Anthroposophy and Ecofascism 69

Peter Staudenmaier writes in Paragraph 23 of Anthroposophy and Ecofascism:

Incidents such as these are distressingly common in the world of Anthroposophy. The racial mindset that Steiner bestowed on his faithful followers has yet to be repudiated. And it may well never be repudiated, since Anthroposophy lacks the sort of critical social consciousness that could counteract its flagrantly regressive core beliefs. Indeed Anthroposophy's political outlook has been decidedly reactionary from the beginning.

This polemical paragraph shows the lengths to which Peter Staudenmaier will let his rhetorical flourishes go. Unfortunately, it has no factual basis. Anthroposophy has never repudiated its racist past because no such racist past exists. Peter Staudenmaier's rhetoric cannot resist going further, accusing Anthroposophy of being without any critical social consciousness, when Peter Staudenmaier himself presented evidence contrary earlier in this same article! (In paragraph 4). Based on two individual incidents involving two individual people (but presented as being common to all thousand-some Waldorf schools and tens of thousands of anthroposophists) it is stated without further evidence that this type of thing is "distressingly common in the world of Anthroposophy.” This is a group that numbers somewhere between 100,000 and 2 million people worldwide, depending on the criteria for inclusion. I would suggest that were this the case, Anthroposophy would not exist as it does in the world today. Waldorf Schools exist in South African townships, in Taiwan and Peru, in Brazil, Columbia and the Philippines – all run by locals as grassroots initiatives. It is hard to call such a movement "lacking in critical social consciousness" and couched in "flagrantly regressive core beliefs."

The sweeping statement that Anthroposophy is politically reactionary is also not supported by any evidence presented in this article. The question will be dealt with at some length in future posts.