posted May 07, 2007 11:31 AM              

quote:

---

Are we so very spiritual? I'm not overly concerned with judging people to be spiritual or not by my personal standards.

---

lol...that's actually very funny. it's what you've done throughout this entire thread. especially by implying that Steiner's works are not for the uninitiated unwashed. simply because the book i mentioned does not support your theories. you entered this thread and made a judgement about my flawed spiritual concepts and how you disagree with them...and then a disparaging remark about a lack of spiritual understanding....and all that....without saying it in a straightforward fashion, of course you weren't speaking about anyone personally, no you never are ~

quote:

---

It is fascinating that so many of Steiner's works have been published and I'm truly grateful. However, much of his words were not meant to be conveyed to the general public and/or those not trained in Anthroposophy, not out of some kind of elitism but because otherwise the concepts Steiner was trying to get across would be wholly misunderstood and misinterpreted. He fully understood that and mentions it in a number of his lectures. I believe that is sadly what we are seeing today.

---

but no of course you aren't speaking about anyone personally, you never are, except for the fact that it's painfully evident that you are. i haven't seen anywhere else your admonishment that Steiner isn't for the spiritually trained until this thread, when his book doesn't support your theories.

posted May 07, 2007 11:38 AM              

quote:

---

At the very least, you appear to be enjoying your imaginary trip into other people's beliefs ... beliefs about which you very clearly know nothing but assume everything. I realize you don't see it that way, and probably won't even if people attempt to explain themselves to you any further.

---

posted May 07, 2007 11:48 AM              

it's like grown Men, having a Temper Tantrum, because thay just can't talk and work things out! It's ridiculous, in this Day and Age!

and well, somebody needed a spanking, LOL

posted May 07, 2007 11:53 AM              

quote:

---

I see you are clinging to your concept of apersonal terms. Your ambitions for status due to your newly learned way of insulting people to become popular, egoless, and spiritual ... well, good luck with that path if it's what you are choosing for yourself.

---

seems to work for you. i can only strive to be the spiritual adept that you are.

quote:

---

Imo, we are free to see the world as we choose regardless of "reality" so please don't let my opinion influence your quest.

---

oh dear, how disappointing that the "reality" of war that you spend so much time and energy defending, even while saying that you aren't, hasn't influenced me. that i do not see it as such is so clearly not 'reality,' according to the enormous effort that you make to discount what i say.

hmmm.....if it really were so innocuous, i doubt you'd take so much time and effort trying to prove otherwise.

quote:

---

I've never, and neither has anyone else on this thread, stated that the US only ever instigates war to save people, nor that war is glorious.

---

posted May 07, 2007 02:58 PM              

quote:

---

If one has the Free Will to choose to murder innocent people then others also have the Free Will to choose to kill him and stop him from killing others.

---

who is the apersonal target in this gem? is it Bush perhaps? could be, but that would be uncharacteristically revolutionary now, wouldn't it? Saddam perhaps....yes, i suppose you could say that 'one' has the free will to kill him, when it serves 'one's' purpose that is, lol. as long as Saddam's killing of innocents was in the interest of the U.S. (who i am assuming is the apersonal 'them'), it was fine by us. of course, that is if the apersonal reference to 'one' is indeed Saddam. perhaps it isn't. perhaps it is stated in those terms in order to justify all unnecessary war. yes, i used the passive tense to remain apersonal, and yes i yet again 'assumed' something....oh dear.

so please forgive that, as well as forgiving my confusion about the following, as my limited understanding does not allow me to grasp the spiritual resolution of this further blatant contradiction....

according to the spiritual quote that you found to justify your pro-war theory ~

quote:

---

Wars are necessary. Without wars the world would soon be overpopulated.

---

so is the war necessary to prevent the killing of innocent people, or is it necessary to reduce the population this time around? are we bombing an entire population to save them, or to fulfill our spiritual duty to annihilate them? of course, it has nothing whatsoever to do with racial or territorial agendas. winky winky.

odd, i know, but somehow, to me, these two concepts just don't mesh.....just my lack of spiritual training again, i'm sure.

so, yet again, to my limited spiritual way of thinking, Linda Goodman's intention is quite clear, as twisted as 'people' try to make it. she is defending, i believe, her thoughts and beliefs with her words. something i would imagine Voltaire would approve of, as his words were about defending to his own death, not the death of others. doesn't LG reference something also somewhere about 'the word being mightier than the sword?' i suppose that would be lost on 'those of us' (apersonal reference, please note) of such limited spiritual understanding as to disagree with this war though. as LG states in Star Signs ~

quote:

---

the Eagle (representing America in the Great Seal) supports the shield, this code intended to convey that our forefathers intended America to be strong in defending herself, yet always ready to defend and support less fortunate nations and peoples...

the arrows of defense against attack clutched in the Eagle's left talon have too often over the past decades been distorted to mean war when war was not necessary, a prostitution of their original symbolism...

it's most important to note that the American Eagle's head is facing toward the Eagle's right, toward the right talon holding the olive branch of Peace.

---

and defending does not always mean bombing and killing....but that's just another one of my own misguided assumptions no doubt.

posted May 07, 2007 04:27 PM              

I do support WW11 with vim and vigor because it is my belief that the attempted incarnation of the anti-Christ was thwarted. Were all motives of the Allies pure and noble? Hardly. But some were and given the choice between Churchill and Roosevelt or Hitler I'll gladly take the former. As an reader of Steiner, naiad, I can't honestly imagine you feeling differently.

Steiner is quite the awesome guy, and i think that there is more to wwii than what's visible on the surface of things...what you say about the Ahrimanic principle operating, and all that...yes of course, that was part of it, and i do understand what you mean.

posted May 08, 2007 08:18 AM            

I find it very odd that some of the very things you're "accusing" me of being are things that some have brought up about you in the past. Which, though like Tink I've often admired you, now leads me to wonder if this really is very unlike you at all.

Regardless, you can believe all manner of things about me or anyone. It doesn't necessarily make them true. Maybe others agree with your perceptions and maybe others don't. I can't do anything about how anyone perceives me against any "evidence" to the contrary.

I've no idea what started you on this ... whatever-you-want-to-call-it you're on.

As much as there is a part of me that would like to take the time to "refute" your assumptions about me and my life, I really don't have that much time on my hands, nor do I think it would make any difference. More importantly, I don't believe I want to feed this ... this, wherever it may be headed.

posted May 08, 2007 08:41 AM            

I agree about the Silmarillion! Every time I read the beginning of it, I'm blown away by how "in tune" it seems to be. Always have wondered about Tolkien's interest in spiritual concepts/theories. I remember reading something he wrote regarding fairy tales and the importance of retaining them and/or creating them in their original, "true" forms ... not the watered down stuff with the "scary" things removed for the "benefit" of the children. His ideas are very in keeping with some of what Steiner wrote regarding fairy tales and such, and I see the same thing in Waldorf ideas today. Was it in that book you recommended? About young children of certain ages understanding and essentially needing the good versus evil aspects being played out in stories? Naturally without dramatization and with "good" winning.

<raises hand> I'm interested in esoteric perspectives regarding politics! Must've missed it or not been paying enough attention before but I'm all ears now, Tink.

Regarding WWII and Steiner, just yesterday I ran across a letter that Hitler wrote where he mentioned the "threat" of Steiner. Chilling. I'll see if I can find it again (I must've bookmarked it) though I'm not 100% sure of its legitimacy.

Regarding war (out there, in here) very nicely put by both you and lotusheartone, imo.

10 ... IO ... What a Wheel of Fortune it is, though.

"Discipline must precede dominion."

There are quite a few snippets I'd like to seriously hang up on my walls where I can see them everyday, just to remind me in troubled times, and that is definitely one of them.

posted May 08, 2007 09:16 AM            

quote:

---

1. Adolf Hitler writes about Rudolf Steiner and Social Three-folding, 1921

"In the course of the London affair, there gradually emerged such mysterious circumstances that it has become not only expedient but indeed necessary to look somewhat more closely at this Minister (Simons), the intimate friend of the Gnostic and Anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner, follower of Three-folding the Social Organism and whatever all these Jewish methods of destroying the normal frame of mind of the people are called: to see whether that mindless face, as Lloyd George described it, is really just the result of a deficient intellect, or if it is the mask behind which something else is concealed . . . (he continues with a protest against Simon's political activity, and particularly the movement to disarm the German people) . . . And who is the driving force behind all this devilishness? The Jew! Friend of Doctor Rudolf Steiner, the friend of Simons, the 'mindless' . . ."
Adolf Hitler, Staatsmaenner ode Nationalverbrecher ("Men of the State or National Criminals"), in Voelkischer Beobachter, 35.Jg., 15 March 1921, S.2. (original German text)

---

posted May 08, 2007 11:03 AM              

for example, while Steiner was developing his biodynamic methods, a group asked him for a solution for containing the rats in their agricultural pursuits. Steiner had an occult method for making all the rats leave of their own accord. Other groups then took this method and applied it to the jewish population in Germany. Soon after, much of the jewish population left the country for israel. Many believed this migration resulted from the occult method that Steiner provided for the rats.

i suppose we could argue that it's better that these spiritual/occult practices be kept in the strictest most limited confidence. but i think that Linda Goodman, and others of this persuasion, believed that much of this spiritual/occult knowledge would be of more benefit for the knowledge of the world. perhaps knowing and understanding the concepts and principles makes us more aware of the forces that manipulate and direct our world and lives. and gives us more of the ability to then have autonomy over our own lives and spiritual progress.

there are those who would keep this knowledge private so that their control would be more complete. but LG knew otherwise...in the spirit of American freedom, she knew (as did spiritual adepts and gurus helping her) disseminating this information would lead to a more free world, and true freedom for the individual, as well as the opportunity for each individual to uncover and achieve a spiritual unfolding and growth from within himself. Steiner, i believe, felt the same. Linda Goodman did not give us all the esoteric secrets...12th night secrets was only meant to be released after the ideas in gooberz and star signs had been dispersed and digested. Steiner did the same with much of his work. once his ideas are more dispersed, i'm sure we will have access to more of the higher concepts. what we learn, and where we are guided, once we start on the spiritual path is an amazing journey, leading us ever further to discover more of the spiritual knowledge that is so integral to our being.

12th night secrets is available somewhere...and the knowledge that LG and her teachers, like Steiner, have given us....will lead us there. and like Heathcliffe, the path may lead directly into the innermost depths of our own hearts and souls. how delightful that we have those, such as Linda Goodman and Steiner, to point us in this direction....to the consternation of many who would prefer to keep this kind of knowledge and freedom far from the hands and hearts of those whom they would control.

posted May 08, 2007 11:31 AM              

i'm sure that you will continue making your implications and suggestions about those not of your spiritual ilk and beliefs, including me, quite known, in the indirect and underhanded manner that you do.

quote:

---

I find it very odd that some of the very things you're "accusing" me of being are things that some have brought up about you in the past.

---

cute, how you reference them, but still evade the direct accusation yourself. if you're going to go on and on about the passive aggression of others, you would do well to examine it very closely in your own frequent behavior.

your false admiration is nothing more than a part of the technique that you use to insult and diminish. your methods are condescending and insulting, without being honest. i'm sure you think this very clever. but i assure you it is not. it is damaging and destructive, for both you and those upon whom you inflict it. though i suppose that is deliberate and the point.

the 'be well' is rather like the 'fake' hearts and wishes of love that you're always so derisive of. like most of what you say, i know it to be lacking in sincerity.

posted May 08, 2007 04:37 PM              

i should have thanked you all earlier for participating in this thread. each of you has given me much to consider and contemplate, and i appreciate so much the way your input and presence here has helped me to think and grow. you seem to have that effect quite often.

and i offer my apologies for the harsh way i have spoken, esp to Eleanore. i may not agree with some of your perspectives, nor with the way you present them at times, but i am very sorry for expressing myself in the manner that i have done here. i am sure that there is a way to discuss and exchange ideas without resorting to meanness. i hope that i will find that way in future discussions.

i would not wish my behavior to stifle in any way the flow and exchange of knowledge and ideas here.

each of you has so much to share in matters spiritual, esoteric and otherwise....and i am grateful that you share your wisdom here. it's my privilege that you do.

so i really would like to thank each one of you, and offer my apologies again for being harsh, esp to Eleanore.

love is always the answer, i believe, and Eleanore, what you say about love and spirituality beginning within ourselves, transforming ourselves, is so spot on.

posted May 08, 2007 07:46 PM            

Sometimes our cup runneth over with Passion.
As the Passion softens, we Know we have lived in the moment and can see more clearly the direction our path is leading.

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted May 09, 2007 12:57 AM              

quote:

---

I remember reading something he wrote regarding fairy tales and the importance of retaining them and/or creating them in their original, "true" forms ... not the watered down stuff with the "scary" things removed for the "benefit" of the children. His ideas are very in keeping with some of what Steiner wrote regarding fairy tales and such, and I see the same thing in Waldorf ideas today.

---

have you seen the Inner Child Tarot?

these cards explore the mythos of fairy tales and how they function at a soul level. the subject-matter is whimsical, but very deep.

the accompanying book has great explanations, and explores each fairy tale in depth, in relation to their themes as they work on our psyche.

from the preface ~

we cannot imagine a childhood without fables or the multi-dimensional characters in them, characters who come to life as our heroes, heroines, nightmares and dreams. these figures lead us to discover the treasures within our own souls.

hidden in the story "Sleeping Beauty" is the lesson of death and rebirth, and the miraculous transformation we encounter as we progress from childhood to adulthood....

when we are young children, fantasy fills our lives. we are introduced to elves and gnomes, dwarves and warriors, angels and beasts. we learn that faith makes the soul shine, that purity is our greatest joy, and that suffering and sacrifce are the unpolished jewels of treasures to come. fairy stories, told and retold, enrich the depths of our hearts from which our hopes and ideals are born. no other literary creation has such a fundamental effect on us as has the fairy tale.

it is said that folklore was traditionally passed down by word of mouth from master to student as a way of enlightening the common folk. in a sense, then, the storyteller, parent, teacher or anyone who tells a story becomes a mystic. the education that is brought forward in myth is a seeding that prepares a fruitful foundation toward inner strength, security, and self-realization. experiencing a myth internally encourages the four stages of development: the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual.

childhood stories are a vehicle through which we discover and honor the muse. what is it to be "amused' or "enchanted"? why do we, in fairy myth, weave our way through horrific dramas of spellbinding proportion and, in the wink of an eye, find ourselves alchemized into stones, animals, witches, or frogs? in these transforming events, we lose touch with everyday reality and, in a sense lose our memory, so that we may be reborn. once the spell is broken, a greater personal myth is born...

the child's mind is full of creative pictures. these images probe the soul, unveil the power of light and dark, and unleash the impulse to understand desire, love, and conflict. from the deep perception of "storyhood" archtypes comes the awakening of the subconscious forces that, in time, heal the spirit. life's riddles and complexities are not solved in words, but in foresight, clear vision, and experience. this inward knowledge renews the soul's life.

From original text:

"In this card, a magnficent soul potential in the form of a butterfly is being unveiled by two fairies. In Welsh mythology, fairies were known as "the mothers" or "the helpers." These fairies are liberating the spriitual quality of humanity. There is a connection between the soul and the butterfuly in Greek mythology. This stems from the belief that the human soul becomes a butterfly while searching for a new incarnation.

The process of transformation is extremely powerful in our lives as we search for a broad understanding of the future and a gentle surrender to the past."

these cards are quite powerful. they seem to have a more deep impact on my psyche than most other tarot cards.

posted May 15, 2007 01:54 PM              

i was reading Gooberz the other day and found the great passage where LG talks about the importance of Jesus saying "resist ye not evil." then a little later Tink posted the same thing here about resist ye not evil...cool coincidence.

every time i read LG or Steiner it's like a particularly relevant whisper in my ear...as if they are speaking directly to my soul through the pages.

Linda Goodman wrote much about karma and how we can rise above our karma and change it. i believe she meant that we can apply that also to our collective and racial karma as well, so that war really never is a necessity. theosophy and anthroposophy are distinctly different, and i think Steiner has more understanding of such things.

it would be sad, as Tink posits, to ponder the death of one's son in battle. what i think would be even more sad would be the deaths of innocent children on his hands....in the bloody pursuit of nothing more than the chess game of foreign policy....as Henry Kissinger (who is currently the closest "unofficial' advisor to GW in the white house - he's there every week, they say) says of them ~ "military men are "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy."

from Rabindranath Tagore ~

The distinctive feature of materialism is the measurability of its outward expression, which is the same thing as the finiteness of its boundaries. And the disputes, civil and criminal, which have raged in the history of man, have mostly been over these same boundaries. To increase one's own bounds one has necessarily to encroach upon those of others. So, because the pride of Power is the pride of quantity, the most powerful telescope, when pointed in the direction of Power, fails to reveal the shore of peace across the sea of blood.

it's interesting to note that in all of our self-congratulations on the role of the U.S. in WW2 and 'saving' people from the nazis, that Stalin was our ally. he certainly killed off equally huge amounts of people in his genocidal efforts as well. funny how we weren't interested in 'saving' them from the murdering Stalin, or not even worried that the dreaded communists were our allies. in order for Roosevelt to enter America in the war, he had to coordinate with the Japanese to allow Pearl Harbor to happen, so many people, including military insiders believe. the incredible number of american lives lost in that tragic event was what was necessary to justify U.S. intervention.

that the Nazi expansion was eventually stopped, of course i concur was a good thing. but then again, were they? many of the nazis were allowed to re-locate to South America. many of them were seamlessly integrated into U.S. government agencies, without any punishment for war crimes whatsoever. so, if the U.S. was actively investing in Hitler and nazi Germany before the war, then allowing the nazis immunity and jobs in the government afterwards, well....makes one wonder, what the point of the war actually was.

it seems that Hitler may have had much the same "use" as Saddam. as long as Saddam was working in the interests of the U.S., he was supported, his genocides tolerated. but when the knowledge of this became threatening to the U.S., he was eliminated.

of course, i understand that Steiner was working against Ahriman in assisting Churchill....it just seems that Ahriman didn't really lose that much, esp with all the nazis simply relocating to the U.S. government and south america.

posted May 16, 2007 02:46 AM              

quote:

---

I suggest that most folks these days are very confused about what "capitalism" really is. What the corporate "globalism" of NAFTA, WTO, ECU, the World Bank, the international Monetary Fund, and other institutions (both governmental and "quasi-governmental") which portray themselves as advocates of "free trade" ACTUALLY support is not free enterprise capitalism at all ... which you surely know jwhop ... but actually a form of MERCANTILISM that calls itself "capitalism" but is actually a very statist set of economic principles not terribly far removed from fascism.

Free enterprise means the government leaves people free to conduct their own economic affairs, with neither aid nor hindrance from government (other than enforcement of laws to prevent criminal fraud, theft, coercion and other violations of legitimate rights). Mercantilism, on the other hand (like fascism), is a system in which very detailed and restrictive laws and regulations control the economic actions of individuals and companies-- and like all systems in which the government has the power to grant preferential treatment to some at the expense of others, this often results in the de facto establishment of "government favorite" corporations that enjoy special permits, subsidies, approvals, government contracts and other preferential treatment that gives them enormous advantage over both private individuals and other companies. Indeed, the only major difference between systems of mercantilism and fascism, and those of socialism, is that the means of production and distribution are "owned" by private companies rather than by "the people" (a euphemism for "the government.")

Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard defined mercantilism (historically) as "a system of statism which employed economic regulation to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state."

Although popular terminology (I'm avoiding the inflammatory word "propaganda") uses the terms "free enterprise" and "big business" almost interchangeably, there is in fact nothing "free" about the "enterprise" promoted by this form of government-sanctioned corporatism. It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the economics of Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson, and is in fact merely another form of coercive state control over economics. I'm opposed to that form of mis-named "free enterprise" too, although you won't find a stronger supporter of genuine free enterprise capitalism anywhere.

What happens with the World Trade Organization and IMF that makes so many people angry at "capitalism" is that these quasi-governmental agencies operate OUTSIDE the economic laws of genuine free enterprise, with vast sums of money that do NOT come from the informed investment decisions of private individuals but rather from the pockets of the taxpayers. (Or from the vaults of international bankers but "guaranteed" by government funds.) These institutions can then make huge risk-free "loans" to developing nations that are contingent on the developing nations doing business with particular "sanctioned" multinational corporations. Free enterprise my foot! The loans are also contingent on the developing nations agreement to revise their domestic currency policies along certain lines in order to receive this aid ... and while the "intent" of this strategy may (or may not) be noble, supposedly designed to come to the rescue of corrupt governments which inflate their currencies and ravage their economies and seeking to lead them to stability by offering massive aid in return for fiscal soundness, IN FACT such support not only keeps the officials in power and enables them to mismanage the reforms but also aggravates the corruption. Countless billions of IMF aid are wasted on bungled reforms by incompetent officials or have disappeared into the pockets of central bankers and crooked administrators; as well as leaving the PEOPLE of the developing countries saddles with enormous industries not of their own choosing that destroy their indigenous economic assets and natural resources, paid for with investment dollars that are NO RISK WHATSOEVER to the multinational corporations who benefit from these guaranteed "development loans" on conditions dictated by their cronies in the IMF! That's just the barest tip of the iceberg of what's wrong with "global corporatism" but the point is that many folks, having been convinced that this system is "capitalism," are justifiably angry at "capitalism." Only it ain't!

The biggest "bill of goods" we have been sold with respect to the whole political/economic spectrum (and here I'm not insulting anybody by saying they've been duped, because we've all been "duped" by this false dichotomy) is the idea that the two "sides" of the political coin are "massive government management of social welfare programs" versus "massive government support of big business and military." That's a joke, because those are the SAME side of the coin, just dressed up differently to appeal to our different emotional preferences! The real coin is "massive government of ANY stripe" versus freedom of the individual supported by minimal government protection of rights. But nobody tells us that anymore. That's what America is REALLY all about - not big business and military versus the welfare state, but big government versus the protection of individual freedom and initiative to solve our own problems and seek our own happiness through VOLUNTARY cooperation rather than the watchful eye of big brother who knows best! If we can export THOSE values to the world at large, then I am happy to stand up and say I am a proud supporter of the American system worldwide. But if we choose to identify American virtue with military might, and the free enterprise system with government promotion of big corporate interests, then I can easily identify with the harsh judgment this country gets from many quarters these days.

~ Gregory Ellison

---

posted January 22, 2019 03:00 PM              

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0025995

Oh, and before you cry "fringe", my establishment-worshipping goat friend, note that it was found worthy by none other than Forbes magazine. You have a subscription, right?