Talking About Us?

From: Michael Helsher
Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:50 pm
Subject: Talking about us?

Peter Peter pumkin eater is talking about us on the critics list!

Oh the vanity of being included in the string of heavy-hitter seasoned participants that he mentions in a recent post at: http://www.topica.com/lists/waldorf-critics/read

I feel like a star is born. Maybe I should sign up on that list again and act like a bonified all-knowing anthropop!

ahh but alas, I'm afraid that my Steinerific lingo is not yet up to the task :^(

Joel had a great idea over at the pool: that we all sign up all it once and overwhelm there defenses by shear force of numbers. Sharon is out of the picture lately so there defenses have been weakened. I propose that we quadruple team against Peter S.. Perhaps Tarjie (I know that you said that you would not participate on that list again, But for this event I think you should re-cant), Joel, Dottie and myself (taking on the smaller left over chunks of course) could tag-team. Frank and Sune can handle Dan. Sounds to me like Christen could handle Debra and Diana...

Oh yes... I smell victory!

"Cry Havoc!

And let slip the dogs of war...

Merrily

Mike Helsher

...................................................................................................................................

From: Sophia
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:46 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

Please beware that all messages written to the WC list are archived twice: First on Topica, then on the PLANS website, where your entire headings, including your email addresses, are published, attracting spam like sugar attracts flies.They apparently do this in order to boost their site's position on the search engines.

If you want to help keep the WC list alive and give PLANS some free PR, go right ahead. My personal advice, however, is to invite them over here, to the AT list.

Faithfully,

Sophia (AT moderator)

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 8:25 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

Dear Mike,

I'm not sure about going war, although I do think that this is an interesting idea, that a group of us join that list for awhile. Obviously our list is being watched, which is kind of a sad thing for Peter S. to engage in - some kind of spying with voyeuristic nuances. (hi Peter!).

The tragedy over there (the WC-list) is the indulgence in hate and enmity. A soul living in such a place, where darkness is nourished, even cherished, is an unfortunate soul.

Since we have some familiarity with the 12 Steps here, it might not hurt to reason through such a journey (that a group of us might join the WCL for a time). Which Step, Mike, do you think such an act should emulate, and where in PoF, would you place the reason for going there?

warm regards,
joel

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:29 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

At 17:25 05.12.2003, Joel wrote:

Obviously our list is being watched, which is kind of a sad thing for Peter S. to engage in - some kind of spying with voyeuristic nuances. (hi Peter!).

Lurking on a public list isn't spying. It's wide open, and everyone is welcome here.

In the past, however, private mails stolen from closed lists have been published on the WC list through "moles" subscribing to private lists under false pretenses.

It's my impression that Peter S. prefers to start all his messages with "Dear critics," to the applause of his followers. For this reason, his comments to what he reads on the AT list are most likely to occur inside his own temple.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 5:14 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

Dear Tarjei,

I disagree. Its not about this being an open list, or about the right to lurk, its all about the motive behind the activity and the deeds that follow.

Think of a public park, where everyday anyone can gather and speak about religion and philosophy. All kinds of people can watch and not engage. But someone who comes with the intent to take down names and tell stories in another place has engaged in a much more concrete act than just passive observation.

That act has intentions, and consequences - it is not at all neutral, but rather becomes filled in its nature with the moral purposes of the action. This is true of all of us, and it is true of Peter S.

Part of the nature of social reality, and our use of the gift of the word, is that when we speak (or write) about someone, we stand in between them and those who listen - we become a creator of meaning, which is a part of our shared social understanding. The gossip is obviously a potential bad actor, because what is said clearly can produce social harm. If harm can ensue, then the act has moral consequences, and therefore moral dimensions.

The openness of this list is irrelevant to the true nature of Peter's moral actions that proceed solely from him. Now I have been very careful here to not characterize those actions, nor the true nature of the moral motive, as I did in the first post you quoted below. In the first post I was mostly wanting to poke at him with words, if he wandered into reading what I wrote.

warm regards,
joel

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 10:27 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

At 02:14 06.12.2003, Joel wrote:

Dear Tarjei,

I disagree. Its not about this being an open list, or about the right to lurk, its all about the motive behind the activity and the deeds that follow.

Think of a public park, where everyday anyone can gather and speak about religion and philosophy. All kinds of people can watch and not engage. But someone who comes with the intent to take down names and tell stories in another place has engaged in a much more concrete act than just passive observation.

I agree with your moral assessment here. What I meant is that in a closed, private email group, such moles are a problem and an invasion of privacy. In a public forum, that is not the issue. What stories they tell each other in private about public events are of no concern. The stories they publish on their websites and lists are easy to handle and respond to, on *our own* lists and sites.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:25 am
Subject: Re: Talking about us?

Mike
I propose that we quadrouple team against Peter S.. Perhaps Tarjie (I know that you said that you would not partisipate on that list again, But for this event I think you should re-cant), Joel, Dottie and myself (taking on the smaller left over chunks of course) could tag- team. Frank and Sune can handle Dan. Sounds to me like Christen could handle Debra and Diana...

Hey Mike,

Waxing poetic is something I have never ever been acused of:)

I say lets not go into that hole again. Let them come over here if they want. I sense they are throwing some meatbate with the Werner information and again Mr. Staudenmaier is doing the twist and turn dance. He just keeps digging that hole even larger for the legacy he will leave as well as what the Critics have to offer. They have no idea how outragious they look to mainstream people just stopping by. Although the girls have cleaned up their act somewhat the boys are digging the grave.

It seems Peter has gotten a little more education regarding the life of Dr. STeiner, or he has realized there is to much information available to the general publie that refutes his out right lies. The idea that Dr. Steiner could be an anti-jew and a pro-jew at the same time shows how he gets his lies are catching up with him. The old Jacobowski argument shows it doesn't matter how educated you claim you are when you simply can not understand a man trying to help integrate his people into a community of others past religious ties. You would think Peter would understand that simple point. He does not. Either he is a liar or he just doesn't get it.

I think the AP boys and girls who dared enter into that fracas have made an impact. One can just tell by the way he is including everything positive and negative to make his case. He has made a fool of himself. Good work by Sune who led the pact and those who endeavored to stand up to the cowardice of lies. It's always easy to hide behind a German translation of a thing when it had not been transcribed into English as Peter has done for most of his papers. His big mistake was mistaking Ariosophy for Anthroposophy and there is no way around it. They built a case on a foundation very different than Steiners yet very close to Hitlers. The game is up.

It's a good day,

Love,
Dottie

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:09 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Talking about us?

At 18:25 05.12.2003, Mike wrote:

I propose that we quadrouple team against Peter S.. Perhaps Tarjie (I know that you said that you would not partisipate on that list again, But for this event I think you should re-cant), Joel, Dottie and myself (taking on the smaller left over chunks of course) could tag-team. Frank and Sune can handle Dan. Sounds to me like Christen could handle Debra and Diana...

Count me out. I am not interested in participating on lists where my freedom of speech has been previously abrogated (including Starman's "Steiner" list), and certainly not on lists promoting a website that endeavors to destroy the Anthroposophical Movement, and where everything I write will draw attention to their cause and their propaganda.

I'll be more than happy to discuss their arguments on this list, however, where any topic goes and freedom of speech reigns - or to comment them on my own website.

Cheers,

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Sophia
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:36 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Talking about us?

I'm a little uncomfortable with threads discussing various lists and list strategies. The management/moderating of Anthroposophy Tomorrow is already declared off-topic.

http://www.geocities.com/anarchosophia/listrules.html

I prefer not to extend this restriction, but I don't want to get involved in rivalry between lists either. For this reason, I would encourage you all to take discussions *about lists* off-list, i.e. to private mail or to closed groups. Anthroposophy Tomorrow has nothing to gain from discussions of this kind.

I may have been responsible for some of this, but I saw it fit to warn subscribers against lists were the public archives are republished on a second website with full headings, depriving contributors of the option to delete their own messages, and exposing their email addresses to spammers' robots.

Beyond that, I recommend a "live and let live" attitude to other lists. They may be fascist or totalitarian or intolerant or what have you, but there's no reason to beat them up in public. What goes around, comes around.

Faithfully,

Sophia (moderator)

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 10:59 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

At 00:50 05.12.2003, Mike wrote:

Perhaps Tarjie

The name is Bond. James Bond.

...................................................................................................................................

From: Michael Helsher
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 3:09 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Talking about us?

Hi Joel, you wrote:

Since we have some familiarity with the 12 Steps here, it might not hurt to reason through such a journey (that a group of us might join the WCL for a time). Which Step, Mike, do you think such an act should emulate, and where in PoF, would you place the reason for going there?

Mike:
First my little self: Well, I think with a little bit of tweaking we could use the tenth step. Instead of "We continued to take a personal inventory, and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it", we could say, "we continued to take other people's inventory and when they were wrong, promptly told them so". Of course this would require a very slight relapse into denial. But considering the fact that I used to live so deeply in it (denial), tolerating a slight amount is acceptable to me. Slight semantical adjustments, small amounts of white lies, and an aloof application of Socratic method, could very much combine in our favor...

Now my big self: "We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves, could restore us to sanity". A good definition of insanity is "repeating the same mistakes, and expecting different results". One of the mistakes that I have repeatedly made is to annex myself from those people that I have great antipathy for. Though I hopefully would not allow myself to become a door-mat (again), I now realize that I have much to learn from many different people, regardless of how I feel about them personally, or their views. I have always come away somehow stronger from engaging people with opposing views (with as much compassion that I can muster). It takes one to know one, and this goes both ways. I like to think that I have experienced this "power greater than myself" as emanating from within, but if it weren't for other human beings, the experience would not be possible. The experience of the "I" in the other is probably the most difficult of human endeavors, and probably not possible if we have not dealt with our own demons. To "think with the power of love in spiritual form" is to realize our connectedness to each other and the cosmos.

So to engage our brothers and sisters on the critics list in a compassionate way, would serve to further the message of what I see Anthroposophy as being: Human Wisdom, which stems from our individual ability to "know thy self" and to "think with the power of Love in spiritual form" (a power indeed greater than my little self).


Holy shit... did I just write that?

Truth and Love

Mike

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
 

December 2003/January 2004

The Uncle Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files

Anthroposophy & Anarchism

Anthroposophy & Scientology

Anthroposophical Morsels

Anthroposophy, Critics, and Controversy

Search this site powered by FreeFind