behinderung“ schlichtweg keinen Ansatzpunkt finden, diese Ausgrenzungsmechanismen wirksam in Frage zu stellen. Denen wäre eventuell schon mal geholfen, wenn sie sich in ihrem Anderssein akzeptiert fühlen könnten.

  23. "Die ganze Kategorisierung und Benennung ist doch recht fragwürdig.."
    Ja, sicherlich ist die fragwürdig! Ich habe gerade versucht, das heraus zu arbeiten :-).Ich beziehe mich auf Steiners Kategorisierung und Logik, die er als 'Geisteswissenschaft' oder Evolutionstheorie präsentiert.

    1. Wir müssen noch viel lernen und vieles differenzieren. "Es gibt" ja "Schwarze", es gibt "Menschen mit Mandelaugen" und es gibt "Sommersprossige Rothaarige". Ich sehe oft kein "Schwarz" mehr, wenn es nicht eine ganz dunkle Hautfarbe ist. Man sagt ja auch nicht "Oh, sie sind ja schwarzhaarig, und ich aber blond. Aber ich hoffe, wir kommen klar!" Man sieht doch ein Downsyndrom. Wenn jemand alle Stunde einen epileptischen Anfall hat, und auf Zehnspitzen läuft, wir nicht viel helfen können, dann ist dies Jemand, der unserer Hilfe bedarf, der eingeschränkt ist. Gildo Horn wagte mal eine Talkshow mit Menschen, die dahingehend etwas anders sind. Da war viel von Inklusion die Rede. Wir bewegen uns in so vielen Sachen wirklich erst in Anfängen. Darum sagte ich auch mal, sinngemäß: "Klar, daß das ganz ganz überkommene Alte Denken sich noch einmal gewaltig aufbäumt. Aufschäumt, auseitert, Blasen bildet, um zu vergehn!" Der altgewohnte unbewußte Rassismus, der "Neger", "der arme Onkel Tom mit Trompete" und aber auch "der Trottel" und "der Krüppel" müssen verschwinden, nicht nur aus der Denke! Sondern auch aus der Bilderwelt, aus der Imagination. Nicht nur neue Begriffe, auch neue Mythen wollen erschaffen werden. Oder?

    2. ... genauso sehe ich das auch! Ich finde es wünderbar dass es Schwarze, Rote, Gelbe, Braune gibt.... . wogegen ich mich verwehre ist ein geistiger Rassismus, der alles was nicht weißer mainstream (vorzugsweise noch heilges arsches Blut) ist per se als minderwertig an- oder mit Albaufdatum versieht.
      Dass solch theosophischer Schmarrn weiter lebt, dazu fällt mir nicht mehr viel ein.

    3. Dass solch theosophischer Schmarrn weiter lebt, dazu fällt mir nicht mehr viel ein.
      Er lebt ja nicht wirklich, er verwest und sondert dabei seine spirituellen Verwesungsprodukte ab - das ist leider immer so, wenn das Überkommene sich auflöst...

      s. birkholz

    4. Bravo Mischalein,

      du hast es auf den Punkt gebracht. Die Realität ist abgeschafft, sogar die Imagination, dass nicht alle Menschen absolut gleich sind, ist purer Rassismus. Verschwinden müssen daher alle Unterschiede, alle Vorstellungen davon, alle Möglichkeiten und Hypothesen unterschiedlicher Wirklichkeiten. Alles und alle sind absolut gleich.
      Klammern wir uns alle kollektiv an diesen neuen zu schaffenden Mythos.
      Einen ungeheuren Vorteil hat das Ganze ja. Wir sind dann absolut sicher vor Rassismusvorwürfen.

      Ich halte mir den Bauch vor lachen anlässlich dieses nicht mehr zu steigernden Sarkasmus! Unübertrefflich, genial, ehrlich!

      Spannende Zeiten Leute, egal ob Bempflinger oder Weltbürger, wenns keine Steigerungen mehr geben kann!
      Die Richtung jeder geistigen Entwicklung ist dann erstmals auch sicher vorgegeben, weil gar nicht mehr anders vorstellbar.

    5. Ethischer Individualismus is nicht Gleichmachewrei und Relativierung. Das Marschieren des Proleteus, die Söhne der Gaia sollen für den Ursprung einstehn?
      Die neue Zeit bringt etwas Neues. Nicht das Alte. Die Weltkriege sind nicht umkehrbar.

    6. @ mischa,

      Wenn das Denken umgekehrt oder abgeschafft wird, dann bringt das Neue das Alte wieder hervor, ganz klar.
      Dann bringt die Zukunft die Vergangenheit wieder hervor, das stimmt sicher.
      Und die Weiterentwicklung aller Dinge, das wunderbare Hervorquellen des Lebens in allen seinen so unendlich verschiedenen Formen und Spielarten führt zum Ursprung zurück, als nichts war.

  24. Depending on the context, Steiner’s term ‘race’ for ethnic group can mean ‘root race’, ‘sub race’ or ‘human race’ (Staudenmaier 2014, nDJnAwAAQBAJ, p.59). Alas, Staudenmaier is not always clear about this meaning in his Steiner quotes. The same holds for Steiner’s concepts ‘Aryan’ and ’Caucasian’ (and European and White). Also, Staudenmaier in his book (p. 57) seems to simplify Steiner’s version of the Aryan myth, confounding fifth sub race and fifth root race (“… the Aryans continued to evolve …”).

    The all over structure of Steiner’s workers lecture on human skin colors (1923) is marked by stereotype modifications (five skin colors, five areas), migrations (India, Malaya, America) and mixing (India), but even more by the repeated mentioning of blood color, individual spirit and independent thinking spreading over the world:

    “Only then can one rightly understand the spiritual element if one first studies how the spirit works in man precisely through the skin-color.”

  25. Everything that surrounds us externally is condensed light. Therefore, I have thought, lighter skin represents Day and darker skin represents Night.

    As Louis Armstrong sung:

    The bright blessed day and the dark sacred night

    Louis Armstrong – what a wonderful world:


    1. Still, Caryn, they remain clichés (cf. Carus). One can always mix them up:
      the bright sacred night, the dark blessed day.

  26. Yes, poetry is balm for the soul. Yet truth shall be found in poetry – here I look from Copernicus’ point of view: “If we look at the material human body, in as much as it consist of matter, is nothing but a substance woven out of light. Man inasmuch is a material being is composed of light” (GA0120, 25th May 1910) and there you look from Ptolemy’s point view and the words are the most sublime I have heard for a long time. “A dying of the past in light, and a opening up of the future in the darkness” (GA0291,5th Dec 1920)


  27. "All birthmarks and warts on surface of human skin are holy signes of despair, destiny and sin" told us Charles Baudelaire, "but the chocolate- or coffeecolored skins, and the sweet curles or the freckles sourroundet by bright red hair too, all the treasures of all my beloved friends are covered by the connaisseurs silent" said Jack Newhouse (okay, Giacomo Casanova sounds more melodious). Next I start to write an interracial loveguide for rainbow-children, but of course I will not forget to mention some lessons in Pimperanto, (an intercultural language, for travellers, who do not want to have too much of trivial conversation) createt by the German Philosopher Walter Moers, the founder of some kind of graphical destructivism...The future I hope for, and to which I belong, will be much more filled with compassion between all of us, there will be much more silent in all holy places, and there will be no need for too much of emphatic pathos, there will be no nations, but every man and every woman an own species; I beg your pardon for my being naughty...


Kommentar veröffentlichen

Danke für Ihre Mitarbeit im Blog. Beachten Sie bitte unsere Datenschutz- Erklärung.

Beliebt & berüchtigt